Science & Religion

Stephen Hawking is in the news again as his new book, The Grand Design, is getting ready to be released.  It's gotten some attention because of his assertion that God is not required for the Universe to exist.  In fact, he said.

"The Universe can and will create itself from nothing."

Of course, this has sparked many on the religious side to say he's obviously wrong.  To me, it's like the old adage about what holds the world up?  At that time it was assumed to be flat.  The answer was, it sits on the back of a turtle.  The next obvious question would be, what is the turtle sitting on?  And the answer, it's turtles all the way down.

So the same logic can be applied here.  If God created the Universe where did God come from?  It seems the obvious answer must be, it's Gods all the way up.

Well, from the Jehovah's Witnesses anyway.  While I was on the phone the other day I heard a knock at my door.  I didn't bother to answer it since I was busy, but once I got off the phone I went to the door and saw a pamphlet had been left outside.  When I retrieved it I saw the title "The WatchTower, Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom".  (I assume it was left by the Jehovah's witnesses, but since I didn't see them, it could have been Jehovah himself!)

Curious, I took a look inside.  One article stood out to me, entitled "A Creator Worthy of Our Praise".  It wasn't so much the title that struck me, but the opening sentences.

"Have you ever wondered 'What is the meaning of life?'  Those who believe that life is the result of mindless evolution grope in vain for the answer."

Really?  That's quite a supposition.  Have they surveyed every person who accepts evolution?  Do they not realize that many religious individuals also accept evolution?  Ignoring this blatant generalization, I was curious how they would answer that question.  Certainly with an opening statement like that, they must be sure they can answer the question clearly and it must be within the article.  I didn't have to read much farther to get their answer.

"Not so those who accept the well-established truth that Jehovah God is the Source of life."

Mkay...so from this I can gleam that they think evolution is not well established and that it is a known fact that God is the source of life.  What reference do they provide for this?  Well a bible verse of course.  Hence begins the circular logic.  They also miss the fact that evolution says nothing about the "source" of life, only its diversity.  But beyond that, even if you accept that God is the "source" of life, that does not answer the question, "What is the meaning of life?"  But they go on:

"They know that he had a purpose in creating us.  That purpose is stated at Revelation 4:11."

Now we're getting somewhere...a defacto reference to where the meaning of life is revealed!  I pulled out my copy of the New Testament, provided to me by the Gideons when I was in 5th grade public school many years ago, and read the passage.  No comment on the constitutionality of this now...maybe for another post.

Revelations 4:11, "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and dominion, because You have created all things, and by Your will they were and have been created."

Hmm...not sure I get it from that alone, it seems to me to be saying we need to worship God and give him praise because he is the creator, not telling me the meaning of life...Maybe I need to read more of the article.  They go on about how we should see the "invisible qualities" in God's creations and how he is "deserving of our reverential respect", but nothing more about why we are here.  WAIT, here it is...clearly in the last paragraph.

"Why, then, are we here?"  The last part of Revelation 4:11 answers:  'Because of your will they [all created things] existed and were created.'  We did not will ourselves into existence.  We exist because of God's will.  For this reason, life lived solely for self-interest is empty and meaningless.  To find inner peace, joy, satisfaction, and fulfillment, we need to learn what God's will is and then bring our life into harmony with it.  Only then will we find the purpose of our creation and existence."

So there version of Revelations 4:11 is worded slightly differently than the Gideons.  Never mind that, I think we get the point.  Those who believe in "mindless" evolution obviously are self-centered people who care nothing for the rest of mankind.  And they can never have true joy or satisfaction with their lives?  Only those who reject evolution are loving caring people.

Ignoring yet another blatant generalization, they didn't answer the question!!...it just says you have to believe in God and then decipher what his purpose for you is.  Why is it so hard to figure out?  Why isn't God more clear about what he wants us to do?

But wait, what if there is no purpose?  What if you spend your life groping for a purpose that does not exist?  How is that a joyful, fulfilling or satisfying life?  Why not just accept that your existence is, and enjoy your life without the dogma of a religion pulling you down searching for a meaning that may not exist.

What's wrong with being good because you care about your fellow man and understand as a society we all benefit if we work together.  Why not make the world a better place because you care about your children and your grand-children instead of because of the fear of retribution from a vengeful God?

I for one want more from a God than generalizations and demands of praise.  So until they can answer the question more concretely, I will continue to live my life and derive satisfaction, joy and fulfillment without the dogma, guilt or fear from religion.

A couple of videos came out recently that just need to be shared.

The first is a new Mr. Deity video that features PZ Myers as a Science Advisor to God.  It's got some great humor and the bit at the end with the banana is a bit of an inside joke.  If you like this, check out the rest of the videos at the Mr. Deity website or on YouTube.

The next video is a parody of the defense of marriage...this time, defending marriage against divorce.

In science education that is.  An article entitled "Why Science Standards are Important to a Strong Science Curriculum and How States Measure Up", was recently published that surveyed the states handling of Evolution in their Science curriculum.  It also compared the results to the same survey performed back in 2000 to show how things have changed.  The abstract states:

In 2000, Lawrence Lerner and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation reviewed state science standards in 49 states and the District of Columbia, specifically with respect to the coverage of evolution. We repeat his survey for all current standards publicly available as of May 2009 and discuss the history and role of state science standards in American public education. Our survey indicates that science standards tend to cover evolution more extensively than they did a decade ago, and that the average quality of the treatment has increased. However, certain types of creationist language are also becoming more common in state standards. We also discuss the history and role of state science standards in American public education.

Sounds like a mix of both good and bad news.  But how did the individual states fare, especially Texas?  Well, as the title of this post implies, we've gone from a C to an F in the last decade, thanks mostly to our creationist State Board of Education and their re-writing of the science curriculum standards.  Texas is listed as "Generally comprehensive except for creationist jargon."  However, this is what they go on to say about the inclusion of creationist jargon.

"Five states, however, fail in their treatment of evolution. In these cases, the treatment of evolution is absent or made useless by the inclusion of creationist jargon and/or disclaimers.

Texas is among those five states, along with Oklahoma, Louisiana, Alabama and West Virginia.  Not a great group to be associated with. Hell, even Kansas gets an A.  At least it appears they woke up after their national embarrassment a few years ago.

Below is a graphic showing how all the states measure up.  Click on the thumb to view full size.

The good news is, there are a large number of states with a grade of A or B.  This gives me hope, but we really need Texas to step up and start taking the future of their children seriously.  Teaching your child superstitions and to disregard evidence is not the way to prepare them for the real world.  To try to put a positive spin on it, there is no way to go but up from here.

There are many problems with religion, but I wanted to highlight one based on this article.  It's regarding some elementary school students in Florida who were sent home for wearing shirts that said

"Islam is of the Devil"

Now, I don't blame the students, they are clearly too young to understand the ramifications of what they're doing, but instead I blame their parents and religious leaders.  To begin teaching your child intolerance at this age is appalling.  And to basically use your child to make a statement like this is bordering on abuse.

It also sends the message that they think their religion is superior to any other.  And that's one of the problems I see with religion.  All religions think they are the "true" way to salvation while every other religion is obviously misguided and in this case considered evil.  This is simply another form of tribalism which I would hope at some point we as a species can outgrow, but obviously not anytime soon.  In fact, it seems to be expanding.

Then within the article was this quote from the Senior Pastor of the church.

"Spreading the church's message is more important that education."

Really?  I guess this goes with what religion wants.  An uneducated flock so they don't know how to question their faith or to think rationally.  In this case, they got their wish as the students were sent home for violating the dress code of the school.

The ironic part of this is the church is called the Dove World Outreach Center.  What a great way to reach out to the world.  I'm sure this irony was missed by those in the church.

It's been a while since I've posted anything about the Texas State Board of Education.  I've been pretty fed up with their crap and found that the more I paid attention to it, the more negative it made me feel, so I backed off for a while for my own sanity.  I don't think I even said anything when the science curriculum standards passed (although it was a mixed bag).  But today provides a small amount of hope that things might eventually change for the better.

You see, today the Texas legislature took up the motion to re-confirm Don McLeroy as Chair of the Texas SBOE.  And luckily, he failed to be re-confirmed.  It was close with 19 votes for confirmation and 11 votes against (a two thirds vote is required).  So what does this mean?  Well, it simply means McLeroy will no longer lead the Texas SBOE.  He's still a member, just not its chairman.  Gov. Perry now has to nominate a new Chair and the dance starts all over again.

But for now, I feel a tiny bit better about this state I live in.

As I've posted earlier, the Texas State Board of Education is set to vote on the science curriculum standards later this week and I had suggested those so inclined to send an email to the Chairman, Don McLeroy and remind him of something he said.  Well, I thought I would go ahead and post what my email contained in case anyone else wanted to use it as a guide.

Mr. McLeroy,

    I simply want to remind you of something you said during your interview on Texas Montly Talks that aired on KLRU in May of 2008.

 

    "I certainly don't want to force my views on anybody else." - Don McLeroy

 

    You said this in reference to the debate regarding sex education in Texas.  But shouldn't this apply to everything you consider while in the position of Chariman of the Texas State Board of Education?  In fact, this statement should be read to all the committee members at the beginning of every meeting and before every vote to remind them of what their purpose really is, to serve the citizens of Texas, not their personal political or religious agendas.

     Your statement should apply to the upcoming vote regarding the Science curriculum standards.  If you truly meant what you said, you would listen to the educators and experts in the field to determine how Texas schools should treat and teach the concepts of science and not try to insert language that is intended to tear down well established principles.  Your personal beliefs should not get in the way of trying to provide Texas children with the best science education possible.

    That's all.  Please follow your own words and do the right thing for Texas and it's school children.

We're about a week away from the final vote that will determine the Texas Science curriculum standards for the next 10 years.  This vote will also heavily influence what gets put into the Science textbooks students will use.  The Texas State Board of Education meeting is scheduled for next week, March 26-27th.  There have been some improvements in the standards, such as the removal of the "strengths and weaknesses" language.  But our creationist members of the board have proposed amendments to insert "sufficiency or insufficiency" language in its place.  The creationist members are trying to insert language that would allow teachers the flexibility to introduce non-scientific ideas into their classrooms.  Specifically, the idea of creationism and intelligent design.

There are some very good write-ups about this already, so I won't go into detail but instead just refer you to the links below.

• Texas Science Standards: Game on! 
• Texas Freedom Network on Don McLeroy
• Austin American Statesman article on Don McLeroy
• Quote mining by Don McLeroy to defend his postion

What I do want to encourage is people to send emails to Don McLeroy, who is the Chairman of the Texas SBOE, reminding him of a quote he made during an interview with Texas Monthly Talks in May of 2008.  He said:

"I certainly don't want to force my views on anybody else." - Don McLeroy

If only he would follow what he said and instead of trying to impose his personal religious views on the rest of Texas he should listen to the throngs of educators and science experts who support good science education.

All the board members use the same email address, so please enter his name in the subject line:  sboesupport@tea.state.tx.us

This can make a difference.  The overwhelming public outcry has helped so far, but until the final vote we need to keep our voices heard.

I know confusion is probably a normal state for me, but in this case I just don't understand.  Compare these two headlines.

Stem Cell Research Opponents want Personhood for Embryos

2,000,000 Children Die From Diarrhea Each Year

So the first is discussing how pro-life advocates are fighting to give legal rights to fertilized embryos so they can't be destroyed or used in research.  While the second article talks about how a large number of living and breathing children are dying every year from a very treatable disease.

So here's my confusion.  Why aren't the pro-life people up in arms about the issue of children dying?  Why aren't they pushing through laws to support efforts to treat these children around the world.  It seems to me if they are really pro-life, start with protecting the lives of people that are already on this planet and trying to survive.  Then ,once you have all those issues worked out, attack the issues of the unborn.  Until you've wiped out disease, hunger and poverty, don't talk to me about protecting embryos.