Sunday, October 27, 2013

Prayer, Latin, and Getting a Grip

Prayer is important for Catholics. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2558-2565, 2566-2567, 2568-2589-2598, and much more)

Say "Catholic prayer," and some folks may think of a group of Catholics droning their way through the Rosary: or parroting something they don't understand in a reasonable facsimile of Latin.

Mary and the Rosary


(From USCCB, used w/o permission.)

The Rosary is a very "Catholic" prayer, although I've heard of folks who aren't Catholic who pray the Rosary more often and more regularly than I do. There are a few "Catholic" prayers that we all say, starting with the Lord's Prayer. (Luke 11:1-4; Matthew 6:9-13; Catechism, 2759-2760, 2761-2776, 2777-2802, 2803-2854)

I had a soft spot in my heat for Mary long before I became a Catholic, and still do. Marian devotions are important in the lives of many Catholics, which doesn't meant that we worship Mary. That would be idolatry, which is a very bad idea and strictly against the rules. (Catechism, 2097, 2112-2114)

The Rosary is an important part of some, but not all, Marian devotions, and I'm getting off-topic. (Catechism, 971)

Latin, Monty Python, and a Really Old Joke

I've said prayers and sung songs in Latin, although my knowledge of the language is minimal.

Latin is a beautiful language, and using it as the 'official' language of the Church made sense when the Roman Empire was still in operation. Later, when monks in Ireland and a few other outposts were keeping civilization alive in Europe, Latin still made sense, since it was the only language all educated Catholics would understand.

Most folks who lived where Rome's Imperial influence had been strong didn't speak Latin, but that language influenced their native tongues. That's why Spanish, Italian, and French are called romance languages, and that's another topic. My ancestral languages didn't. still more topics.

A traveler who spoke Latin was in the position of someone who speaks English today. Anywhere in Europe, the odds were pretty good that the traveler would eventually find at least one person who would understand what he or she said. It helped to be within a day's walk of a monastery, of course.

Today, Latin is still the language used by the Catholic Church for official documents and communications. I don't think that will change, particularly since we've accumulated quite a few documents over the last two millennia. Translating from one language to another is a tricky affair, as anyone who uses online tools like Google Translate should realize.

There's a joke that's so old, maybe you haven't heard it.

A man traveling in the Orient uses his phrasebook to ask for some service. The attendant obviously understands, but seems distressed. He replies, "alas, exalted thimble! I would carry you there on my back, but the cat is already late for the wedding." The attendant had probably memorized his phrasebook, without benefit of recordings to give some idea of what English is supposed to sound like.

Then there's the Monty Python 'phrasebook' sketch. As I recall, the author was charged with publishing a foreign phrase book with intent to cause riot.


(From Monty Python's Flying Circus, via YouTube, used w/o permission.)

Moving on.

Vatican II and Getting a Grip

Latin has become a rather sensitive topic, particularly after the mid-1960s, when the Second Vatican Council results hit the news.

Some American priests, and even bishops, were delighted. I suspect that many of them read about the Vatican II documents in Time, Newsweek, and maybe even The New York Times. Judging from the results, some of them never bothered to read the Vatican II documents themselves: in the original Latin or official translations into our native language.

We're still cleaning up the mess left by screwball 'reforms.'

Many Catholics living in America gritted their teeth as altar rails and statues were hauled out, and kept the faith. In my parish, some folks recovered all the pieces from the altar rail and put them in storage. The stone altar rails are still around, waiting for an economy that's more conducive to major remodeling projects.

Some folks were appalled by 'in the spirit of Vatican II' antics, and set up their own little churches. Some of these 'roll your own faith' outfits are still around, apparently convinced that they're the only 'real' Catholics in the whole wide world.

Being upset makes sense. Assuming that the Holy Spirit was AWOL and no longer guided the Magisterium: not so much.

Happily, many documents of the Church have been translated into my native language, English, like the Catechism. yet again more topics.

Before I get back to prayer, writing about prayer that is, a few words about the Magisterium, Papal authority, and getting a grip.

Papal authority doesn't mean that Catholics have to believe that Popes never make mistakes. They're human, and some have been remarkably poor role models. Even the worst of them didn't make any official statements that permanently damaged the Church. After two millennia, that's a remarkable track record.

The Magisterium is the Church's central authority, with the task of maintaining what Jesus gave us.

That's a massive oversimplification. I've posted about this sort of thing before:

Prayer and Praying

Prayer is important, but convincing you that everyone should pray the way I do doesn't make sense: and that's still more topics.

I learned that the sort of prayer I usually do is called "Franciscan:" informal 'conversation' with God. Quite a few folks are discussing four types of prayer, online anyway. They're called Franciscan, Ignatian, Augustinian, and Thomistic. The forms of prayer, not the people, of course.

I think formal prayers like the Lord's Prayer are important. I should probably make an effort to do more of them, more often. There's meditating, too, studying Holy Scripture, and 1 Corinthians 12, and those are — you guessed it — even more topics.

Related posts:

Friday, October 25, 2013

Kepler-69c and Habitable Zones; The Great Martian Land Rush

We've found more than 1,000 planets circling other stars, much of the old Martian atmosphere may still be there, and scientists discovered why some eucalyptus trees have gold in their leaves.
  1. Found: 1,100 Exoplanets
  2. Mars, Water, and the Case of the Missing Atmosphere
  3. Trees With Gold in their Leaves
  4. Habitable Zones and Kepler-69c: There's More to Learn

Crackpots, Dreamers, and NASA Design Studies

Terraforming, changing the environment of another planet to something we'd find comfortable, has been a "science fiction" idea for decades.

There was a time when I thought terraforming other planets was possible: and probably something we wouldn't have the technology to accomplish for centuries, or millennia. That may be true, but now I suspect that we're decades, a few centuries at most, from 'terraforming' parts of Mars.

What's changed my view is the continuing intense interest in settling Mars. Some of those folks are, most likely, crackpots. But some are practical scientists.

It looks like some of the students who participated in NASA's 1975 Space Settlements design study are now scientists: and never stopped thinking about ways to settle on other worlds.

Although I don't agree with the late Arthur C. Clarke on some things, what he said about the evolution of new ideas is, I think, generally true:
  • "It can't be done."
  • "It probably can be done, but it's not worth doing."
  • "I knew it was a good idea all along!"
My guess is that today we're near the end of the second phase for settling other planets.

Folks who get conniptions about anything America does may be happy to know that students from India won a 2011 NASA space settlement design contest. Then again, maybe not.

The Ethics of Terraforming

The big question isn't so much whether or not we can change another planet into a reasonable facsimile of Earth, given time.

It's whether we should.

Provided that folks who run the terraforming projects don't hurt other people, I don't see a problem. Humans are designed to study, and manage, this universe. So far, we've learned quite a bit about how to work with Earth. We've also learned about things we never want to try again. Ever.

Trying isn't the problem.

Being greedy, stupid, and short-sighted is.


(from the United States Library of Congress, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission)

I've been over this before, including:

1. Found: 1,100 Exoplanets

"Alien Planet Count Passes 1,000 Worlds, a Milestone"
Mike Wall, Space.com 1 (October 23, 2013)

"Just two decades after first spotting planets orbiting a star other than our own sun, astronomers have notched a big milestone - the 1,000th alien planet.

"Two of the five main databases that catalog exoplanet discoveries list 1,010 confirmed alien worlds as of today (Oct. 23). That's a lot of progress since 1992, when researchers found the first-ever exoplanets orbiting a spinning neutron star, or pulsar....

"...The five main exoplanet-discovery databases, and their current tallies, are: the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia (1,010); the Exoplanets Catalog, run by the Planetary Habitability Laboratory (1,010); the NASA Exoplanet Archive (919); the Exoplanet Orbit Database (755); and the Open Exoplanet Catalog (948).

"The different numbers reported by the databases reflect the uncertainties inherent in exoplanet detection and confirmation."
There isn't anything particularly significant about the thousandth planet in the Exoplanet Encyclopedia or Planetary Habitat Laboratory's The Habitable Exoplanets Catalog‎.

The news excites me for about the same reason that outstanding scores excite a sports fan. It's also reflects how much we've learned recently about planets circling other stars: and how much we still have to learn.

One Galaxy, Billions of Worlds, in a Universe with Billions of Galaxies

"...the current tally is likely just the tip of the exoplanet iceberg. For example, a study published last year estimated that every star in the Milky Way hosts 1.6 planets on average - meaning that our galaxy likely harbors at least 160 billion alien worlds.

"And those are just the planets with obvious parent stars. Another recent study calculated that 'rogue planets' - those that cruise through space apparently unbound to any star - may outnumber 'normal' worlds by 50 percent or so...."
(Mike Wall, Space.com)
If that study is accurate, and an average of 1.6 planets circle stars in this galaxy: our Solar system has a superabundance of planets: well over a half-dozen.

Maybe we live in a very unusual planetary system: or maybe we'll discover many more than 160,000,000,000 planets in this galaxy. Either way, we aren't likely to run out of places to go and things to learn for quite a while. Even after we thoroughly explore this galaxy, there are billions more. This is a big universe.

More about exoplanets:

2. Mars, Water, and the Case of the Missing Atmosphere

"Meteorite Study Suggests Mars Atmosphere Trapped in Rocks, Not Lost in Space"
Becky Oskin, Space.com 1 (October 22, 2013)

"The atmosphere of Mars may not have escaped into space billions of years ago, scientists say. Instead, the bulk of Mars' carbon dioxide gas could be locked inside Martian rocks.

"Most of Mars' carbon dioxide vanished about 4 bildflion [sic!] years ago, leaving a cold planet covered in a thin veneer of gas. But a new analysis of a Martian meteorite claims that some of the carbon dioxide disappeared into Mars itself, and not out into space as previous studies have suggested.

" 'This is the first direct evidence of how carbon dioxide is removed, trapped and stored on Mars,' said Tim Tomkinson, lead study author and a geochemist at the University of Glasgow in the United Kingdom. 'We can find out amazing things about Mars from the very small amount of sample that we have.'..."
Tomkinson and the other scientists analyzed a small slice of the Lafayette meteorite. It's a nakhlite: a particular sort of rock that started as basaltic magma on Mars. That was a very long time ago: 1,300,000,000 or more years back.

More recently, an impact on Mars sent the Lafayette meteorite into space. About 3,000 years back it fell on Earth, where it was discovered: a little under a century ago.

More than you probably want to know about that sort of rock:

Wet Rocks on Mars

What's exciting about the Lafayette meteorite is what we've learned about its time on Mars. Its cracks and crevices contain clay and carbonates. This piece of rock was in water, where it absorbed carbon dioxide.

Rocks do that all the time here on Earth. Now we've got evidence that rocks on Mars did that recently, geologically speaking: about 625,000,000 years ago. This is a big deal for folks who have been trying to figure out what the Martian atmosphere was like in the Solar system's early years.

It's also evidence that water flowed on Mars within the last 700,000,000 years. Back then, Earth's climate was much colder than today's; and the earliest animals we've found so far, sponge-like critters called Otavia antiqua, were a newish sort of life here.

Even so, that's "recent," compared to the 4,540,000,000 years Earth and Mars have been around. It's quite possible, even probable, that Mars had more water in it's very early eras.

The Case of the Missing Atmosphere

Today's Mars has a very thin atmosphere. Pressure at the surface is about six tenths of one percent of Earth's. That's enough for custom-designed parachutes and dust storms. The latter may make exploring Mars more difficult, it its own way, than exploring nearly-airless places like Earth's moon.

Mars is smaller than Earth, so more of its atmosphere could escape over the four and a half billion years since it formed. Earth-based astronomers confirmed that Mars had an atmosphere, which seemed to be much less substantial than our home world's.

But I don't think most scientists expected so little air on Mars.

One of the questions lately has been: what happened to the Martian atmosphere? It could have 'boiled off,' escaping into space, but although Mars is much smaller than Earth: it isn't that much smaller. Loss to space might be the answer, or not.

Analyses of the Lafayette meteorite adds evidence favoring another explanation.

The Martian atmosphere may still be on Mars: chemically locked in the planet's rocks.

From a 'pure science' viewpoint, this is a valid idea which can be tested. If verified, we have many more questions: starting with exactly how the Martian atmosphere got absorbed.

The Great Martian Land Rush?

We don't have the technology, or the economic incentives, to colonize Mars. Not today, not quite. But we're getting closer.

Folks exploring Mars might be able to haul enough breathable air with them, using existing air recycling tech. That's a lot of material and equipment to haul over interplanetary distances. The job would be easier, and probably cheaper, if explorers could limit supplies to what's needed for deep space: and make their own air on-site.

If the Martian atmosphere is still there, chemically bound to rocks on or near the surface, 'all' explorers have to do is separate air from rocks. There's more to it than that, of course.

The atmosphere of Mars is mostly carbon dioxide now, and probably was in the planet's 'springtime.' The bad news is that we can't breath carbon dioxide. Actually, we can: but it doesn't do us much good. The good news is that carbon dioxide is made of two elements that we need and use: oxygen and carbon.

If explorers can extract breathable oxygen and the carbon that we and the food we eat need from Martian rocks, settlers can too.

The 'great Martian land rush' may not happen for decades, or centuries. But it's looking more like a practical idea and less like "science fiction" every year.

More about Martian carbon dioxide and all that:

(From Nature Communications, used w/o permission)
"Figure 3: Mars' H2O and C2 reservoirs and Amazonian secondary mineral formation."
(Nature Communications )

3. Trees With Gold in their Leaves

"There's Gold in Them Thar Trees"
Charles Q. Choi, LiveScience (October 22, 2013)

"Trees may turn golden for reasons that have nothing to do with the onset of autumn: Eucalyptus trees can hold grains of gold, potentially helping reveal buried treasure, scientists now find.

"Many plants root deep into the Earth, drawing up nutrients and minerals they need for life. Researchers hope this fact could one day help miners unearth gold, especially since discoveries of new deposits of the precious metal have dropped 45 percent over the last 10 years.

"Scientists in Australia focused on eucalyptus trees, since traces of gold are sometimes found in soils surrounding these plants. However, researchers were not certain until now whether trees could actually absorb the precious metal from underground deposits or if the wind simply blew gold dust there from other sites...."
After the initial 'wow, that's interesting' impression, I realized that this story might easily get - misunderstood.

It may be only a matter of time before someone starts selling eucalyptus tree seeds and saplings: implying that planting them will make gold appear under your 'millionaire maker' tree. If whoever tries this is careful about what words they use, their enterprise might be legal.

There may already be made 'contains gold' eucalyptus leaves for sale somewhere, and adverting for products containing eucalyptus oil may play up the 'gold' angle. Advertising doesn't have to be deceptive, and that's another topic.

Eucalyptus Trees, Gold, and Getting a Grip

"...The researchers are not proposing mining these eucalyptus trees for gold, Lintern cautioned. 'The amount of gold in the trees is extremely small. You would need 500 trees or more growing over a gold deposit to have enough gold to make a ring.'

"Instead, eucalyptus trees could help miners identify where deeply buried gold deposits might be located and therefore avoid wasting time, money and resources hunting for the precious metal over vast tracts of land, Lintern said."
(Charles Q. Choi, LiveScience)
Looks like I'm not the only one who thought about possible misunderstanding of this news. Harvesting leaves from that many trees to get under an ounce of gold doesn't seem to make sense, particularly since the gold would have to be sorted out from the leaves.

As 'prospectors,' though, eucalyptus trees make sense.

My guess is that since eucalyptus trees probably don't need gold, and 'excrete' what they absorb from the soil into their leaves. The article doesn't say, but that seems reasonable.

4. Habitable Zones and Kepler-69c: There's More to Learn


(Used w/o permission.)
Artist's rendering of Kepler-69c, as a super-Venus (left) and super-Earth (right).
"Super-Earth Planet Is More Like Super-Venus, NASA Says"
Elizabeth Howell, Space.com 1 (October 21, 2013)

"An alien planet declared a super-Earth by NASA might not be so habitable after all. New measurements flag the planet (called Kepler-69c) as more of a 'super-Venus' that would likely be inhospitable to life.

"The planetary status change is part of a larger struggle over how to define the habitable zone of a star. In recent years, scientists determined that the distance between a planet and its type of star is just one metric that hints at the likelihood of liquid water on its surface, which could fuel life. Other factors include the planet's atmosphere and even how the star behaves.

" 'There are a lot of unanswered questions about habitability,' astrophysicist Lucianne Walkowicz, Kepler science team member at Princeton University, said in a statement...."
"A lot of unanswered questions" is, I think, an enormous understatement. A hundred years ago, the best information we had about other planets in the Solar system came from observations made through Earth's turbulent atmosphere.

Today, we've landed robot explorers on Mars and Venus: and sent others to Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and beyond. Venus is hotter than we thought it would be, Mars has less air than many expected, and we've learned: that there's a very great deal yet to be learned.

Depending on a person's temperament, that could be frustrating, irrelevant, or fascinating. I'm one of the fascinated ones.

Kepler-69 System: Background


(NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech, used w/o permission.)
"The artist's concept depicts Kepler-69c, a super-Earth-size planet in the habitable zone of a star like our sun, located about 2,700 light-years from Earth in the constellation Cygnus.

"Kepler-69c, is 70 percent larger than ... Earth, and is the smallest yet found to orbit in the habitable zone of a sun-like star. Astronomers are uncertain about the composition of Kepler-69c, but its orbit of 242 days around a sun-like star resembles that of our neighboring planet Venus."
(NASA)


(NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech, used w/o permission.)
"The diagram compares the planets of the inner solar system to Kepler-69, a two-planet system about 2,700 light-years from Earth in the constellation Cygnus. The two planets of Kepler-69 orbit a star that belongs to the same class as our sun, called G-type.

"Kepler-69c, is 70 percent larger than the size of Earth, and is the smallest yet found to orbit in the habitable zone of a sun-like star. Astronomers are uncertain about the composition of Kepler-69c, but its orbit of 242 days around a sun-like star resembles that of our neighboring planet Venus. The companion planet, Kepler-69b, is just over twice the size of Earth and whizzes around its star once every 13 days.

"The artistic concepts of the Kepler-69 planets are the result of scientists and artists collaborating to help imagine the appearance of these distant worlds...."
(NASA)

More about the Kepler-69 system:
Related posts:

1 CAUTION: Space.com was listed as an "attack website" October 24, 2013.
Rhis is the third such incident in the last 90 days:
This post contains links to space.com content.

You may chose to click those links, but I do not recommend doing so this week. (October 25, 2013)

The links were safe when I visited them, previous to the latest incident. Although the links remain for your later convenience, I do not recommend using them until several days after the most recent "attack website" listing.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

Sometimes the Answer is "No"

Prayer can be meditation, turning something over in my mind and looking at it from all angles; or formal praise and petition, like the Lord's Prayer. It can be an informal but respectful conversation with the Almighty.

Just knowing about prayer isn't enough. We need to do it. Prayer also needs to be tied to how we live, and how we live:
"He 'prays without ceasing' who unites prayer to works and good works to prayer. Only in this way can we consider as realizable the principle of praying without ceasing."
(Origen, as quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2745)

Deciding Who's In Charge

Prayer doesn't make God do tricks for me. Reciting particular phrases and expecting results is superstition. Catholics aren't allowed to be superstitious, and that's another topic. (Catechism, 2111)

The idea isn't to 'make' God do what I want. Answered prayer starts with changing my heart and mind, so that I want what God wants. (Catechism, 2739)

"Conversation with the Almighty?"

The old joke is right, in a way: God is a great listener, but He doesn't say much.

Having a "conversation with the Almighty" doesn't mean that I think I hear God's Voice. I have never had a 'road to Damascus' experience like the one in Acts 9:3-11.

What I mean by "conversation" is deliberately forming ideas, and sometimes words, directed at God: the same way I'd direct words at any other person. Except that in this case the other Persons are God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit: and that's yet another topic.

I don't expect God to "do tricks for me," but it's okay for me to ask for help or guidance.

Sometimes the answer is "no." As a young man, I was very attracted to a particular young woman. What I didn't know was whether or not I should marry her, so I asked God what I should do. A few days later she told me to keep looking around.

That isn't the quickest response I've had to prayer, but it was prompt: and disappointing in the short run.

In the long run, it helped put me on paths that led me to marrying someone else: and that has worked out very well indeed.

A very quick look at:
  • Prayer
  • "Prayer in Gethsemane"
    Pope Benedict XVI (February 1, 2012)
  • "General Audience"
    Pope Benedict XVI (November 30, 2011)
  • "The Lord's Prayer," 14 – 17
    (St. Cyprian, Treatises (3rd century))
  • The Lord's Prayer
    • Introduction
      (Catechism, 2759-2760)
    • "The summary of the whole Gospel"
      (Catechism, 2761)
    • At the center of Scriptures
      (Catechism, 2762-2764)
    • Overview
      (Catechism, 2765-2766)
    • The prayer of the Church
      (Catechism, 2767-2772)
    • "Our Father"
      (Catechism, 2777-2796)
    • The seven petitions
      (Catechism, 2803-2854)
Related posts:

Friday, October 18, 2013

Oxygen, Life, and Autocells

Oxygen in another planet's atmosphere might not come from plants, and life on Earth may have started on Jupiter, of all places:
  1. Oxygen: From Plants Or Sunlight
  2. Life's Origins: Autocells?

What If We're Not Alone?

It's not likely, but next week someone might find clear, unequivocal, solid evidence that life exists on other planets.

If that happened, I'm pretty sure that some folks would be excited, others incredulous, and others upset. I'd be in the first group.

Finding people who aren't human would be even better: or worse, depending on who you ask.

I've read and heard that discovering extraterrestrial life would radically change our view of life, the universe, and everything. How true that is probably depends on who you look at.

Knowledge and Uncertainty

Faced with new information, flat-out denial is an option.

Some folks may decide that news of life on another planet is a plot: to sell newspapers; promote immorality; whatever. I don't think many will take that option, but I'm also pretty sure that folks who will not believe what's real will want, and get, attention.

Others may say that because life exists on other worlds, God can't exist. That seems as goofy as saying that God isn't there because the universe is big and old: or that God must have made a universe that's small and young because that's what Ussher said.

Me? I've been through a false alarm, back in 1996 when some scientists said they'd found fossilized microbes in a Martian meteorite. The last I heard, there's still debate over whether we're looking at nanobacteria smaller than anything on Earth: or odd mineral deposits.

That ongoing discussion didn't shatter my faith in science or anything else. Tiny features in the ALH 84001 meteorite could be evidence of extraterrestrial life, or not. If they are fossils of living creatures, they're too different from anything we're familiar with to be certain.

Their size notwithstanding, the things look too much like terrestrial microbes for me to think that NASA's David McKay is a crackpot.

It's easier when something is obviously true, or patently false. That's not always the case, and I think it's prudent to accept uncertainty as a fact of life.

Space Aliens

Looking back on attitudes that sold tickets to Close Encounters of the Third Kind, some folks might see the space aliens as celestial saviors. That seems goofy, too. On a serious note, idolatry is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2113)

In the unlikely event that an alien spaceship lands on the White House lawn tomorrow, I'm pretty sure that we won't experience something like either "Earth vs. the Flying Saucers" or "The Day the Earth Stood Still." And that's another topic.

More of my take on science, life, and people:

1. Oxygen: From Plants Or Sunlight


(From Carnegie Institution for Science, via Space.com, used w/o permission.)
"This graphic shows the orbits of the alien planet GJ 667Cc, which takes about 28 days to orbit its parent star. The orbits of other potential planets in the system are also shown."
"Life on Alien Planets Trickier to Find Than Previously Thought"
Miriam Kramer, Space.com (October 7, 2013)

" Finding alien life on habitable planets around distant stars may be harder to identify than scientists have previously thought, a new study suggests.

"The search for inhabited and habitable exoplanets is focused on M dwarf stars - stars that are smaller than the sun but make up more than 75 percent of the stars in the sun's vicinity, scientists have said.

"But these small stars have different ultraviolet properties from the sun, however, which could further complicate the search for alien life, researchers with the new study, which was unveiled today (Oct. 7)...."
Scientists have learned that oxygen in a planet's atmosphere may come from the local equivalent of plants: or not. This makes looking for life in the universe trickier, since up to now oxygen in a planet's atmosphere was seen as a fairly certain sign that plants lived there.

Happily, we learned this before someone found a lifeless planet with oxygenated air. That would have been exciting, but also a huge disappointment as researchers learned where the oxygen came from.

Illustrations, Abbreviations, and Assumptions

Including a graphic that shows orbits of planets circling GJ677C in this article is a good idea.

Assuming that everyone will understand what the abbreviations in the graphic mean: maybe not so much. Quite a few folks probably recognized "CO2" as "carbon dioxide" immediately. Most of us grew up with carbon dioxide extinguishers in the hallways of many buildings.

"HZ" probably stands for "Habitable Zone," since "Hertz" doesn't make much sense in this context. Besides, that acronym is spelled Hz."

Small Stars, (Comparatively) Big Flares

"...'Before we can claim the discovery of life on exoplanets, we have to examine the stars harboring these planets more carefully,' study leader Feng Tian, a professor at the Center for Earth System Science at Tsinghua University in Beijing, China, said in a statement. He presented the research today in Denver, Colo., at the 45th annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society's Division for Planetary Sciences.

"The buildup of high levels of oxygen in the atmosphere of an exoplanet is the most promising indicatory for life on alien planets, officials from Tsinghua University said. The new study shows that oxygen can still build up in the atmospheres of lifeless planets, they added.

"Feng Tian and his research team used the idea of a hypothetical habitable planet orbiting GJ 876 to test this in an earlier study. 'In this case the atmosphere of a lifeless planet can be close to that of the Earth's 2.2 billion years ago, after the so called Great Oxidation Event in Earth's geological history,' he said...."
(Miriam Kramer, Space.com (October 7, 2013))
These researchers discovered at least one way that local sunlight could break compounds in an exoplanet's atmosphere apart, producing oxygen without the help of plants.

The process is the same sort of thing that produces ozone in Earth's atmosphere.

I'm not terribly surprised that these folks are the first to study what ultraviolet (UV) light from red dwarf starts does to a planet's atmosphere. Red dwarfs, spectral class M stars, are smaller and cooler than our star. On average, their sunlight has more red and infrared light, and less blue and ultraviolet than our star's.

That's "on average," though. Many red dwarfs also produce flares, like our star. The difference is that red dwarf stars are much dimmer than our sun, but their flares aren't. For example, flares on Proxima Centauri emit about as much X-ray radiation as the sun's.

We didn't notice solar flares until 1859, and they didn't matter much to us until we started building large power grids and using radio for communication.

A planet close enough to a red dwarf to have Earth-like temperatures would be close enough to experience the star's flares: up close and personal. Besides X-rays, these flares can emit UV light, which could produce oxygen in the planet's atmosphere.

Sunlight on Other Planets

A lifeless Earth-size planet in a star's habitable zone might easily have water, methane, and carbon dioxide (H2O, CH4, and CO2) in its atmosphere. Far-ultraviolet light breaks these compounds apart. That reaction releases oxygen, since two of them, H2O and CO2, contain oxygen.

A similar process changes the sort of oxygen we breathe, O2, into two O1, which promptly latch onto O2, making O3, which splits into, O2 and O1, and the dance goes on. The ozone-oxygen cycle has most likely been going on since Earth's atmosphere had enough oxygen.

Photosynthesis: Good News, Bad News

An atmosphere similar to Earth's 2,200,000,000 years back wouldn't make the place habitable by humans. Our planet's air apparently had roughly a tenth the percentage of oxygen it does today for a long time after the Great Oxygenation Event.

Oxygen is poison to some microcritters. Scientists describe them with the distinctly un-catchy phrase "obligate anerobes." Some microorganisms of that sort survive, but these days they're limited to oxygen-free environments.

There's very good evidence that cyanobacteria started producing oxygen about 200,000,000 years before the Great Oxidation Event. Oxygen from these microorganisms didn't have a chance to reach the atmosphere. It combined with iron, organic matter, or anything else dissolved in Earth's ocean that reacts with oxygen.

Eventually, with much less stuff to react with in the water, oxygen from cyanobactera got dumped into Earth's atmosphere. Good news for us, not so much for obligate anerobes.

More about:

2. Life's Origins: Autocells?


(From Van Dyke 1982, An Album of Fluid Motion, via Astrobiology Magazine, used w/o permission.)
"Convection caused by heating will generate a pattern of hexagons in a thin film of oil, showing that order can be brought to a system."
"Did Autocells Lead to Life?"
Amanda Doyle, Astrobiology Magazine (September 23, 2013)

"The origin of life on Earth is still a hotly-debated topic. There are many different theories on how life was kick-started, as well as various experiments underway attempting to understand the processes involved. For example, a reverse engineering approach can be used by stripping away cells until the simplest possible system is left. However, evolution has ultimately hampered our understanding of life's origins as it has washed away the traces of the first forms of life, making it impossible to retrace life's early steps. This means that even the simple systems left after the reverse engineering approach are still too complicated to bear a resemblance to the first forms of life.

"Life must have started simply; it couldn't be created from a complicated group of molecules already working together. There had to a step prior to this in which these molecules themselves were created. Terrence Deacon, of the University of California Berkeley, outlined in a recent talk how this step could have taken place...."
I agree that life "started simply," as the article says.

Life might have started abruptly, going straight from no energy and matter at all to Earth's current roster of biomes: from arctic wastes to tropical rainforests. But it's become increasingly obvious that this universe is "in a state of journeying."

I've given my take on God, change, and secondary causes before:

Evolution and Hungry Critters

Amanda Doyle is right about evolution hampering our efforts to understand how life started. "Reverse engineering" of today's life tells us quite a bit, but we're studying creatures that have been changing for 3,600,000,000 years. Chemical machinery inside our cells is remarkably modular, and that's almost another topic.

After at least three and two thirds billion years, not only has life changed a great deal: living creatures have eaten and recycled nearly all physical evidence of earlier eras. Still more topics:

Heat, - - -

"Life needs order

"A tricky challenge that must be overcome before life can form is that order must be generated. However, this is not as simple as it sounds because the laws of physics state that things will naturally descend into a state of disorder. For example, a book placed precariously on the edge of a shelf will probably fall - thus creating disorder - but it is highly unlikely to create order by picking itself up again.

"Order can still be created locally, even when the overall system tends to go towards disorder. Pushing heat through a system can organize it, for example a regular pattern of hexagons is created when a thin layer of oil is heated evenly to form Benard convection cells...."
(Amanda Doyle, Astrobiology Magazine)
"Things will naturally descend into a state of disorder" is true, and it is a law of physics called entropy. More specifically, it's an important part of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics.

We see an effect of entropy when an ice cube warms up as the drink it's in cools.

I'm not at all convinced that entropy applies to biological evolution. It's a very "scientific" word, though.

What's interesting, and may be important, that "pushing heat through a system can organize it." That's related to entropy, in that Bénard convection cells happen when energy 'moves' through a system on its way to thermodynamic equilibrium.

- - - Catalysts and Self-Packing Molecules


(From Terrence Deacon, via Astrobiology Magazine, used w/o permission.)
"The catalysts could form enough molecules that self assembly occurs, creating a barrier around the catalysts so that they don't disperse."
"...If the container surrounding the catalysts becomes shattered, the catalysts will spill out. All is not lost, however, because they will just create another container for themselves. If the catalysts spread apart a little after the breakage, it's possible that multiple systems could then be created meaning they can effectively 'reproduce'.

"These autogenic 'cells', or autocells, are still not living cells in the traditional sense because they still lacks processes that are essential for life...."
(Amanda Doyle, Astrobiology Magazine)
I see self-assembling molecules as another fascinating example of exquisite design built into the universe. Others might see them as a threat to their faith, or as proof that God doesn't exist.

I don't hope to convince zealots. I do, however, see no problem with believing that a rational, orderly God created a rational, orderly universe.

Moving along.

Jupiter, Mars, and Life on Earth


(From NASA, via Astrobiology Magazine, used w/o permission.)
"The famous Martian meteorite ALH 84001 contains a 'fossil' that was ruled out as life because of its small size, however it could still be an autocell - a precursor to life."
"...A helping hand from the gas giants

"A huge problem lies in the fact that the autogenic process is unlikely to start on a planet such as the prebiotic Earth, as the polymers needed for life will break down in water. However, if we take our chemistry experiment to a gas giant like Jupiter, the high levels of methane and ammonia will produce hydrogen cyanide polymers. These polymers can only be produced in environments without water and have a 'backbone' identical to proteins, but with different side chains. These are called polyamidines.

"If these polyamidines hitched a ride to the Earth in earlier epochs when the Earth was being bombarded by outer Solar System material, they would come into contact with water. However, these particular polymers will resist being broken down for some time. Instead, they replace their side chains with the carbohydrates characteristic of proteins.

"In this way, they create partial proteins, and this might be a way that autogenesis based on proteins began on the early Earth. The inner planets also have the advantage of containing phosphorous, sulfur and iron which are unavailable in the outer planets, and these metals speed up catalysis...."
(Amanda Doyle, Astrobiology Magazine)
Maybe life on Earth couldn't have started without a chemical assist from Jupiter. Terrence Deacon's idea isn't as preposterous as it might seem. We've found quite a few meteorites that came from Mars, including that famous 'they're too small to be microbes' one.

It's quite possible, even likely, that stuff from Jupiter and other planets got splashed into space by large impacts in the Solar System's youth and eventually fell on Earth.

If this is, as Terrence Deacon says, the only way life could have started on Earth: we can narrow the search for life in the universe quite a bit.

I'm not entirely convinced, but this is a fascinating bit of research.

Related posts:

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Life in the Universe, God, and Getting a Grip

I've noticed two basic schools of thought about life on other planets.

On the one hand are folks who think life can and probably does exist throughout the universe, wherever conditions permit.

On the other are those who seem to think that life on Earth is wildly unlikely, and probably doesn't exist anywhere else.

Back in 2004, someone wrote a book which came close to claiming that life couldn't have started, much less survived, on Earth. I'm exaggerating, but not by much. I still have a copy. It was well-written, with reasoning based on a particular selection of facts.

The author may be right, or not.

Increasingly Informed Speculation

We don't know how common life is: yet.

Folks who support the 'crowded universe' school, and those who think we're alone, have been debating at least since 1277, when the Church said that Catholics must not claim that other worlds cannot exist.

Come to think of it, the 'alone' school said they were right because Aristotle didn't think there were other worlds, about two dozen centuries back now. This debate has been going on for a long time.

We've learned quite a bit in the last few decades. Other planets are much less like Earth than some imagined, but we live in a galaxy where billions of worlds circle other stars.

Many stories from the golden age of science fiction were wildly wrong. Tales of thriving high-tech civilizations of Martians, colorfully weird natives of Venus, and an assortment of other intelligent life living on the outer planets and/or their moons are still entertaining: but they are now fantasy, not science.


(Frank R. Paul, from the collection of Fabio Feminò, via Tales of Future Past, David S. Zondy, used w/o permission)
"...The idea that Mars was alive was a perfectly respectable position in the '30s. Even scientists who declared Mars a 'dead' planet admitted that there were probably mosses and lichens to be found...."
(Mars, Tales of Future Past)

Faith and Reason, Religion and Science

Someday my native culture may outgrow the notion that faith is incompatible with reason, and that science opposes religion.

That hasn't happened yet. I still stumble into folks wrangling over whether God agrees with a 17th century Calvinist, or doesn't exist because life changes.

I don't agree with either side.

Getting a Grip

As a Catholic, I must accept the Bible as Sacred Scripture.1 That does not mean that I must ignore facts, stop thinking, or assume that the first and second chapters of Genesis are from a science textbook.

We live in a vast, ancient, and evolving creation. Telling God that we disapprove does not make sense. Admiring the Almighty's work does.2

Humans are animals: but we are more than just animals. This is okay.3

We knew that God made our bodies from the stuff of this creation. Now we know more about that creative act. This is okay, too.4

I've been over this sort of thing before:

1 A ten-point list "for fruitful Scripture reading:"
  • "Understanding the Bible"
    Mary Elizabeth Sperry, Associate Director for Utilization of the New American Bible, USCCB
2 We live in a vast, ancient, and evolving creation. Telling God that we disapprove does not make sense. Admiring the Almighty's work does.
"The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. With Solomon they can say: 'It is he who gave me unerring knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements. . . for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me.'121"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 283)
3 Humans are different. This is okay.
"...While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution..."
("Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God," International Theological Commission, 63. (July 23, 2004))
4 We knew that God made our bodies from the stuff of this creation. Now we know more about that creative act. This is okay, too.
"...In modern times the theory of evolution has raised a special difficulty against the revealed doctrine about the creation of man as a being composed of soul and body. With their own methods, many natural scientists study the problem of the origin of human life on earth. Some maintain, contrary to other colleagues of theirs, not only the existence of a link between man and the ensemble of nature, but also his derivation from the higher animal species. This problem has occupied scientists since the last century and involves vast layers of public opinion.

"The reply of the Magisterium was offered in the encyclical Humani Generis of Pius XII in 1950. In it we read: 'The magisterium of the Church is not opposed to the theory of evolution being the object of investigation and discussion among experts. Here the theory of evolution is understood as an investigation of the origin of the human body from pre-existing living matter, for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold firmly that souls are created immediately by God...' (DS 3896).

"It can therefore be said that, from the viewpoint of the doctrine of the faith, there are no difficulties in explaining the origin of man in regard to the body, by means of the theory of evolution. But it must be added that this hypothesis proposes only a probability, not a scientific certainty. However, the doctrine of faith invariably affirms that man's spiritual soul is created directly by God. According to the hypothesis mentioned, it is possible that the human body, following the order impressed by the Creator on the energies of life, could have been gradually prepared in the forms of antecedent living beings. However, the human soul, on which man's humanity definitively depends, cannot emerge from matter, since the soul is of a spiritual nature...."
("Man Is a Spiritual and Corporeal Being," John Paul II (April 16, 1986))

Sunday, October 13, 2013

Finding Gratitude

Readings for the 28th Sunday in Ordinary Time:

28th Sunday in Ordinary Time

By Deacon Lawrence N. Kaas
October 13, 2013

The setting for today's story about Naaman the Syrian takes place between the borders of Galilee and Samaria and is really a fitting location and involving the Jews and Samaritans. For you see the land itself is very much a part of this biblical drama.

You may well remember the story of Naaman not recorded this morning but is covered in earlier passages of the same book of Kings where we learn he was a commander in the Army of the king of Aram.

This Naaman had leprosy and if you remember that in that day leprosy was really an opportunity to anticipate your own death for there was no cure. A little girl captured from the land of Israel encouraged her master to seek healing in the land of Israel.

From there we pick up the story in today's readings from the second book of Kings, he is told by an aid of the prophet to plunge into the Jordan seven times and his flesh would be healed. Upset at the lack of attention, I guess, he said are not the rivers of Damascus, the Abana and the Pharpar, better than all of the waters of Israel, could not I wash in them and be cleansed? As the story goes, he leaves angry.

But once again encouraged by his own people he does what the prophet has commanded and washes in the Jordan and is cleansed. In much gratitude now, he returns to the prophet Elisha to offer a gift. Even after some insistence Elisha turns down the gift. But here's a little twist in the story that needs a little investigating to understand. For he asks for two mule-loads of earth.

Why? As they believed in those days, gods were not transferable from one nation to another or one people to another. Naaman asks for these two mule loads of earth that he could take back to his own country so as build on it an altar upon which to offer holocausts or sacrifice to no other God than to the God of Elisa. A story of gratitude.

We look now to the story of the 10 lepers found in our Gospel reading for today. Leprosy in that day was so horrible a disease that people who had leprosy were ousted from the community they could not come within say 8 to 10 feet, even of family members. And in the case of a windy day even required even to stay further away, so afraid where they of catching this, so horrible disease of leprosy.

As the story is recorded for us today we hear the 10 lepers petitioning Christ, saying, "Jesus, Master! Have pity on us!" Jesus tells them that they must go to the priest and show themselves because until they do they really cannot enter back into society. Nine, did as they were told but one, we are told, was a Samaritan. So! you may wonder, why is that such a big deal. Will first of all, the Jews had nothing to do with Samaritans, but in this story Jesus is telling them and us that the Samaritans, too, are to receive God's mercy. The key to this story is the gratitude of the one and the ingratitude of the nine.

I want to pose a question for you today and that is concerning your gratitude to Almighty God for what he has given you and is still giving you every day of your life? Maybe I should even clarify that question by asking you point-blank why are you here today? Why do you come back every week and celebrate the Mass with our priest, how would you answer that? Would you say that you come regular because the church obliges you to? Or is it the command to keep Holy the Sabbath? Some may respond that they want to offer a good example to their children. Others may say well it's become a habit.

Still others look upon their weekly worship as an expression of faith, a spiritual oasis if you will, a place to fuel up for the week ahead. For many of us, the words of Vatican II come quickly to mind: "The liturgy is the summit toward which the activities of the Church is directed and the font from which all its power flows. The goal of apostolic endeavor is that all who are made Suns and Daughters of God by faith and baptism should come together to praise God in the midst of the church, to take part in the sacrifice and eat the Lord's supper."

If in much gratitude to Almighty God for all that he has given us, including life, should we not spend at least one hour per week in giving thanks. We have the opportunity in every Eucharistic encounter to be transformed by God and by grace. We are chosen not just to pray, pray and obey, but to be so in love with Jesus and so passionate about the Gospel that we cannot help but Glorify God, fall at Jesus' feet and thank him. Is not this what keeps bringing us back to the One who never stops giving: loving, is compassionate, forgiving, and each time we returned Jesus, will assure us," stand up and go, your faith has saved you." Gratitude, is the key, do you really understand what God has done for you? If you are really, steeped in much gratitude to Almighty God for all that is done for you how can you stay away?

You will note: that for the most part I am back with you. I had a rough go of eight days in the hospital and many more days in recovery and I'm still not sure about the recovery part but may be being almost 80 years old has something do with that as well, don't you suppose. Being as how our theme for this homily is gratitude I wish to express my gratitude to all of you for your prayers and your concerns and especially those doctors and nurses who cared for me those eight days and on going, because without their tender loving care I probably wouldn't be here today. And I want to say a special thank you to the lady who cleaned my bedroom after a night doing battle with my inability to stand which turned out to be the beginning of this whole episode. God bless you all and thank you I promise to keep you in my prayers.

Be good, be Holy, Preach the Gospel always and if necessary use words.

'Thank you' to Deacon Kaas, for letting me post his reflection here.

More reflections:
Somewhat-related posts:

Truth Cannot Contradict Truth

What is wrong with this picture?


(From TrollArt.com, via Google Developers, Google+, used w/o permission.)

From my point of view, it's the live ammonite in the pickup and pterosaur flying out of a cliff face. Neither has been around for about 65,000,000 years. That's quibbling, though.

I think most folks recognize fanciful embellishments: including folks who are still in elementary and high school. Sometimes a little playfulness makes a picture more memorable.

That's why this cartoon is the sort of illustration I'd like to see in science textbooks. It's a clear illustration of a fairly complicated set of data.

Errors, Spelling and Otherwise

That's my point of view. I'm a Christian with a lively interest in God's creation, and a willingness to take reality "as is."

Not everyone shares these views. The third, sixth, and seventh comments responding to a post on Google+ reflect two all-too-common ways of thinking:
#3
"Two errors in posted image:
1) The dates are significantly too long ago.
2) The Flood, which caused the immediate burial of dinosaurs, etc needed for good quality Fossilization, is absent.
"

#5
"Not sure if serious or trolling.."

#6
"Please cite the Bible as your source, so that everyone can be keenly aware you have made no distinction between mythology and science, and thereby safely ignore you."

#7
"As a beliver in the one true God who created all things, who is over all things even science, and logic....."
(Google Developers post, Google+ (October 11, 2013))
The "Two errors" comment might be trolling. The seventh, where "believer" is misspelled, is almost certainly an honest expression of belief. So, I think, is the one that ends with "safely ignore you."

Pouring Oil on Troubled Fires

My contribution, added much later, was "Next thing you know, someone will claim that the sky doesn't keep the upper waters from flooding us."

By then the discussion of "mythology and science" had marched down a well-worn path.

Followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster criticized the "wild and uncanny ignorance" of those who believe in the "god guy."

The other side said that Earth had to be as old as they think it is because "the Bible is God's word and not the work of fallible people, we know it is correct."

The conversation was fairly coherent, as such things go.

Emotions tend to run wild when folks who passionately believe that religion is nonsense argue with folks equally convinced that God agrees with a 17th century Calvinist.

Perhaps I'm being unfair: or, not.

My hope was that someone would see my comment and get curious about my beliefs. Besides, pouring oil on troubled fires occasionally pushes back the darkness.

Transpacific Flights and Mesopotamian Cosmology


(From "The Three-Story Universe," © N. F. Gier, God, Reason, and the Evangelicals (1987), via Nick Gier, University of Idaho, used w/o permission.)

Oddly enough, folks who sincerely believe that Earth didn't exist before 4004 B.C. don't seem troubled by transpacific airline flights and other evidence of a spherical Earth.

If the imagery we find in the Bible was literally true, as read by a post-Victorian American, we'd be living between "the waters beneath the earth" and "the flood waters stored on high." (Genesis 1:7; Exodus 20:41 Samuel 2:8; Job 9:6-7; Job 26:11; Psalms 33:7; 75:4; Sirach 43:10)

I knew one fellow who said that our sun goes around Earth, not the other way around: because the Bible says so. (Joshua 10:12-13) Even he didn't seem to have trouble with thinking that Earth is spherical.

I suppose implications of around-the-world cruises and international long distance telephone service1 made believing in a flat Earth too much for all but the most - devout?

Biblical imagery uses ideas from ancient Mespotamian cosmology. Back then, many folks assumed that the ground we walk on rested on huge pillars, with vast expanses of water beyond the deepest wells and on the other side of the sky.

I don't think Psalm 150:1 is 'mere poetry.' On the other hand, my faith wasn't shattered when Voyager 1 didn't crash into a celestial dome on its way to interstellar space.

Reading the Bible: Often

Nearly two dozen centuries back, a chap named Eratosthenes observed the sun's angle at noon on the summer solstice and calculated Earth's circumference. His results weren't entirely accurate, but pretty good for a rough approximation.

Since then, we've learned that the universe is vast and ancient on scales far beyond those measured by Eratosthenes. I don't mind. If anything, the overwhelming scale of creation increases my awe of the Creator.

My willingness to say that Ussher was wrong could brand me as one of the "disrespectful atheists." I'm not, but I do not expect the Bible to follow American, or even Western, cultural norms.

I take the Bible very seriously. As a Catholic, I have to. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 101-133)

Believing that the Bible is the Word of God is literally Catholicism 101. Since I can't believe that God is a liar, I think that what's in the Bible is true.

But since I also believe that God isn't an American, I don't have to assume that the Bible was written by someone with my culture's profound lack of appreciation for metaphor.

I've written about this before:
We're expected to read the Bible, often:
"The Church 'forcefully and specifically exhorts all the Christian faithful. . . to learn the surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ, by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures. Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.'112"
(Catechism, 133)
If that's not what you've heard, I'm not surprised: and that's another topic.

More about Sacred Scripture, what it is and what it isn't:
  • "Understanding the Bible"
    Mary Elizabeth Sperry, Associate Director for Utilization of the New American Bible, USCCB

Why Bother With Science?

In the last several weeks, I've written about evolution, exobiology, exoplanets, fusion reactor research, meteor craters that are 35,000,000 years old and older, a fish that's been dead for 419,000,000 years, and a submerged mountain in the Pacific Ocean.2

Why all the stuff about science and technology in a 'religious' blog?

I am fascinated and delighted by what we're learning about God's creation. I enjoy sharing what I learn: even if — particularly if — it's not what my high school science textbooks said.

The goofy notion that science is against religion has been fashionable on and off since around the middle of the 19th century. I can see why folks who don't want God to exist sometimes claim that religion is an illogical set of 'unscientific' superstitions.

What's remarkable, and sad, is that many Christians say roughly the same thing: using different terms and invoking verses like 2 Timothy 2:15.

My faith doesn't depend on an interest in science, but it's not threatened by knowledge.

I think God exists, and created everything. I am also quite certain that God knows more than folks who lived more than a thousand years ago: or anyone living today.

Honest study of this universe cannot get in the way of faith. Since God created everything, including the physical world, nothing we learn about this creation can interfere with faith. (Catechism, 159)


(image courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech)
"Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth."
(Dei Filius (1870), quoted in Catechism, 159)
Related posts:

1 "International long distance telephone service?!" Think about it: anyone calling someone in another country either knows about time zones before dialing; or learns by experience.

2 I routinely update a link list of 'science' posts:

Like it? Pin it, Plus it, - - -

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America Amoris Laetitia angels animals annulment Annunciation anti-catholicism Antichrist apocalyptic ideas apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority balance and moderation baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs brain Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism change happens charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climate change climatology cloning comets common good common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion Corpus Christi cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Crucifixion Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression designer babies despair detachment devotion discipline disease diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Epiphany Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus fear of the Lord fiction Final Judgment First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geoengineering geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude great commission guest post guilt Haiti Halloween happiness hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception immigrants in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language Last Judgment last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magi magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage martyrs Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance penitence Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth positive law poverty prayer predestination presumption pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quantum entanglement quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance Resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes SETI sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transfiguration Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom universal destination of goods vacation Vatican Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war warp drive theory wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news:

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.