Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Bear-Faced Assault--Part 1
For 28 years we have lived in the northern Shenandoah Valley
and (knocking on wood) have never been attacked by anything more fearsome than
a fat old raccoon—and he was more confused than threatening. (I think he got
lost on his way to his girlfriend’s den, one spring morning.) Upon moving out
here from the city, urban friends imagined all sorts of invasions that
thankfully never came. What sort of invasions? Dastardly things, such as
motorcycle gangs, pumas, wolves, vampires, and a stray sasquatch or two. Life
has been pretty tame here though, with garden-raiding deer the major menace so
far.
So far, that is, until a few nights ago. Shortly after
rousting from bed one morning, I peered out the window to see what birdies
might be at the feeder, to be greeted with the sight of it in strewn in pieces
on the ground. Normally, it hovers about five feet above the grass, swinging
safely above leaping squirrels and raccoons—saving its offerings for songbirds.
The damage was far more than just a suspension cable somehow snapping and
dropping the feeder to the ground. It looked as if it had been savagely
disassembled with a sledge hammer.
I let the dog out, to investigate the scene of the crime,
while I threw on some clothes. I watched him gingerly sniff over the debris,
spookily jumping every few moments, as if the smell of something frightening
lingered in the air. Convinced the coast was most likely clear, I followed the
dog out. Something big had visited in
the night… big enough to reach up, tear the feeder apart, and pull its remains
from its perch. Not a seed was left.
Deciding to patrol the area for other possible evidence of
vandalism, I next saw the trash can on its side, with its once neatly-ensconced
bags torn asunder and scattered over the yard. Looking closer, I noticed two
significant holes punctured in the can’s heavy plastic sides, as if some large
mouth with piercing teeth had wrestled with it and won. The can’s twist-lock,
“secure” top had been untwisted, unsecured, and cast aside.
Looking off along the trail of trash into the woods, I saw
the beehive toppled from its perch and busted into several pieces. The dog
continued to sniff the scene, jumping back every few moments. His nose and my
eyes were painting an intimidating picture.
More on the attack next time…
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Darwin's Battle--Part 2
Darwin gathered an immense amount of material during his
trip. Back home in England, his probing mind drew him evermore deeply into the
mystery. He gradually developed (over 20 years) his theory of
evolution—although he did not use the term “evolution.” He preferred to
describe it as the “origin of species by natural selection.” He was not
introducing evolution to the world—which had much earlier been proposed—as a
means by which species originate. What he did introduce was a concept that came
into direct conflict with established religion.
Darwin was saying that nature
selected which changes will survive and which will perish. When those spontaneous
changes are passed on from parent to child and grow over time to create new
kinds of critters, a new species is born. God had not laid out every tiny and
final detail; instead, Mother Nature has decided as she went along, and is continuing to decide. In other words, God
is not a micro-manager; the task is accomplished by the natural world, which
has an unsettling way of operating in a seemingly random or even mindless
manner. The problem many people had was accepting that this seemingly haphazard
process could have led to such an intelligent result.
He couldn’t have published his book at a worse time or place
than England in 1859. The advanced scientific community was already beginning
to find itself engaged in a growing struggle with the Anglican Church. Most of
the “scientific” studies of the natural world in Darwin’s time, however, were
being conducted by parish priests. They had the time between Sundays to study
bugs and animals and trees and to ensure that their findings were disseminated
in accordance with the church’s philosophy. England was definitely a
God-fearing country.
Another dogmatic belief that English society had adopted was
the pastoral viewpoint that, not only was nature fixed and final, but that it
exhibited evidence of God’s peaceful Earth—wherein the lion reclines with the
lamb and all critters are benign comrades. The English pastoral garden scene (long
before having been rid of any big carnivores) was envisioned to be, like the
scene on Noah’s Ark, one in which all creatures got along in polite fashion.
Darwin’s insight shattered both of these perceptions. Not
only was the natural world’s progression wrenched from the purview of God, but
natural selection was far from a peaceful process. He found the so-called Peaceful
Kingdom to be a battleground, wherein competing species were “red in tooth and
claw.” Constant killings occurred; often brutal and without compassion.
These two findings were a hard sell to English society.
Organized religion—already beginning to feel suspicious about science—resisted these
radical ideas, and fought back. The struggle continues 150 years later. It’s
not that Darwin’s conception was all that radical, as much as that it shattered
the dogmas of a fixed, pleasant world. It was the rigid viewpoint of the
religious establishment that was being challenged. And that establishment did
not release its grip without a fight.
It is sad that so many people today—mostly because of fundamentalist
religious interpretations—continue to oppose evolution. Of course, most
spiritually and religiously mature people are completely acceptable of
evolution… it’s the close-minded, literalist faction that insists on the old
perception.
Evolution is an elegant and beautiful process. It is one that
a truly wise designer God would have set up, and then sat back and watched the
show. The process envisioned by Darwin is far more intelligent than any
so-called “intelligent design.” It does not exclude the divine; it only
relieves the divine from and endless process of micro-managing.
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Monday, May 7, 2012
Darwin's Battle--Part 1
In his early twenties, when he was still trying to decide
what he wanted to be when he grew up, Charles Darwin latched onto a
future-altering job as naturalist aboard the English research vessel HMS Beagle. His task was to collect
specimens during the ship’s voyage around the Americas and return them to
England for examination by the country’s scientists. The goal was to add to the
burgeoning knowledge of the natural world that his Victorian homeland was
gathering.
For five years, young Charlie dutifully collected thousands
of samples of animals, plants, and rocks. As he became absorbed in his
activities, his inquiring mind began to probe evermore deeply into nature’s
wonders, wonders that he was thrilled to be seeing first hand. He gradually
came to understand that the English worldview that he’d inherited had some
significant flaws; a worldview that had entangled its Victorian Christian
beliefs with a growing body of scientific findings. Those who had constructed
this worldview had not yet experienced any internal conflict between the
prevailing religious and scientific beliefs; but that struggle was just over
the horizon.
The English—who were then at the forefront of the natural
sciences—were confident that the magnificently complex world that they were
studying had been created as is, by
the deity. The natural world was viewed as an intricate, peaceful, and
beautiful creation that had been exquisitely fashioned; every creature and
every plant just so, in a perfectly-meshed jigsaw puzzle. It simply remained
for humans to discover how the puzzle had been assembled. Like the heavens
above, they believed it was a grand plan that was flawless and enduring. Set in
place by the Christian God, the world was so perfect that it never needed to
change. It was this perspective that allowed them to blend science and
religion, and not see the many dichotomies.
Charlie was very accepting of the English worldview when he
shipped out on the Beagle. There was
no internal conflict within him. He had recently enrolled in seminary and
was being urged by his father to become an Anglican pastor. He was simply
hoping to delay his lifelong assignment to some staid countryside parish, by
grabbing a thrilling chance to see the world. He returned from the voyage with
a transformed viewpoint and a passion for what he really wanted to do with his
life: continue to pursue his studies of nature, rather than tend to the souls
of parishioners.
He had experienced several revelations on his five-year
odyssey: the main one being that the world was not fixed and unchanging. He saw many examples of nature having
transformed from some earlier manifestation into what he was observing during
his trip. For example, in Argentina he found fossil bones from what appeared to
be several long-dead species of gigantic creatures. He knew there were much
smaller living animals of almost identical species, which were roaming about
the land. They must be related, he realized; yet the fossils provided evidence
of extinct species—something long gone. Wasn’t this a case of nature having
evolved over time—rather than having been created once, never to change?
More on Darwin’s battle next time…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)