Did You Know That. . . .?

Tags

cosmology, evolution, foreign affairs, genius, Good stuff to know, mind, pseudo-scientists, science, Syria, Writers

A lot of disparate thoughts travel through this brain case I can safely inform you. You know me well enough to recognize the dangers of entering into my sandbox of synaptic pleasures. I’m either hopelessly unfocused or a cobbled together unrecognized genius. Some days it’s more one, other days, well.

I’ve come to see it as a blessing of sorts. At least I try to see it that way. I should have been a college professor, but of course that but begs the question–on what subject?

Any the hoo, I have a lot of thoughts about Syria but not a lot of coalesced conclusions, so I’ll beg off at the moment. Is it too trite and cowardly to just say, I’m conflicted?

I had a bizarre discussion with fellow high-school mates about the issue of spanking as discipline which proved to me once again how easy it is to stay with ideas that are both comfortable and supported by simplistic memes that denote little if any critical thinking. More and more I conclude that indeed advances in the human condition are the result of a very few minds indeed, and put into place by mostly brain-dead human hordes who are spoon fed some “reason” for implementing them.

If all that sounds rather cloudy and vague, well, it’s a cloudy and vague day here in Las Cruces. It’s been raining off and on for several days, which is highly unusual, at least for us recent arrivals–we saw so little rain last year that it made one appreciate water as a life-giving commodity surely. This year, we were told, as of Monday at least we had not yet received four inches of the wet stuff, and we might get at least that during this week. Since the desert is nothing but sand covering a rock hard-pan, the danger in these parts is floods in low-lying areas. Water races to its lowest place and rushes along, making gullies and rivulets through the desert. These become ditches or arroyos as we call them here, and eventually the Grand Canyon if you can stick around that long.

So anyway, here are some things I’ve read this week that you might find interesting.

Vlad, who appears to be in the driver’s seat at the moment internationally that is, has some things to say and said them in the NYTimes.

It’s an interesting “open letter to the American people“. Part propaganda, part history lesson, part chutzpah, it is worth a couple of minutes to read.

Having a power mad ex-president of the Communist party and ex-KGB officer, Putin deigns to give America a lesson in democracy. One can but admire the rich irony of that alone!

What he has to say about the subject of exceptionalism is worth reading. There is truth in those words.

As I said, my thoughts on the subject of Syria are unclear. That Putin wants to be a “player” is clear. What it will cost is not so clear.

A man so determined to show off his “masculinity” bespeaks something surely. What that is, I am not at all sure of.

 

¤

I did mention the possibility that I am a hidden genius didn’t I?

That is almost surely a good reason for concluding that I am not.

Like “hero” we bandy about the word genius rather loosely these days.

If you would like to read an interesting take on what genius is and is not, then read I Dream of Genius over at Commentary. I found it a good read.

At least you can see if those you think of as geniuses are what the author does.

¤

If you would like to look at the mind in a different way, a more evolutionary way perhaps then you might want to pick up a new book out there by E. O Wilson, emeritus professor of biology at Harvard.

If you are unsure of whether you want to invest in The Social Conquest of Earth, then you can read through a review of the book from The Spectator.

HINT: once more we are compared to insects. All it all, it looks worthy of some good reading and some very good thinking ahead if you opt in. The review is not favorable on Wilson’s book. See if you agree. In either case, it seems a worthwhile read.

¤

Cosmic archaeology, need I say more?

Some say that aliens have looked and found us. But there is a thriving scientific community that spends its time looking for them. This is way more than looking for Goldilocks planets my friends, much more.

This is the type of scientific speculation that leads young boys and girls to dream of going into space, and leads them to enrolling in our best science and technology universities.

Come and dream for a few minutes. What can it hurt?

Go and read Distant Ruins.

¤

What happens when we both hear and see something? Do these two senses work together to enhance our fact gathering?

Is there a hierarchy of the senses? Do some matter more? Does one?

Oh I’m sure in the late recesses of a bleak and cold winter’s night, you too have asked this question.

So go and get the answer: Who did you hear, Me, or your lying eyes?

HINT: You might just have been McGurked!

¤

Another thing I imagine you’ve given a lot of thought to is why we are so fascinated by the lives of the writers we read and admire. I mean how much has been written about the life of Hemingway for instance? Are we not enthralled with the secret world of Proust, or Dickinson? How about Emerson or Fitzgerald? Balzac? Oh come now, you know you are curious.

A biography writer, shares some thoughts on what we can and cannot learn about those whose words cause us to depart this reality and enter another, one that sometimes we would rather inhabit.

Good reading here.

¤

Finally, if you have ever had the occasion to be “linked” to a “scientist” or other “expert” on something like global warming or evolution, or biblical literalness, American exceptionalism, the Judeo-Christian roots of American government, or similar things, you know what you are up against.

If you had the resources and or time to do the research,  you would almost surely find that most of these experts are anything but. Some our out-and-out failures who can be bought for a price, others are traveling into areas for which they have no formal expertise at all, and others are simply grifters, ready always to make a buck upholding any cockamamie “theory” that comes down the pike.

There is a great little site called Encyclopedia of American Loons. You can look up the biography of a startlingly large group of imposters and get the real low down on what they know and don’t know. An invaluable site. Since they seem to be novice bloggers I asked to them add the widget for a search engine and they have. Now you can enter a name and find out if they have bio’ed him or her. Or if you just want some fun reading, just go read a few.

So, now that I have solved all your reading needs for the weekend, I’ll leave you to it, with promises of more to come.

Related articles

• Sen. Menendez reacts to Putin’s op-ed: I wanted to vomit (thelead.blogs.cnn.com)
• Vladimir Putin Lectures the US on Morality in the New York Times, Greenwald Co-Signs (littlegreenfootballs.com)
• The Social Conquest of Earth – Edward O. Wilson (konradebooks.com)

 

It Wasn’t Supposed to Be This Hard

Tags

ancient Israel, beer, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Social Networking, Twitter, Yahweh

I figured that if we knew from day one that life would be as tough as it is, there would be a huge uptick in the suicide rate among seven-year-olds. Thankfully the little darlins’ are protected from the awful truth.

I’m thinking of holding a contest to name the number of days we have waited since the inception of our brake problems until the fix date. Winner gets what’s left of my sanity. New date for “it’s done” is now tomorrow. I ain’t takin’ bets I tell ya.

Oh, since nobody seems to have come upon it, there is a new post on 1000 Shitty Things. It’s not half bad, so take a look if you are looking for a bit of giggle in your day.

As the cartoon suggests, I’ve been spending considerably more time on Twitter lately, and trying to be a better Facebooker.  There is always a price to be paid, given that God begrudgingly won’t extend the number of hours in a day. I’m doing my best. I continue to stay pretty current with what most of you are saying, although my comments are few. Our server was down for six-hours plus yesterday and that explains the lack of posting.

Twitter has actually become a favorite with me. Mostly due to the retweet device which brings me  just tons of new and interesting tweeters through my friends. I ran into this one guy that is hysterical. Goes by the moniker Jesus_M_Christ. You can probably find him in a search. Yesterday he said something along the lines: “I flirted with atheism for a while, like all boys, I too rebelled for a time against my Dad.” He says amusing stuff like that daily.

 I’ve been reading the usual political nonsense, as no doubt you have. More and more, I find the American “voter” a study in utter stupidity. As one would expect, as time has gone by, little by little the tide has turned and now more people think the GOP has a better solution for our economic woes. Quite a feat when they have proposed zero, done nothing, and only moan about the good old days when the rich got the breaks and the rest of us paid. It’s magic I  guess. Or it shows beyond any doubt that voters base their “opinions” on star dust and on reading tea leaves.

Which only goes to beg the question as to why so many of us bother to engage in this art? of political commentary. We are a voice crying in the wilderness of arid minds it seems. Yet we labor on. Except in our case, we may indeed by more worthy to tie the shoes of the average politician than they are. Did  you get the metaphor?

There are not many Margaret and Helen posts these days, but they are always a gem. Do go and have a laugh, and of course, hear the truth as only they can give it.

Just heard this lovely quote on Keith Olbermann regarding a Beck follower:

I just love Glenn Beck. He’s explaining to us all the real American history they didn’t bother to teach us in school.

Choice is yours: laugh hysterically at how anyone could be so stupid, or weep copiously at what passes for knowledge in this land of waving grains of wheat. (I think copious is a grand word don’t you?)

I have to admit the truth (treat this as a confession of sin omnmipotens Deus) that Vanity Fair, just makes me get all squishy and excited. I love their brand of bitchy biting commentary on just about anyone and anything. They are doin’ the Palin! Oh yeah, don’t miss this dishin’ of the dirt from the masters of New Yorky arrogant, sophisticated, ‘oh no you dint!’ kinda schtick.  Worth the price of admission (oh, we are free aren’t we? Whatever, go read it and enjoy).

We had a troll the other day who added his two cents about the wonders of Beck and his “reclaiming our honor” garbage. Apparently Stevie was unaware of TV and that you don’t have to be physically present at an event to know what happened there. He suggested that my question about Beck’s receptivity among Christians was questionable given his Mormonism, was somehow inappropriate. In the small case that Steve is not back asleep under his bridge, I offer this from the Evangelical world. Apparently their concerns about Beck are deep.

I don’t know quite what to make about this next entry. A drunk Yahweh? or drunk Hebrew Testamental writers? Either suggests that, well it suggests SOMETHING. Coming from Biblical Archaeology, it can’t be dismissed as simply nonsense can it? Apparently ancient Israelites were swillers of the beer. Yep. I didn’t say it. I just report it. Make of it what you will.  And before OKJimm can say it, I will, “I’ll drink to that!”

Well, there is lots more in the news, but I’ve read it all, and there is nothing else you need know at the moment. Trust me. You do don’t you? Signing off to go and fix Taco Salad for dinner. Ain’t that man lucky to have me?

And who said: “I’m wearing my push-up bra today. I want to get my way.”

Related Articles

• Quote of the Day: “Glenn Beck’s Hypocritical Revival” (themoderatevoice.com)
• Glenn Beck’s Online Flop (thedailybeast.com)
• Olbermann: Beck Caught Lying During Rally (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)
• Late Night: God Gooses Glenn Beck (lafiga.firedoglake.com)

What’s Up? 07/22/10

Tags

Archaeology, Billo O'Reilly, Fox Noise, Keith Olbermann, Moon, Moorehead Circle, Muslims, neuroscience, Newt Gingrich, science, Shirley Sherrod

Well the firestorm on the Sherrod case continues. We hear that Fox is beside itself, being all put upon by the entire WORLD. I mean, they didn’t do a darn thing wrong, and it’s the filthy liberal media that is making up stories against them.

How sad.

Not having done a thing of course means that O’Reilly, trying to be “big about it” has offered an apology to Ms. Sherrod for not doing anything wrong. He then manages to slam her again, and of course defend Fox. So I guess we are to conclude that he was technically wrong, but morally right? Billo the Clown at his best.

Shephard Smith, also from Fox, was not so kind to his own network, blasting Fox for running the story without investigating the video, and claiming that his segment refused to engage in the story because of they “do not trust the source,” namely Breitbart and his scummy site.

But if you read nothing more on this story, don’t miss Keith Olbermann’s scathing utterly devastating commentary on the whole affair. Returning abruptly from his vacation just to speak on this issue, he puts all of us to shame. He condemns all, without exception, and points to the fact that today, the right is busily making the racists the victims and the victims the true racists. Quite a turn of events.

What seems to be a cry in unison, is the demand by the left en mass to stop kowtowing and  running scared from the right wing lie machine. Stand up! Stop trying to ignore and placate the right. They are not interested in any concept of fairness or truth. They want to rule and they are about almost any means to do so. They have declared that any election they don’t win is illegitimate. They are no longer into democracy or representative government. They are about tyranny of the One Party Rule. And they have the nerve to call the left fascist!

The right is so schizophrenic that one part never knows what the other is doing. On the one hand they are always criticizing Obama for “destroying religion (meaning of course Christianity) in Merika, while on the other Newt Slippery Gingrich is saying no to mosque’s at Ground Zero because Saudi Arabia doesn’t have churches there. Love the lack of logic. Or is Newt saying that we no longer care about being a “bastion” of religious freedom? Dopes like him seldom think beyond the last word out of their mouths.

“Lunar Apatite with Terrestrial Volatile Abundances.” Yeah, bet you know what that means? Sure ya do. Okay, it means that (hold onto your socks if ya gotta ’em) the moon is full of H2O. Yessiree Bob. It’s called Lunar “dew” (imagine Louis Black saying that–DOOOOO). The fine article alluded to will be in Nature’s July 22 issue, should you be so inclined to read all the specifics. This was all discovered last fall, and I’m at a loss how we have survived not knowing about this until NOW. Anyway, they have found even more that is different that the dew variety. That seems important to me. I figure it’s important because they finish by saying: “we must now re-evaluate the volatile inventories of the moon, relative to the Earth.”  See? That sounds quite important. Inventories? Cheeky moon scientists!

I can usually find something even weirder if I try. So, I have.

There is a world called possibilian. Okay. Digest that. And a neuro-scientist writer who writes about life in the space between what is and what if. Got that? Possibilianism celebrates the breath of our ignorance. Kinda like there is way more chit we don’t know than do, so let’s play. Or like the universe is so vast that anything that could happen has happened somewhere. (My personal favorite, since somewhere me and Johnny Depp are having wild sex in whipped cream!) Anyway, this Eagleman dude sounds like a real hoot to have at a party. The site is called “Killing the Buddha” and bears more watching I think.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve always felt like the poor relative when it comes to archaeology. Seems all the good stuff is somewhere else. The Pyramids, early human bones, caveman paintings, you know what I mean. But we can toot our Merikan horns a bit, since things are hoppin’ in Cincinnati, Ohio of all places. (See, doesn’t that help make you feel better after LeBron left Ohioans?). Seems we have a 2,000 year old “wooden” Stonehenge. Ours is called Moorehead Circle. 😛 So there you British with your royalty and castles and and  stuff. We got somethin’ too!

So, that’s all ya need to know today. You can return to your normal life.

Women’s Lives in Biblical Times

Tags

archaelogy, bible, biblical studies, Book Reviews, Israel, Jennie R. Eberling, Palestine, patriarchy, Women's history

I seldom, in doing book reviews, venture far from biblical studies or theology. I wouldn’t normally attempt to review a professor of archaeology. But Jennie R. Ebeling, Associate Professor of Archaeology at the University of Evansville, has written a book that beautifully marries the two, and I feel able to assess its worth and impact on the genre at least of biblical studies.

My deepest thanks to Continuum Books, and T & T Clark Publishing for making a copy of her book available to me., Women’s Lives in Biblical Times.

Anyone who has spent any time studying the bible is surely aware that women’s lives are difficult to determine and assess when reference is only given to the bible itself. Let’s face it, the bible was written (so far as we know) by men, about men. Women play at best tangential roles, except in a very few instances. It was a world of patriarchy and thus it is men’s story that is retold.

Professor Ebeling, seeing the usual false portrayal of women in much of fiction dedicated to the time of ancient Palestine, seeks to give us a better picture of women’s lives. In doing so, she has chosen to join a number of disciplines to accomplish her goal. This is no doubt in keeping with much that is going on in science these days. Much is interdisciplinary, giving in the end a fuller and more complete picture of whatever focus is intended.

Her methodology involved the collection of evidence from several sources. First of course, she draws upon the best of biblical scholarship and linguistics to understand as best as can be done today what exactly was being said in regards women. She then adds her own speciality, archaeology to the mix, absorbing the latest conclusions deduced from dig sites throughout the biblical region. She then includes the texts of documents originating from comparative Near Eastern and Egyptian sources, insofar as they treat of women’s lives.

While she determined to speak to the Iron Age I period, (roughly 1200-1000 BCE), she found it useful to include the iconography of Iron Age II (roughly 1000-586) sites in the region. Finally, she added ethnographic studies of  the region dating from the 19th and early 20th century.

Professor Ebeling then merges all this accumulation of facts and evidence and forms charming stories about a mythical woman called Orah, who was born, raised, and died in the highlands of what is now Israel. More specifically, the area is in the vicinity of the ancient holy city of Shiloh, location of the Ark of the Covenant in the times of the Judges, before the Monarchy.

She divides the chapters into the major life events of Orah, and ties them to the seasonal changes in the village. These various harvests and plantings of course were tied to the various ancient festivals.

A warm delightful story is woven from the information now at hand for what life was like in those small villages. Following the “update” on Orah’s life, for instance, as she moves from childhood to womanhood, and then marriage and childbirth, Ebeling adds specific information to substantiate the points of the story.

References to the bible are replete throughout, as are to her other sources. In a word, each “conclusion” about the life of Orah, is well documented with evidence and reasonable inferences thereof.

One comes away with a genuine pride in the value and power of women of that time. Surely they were not accorded much formal power to be sure, but they were essential to the well being of the community and household. Patriarchy ruled, as we said, and when Orah was of marriageable age, she was betrothed and ultimately went to a new village to live in the home of her husband. If her husband’s father was still living, the father was the ultimately authority. Even if her husband’s mother was alive however, authority passed to the son upon the father’s death.

However, within the house, women ran things. They did the balance of the cooking and pottery making and textile manufacture. They cared for the family vegetable plot. They took care of all childbearing duties and probably most funeral arrangements. All this and they still assisted with the plantings and harvestings.

As many already know, Yahweh was the main God to be worshiped, and most women like Orah made pilgrimage to Shiloh at least a couple of times in their short lives. (Few reached beyond 40 years of age.) Still, however, there were many other gods who were worshiped locally and we can be sure that Orah and her family kept a sacred space within the home for fertility god worship.

What I wish to speak principally about here is how valuable Ebeling’s book is the average layperson. While she has no doubt (and it is quite clear to me she has), made a seminal contribution professionally, she offers the layperson valuable information and a “sense” of life in ancient times that proves most valuable to our worship and meditation upon scripture.

I can only relate that this very weekend, listening to the Gospel readings about Jesus and Martha and Mary, the extension of hospitality and the serving of Jesus and his disciples was deeply enriched by what I had learned of what those homes were like and what those “womanly” duties were.

Coupled with a new interpretation offered by our rector as to the story’s meaning, I saw Martha and Mary in new light. Our rector’s interpretation dovetailed simply perfectly into the world that Professor Ebeling created for me of women living in ancient Israel.

I can further sense that I have a new outlook on all that I read whether scriptural or commentary on these times. So clearly do I have this vision of these women, these homes, these relationships, these cares and these seasonal events, that I will never read the bible the same again.

Professor Ebeling is to be commended for her work. While she is modest in her claims, and always indicates when the evidence is thin and she is making extrapolations and from where, one is left with some serious assurance that she has struck near the mark of reality for that time. As she points out, only time and more evidence will clarify and expand our understanding. For now, this is a brilliant step forward.

I recommend you read this if you too desire to understand historical framework of the times in which Jesus walked.

What’s Up? 06/10/10

Tags

Anglican, Anglican Communion, Archaeology, environment, Humor, Jacques Cousteau, oceans, Sarah Palin, The Episcopal Church

Well, ya know my day has been a bit troubled from the last post, but frankly, I’m letting it go pretty easily. I’m praying for a woman to re-prioritise her life in a more meaningful way.

Other than that, the rolls are baking in the oven, making the house smell wonderful and the Contrarian has completed his gardening for the day and is busy re-reading a number of his short stories–reading me snippets here and there, much to my delight.

I am turning to see what the intertubes have collected for me to read, and if I find a thing or two that you might like, I’ll pass them along. Agreed?

Okay, my first stop was over at vodkaandgroundbeef. I find her writing simply hilarious. Okay, I won’t mention it every day, but really you can’t miss her.

Almost as delish is the post from Joe.My.God–did Sarah get a boob job? Oh dish that dirt! And we aren’t even linking to Perez Hilton. Miz Feminista coulda? Ranks up there with Carly’s gossipy girl snarl about Boxer’s hairdo. Oh ladies, remember, we are about POWER and TRUTH aren’t we?

Don’t know about you, but I watched a lot of Jacques Cousteau specials growing up. He more than anyone taught us the beauty and fragility of the oceans. Stephany Anne Golberg has a nice story about his life at The Smart Set.

Who killed Otzi is the oldest murder mystery going.  Seriously, like over 5,000 years old. That’s older than Columbo by at least 15 years I think, or Hawaii-50’s “Book em DanO.” Heck if that don’t titillate you, then they have a story on the oldest leather shoe ever found too. I mean you gotta know this stuff right?

The Archbishop of Canterbury has turned a cold shoulder to the Episcopal Church for failing to abide by his wishes. Tobias Haller strikes the perfect note in his poem at In a Godward Direction.

For all you anal types (I tend to be one) here’s a way to rethink and revise that constant urge to live by the to-do list. Brought to you by Balance in Me.

Questions, questions, always questions. Answers are optional. How is God the Creator is a thought provoking essay on what exactly do we mean when we say that God created everything? Brought to you by Closer to Truth, via Science and Religion Today.

Enough for today. Have a good one!

Looking at the Bible Anew

Tags

ancient history, bible, fundamentalism, God, Hebrew Scriptures, inspiration, interdisciplinary science, Israelite history, Jericho, Joshua

For anyone who has come face to face with the clear evidence that factually the Bible contains many historical errors, a crisis of sorts must ensue. If one believes, as I do, that there is inherent worth in the book itself as a dispenser of spiritual food, then one must reach some conclusion as to what the word inspired means.

Clearly, as most any biblical scholar will attest to (excluding the strange world of the fundamentalist who engages in a process of no-think) the Bible was not either dictated, nor was it kept from factual error of any kind by God. The record simply cannot support such a conclusion. Yet, we do claim that the sacred scripture is “inspired,” and we must define what we mean by that.

Some claim that inspired refers to the timelessness of the moral teachings that are the heart of each story told within its pages. Some claim that we are informed through the stories of some of the attributes of God. Others suggest the inspiration comes from the unfailing integrity of the writers to set down as clearly and honestly as possible their vision of God’s walk with his people.

We are today a people who depend increasingly on the interplay of numerous disciplines in our quest for knowledge. This of course was not always the case, and particularly so in the case of biblical study. For very long, the bible was examined within its own pages for knowledge. History, slowly at first, and then with the help of various other sciences then began to help us flesh out that knowledge. We saw where it confirmed and where it contradicted.

The linguist consults the anthropologist and archaeologist, the historian, and the astronomer. It is because of this trans-disciplinary interface that we confirm or not the work of each other. Nowadays, an archaeological proposition is subject to biological, geologic, and a host of other disciplinary talents all of which study, test and then confirm or criticize the conclusion of the principal field.

Take for instance the case of Jericho, the Canaanite city that fell to Joshua’s trumpets. The bible tells us this generally in the story from Joshua, chapter six. The problem with this is that Jericho, at the time of the Israelite entrance in the promised land, was long desolate, a pile of rubble, a city no more. The city of Ai, referred to at length in Chapters seven and eight, was reduced to rubble during that time period, and thus may have fallen at the hands of Joshua. Also, Bethel fell similarly, although this is not noted in the bible.

We learn, as we have throughout much of the Hebrew Scriptures, that “history” is often factually wrong. And this was not because of faulty ability to tell the truth, but rather the stories served the greater purpose of establishing a “truth” believed by the people–namely that whatever happened that was God came from God, and whatever bedevilment befell the Israelites was due to their unfaithful behavior.

As I have studied so far up into 1Samuel, I’m discovering that this pattern of telling somewhat incorrect history for a greater purpose of “spiritual truth,” continues. There are double traditions in most of this history. Stories from the Northern Kingdom and the Southern are placed side by side, as if the writer is unable to choose the “correct” one. And later editors, also abhorring the idea of removing theological conclusions they disagree with–rework the traditions to point to their favored beliefs.

The movement from tribal confederacy that developed from the entrance into Canaan until the time of Saul, and the ensuing monarchy, are treated similarly with double traditions. One is demarked the Saul tradition, the other the Samuel. The Saul tradition  suggests the “rightness” of the monarchical movement, the Samuel cautions against it. Indeed, the monarchical period will not go well over time, and a number of the prophets, (Hosea) will rail against it and claim it was a turning away from the true Kingship of Yahweh, the only rightful king of Israel.

I have come to realize that to understand the factual history of Israel from its inception  is to understand the bible. It is to make clear why we tell the same stories usually twice. And why the stories set side by side conflict so often.  We see the factions within the Israelite communities vying for power, attention, and prophetic correctness. Most importantly, we see the conflicting theologies being played out. We truly do see how a  people day to day struggles with this difficult God whom they both look to for protection and yet in some way fear.

It is, as I have said, not a particularly good way to know God, but it certainly eliminates a lot of the grunt work as having already been done by our ancestors. We can move from there, as we have, using the interdisciplinary tools available to us to more completely reconstruct the world of our ancient religious fore bearers.

As believers, all, we share in this tapestry this is still under construction. We learn from it, we grow, we alter, add, subtract, join and sever elements. We match colors and shades, echoes of songs and poetry, epics and sagas, wise and foolish. In the Bible, as in most any sacred scripture founding any faith, we find ourselves–the good, the bad, the beautiful and ugly.

Some suggest that our “job” here is to be authentically human. Surely, the Bible is one of our most honored mechanisms for doing just that. That is plenty of inspiration for me.

Of Science and Truthiness

Tags

astronomy, evolution, hypotheses, Mars, red planet, religion, science, theories

Mars, you remember Mars right? Fourth planet from the sun, little bro of earth, last best hope for mankind should we trash this place to unlivability? Yeah, that’s the one, red in color.

Red, uhuh, and what caused that? I always figured that God spilt his strawberry kool-aid while poking Jupiter in the “eye.” Failing that, an all out planet paint war game where in the red team won?

Nah. Actually scientists always thought that the rocks were largely iron and that when the planet had a lots of water on it, that it rusted the dang old place, making it the original junk yard.  But, science always trumps itself in revising old theories. The new one is that it wasn’t water at all. They think it was just the usual mix of oxides in the rocks that wore away over gazillions of years through erosion. Yep, good old fashioned erosion.

We owe this new idea to those famous pesky land rovers “Spirit” and “Opportunity” that just wouldn’t say quit and collected enough evidence that there were chemicals present in Martian soil that wouldn’t be there had water covered the land. So the red dust came after water had retreated off the landscape.

That’s what I love about science. It’s one of the only truly honest and honorable forms of human endeavor. Oh, don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of personal pet theories on just about anything to go around, and plenty of in-fighting for research grants and publication space. But in fairly short order, good ideas win out over bad. Every now and then somebody holds out a different theory and never lets go, and perhaps once in a huge while on some obscure issue, the minority point is eventually proven true. But it doesn’t happen often, and never on huge issues.

Certainly not on ones that increasing transcend disciplines. This is I suspect a fairly recent phenomenon, this cross disciplining. Archaeologists look to chemists and biologists and geologists and others to come in and work in the same general field. Of course, it wouldn’t work if each of these came to wildly different conclusions, they must fairly clearly support one another, or something would be declared quite radically wrong with some number of the theories.

So, in the end, the conclusions reached today are a good deal more reliable than ones in the past that relied solely on a single disciplines standards and theories. Of course the Genome project did hugely support the evolutionary biologists in their ongoing work. According to some scientists, they thought that it would put to rest any question about the efficacy of the theory. Not so, one can never under estimate the power of a personal need for results to be something other than they really are.

Scientists, it seems to me, are pretty much like other humans. They want recognition, and they want funding for their research, and they want to add to the volume of human knowledge. They would never knowingly or even suspiciously engage in work they knew to be false or suspect, because it would mean their lives would be meaningless, of no  purpose or result.

This is not to say that some pseudo scientists don’t try to pull the wool over the public’s eyes for the short term. But their motives are to secure a windfall quickly and then disappear from the scene when the jig is up.

Real scientists live for that elusive once in a life time discovery. Their research is designed for only that purpose–to make a singularly significant advancement, one that from that moment on directs the rest of the discipline’s energies to  a new set of parameters. This is no different than the doctor who strives to create a new and better treatment for a specific disease, nor the lawyer who writes a brief from a novel point of view, attempting to revision a concept of law.

In other words, scientists don’t waste time on nonsense, and things they know or suspect to be fallacious. In that they are more truthful and honest than most of us. Charlatans may hold sway for a short time, but evidence accumulates and the misleaders, the out right frauds are discovered, ferreted out, and dismissed in utter disdain.

The same cannot be said for politicians surely. They are more than willing to ignore the truth totally in pursuit of personal aims of re-election and power. Preachers and religious proponents have shown themselves more than willing to obscure the truth, fan the flames of untruth, and otherwise distort reality in pursuit of lining their own pockets, their churches, or their personal theology. They can often function in a world of “doing it for the people’s good.”

Perhaps because of the stringent controls in science, the need of replication, and “showing your work” such shenanigans are not prevalent, except in those fringe areas where in fact result is assumed and means are manufactured. And that is where the fringe loses its power. Their fantastical theories cannot hold up for long because they cannot either show the work or replicate by means of experiment their claims.

Science is our most trustworthy ally in discerning truth, simply because truth must prove itself in an objective way. Science doesn’t start with a conclusion and then seek proof to sustain itself. That is the province of the charlatan. Science starts with a hypothesis, and then designs methods by which to TEST the hypothesis. If tests fail to confirm the hypothesis, a new one is constructed. Plain and simple.

Ironically, we have no trouble trusting science when it comes to our expectations at the light switch, the ignition switch, the power button of the computer, the efficacy of medicine to cure our ailments, or any of a thousand other instances of science which are accepted in every day life.

Only when science butts heads with somebody’s personal theology of how things are “supposed to be” do we find the phenomenon of disbelief and argument that science is engaged in a conspiracy of deception. It continues to astound the scientific community, and it continues to astound the rational mind of most thinking humans. Such is life, and so perhaps I’m right, that God spilt his strawberry kool-aid on Mars. I mean it could be true, right?