BioLogos

If you haven't taken the time to look around BioLogos yet, you should. The BioLogos Foundation was founded by Francis Collins, the former head of the government's contribution to the human genome project, and current head of the National Institutes of Health. The organization is dedicated to helping bridge the divide between science and religion. BioLogos largely reflects an evangelical Christian point of view, and so it's probably best described as a Christian-theistic view of of science. However, it rejects creationism of both young and old-earth types, as well as Intelligent Design.

I'm not particularly informed on the who's-who of religious scholarship, but it looks to me like they've got some quality people contributing content. For example, Peter Enns (whose book, Inspiration and Incarnation I discussed here) has been an active participant.

In the year that it has existed so far, BioLogos has been at the center of at least two controversies. First, Francis Collins was criticized for mixing science and religion, especially after he was nominated to head the NIH. Perhaps in response, Collins resigned from the organization when his government job began. On the broader issue of mixing science and religion, I have some sympathy with the critics--I do think that Collins makes scientifically indefensible statements from time to time. However, based on what I've seen so far, my opinion is that the general criticism is too harsh. I think most of the material is true to the scholarship from which it is drawn.

The second controversy revolved around the resignation of Old Testament scholar Bruce Waltke from Reformed Theological Seminary. Waltke gave an interview that was posted on BioLogos wherein he said that mainstream Christianity is going to have to come to terms with evolution. Apparently his public acceptance of evolution was too much for the seminary. He initially asked BioLogos to remove the video--while reaffirming its content--and BioLogos complied. But I guess the cat was out of the bag, so to speak, and Waltke resigned.

I plan on drawing attention to some of their content in future posts, but in the meantime go have a look around at BioLogos.

Continue reading...

Climategate: Another Investigation, Another Exoneration

Last week a panel appointed by the University of East Anglia released the results of their investigation into the scientific publications of the Climate Research Unit (CRU). The committee consisted of 11 members who were chosen in consultation with the Royal Society. The report is an easy read and is available here. In summary, the panel:

- Found no evidence of fraud or inappropriate manipulation of data.
- Found that statistical methods were not always the best, but it was not clear that use of better statistical methods would substantially change the results and conclusions.
- Recommended that CRU involve professional statisticians.
- Recommended better data storage and documentation.

Of the investigations launched since the breaking of Climategate, three have released reports. The first was an investigation of Penn State climatologist Michael Mann, which I covered here. The second was conducted by the Science and Technology Committee of the British House of Commons (their conclusions here). And this is the third. Although some of these investigations have found things to criticize, none of the investigations thus far have found anything that would significantly alter the state of the science, nor have they found any scientific dishonesty. I don't expect that further investigations will find otherwise, but we will see.

For more on this latest report see Discover Magazine's coverage here and here.

---

Continue reading...

Testimonies I'd Like to Hear at Church

Mormon Scholars Testify is an online collection of essays by LDS scholars of various types that explain why they believe in the Restored Gospel. It's not all high-fructose correlated corn syrup, either. For example, take this passage from Grant Hardy:

I am still bothered by a number of things—the lack of direct archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, its anachronistic quotations from Second Isaiah, polygamy, the Mountain Meadows massacre, our exclusive reliance on the King James Bible, our tendency to mythologize our history, our preference for sentimentality over substance, our quickness to label honest disagreements as anti-Mormonism, our devotion to the Boy Scouts, and my own impatience when the church doesn’t speak out more forcefully on moral issues such as torture or access to healthcare.

Or this from Ron Hellings:

I have heard people say that science and religion are two paths to truth. I do not believe that. There is only one path to truth, and to me it seems closer to science than it is to what passes for religion in most people.

Or Armand Mauss:

Much of what I can’t claim to know is routinely included in the testimonies of other Latter-day Saints, whose conventional lists of what seems true and certain to them leaves me baffled at their apparent spiritual attainments.

Yet if you read the full essays, you will find that each is ultimately faith affirming. Perhaps it would not be appropriate--particularly because they would be misunderstood by some, but I wish I could hear more of these kinds of testimonies in our Sacrament meetings.

---

Continue reading...

Q&A with a Member of the Creation Committee

I am excited to present an exclusive interview that LDSSR conducted with Jacob, a member of the Creation Committee.

LDSSR: Thank you, Jacob, for agreeing to this interview. Could you begin by telling us about your job.

Jacob: The Creation Committee oversees and implements the Lord's creation projects in the universe.

LDSSR: So do your projects include the whole universe or more limited areas?

Jacob: Well, the committee oversees the whole universe, but we are sub-divided into regional areas. So, for example, I am on the part of the committee that oversaw your solar system.

LDSSR: OK. Well let's get to the heart of the interest of my readers. Could you tell us more about the time frame and method of creation?

Jacob: Sure. The time frame for Earth and its solar system was six days that would be equivalent to a total of your six thousand years. The methods of creation are proprietary, I'm afraid, but I would say that your Book of Abraham gives a pretty good summary of it.

LDSSR: On the one hand that isn't very surprising. It is what you get in Sunday School, after all...

Jacob: Precicely.

LDSSR: ...but I wondered if you could help me square that with our scientific investigations.

Jacob: That's a big issue--probably more than we can discuss in detail--but one thing you need to understand is that the Creation Committee operates in coordination with other committees that have their own missions.

LDSSR: Can you give some examples?

Jacob: Well, for example, there's the Evidences and Faith Committee. Their mission is to make sure that mortals need to exercise faith. So they make sure that evidences of God aren't too compelling, or in some cases, that the evidence leads in the wrong direction. So, for example, it was their decision to scrub DNA that could support the Book of Mormon. That kind of thing.

LDSSR: Were they also responsible for the portion of the Book of Abraham papyri that were burned in the Chicago fire?

Jacob: Yes, exactly.

LDSSR: Did they have to be so destructive?

Jacob: Well, again, they do their work in cooperation with other committees. Two others involved with that were the Trials and Adversity Committee as well as the Mortal Expiration Committee--we like to call them the Death Squad. The folks on the Death Squad really like the challenge of taking out as many people on their list as possible with one event, while leaving people not yet appointed to die. In a strange way, they find aesthetic value in efficiency.

LDSSR: That's kind of disturbing, but I guess it sort of makes sense. But returning to the scientific evidence--so you're saying that the idea that radioisotopes, and fossils, and DNA, and so forth--that it is all a deception--that that's true?

Jacob: We prefer to say that it is a test. By their very nature, tests involve some deception. But it isn't deception for deception's sake. It's part of a test.

LDSSR: If that's true, it's elaborate beyond comprehension.

Jacob: Oh, those guys from the Evidences and Faith Committee really pay attention to detail. I mean, you don't want to be the one responsible for messing up the mortal probation of several billion souls; I can tell you that.

LDSSR: Well, OK. But don't they go overboard?

Jacob: It's better to be more convincing than less.

LDSSR: But doesn't that run counter to the whole reason for the test? I mean, you've fundamentally deceived--or tested--billions of people in a very convincing way. Don't most of them fail?

Jacob: Actually the success rate is better than you would think because most people don't believe what scientists say, no matter how good the evidence...

LDSSR: I guess I should have seen that coming.

Jacob: ...so really, the worst performers are the scientists, but they make up a tiny fraction of the whole.

LDSSR: So all of that careful scientific investigation and testing amounts to nothing?

Jacob: Well, that kind of irony is popular up here. You know, the first shall be last and the last shall be first--he that is least shall be the greatest--the wise shall be foolish and the foolish shall be wise--and so on.

LDSSR: Why was the test limited to those who lived after the scientific revolution? What about all of those people who lived during times--most of history, really--when God's existence was assumed?

Jacob: Well, again, this gets back to the different committees. For much of mortal history, nature did indeed seem to support the existence of God. However, technology was limited so, as per the Trials and Adversity Committee, people faced a lot of sickness, pain, and death. The Proclaiming the Gospel Committee really needed technology improvements in order to finish up their work in the last days. The question became, how do you give these mortals such technological advancements--which they will use to eliminate their trials of sickness, pain, and death--and still test them? So it was a trade off. The Evidences and Faith Committee and the Trials and Adversity Committee worked together to ensure that a reduction of pain, and so forth, through technology would be accompanied by false scientific conclusions to test their faith--

LDSSR: --made using some of that same technology. Wow. That's...incredible.

Jacob: Hey, these guys are professionals.

LDSSR: I guess our time is up. Thanks so much for your insights.

Jacob: You're welcome. And happy April Fool's Day.

---

Continue reading...