Reading secular publications
like Time reminds me something
retired USMC Lt. Col. Oliver North said, “Every morning I get up and read two
things, the Washington Post and the Bible, just so I can know what both sides are
up to.”
The article about Nye starts
with this: “Bill Nye The Science Guy
follows Undeniable, his defense of evolution,
with his new book, Unstoppable, a
call to action on climate change.” The
first thing that grabbed my attention was the seeming misapplication of the titles. I thought “denier” was a moniker reserved for
climate change non-believers, not those who might believe that, “In the
beginning, God…” Moreover, if evolution
has to be defended, how exactly is it undeniable?
Perhaps
the explanation to Nye’s evangelism for the theory of evolution is best
understood in light of a piece about Paul Karl Feyerabend, a German
renowned for his work on the Philosophy of Science.
According to Feyerabend, new theories
came to be accepted not because of their accord with scientific method, but
because their supporters made use of any trick – rational, rhetorical or ribald
– in order to advance their cause. Without
a fixed ideology, or the introduction of religious tendencies, the only
approach which does not inhibit progress (using whichever definition one sees
fit) is "anything goes": "'anything goes' is not a 'principle' I
hold... but the terrified exclamation of a rationalist who takes a closer look
at history."
The
second thing in the interview that disturbed my Spidey-senses was Nye’s response
to this question: “How do you make the average person understand science?” Nye:
“You have to have learning objectives – things you want to get
across. You want to make a point: Humans and dinosaurs did not live
concurrently. If you get the adjacent
carbon dating of volcanic soil, that’s cool.
But what I want you to get is that ancient dinosaurs and humans did not
live at the same time. The rest is
gravy.”
I
get that Nye has an ideology he wants to get across. What through me for a loop was the need to dogmatically
convince his intended target that, “Humans and dinosaurs did not live
concurrently.” Whether they did, or
didn’t, has no bearing on whether or not Nye evolved from a monkey.
Nye’s
book defending the “undeniable” gives an interesting summation of the unique
position he contends human’s hold on the hierarchy of evolutionary development. Nye says, “We are all so much alike, because
we are all human. But it goes deeper
than that. Every species you’ll
encounter on Earth is, near as we can tell, chemically the same inside. We are all descended from a common
ancestor. We are shaped by the same
forces and factors that influence every other living thing, and yet we emerged
as something unique. Among the estimated
16 million species on Earth, we alone have the ability to comprehend the
process that brought us here.”
It is perhaps the height of haughtiness
that Nye thinks he’s smarter than all the other animals. I’m not sure how Nye can know with scientific
certainty that we alone are the only species with, “the ability to comprehend
the process that brought us here.” The
oldest book of the Bible (Job
12:7-10) has this to say about animals and their knowledge of the
process, “But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds in
the sky, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it
will teach you, or let the fish in the sea inform you. Which of all these does not know that the
hand of the Lord has done this? In his
hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.”
I do agree with Mr. Nye on one
point, we do have “the ability to comprehend the process that brought us
here.” I simply disagree with Mr. Nye on
what that process is.
I’m quite content to be as
smart as the sheep mentioned in Psalm
103, “Know that the
Lord, He is God; It is He who has made us, and not we
ourselves; We are His people and the sheep of His pasture.”
What Nye really needs is to know the Good Shepherd.
This column appeared in the 6 JAN 2016 Upson Beacon.
