Do you think Science and Religion can co-exist in a society?

[RoadRunner79]

Some may be interested in the following.... and checking your facts.

http://strangenotions.com/gods-philosophers/

I wondered when someone would post that.
Thirty years after Benjamin Franklin's lightening conductor was universally adopted by the smart folk, church bell ringers throughout Europe were still being electrocuted. What does Tim O'Neill have to say?
Could it be that:
a) The lightening conductor didn't work in Germany?
b) The catholic church said lightening was the work of demons?

Answers via E-Mail: parchment only.

While I'm not very familiar with this particular issue, after the time of Ben Franklin.  Customs and even ill conceived ideas can be difficult to get rid of (I would point out, that this one is extra biblical.  Also, I don't think that by cherry picking a few instances or by ignoring the history and facts surrounding the issues, that you can extrapolate to the idea that religion is against science.  As the author of the article states, it is a myth, and seems to be embarrassed by those who put it forth.  I have seen commentary, that stated the belief, that the Galileo affair was more about politics, then it was about the science.  That if it had happened 100 years sooner or later (because of the reformation) that things likely would have been different.  They also tend to point out, that Galileo's case while shown to be correct in hindsight, wasn't strong enough to go against the scientific consensus at the time.

And some may try to isolate certain instances, to try and say that the Church was against science, but they also largely ignore, a lot of history in facts, which says quite the opposite.

Edit:   by the way, I am a big believer in lightning rods on tall metal things.

---

Well most early scientists were Christian.  The world has both science and religion in most counties. So yes. However, in order for progress to occur, religions must either change in light of scientific findings, ignore the findings, or change the scope of religion.  This much of Christianity has been doing for a long time.  What there isn't room for is both dogmatic theology regarding the physicalities of the world and science.

Don't you think the most early scientists were pagan? Many ancient Greeks and Romans embraced rationalism and scientific inquiry as a way to understand the world. Think of the accomplishments of people like Aristotle, Ptolemy, Pythagoras, Democritus, Archimedes, Pliny the Elder, Theophrastus, Galen, and Euclid. If any faith should get credit for science, it would be paganism.

When Christianity took hold in Europe about 500 CE, science didn't come into its own until much later. The authoritarianism of the church suppressed the kind of freethinking that really did produce modern European science. Heresies like Arianism (the notion of God not as a trinity but a single being) and Manichaeism (the belief that God is benevolent but not omnipotent) were brutally suppressed. Indeed, the notion of "heresy" itself is explicitly anti scientific. If science and Christianity co-exist so nicely why that thousand-year delay? Why, if science and Christianity co-existed nicely and Christianity promoted scientific innovation during the Middle Ages, did Europe show no economic growth for a millennium?

Care to give some facts to back up these claims.  You may want to read the article I posted

Some may be interested in the following.... and checking your facts.

http://strangenotions.com/gods-philosophers/

Sure, let me check THE FACTS: I and rest of the atheists acknowledge biological evolution; you don't. Biological evolution is a scientific fact; 6 day creation is not. You were taught against scientific facts; you are against science and reason. You lose this argument.

There's a whole lot wrong here!
You may want to know what you are talking about, before you start making claims like this.  Or is there something particular that I have said, which leads you to this conclusion?