26 – SUPPRESSING SCIENTIFIC TRUTH

No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right;

a single experiment can prove me wrong.

                                                                                   Albert Einstein (1874-1955)

February 24, 2025                                                            

Last time we combined a little explanation about what Science is, as a discipline, with a little editorializing about a scientist, namely Richard Dawkins. I want to repeat that approach in this post.

Recall that Science is the study of cause-and-effect in closed systems (i.e. systems where what is being studied can be controlled and a proposed explanation can be tested experimentally).  While correct, this definition is not quite complete: to be “scientific,” the proposal being studied must be able to be shown to be incorrect, or false; in other words, the scientific method can only study things which are falsifiable.

In other words, a proper scientific explanation (aka a hypothesis) must be able to be proved or disproved; thus, if ever the result of an observation contradicts the prediction, the theory or hypothesis must be revised or rejected.

This is Einstein’s point in the quotation above. And this is what separates Science – think Natural Science – from “Social Science” (History, Sociology and so on).  Where Science studies mechanisms in Nature and how they work, Social Science studies human nature and human behaviour.  One studies various closed systems, while the other studies open systems. 

(I realize that some argue that, in the end, there are only closed systems, and that some systems only appear to be open because we do not have enough knowledge – yet – of all the factors that are in play. For the purpose of this post, I will simply note that such an argument is not scientific, it is philosophical and blindly philosophical because it is not supported by actual evidence.) 

In studying either system, one gathers evidence to support a theory which explains what is being studied; however, scientific evidence is better at predicting results in Nature than social scientific evidence is at predicting human behaviour.  Let me share a story involving Dr. Einstein that illustrates this.

Before I finished high school, I was taught the Steady State Theory of the Universe. This theory claimed that the size of the Universe is unchanging: the Universe is, today, the same as it has been in the past and as it will remain forever; in other words the Universe had no beginning and has no end.

Now, since Science studies cause-and-effect, the Universe is an effect, and, by definition, every effect must have a prior – and sufficient – cause.  (Do you see where this is going?) The obvious question arises: “What caused the Universe?”  Of course, the Bible has an answer: Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning, God…”

But note that, to claim that the Universe has no beginning and no end is to propose that: the Universe is an effect without a cause; OR the Universe caused itself.  Both of these are: 1) impossible; 2) nonsense; and 3) outside the realm of scientific study.

Yet, Albert Einstein once advocated the Steady State Theory!  This “giant” in the field of Science, a man who surely understood logic and the laws of causality, embraced a nonsensical, unscientific theory!  And he did this despite the fact that the mathematics which supported his theories showed an expanding Universe with a beginning!  

Why?  I think there were two reasons: one lying in what we know about Einstein-the-man and the other being found in the Bible.

From his own words, we know Einstein disliked the conclusion to which his equations about the Universe’s origins pointed.*  For a time, his all-too-human desires overwhelmed both mathematics and evidence, and so he buried that which he did not like.  Which gets us to the second reason…

Einstein wanted to avoid the God of Genesis 1:1; the Steady State Theory allowed him to do that; so he suppressed the truth – just as Paul describes in Romans 1:18, “…who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.” Like all fallen human beings, Albert Einstein was unrighteous by nature and he acted as Paul tells us sinful people act.

Since the 1970’s, the Steady State Theory has faded as a credible explanation for the origins of the Universe; it was sidelined by evidence favouring the Big Bang.  To his credit, Einstein did abandon Steady State nonsense – in 1931 – as did a number of other big-name scientists of that era. Yet this anecdote reminds us that even the greatest scientific minds belong to fallen human beings.   

Next time:  Celebrity Science and Error