jump to navigation

Regarding “Truth” September 16, 2009

Posted by Treehopper in astronomy, catholic, opinion.
Tags: , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Who’s Truth Is It Anyway?

As I’ve stated elsewhere, I’m neither a scientist nor a theology scholar.  I do, however, have my feet solidly in both camps as a serious student of both astronomy and Catholic Christian theology.  This often leads to a precarious balancing act, especially when in full view of the prevailing academic atheism that has been so popular in our institutions of higher learning for the past several generations.  So to echo Pilate’s rather indelicate question, just what is truth?  Does one side or the other have an exclusive claim to truth?  Does a person of faith today have to travel incognito with regard to his religious beliefs or be prepared to take one on the chin by his irreligious peers?

Science or Faith?

Science or Faith?

At the very end of the August 2009 issue of Sky & Telescope in the “Focal Point” editorial article (page 86), a trio of astronomers from the University of Texas at Austin collectively penned an opinion piece titled, “Keeping Science Safe.”  These authors use such charged terms as “insidious” to describe the efforts of so-called “Intelligent Design” proponents, and referred to their worldview as “antiquated” and “antiscientific.”  To these astronomers and their “worldview”, one must flash their skeptic’s credentials at the door before being admitted to the halls of “true science.”  The irony here is that while accusing the opposing camp of running an agenda, their own pre-conceptions are laid bare.  To wit, there is no room in modern academia for faith in a Creator.

Such a notion runs face-on into the historical record of such luminaries in the field of astronomy such as Copernicus, Galileo, Brahe, Kepler, Newton, et al.  Go beyond astronomy into other fields, and you’ll find a small army of equally notable names; all whose contribution to science is undisputed, and all of whom expressed a religious faith.  One need not argue too vehemently that the scientific method itself owes a great deal of its foundations to men whose consciences were formed by fervent faith in God.



Welcome to Faint Fuzzy! August 2, 2009

Posted by Treehopper in astronomy, catholic, general, opinion.
Tags: , ,
comments closed

Welcome to Faint Fuzzy.  It’s my little corner of the interwebz where I can ponder a few of my favorite things: science (namely astronomy), religion (namely Catholic Christianity) and why I feel the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

The articles here will represent my particular view on things.  I don’t claim to be unique.  I certainly don’t claim to be incredibly smart or gifted.  I won’t even claim to be right about certain things.  Most of what will be found here will be “thoughts in process” or perhaps slightly more advanced ruminations.  I’ll try to be “fair and balanced”, but I’ll never claim to be unbiased (and never trust anyone who says they are!)  While I have no problem with differing opinions, I can and will wield editorial control over the content here (meaning I will edit or delete comments at my discretion.)

For those unfamiliar with the term, a “faint fuzzy” is a euphemism used by some in the astronomy community to refer to Deep Sky Objects (or DSO’s).  These objects (and there are a lot of them) often appear as dim smudges in a small telescope.  I thought the name was appropriate because I often feel as I’m trying to frame a position on a topic, it’s as unfocused and indistinct as some of these far away celestial doo-dads.  Sooner or later, I hope to articulate some of these faint and fuzzy concepts into something more tangible. Just bear with me.

Speaking of bearing with me, I’m somewhat new to this whole blog thing as well.  I manage a couple of online game-related blogs which use the WordPress “engine”, so it’s somewhat familiar.  But it’ll take me a while to figure out all the in’s-and-out’s, gadgets, widgets, and deely-bobs I have at my disposal.  So this is very much under construction for now.

Let me know what you think.