science

I was quite mistrustful of science when I was a kid. Actually, until I left the church. I liked science, I was interested in it, and I did really well in science classes. But I never truly trusted science. Why? It didn't mix well with church teachings. And I gave church teachings precedent. If there was a discrepancy, I generally adjusted science to church teachings, rather than the other way around.

The biggest issues were evolution and the age the earth. By ninth grade biology, I was learning evolution (yes, in Utah), but the focus, as I remember it, was on micro-evolution. You know, Darwin's finches and those moths that micro-evolved from mostly white to mostly black during the Industrial Revolution in England. I was cool with micro-evolution; the evidence was right there and quite clear. But the evidence, you see, only showed changes within species, and not changes from one species into new ones. That way, I could still believe the Bible's "each after its own kind."

Eventually, I came to think of evolution as God's way of creating the earth. Seven days didn't really mean seven days. Seven days could really mean billions of years. Or something. But, really, I didn't trust it. Outwardly, I would talk about the age of the earth, about geological time, about dinosaurs, about human activity that occurred long before 6000 years ago. But inwardly, I was confused about how Adam and Eve fit into that. Was the timing just off? If it was, was it just the timing of the Bible that was off, or the timing of carbon dating? The scientists must think things are much older than they really were.

Also, I didn't like science because it made so many mistakes. It seemed like every twenty years, a new theory came out, and they eventually threw out the old theories. Like ether, the four humors theory of health, how the continents move, breast milk is bad for babies, miasma theory of disease transmission, etc. There were so many mistakes! How great could science be if they just keep changing their minds? They could be soooo sure about something, then be sooo sure about something totally different 50 years later. I thought that was just messed up. I thought that in a 100 years, no one would be talking about evolution anymore, except to say how stupid we were back then. Ultimately, this was just a way for me to still believe in church teachings that contradicted science.

At the time of my epiphany, when I stopped believing the Bible was anything but a collection of old stories, when I stopped believing Joseph Smith had no more connection to the supernatural than I do, science suddenly clicked. All the great barriers that kept my religious sanity collapsed, and I had a great "Ah-hah!" moment.

Evolution? It makes sense.

The development of the stars, planets, solar systems over eons? They make sense. And what is more, it is absolutely, astoundingly amazing and beautiful.

And the scientific method, all those changes in theories? That's a good thing. A great thing, in fact. It means that science recognizes its own fallibility, and makes adjustments to old theories when there is new evidence. That, I now see, is what is beautiful about science. It what makes me trust science more than religion now. Religion says Adam and Eve were the first humans and lived about 6000 years ago; Mormonism says that they lived in Missouri. Religion says this despite the fact there is no evidence to support that, and there is plenty of evidence that contradicts it. Science (and Bible scholarship) says Adam and Eve are a creation myth just like any other. Granted, many liberal religious people have adjusted their thinking about the first humans to scientific evidence, but there are many who still insist that the myth is Truth. And that's scary. Especially since I used to think so, too.