Month: August 2005

Posted on

Fascinating…

So yeah, as a few of you have noticed, there’s actually been a good and lengthy discussion on my “Lee Strobel is an Idiot” posting on August 3rd, which I find rather fascinating. I’m very much enjoying the stimulating conversation that’s going on there between very diverse people with different backgrounds and understanding. I hope it continues since I’m learning a decent amount from it!

…which brings me to another subject… I’ve been thinking recently about why all these articles and such are coming up about Intelligent Design Theory versus Evolution, or more importantly, why I seem to be making a relatively big deal about it. Yesterday, I noticed that this week’s Time Magazine is publishing a few articles on the subject and even has it on the cover for the week. I guess it represents a crossroads in my life, perhaps. I’ve been going to church for many years; I’m already entrenched at one in St. Louis where I get to play drums every week (score… ;-)). But at the same time, I’m continuing with my graduate school education. I now have a bachelor’s degree in Chemistry and in Biology, so I’ve lived and breathed science for the past 5 years (if not longer), while at the same time attending the Wesley House regularly and hearing the “other side” of the story. I don’t know that I’m making decisions or life plans or anything around this “crossroads,” yet I think I am making progress toward the “truth,” or however close to it one can get.

The ID vs Evolution debate is a difficult one that will never be fully completed. I posted an article yesterday that is written by a proponent of the ID side of things. I don’t agree with a few things out of his article, but I do agree that the problem needs to be resolved with healthy debate, much like we are doing in the “Lee Strobel” posting. There are severe problems with the way ID is presented to young school kids. On the other hand, Evolution is still a theory (although, a very well-supported one…) and should be treated as such. Neither is truly “right” as they are being taught today. I guess more time is needed to come to a clear consensus. The issue needs good, healthy discussion before anyone will waver and listen to the other side’s argument…and I certainly find myself leaning toward one side, unable to listen to the other.

The problem is: which one?

Posted on

Review: March of the Penguins

So Brooke and I saw “March of the Penguins” on Saturday night and I think we both agree that it was a good movie. What can I say? Penguins are cute. It’s hard not to like watching them. And seriously, it’s incredible what these guys/girls do every year.

The movie begins with the trek from the edge of Antarctica and follows penguins travelling (i.e. “waddling”) toward a more centralized, safer location where they will breed. The males and females will mate and the male will sit there for months without eating…just standing there…with an egg on its feet under a flap of skin to keep it warm. The females will go back to the ocean and then return again with food for the young after they’ve hatched. This is a 70 mi trip each way, keep in mind. This is all happening during a winter in Antarctica which, needless to say, is only slightly worse than a winter in Kirksville.

Anyway, it’s 1.5 hours long and very easy and entertaining to watch. Morgan Freeman does an excellent job narrating, of course, and the penguins are interesting to learn about. If you can see it, I’d recommend doing it. If anything, rent it sometime and watch it, if anything, just to learn more about these incredible creatures. No wonder the penguin is the mascot of Linux… 😛

Posted on

Lee Strobel is an idiot

So, I mentioned awhile back that I’m reading “The Case for a Creator” by Lee Strobel, who also wrote such books as “The Case for Faith” and “The Case for Christ,” two very popular books on the college scene in such “black and white” groups as CCF and Campus Crusade…

Anyway, so I saw this book at Barnes and Noble and couldn’t help but buy it since it was that trendy author writing about two things I’m interested in: God and science. Thus far (and, granted, I’m only 80 pgs into it…), the book is worthless. Strobel uses “evidence” out of non-evidence. For example:

“The problem with irreducibly complex systems is that they perform no function until all the parts are present and working together in close coordination with one another. So natural selection cannot help you build such systems; it can only preserve them once they’ve been built. And it’s virtually impossible for evolution to take such a huge leap by mere chance to create the whole system at once.” — pg 79

Why not?! The chances of being struck by lightening once, surviving, and then getting struck again in the exact same location as before isn’t likely, but it’s still possible. How do you know it isn’t possible? And now to the whole “evidence by non-evidence” point:

“This is not an argument from ignorance…we’re not inferring design just because the naturalistic evolutionary theories all fail to explain information. We infer design because all those theories fail and we know of another causal entity that is capable of producing information – namely, intelligence. Personally, I find this to be a very strong argument indeed.” — pg 78

Oh really! All those theories fail? Do you know how science works, Mr. Strobel? You know there is no such thing as “proof” in science? That’s because any evidence can come along and change the way we we all see the world. You assume that since we don’t understand a few facets of the world around us, we must assume that “intelligence” as we know it must be involved. We thought the world was flat until we found evidence to support that it’s round. We thought the universe revolved around Earth until we found that Earth revolves around a star…that is one of infinite stars in the rest of the universe. The “intelligence” you’re talking about is human intelligence. God is all-knowing, thereby presenting an entirely different type of intelligence from what we have experienced. Frankly, Mr. Strobel, you don’t know anything about science if this is the “evidence” you’re presenting. You shouldn’t be writing books about things you apparently know nothing about.

The point of all this is: humans understand absolutely nothing about the “known” universe. We don’t know how God works. We don’t know how it was all done. To quote the common phrase, “we don’t know jack.” How can we assume to know how it all works? Isn’t it possible that there are other universes parallel to our own that have completely different physics to our own? How about another planet out there that has beings built out of neon rather than carbon? Or perhaps even that on some planet on some distant galaxy, a milk cow won an election against someone looking strangely like George W. Bush. Frankly, we don’t know. I can’t prove that these things aren’t happening because, well, because it can’t be proven.

Much like Strobel can’t prove anything he’s putting forth in his book. Know why? Well, because “evidence by non-evidence” isn’t evidence at all. It’s ignorance.

Posted on

God vs Evolution

“There are gaps in science everywhere. Are we to fill them all with divinity? There were gaps in Newton’s universe. They were ultimately filled by Einstein’s revisions. There are gaps in Einstein’s universe, great chasms between it and quantum theory. Perhaps they are filled by God. Perhaps not. But it is certainly not science to merely declare it so.”
— Charles Krauthammer, Time Magazine, August 8, 2005

I posted another essay posted in the “Articles” section above…check it out…

There seem to have been more than a few articles about this subject over the past few weeks. There’s a show that’s going to be on the History Channel on August 7th called “Ape to Man: The Evolution of Evolution,” indicating that interest in the subject is still as strong as ever.

We talked about teaching intelligent design (……creationism…) in our public schools in my Evolutionary Thought class this past semester and came to the conclusion, much like anyone who knows anything about science, that it’s a dumb idea. It’s one thing to teach it in a Catholic high school, but to teach it in our public schools is entirely wrong. What happened to a separation of church and state?

Anyway, it’s a good essay…check it out…

Posted on

Current TV

Many of you heard about Al Gore, et al. purchasing a TV news network last year and developing a news channel developed at younger audiences, known as Current TV. Yahoo! News says that the channel is targeted at “Internet-savvy viewers 18 to 34 years old” and features “professionally produced segments and viewer-produced videos running from a few seconds to 15 minutes in length,” known as “pods.”

I’m very happy that there’s a new channel out there (although, we don’t get it in St. Louis, sadly…) providing news to a youth-targeted audience. Many people my age get their news from the Daily Show more than they do from any other source…this is great, ’cause it’s an awesome show, yet it still leaves much to be desired. Also, and perhaps more important, this station will have a more liberal bias than all of the other 24-hour news networks.

…let the games begin. 😉