Gerald Schroeder held Doctorates in both Earth Sciences and Physics from MIT (where he also taught Physics) and was on the Board of the Atomic Energy Commission. And, yes, he also happened to be a Jew. That doesn’t make him or his ideas wrong. If you can’t refute the soundness of his work through actual proof, then why comment at all? Being capriciously dismissive and committing ad hominem is wrong.
I have not read Schroeder, nor heard anything about him, until here.
There are several things “wrong” here with your comments.
For one a concept or model is tested - verified or refuted - by the number of EVIDENCE, not proof.
Proof is some sorts of mathematical models or mathematical statements, that often appeared in the forms of equations.
A concept or model is only determined to be “science” or “scientific”, if you have evidence to support it, not proofs (equations).
Like the explanatory model, the mathematical model (hence proof) needs to be tested. And tests can only be performed through observations or acquiring evidence. These observations/evidence are then compared to the models of the hypothesis.
This is problem I find most people have with science, they don’t understand the proper terminology, so they often misuse the terms, or worse, they make up something, which is dishonest.
Second.
No ideas, no concepts, no models (that would include all hypotheses, theories, equations) ARE NEVER CONSIDERED TRUE-BY-DEFAULT, without ever being tested...EVER.
All concepts and models have to be tested first, before it can be considered true.
So, when you wrote :
“And, yes, he also happened to be a Jew. That doesn’t make him or his ideas wrong.”
No, it doesn’t make his idea, “wrong”, nor does it make his idea, “right”...regardless if he is theist or non-theist.
Being “theist” or “atheist”, isn’t the point, Shaul.
Even if Schroeder was an atheist, and if he came up with untested idea, then it still wouldn’t be true. Being atheist doesn’t give you special privileges of being right when it comes to science.
It is evidence that are essential to any model being “scientific”, not about being theists or atheists, or being followers of any sorts of “-ism”.
The point is - Does Schroeder have EVIDENCE to support his idea or not.
(A) If the answer is “yes”, then his idea could be “probable”.
(B) But if the answer is “no”, then his idea could be “improbable”, therefore mostly likely false.
If he has no evidence that support his idea, then he isn’t right...even if Schroeder is an atheist.
Science isn’t about theism or atheism or agnosticism. None of these -ism have anything to do with science.
There are no conspiracy against Schroeder being Jews. There are many other scientists who are Christians and Jews, who don’t accept Schroeder’s claim.