When he noted parallels between his independent research and my musing on the Big Bang theory in my book Counterargument for God, Professor C. W. Bobbitt was kind enough to share his thoughts on that same subject. This post is overdue -- it really should have been published along with his writings on the origin of the universe published on this web page last month. Professor Bobbitt has also offered a unique perspective on Darwin and evolution theory that I will post that article in the near future, as soon as I locate the email that I accidentally filed in the wrong folder. HOW THE UNIVERSE BEGAN: THE BIG BANG The realm of existence contains everything that has being, everything that is. This includes “nothing”, which is the absence of something. This is said to set the stage for our understanding of how something can come from nothing; that is, how the universe could come to be. At some point in existence, “nothing” spontaneously separated into two somethings---two universes, mirror images of each other, each with its own space and time. Since we presently live in a universe which contains matter, let us choose one of these universes to be ours, and let the other universe be one of anti-matter so that the net change of matter due to this event is zero. This has the advantage of satisfying in a measure our innate sense of scientific correctness. We can focus on our universe and forget the other one, which is now in its own space-time .somewhere in existence. The appearance of our universe in existence was instantaneous: there was nothing, then there was … [Read more...]
Oliver the humanzee, and The Origin of Species
The last thing on earth I want to do is create the impression that I'm obstinate, but I'm afraid that's may be my only choice -- unless I choose to go quietly into that good night, pretending that my curiosity has been completely sated, when in fact it hasn't. I almost wish I could fake it. But that will never be my style, I'm afraid. Long before I began writing Rocky Leonard detective novels, I admired the tenacity of fictional police detective Lieutenant Frank Columbo. I guess his stubborn refusal to never admit a problem might have stumped him rubbed off on me. Also, I graduated from the University of Georgia, which makes me a Bulldog -- creatures notorious for refusing to quit. Apparently, it's in my genes and chromosomes. Once I began writing detective novels, I realized I had to train my own mind to think like a detective. I had to learn to apply deductive reasoning in situations where I'm evaluating potential evidence. I'm afraid my reticence to simply believe and accept everything I'm told comes quite naturally to me, even when the information is coming from an authority figure. Trust, but verify. Those are words to live by. When I have questions I feel compelled to ask them, even if they don't get answered...because if I never ask my questions, no one even knows that I'm legitimately seeking answers. Of course, my stubbornness in refusing to believe something until I can understand it sometimes creates an impression that I'm unable, or unwilling to learn, and occasionally I alienate an acquaintance, sometimes even a friend. I have no desire to … [Read more...]
Reply from Dr. Ken Miller
Dr. Ken Miller of Brown University graciously took the time to respond to my onen letter that was addressed to him and Dr. Francis Collins. He has given me permission to publish his reply in full. I will not be making any editorial comments or raising additional questions at this time. I only wish to add my sincere gratitude to Dr. Miller for his kindness and the sincerity with which he answered my questions. I did take the liberty of highlighting excerpts from my original letter in bolded italics to make it easier to distinguish my questions from Dr. Miller's answers. Trust me, my questions are not more important than Dr. Miller's answers. That is not an impression I'm trying to create. Highlighting was added solely for purpose of improved readability. Without any further ado, it is my distinct pleasure and an honor to present Dr. Miller's unexpurgated, detailed reply: May 26, 2015 Dear Mr. Leonard, I don’t know if Dr. Collins will find the time, in the midst of his public duties, to respond to your open letter. But I do have a few minutes right now, after submitting all of my grades for the semester and having finished my last set of recommendation letters, to respond to your inquiries. One thing that you and Professor Miller seem to share in common with Professor Coyne is your apparent belief in the infallibility of evolution theory, and that descent is the only viable explanation for the origin of species. I cannot speak for either Coyne or Collins, but I suspect they would answer this statement the same … [Read more...]
An open letter to Dr. Francis Collins (and Dr. Ken Miller)
Dear Dr. Collins, I'd like to begin by saying that I have tremendous respect for your work on the Human Genome Project. I enjoyed your book The Language of God so much that even quoted you a couple of times in my book, Counterargument for God. So, if there is a human being on planet Earth as qualified to answer my question as (atheist) biologist Jerry Coyne, it would appear to be either you, or (Catholic) biology professor Ken Miller, whose work I'm most familiar with from watching his lectures posted on You Tube that attack intelligent design. However, I did appreciate his calm and pleasant demeanor on display while he ridiculed my personal beliefs. One thing that you and Professor Miller seem to share in common with Professor Coyne is your apparent belief in the infallibility of evolution theory, and that descent is the only viable explanation for the origin of species. Unsurprisingly, Professor Coyne didn't respond to his open letter. However, I didn't really try to hide the fact that I am a creationist and an advocate of intelligent design. Professor Coyne may have been hostile to the source, rather than the questions asked. In retrospect, I probably could have done a better job of framing my questions without antagonizing him. Professor Benoit LeBlanc was kind enough to attempt answering them, but unfortunately his answer required Deep Time that I don't believe is available in the scenario we're hopefully about to discuss. I don't believe my personal religious beliefs will keep either of you gentlemen from answering my questions because we are all … [Read more...]
Christian atheists
Some words just don't seem to go together. For example, there's honest politician. Another phrase that seems somewhat oxymoronic is lucky loser. And then there's Christian atheist. Seriously? How can anyone be an atheist and a Christian? The contradiction of the two terms seems painfully obvious. The short answer is, you can't. This isn't another way of describing Christian apostasy -- apostates tend to be activists, relentless and very aggressive with their attacks on Christianity. Many Christian apostates not only reject the tenets of their former faith, they seek to eradicate belief in weak Christians. Wikipedia defined a Christian atheist as someone who rejects belief in any sort of a supernatural God, but tries to emulate the moral example of Jesus. I must admit that I've never encountered a Christian atheist before -- in fact, the only person that might have fit the description of one was Mahatma Gandhi, and he was murdered years before I was born. Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem to make any sense to reject that Jesus was the Christ, yet make him your primary role model. Let's face facts -- Jesus wasn't real big on having fun, was he? Think about it...if atheism really is true, and Darwin's theory about how life randomly descended into modern animals without rhyme or reason, then the only sensible rule for society should truly be survival of the fittest. Every man for himself and woman for herself, and get all you can while you can. After all, you're going to die soon enough, and there goes your chance to lie, cheat, steal, commit … [Read more...]
