Sunday, July 13, 2008

Creavolution

Hi guys, in my first post here, I’d like to talk a little bit about Creationism and Evolution. Perhaps the greatest schism in modern academia, the feud between Creationists and ‘Darwinists’ runs deep, and draws out the very worst in people all across the world. For the most part, what can be said against the other side has been said, and activists on both sides continue to hurl the same arguments at each other that they have been saying for years in an endless cycle of pointless bickering. Recent years however have seen both sides improving their political tactics, modifying their language and word usage to make their case harder to shoot down in court. A new Louisiana law has been passed that, through quite clever wordage, allows teachers to teach all sides they want to of any topic they consider scientifically controversial. Implied of course is that evolution is a flawed theory and therefore something along the lines of creationism or intelligent design can be taught as an opposing theory so as to allow the students to decide for themselves which idea has greater merit. I have trouble understanding how that is constitutional seeing as federally public schools=state and teaching religious ideas=church and public schools teaching religious ideas=church and state together which certainly does not withhold the constitutional principle of separation of church and state. Now perhaps they could get by if they taught every creation idea from every religion and culture as an opposing view to evolution, from Hindu and Buddhist to Native American spiritualism and Scientology. But this is totally impractical and will never happen and so none of it should be taught except science.

The issue however is that the entire argument is entirely unnecessary. I have issues with both sides, and will start with the creationists. I am a man who believes the universe is God’s creation and I am also a man of science (I’m an engineer). I don’t find that there is any contradiction there at all. The two ideas work in harmony together, each pieces of the puzzle that fit together to attempt to explain the world around us. If one is to say that God created all the universe, how is it wrong to say that he created it through the means we have observed. He has given us the greatest challenge possible; 14 billion years of history to try to understand. What greater challenge is there than to try to understand the universe? To understand how life, in all of its infinite complexity, came to be. It is the perfect challenge for the intelligent, curious species that we are. And it is one that we will surely never complete. We will never know all there is to understand, because we were not meant to. We are meant to strive, endlessly, to learn. What would life be if there was nothing left to learn, or to discover? Science is the greatest pursuit on earth because it does nothing but glorify God.

To accept this idea is to accept that the Bible is written as a metaphor. Creationists say that evolution is not so because that’s not how it is in the Bible. Of course that’s not how it is in the Bible! Man 2000+ years ago would not possibly have understood all that we understand now. Moses and Aaron would not have understood evolution, DNA, or mutations. And God clearly didn’t want to tell them. He wanted us to discover it all on our own. He gave us the foundation, just enough to go on. He told us it is His work and we should be thankful for it, then left us to explore. It was a beautiful gift, to leave us wanting.

In essence, there is no harm in believing in God and accepting science. Science and evolution are not a threat to Christian beliefs, they exemplify them. To reject them is to reject His infinite ability, and all of his gifts of curiosity and learning that He gave to us. However, though the pieces fit together, they are never the less separate pieces and should be treated as such. Because of this, each piece has its own institution set up in which to teach. The school is set up to teach the sciences, and the church is there to teach about God. Attendance at one is mostly voluntary, and attendance at the other is mostly compulsory. Because students are required to attend school, the material presented to them should only that that the institution in set up to teach, i.e.; science (and language arts and other things of course). If some, most or all students wish to learn about God, then it is their choice to attend church, bible study or any other event where they can learn about Him.

Well I’ve run out of time, I’ll post some thoughts on the science community later when I have a chance. Take care

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Russia, the second coming

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1821259,00.html
After the U.S. and Czech Republic signed an agreement calling for the basing of a U.S. radar south of Prague, Moscow responded with a threat of unspecified "military" action if the system is ever deployed.
test