Argument for God not to be obsolete appears to be only that ...you have X (science) therefore Y (religion) must be the case. Is it for this reason...? "Ignorance of Nature gave birth to gods. Knowledge of Nature is calculated to destroy them."
What you are talking about is blind belief Acronym -- not religion. "A religion is a set of beliefs and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction." This definition is from the Wikipedia, and should suffice for now, although there are better and more detailed definitions. Metaphysics is based on logic. The king of philosophers, Aristotle spent a great deal of time pondering the Divine, and we know that until the Renaissance no one had a greater influence on science than Aristotle. Likewise, Newton was a great Biblical scholar, and published more in that area and certainly devoted a much greater part of his time there than in the sciences. And there are too many other numerous other great scientists to mention in this type of a forum that contradict what you stated about above about religion. However, if you were referring to blind belief instead which indiscriminate people often mean when they are talking about religion then you would be correct, and unfortunately in the established religions for the common man there is a great deal of blind belief which causes much damage as we see now in particular in Islam.
Einstein was no Bible scholar nor is he known as a scholar of metaphysics. He couldn't even do his taxes, and we know that morally he was particularly lax -- maybe that clouded his views on the Torah. Chosen doesn't mean in the way most people think of the word "chosen." It really isn't a gift, but a burden. Jews have to keep 613 commandments, non-Jews only 7. Chosen means that one was chosen to keep 613 commandments vs. 7 commandments. Failure to keep all these 613 commandments entails punishment for Jews as it is for non-Jews who fail to keep their 7 commandments. Obviously, if one can adhere to all 613 commandments vs. someone who is meticulous with just 7 commandments then from a spiritual point that person would be greater, but it should also be obvious that one has a much greater chance of failure with 613 commandments than with 7 commandments. His views in the area of relativity carry weight, but in this area he is like a small child, and it would be foolish for anyone who is serious about exploring metaphysics which connects to practical matters in daily life like ethics to pay any attention to them.
Genetics proved evolution? Humans supposedly came from chimpanzees but chimps have 2 MORE chromosomes than humans? And the genome projects have shown that humans share more DNA with dogs than chimps? We did not come from dogs buddy..... or chimps... The story about humans starting in Africa and migrating out to europe and becoming the "new and improved model" [figure it out, it's entirely racist in origin] was proven bogus by the human genome project, there is not enough genetic difference to support the idea of separation by more than a few thousand years.... I'm telling you, it's big science with a purpose of making you believe what they want you to believe and demeaning you in the process. They operate the same as big pharma, they cover up what they don't want you to know by just not commenting on it and not publishing it and feeding you the rubbish they want you to believe......
Does anyone care to (try to) refute this? Until this is refuted, the answer to the original question proposed in this thread is "yes".
The statement is a logical fallacy of the argument from ignorance variety, so there is little to refute beyond that simple fact.
dr dino has polluted your mind: Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., is the director of the Human Genome Project. His most recent book is "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief." " Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things."