skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Eco-therapists use the great outdoors to lift spirits.
SUMMARY: A growing body of psychologists believes that many mental problems such as depression, stress and anxiety can be traced to society's alienation from nature. Their solution: go outside and enjoy the natural world.
Traditional psychotherapists focus on a patient's interior. They prescribe pharmaceuticals or meditation or old-fashioned couch therapy. But practitioners of the new "eco-therapy" believe patient care must include time spent in the great outdoors. Eco-therapists, according to this article, believe that “evolution over millions of years” has hard-wired humans to interact with the environment -- air, water, plants, and "other" animals.
Beginning with the Industrial Revolution, people have been steadily removing themselves from the natural world. Our lives are now regulated by the factory clock, not the sun or moon. Technologies like iPhones and BlackBerrys are dominating our lives and keeping us from appreciating our natural surroundings. More than half of the world's population now lives in cities with many people barely ever getting a glimpse of green. And many people are agonizing over the destruction of much of what remains of the natural world. "We began to get the impression that we were somehow above and separate from nature," says Craig Chalquist, co-editor of the new book Ecotherapy: Healing with Nature in Mind.
Getting reconnected to nature shouldn’t be hard. Patient treatment often begins with starting a nature journal in which a record can be kept of how much time is spent outside. Many patients spend less than 15 to 30 minutes a day outside, not counting time spent walking to and from their cars. Eco-therapists tell their patients to slow down, go for a hike, garden or simply take a walk outside. Therapy sessions may also take place outside, in a park instead of an office.
A 2007 study in England found that a daily walk outdoors could be as effective as taking antidepressant drugs for mild or moderate depression. Regular exercise outside is also known to be a powerful mood enhancer, and a boost in vitamin D production from the sun may also help one‘s mood.
Ultimately, eco-therapy may also be a means of changing the human behavior that is causing stress over worsening environmental news. (The International Association for Ecotherapy currently has more than 100 official members.)
To read the entire article click on this TIME link.
For a related article, click on this November 10 Post.
COMMENT: Did you notice the evolutionist bias in the article? I believe the eco-therapists are on to something good even though, if they are evolutionists, their thinking may be a bit clouded by this bias.
Yes, being out in nature can have a tremendous effect on our sense of well-being. However, it is not clear how viewing nature from a Darwinist perspective can help one’s mental state. The fresh air and sunshine may be uplifting, but doesn’t evolution teach that once we die, we’re dead for good? Wouldn’t walking in a park and noticing the dead leaves and trees remind us of this grim outlook? And we'd better not walk near a graveyard! Also, if being outdoors makes us worry about environmental issues, how can that raise our spirits?
The real reason why being out in nature can be a powerful antidote for stress, depression or loneliness is that it brings us closer to our Creator. Sincere Christians appreciate the clouds, the sun and stars, the plants, and God’s animals (not “other” animals) as a reminder of God’s creative power and love as well as His ongoing care for us. The beauty that we observe in nature can give us a little bit of a taste of the beauty we look forward to observing in the heavenly world to come.
Non-believers may still unconsciously retain a sense of this connection between our created world and the Creator which they might well reawaken with a walk in the park. May they be open to discovering the true identity of our Creator God in the pages of the Bible. There they will learn all they need to know about how they too can receive the gifts of forgiveness and salvation through faith in Jesus Christ and the promise of eternal life in heaven. No more stress and depression in that future world!
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What is the Gaia Theory?
This theory, originated by James Lovelock in the 1960s, proposes that the Earth is a finely tuned super-organism consisting of the entire natural world. It was based on the observation that all of the Earth's processes appear to be working together to maintain optimum conditions for life. Lovelock stressed there is no conscious force involved as some people have misinterpreted his theory. Of course, he ignores the conscious force known as God.
Source: Living with the Planet by Catherine von Ruhland
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Artificial Intelligence researchers worry some machines may eventually be able to make decisions on their own.
SUMMARY: Leading artificial intelligence (AI) researchers believe computers and other machines may become so intelligent in the future, they could pose risks. Sponsored by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), a panel of 25 AI scientists, roboticists, and ethical and legal scholars convened in Menlo Park, California to address such prospects as human-level artificial intelligence, self-evolving machines, and the possibility the internet could become self-aware.
AI machines are already at work in the real world. Some robots can vacuum and mop, and others help lifeguards decide whether or not a person is really drowning. However, at present such systems can do no more than advise and assist humans, but AAAI warns the day isn't far off when machines could have the ability to make and execute decisions on their own. What precautions should we be taking?
The panel members agreed that creating human-level artificial intelligence is possible in principle but disagreed as to when such a breakthrough will occur. In 20 years or 1,000? Tom Dietterich of Oregon State U. said much of today's AI research focuses not on human-level intelligence but rather on "idiot-savants" systems that work at tasks in a very narrow range of application, such as math. However, the panel did spend considerable time discussing whether there could someday be a runaway chain reaction in which machines would be capable on their own of building ever-better machines. Most of the panel members were skeptical that could occur in the foreseeable future.
A more immediate concern is the possibility of malware (malicious computer software) which could mimic human behavior. Identity thieves might be able to plant a computer virus on a smartphone that could monitor text and voice messages, e-mail, etc. a virus which then could impersonate that individual with little or no guidance from the thieves. One expert worries that we are close to creating systems so complex and opaque that we don't understand them.
Such worries are causing scientists to consider "the responsibility of an AI researcher." But for now they reassure us of one thing--the internet is not about to become self-aware.
To read the entire article click on this NEW SCIENTIST link.
COMMENT: It is a good thing that some scientists are seeing a responsibility in this developing area of research. While many scientific advances have greatly aided humans, some of it, such as "dirty bombs" or the aforementioned computer viruses, hasn't.
My prayer is that as these researchers work with artificial intelligence, they might contemplate the source of human intelligence. If human scientists can intelligently design "intelligent" machines, who intelligently designed the human designers? Perhaps, they then can eventually be led to find the source of all intelligence, the Creator God, whose identify they can discover only in the pages of the Holy Bible.
Like Christians everywhere, these AI scientists may also become reassured that God cares for His creatures and will not allow anything to threaten us that is not according to His plan. Psalm 23:4 reminds us: "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me."
I seriously doubt creatures (in this case, machines) could ever become more intelligent than their creators (in this case, the scientists). That is especially true when we are talking about us human creatures and our divine Creator. We are making a serious mistake when we try to make God conform to our own desires. "Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!" (Romans 11:33 NIV) For our future eternal welfare, may we not reject that godly wisdom we find in John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How much does an IMAX projector weigh and cost?
An IMAX projector weighs as much as a male hippopotamus (2 to 3 tons). It costs around $5 million and has a bulb so bright that if pointed upward it can be seen from the International Space Station. (Picture: IMAX theater, from Wikipedia)
Source: Discover (June, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Pregnant women in Rio de Janeiro can hold models of their unborn children.
SUMMARY: An invention which converts ultrasound data and MRI scans of unborn babies into plaster models which pregnant women can hold is attracting the attention of medical experts. "For doctors, this is a fantastic development and it is absolutely unique," said Stuart Campbell, head of obstetrics and gynecology at King's College London and a pioneer in the use of ultrasound diagnosis in the 1980s.
A clinic in Rio de Janeiro is experimenting with the technology which was developed by Jorge Lopes, a Brazilian designer. "It's amazing to see the faces of the mothers. They can see the full scale of their baby, really understand the size of it," Lopes said. Professor Campbell wants to use the technology to educate expectant parents and to help mothers who have difficulty bonding with their babies or to assist parents to understand physical abnormalities that might have been uncovered during pregnancy.
Dr. Lopes came across the 3-D printing method used in his invention when he was working for museums on reconstructing archaeological finds such as dinosaurs and mummies. Now he is focusing on creating simple software that doctors could use independently and on the spot.
(Picture: 8 week fetus model, from Wikimedia Commons)
To read the entire article click on this TIMESONLINE link.
COMMENT: It is clear that ultrasounds are an important factor in the battle over abortions. Pro-abortion advocates generally seem to dislike ultrasounds within the context of pregnancy, while pro-life supporters appear to see a real need for them. It makes sense for a woman who is contemplating an abortion to be able visualize that her unborn child is not just a blob of tissue but a real developing human being.
If ultrasound pictures are valuable in persuading some women to change their minds about an abortion, it would seem even more valuable if mothers-to-be are actually able to hold models of their babies at whatever stages of gestation the unborn babies happen to be in. Even though this article did not specifically connect this new technology to the abortion industry, if the technology does become widespread, I can see why abortion clinic operators and backers might have a lot to worry about.
Still, the best weapon against an unnecessary abortion is the Word of God (Psalm 51:5; Jeremiah 1:5). When women learn that God considers a developing embryo or fetus to be fully human from the moment of conception, that may be worth more than all the pictures and models put together. God is the One who alone can give life, and He is the only One who can ethically take or give permission to take a life. May God bless all those people in this country and the world who are working to end the sorry practice of unnecessary abortions.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How many people have been killed by volcanoes during the past 500 years?
At least 300,000, and between 1980 and 1990 alone, at least 26,000 people lost their lives because of volcanoes.
Source: www.livescience.com
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
The Psalms' reference to snakes being able to hear is supported.
SUMMARY: When a snake charmer plays his flute causing a snake, often a cobra, to sway to the music, most people would say the serpent is responding to movements and not to the music--because they say snakes can't hear. This belief is commonly supported by statements in encyclopedias, on Web sites, or in books about snake charming, but is it correct?
One of the passages Bible skeptics have referred to in their attempts to refute the Bible's accuracy is Psalm 58:3-4:
The wicked go astray from the womb, they err from their birth speaking lies. They have venom like the venom of a serpent, like the deaf adder that stops its ear, so that it does not hear the voice of charmers or of the cunning enchanter.
Some research now has shown that scientifically this is an accurate statement. According to the Web site of Torrey Pines State Natural Reserve (near San Diego), research begun about 35 years ago, especially by E. G. Wever and associates at Princeton U., shows snakes indeed do have a hearing capacity comparable to that of lizards. Snakes have bones in the jaw that move in response to vibrations which are then transmitted to a pair of inner ears. Snakes can respond to both airborne and ground vibrations with the auditory response of snakes in the range of 200 to 300 Hz being superior to that of cats.
Conclusion: Christians should not allow misstatements about snakes tempt them to lose faith in the accuracy of the Bible anymore than Eve should have allowed a question from a snake ("Did God actually say.." Genesis 3:1) to cause her to go astray.
(Picture from Wikipedia)
To read the entire article click on this CREATION MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL link.
COMMENT: Bible skeptics are numerous and of late seem to be stepping up their attacks on those who accept the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. This creationist article does a good job of showing once again that we would be wise not let misstatements from Bible doubters, whether scientists or not, cause us to lose any sleep over the Bible's truthfulness. The scriptures have yet to be proven wrong, though many have tried to do just that.
Some creationists draw a distinction between "proving" the Bible and "defending" the Bible. As this article suggests, trying to prove the Bible with science is unwise because it puts science above the Bible. Yet, defending the Bible when it comes under attack is known as Bible apologetics, and this practice has a long and noble history.
Ultimately, it is the power of the Holy Spirit and not science which causes us to have faith in God's Word. However, I believe we should praise the Lord for all the little bits of encouragement that He sends our way during our temporary stay on earth. We know the day is coming when we will no longer need "faith" for we shall see God as He is. (Job 19:25-27) For now, our faith in God's Word leads us to have faith in Jesus Christ as our Redeemer from sin and our hope for everlasting life in heaven.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How can you get up to $4,500 for your old car?
If your old car is less than 25 years old, has a fuel economy rating of 18 mpg or less, has been registered and insured for at least 12 months, and is still drivable, you can get a trade-in credit of up to $4,500 provided the new car you are purchasing gets at least 22 mpg and at least 10 miles better mpg than the car you are trading in. This federal program will expire November 1, or sooner if funding runs out.
Source: Bottom Line Personal (August 1, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
A new book blames New Atheists and science bloggers for science's decline.
SUMMARY: When man first stepped on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission 40 years ago, scientists and engineers were heroes. Americans were interested in science, and science helped guide government policy. Today? A new book, Unscientific America, concludes that scientific illiteracy is casting a dark cloud over America's future.
Authors Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum discuss how science has fallen in popularity during the past 40 years though there was something of a resurgence during Carl Sagan's heyday. They see a decline of science in mainstream journalism, reflected in the observation that reporters are spending more and more time working on their blogs and less time investigating and learning.
Although poor science education, "science-phobic" politicians, and "religious ideologues" all play a role in undermining science's place in society, the book first and foremost blames scientists themselves. The authors make the following points:
First, New Atheism is not endearing itself to the 90% of Americans who believe in God. New Atheists are ignoring the fact that their shrillness gives science a bad name, at least in middle America.
Secondly, science blogging may actually be degrading America's scientific culture. These bloggers, who already agree about everything, strengthen each other and become increasingly self-assured and less tolerant of other viewpoints. This has led to, in some cases, a loud, angry, nasty, and profanity-strewing minority of the science world denouncing the rest of America for superstition and science ignorance. The opportunities decrease for meaningful dialogue among those holding different viewpoints.
What are some possible solutions? The book suggests developing "Renaissance scientists" who have good speaking and outreach skills, but will that work? Perhaps there are no good solutions, and the recent election of a new president isn't likely to be a panacea.
(Picture from NASA)
To read the entire opinion piece click on this HOUSTON CHRONICLE CHRON.COM link.
COMMENT: Is science really losing its mystique? This is an interesting thought considering there is also evidence that Christianity is losing some influence at the same time. But the theory of evolution (if you want to call that science) just took a beating in a recent Pew Research poll and a survey not long ago in Great Britain found the British generally have a low regard for science. It really is a timely question though considering we have just celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing, arguably the moment when the popularity of science was at its peak.
I can't quarrel with the two reasons given for the falling reputation of science. New Atheism as practiced by people such as England's Richard Dawkins is an embarrassment for the scientific world just as the many "Christian" televangelists who have fallen into disrepute have been an embarrassment for Christians. The aggressive, foul-mouthed, anti-Christian attacks by the New Atheists cannot hope to win them many friends. Indeed, the LSI Blog has experienced a bit of this as I had to remove a visitor comment from a recent post because of his profanity-laden anti-creationist comments.
Real practical science also known as operational science should not be in trouble. Real science is, generally speaking, trying to make this a better world. It deals with testing and experimentation and the scientific method. It should not be confused with wild speculations about prehistoric times. Medical advances and better technologies are some of the successes for operational science as well as the triumphs of the space program.
The apparent decline in Christianity may also be due at least in part to a departure from its real purpose. Christianity’s focus should be on spreading the central message that Jesus Christ is "the way and the truth and the life" and that nobody comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6). Instead, some people who call themselves Christians are ignoring the Gospel of Jesus Christ and replacing it with an emphasis on issues of social justice or feeding the poor, or even proposing false gospels such as the idea that God wants all Christians to become wealthy. Pseudo-Christians cannot help those people who are desperate for answers to questions regarding life after death.
So, if both science and Christianity would get back to their real purposes, I feel they both could recover some lost ground, and we would have a much better world.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
During a solar eclipse, what is the speed at which the moon's shadow races across the Earth's surface?
A speed of 5,000 miles an hour.
Source: Discover (July/August, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Many tiger moths can apparently use ultrasonic noises to interfere with bat echolocation.
SUMMARY: Some tiger moths are able to make sounds to frustrate bats which are preying on them, according to an article in the current Science magazine. Most bats use echolocation, a sonar-like ability in which they emit sound waves to locate prey, such as moths. However, it appears that some species of tiger moths (picture from Wikipedia) are actually able to jam the bat's echolocation.
These moths have an organ called a tymbal that allows them to emit ultrasonic noises in the same range which many bats use to locate prey. The noises may act as a warning to predators similar to the bright coloration used by many toxic moth species. However, since bats hunt in the dark and wouldn't be able to see the coloration, the ultrasonic chirps from the tymbals of moths with toxins may act as a substitute alarm.
Whereas the use of tymbals is widespread among tiger moth species, even among those that do not produce toxins, scientists sought to discover which of three possible answers could explain the reason for tymbals-as a warning, to startle bats, or to jam their echolocation. The researchers set up an experiment using captive bats and moths. If the sounds from the tymbals were meant as a warning, the scientists expected the rate of predation to fall off as bats learned to avoid the toxic moths. If the sounds were meant to startle bats, the predation curve should ascend as bats got used to the sound. If the tymbals were a jamming device though, the predation rate should remain low and steady as bats struggled to cope with the sounds.
Indeed, the researchers discovered the rates of feeding remained constant throughout the experiment, providing evidence that the tiger moths were actually jamming the echolocation ability of the bats. Moreover, they discovered that bats were only one-fourth as likely to find the moths whose tymbals were intact compared to moths with damaged tymbals.
(Thanks to an LSI member for bringing my attention to this article.)
To read the entire article click on this ARS TECHNICA link.
COMMENT: Why are evolutionists and creationists able to look at the same evidence and often come to such different conclusions? As the Creation museum in Kentucky emphasizes, it's all because of the starting assumptions. Because of their belief in the absolute literal truth of the creation account in Genesis, creationist scientists can explain how the scientific evidence fits in well with the Bible and the existence of an Intelligent Designer. But Darwinists, because they believe the theory of evolution to be a fact, will see things through evolution-tinted glasses.
This interesting story concerning another example of intelligent design demonstrates the latter. Because evolutionists believe moths evolved much earlier than bats, there is the problem of why these insects would need to evolve a defensive adaptation for bats if there wouldn't be any bats around for eons to come. So I was struck by this sentence in the article: "But before the moths could use the chirps for jamming bat signals, they first evolved them for other purposes." There was no explanation for such a bold statement, but it does show how one's basic beliefs can color one's thinking.
God has given bats tools such as echolocation to help them find food, but He has not left potential prey such as moths completely defenseless either. This is the most logical explanation for all the examples of the gifts given to both predators and prey which we see in the natural world around us.
As far as the spiritual world is concerned, God has also given us gifts. We have the gift of His Holy Word through which we learn of the gift of His one and only Son, Jesus Christ, who came to earth to save all mankind. We also have been given the gift of the Holy Spirit who creates the faith in our hearts we need to accept Jesus as our very own Savior and to be able to look forward in anticipation to everlasting happiness in heaven. Thank you, Lord.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Where and when will this century's longest total solar eclipse occur?
On July 22 of this year a total solar eclipse will occur over India, Nepal, Bhutan and China. The total darkness will reach its peak over the Pacific Ocean and last up to 6 minutes and 29 seconds.
Source: Discover magazine (July/August, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Cursing, videogames, gossiping, and getting dirty all said to have some benefits.
SUMMARY: Richard Stevens, a psychologist at Keele U. in England wondered whether there might be a benefit to cursing, something he did when he hit his thumb with a hammer and what his wife did as she was giving birth. So Stevens investigated. He discovered that uttering profanity may help someone withstand pain.
In an experiment reported in this month's NeuroReport, he and colleagues had participants submerge hands in ice-cold water for as long as possible (up to 10 minutes) while either swearing or saying a neutral word. They found that the subjects who cursed averaged 40 seconds, a third longer than those who didn't. The biological basis for this discovery is not clear, but profanity may be associated with increased aggression which in turn is linked to increased pain tolerance.
VIDEOGAMES: Videogaming has been blamed as a cause for aggressive or violent behavior, lower performance in school, and childhood obesity. However, because videogames are usually very engaging, they can also have therapeutic, medical, and motor-skills benefits, says expert Mark Griffiths, a professor at Nottingham Trent U. in England. He notes these games can distract people from painful conditions which results in a lesser need for pain killers. One study also found that surgeons who had played videogames more than 3 hours a week had better fine motor skills and made fewer errors in surgery training exercises.
GOSSIP: It can be a destructive force: ruining reputations, exposing secrets, etc. But Sarah R. Wert, a psychology researcher at the U. of Colorado, thinks there is evidence that gossip is a means for people to trade essential information and for social norms to get developed. "It saves us from having to repeat the mistakes of others," another psychologist says. Gossip can be fun, entertaining and facilitate social bonding even as it has its dangers.
GETTING DIRTY: Many researchers believe that a child's exposure to certain harmless and beneficial microorganisms is essential for his or her proper immune development. An emphasis on cleanliness can keep us disease free in many respects, but studies have shown that a lack of exposure to beneficial microbes in the environment may make us more likely to develop immune diseases like asthma or allergies. This may be the reason why these diseases are increasing in industrialized nations with their antibacterial cultures. So, it may be wise to let the kids play outside and get dirty even though good hygiene is still important to protect people from dangerous pathogens that can cause infections.
To read the entire article click on this NEWSWEEK link.
COMMENT: Let's consider these bad habits one at a time.
Cursing: Plain and simple, this is a sin. Ephesians 4:29 says, "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths." While some studies have shown that releasing tension is good, Christians are obligated to find ways of doing this that are not improper. Perhaps working on neutral words and expressions to use when we do hit our thumb with a hammer might work despite what the one study quoted in the article claims.
Videogames: I don't believe videogames in themselves are bad, but what has been criticized is the violent and indecent nature of many of the games as well as the amount of time many gamers spend on this activity. 1 Corinthians 10:31 says, "So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God." Choosing wholesome games may be God-pleasing because of the apparent health benefits. Limiting the amount of time playing these games though is crucial so that there is time for family, for sleep, and for other beneficial activities, especially worship.
Gossip: That gossip can be claimed to have any major benefits was a surprise to me. Certainly we are not allowed to spread evil stories about others (James 4:11) nor reveal secrets about others unless there is a good reason (Proverbs 11:13). Of course, there are times when it is important, even necessary, to reveal a secret, such as turning in a criminal to the police or trying to stop an illegal or dangerous activity. Nevertheless, speaking good things about our neighbors is the usual route we should take.
Getting Dirty: God has designed the human body well in that a little bit of dirt seems to be a positive. In ages past, before antibacterial ointments were invented, it was absolutely necessary that our immune systems could benefit from this ability. That doesn't mean, of course, that we should go out and purposely expose ourselves to all sorts of harmful bacteria and viruses. Ever hear of Swine Flu?
The worst vice of all is to reject the Holy Spirit when He comes offering faith in Jesus and forgiveness for all our sins. Any advantage to this worst of all sins pales in comparison to the terrible downside. Don't do it.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Can exercise lower blood sugar?
Elevated blood sugar in type 2 diabetes can adversely affect the heart and blood vessels, eyes, kidneys and nerves and more. Physical exercise may play an important role in managing the disease. One study in May published in the Journal of the American Medical Association involving players from 12 National Football League teams found that even though the NFL players weighed an average of 60 pounds more then men in the control group, their average fasting blood sugar was lower.
Source: Dr. Tedd Mitchell in USA Weekend (July 10-12, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Her ordeal is assisting researchers as they work on ways to improve recovery of diseased hearts.
SUMMARY: Hannah Clark, a British teen-ager who received a transplanted heart as an infant, has made a "magic" recovery, her doctor said. Ten years ago her heart was not contracting, and when she was 11 months old her doctors decided to transplant a donated heart next to it, giving her two hearts. The heart with which she was born was defective because of cardiomyopathy, a condition marked by enlarged or inflamed heart tissue that can slow down blood flow through the heart, cause blood clots, and lead to heart failure.
By the age of 4, both her hearts appeared to be functioning normally. The transplanted heart seemed to be helping her diseased heart to heal. However, she was facing a new problem. Because of the donor heart, Clark had to take powerful immunosuppressant drugs. These drugs were apparently making her susceptible to cancer. When she was 8 and fighting a long battle with cancer, her doctors decided to just remove the second heart and take her off the immunosuppressant drugs. Today Clark seems to have beaten the cancer and is living free of medication. She is able to go swimming and shopping.
Leading cardiologists say Clark's remarkable recovery will influence future research into heart transplants and artificial hearts. Now that they know the human heart is not an "end-stage organ" but that it has regenerative powers to heal, they hope to find out exactly how a diseased heart can recover.
Researchers who work with LVADs (devices that support the heart's pumping ability) and CRT (a therapy that helps reset faulty electrical problems in the heart) had noticed regeneration of heart tissue in their patients. "The next steps are, 'How does it do this and how can we capitalize on this process,' " said Dr. Douglas P. Zipes, a medical journal editor, about the heart's ability to regenerate.
In addition to these developments, researchers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles are obtaining stem cells from the hearts of adult patients with heart problems, growing them in a petri dish, and then infusing them back into the patients, hoping to get their hearts to grow.
To read the entire article click on this ABC NEWS link.
COMMENT: On Monday this blog commented on a recent Pew Research Center survey which showed Americans still see a lot of value in science while having major disagreements with scientists on at least two issues-evolution and global warming.
Today's story may provide a clue as to how people can hold these two seemingly contradictory positions. When scientists are doing more than just theorizing, when they are working with facts and accomplishing something that has real promise for helping Americans, I think most people are ready to give them support.
Nobody can deny that medical research can be credited with significant accomplishments. People are living longer, have more options to treat diseases, and in most cases can be more optimistic about their future health. We can thank scientists working in medical research for these advances.
Technology also has many success stories, whether it is safer cars, labor-saving devices, renewable energy, or even better "toys" for children and adults.
Of course, nobody lives forever in this world. This is why Jesus is preparing a place for us in heaven. While we have faith in Him as our Savior from sin, we also can have faith that He can use medical science and other sciences for our good, that is when scientists are not engaging in wild speculations but rather are actually trying to improve the world we currently live in.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Are self-tanning lotions safe?
They seem to be. Self-tanners approved by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) include dihydroxyacetone (DHA) which a few test-tube studies have suggested might cause cell damage. However, DHA has been in use in the U.S. for more than 40 years with no ill effects reported, and there are no known human studies reporting a risk.
Source: Consumer Reports OnHealth (August, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Pew survey finds Americans see value in science but they also disagree with scientists on global warming.
SUMMARY: Americans value many of the achievements of the nation's scientists but don't always agree with the theories these scientists hold.
A telephone survey was conducted recently by the Pew Research Center in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). The opinions of some 2,533 scientists in the AAAS were obtained as well as those from 2,001 public respondents. Although most Americans see worth in the nation's scientific achievements, there were wide disagreements between the two groups on some issues.
While almost 9 in 10 scientists accept the evolution theory, only a third of the public does. Less than half of Americans agree human activity is causing global warming while 84% of scientists believe this theory.
Some 27% of Americans said scientific advances are the nation's greatest achievement, but that was down from 47% who said the same thing in a 1999 survey. Still, many Americans value the work of scientists while disagreeing with some of their conclusions. More than two-thirds of those who say science conflicts with their religious beliefs still acknowledge the contributions of scientists to society.
(Picture of alleged Rhodesian men from Wikimedia Commons)
To read the entire article click on this YAHOO NEWS REUTERS link.
To read a detailed report of the survey, click on this PEW RESEARCH CENTER link.
COMMENT: The results of this poll must be very discouraging to backers of Darwin's theory. Despite having a near monopoly on the opinions expressed in television nature shows, in textbooks, in public museums, in public universities, in Hollywood movies and among judges who have to rule in creationism vs. evolutionism cases, the evolutionist community is failing to make its case with the general public. And the situation may be getting worse for Darwinism. The 32% supporting evolution in this poll is a drop of 7% from the 39% that gave Darwin's theory a vote of confidence in a February Gallup survey.
While 87% of scientists still support the theory, that means 13% do not. One could not get 13% of scientists to deny the law of gravity or the fact that we live on a spherical planet or that the moon is made of rock and not green cheese. So why is such a significant minority of scientists willing to oppose the theory of evolution if the evidence is so overwhelmingly in favor of it?
Actually, I am curious as to why 87% of scientists still publicly support Darwin. So I propose the following possible reasons why so many scientists are still evolutionists despite their failure to convince the public about the validity of their views.
(1) Faith. Having abandoned or never accepted the idea of a Creator, they must have faith in something in order to make sense of the universe.
(2) Fear. They know what will happen to their reputations and their standing in the mainstream scientific circles if they were to publicly admit their doubts about Darwin.
(3) Friendships. Their colleagues likely are giving them moral support when some questions about Darwin might start to creep into their thoughts. It has been said that each field of science, despite having some problems harmonizing its findings with Darwinism, believes the other branches of science have proven evolution and so interprets every bit of evidence accordingly.
(4) Focus. It may be difficult to focus on scientific data that conflicts with evolutionary theory because that may mean having to admit that one is wrong about evolution.
In contrast, Christians place their faith in the Creator God, the only One who was there when this universe began. We fear the Evil one who is having such success getting people to worship nature instead of nature's God. Our main friendship is with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Our focus is on the future where we can enjoy complete happiness in communion with our Creator without being tied to a hopeless theory that offers no promise of a better life.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Why will slicing an onion cause one's eyes to water?
Slicing an onion will release enzymes and other substances into the air forming a gas. When the gas reaches the eyes, it interacts with the water in the eyes to produce mild sulfuric acid which is caustic and which causes one to blink. The blinking produces tears that help wash away the acid.
Source: Marilyn von Savant in Parade magazine (July 12, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
She admits though that many psychologists disagree with her theories.
SUMMARY: In 1998 Judith Rich Harris, an independent researcher, published The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do. In the book, which recently has been expanded and revised, she argues that parents matter much less than peers when it comes to the behavior of their children. An editor with Scientific American's Mind magazine interviewed Harris. (questions and answers abbreviated and paraphrased)
MIND: Freud argued that a child's problems can be blamed on parents, especially mothers, but in your book you say parents are mostly innocent and peers are much more influential. What led you to write the book?
HARRIS: Not just Freud, but psychologists of all persuasions, even behaviorists such as B. F. Skinner, ultimately blamed parents. I wanted to reassure parents and let them know there are different ways to rear a child, none of them proven to be more effective than another. But I now question the belief that parents have a good deal of power to shape the personalities of their children.
MIND: How did the field react?
HARRIS: Professors of psychology criticized the book before they read it and cited the same studies for their opinions which I had dissected in the book. Or they cited a book that hadn't yet been published. After a while the professors began to listen to what I was saying and now my work is cited in many psychology textbooks. Of course, most developmental psychologists still don't agree with me even though they acknowledge there is another view. Studies show that when children have similar traits as their parents, it is due to heredity, not child rearing. Adopted children don't resemble their adoptive parents in personality.
MIND: Why is this controversial. Why are we so convinced that parents must matter?
HARRIS: It's part of culture. It's risky to question a cultural myth. Actually, the idea that parents can determine how their children can turn out is a rather new idea. Years ago, before the cultural change, parents didn't feel as much need to sacrifice for their children, didn't worry about the self-esteem of their children, and routinely used physical punishment. Fathers provided little or no child care and were there primarily to administer discipline.
But despite the changes these past 70 years, people are the same as ever. Today's adults are no less aggressive than their grandparents were, no happier or self-confident or in better mental health.
MIND: Have your ideas changed since writing the book?
HARRIS: I expanded the Group Socialization Theory to better explain personality development. The expanded version is based on the idea that three different mental modules are involved in social development: relationships including parent-child relationships, socialization, and strategies for competing with peers.
MIND: How can this new theory of child development apply to teachers and public policy?
HARRIS: Improving the home environment will not help children behave in the classroom. School-based intervention is needed, and that's where teachers have power. The teacher's biggest challenge is to keep the class from splitting into anti-learning and pro-learning groups. Asian teachers seem to do better than Americans at keeping their classrooms united.
To read the entire interview click on this SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN link.
COMMENT: Certainly in many cases, where parents have lost control over their children, Harris is right about peers having the most influence. However, is that true for every parent?
Godly parents striving to raise their children according to the Word of God should not abdicate their responsibilities and influence in raising their children in God-pleasing ways. Proverbs 22:6 says, "Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it." (NIV)
While even Christian parents can't be ruthless dictators trying to influence every facet of their children's lives, they can generally have a positive effect on the important choices their children make: selecting wholesome friends, staying out of legal trouble, developing kind and polite personalities, etc.
Even godly parents trying their best will not always succeed. Adam had his Cain and King David had his Absalom. So if a child goes bad, a parent shouldn't necessarily blame himself or herself.
Although I am not a child psychologist, I would think four good suggestions for Christian parents as they work to raise Christian children would include (1) as an example for your kids lead the kind of Christian lifestyle you would like your children to lead, (2) bring your children to church with you on a regular basis, (3) pray regularly for and with your children and for your efforts in raising them in God-pleasing ways, and (4) keep the hope of eternal life always before them so that they don't just live for the present.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What is the biggest factor in our nation's rising obesity rates?
An increase in calories consumed and not a decrease in exercise. A study presented to the European Congress on Obesity in May contained information on the dietary and exercise habits of people from the 1970s through the early 2000s. People now seem to be exercising as much as they did back then--but are consuming a lot more food.
Source: Consumer Reports OnHealth (August, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Spider builds models of itself in order to fool attacking wasps.
SUMMARY: The first example of an animal ever found to build models of itself in order to distract predators is a spider named Cyclosa.mulmeinensis. This discovery, as reported in the journal Animal Behaviour, also may answer the question of why many spiders decorate their webs with strange-looking ornaments.
Various animals try to fool predators through disguises such as camouflage (examples: peppered moth and stick insects) to blend in with the background. Others have bright ornaments (example: butterflies with large eyespots) or colorful detachable tails (example: some lizards) so as to detract any predators. But animals do not tend to build life-size replica models of themselves to act as decoys.
The orb spider Cyclosa.mulmeinensis is an exception as biologists Ling Tseng and I-Min Tso of Tunghai U. in Taiwan have discovered. This spider and related spiders in the same genus decorate their webs with material such as detritus, plant parts, prey remains or egg sacs. Being of a similar color to the spider, the decorations might help camouflage the arachnids.
In experiments, Tseng and Tso were surprised to find these decorations attracted far more wasp attacks than undecorated webs. However, tests with Cyclosa mulmeinensis found a favorable result. These spiders build strings of oval objects on a web, objects that resemble themselves in size and color. When the spiders are present on the web along with these decoys, wasps would normally attack a decoy. Spiders on undecorated webs had no such protection.
Scientists think different spiders decorate their webs for different reasons--to strengthen the web, to act as a warning to predators, to keep large animals from accidentally walking into and destroying the web, or as a signal to attract prey. But Cyclosa spiders seem to build decorations more as an anti-predator device than a camouflaging device even at the cost of increased detection.
(Photograph of a female Cyclosa.mulmeinensis from Wikispecies)
To read the entire article and see photos of the spider decoys click on this BBC link.
COMMENT: The Intelligent Design implications of a story such as this one are obvious, but I would like this time to comment on a question that creationists often have to face.
Creationists believe that Genesis strongly implies that there was no death in the world before Adam and Eve’s original sins. At the conclusion of the sixth day God declared His creation to be very good (Genesis 1:31), animals were originally vegetarian (Genesis 1:29-30), Adam did not have to fear death until he disobeyed God (Genesis 2:15-17), and the ground was not cursed until Adam sinned (Genesis 3:17-18). Romans 5:12 confirms that death entered the world through Adam's sin.
With this in mind, why would God create animals with killing features they would not originally need to use or with defense strategies like the spiders if they did not need to fear attack? The July-September issue of Answers magazines provides some possible solutions to this problem. I am paraphrasing these possible solutions as:
(1) Features that are now used for killing may at first have had only positive purposes.
(2) God gave predators and prey new features at the time of the Curse.
(3) God created animals with all the gifts they would need to live in a fallen world even if they wouldn’t need to use them at first.
(4) The original features degenerated as a result of mutations.
(5) The original features became harmful as creatures moved out of the habitats they were designed to live in.
(6) God placed information in the genes of the original creatures that wasn’t needed until after the Curse.
(7) There may be other explanations for the origin of the harmful features we have not yet considered.
This is all speculation, of course. The Word of God does not give a specific answer to our question. However, one thing is obvious. God did not leave predators without weapons enabling them to obtain food. God did not leave prey without some defense mechanisms. It is not always a pretty world that we have inherited as a result of the original sin, but we must cover our eyes not to see the presence of God in this well-designed world with well-designed creatures despite what sin has done.
Doesn’t this make us all the more yearn for the perfect world to come when the word “death” will not be found in any heavenly dictionary? And this perfect world can be ours if we but confess our sins and accept the free gift of salvation which becomes ours as a result of the cross of Jesus Christ.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Why can't the space shuttles land in the rain?
Because of the terrific speeds the shuttles can reach (up to 17,500 mph in orbit) raindrops would strike these vehicles like bullets and seriously damage their brittle tiles.
Source: Marilyn vos Savant in Parade (7/5/09)
Photo: Shuttle Atlantis (from NASA)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
However, she thinks these legends were based on fossils, not living creatures.
SUMMARY: Adrienne Mayor, a researcher at Stanford U., says she has found links between certain dinosaur fossils and legends of dragons. She has found enough information to have written three books on the subject, and the Children's Museum in Indianapolis thought enough of her work to have consulted her when they were building a dragon exhibit.
Many if not all ancient cultures have legends of dragons, and Mayor believes these stories were based on how the ancients imagined dinosaurs would look like after finding their fossils. Dracorex hogwartsia, a fossil named after the Harry Potter stories, surprised scientists when it was discovered its long muzzle and spiky horns make it look remarkably like the dragons of ancient China and medieval Europe. However, Dracorex was discovered in North America, not China or Europe. That raises the question of how ancient Chinese, Europeans and other cultures far from North America could have come up with these dragons if the corresponding dinosaur fossils to date have been found only in America.
There are serious reasons for doubting that the dragon legends resulted merely from observations of dinosaur fossils. The widespread discovery of similar looking dragons in the folklore of almost every culture on every continent suggests people probably did see the real creatures alive and well.
(Photograph of a Chinese dragon sculpture, from Wikipedia)
To read the entire article click on this ICR link.
COMMENT: At least some secular scientists appear to be coming around to the view that there is a link between dinosaurs and dragon legends after all. It is a bit amusing though that Ms. Mayor cannot bring herself around to suggesting that the ancients may have actually seen real live dinosaurs. Of course, she realizes that she would lose her credibility in the world of science if she were to suggest such a thing. The belief that the dinosaurs went extinct some 65 million years or so ago is an article of faith mainstream scientists dare not challenge.
For those not familiar with the strong possibility biblical authors wrote about prehistoric beasts like dinosaurs when they mentioned dragons and other creatures like the behemoth and the leviathan, you can read my article on the subject as posted on the LSI Web site.
Is there any other evidence that dinosaurs and humans were at one time contemporaries? You bet. Dr. Mary Schweitzer's discovery of soft tissue and red blood cells in both Tyrannosaurus Rex and hadrosaur fossils should lay to rest the opinions of scientists that these animals died out millions of years ago, but, of course, it hasn‘t. Bible believers know all land creatures were created on Day 6 of creation week along with Adam and Eve, and Adam must have given dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals their names (Genesis 2:19-20).
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What is the world's largest lake?
By size and volume it is the Caspian Sea, located between southeast Europe and west Asia.
Source: www.livescience.com
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
Researchers hope to learn from these amphibians how to regrow human limbs.
*********************************************
HAPPY BIRTHDAY U.S.A.!
MAY GOD BLESS YOU!
*********************************************
SUMMARY: Ever since Aristotle scientists have been trying to discover how salamanders can regrow lost limbs. Recently they have been surprised to find out that cells near the site of an amputation revert to adult stem cells which can only develop into the type of cell necessary to regenerate the lost body part. In other words, when a salamander loses a tail, it won't regrow a leg in its place. Scientists had thought these cells would be pluripotent, able to form many different cell types.
In the study, published in Nature, scientists explain that when these amphibians lose a body part, the muscle, bone, and skin cells near the amputation site change into a clump of adult stem cells called a blastema. The blastema cells all look alike and scientists do not yet know how they can go on to form the correct tissue type. The researchers learned that cells added to the blastema always became the right kind of cell. Muscle became muscle. Cartilage became cartilage. Only cells just beneath the skin were able to develop into more than one cell type.
Scientists studying salamanders hope to find ways to regenerate human limbs, and this study may help them in their investigations. Instead of trying to generate multipotent or pluripotent cells, they now think they need to try to understand how these cells get the appropriate signals to make a new limb in terms of organizing the different tissue types.
(Photograph of a Fire Salamander from Wikimedia Commons)
To read the entire article click on this DISCOVER link.
COMMENT: According to Wikipedia, amphibians are unique among vertebrates in being able to grow back body parts such as limbs and tails. We must be in awe of this ability. The cells at the site of the lost limb "know" exactly what kind of tissue to become in order to regenerate the lost body part. Even our very intelligent researchers are not yet able to figure out how they can do this. Need I mention that this seems like just one more on an endless list of examples showing that creatures like salamanders must have been intelligently designed?
A second point that seems reasonable to me regards the unique position salamanders have among vertebrates. The ability to regenerate lost limbs is a wonderful and very positive gift every animal should want to possess. Why is it other vertebrates including humans haven't been able to evolve such an amazing talent, which salamanders can use to escape predators?
The fact remains that the Creator has given to each creature the gifts it needs. Humans can compensate somewhat for the inability to regrow lost limbs by having knowledgeable doctors who can reset bones and sometimes reattach limbs. Perhaps God will some day give them the knowledge to help even humans regenerate lost body parts. While we can't yet grow back lost arms, legs or noses, we humans have been given a gift none of the animals has been promised--the gift of eternal life in heaven available through the death of Jesus Christ, a gift we must not reject if we do not want to imperil our souls.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What surprising coincidence involved John Adams and Thomas Jefferson?
Both Adams (top) and Jefferson (bottom) died on the same day: July 4, 1826, which was the United States' 50th anniversary They were two of the United State's founding fathers and the only two men who signed the Declaration of Independence to go on to become president.
Source: Wikipedia
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. After posting a comment, please allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
They engage in risky behavior because they think they have little to lose.
SUMMARY: Nearly 15% of teenagers believe they will die young, a reason according to new research that they may use drugs, attempt suicide, or engage in other unsafe behavior. The study, which appears in the July issue of Pediatrics and which was based on a survey of 20,000 kids, counters conventional thinking that teens engage in risky behavior because they think they're invulnerable to harm. Instead, they may take chances "because they feel hopeless and figure that not much is at stake," according to study author Dr. Iris Borowsky of the University of Minnesota.
Such a fatalistic outlook could cause their behavior to turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Teens who thought they would die early were seven times more likely to be diagnosed with AIDS than other young people and were more likely to attempt suicide and get into serious fights that could lead to major injuries. Adolescence is "a time of great opportunity and for such a large minority of youth to feel like they don't have a long life ahead of them was surprising," Borowsky said.
Dr. Jonathan Klein of the U. of Rochester suggested that doctors should seek to detect kids suffering from fatalism so that they might potentially prevent unsafe behavior. Native Americans, blacks and low-income teens are more likely to be exposed to violence and hardship and much more likely than whites to believe they will die young. Still, fatalistic teens weren't more likely to die than more optimistic kids; there were just 94 deaths reported from the more than 20,000 teens.
To read the entire article click on this YAHOO NEWS link.
COMMENT: This report should be an eye-opener for anyone who works with our young people. While 15% may not sound like much, what it means is that in an average class of 33 students five of them may be engaging in risky behavior and be fatalistic.
Some observers of religion are reporting it seems more and more difficult to get teens to attend church. Yet, an article like this one makes it imperative that these youth need to find out who they really are (beloved children of God) and why they can be optimistic about the future (Jesus died for them and promises to be a friend who is always by their side).
The challenge then for parents, pastors and youth workers is to get through to these teenagers regarding their spiritual lives and the true hope for the future which we all have through faith in Jesus Christ. Jesus never promised that life for everyone would be easy and carefree, but He did promise to be with us to the end of this earthy life all the way to a blessed eternity. Also, I believe it is important to show teens the many ways they can serve Him, a reason He will grant most of them long and prosperous lives.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
According to the Food and Drug Administration, how many food recalls have there been during the past three years?
There were 214 food recalls in 2006, 247 in 2007, and 310 in 2008. Experts say the increasing number of recalls is due to better detection of potential problems because there has been no increase in food-borne illnesses.
Source: Parade magazine (June 28, 2009)
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. Please allow several hours for a comment to appear on the blog.
SUMMARY: A growing body of psychologists believes that many mental problems such as depression, stress and anxiety can be traced to society's alienation from nature. Their solution: go outside and enjoy the natural world.
This theory, originated by James Lovelock in the 1960s, proposes that the Earth is a finely tuned super-organism consisting of the entire natural world. It was based on the observation that all of the Earth's processes appear to be working together to maintain optimum conditions for life. Lovelock stressed there is no conscious force involved as some people have misinterpreted his theory. Of course, he ignores the conscious force known as God.
