Scientists and the evolution of 'truth'
So, Beagle (Write Back, December 5) thinks my comments about science changing its 'truths' when they are proved wrong are silly, but he then goes on to lambast creationist websites, which I neither mentioned, nor quoted from.
Perhaps he can tell the person from whose book I quoted the two examples that prove he is silly - i.e. the professor of science and religion at Oxford University, Alister McGrath, who holds Oxford doctorates both in the natural sciences and Christian theology.
If old ideas, which we were assured were true, are abandoned by scientists in favour of new ones, how can they have been true in the first place?
It only tells us that they have discovered new theories, which seem to fit the facts better than the previous ones.
I'm glad Beagle admits science does not know everything, and I would agree with him on that.
I'd also remind him that so many of the early scientists were Christians, who sought to learn more about the world God created, and laid the foundations for science as we know it today.
Tandragee, Co Armagh