Today I have received two comments from people pointing out my ignorance. One was related to a post from last month dealing with evolution the other was regarding today’s post where I brought up something from physics. I am not a scientist and unfortunately I didn’t take very many science classes in college. The Theology curriculum at Walla Walla has one of the highest number of required classes, I think falling only shortly behind the various Engineering programs.
As far as my biology education went, in our 7th or 8th grade science text book produced by the SDA church it’s handling of Evolution was focused solely on arguments against it. My high school biology class, at that same Adventist school, was required to use the official state endorsed text book which did include a chapter on evolution, however the teacher pointed out that chapter 4 covered evolution and proceeded to move on to chapter 5 piling on too much homework for anyone to have time to read that chapter on their own. Then skip ahead seven years to the seminary course called “Issues in Origins” which presented a watered down and outdated version of evolutionary theory and pathetically weak rhetorical arguments against it.
I would like to say that I do think that any secondary education that does not include with teaching the facts and theory of evolution should not be accredited. Yes, I am saying that my high school diploma shouldn’t be worth the paper it’s printed on.
My first legitimate exposure to evolutionary theory was when I went to the Field Museum in Chicago for my Archeology of Ancient Egypt class and went through the “Our Evolving World” exhibit before going to the King Tut exhibit.
As far as physics go, I had a conceptual physics class in high school and two quarters of astronomy in college.
I don’t like to be wrong, especially since it weakens the credibility of my blog, but I have no problem admitting when I am. That being said, I will try to stick to what I know (theology, history, biblical studies, religion, politics, etc) and when I do have to address a scientific topic, I will do better diligence to try to keep my facts straight. I do ask that my more scientifically literate readers help keep me honest.
Permalink
Dustin,
Please don't feel like your lack of formal background in the sciences should discourage you from discussing scientific topics on your blog. A blog is a place for people to discuss ideas and get feedback, it's not a place where people have to be right all the time. Now if you write a book you will want to be certain that all of the facts are completely correct. When I "pointed out your ignorance" yesterday I was only wanting to refine your understanding of physics. I did not want to discourage you from using physics as an argument. Science is after all one of the strongest tools in the fight against ignorance and I encourage you to get comfortable using it. For someone of your intellect it would be pretty easy to read and understand some introductory science books. May I suggest you read some books on evolutionary biology, geology, introductory physics and if you are really ambitious quantum (an experimental book on quantum would be best, prevents you from getting lost in the math, but also doesn't create a lot of misconceptions like a watered down "laymens" book will.)
BP
Permalink
I may not have adequately expressed myself, I will still use scientific arguments if I have time to adequately research them and as I continue my self education on science I'll gain more comfort with off the cuff comments like I have with other topics.
I'm currently reading The Selfish Gene which is definately improving my understanding of evolution, next will be something on cosmology.