of the

American Scientific Affiliation & Canadian Scientific & Christian Affiliation

Volume 38 Number 5          SEP/OCT 1996


The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA is published bi-monthly for its membership by the American Scientific Affiliation, P.O. Box 668, 55 Market St., Ipswich, MA 019380668. Tel. (508) 356-5656, FAX: (508) 3564375, E-mail: asa@newl.com Send Newsleffer information to the Editor: Dennis Feucht, 14554 Maplewood Road, Townville, PA 16360. E-mail: dduv6ga@prodigy.com

Joint Annual ASA/CSCA Meeting in Toronto

The ASA and CSCA Annual Meetings were held jointly this year at Victoria U. in downtown Toronto, Ontario, a settin- befitting the theme, "Science, Christianity, and the Urbanization of Planet Earth." The 160 attendees heard keynote speaker Robert C. Linthicum describe the emerging urban situation, offer a theology of the city, and, in his third and final address, frame a biblical response for Christians to take.

On Sunday a former professor of social science, the mayor of Kitchener, Ontario, Richard D. Christy, gave the morning sermon and an evening public lecture on "Christianity, Politics, and the Crises of Contemporary Society." Meeting attendees, following a map of downtown Toronto, spent a sunny afternoon walking through various sections of the city. Their assignment was to observe it from the perspective of a homeless 15-yearold trying to survive on its streets. This pedestrian tour led small groups of ASAers to the Yonge St. Mission, a Christian organization founded in 1896 that provides for the physical, emotional, and spiritual needs of street children.

At the ASA business meeting, the new Council candidates were announced: Jay Hollman and Jack Swearengen. ASAers were asked to be sure to vote on upcoming constitutional changes, which require votes from one-third of our members and fellows. Ken Dormer gave an update on AISRED activities in Kenya. Next year's meeting will be at Westmont C. in Santa Barbara, CA, August 1-4. In 1998, we will meet in Cambridge, England and in 1999 at the John Brown U. in Siloam Springs, AR.

Detailed Annual Meeting news and pictures will appear in the next issue.


More ASAers Reach Churches

Olson presents lecture series

Edwin Olson presented a series of Sunday evening talks on "A Scientist and His Bible" at his church, Trinity Baptist, in Spokane, Washington. Ed described the context in a letter to the Editor: "My series ... was followed by the showing of Kenneth Ham's videotaped lecture on the 'Genesis Solution.' This was my pastor's way of saying that there are views other than mine. I presume you know that Ham was once associated with ICR and, in fact, was so when the videotape was made."

Since then, more young-earth material has been presented, to Ed's frustration. Ed sums up his situation as follows:

Please understand that I very much appreciate my pastor. He is a good man whose sermons are almost always excellent. But somehow, scientific thinking is not his forte. I think it is my presence in my church that minimizes, if not eliminates, the hokey material so widely available to us conservative Christians.

Some of the "hokey" material was a four-part video series that Ed's Sunday School coordinator brought in. Two of the topics Ed remembers are the ark of the covenant and the Shroud of Turin, claimed by some to be Jesus' burial cloth. Ed led a discussion on the shroud, referring to the account in John 21:6-7 and to the carbon 14 dating, which places the shroud's origin in the Middle Ages. Several months earlier, Ed had responded in a Spokane Christian periodical to the Shroud controversy. What concerned Ed was that "the whole series carried a tone of the sensational with conjecture as the most potent weapon." Creation-evolution is not the only science issue of interest to church members nowadays.


In his talks, transcribed in a nicely formatted 25-page handout, page I gives his cautionary introduction, alerting the audience in advance that some of what he will present might not fit into their mold on some of the issues. Ed first lists some facts of the Bible/science relationship. He then lists some places Christians can turn for help, including ASA. The first session ends with a list of questions that introduces the issues. In the second session, instead of answering the given questions, Ed talks about "the proper way to think in addressing Bible/science issues."

In session two, he describes what science is, God's creative activity (citing Robert Fischer's little book, God Did It, But How? which says: "The debate has always been about the way or ways in which God works.") and finally, Henry Morris's interpretation of the days of Genesis. Olson commends Morris for his capable, untiring efforts, but laments that the price has been estrangement from the scientific community. Ed notes what Morris has done:

He won other competent people to his position, and together they have cut a wide swath in America's conservative Christian community. They have become the voice of science for millions of American Christians - for Bible school faculty and students, for homeschoolers, for many pastors and congregations outside the mainline denominations. This stream of influence comes through books, pamphlets, films, lay seminars, radio programs, field trips, public debates, the Institute for Creation Research and the Creation Research Society. No channel seems to have been overlooked in the effort to promote what they call "scientific creationism." I stand in awe of what Morris and company have accomplished.

In session 3, Ed gives his own old earth view of origins and how it relates to the Genesis account. As a geologist,


Continued on page 6, ASAers Reach Churches


 
The Executive Director's Corner

My heart is full and overflowing with the joys of our 1996 annual meeting in Toronto. It was good to bring our two groups together (ASA/CSCA). The night before the conference began, Dan and Faith Osmond graciously opened their house for a buffet dinner that included the ASA staff, the ASA Council, most of the CSCA Council, the program chair (David Moberg), and several of our spouses. The CSCA Council and their spouses provided a delicious spread of food and then we sat in one grand circle to exchange ideas. It was good to see Doug Morrison, CSCA Executive Director, looking very well after his serious surgery a few months ago.

After the annual meeting Gary Partlow, CSCA President, said he hoped that our two groups could have an annual meeting together again soon, perhaps in the United States. Bob Vander Vermen had a picture of those who attended the last ASA meeting in Canada at the York U. meeting in 1972. 1 found myself hiding in the back row. The CSCA was not yet organized.

Robert Linthicum was a very stimulating plenary speaker. He portrayed for us the great love that God has for the city using passages from Deuteronomy, Ezekiel, and Luke. Everyone sat with rapt attention and we were truly grateful to be able to hear this man of God whom I believe is a prophet for the cities. Sunday afternoon we spent about two hours walking through several contrasting parts of Toronto, especially areas of moral deterioration and poverty. We were then well prepared for the discussion at the Yonge Street Mission. They have a strong mission to many street children who cannot qualify for help in the Canadian health care system. It was a pensive trip back to Victoria U. on the subway.

There were many new faces among the 160 or so registrants and it was so good to meet them. Although I wish that there were more, there were some young people scattered throughout the crowd. The eleven commission and affiliation meetings seemed to go well. Bob Newman had prepared the first edition of the Creation Commission Newsletter, others talked of symposia at future meetings, and yet others outlined their purposes. Don DeGraaf kept his busy Communications Commission going until almost I I p.m. This commission is helping ASA transfer to the modern world of intercommunication. It was a difficult choice to decide which papers to hear when there were three concurrent sessions. Some said that there were too many papers and that we ought to encourage more poster sessions.

Another highlight was our Sunday morning worship service in Victoria C. chapel with its high ceiling and beautiful stained glass windows. The Anglican service was based on the Service of Thanksgiving and Dedication in celebration of the Centenary of Victoria U. held on Sunday, Oct. 11, 1936. Majestic orpri. music played by Esther Martin, singing voices reverberating, and a challenging sermon by the very personable mayor of Kitchener, His Worship Richard Christy were offered in praise and thanksgiving to our Heavenly Father.

The week before the annual meeting I had the privilege of attending and participating in a conference at Trinity International U. It was called "The Christian Stake in Genetics." We heard many top Christian speakers concerned with this topic including Francis Collins, Director, the Human Genome Project at the National Center for Human Genome Research, NIH. In the opening portion of his remarks, Francis spoke about the ASA and how important it was to him as an affiliation that adhered to the Scripture and integrity in science. I really appreciated these comments and his magnificent speech. We also were energized with a presentation by Chuck Colson, who spoke about the need to maintain the firewalls of the inner restraint of conscience and the outer control of law in a society where truth is crumbling. (See related article on p. 8.) Because so many Bioethics Commission Board members were present, Chair Jim Peterson held a breakfast meeting. They hope to present short symposia at the next two annual meetings.

Now that this annual meeting is over, we start thinking about the next ones. Make plans to be in Santa Barbara, CA August 1-4, 1997 at Westmont C. The first day of August is a Friday and the program chair plans an exciting field trip for all. The speakers already include Hugh Ross, John Suppe, and Dawn Wright. If you have program suggestions for the 1997 meeting, send them to me or to Jeff Greenberg, Program Chair and geologist at Wheaton C., IL.

It looks like our meeting in Cambridge, England in 1998 will start on the evening of 2 Aug following the closing of the C. S. Lewis quadrennium meeting that morning. We are negotiating for accommodations and this fall R. J. Berry and Jack Haas, program co-chairs, will meet in England to discuss program details. There are many ideas floating around and as they mature I will inform you of them. Finally, I can tell you that the Council approved John Brown U. in Siloam Springs, AR as the 1999 site for the annual meeting. Both President Levon Balser and Dean Richard Ruble are ASA members. How many other colleges or universities can boast of that? We last met there in 1964. They have been asking us to come back for many years to this wonderfully air-conditioned, beautiful campus that is in the northwest corner of AR, not too far from places like Branson, MO and Tulsa, OK.

The new Templeton/ASA lecture series is in the works. By the next newsletter there should be some announcements and you can see if there are lectures near you. If you are near Mt. Vernon, IA, you can contact William Carroll, Professor of History, at Cornell C. to find out when Dr. Peter Hodgson will give lectures in early October. Peter is head of the Nuclear Physics Theoretical Group, Nuclear Physics Laboratory at Corpus Christi C., Oxford U. There is more to say but it will wait - except the important reminders to keep us in your prayers and on your donation list. You allow us to survive month by month. Thank you!

Don



American Scientific Affiliation Information Brief

CLAIMS BASED ON THE AUTHORITY Of SCIENCE

AND HOW TO ASSESS THEM


As a Christian confrontented by statements  based on science," how do you handle such claims when they conflict with your beliefs?

Science and technology are increasingly influential in life today all over the world. This brochure is intended to advise Christians who are not scientists on how to evaluate claims based on science that have wider consequences. Our teacher is Dr. Richard Bube, a Christian and scientist who has had extensive experience teaching classes on science, on Christian faith, and on the interaction between them. He has also spoken and written extensively as a Christian and science professor on how science and Christian faith relate.


Common Questions

 

Christians encounter issues involving science, as illustrated by the following commonly-raised questions:

Can a Christian today still be a scientist? Can a scientist today still be a Christian?

Has modem science demolished the basis for the traditional Christian faith?

Does faithfulness to Christ require that we reject all the theories of modem science?

Can we live life keeping science and Christian faith so separate that they do not have anything to say to each other?

Has science, as some Christians claim, proved the truth of Christianity?

How about those who say that scientific changes require that we invent both a new science and a new theology, adequate for the future?

These and similar questions can be answered in a way that is faithful to both authentic science and authentic Christian theology. Here's how.


How to Approach such Questions

The following list can be applied in evaluating issues involving both science and Christianity:


Define key words.

We first need to define what we mean by the key words of science and theology so that we are not misled in subsequent discussion by the use of inappropriate definitions. This is not some kind of irrelevant scholarly exercise but the everyday, common-scnse insistence that we know what key words mean and that they be used consistently. Critical distinctions in meaning between words are also important, such as between the concepts of.

Do scientific laws describe (provide valid insights into the nature of reality), prescribe (cause physical events to happen) or explain totally (making any other kind of description, as from Christian theology, irrelevant)?

Do we really prove anything in either science or theology - that is, provide absolute certainty of ultimate reality - or do we instead seek for evidence concerning that reality upon which we can make our faith choices?

Scientific uses of these words implies simply that we have a description capable of predicting the future accurately from a knowledge of the present (determinism) or a description that is capable only of predicting probabilities (chance). Is there a necessary connection between the scientific uses of these words and the basic worldview of Determinism (there is no real freedom or responsibility in life) or Chance (nothing has any ultimate meaning or purpose)?

Pseudoscience is a discipline that looks like science and sounds like science but fails the basic tests for authentic science. It corresponds to bad science, done irresponsibly, makes claims of producing results that authentic science cannot (such as an ethical system), or sets out to scientifically demonstrate the validity of some previously chosen philosophical or religious position.

Pseudotheology is a discipline that looks like authentic Christian theology but fails the basic tests for authentic theology. It applies bad hermeneutics, done irresponsibly, and makes claims to produce results that authentic theology cannot (such as identify physical mechanisms for phenomena), or sets out to theologically demonstrate the validity of some previously chosen philosophical or scientific position.

A rational act is one taken after consideration of the evidence; a nonrational act is one taken without consideration of evidence; an irrational act is one taken in spite of the evidence to the contrary. Authentic Christian faith is a rational faith.

If supernatural is differentiated from natural by insisting that supematural means that "God did it," it is easy to conclude that natural means that God didn't do it. Rather, natural is our description of how God ordinarily acts in the universe, and supernatural is our description of the meaning of this action and of some specific actions that might not be scientifically describable by their very nature (miracles).


Avoid the "faith versus reason" dichotomy.

Faith and reason are essential aspects of all human activities, including both science and Christian theology. Both make assumptions (faith) and draw conclusions from them (reason). The belief that the universe is rationally comprehensible is an assumption of science. Faith in this assumption not only motivates scientists to do research, but actually makes it possible and effective. The same belief can be a reasonable conclusion drawn from biblical teaching about our universe as created by a rational God. Consequently, science and faith are not opposites. Blaise Pascal, an earlier Christian and scientist, said that science is the activity of "thinking God's thoughts after him."

Identify tricky assumptions.

The following assumptions are often made in arguments involving science. Ask if the argument you are hearing assumes one or more of them:

The universe is all that exists.

This is a faith commitment, not a scientific conclusion.

If something cannot be measured, it doesn't exist.

This is also a faith commitment and not a scientific conclusion.


The existence of chance events in the world rules out the activity and reality of God.

This is a confusion of scientific chance (probabilistic descriptions) and a worldview (Chance: no meaning or purpose).

Although difficult to defend when identified, the unthinking acceptance of these false assumptions (and others like them) is common and often controls public thought.


Seven Patterns Relating Science and Christian Faith

There is more than one way that people have related their understandings of Christianity and of science. Dick Bubc has identified seven of them. For each, we can ask, "What does this pattern tell us?" and "What does this pattern tell us about?"

The first group of patterns share the common assumption that science and theology tell us the same kinds of things about the same things. That is, science and theology address the same kinds of questions to the same subject-matter and are thereby alternative ways of achieving the same kind of knowledge.

Pattern 1: Science has destroyed Christian theology.

In case of conflict, both science and theology cannot be right. It is either science or theology and science always wins.


Pattern 2: Christian theology in spite of science.

As in Pattern 1, the choice between science and theology is either/or, and theology always wins.


Pattern 4: Science demands traditional Christian theology.

This pattern agrees with Patterns I and 2 that science and theology cover the same ground in the same way, but concludes that science provides all the evidence needed to prove to anyone the truth of traditional Christian theology.


Pattern 5: Science redefines Christian theology.

Because science and theology cover the same ground in the same way, traditional theology must be redefined and rewritten to agree with modem science.

Pattern 6: A new synthesis is needed for a redefined science and a redefined theology.

Agreeing with previous patterns on what science and theology are, Pattern 6 offers instead more of a condition to be desired than an accomplished state of affairs. This pattern says that science and theology should tell us the same things about the same things but they both need to be reformulated to make this possible.

Not all patterns view science and theology as having the same goals, questions or methods. Pattern 3 assumes just the opposite.


Pattern 3: Science and Christian theology are unrelated.

Science and theology tell us different kinds of things about different things, so there is no common ground and no possibility of conflict. Neither has anything to say about the other. This pattern is perhaps the most commonly chosen pragmatic pattern of all.


Finally, Pattern 7 offers a different perspective on the problems associated with all of the previous patterns.


Pattern 7: Science and theology offer complementary insights.

Science and theology each provide valid insights into what reality is, according to its own perspective. Integration of insights from each allows us to have an adequate and coherent view of reality. Several essential aspects of this complementary view are:

1. Complementarity has to do with the interaction between scientific and theological descriptions, not their separation. It does not start with the premise that science and theology are mutually exclusive. Although science and theology do not interrelate exhaustively, in many areas they do overlap and integration of the two perspectives is necessary.

2. Complementarity is not a blind acceptance of contradiction, paradox, or dualism but a recognition that two or more different but valid kinds of insight are needed to more fully comprehend something that well-developed models are not, of themselves, able to encompass.

3. Complementary descriptions become necessary when:

a) we desire to describe the unknown in terms of the known. Examples: descriptions of electrons, God's sovereignty and human responsibility, different aspects of God's nature, and the meaning of the Atonement.

b) we have descriptions from different realms of discourse. Examples: anatomical and psychological descriptions of the whole human person, scientific and theological descriptions of healing, weather, origin of life, or ethical issues concerned with the beginning or ending of life.

In science and theology we develop descriptions of the world in which we live, and its relationship to God, its Creator, Sustainer and Redeemer. The complete, detailed description of these relationships to God transcend both human experience and language. God has chosen to reveal himself to us using theological descriptions that we can understand, which at the same time are able to show us valid insights into his truth. These descriptions are not meant to be exhaustive, and it is appropriate that we integrate them with authentic scientific descriptions of the mechanisms of God's activity in the physical universe.


Closure

The complementary approach provides a creative framework from which to view some of the basic questions involving science and technology: How do new properties arise in the physical world, and how should we describe its structure in terms of parts and wholes?

What does it mean to be human? We need to integrate both the scientific answer to this question in terms of genetic material and the theological answer in terms of soul and spirit.

In how many different ways should we describe a spiritual event such as Christian conversion?

Above all we emphasize time and again, "God is the Author of the whole story."


For Further Reading

For further study of the relationship between science and Christian faith, read Richard Bube's book, Putting it All Together: Seven Patterns Relating Science and Christian Faith, published in 1995 by University Press of America, 4720 Boston Way, Lanham, Maryland, 20706; or, 3 Henrietta Street, London WC2E 8LU England.


The American Scientific Affiliation

The American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) is a fellowship of men and women of science and related disciplines who share a common fidelity to the Word of God and a commitment to integrity in the practice of science. ASA was founded in 1941 and currently has about 2500 members. The stated purposes of the ASA are "to investigate any area relating Christian faith and science" and "to make known the results of such investigations for comment and criticism by the Christian community and by the scientific community."

Copies of this and related brochures and other literature are available by contacting:


American Scientific Affiliation

P.O. Box 668

Ipswich, MA 01938-0668

(508) 356-5656

fax (508) 356-4375

e-mail: asanewl.com



ASAers Reach Churches, continued from page I

Ed doesn't say too much about origins of life or its evolution, and concludes with: "Finding a middle course that respects both scientific knowledge and a providential God is an intellectual challenge, one which will always be with us."  Ed Olson

Murphy writes book for preachers about sci/tech

Astrophysicist George L. Murphy is one of three authors of Cosmic Witness: Commentaries on Science/Technology Themes (SCS Publishing Co., P.O. Box 4503, Lima, OH 45802-4503; tel. 800 241-4056). George's approach here is to reach churches top-down. This book was written because the church is called to preach the Gospel in a world profoundly influenced by science and technology. Preachers who do not address it, the authors believe, ignore a significant part of the church's ministry, for the Word that is preached is the same Word through which the universe was created and is sustained.

This book is intended to help preachers develop sermons which address the intersection of Christian faith and science/technology. It not only raises questions and examines critical issues and ideas, it also provides illustrations to entice preachers to consider the challenge of preaching about contemporary concerns. It is based on a three-year lectionary.

George is also a theologian and is a pastor of St. Mark Lutheran Church in Tallmadge, Ohio. He has been bridging the science-church gap for some time. Previously he wrote The Trademark of God (Morehouse-Barlow, 1986), a book for adult church classes addressing creation and evolution.

Had he not spoken to the ASA about his effort to reach the church using the precursor to his Trademark book, the following small-world story about George might not have occurred. Unknown to the Editor, my wife, Dotty, had George's father, Paul, as her major advisor in classics at Ohio U. in Athens. Dotty remembers George as a youngster at his parents' house. When I advised her to attend George's talk at the ASA Annual Meeting in Newberg, Oregon in 1983, George's introductory background sounded vaguely familiar to her. After describing the course leading to the Trademark book, Dotty talked to George and nostalgic smiles appeared on their faces as they reminisced. George L. Murphy


Carpenter addresses church about Earth Day

Chemist Richard Carpenter of Charlottesville, VA gave a short message to his church, Olivet Presbyterian on April 21, the day before Earth Day this year. Richard opened his talk with:

I helped plan the first Earth Day, in Washington 26 years ago this June, and I have welcomed the steady growth of an impressive environmental ethic over this generation -length time. But the role of organized religion in the movement has always been ambivalent.


Referring to Lynn White's 1967 blame of Christianity ("The Historic Roots of Our Ecological Crisis," Science) for dominion and progress over nature in Western culture, Richard said that this critique made sense to many. But in the last three decades, the church's response "has produced several thoughtful studies and guidance documents" but with only cautious official participation in environmental programs. The reasons for this caution were identified as:


1. the obvious church focus on spiritual rather than material matters;

2. concern over atheistic, New Age, Eastern religious and pantheistic overtones to the environmental movement;

3. rejection of the demeaning of humans as just another species by Earth First people, ardent animal-rights activists and "deep" ecologists;

4. skepticism of government and political involvement in environmental issues;

5. unattractive aspects of any broadly popular secular appeal.

"Jesus gave no instructions to love nature. The Ten Commandments don't mention it. Christians certainly do not worship nature," Richard makes clear. We are, he believes, "thinking out just how our religion fits in to this maturing fixture of our national lifestyle."

The positive side of this issue - and the reason Christians can be involved in Earth Day - is that we are called to stewardship of God's creation (I Cor. 10:26; Gen. 2:15). "We are in charge, like it or not." Stewardship, Richard concluded, means not only using nature for our needs and enjoyment, but also "earthkeeping" - caring for something that does not belong to us, restoring and conserving fruitfulness, sharing the Earth justly and equitably, and entrusting it to our children. "We have the correct model for 'dominion' in Jesus Christ, who, though having the nature of God, took the nature of a humble servant and lived lightly on the land."

"Have a nice Earth Day!" Richard wishes attendees, ending his talk. Richard writes that it was well received and that he has gone on to lead an adult Sunday school class discussion on the topic. H Richard A. Carpenter

Hardin teaches class on creation

A new ASA member, Dane Hardin, recently taught a five-week class to young adults and parents of young children titled "Creation: The Biblical Account Versus the Scientific Record." His goal was to answer two questions:

1. Is the Bible believable?

2. What can science tell us about God?

The class content was taken mainly from material from Hugh Ross's organization, Reasons to Believe. The theological base was the dual revelation of God in his Word and in creation. Both are trustworthy sources of information regarding God. Dane used word studies of Hebrew and scientific theory about the early history of Earth to show that there is no real conflict between Genesis I and old-earth scientific accounts of creation.

The second question was addressed from the point of view of intelligent design in the universe, including cosmology (Big Bang), fundamental forces from physics, production of life-essential heavy elements, and other "fine-tuned" kinds of evidence. Dane wanted to remove stumbling-blocks to acceptance of the gospel and included a good bit of it in the course content.

The result? The class, Dane reports, was well received and "it often drew attendees from outside the intended lifestage class group. The hardest issues I had to face were from those who felt that intellectual assent is not needed in order to come to faith in Christ." Some also had trouble with "the strong possibility that the universe consisted of nine dimensions within the first fraction of a second after the Big Bang (thus supporting the extra-dimensionality of God the transcendent Creator)."

The class was taught at the University Baptist Church in Santa Cruz, California.

It is essentially next door to the U. of CA, and about 70% of the congregation has college degrees. Dane thinks this might be why the class was well received. E Dane Hardin

ASAers in Action

University physics professor Moorad Alexanian in Wilmington, NC has been interacting with the Christian Science Monitor and his local newspaper, the Wilmington Star. In the Monitor (I I JUN 96, p. 19), the article, "The State of Our Science-and-Technology Union," by Cora B. Marrett of the NSF, notes that two decades of surveys show a decrease in science understanding by the populace during an increase in the extent that technology affects their lives. (See the National Science Board 1996 biennial report, "Science and Engineering Indicators.")

Also noted was the decline in U.S. surplus trade in advanced-technology products every year since 1991. "In aerospace alone," the article says, "the surplus declined by 13 percent in 1993 and 9 percent in 1994 - a drop of nearly one-fourth in just two years." The article also cites NSF's investments in systemic educational reforms and that "high-school graduates are completing substantially more mathematics and science courses than in the early 1980s."

But what constitutes popular scientific knowledge? Moorad raised this point in his letter to the CSM (18 JUN 96, p. 20) regarding two of the ten questions used to poll the public. One of the true-false questions was: "Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals." Moorad replied: "Surely this answer is determined more by the philosophical and theological presuppositions of the quiz taker than by his or her knowledge of science."

Moorad also asked what significance to science and technology this question had: "The earliest human beings lived at the same time as the dinosaurs." Moorad's conclusion was: "When testing the general scientific knowledge of our students, we ought to emphasize questions that are based on fundamental scientific theories already verified by experimental data."

How did the students fare? The highest percentage right (78) was given to the true-false statement: "The center of the Earth is very hot." As for the previous two questions (in order) students got them right only 44 and 48 percent of the time, as the NSF graded them. Also with the lowest score of 44% w s: "Electrons are smaller than atoms."

Charles Thaxton is going to become a movie star! Well, Moody Science Films is going to feature him and his book, The Mystery of Life's Origins, in an upcoming film. Charles is making plans to interview with them in November. His newer book, The Soul of Science, is being translated into Czech and should be out next spring. He also contributed an essay, "Christianity and the Scientific Enterprise," to a book ministering to the Harvard U. community, entitled Finding God at Harvard. Spiritual Journey of Thinking Christians. Charles and his wife are living in Prague, bringing the gospel to Eastern Europeans through science interests, and are in need of financial support to continue their ministry. Their Stateside contact is: Konos Connection, P.O. Box 991, Julian, CA 92036; tel. (619) 789-6827.


Charles Thaxton (see previous item) also appeared in a cover story by Thomas E. Woodward in Moody, DEC 1988 entitled "Doubts About Darwin." The article covers thinking on the topic by Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History, and by Thaxton. More recently Woodward offered the full article in order to tell of Charles' work to students and faculty when he visited Trinity C. in Florida, on 22 Nov 1995.

Tom promoted the event with a one-page handout, giving a brief introduction to the SETI project (NASA's Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) and its criteria for detecting intelligence in radio emissions from space. Tom's baiting question is: "If a tiny bit of information received by SETI would be hailed as solid proof of the intelligence that sent it, why wouldn't the volume of DNA code in a single-celled animal supply evidence of the intelligence that programmed it?"


Personals

Medical doctor Ernest M. Steury was honored by President Daniel A. Moi of Kenya, Africa in December 1995 for his 37 years of service in Kenya. Ernest was awarded the Order of the Grand Warrior.

Ernest and his wife, Sue, recently returned to Kenya for one year after spending two in the U.S. He resigned as Executive Officer of the Tenwek Hospital before leaving Kenya in 1994 and is now assistant field director and national coordinator for World Gospel Mission, establishing a family-practice residency and working part-time at the Tenwek Hospital and with the National Church.

Despite this busy schedule, Ernest says he "had the joy of visiting with Ken Dormer during his visit to Nairobi" for the AISRED board meeting. Ken also toured the Tenwek H. with Peter Okaalet of MAP Int'l. Ken is also on the MAP board and helps interview medical students who are awarded grants to work at mission hospitals. It was Ken's third visit to the Hospital. Ernest is at: Box 123, Kericho, Kenya.

David S. Oakley at Colorado Christian U. has received a $10,000 Templeton Science-Religion Award. Not only that, David and collaborators have accounted for the lack of observed neutrinos that, according to theory, should be emitted from the sun. The full story is given in: "On the correlation of solar surface magnetic flux with solar neutrino capture rate," David S. Oakley, Hershel B. Snodgrass, Roger K. Ulrich, Toni L. VanDeKop, The Astronomical Journal, 437:L63-L66, 1994. E R.S. Beal, Jr.


Who said

Apart from the well-documented contributions of theists to the scientific enterprise, in particular since the founding of the Royal Society in the seventeenth century, there is clear evidence of a contemporary 'selection pressure' so that Christians tend to be more abundant in the sciences than the arts.

A possible source of this 'selection pressure' is the shared skepticism of both Christians and scientists towards the more extreme forms of relativism promoted by post-modemism, and their common 'realist' stance which maintains that neither scientific nor religious knowledge is a merely social construct.
Excerpted from a letter to Nature (30 Nov. 1995, Vol. 378, p. 433) by British Christians in Science member Denis Alexander of Cambridge. M T Timothy Chen


ASAers Do Genetics and Bioethics

Francis Collins, head of the U.S. Genome Project, was a featured speaker at "The Christian Stake in Genetics " an update on state-of-the-art technoiogy, held at Trinity Int'l U. in Deerfield ' IL on 18-20 Jul. Concurrently held were the "Intensive Bioethics" institutes, taught by leading Christians in bioethics and directed by Harold Brown, Nigel Cameron and ASA keynoter in 1994, John Kilner. The faculty included ASAers V. Elving Anderson, Hessel Bouma III, Francis Collins, James Peterson, head of ASA's Bioethics Commission, and Frank Young. ASA's Executive Director Donald Munro, who is a biologist, served as a science resource person. For follow-up information, contact the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, 2065 Half Day Road, Deerfield, IL 60015; tel. (800) 417-9999; fax: (847) 317-6509.


Local Section News

On May 25, the Washington-Baltimore (W-B) Section had its spring meeting at the Chef Peking Restaurant in Rockville, MD. The meeting topic was "Faith and Science: The Past and Future of ASA." Samuel Elder, a physics professor from the Naval Academy, and Glenn  Urkland, a retired physicist from the John Hopkins U. Applied Physics Lab (APL), discussed the early history of the Local Section, when they were its leaders in the 1960s. They organized three all-day Saturday meetings at APL which were attended by many leading scientists from the area. They discussed the relationship of Christian faith to the conduct of scientific research.

The May meeting was small but interesting. Sam noted changes in the scientific and American Christian cultures since the 1960s: people are working harder now, there is less idealism, and there is a continuing interest in advancing careers and earning more money. Interest in traditional institutions of church and college continues, but without as many creative special- interest organizations such as the Local Section was then.

The Section met also in October, with over 30 in attendance - many from the same church. "What of the other evangelical churches in the area?" asks Paul Arveson, a research physicist at the Naval Research Lab and a longtime ASA promoter. He says; "There is a lot more that can be done regarding the promotion of the ASA. It's just a question of what is the best way to spend the little time we have." The W-B Section will continue to host quarterly meetings around the area. To get on their mailing list or schedule discussion at a future meeting, contact Paul Arveson at (301) 816-9459 or via his E-mail address: arveson@ oasys.dt.navy.mil DZ Paul Arveson

With the Lord

Wayne Ault died on June 25, 1996 in Memphis, TN. Wayne was an ASA Fellow and a geologist who was active in the ASA for many years. He served on the ASA Council and was vice-president twice.

The Editor's Real E-Mail Address is:

The address given last issue was a fleeting one. The above address is likely to be more permanent. For those who have attempted to contact the Editor at the old address, please re-route your email to the above address. Thanks and sorry about the inconvenience.

Another correction from last issue (JUL/AUG 1996, p. 5, "A new view of the Star of Bethlehem"): the reference given to the American Scientist should be to the New Scientist, 23/30 DEC 1995, pp. 34, 35. E Ed Olson