His bigotry against ideas other than non-religious ones is why he could not accept the Big Bang Theory - sounded too much like Genesis. Of course, it's the accepted theory, today.
More proof that scientists do NOT have open minds.
This is absolutely not untrue.
Einstein was the
champion of the "big bang theory". This theory originated from George LeMaitre, a Belgian
priest. The theory was named the big bang theory not by either Einstein or LeMaitre but by the detractors of the theory in the scientific community to denigrate it. After Hubble's Law had been published, Einstein endorsed LeMaitre's "big bang theory", since Hubble's Law shows that the universe is apparently expanding and this explains why we see red shift nearly everywhere we look in the universe. Previously, it was believed by almost the entire scientific community that we lived in a static universe that had no beginning and would have no end.
LeMaitre predicted a background radiation that would be expected to exist if there really was a beginning of the universe. In 1964 Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias accidentally observed this background radiation for the first time, and their measurements were consistent with LeMaitre's prediction of the intensity of the signal. These two won a Nobel Prize for this discovery, however there is still contention as to whether the big bang actually happened although it's widely accepted as scientific fact by most people today.
If Einstein had any bigotry with regard to science, it was his belief that a model could precisely predict the actions of particles. He did not (originally) believe in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and argued at length with Bohr over this, Bohr proved him wrong using Einstein's
own equations. You may know this argument from Einstein's famous quote "God does not play dice". You can know that Einstein abandoned his belief because the Boise Einstein condensate is named after him, and exhibits the property of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. In science, to progress, you have to admit when you're wrong. In the pursuit to understand the natural world there have been far more failures than successes, but the successes are kept and built upon. Every scientist makes errors, it's impossible not to.
If you want to criticize scientists, at least get what they actually professed correct. A good scientist's mind is often limited (but not always), to observable fact, because scientific discipline makes the assumption that everything in the universe can be explained by cause and effect that nothing has a supernatural explanation. After all, a scientist can't ram a proton traveling at 99.999999% the speed of light into a substance, observe odd behavior and say "well, God did it". You may want to regard that as a limitation of science, this sort of disciplined thinking has utterly revolutionized the world.
I would like to point out that when Christianity dominated Europe in culture and education it was called the Dark Ages. During this time a man by the name of Bruno was burned at the stake for claiming that stars were other suns (among other more radical and wrong ideas), and Galileo almost saw the same fate for implying the Earth wasn't actually the center of the Universe.
I would humbly like to suggest that based on my observation of the past, that scientists have much more open minds than religious dogmatists. Perhaps you would like to inspect your own openmindedness.
I would also like to point out that over our lifetimes our opinions and personal beliefs do change. I was rather surprised to see Einstein be so blunt with regard to atheism. Although I cannot know for certain, I rather doubt Einstein always had this hardened a view. Einstein has made many statements on religion, and I've never seen him be less evasive than in this particular quote. It's very surprising to me.
As an aside, I should disclose that I am an atheist myself, although I think it's likely I'll take Pascal's Wager at some point while I lie on my deathbed but I'll never accept Christianity I'm certain. I cannot believe the one true religion can have such a history. Perhaps I will become a Jain, they are non violent, have never had a war or an Inquisition or a Crusade. They believe that the ultimate sin is to harm others, and by others, animals are included in that, even plants are. I would have to agree at least partially with that philosophy, it's very compelling anyhow - to strive to hurt as little as possible throughout your lifetime. That philosophy doesn't seem to exist in any Judeo religion which I think is great pity and most ironically of all, many Christians consider such a religion a false religion undoubtedly created by Lucifer. I often wonder why Christians never consider the possibility that their own religion is a creation of Lucifer.
