US geneticist wins $1.5 million religion prize

A one-time priest who later became an evolutionary geneticist and molecular biologist and helped scientifically refute creationism with his research was honored Thursday with one of the world's top religion prizes.



March 25, 2010

Francisco J. Ayala, 76, a U.S. citizen originally from Spain, will receive the 2010 Templeton Prize, valued at $1.53 million, the John Templeton Foundation announced at the National Academy of Sciences.

It is the largest monetary award given each year to an individual and honors someone who made exceptional contributions to affirm spirituality. Officials increase the value each year to exceed the Nobel Prize.

"I see religion and science as two of the pillars on which American society rests," Ayala told The Associated Press, saying the United States is one of the world's most religious countries. "We have these two pillars not talking, not seeing they can reinforce each other."

Ayala is a notable choice because he opposes the entanglement of science and religion. The former Dominican priest is adamant that science and religion do not contradict each other.

"If they are properly understood, they cannot be in contradiction because science and religion concern different matters, and each is essential to human understanding," he said in remarks prepared for the acceptance ceremony.

Ayala is a top professor of biological sciences at the University of California, Irvine. His pioneering genetic research led to revelations that could help develop cures for malaria and other diseases.

Read more: The Associated Press

 

This is becoming a big movement now. There is a multitude of research and work being presented to support this theory. I'm glad for him. The gap between religion and science is beginning to close.

 

How loathsome.

Forgive me, but there are a number of points I find either bothersome or contradictory here:

1. 
   
2. The notion of reinforcing science with religion with each other, however I would like to know in what manner they should reinforce one another.
   
3. This seems suspicious to me. What specific theory are your refering to, and why should science and religion be fused together?
   
4. This contradicts the idea of science and religion being pillars which can reinforce each other.

What I find bothersome is what I detect as some type of misrepresentation between the Templeton Foundation and Ayala's work, which would fuel ideas just like the following:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Templeton Foundation was accused of usurping anything that might suggest the intersection of religion and science.