Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts

Motherhood and the Brain

From The Atlantic: What Happens to a Woman's Brain When She Becomes a Mother:
"Even before a woman gives birth, pregnancy tinkers with the very structure of her brain. . . .

 "Mapping the maternal brain is also, many scientists believe, the key to understanding why so many new mothers experience serious anxiety and depression. An estimated one in six women suffers from postpartum depression, and many more develop behaviors like compulsively washing hands and obsessively checking whether the baby is breathing. . . .

 "Becoming a parent looks—at least in the brain—a lot like falling in love. Which helps explain how many new parents describe feeling when they meet their newborns. At the brain level, the networks that become especially sensitized are those that involve vigilance and social salience—the amygdala—as well as dopamine networks that incentivize prioritizing the infant."


Like many other issues, this is not as simple as Nature or Environment. And it's yet another testimony to the wonder of the human body, and to God's image reflected in motherhood.

Happy Mother's Day Weekend!!!

on 5/08/2015 0 comments
Labels: , , ,

[Book Review] Case for a Creator for Kids

Do you have questions about how science and faith interact? I have, for over 20 years. And I still do.

What about your children? Through your parenting and through church, you are teaching them what the Bible says. But you are also concerned with messages they are getting from books, movies, and even school.

If you have questions for yourself, or to help you engage your children on this topic, I highly recommend Case for a Creator for Kids by Lee Strobel. My older son (Elijah) and I recently read through and discussed this book, and my younger son is now reading it as well.

Like other parenting books that cover "tough" topics (science and faith, sexuality, etc), the biggest benefit isn't in the content of the book itself. The biggest benefit of this book is that it is a tool to engage your children in discussion.

If you want to learn more about the book, check out my review on Brave Reviews. Then buy a copy for your family.

PS -- If you want a preview of the book, here are Elijah's three main take-aways (his written words, verbatim):
  • Best evidence is for an intelligent Creator.
  • Big Bang is very similar to creation. 
  • Chances are that God is real. 

Related Links:
on 3/10/2015 1 comments
Labels: , , , , ,

Favorite Tweets for December

Life is short. Eat dessert first.

It was a busy month for all of us, right? But especially so for the Espinosa family: 2 birthdays, 1 anniversary (15 years!), Hanukkah, and Christmas.

Let's celebrate a wonderful month, and a exhilarating year, in which we saw God provide for us in everything.

Here were some of my favorite Tweets (@EspinosaJoey) from the past month:

From Others 

@ValerieHulme:  "Seek to heal what is broken. Lead with love. Follow love w/ compassion. Listen. Learn." Great words from .

@Elloh_L:  "The only thing I know to do is partner with God the Father to teach people to be color blessed, not color blind."   

@ElizabethEsther:  "I can sincerely BELIEVE I'm not racist while still BEHAVING in discriminatory ways." //

@MillVillageFarm:   Thanks for awarding our Mobile Market $10k to help extend our work to additional communities!   

@FallonTonight:  Microsoft is ending Clip Art for Word. It's a small inconvenience for Word users, and a devastating blow for church newsletters.

@CSLewisDaily:  "In commanding us to glorify Him, God is inviting us to enjoy Him.” ~   

@PopAtomicStudio:  I'm not saying renewables are bad - they are an important piece of the puzzle, but can't go it alone & do have limitations.

@Lecrae:  Sick to my stomach about the killing of these NYPD officers. More people dead, more families hurting, more division. God help us.

@BobGoff:  Wise men set out to find a baby who God sent to find us. 

@ChrchCurmudgeon:  They call it a "selfie" because "narcissistie" is too hard to spell.

IJM:  "Two pre-requisites for churches doing justice: courage + humility. They seldom coexist."


From Me

The verdict in the case explains & validates the frustration of the black community in .

Bought beer. Got carded.

If you want to see how a church body can bless families who have children with special needs, watch this:

You can be a part of life-change & community transformation in .  

Just had a job interview where the interviewer prayed for me before I left.

"The key to understanding masculinity is Jesus Christ." Mark Driscoll (in Real Marriage)...  

College-access programs assist students who grow up in . (via )

"You sit on a throne of lies!"   

Chinese food DOES sound good right about now... "Chinese takeout on Christmas"
on 12/31/2014 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Favorite Tweets from November

#tbt to 2009... thankful for these kids!

Of course, there is still a day left in the month. Will there be any crazy good tweets today that need to be added to this list?

Who cares. I'm still digesting food.



From Others:

@itsmikeberry:  Becoming a Christ-follower is not about cleaning yourself up, it's about giving yourself wholly to the God who can.

@davidpmurray:  "We all want to be happy. The problem is what often makes us happy are the instruments of our destruction."

@EndPoverty:  “Vote for principle, though you may vote alone, & you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”- John Quincy Adams

@PaulMMCooper:  "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." - Winston Churchill

@LeeBezotte:  "He who runs from God in the morning will scarcely find Him the rest of the day." - John Bunyan
  
@AllProDad:  "Being a great father is like shaving. No matter how good you shaved today, you have to do it again tomorrow." - Reed Markham

@FirstLegoLeague:  "Never cease trying to be the best you can be -- that's under your control." - John Wooden,

@TimHawkinsComic:  "I don’t understand why the bottom of the heart is the best region of the heart to thank someone from."

@ChrchCurmudgeon:  Donut wholes > donut holes 

@MZHemingway:  So SNL did it’s first mildly critical skit of Obama ever and it got "fact checked" by mainstream media? That’s *perfect*. PERFECT. Love it.


From Me:

Started by 3 years ago, Mill Community Ministries is growing! Check it out:

"We stopped trying to build a life of SUCCESS, & started trying to build a life of SIGNIFICANCE." Mike Pereyo,









on 11/29/2014 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Favorite Tweets from October

I hope you get a monster amount of candy for Halloween. Or just because it's Friday. Whatever reason you need.

Here's another treat for you -- some of my favorite tweets that you may have missed this past month.


From Others:

@FallonTonight:  A Russian group nominated Putin for a Nobel Peace Prize. "I'm all about peace," Putin said. "Piece of Ukraine, piece of Poland…"

@Jonnie_W:  Just met in an elevator, and I got flustered. Hope he knows my Love Language® is sweaty palms. 

@BurkParsons:  In his sermon on the mount Jesus demanded perfect righteous of us, in his death on the mount he fulfilled it for us.

@JoeWaters_GVL:  "Childhood poverty gets biologically embedded." - Dr Gorski 

@JamieTheVWM:  Maybe we should stop saying "Jesus loves you." and start saying "I love you. Jesus taught me how."  

@TheFatherEffect:  Your kids learn about grace by watching you give it to others.  


From Me:

To boost young brains, get kids to .

Definitely a good sign --> "As overtesting outcry grows, leaders pull back on standardized tests."

Another reason why should be the first to go to Mars!

Will this video inspire students to go into -related careers? is beautiful!!   

A little encouragement for the football coaches at Greenville High.  
on 10/31/2014 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

New Skill: Computer Programming

After taking a month off from new skills, I'm ready to get back at it.

Of course, since we just moved and I'm starting a new job, I'm not sure if I'll still be able to give a full 2.5 hours per week to this, besides still practicing my Spanish and my ukulele. We'll see.

Programmed for Success

I am not a tech guy. I have workable knowledge of social media and blogs. I don't crave (or know how to use) most new technologies.

We got our first DVD player in 2002, years after it was mainstream. When others were getting Blackberry phones, I got a Palm Pilot. I bought my first smartphone in 2011, and Joanna got hers in 2013. We still have never owned a flat-screen TV, or DVR. I wouldn't know how to hook up or use either one.

But this month, I want to improve my understanding of technology, though at the fundamental level. I will begin to learn some computer programming, or coding. (I think there is a difference in these two terms, but I have no idea what it is.)

I will begin by using the resources provided at Code.org. I dabbled with this when it came out (last fall?), but will dedicate more time to it over the next couple of months. I'll start at the ground level, and work my way up. However far I get, that will be great.

Another thought (and this may justify the time I'll put into this): I may do this with my older son Elijah, who has already shown great interest and proficiency in programming. At a STEAM Camp in Allendale, he won a Sphero in a programming competition.


Why Is Programming Important?

Here's a sampling of what others think:

Issac Asimov (New York Times, 1964) (HT: 22 Words)
"The world of A.D. 2014 will have few routine jobs that cannot be done better by some machine than by any human being. Mankind will therefore have become largely a race of machine tenders. Schools will have to be oriented in this direction…. All the high-school students will be taught the fundamentals of computer technology, will become proficient in binary arithmetic, and will be trained to perfection in the use of the computer languages...." 

The code.org website postulates that by 2020, there will be one million more computer science jobs than computer science students.

CGP Grey, with a combination of humor and intellect, makes THE BEST educational videos. So when he says computer programming should be a part of the standard school curriculum, I'm with him.

On this note, CGP Grey may be happy with these new high school graduation requirements in Texas, which allow the student to substitute computer programming for their language requirement.

Massachusetts is also putting programming in the curriculum. Note: the article has been archived, but the original article had this quote:
“Computer science is a natural outlet to exercise critical thinking and problem-solving skills, and it enhances mathematics, engineering and robotics,” Brehm said. “There’s also a shortage of people in the workforce who can code.”
Florida is leaning this way, too.

And running the risk of going on and on, here's some other interesting reading:


I don't know if I'll ever get a "coder's high" but I will at least giggle at jokes like this: 
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary, and those who don’t.  (Max Little, Mathematician, Aston University)

Additionally, my son and I can cement our claim to be White and Nerdy:

 

Why Am I Doing This Whole "New Skills" Thing?

Let's refresh. Of all the things that I could be doing with my time, why is it so important for me to learn new skills?

Of course there is the practical side: I hope that my new skills in Spanish, ukulele, computer programming, etc, will help me, or even better, help me to help others.

But even if I don't become proficient at any of these skills, the process of learning new skills is beneficial. Just as physical exercise builds and maintains muscle, continual learning keeps brain cells alive, and even changes those brain cells. And studies show that a hobby can make you more productive at work.

For more on this, read my intro post, 20 Hours to Learn Anything: It's a System, Not a Goal.


How about you? Do you plan on learning any new skills?


on 8/01/2014 0 comments
Labels: , , , ,

I Am a Six-Day Creationist


I didn't make many comments on the recent Ham-Nye debate, but it was interesting to follow the aftermath. As you'd expect, few people's minds were changed as a result of this event, and both sides claimed victory.

But I would like to go on record and share my beliefs, and how I got to this point.

As you can see from the title of this post, I do in fact believe that the world was created in six literal 24-hour days. But I haven't always felt that way.

Before I explain more, I'd like to recap a post from Tim Challies, Why I Am A Six-Day Creationist, for the sake of comparison. He says that he has always believed this to be true, and then he explains the three main reasons why:
  1. The Bible teaches it. 
  2. The writers believed it. 
  3. Science confirms it.
(Note that Challies wrote this post 4 months before the Ham-Nye debate.)


My Journey

Unlike Challies, I didn't always believe this was true. I did not grow up believing that the Bible was completely true, or even somewhat valid on most issues. And even after I became a Christ follower at the age of 19, I still believed that evolution was true and that the universe was old. Really old. After all, this is what I had always been taught in school, and I didn't see any evidence to believe otherwise.

Besides, I didn't want to be one of those "whacky" Christians that turns up their nose towards real science.

But over the next few years, I read a some books on this topic and talked with a few men that I respected who believed that God created the world in six-literal days, including all the kinds of organisms.. These (one was a personal mentor, and one was a PhD chemist) guys seemed normal enough. And what they (and the authors of the books that I read) said made sense.

Funny enough, I went to the opposite end of the spectrum. Following the lead of guys like Ken Ham -- but not the men that I knew personally -- I believed that this was a core issue in my faith, and for the faith of others. I thought that it was impossible for a "real" Christian to believe in evolution, or an old earth. I became a staunch stubborn apologist for young earth creationism.

Then I experienced another transition in my thinking, over years and years. I began to see that this issue is more complex than I realized, and, even more importantly, I began to see that I needed to show more grace on this non-salvation issue.

Where I Am Now

So here's what I think: I believe that the earth is on the magnitude of thousands (not billions) of years old. And I believe that life as we know it today did not arise by a primordial soup and macroevolution (the change from one genus or species to another over a long period of time).

But I also know a lot of strong Christians whom I respect and who are a lot smarter than I am, who don't line up with me on this issue. We have to be gracious and loving to each other, even as we pursue truth together.

Going back to Challies three points above, here is how I would respond:
  1. I totally agree that the Bible is clear in what it means by "day" in Genesis 1. My biggest thought is, "If God wanted to make it more clear that He created the world in six, 24-hour days, how would He have had that recorded in His Word?" I can't think of how He could have done so. 
  2. I also agree with Challies here, that none of the Biblical writers contradict what Moses wrote in Genesis 1 or Exodus 20:11.
  3. Here is where I will differ from Challies. From the science that I've studied, I've come to these conclusions:
    1. There is a bunch of evidence that backs up the claim that the earth is relatively young. 
    2. There is a bunch of evidence that backs up the claim that the earth is very old. 
    3. There are evidences that don't support a young earth. 
    4. There are evidences that don't support an old earth.  
Therefore, while the evidences can support a young earth, I also see how they can support an old earth. Presuppositions do matter, then.

You see, perhaps the baseline questions we need to ask aren't Did God make the world, some time ago? or Did the world come about through chance over billions of years? I think better questions to start with are:
  • Could there be God who made the world in six literal days?
  • Could this world have come to be through random chance?

Let's not rule anything out at the start of our conversations.

"I stand in awe of God because of what he has done through his creation. Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God."  James Tour, PhD nanoscientist

And even more importantly, let us not forget The Crux of the Matter, when it comes to the Christian faith.

For More Reading

I could write more, but many smarter men have written much more than I ever will on this topic. Want to learn more? Check out these resources:

And if you want to read more about what I've written on this topic, check out these posts:

**photo credit: c@rljones via photopin cc
on 3/20/2014 2 comments
Labels: , , ,

Roe v. Wade: Do You Really Believe What You Say You Believe?


For those who say they are "pro-life" -- are you really pro-life?

And for those who say that they are "pro-choice" -- are you really pro-choice?

Years ago, I was in a men's group, centered around a discussion of a book on marriage. At some point, the topic of abortion came up (not sure how). One of the men said, "Most people who say they are pro-life really aren't. They are just anti-abortion."

I was shocked by what he said, probably because I felt attacked. But in a sense he was probably right.

One of the complaints that pro-choicers have against pro-lifers is that the latter (who are typically social conservatives) are only focusing on the pregnancy and birth. Then, after that baby is born, the same social conservatives don't focus on helping those through social programs. We fight like crazy for the baby to be born, but afterwards we say "You're on your own!" Do we fight like crazy for life at birth, and then ignore that child's need for quality of life? Yes, too much so.

Then again, I might have the same issue against those who say they are pro-choice, and, "It's a woman's body and her choice what to do with it." If you want to casually dismiss the rights of the baby (or fetus, if you will), then are you ok if that woman regularly gets drunk and uses copious amounts of illegal drugs throughout the length of her pregnancy?

Want me to go further? A recent study determined that any level of alcohol in a woman's body disrupts the brain's circuitry. Knowing the long-lasting effects that will be done to a baby, especially through overuse of certain drugs and chemicals, do you really still think it's purely the mother's choice? And if we know that nicotine causes long-term health effects for the offspring, and that smoking can lower the child's birthweight, should a parent be held accountable for smoking or using nicotine gum?

And if you say "No" -- that we have to leave these decisions up to the mother, and help her make better choices -- then that same reasoning would lead us to reducing social and governmental services, since it must be purely up to the parent to decide what is good.

Who Does Get a Say in This?

Let's go back to the original argument against pro-lifers, that perhaps many (or most) are really just anti-abortion. I think that is true for a lot of people, especially for social-conservatives.

But what about others? What about folks who are pro-life (= anti-abortion), and who are also working to meet the needs of those in poverty? What about those who have fostered and adopted, or have supported those who do that?

Over six years, a coalition of churches in Colorado has reduced by 70% the number of children in the child welfare system. Instead of 875 children waiting to be adopted, there are 275 (as of September 2013). Since those churches have worked to provide a better quality of life for children, I think they have earned the right to be heard on the topic of being "pro-life."

Of course, we need to consider the opposite point, that adoption is not used as much as it could be in this country, because our society sees abortion as a viable option. (There are 15 infant adoptions for every 1000 abortions in the US.) John Piper argues in For Adoption or Against Abortion? that eliminating abortion would help us (as a nation) to increase support for adoption and fostering.

The Science of the Matter

For me, as one who has loved science since elementary school, I want to look at the science of the matter. After all, we have to follow the data wherever it may lead, no matter what we personally think.

It seems that so much of the public arguments about abortion have people lining up on one of two sides:
  1. It's about the woman's body, and what she wants. 
  2. It's about what the Bible (or some other religious text) says.
If that is the core of the arguments, we aren't going to get anywhere. No amount of arguing is going to get someone to switch from one camp to the other, on this isolated issue.

Therefore as a scientist, I think we need to focus on what science says. The question that we should be debating (from a scientific perspective) is "What is life?" or "When does life begin?"

It's not the point of this post to list out my arguments for my perspective. Maybe another time. I am merely proposing that we shift the framework of the conversation from Our Wants vs God's Word to Science.

The Moral of the Story

OK. I fudged a little. I am going to talk about my perspective. That's my choice, right? (Just like it's your choice to stop reading this now. But I hope you'll hear me out, or at least leave a comment before clicking away from this page.)

I do think that life (from a purely biochemistry perspective) begins at conception, when the genetic material from the sperm combines with the genetic material from the egg. Cellular metabolic processes skyrocket from that point in the cell, and that is equivalent to life.

Also, the mother's body has to react in a way to not reject the cell. That is, without a specific response, her body would treat the new cell as a foreign object and therefore she would fight against it. To me, this goes against the typical pro-choice stance that "fetus is just a part of the mother's body."

If this is true -- that we are talking about two separate lives (the mother's and the baby's) -- than that is when we can bring in morality to the discussion.

It is then that we can discuss the fact of whether abortion is black genocide, since "a Black baby is 5 times more likely to be killed in the womb than a White Baby." In view of yesterday's remembrance of Martin Luther King, this is worth mulling over:
As one Black man says in the 3801 Lancaster documentary, “Everything that was ever gained during the Civil Rights Movement is worth nothing to a dead Black child,” and as one Black woman proclaims, “Make no mistake, abortion is a civil rights issue.”
It is then that we can wonder over the fact that 50 times more American lives have been extinguished by abortion in the last 40 years than by war over the last 240 years.

So, let's move beyond what our personal wants or our faith or what judges have ruled, and let's talk about the science of the matter.

Let's Talk

Before you claim to be fully pro-life (or pro-choice), be sure you are willing to fully fight for your stance. Are you willing to follow the rabbit trail (either the path of "pro-life" or "pro-choice") all the way to the end?

Or even better than resolutely defending your perspective, let's be gracious to each other in our speech, knowing that this is a complicated, messy discussion.

I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments, on anything I just wrote. What do you think of the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice"? Should we focus our conversations more on science, as opposed to philosophy or religion?


Related Links:

on 1/21/2014 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , ,

20 Hours to Learn Anything: It's a System, Not a Goal


For all the goals I had in 2013, losing weight was not one of them. However, of my eleven monthly 1 small thing goals, 5 of them were health related. I did those monthly goals with the intention of trying to form new, habits, and slowly but surely, I have become a regular exerciser.

So, while I did not intend to lose weight, I did want to be healthier, and I took specific action steps to achieve better health. Since the summer, I started doing two things:
  1. Exercising regularly, which usually means jogging 2 or 3 days each week.
  2. Tracking my caloric intake, using an app on my phone.
The results:  I lost almost 10 pounds in the last six months of 2013.


What I Learned About Goals

Here's what I learned about making goals: Don't make the end result the focus. Yes, you need to have a specific objective. But more important are the action steps toward your goal.

You see, I realized that I can't always control results, but I can control what I do.

What if I made "Lose 20 pounds my goal," which is sort of true for me, because I do want to lose another 10 pounds or so? What if I made 20 pounds my goal, and only lost 10? I would probably feel like a failure.

But I focused on two action steps (involving exercise and diet) and I let the results take care of itself. James Clear wrote about this, as he explained why it's more important to have systems than goals. He writes that goals . . .
  1. reduce your current happiness (because we equate goals with happiness)
  2. are at odds with long-term progress (because we slack off after accomplishing them)
  3. suggest that you are more in control than you think (sorry, Type A people, we can't control everything in life)


This Year's Goals Systems

2013 Goals: Each month, do something regularly to form a habit.

2014 System: Spend 20 hours over 2 months to learn a new skill.

I was inspired in part by Josh Kaufman's TEDx talk, in which he makes the case that it takes about 20 hours to learn the basics of a new skill. For me, this will translate to roughly 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week, for 8 weeks.

Here are some of the skills I hope to learn:
  • Basic Spanish language
  • Playing an instrument (probably the ukelele, which is what Kaufman did, too)
  • Solving a Rubik's cube
  • Computer programming
I need two more skills (since I'll need six for the year). You can let me know of any suggestions in the comments.

Again, I will focus on the system (i.e., practicing for 30 minutes a day), not the goal (mastering the ukelele, becoming fluent in Spanish, setting a world record for solving a Rubik's cube).

Yes, I do want to become competent in speaking and translating Spanish, and I'll keep that objective in mind. But the part that I will focus on is what I will do to make it happen. I will focus on what I will do and how long I will do it. If I do that, the results will take care of themselves.

 

Skill #1: Learning Spanish

The first objective for the year is learning Spanish. Of course, I do not expect to acquire even a basic mastery in just two months. Instead, I will focus on establishing a system to learn Spanish in January and February, and then plan to continue my study through the rest of the year (and beyond?).

We've already bought the Rosetta Stone software. We got a good deal on the homeschool version (for up to 5 users, plus it tracks grades), so all five of us will be working on this, though at different paces and with varying focuses. For example, our youngest child will only do speaking and listening.

I haven't taken Spanish in almost 20 years, but I am excited to do this. The main reason is to be able to help others who speak Spanish but not (or only a little bit of) English.

And there are personal benefits to learning new skills (such as foreign languages). It has been shown to positively modify the brain's structure, keep aging minds sharp, and delay dementia. For children and youth, learning a foreign language has been shown to increase a broad range of cognitive development. In addition, the "flow" state of acquiring new abilities has been shown to increase happiness. That is, our whole body likes it when we learn new things.

Our six-year-old on lesson 1.

¡Vamanos! (Let's Go!)

Since all five of us will be learning Spanish, perhaps we can produce something like this (from what I understand, it was produced as a final project in a Spanish class):



What about you? Are you up for learning any new skills in 2014?


Related Links:

**top image courtesy of imageafter via everystockphoto
on 1/07/2014 2 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Science and Magic

If you know me, you know that I love science.

As best I can remember, this love of science began in elementary school, when the teacher burned a strip of magnesium metal. I thought it was the coolest thing I had ever seen. From that moment on, I knew that I wanted to be a chemist.

(That may seem odd, because chemists don't usually try to cause fires. But here's the lesson for teachers: if you want a child to be interested in science, don't stress over standards and definitions. You just have to do something that makes them say, "Wow!" That's it.)

Suddenly, my mind was inclined to all things science. My worldview was shaped by materialism and pragmatism. Therefore, any thoughts about God and Jesus and religion were immediately met with my inner voice screaming, "That's all just stories. I need evidence."

You can read more about my journey from atheism to faith in Remembering My Salvation. But let's get back to the topic of science. . . .

CS Lewis and Scientism

I first read C.S. Lewis (The Chronicles of Narnia) when I was in middle school, long before I was a follower of Jesus Christ. I enjoyed that series immensely, as pure entertainment. But when I re-read those books in college, after I became a Christian, I saw them on a whole different level. That's a testimony to Lewis' ability to connect with a variety of mindsets.

I recently watched the documentary The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case Against Scientism. Scientism is effort to use the methods of science to explain and control every part of human life. It states that the bar of science is the standard by which every human discipline should be measured.

Scientism is not the same as science. Justin Taylor notes that under scientism "science (a good thing) can be twisted in order to attack religion, undermine ethics, and limit human freedom."

The Twins of Science and Magic

Lewis considered science and magic to be twins:
  1. Both attempt to give MEANING to life. Therefore, they both have the ability to function as religion.
  2. Both encourage a LACK OF SKEPTICISM, by telling you to trust the "experts." Numerous psychology and sociology studies have shown that "people will believe almost anything if it's dressed up in the name of science." (See the Milgram Experiment, for example.)
  3. Both involved a quest for POWER, as they involve a desire to control our world.

If you are interested in science and philosophy, I encourage you to watch the entire video. But you can at least skip ahead to learn more about:
  • Scientocracy (22:46), a society that claims to be based on science, but is actually ruled by a certain clique of people, who claim a right to rule based on their scientific expertise.
  • Governmental tyranny (27:51). "I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come it." 

Where I Stand

Now that I come to faith, some have accused me of being anti-science. Again, if you know me, you know that that is not the case.

I love science, and I want others to love it and explore it, too. It's my job, after all, and I enjoy exploring science with my own children.

But we cannot get sucked into the circular logic that claims, "If science can't prove it, then can't know that it's real." Neither science nor magic can rightly claim to give all of life's meaning, truth, and power.

Stuart Firestein reminds us that it's not like there is a finite set of truths (in our perspective). Everything we learn about the universe only shows how much more we don't know. And science cannot claim to give us all those answers.

“In an honest search for knowledge you quite often have to abide by ignorance for an indefinite period.” -- Erwin Schrodinger

Related Links:

 **image courtesy of vierdrie via rgbstock.com
on 10/22/2013 0 comments
Labels: , , , , ,

Surprising Ways Your Brain Works

Lately, I've been fascinated by the brain. Not anyone's brain in particular, but how the brain works. It must be the nerd scientist in me.

I've written a lot about the brain on my other blog. For example:

Are you intrigued? Then here's another great post that you may find interesting: 10 Surprising Facts About How Our Brain Works. You should read that post, so you can learn . . . .
  1. Why your brain does better creative work when you're tired.
  2. How stress can make your brain smaller.
  3. That it is literally impossible for your brain to multi-task. 
  4. That naps improve your brain's performance.  
  5. Why your vision trumps all other senses. 
  6. That introversion and extroversion result from different wiring in the brain.  
  7. Why we tend to like people who make mistakes more.
  8. How meditation can rewire your brain for the better.  
  9. Why exercise is good for your brain.  
  10. How to trick your brain into thinking that time is going slowly.

Read the full article to learn more, and to see how your life can be different as a result of these 10 facts.

You can also check on these related posts on this blog:
on 10/03/2013 0 comments
Labels: ,

Artificial Foods: Just the Facts, Ma'am

Aspartame contains wood alcohol, and a by-product causes multiple sclerosis and lupus.

 The preservative in vaccines contains mercury, which has been shown to cause autism.

Margarine was originally manufactured to fatten turkeys.

Within the last few months, I've read blogs containing these (or similar) statements, especially when the articles are shared on social media by my friends.

What do the statements have in common? They are all false.

My Thoughts    


As a scientist, I'm probably a little defensive when people give chemicals a bad name, so I have to be careful myself that I come to the discussion with an open mind.

And I am not saying that diet sodas, margarine, and artificial preservatives are not bad. The truth is, excessive amounts of those foods probably should be avoided.

On the other hand, people who say that natural is always better don't really believe that. After all, poison oak, tobacco, and arsenic are all natural products, but you won't catch me intentionally ingesting large amounts of them.

And as a blogger, these articles catch my attention, often because they are just recycled content from old emails, blogs, and forums. (A quick check on Snopes can be helpful.) At best, re-posting this material is deceptive, often because the "author" has something to gain. At worst, it's plagiarism.

Do the Ends Justify the Means?

We all have biases. We all know certain facts. But no matter how much we believe (or even know) something to be true, that doesn't give us a right to us falsehoods to back up that claim.

What bothers me most is when the people who share such articles are Christians. After all, they surely wouldn't think to use these tactics when evangelizing.

For example, we Christians would all agree that helping others believe in Jesus is our number when focus when it comes to others. However, does that mean we should . . .
  • tell someone that if they believe in Jesus, then nothing bad will ever happen to them again; or
  • make up a story about how they had a problem, and then Jesus appeared in a vision and solved their problem?
 Would the end (of evangelism) justify the means (of deception)? No way!

Just The Facts

I'm all for people eating healthier. And I'm all for a discussion with you about what constitutes "healthy" and "unhealthy." But when we discuss that, let's please talk from a basis of facts and science, not fear-inducing rhetoric.

Related Links:
**image courtesy of jensoi via morgueFile

on 9/17/2013 2 comments
Labels: , ,

Bad Behavior: He Can't Help It

Have you ever wondered if kids who behave badly really can't help it? I'm not saying that children are not responsible for their actions. But what if the brains of some are hardwired that makes impulsive reactions more natural?

Last month, at our Elevate Summer Camp, a child pulled a fire alarm one afternoon. I've known this child for over a year, and I've seen him making foolish choices and then honestly regretting them later. I talked with him about what he did, and I know exactly what happened. He saw that the alarm said "Pull" and he just did so. Immediately, he realized what he did and said to the girl next to him, "Don't tell anyone what I just did." Thankfully, she did.

He made an impulsive decision. He often lives as if there is no filter between his desires and his actions. I don't think he is alone in having this problem of difficult-to-control urges towards negative behavior. For example, researchers have discovered an association between alcoholism and genetics.

The Science of Aggression

With many children that we have ministered to in Allendale, there seems to be an excessive amount of anger and aggression. No matter how many times we converse with them, or how many consequences they get, they still impulsively react with anger (that does not dissipate quickly). We know that there is a connection between Anger and Fatherlessness, but is there something going on on a deeper biological level?

Researchers from Germany have used molecular imaging to monitor the presence of the neurotransmitter dopamine. Dopamine typically calms neural and bodily activity, so a lagging release of this chemical is a key factor in anger and aggression. As the team noted, "For many people, anger is an almost automatic response to life's challenges" (emphasis mine).

Helping Them Manage

So, if negative behavior cannot be controlled (or at least, controlled with great difficulty), how should we respond? Should we just give up, and throw in the towel? Of course not!

In working with kids who have issues with ADHD and emotional self-control, we have to help them learn to manage their challenges. We cannot go to the extreme of excusing and allowing their behavior, and we cannot go to the other extreme of blindly punishing behavior that is more childish than foolish and rebellious.

We have to give children the bigger vision, that includes these principles:
  • "We love you."
  • "We accept you and understand your challenges."
  • "In order for you to succeed, we have to help learn to control your behavior and make better choices."

A Theology of Impulsivity 

But I also know that asking a child (or an adult, for that matter) to "do better" will always be a losing battle. For whatever desires and impulses we have, the natural self will win if the person is in the battle alone, especially if there is some sort of ingrained biological tendency.

The Christ-follower, however, is not alone in this battle. Those who have the Spirit of God living in them have a power-filled desire to control their actions. Instead of a mind vs flesh battle, we live a spirit vs flesh battle (Galatians 5:16-17).

When we are tempted with selfish and destructive impulses, we can remember these principles from the article Temptation Is an Invitation:
  1. Temptation is not a sin
  2. Resist the devil
  3. Draw near to God
  4. Know the Word
  5. Look for the exit sign
  6. Rinse and repeat 

Related Links:
 **image courtesy of adamfast via sxc.hu
on 7/24/2012 0 comments
Labels: , , ,

Genetics and the Birds and the Bees

Near the end of the school year, the kids were learning about the human body. In talking about genetics, my wife explained to the kids that life starts from a cell, where one half comes from from Dad, and one half comes from Mom.

Ever the inquisitive mind, Elijah asked, "I know that the baby grows in the Mommy. But how does the Daddy part get to the Mommy part?" To which my wife said that he would be learning about that later.

Showing off his perceptiveness, Elijah said, "I think it has to do with . . ." and then he made a kissy face.

Joining in, Hannah said, "I think you're right. But there must be something else, because we kiss."

Not sure how they figured that all out, but Joanna and I had better make sure we keep our bedroom door locked.

Related Links:

**image courtesy of Sindala via sxc.hu
on 6/07/2012 0 comments
Labels: , , ,

Should Christians Believe in Evolution?


My views on evolution have, well, evolved. All through my childhood and teenage years, I believed that life today existed as a result of small changes over time. These changes caused bacteria to evolve into plants and animals, sea creatures to evolved into land animals, and monkeys to evolved into humans. Why? Because that's what I was taught, it seemed to make sense, and I had no reason to believe otherwise.

Even after I became a Christ-follower, I still believe in this process of evolution. I remember taking  Introduction to Biology my Junior year, and studying this topic, and that a friend (and brother in Christ) said to me, "I can't believe that we are forced to learn this junk, when it's not true." I gave a non-committal answer, since I still believed in evolution.

But then I figured that I didn't want to go by what any "expert" said -- whether that was a textbook or a pastor. I wanted to study it for myself, and come to my own conclusions. I read books by Josh McDowell, Philip Johnson, and Michael Behe.

I learned a lot, but two things jumped out at me:
  1. The case for evolution (as in organisms growing more complex by a series of small changes over time) is not as solid as I had always thought.
  2. The very word evolution can mean different things.
This second point is crucial. Because it means that someone saying, "Evolution is completely true" is both right and wrong. And it also means that someone saying "Evolution is not at all true" is also both right and wrong.

That's why I love Should Christians Believe in Evolution? by Will Little. In this article, he explains distinctions among four core definitions of evolution, and compares each of those to what the Bible teaches.

Here are some other snippets from his post, which reflect his honesty and humility:
  • "Christians have absolutely nothing to fear from scientific discoveries."
  • "It appears to me that modern evidence does suggest that natural selection acting on genetic changes . . . can alter populations to the point of producing new species."
  • "To be honest, I still have more to learn and I'm open to having this clarified."
Be sure to read the full article.

Related Links:

on 5/23/2012 2 comments
Labels: , ,

Your Child's Health May Be 64 Calories Away

A recent study indicated that in order for the USA to reach its goals for reducing obesity rates by 2020, children need to eliminate an average of 64 excess calories per day. This average varies according to ethnicity and socioeconomic class, and you can read a more complete summary here.

I'm not proposing that we put kids on strict diets, or that we need to stress over obesity rates. Continually talking about being "fat" or "skinny" probably does more harm than good to a child's psyche.

Instead, I want to point out how just small changes can help an individual (and a family, and a society) increase its health and well-being. Reducing 64 calories can mean an extra 30 minutes a day of outdoor play, or eliminating 1 chocolate chip cookie. You can get closer to that goal by taking the stairs instead of an elevator, or by regularly choosing water over your preferred iced tea or soda. And kids get more active when there is a variety of toy choices.

Again, the goal is not to stress over body weight itself, but to promote a lifestyle of health.

Related Link:
image courtesy of richardsweet via rgbstock.com
on 4/18/2012 0 comments
Labels: , , ,

When Were Flightless Birds Created?

Here's a recent thought from my daughter, Hannah:

We know that birds and fish were created on Day 5 (Genesis 1:20-23). And we know that land animals were created on Day 6 (vv. 24-25).

But what about flightless birds, like ostriches, emus, and penguins? Are they still grouped with the Day 5 animals, since they are "winged birds" (v. 21), even though they don't "fly above the earth"? Or are they one of "all the creatures that move along the ground" (v. 25), and thus were Day 6 animals?

What do you think? When were flightless birds created?


Genesis 1:20-15
 20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
 24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 

Related Link:

image courtesy of imc via sxc.hu
on 4/16/2012 0 comments
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )