Human beings possess a number of fears. In general, we refer
to fear in its numerous negative forms. Unchecked, our fears can paralyze,
stifle, and limit us. However some fears have served us well. The fear of not
knowing is one such fear that has benefited mankind. On occasion, this fear has
motivated us, protected us, and even lifted us. When we lacked knowledge, we
vigorously pursued it piece by piece. Our fear of not knowing is partly
responsible for where we are now compared to where we were centuries ago.
This is not to say that our fear of not knowing has hurt us
from time to time. In fact, humans commit some pretty ludicrous errors in an
effort to soothe our ignorance discomfort. The biggest of these mistakes occur
in the form of abrupt conclusions and impulsive declarations. These types of
mistakes run rampant on the philosophical battlefields shared by the quibbling
realms of science and religion.
There has been long debate about the origin of humanity, our
Earth, and our universe. The realms of science and religion have long been at
odds over such questions as: Why are we here? Where did we come from? How did
this all come into existence? What is the overall purpose?
Instead of uniting in our curiosity, we did what humans do
best. We polarized ourselves and alienated one another over the subject. The
stiff-necked faithful condemned the obstinate pagan. The self-appointed free
thinkers mocked the canonist disciples. Back and forth these camps have thrown
mud, hurled insults, and wholly discredited one another.
Fast-forward to this week. New studies and scientific models
are challenging the theory of universal origin known as the Big Bang theory. This
theory has long been championed as the single greatest evidence against the existence
of Divinity. Now, there is evidence that maybe the Big Bang Expansion model
contradicts mathematical and scientific realities that contemporary science has
presently established. According to these scientists, “The universe may have existed forever,
according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement
Einstein's theory of general relativity.”
For years the “science” was conclusive on the Big Bang
theory. There was sufficient evidence to establish the validity of the theory
beyond a reasonable doubt. At last, there seemed to be a definite solution to
the infinite nature of our universe and our origins. Too bad that pesky science
got in the way and once again provided another explanation for the formerly
unexplainable. Science has an annoying habit of doing that.
On a side note, I grew up with scientists telling me that
Pluto was a planet. I made the stereotypical Styrofoam Solar System models and
presented them just like every other kid in my grade. Since that time Pluto has
be classified and reclassified so many times in order to account for new and
improved information. Asking my elementary aged nephews now, they will tell me
that Pluto is “the largest object in the Kuiper belt, the tenth-most-massive
known body directly orbiting the Sun, and the second-most-massive known dwarf
planet, after Eris…
What?! You mean to tell me we can’t get solid correct
information within our own infinitesimal Solar System, and yet we are so confident
that we know exactly when and how the universe began based on hypothetical models of
space expansion? Considering the size of our Solar System in comparison to the
size of the Milky Way Galaxy, then compared to the universe at large... Even by
scientific standards that is a significant leap!
I digress.
It seems that science is anything but conclusive. There exists
a possibility that another study or discovery once again reveals the
plausibility of the Big Bang Theory. It is possible that a whole new theory
surfaces that feasibly explains the origins of the universe. Dare I say, there
exists that small chance that creative design is scientifically proven to be a
reasonable explanation? For the time being, let just be honest and say that the
science is anything but conclusive.
Let’s take a closer look at other moments in our history
when the science was “conclusive”:
Geocentric Theory – Scientists, scholars, and clergy
believed for a time that the universe revolved around the earth. Based on their
now-primitive observations and biblical interpretations, they deduced that the
Sun, stars, and all other celestial bodies all moved relative to the Earth,
which was considered a stationary object. Teachings to the contrary were
considered heretical. Galileo Galilei was famously tried for heresy for his
defense of heliocentric theory. Fast forward to today, and we know that our
Solar System does indeed revolve around the Sun. Not only that, but our Sun is
one of trillions of stars in the universe, and none of them are technically
stationary.
Alchemy – This is a favorite of mine. Alchemy was an archaic
field of science that was wildly popular in historic times. Its defining studies
were dedicated to the discovery of immortality and the transformation of base
metals into coveted noble metals such as gold and silver. The scientific consensus
was that parts of the Cosmos could be extracted and altered in order to
produce material perfection. So scientists went about extracting what they
could from the “cosmos”. They tried to find gold in everything from sacks of
grain to vats of human urine. Thank goodness we have evolved past this, or else
professional gold mining would be an even less glamorous career in the
workforce.
Piltdown Man – Many scientists were eager to locate the
missing link connecting modern humans to evolutionary ancestors. In 1912, skull
bone fragments were discovered in a gravel pit located in Piltdown, England.
Upon assembling the skull, scientists were happy to deduce that the missing
link had been found. They called him the Piltdown man and the science was conclusive. For the next forty years, a considerable part
of the scientific world reveled in their accomplishment. Their hubris abruptly
ended in 1953 when it was revealed that the entire thing was a hoax. Someone
had combined a human skull, an orangutan’s jaw, and a chimpanzee’s teeth to
pull it off. For FORTY YEARS the science had “settled” the debate. How fitting
that the fraud was exposed by…you guessed it…science.
This is not an attempt to diminish the importance of science
at all. Throughout history, science has stood the test of time. Science has not
failed. However, humans have; and they have done so in spectacular fashion.
These examples just prove that science is anything but conclusive. New
technologies, methods, and experimentations always push the boundaries of
contemporary science and open our minds to previously untapped knowledge and
revelations.
Is it any wonder why a portion people may be skeptical of “scientific
findings”? The same tactics are being repeated over and over again: A theory
becomes popular and widely accepted as gospel, scientists and the general
public must all toe to new line of thinking, opinions to the contrary are seen
as heretical and deranged, evidence is presented that challenges the status
quo, the theory is adjusted or abandoned, and then the cycle repeats. World
history has witnessed the same cyclical errors with every generation. Like I
said, these are not errors of science; these are human errors.
Skeptical about climate change?
“THE SCIENCE HAS SPOKEN!”
Don’t believe the vaccine/autism hype?
“THE SCIENCE IS CONCLUSIVE!”
Concerned about drug induced impaired driving?
“YOU’RE DENYING THE FACTS!”
Time after time, science is used to justify some political
point or promote some passionate campaign. Science was never intended to do
that! Science is a means of finding the truth through observation and
experimentation. Many have come to believe that theories and science are one in
the same. This is convoluted thinking. In reality, science is used to establish
the validity of a theory or hypothesis, or eliminate it altogether. That is why
theories come and go, but the scientific processes and methods remain constant
and repeatable.
Science is a means by which we can discover truth and prove
truth. It is not the end-all-be-all truth. But it is nothing to fear or hate
either. While science cannot prove the truth of everything within its current
parameters, it certainly has proven many things. Scientific discovery through
observation and experimentation have given us insight into the laws that govern
our universe and our lives.
Make sure you understand how important science is and what
role it plays in your life. It is not an omnipresent danger that erodes your
faith and destroys your beliefs. Science is simply another piece to the puzzle
that allows us to see the bigger picture. My faith has certainly not been
challenged by theories regarding evolution or origin. I look scientific
discovery and ask, “how does this enhance or enlighten what I already know?”
This ought not to surprise you, but I don’t know everything.
My faith is not an attempt to know everything either. There are an infinite
amount of things that I have never observed. I never observed a creation or a
big bang. That is not to say there is no evidence. There are mountains, rivers,
planets, stars, and life that all suggest that some power beyond our current
comprehension and understanding is behind our existence. To others, the
evidence may suggest something else. Who is right? Perhaps both? As with all
truth, this truth will be established with more time, technology, and
knowledge.
In conclusion, this conflict does not have to be a conflict
at all. It doesn’t have to boil down to a narrow battle of fact versus fiction
or enlightened versus ignoramus. Both camps essentially share the same purpose:
seeking truth. With that perspective, truth seekers on both sides ought to
appreciate the experience and knowledge that others have. Any moderation and
respect shown from either side will accomplish more progress and understanding
than short-term “truths” or shortsighted dogmas.
Reconciling my faith and my testimony with established
scientific truths is not as difficult as some may seem. While I am judicious in
my acceptance of some scientific theories as fact or gospel, I have accepted
many scientific findings as valid and important. In fact, some findings have
served me well enough to strengthen my faith and validate my testimony. I
eagerly anticipate more scientific findings that will add upon the truth that
we already have.
No comments:
Post a Comment