Thoughts from a scientist who is a Christian (not a Christian Scientist)
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Posted by jlwile on April 15, 2013
As an atheist who became a Christian, I am always intrigued to read of similar journeys made by others. I have written about a couple of them in the past (here and here), and now the GeoChristian points out another one:
I love what she says at the end:
I came to Harvard seeking Veritas. Instead, he found me.
Posted by jlwile on February 27, 2013
The Home Educating Family Association is a wonderful organization that provides all sorts of useful resources to homeschoolers. They publish a magazine called (not surprisingly) Home Educating Family. Recently, they asked me to contribute to their first issue of 2013, which focuses on pro-life topics. I ended up writing two pieces for them. The first one is entitled “My Little Girl,” and it discusses our experience of adopting a teenager (who just turned 34!). It was probably the most difficult piece I have ever written, as it brought up all sorts of (mostly wonderful) memories. I had such a hard time finding the words I needed to convey what I felt, and then I had a hard time proofreading the piece because of my tears! The article is not available on the internet, so if you want to read it, you will need to get the print magazine.
The other article didn’t make it into the print magazine, so it ended up being posted on the Home Educating Family Association blog. It is essentially a composite of two blog posts I wrote previously discussing how a baby in the womb is fully human. It is not emotional, but some might find it interesting. If you care to read the piece, you can find it here.
Posted by jlwile on December 17, 2012
I read an incredibly interesting book about another atheist-turned-Christian. In this case, it’s Dr. Holly Ordway, and while her conversion was quite different from mine, she was also heavily influenced by the objective evidence that supports the validity of the Christian faith.
My review was published by Apologetics 315. You you can read it there.
Posted by jlwile on November 6, 2012
This photo shows four of the eight eyes on a jumping spider. The middle two are the principal eyes, and the other two are the anterior lateral eyes (ALEs). (click for credit)
Most spiders have eight eyes, and their arrangement varies depending on the type of spider. In fact, when studying a spider, scientists often use the number and arrangement of the eyes to help them classify the specimen.1 What does a spider do with all those eyes? Well, in the case of a jumping spider, we know that the two large eyes near the center of the head are the spider’s principal eyes. They can see sharp images, are sensitive to color, and can move to track a target.
The eyes that are right next to the principal eyes are called the anterior lateral eyes (ALEs). They cannot move, do not seem sensitive to color, and as far as we can tell, don’t really allow for the spider to see images. Instead, it has always been thought that these eyes help the spider detect motion.2 But what about the principal eyes? Do they detect motion as well? Three researchers decided to determine the answer to that question by conducting a interesting experiment with some spiders and an iPod touch.
They ended up using removable paint to “blind” specific eyes of jumping spiders from the species Phidippus audax. For 16 of the spiders, they used the paint to “blind” only the principal eyes. They then used the paint to “blind” only the ALEs of 14 other spiders. Finally, they used 16 spiders with none of their eyes “blinded” as a control group. One at a time, they put the spiders in an “arena” that had four walls. Three were foam-core walls, and the fourth wall was the screen of the iPod touch. They allowed each spider to acclimate to the arena and waited for its head to face the screen. When that happened, they remotely started an animation of a black circle either looming towards the spider or retreating from the spider. The results they got were quite interesting.
Posted by jlwile on September 5, 2012
It’s that time of year again. Most students who attend public and private schools have started classes or are just about to start them. Even many home educated students take a summer break from their academic work and are facing the same situation. While there have been many different “back to school” articles written over the past few weeks, I think this one offers one of the more interesting messages. It talks about doubt and how you should not suppress it in your students.
The article is written by Dr. Kara Powell, who is on the faculty at Fuller Theological Seminary and is also the executive director of the Fuller Youth Institute. She talks about how it is natural for students to have doubts, and the last thing you should do is try to ignore those doubts or sweep them under the rug. Instead, you should encourage your students to express them, and you should address them as best you can. How does she come to this conclusion? She bases it on a study done by the Fuller Youth Institue. I wrote about a preliminary version of the study previously. It has grown since then, and the results are very interesting.
The study in its current form followed 500 youth-group graduates during their first three years in college. One of the main findings was that students who feel free to express doubts about their faith are more likely to be strongly active in their faith than those who do not. As a result, Dr. Powell says:
Doubt in and of itself isn’t toxic. It’s unexpressed doubt that becomes toxic.
That’s why she says that you need to foster an environment where students feel comfortable expressing their doubts. I couldn’t agree more.
Posted by jlwile on July 16, 2012
Last week, I posted an article about three different things that have recently upset some atheists. It seems that in writing that article, I upset a creationist. Ken Ham, the president and CEO of Answers in Genesis, took offense at the article, claiming that it took “a slap” at Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum. Before I respond to his unfounded claims, I do want to make it very clear that I am a big fan of the Creation Museum, as anyone who has seriously read my materials should know. For example, back when the Creation Museum celebrated its one millionth visitor, I wrote:
As anyone who reads this blog regularly knows, I have some problems with the Answers in Genesis ministry. At the same time, however, Jesus tells us that we must judge a tree by its fruit (Luke 6:43-45), and the fruits of the Answers in Genesis ministry show that it is a very good tree.
One of those fruits is the wonderful Creation Museum, which just recently welcomed its one millionth guest. This is a remarkable achievement, given the fact that the museum has been around for less than three years.
What makes the museum so popular? Well, unlike many museums, it actually makes its visitors THINK. Rather than just mindlessly repeating the dogma of the day regarding origins, it actually shows how strongly a person’s preconceived notions can affect the conclusions that he or she draws from the scientific data. It also has a lot of world-class displays, including one of the famous fish eating another fish fossils and an amazing discussion of the construction processes that could have been used by Noah to build the ark.
There are some things I don’t like about the museum, but they pale in comparison to the things I like about it. I know most evolutionists are furious about the Creation Museum, and it’s easy to understand why. The more people think, the less they will believe in evolution!
In addition, when atheist blogger Dr. PZ Myers visited the museum, I complimented the security staff, discussed how excellent one of the exhibits is, and mentioned that Ken Ham’s behavior towards those with whom he disagrees is significantly better than that of Dr. Myers. Even in the article that offended Mr. Ham, I indicate that the Creation Museum is significantly more scientifically accurate than most museums, including the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History! In the end, there is just no way to make the case that I am anything but a huge fan of the Creation Museum.
With that out of the way, let me respond to three things that Mr. Ham brings up in his article.
Posted by jlwile on June 15, 2012
My nephew, Nathan, who recently passed away.
Not too long ago, my aunt died. Her death was not a tragedy. She lived a full, happy life. She married, had a wonderful son, and truly enjoyed her life to the fullest. She had a strong faith, and she positively impacted a lot of other people. It was hard to say goodbye to her, and I miss her a lot, especially when I am playing cards at her favorite hangout, the American Legion Post in Lapel. But death is a part of life, and you expect it for people who are getting on in years.
Nathan was not getting on in years. He was in the prime of his life. He was taken from this earth before he could get married, have children, or even start a career. His parents will never know the joy of experiencing his college graduation, his wedding day, or the birth of his children. There will forever be a hole in their hearts, because a huge part of their lives was taken from them far, far, far too soon. Parents should never have to bury their children. It just isn’t right.
So what are Christians to do when faced with such a tragedy? Are they supposed to wonder why God took Nathan so young? Are they supposed to come up with some reason for why this had to happen? Are they supposed to make sense of it all? I don’t think so.
Posted by jlwile on May 29, 2012
The convention center's suggestion to homeeschoolers.
I gave a total of six talks at the convention, and most of them were for the teens. However, there was one, entitled “What Are They Doing Now?“, that is specifically for the parents. The talk focuses on homeschool graduates and what they are doing with their excellent education. First, I share some statistics, such as the fact that homeschool graduates are more likely to have college degrees and more likely to be in college than their non-homeschooled peers.1,2 I then turn to a discussion of some individual homeschool graduates who are, literally, making the world a better place.
The homeschool graduates I talk about are all doing amazing things. For example, one is a medical doctor and bioethicist, another is an undercover operative for an intelligence agency, and still another is part of a non-governmental organization that is making better nutrition available to those in third-world countries. Many of them have impressive degrees, and many of them skipped university and started making a positive difference in the world right out of homeschool.
One of those who started changing the world right out of homeschool is named Sydnee. At the ripe old age of 17, she felt the Lord leading her to an orphanage in Monrovia, Liberia. This was not part of some organized trip, and she didn’t know anyone there. She simply felt the leading of the Lord, convinced her parents, and ended up going to that terribly dangerous country because she wanted to help those who had no hope. The orphanage specialized in adopting these children out to parents in developed countries, giving them a chance for a safe, happy life. Sydnee thought the Lord wanted her to be a part of such a life-changing ministry.
Posted by jlwile on May 25, 2012
Worker bees entering a hive loaded down with pollen. (Public domain image.)
If you don’t follow the news as it relates to science, you might not be aware of a genuine threat to our food supply that was identified six years ago: Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). Many beekeepers have experienced the disappointment of checking their hives to find one of them mostly empty. While this is to be expected, most beekeepers report it happening rarely – on the order of one hive in five each year. Starting in the winter of 2006, however, some beekeepers started reporting losses of 30 to 90 percent of their hives. This unusual increase in beehive loss has continued, and the problem is called CCD.
Why should we worry about CCD? Doesn’t it just mean there may be a shortage of honey one day? Absolutely not. Bees are critically important in the reproduction of many flowering plants. They collect pollen from flowers and take it back to their hive, as shown in the picture above. The big yellow “globs” on their legs are pollen sacs that are full of pollen. However, while they are collecting pollen, they can’t help but transfer some of it from one flower to another. That transferred pollen fertilizes the egg cell that is held in the female part of the flower, producing a new plant that gets packaged into a seed. The seed is further packaged in a fruit, which provides food for animals and people.
So without bees, animals and people would have a much harder time finding food. Now as far as we know, wild bees are not affected by CCD. As a result, it is doubtful that CCD will destroy the food supply in nature. However, hives that are maintained by beekeepers are responsible for fertilizing all sorts of commercial crops. As a result, if beekeepers continue to lose hives, there will eventually be a shortage of bees available for crops, which will result in higher food prices. These higher prices will not be limited to fruits, because some fruit products (such as almond hulls) are used for feeding livestock. In the end, many foods will become more expensive if CCD continues at its current rates.
Scientists have been looking for the cause of CCD for quite some time, and many avenues have been investigated. However, there haven’t been any studies that have proved particularly promising…until now.
Posted by jlwile on March 6, 2012
Dr. Alister Edgar McGrath is a remarkable man. He holds an earned PhD in molecular biophysics and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree, both from the University of Oxford. He was once an atheist, but while studying chemistry at Oxford, he began to realize that the evidence for atheism was “circular, tentative, and uncertain.” The more he examined the evidence, the more convinced he became that Christianity was the most rational worldview. As a result, he became a Christian.
Because he was once an atheist, he continues to study atheism today. One of his best books is The Dawkins Delusion?, where he shows why atheists should be embarrassed by Dr. Richard Dawkins. However, that’s not the book I am writing about. Instead, I am writing about another one of McGrath’s masterpieces, Why God Won’t Go Away. Having publicly debated both Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, McGrath is well aware that many in the “New Atheist” camp would like God to go away. However, as McGrath demonstrates in this easy-to-read book, God stubbornly refuses to comply with the desires of the New Atheists.
Now even though this is an easy-to-read book, it is not simple or superficial. It is a deep, serious discussion of the New Atheist movement and its severe intellectual problems. However, McGrath is such an excellent teacher that you hardly notice how deep the material is until you put down the book and start thinking about what you have read.
Like
Dr. Wile on Facebook.