"The Atheist Delusions" Informs

     I read "Atheist Delusions:  The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies" and it was packed full of facts, details and assessments that inform on the matter of faith and culture like no other book I have ever read.  The author, David Bentley Hart, is clearly a scholar and spends considerable time describing events in history as described by those who were present.  He also addresses the attacks and accusations frequently cited by fervent atheists to clarify the facts that often times do not support the assertions.  The Christian Church that birthed western culture is examined using facts that describe the actual history (unlike the standard myths that disparage the church).  The brightest light in this book shines on the early church (100-1000 AD) with repeated clarifications and references to ancient and primary sources but his clear command of historical knowledge is evident in other periods as well.
    The author is not Catholic but that makes his arguments and clarifications even more compelling.  His fluency in ancient literature and events is precisely what is needed to dispel the numerous myths and false ideas that are often cited concerning Christianity.  One myth is that christianity has long been at war and is still at war with science (even though Christianity birthed and nurtured science as An academic discipline)  There is the idea that there was a period called the "Dark Ages" (for the transitional period from Roman Empire to Christian Europe) which was less civilized than the Roman Empire that preceded it.   There is also the astounding idea that Christianity suppressed the rights of woman and slaves (when in fact they were systematically freed).  The facts are supporting his assertions are overwhelming.  There is no way for me to provide a complete review so I focus only on those parts that seemed most well done.
     Aristotle had a lock on science for more than a millenia that was broken by Christian free thinkers like Galileo.  Ptomley was focused on astrology and never saw the implications of his careful measurements (that gave him the power to predict planetary and astronomical events).  Copernicus was not an isolated genius in the desert of western culture but rather someone and influenced by those who trained, tutored and challenged him to understand the heavens and the natural order.  Technology (in practical applications) rapidly advanced at a rate unparalleled in the previous Hellenistic and Roman era's.  The author speculates that the slow dismantling of slavery may have nurtured innovations that made human labor more productive during these "Dark Ages" which were anything but "dark".
     A considerable amount of time is spent on the Galileo affair.  This event, often cited by those who wish to describe the typical and systematic posture of church and science at war.  Details (facts) are provided so that the reader can have a better understanding what actually transpired and how this event was a rare event of the church overstepping self imposed bounds.  The church asked that Galileo prove his assertion of the earth and planet orbiting the sun (virtually all of them agreed with the Copernican model that eased the ability to predict the placement of planets and stars in the sky).  This assertion (of a spinning earth speeding in an orbit obout the sun was later found to be correct) could not be proved to the satisfaction of those who reviewed the evidence.  Galileo had no explanation for the lack of retrograde motion of the stars when compared to the planets for example. The Earth did appear to be stationary to those who were on the earth.  So while his assertion made planetry motion easier to predict it was not clear that this meant that the earth (and planets) were truly orbiting the sun. 
     The real story of this event was how personal relationships can be strained, friends can be alienated and those of great talent can neglect the need to relate in productive ways with those around them.  Galileo was a physicist who interpreted data with great insight but he was by some accounts arrogant (almost condescending) and vindictive.  His his inability to maintain positive relations with those who provided him great comfort and privilege contributed to the house arrest and forced retirement in a well cared for villa.  The church was struggling with charges that it was compromising scripture, facing  schisms and confronting heresies.  These factors (lack of transparent reasoning, personality and political pressure) all culminated in an event that the church has long regretted and asked forgiveness for.
     The anlysis of culture was well done.  While he has plenty to be disappointed about in the now post christian west (that still benefits from the christian culture that fermented it) he does not end the book in despair.  He points to the past Christian response to similar challenges of the faithful in moving to the desert at the edges of society to reflect, and pray and change.  He looks for the Christian culture to rise up and empower the faithful in Africa, Asia and South America even as it retreats with a shrinking population focused on materialism in Europe and the United States.
     This is one book I will reference in the future again and again.  Packed with facts and presented by a master.

Reflections on "Saving Darwin"

     I am glad to have read "Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution" by Karl Gibson.  The text started by identifying the author as a fundamentalist Christian who once believed strongly in creationism.  Initially I thought the text would not have a perspective useful to me (due to the fundamentalist perspective).  He rejected creationism in his sophomore year in college, obtained a Ph.D. in physics and retained (most importantly) his Christianity.  This text reveals a great deal about the historical and cultural factors that have been at work in elevating the false dichotomy of science (Evolution) vs. faith (Christianity).
     The analogy of a gathering storm and scientific discovery struck a harmonic chord (having seen the process from time to time).  "A cloud appears, here and there, in a deep blue sky.  A drop of rain is felt.  More clouds. More rain.  The sky becomes partially, then fully obscured.....the clouds begin to break, and the sun reappears.  But it is not the same sun, and everything looks different."  Clearly this storm (that has brought evolution) has been with us well over a hundred years and the sun is only beginning to emerge among the those who remain steadfast in the faith.
      Legal and cultural battles (particularly in the United States) are discussed in depth.  The false spectacle of science versus faith in the Scopes trial (and in the trials since) are examined in depth.  You can be sure that the media (consisting of those who are antithetical to small town life) went to great lengths to paint the trial as the enlightened versus those not so enlightened.  Those Christians, more fully informed about the theory of evolution and who had recognize the wonder of evolution were not called by either side and not reported on.  The full story is not usually revealed in these controversies and Dr. Gibson goes to great lengths to detail this fact.
      The question of why these battles take place is examined.  The author makes a number of observations that are related to this ongoing struggle (between creationism and evolution) in our culture.  First the author points to the fact that half of the population recognizes creationism in polls as the best explanation for the state of life (on Earth).  Secondly the author points to the use of evolution and natural selection to justify eugenics and murder at the largest scales in the history of mankind.  The United States, in particular, has fought costly conflicts against regimes that believed in extermination of others due to race, religion and nationality.  The pairing of evolution (as a guiding principle) with Marxism and Totalitarianism may be the undercurrent of resistance to adapting evolution as a valid explanation for biological species.
     The author details the failure of our culture to separate the science that explains how evolution differentiates life from the wrong use of power to "accelerate" and "optimize" the evolution of the human race.  This failure is at the heart, in the view of the author, of why creationism is still held so strongly by so many.
     This theme (acceptance of evolution) opened up a line of personal reflection.  The fact that classrooms are used to transport facts and knowledge but do not focus on students experiencing the process of science may be contribute to the resistance (of evolution).  The lack of understanding about what science is may contribute to the failure in separating the scientific explanation from the wrong use of state power (or use as a philosophical model).  Creationists, Socialists, Marxists and/or Nazis would all rather use "Darwinism" (or anti Darwinism fervor) rather than have students see evolution as truth formed using science that explains the complexities of emerging life forms.
     I wish I could have known more, from this text, about the reason for the two dissents in the most recent "Intelligent Design Case".  One dissent (by Scalia) may not be due too a belief in "Creationism".  The author cites a devout Catholic faith that may have influenced his dissent.  It may be more reasonable and consistent that he would oppose federal intervention in local school board matters because of the deference and limitations he thinks the court should display in such cases.  If science class was about how to obtain and analyze data to draw valid conclusions then maybe the textbook content would not be such a huge issue.
     A bright spot for Catholics is found when the author reports that the Catholic Church has remained fully in support of the value of life of every individual and the right to pro-create despite being labeled as dim, criminal or wrongly conceived.
     The author certainly reveals a concern about the struggle that falsely places science at odds with faith.  Clearly he has good reason for concern.  If those fervent in the faith fail to see truth then there are consquences for those faithful.  This book is an attempt to help all of us see the truth.

Comments on "Finding Darwin's God"

     "Finding Darwin's God" by Kenneth Miller is an impressive work that clearly supports the idea that science and faith are, in fact, mutually supportive (each benefiting the other). He does an especially good job at laying out (in lay terms) the radioactive dating methods and geological data that support the modern scientific estimate of the earth's age.  The treatment of biological understanding of species differentiation was done well (he is well respected biologist).  He has a burden for those faithful who find natural selection and evolution to be a disturbing contradiction. It is a refreshing work that recognizes the need for God's creation to provide us with a genuine choice about the purpose of life and specifically our lives.

     It was surprising nugget of information to read about a series of Schrodinger lectures in Dublin in 1943. The lectures detailed ideas about how modern quantum physics and developing chemistry could explain cellular processes and biological systems.  Schrodinger speculated that populations of atoms that would make up biological information and transcription systems would compensate for the individual quantum variation (providing reliability and certainty).  How quantum uncertainty plays out in biological systems helps explain the forces that drive the process of natural selection and, in the end, evolution.

    The text is full of great quotes but the one I think captures the theme of the book (and follows a detailing of how quantum uncertainty drives biological variation): "Things look diffferent today. Darwin's vision has expanded to encompass a new world of biology in which the links to molecule to cell to organism are becoming clear. Eveolution prevails, but it prevails with a richness and subtlety its originator may have found surprising".

"Aquinas on Creation" Comments

     Read a book titled "Aquinas on Creation" which were translated by Steven Baldner & William Carroll. The book is basically the original writings of Thomas Aquinas on the text by his mentor Peter Lombard. The text and language is very dense and the reading is not recreational. It is amazing that the arguments posed by present day scientists and academics with genuine lives of faith still use the reasoning and assertions of this classic western thinker.

     In Physics during the last 50 years it has been noted that the constants that guide the behavior of our universe have values that happen to allow for the emergence of life. Gravity, as an example, is strong enough to induce fusion that powers our sun but weak enough to allow for planetary orbits at appropriate distances. The electrostatic constant, Plank's constant, nuclear force constants are seem to have values that are in the range that allows for life (some of these ranges are very small relative to possible values). This is the basis if the anthropic principle. The anthropic principle states that the universe has been formed with the possibility for life. This idea is consistent with the writing of Thomas Aquinas in the 1200's.

     I was especially impacted by the assertion that all things in the universe are good. "the divine power shines forth even among the wicked in the fact that they are held back and the divine providence shines forth through the fact that evil deeds are turned into good". The assertion by John Paul II that theology and philosophy need each other also is found in the writings of Aquinas.

     Thomas Aquinas also points out that creation is compatible with natural causes in nature. This continued to lay the groundwork for the the birth of science as an academic discipline in western culture. The tremendous support for science of all types by the church is fueled by the encouragement to understand all natural causes and links because they are certain to lead back to our creator.  This text confirms this ancient western tradition among the monotheistic faiths.

Does Tutoring Help or Hinder?

     Skilled tutors, competent in the subject matter, can provide a student with additional formal opportunities to examine, inquire and comprehend difficult to learn skills and knowledge. These understandings and skills may be difficult for a student to obtain only through the limited time available in class.  A content expert that spends time in fruitful dialogue with a student can help establish student understanding and improve skills related to the discipline.
     Guidance from the tutor can take the form of carefully constructed questions or examples specifically targeted to engage the student.  The additional perspective of an expert can strengthen their participation in the classroom.  A master tutor can help a student form the questions and arguments that lead that student to greater involvement in the classroom labs, activities and discussions.  Tutors can customize topics to meet the needs of a particular student. Expansion of a topic can be suited to match the individual's style of learning, intellectual capability and motivating interests.
     A tutor should carefully supervise the effort of a student to complete an assignment by focusing on "how they know what to do".   Problems and analysis similar to homework should be examined, explained and used by the tutor to foster genuine dialogue that yields a deepening comprehension of the subject.
     Tutors can provide another person who has a genuine interest int the success of the student.  Intangibles can be addressed including skills in personal time management, self confidence and encouragement in addition to what is provided by parents, teacher and peers.
    Content experts unskilled in tutoring can assist in completing assignments without establishing student comprehension.  A tutor can also fail to foster fruitful conversation regarding the principles of the topics engaged.  A student focused only on memorizing a specific set of procedures, without comprehension of principles, is not well served by a tutor.
     Productive class participation may be suppressed.  A student may elect to be less attentive and less efficient in class because the tutor can compensate for that less productive behavior.  This is, in my experience, a major pitfall.  Students who come to class knowing that all classroom activities designed to assist in developing comprehension are unnecessary (because the tutor will tell them what to do at some other time) may display less attention to the class and erode the relationship with the instructor.  A chasm can then further develop between that student and the learning experience that is being laid in support of the student's understanding and discovery.  In the worst case scenario I have seen students distract others during class precisely because these students have competent tutors and can devote the class to social conversation (a very desired activity in the teen age years).  Such tutoring will enhance test performance but may suppress lab and classroom assignment grades.

   A tutor may either help or hinder (it depends on the student and the tutor).  The paradox is that, if a tutor is really outstanding, then the student will learn how to learn the material and the tutor will (over time) become unnecessary.  The better the tutor the faster this student becomes an independent learner.

Is the Science Fair fair?

     The Science Fair requires a research project produced by a student is a very competitive event.  The competition clearly favors students with resources, experience (or access to experience) and demands significant effort by every participant.  Some will win. Many will be discouraged.  The science fair experience offers all opportunities to display initiative, character, persistence and competitiveness while developing skills that will serve them throughout a lifetime.

     It is hard to overstate the impact of this event on the lives of those who pour effort into their project.  I have spoken with engineers, physicists who discuss a high school science project forty years earlier with great enthusiasm.   Science students do win scholarships, awards and gain recognition otherwise not possible on the athletic field, as a star on the stage or as a student government representative.  I have seen young lives transformed by taking part in regional, state and international science fairs.  In my experience there is no science event (classroom or extracurricular) during the high school years that can have the impact of the "Science Fair".

     The "Science Service" (formed by a journalist E. W. Scripps in 1921) spawned science clubs and activities focused on public experiences in science.  In 1942 the "Science Talent Search" was established by the Science Service and Westinghouse with the purpose to encourage talented students to pursue a career in science or engineering.  The "Science Fair" of today is guided by the standards of the "Science Talent Search" and now accepts science projects from around the world through a network of local, regional, state and nationally organized hubs.
     There are two distinct classes of the many awards, scholarships, prizes and recognitions at the competition.  Science Fair category awards in subject categories (such as Chemistry or Botany) are selected by judges associated with the Science Fair (and normally handed out on Saturday morning).  Special awards are granted by numerous societies and institutions with particular interests at every level of the Science Fair network.  "Conservation Clubs" may select the best project with an environmental focus. The military selects projects with applications relating to the military mission.  Associations of doctors and dentists may offer awards relating to medical and dental health issues.  These representatives from these associations may have no contact with judges associated with the fair   It is therefore possible to win special awards but not win official "Science Fair Awards".  It is also possible that a project win a "Science Fair" category award but win no special awards at all.  It is often happens that high quality projects garner both the Science Fair category awards and numerous special awards.  The winnings can become significant and even substantial with each level of science fair competition offering a new set of prizes, cash awards and college scholarships.
     Judging many dozens of science fair projects uniformly in a 4-24 hour window is the most amazing feat of the science fair.  Individual projects can have a huge amount of data, extensive logs over many months of effort, research papers, advanced mathematical and statistical operations and pages and pages of programming code printed out for review.  A judge with 3-5 hours of available time may be asked to review 5-50 projects.  The time factor (in judging) is huge and so a number of techniques are used to reduce the judging load.  Projects can be "red flagged" or stricken from the judging list because required forms are incorrectly filled out, the size of the display board is wrong or some policy is violated. Removing projects from the list of those being evaluated allows judges to focus time on other project.  Projects can be eliminated quickly when, without the presence of a mentor, a casual conversation reveals a lack of project knowledge.  Insufficient or incoherent research, deficient logs and data that fails to support the conclusions of the project all allow for a judge to quickly move on to another project.  Rapid judging has the impact of favoring those project displays with visual appeal and participants than present themselves well and are fluent in articulating the project.
     Many winning projects are variations of topics done in previous years and so the research reports that accompany the projects can become quite extensive (20-300 pages).  Forms from previous years, seemingly difficult to complete in the past, are dated and signed again for a similar project.  The project display board is redone and improved.  The mastery of the content shared during interviews with the judges become more evident with each year of investigation in a similar content.  When the confidence of the participant grows so does the ability of the participant to articulate the purposes, procedures, findings and implications of the project.  Experience, or access to experience, can have a huge impact (as it does in most academic competitive events).
     Participants may have different degrees of mentoring available to them and this can be the single biggest difference between the outstanding project and the winning project.  One student (from a school I worked at) had a mother who was a commercial artist.  Her project display board with colored stage lights discreetly highlighted an surreal professional display.  Her father was a research professor who was published extensively and often had his daughter with him on a research vessel during the summer months.  She was well versed and understood her project and was very articulate.  She did her project but had significant assistance.  The project, redone over three years, garnered over a dozen scholarships and many awards.  The mentoring, guiding, tutoring, advising and constructive critique of her parents was an asset that not every science fair participant has (or could ever have).
     A casual walk down the row of science display boards can quickly reveal the huge disparity in available resources that support the project.  Some students will spend well over a thousand dollars on a single project.  Students may be in educational environments that have little or no available equipment.  I have seen students who built computer cooling systems and bought computers and cooling systems just for the project (they won at the state and international levels.)  Some students borrow the school equipment.  Some students have little available funding and are at schools with sparse or dated equipment. Those who are able and willing to spend much more can spend much more.  Funding can have a huge impact on the equipment, quality of the equipment and even on the display board hardware.  There is no limit or budget to the Science Fair project so this becomes another factor that not every participant has access to.
      Not all future scientists win at the Science Fair.  I spoke with Russell Hulse, a Nobel Prize Winner in Physics, about his Science Fair project (radio telescope) that never won.  The lack of mentoring, resources and his personal admission that the display board never looked as good as others meant that his project fell short year after year.  He does report that he learned more from his projects than he did in the science class. Each day he looked forward to the end of school so he could go home and work on his latest science project.
     The Science Fair is not fair and I am certain that no can ever make it fair with more rules.  The science fair has winners who never win and that is the strength of the experience.  The winners are those who generate projects and research with noble purposes, with genuine curiosity, with personal investment while displaying the persistence and effort.
  
  
    
  

    
  

  

      

Squirrel versus Mojave Ratler

[This was an event during a Grand Canyon Hike taken with Steve Anthony, Bill Griffin, Andrew Mecom, Jeff Tesney that occurred in the afternoon of July 21, 2010]


   After arriving at Indian Gardens following a hike from Phantom Ranch up Bright Angel Trail we settled into our camping area and rested.  The plan was to visit Plateau Point later in the day but avoid the heat of the afternoon.  Jeff, Bill and Steve used the time to wander the area looking at the sights.  While walking in the area of a small stone storage facility the came upon a squirrel and a snake in a conflict.  Bill came to let me know and I walked down to the site of the conflict directly in front of the wall of the building.  The snake was pink in color and had the unmistakable marking and rattle associated with the Grand Canyon Rattler.
    The squirrel,  appeared to be taunting the rattler by standing on rear legs leaning forward toward the snake and swaying sideways (left and right) as if he was daring the snake to strike.  The rattler eventually would lunge out at the snake only to be met by repeated swipes of sharp little claws which very accurately ripped across the face of the rattler.  This was truly a struggle to remember.  The most verminous deadly snake in north america being scratched and beaten by a lone scruffy looking squirrel repeatedly over a 30 minute time period.  The process of squirrel taunting, rattler lunging, squirrel dodging and scratching continued for more than 20 minutes (the time I spent watching but I missed most of the action).  
    In the final play of the conflict the squirrel backed away from the rattler, went around the back of the rattler that was poised to strike in the forward direction and slapped it from behind!  Clearly the squirrel got the better of the snake who in the end seemed blinded and dazed as it slithered away. 
     Later I spoke with a park ranger and related what we saw.  He shared with me that he and another ranger actually saw two squirrels kill a rattler and drag off the body of the dead rattler. I asked him why squirrels are apparently so deadly in their treatment of rattlers and the ranged speculated that because rattlers have been known to enter squirrel dens to consume the young squirrels that this may be a protective behavior.  That makes sense to me.