Theories About Science and Religion

From Webster's Dictionary: lay-man (lâ'men) n. 1.Someone who is not a member of the clergy. 2.Someone who does not belong to a particular profession or specialty.

OK, that means I am a layman at pretty much everything you can think of. Other than what I do for a living, my views do not have the years of education, study and research to back the claims of my theories. Maybe a layman's opinions are of some value. It may be possible that a simple, blue-collar point of view could help in answering unanswered questions of those deep in their isolated studies. A different perspective may even bring us to consider reexamining accepted theories and facts. No longer in the industry, I still consider myself as a blue-collar person in mind and attitude. I do not mean a redneck, but someone that works in a blue-collar industry. The working class is the backbone of our nation. The trucker, plumber, garbage collector, mechanic and others who have learned to survive without a safety net. Life is the professor, and it is sometimes a harsh and unforgiving disciplinarian. I think that after about five or ten years of life's education, the working class should receive a well-deserved degree. Let us call it a BCE, a degree in Blue Collar Education. Those who belong to this fraternity have earned their education in the proverbial school of hard knocks. Tuition is free and open to anyone. After initiation, our secret greeting is the weary look in our eyes from the grinding struggle. Even though we are layman in one field or another, I believe our opinions hold a certain amount of value.

People with a BCE have the unique ability to filter out vague information, and see them as face value. Here is an example. Let us say that an artist picks up an old piece of wood and decides to paint a pretty picture on it. He covers the wood, painting colorful flowers and cute forest animals in the scene. We now find it in an art gallery exhibition. Experts marvel at the expressive and bold use of colors. They note the detail in the scene and praise the artist. They hail the piece as an extraordinary exercise in folk art. In awhile the group moves on to another art piece and an old farmer walks up. Curiously, he bends down to examine the piece of art. After a few moments he straightens back up and in a graveled voice, he comments loudly, "Taint' nothing special. Somebody just painted a pretty picture on an ol' piece of wood." Yes, the painting is lovely and finely crafted. The art speaks to the soul and admirers can interpret it in their own way, but underneath it is still just an old piece of wood. In this same vein, consider a politician who says it is for our own good, but the reality is that someone's rights are being denied for a few. You can paint it with poetic and vaguely written words or explanations, but the bottom line is the result, the proof. A BCE perspective is a direct viewpoint, free from the restraints of institutionalized ideas and teachings. My views do not representative any particular group or another. In fact, those with a BCE will vehemently disagree with many of my ideas. I am only a layman with opinions and questions. If there are no concrete answers to my questions, then my opinions are a result of this. If the views are wrong, prove it, and let us move on. If you cannot prove it, then a layman's view is just as good as anyone else's.

There is one advantage of being a layman in just about everything. Any topic is open. If I am ignorant in science, I can be ignorant in any other subject area as well. The choices are endless. The trouble is where to begin. Most would probably start at the beginning, a logical starting point. While it may seem that this examination is proceeding in the same way, let us remember that old painted piece of wood. It took many thousands of years for humans to reach the point we are now. Imbedded in that history are beliefs that have contributed to who we are today. Like removing layers of paint, we must sift through our conflicting theories and faiths before we can examine the wood.

Science and Religion

OK: Let us get this one out of the way, but we will probably revisit it later. On the question of the human race, if you look at things on the surface, both religion and science makes sense. Unfortunately, if you look underneath it all there are only unanswered questions or scientific theories. Religion insists the proof is in their old reliable unquestioning faith. Science offers the archeological research and testing in their rationale. In the end, they lack any indisputable proof. This is not to say each side is completely wrong, only that in many instances they are both prone to a lot of guesswork. There is a wide range of varying suppositions to explain things, from scientific to spiritual. The results are numerous sects of religions, and many specific scientific areas of study. Imagine what would happen if both sides accept each other's views at face value. Would this lead to new ideas and thought? Could science help explain the meaning of God? Is religion right about creation after all, and there is no missing link? Oops, now I did it. Each side is starting to arm themselves for a creation vs. evolution battle, with their well-worn opposing arguments. Before we let our temper get the best of us, hear me out. Evolution makes sense except for the gap that science calls the missing link. Could it be possible that the concept of a supreme being can provide that piece of the puzzle? To science, it would require their acceptance that the stories in religion, any religion, are evidence of intervention by another more advanced race. To religion it would validate their beliefs, but require a major overhaul of the way they see things now. This may be difficult for the faithful. They have unmoving faith in their beliefs because religion has a tendency of using unquestioning faith as a means of control. Sorry but blind faith is just that, blind.

In any event, for this cooperation to happen each would have to accept that outside of our cozy little galaxy and universe, there are others. The reality is that we cannot be the only ones out here. This does not mean little green men, or some mystical spirit who watches over every little movement we make. Let us face it. Most of us have seen the scientific evidence that there are many other galaxies and universes far out in space. Religious or not, it is probably a safe bet that we are not alone. If this is so, they are probably not big-eyed childlike broccoli stems with feet, or eight-foot lizard monsters with plasma guns. Nor is it a single all-seeing all-knowing, and very lonely God. The people in their society probably look just like us, with the same physical and emotional needs. They most likely are the inspiration and basis for all religions of the world. Our own modern technical achievements would pale in comparison with what they had done here in the past.

Eventually both science and religion would begin to see that if an advanced race took the trouble in creating us, there would have to be a purpose for it. The archeological evidence would begin to make sense, as would the imaginative stories and folklore of the past. The moral theme in the various myths, the symbols and artifacts that have been uncovered from around the world, all would take on a different meaning and interpretation. If only each set aside the arguments and engage in mutual acceptance. Then maybe humans can be better prepared, because if this race was here once before, they most certainly will be back. I do not believe that victory will rest in our military power. We may not even consider the risk of opposing their weaponry. Victory could simply be in their acceptance of us as a human race. I think that if someone did have a hand in our being here, it would be like a scientist with a bacteria dish. A scientist creates an environment in the dish, and then injects the specimen in it to study. The scientist then places it under predetermined conditions for the experiment to take effect. This will take some time, maybe even days or weeks. So the scientist keeps busy with other tasks and duties to occupy his time with. He may occasionally check on the dish from time to time, taking notes on the progress. Finally, it is time to see the results. He will evaluate what had happened, and then consider what to do next.

Is it possible that an advanced race of people began an evolutionary experiment on our planet? Why did it take place? On the other hand, could something have happened to make our creation unavoidable? Whatever the reason, the visitors eventually decided to leave earth after they created humans. Why the visitors left is a mystery. Maybe like our scientist, a waiting period was necessary for the experiment to evolve. According to religion, in some instances they tell humans their people will return. Some even occasionally visit from time to time, helping humans and reviewing their lessons. It would seem that their intention is to someday return. So, if they do come back what results are they hoping to find? Either way, the evidence that remains only goes back so far, and even these artifacts are subject to debate. Testing this evidence can only tell us how long something has been here not when it was actually made. This is not so certain. At times you will hear, "Probably around . . ." and then a continuance of suppositions.

At faith value, religion is not much help either. Time does not seem to have meaning in religion. People live for hundreds of years early on. If their calculations are correct, the beginning of our story goes back many hundred thousands of years. This of course flies in the face of science. They insist that the current crop of humans have only been here for about two hundred thousand years. At that time, we were gnawing on tree bark and using sticks to batter each other. We did not do anything of significance until 190,000 years later when tree bark had lost its appeal and we suddenly began to raise crops and herd animals. Bored with that, a mere 7,000 years later we began to erect large stone cities. If this is so, why the abrupt change in lifestyle after wasting 90 percent of the time living in caves? In light of this, they completely dismiss the timetable of religion as an inability to keep a proper calendar. As if the Gregorian is the ultimate in calendar efficiency. The scientific theory of humans, and let it be known that it is only a theory, has many holes in it that cannot be easily dismissed.

What were we doing for 190,000 years? Without any proof the human story is open to alternative theories. It is not as important to fantasize about the technology an advanced race used, as it is to wonder about what their intended purpose was in creating us. I am not a religious fellow, although I grew up as one. While I now lean towards atheism and scientific possibilities, the childhood lessons of religion are still ingrained in my being. Every religion has passed down the same values and morals, in spite of our occasional inhumane treatment of one another. If an advanced race is responsible for human creation, then there must have been a reason why these common lessons were so important to them. This importance led to their insistence in our passing the lessons on to other generations. We have done so, but there are things that we do to each other that often prove we did not completely get the message. We eventually have turned their lessons into bible stories, legends, myths and fairy tales.

I believe that together science and religion can both provide the answers and more. There is time for preparation if their civilization does return. Let us hope that science and religion will soon champion the act in consideration and acceptance of opposing views.

Sources:

Webster's Dictionary