Russia’s science and higher education ministry has dismissed the head of a prestigious genetics institute who sparked controversy by contending that humans once lived for centuries and that the shorter lives of modern humans are due to their ancestors’ sins, state news agency RIA-Novosti said Thursday.

Although the report did not give a reason for the firing of Alexander Kudryavtsev, the influential Russian Orthodox Church called it religious discrimination.

Kudryavtsev, who headed the Russian Academy of Science’s Vavilov Institute of General Genetics, made a presentation at a conference in 2023 in which he said people had lived for some 900 years prior to the era of the Biblical Flood and that “original, ancestral and personal sins” caused genetic diseases that shortened lifespans.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Beliefs can’t, but those beliefs generally come from somewhere, and those books tend to be full of testable claims.

    And those tests generally fail, meaning we can only assume those sources are not really literally true. And if they’re not true, you’re really just making stuff up as you go along and assuming things are true as you see fit.

    Now, there’s nothing wrong with making stuff up, I do it all the time for table top gaming. But I don’t base my worldview on the stuff I just imagine into being

    Deism isn’t incompatible with science, but any god who does stuff can be tested. Since I’ve never seen a single paper published showing any evidence for any god, I can only assume that either no gods exist, or they don’t do anything. For me, those are basically the same thing.

    • Mobiuthuselah@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      There are many things in those books that are demonstrably true, but that doesn’t necessarily prove everything in them just as those things that are demonstrably false don’t necessarily disprove everything in them.

      It’s just a matter of not being able to observe, measure, or physically test a god’s existence. From an objective standpoint, believing whether a god exists or not is still just a belief.

      I’m only trying to show how a scientific person could compartmentalize their beliefs from their studies and to that end, I think we agree that they aren’t incompatible. What someone chooses to believe after that is up to them, because as you point out, there’s no peer reviewed published evidence one way or another.