Life in my own hands

I took my life into my own hands last Saturday, and went to Target. I was there fairly early, which I think was the sole reason for my survival, but it was still touch and go. During my escape I found myself in line behind a woman writing a check, and not just writing a check but writing a check to supplement a gift card. The gift card did not cover the cost of her goods, and in a vain attempt to accelerate the process she performed some mental math and wrote the check before the difference had been calculated. The computer disagreed with her about how much the check should be worth, so the cashier called a manager to find out if they could give the woman three dollars back. The manager was not immediately available, and after waiting long enough for the manager to begin making her way toward us, the woman wrote another check for the proper amount.

I will be the first to admit that watching this spectacle was like watching someone tell a very long, humorless joke, complete with nervous laughter, but with the added pain of knowing that I could not leave that place of quiet chaos until the joke was finished. However, I was still a little surprised when I suddenly heard very audible expletives being muttered behind me. The man just a person back from me apparently found the joke to be not only humorless, but cause for enough anger to growl some words generally reserved for times much more desperate than these. As I say, I was a little taken aback by this and so shared my experience with my wife later that day. She said that she had heard a man in a coffee shop tell another man that he gets angry this time of year because his wife always "outdoes" him in their gift exchange.

Now, I'm not one who would claim to be capable of explaining the "reason for the season", at least not the reason for America's season, with all of her very confusing Santa, Things, Jesus, Economy, Love, Objectors messaging. But, I think it would be safe to say that audibly cursing in Target and being angry with your wife for "outdoing" you do not fall into anything loosely defined as the "reason".

It would be pretty easy to finish up here with a little admonition to remember the spirit of Christmas over the next few days (and from what I understand the spirit of Christmas to be, that's probably a fine idea), but I think I'm going to be so bold as to suggest that we define that a little. Let's take the opportunity over the next few days to discover (or re-discover) those things which last forever; our relationships with people. After all, what was the original Christmas greeting if not a joyful proclamation of the value of every human life? So, should you somehow find yourself in a large retail store, or (may you have strength) at the mall on the evening of the twenty-fourth and you feel tensions are becoming too high, I would encourage you to jump up onto the nearest checkout counter or bench and shout, "Joy in heaven, and on earth, peace and goodwill toward everyone!" It's a wonderful thing to hear, and who knows, maybe it will lead to a scene from a musical...which I for one would really like to see.

A little closer

We just returned from a very big trip. At least, it felt really big; and I guess in terms of miles traveled and the difference between the world we live in and the one we entered, it was in fact quite big. A group of us traveled to Southeast Asia with the goal of bringing a little Christmas cheer to people who might not find it so easy to be cheerful, mainly kids who live on the street or in an orphanage of some variety. Very kind people donated money to our trip, both for our travel costs as well as for gifts and activities we could provide for the children. The generosity of these people was sincerely overwhelming and we are very grateful for their wonderful hearts. In case you're curious, the trip was amazing.

But I'm not quite ready to write about most of my experiences there; about the kids who live at the garbage dump, the detention facility where the Pol Pot regime imprisoned, tortured and murdered hundreds of their countrymen (and millions across the country), the beggars who have lost limbs to landmines, spirit houses that very poor people buy because they believe it will keep evil spirits out of their home, and the kids on the street who have only other kids to watch over and protect them. No, I'm not ready because those are very hard things and the jet-lag is severe.

However, I will say I am honored and privileged to have been a part of this adventure. I am honored to have been able to, with the incredible assistance of others help make kids laugh and smile, and perhaps bring them a little hope in some cases. I am privileged because having seen this other world affords me the invaluable opportunity of adjusting mine just a little closer to real.

A whole lot bigger

Sitting in a waiting room the other day, I picked up a Time magazine. I don't really mind waiting rooms because they're relaxing, quite, and give me a chance to catch up on my pop-publication reading. The really annoying part of the doctor visit is when they move me from the cozy waiting room with good entertainment, to the little exam room without a window or anything decent to read, and then proceed to make me wait there. I would really much prefer if they just let me do all the waiting in the room built and named for doing so, instead of using a completely inappropriate place for the activity.

But, as I was saying, I picked up Time. They had a really fascinating article in which they documented a debate between a top atheist scientist (Richard Dawkins) and a top Christian scientist (Francis Collins). It was fairly short for the topic at hand, but a very good read none the less. Both of the men in the article are clearly brilliant and at the top of their profession, but one happens to attribute some of the inexplicable to the God of Judeo/Christian tradition, and the other does not. Reading the article would not, I don't believe bring anyone to move from one camp to the other. That is, a Christian reading the article would probably agree with the statements made by the Christian scientist as being perfectly logical and feasible, which they would be for a Christian, while an atheist would likely find the atheist's position more probable and legitimate.

However, a statement at the end of the article was very striking. Dawkins is explaining that he doesn't necessarily rule out any sort of intelligent design, he just doesn't buy into the god put forth in traditional Christianity as being that designer. He postulates that it could be the god of some other planet, or aliens, or something entirely different, and then he says, "If there is a God, it's going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed." Yes.

To believe that one can understand God is to remove the real, powerful, vibrant romance and adventure of this life. Is one capable of knowing God? Absolutely; God himself promised us that. But, to suggest that we might actually understand him will drive people to either confused despair or crushing boredom, depending on whether they realize they will never reach the supposed goal, or falsely believe they reached it long ago. No, Dawkins is right; God is a whole lot bigger than that. Catching little glimpses of that incomprehensible size and majesty is what makes this life an honor and a pleasure to live.

Evangelical Agnostic

Sometimes I listen to this streaming radio station by the name of RadioIO, and specifically the acoustic section. It's cool because they play a bunch of music I don't hear anywhere else, and it's all acoustic, which is pretty rare. It's not so cool because they play these bizarre ads that say things like, "The odds of your child being in a Broadway show: 1 in 3400. The odds of your child developing autism: 1 in 167", and then go on to talk about autism awareness, or something. I always get so freaked out by the first part of the ad that I never hear what I'm supposed to do about the situation. They have other fun ones about the dangers of mercury poisoning, and how last year Americans spent more than they saved for the first time since the Great Depression; you know, topics that don't quite make it into the NBC advertising slots. The radio station offers commercial free programming for a fee, so I have my suspicions that the ads are designed to both convey information, and drive you toward paying to get rid of them. I'm seriously considering just paying the money.

The other day I heard a song on this station that I think was titled "Happy New Year", by Todd Snider. It was kind of a clever little, tongue-in-cheek commentary on the singer's avid agnosticism, which he labeled as evangelical agnosticism, which in itself is a humorous idea. But, one part of the song struck me as particularly telling, and I think it was the evangelical part. The lyrics are, "i believe this is where i wanna stick to what i know, which is nothing you know, nothing for sure". This is an important statement because it (as music and poetry often do) expresses the feelings of the current culture and age, and there's a good reason for these feelings. Saying something like this makes everyone feel all warm and fuzzy, like they just got an answer correct in front of the class. It makes them feel like that because it implies that there is no right answer, so whatever they say is fine. So now we've got all kinds of "tolerance" floating around us like a soothing song. Above all, I believe humans are driven by a desire to feel they're okay, and the sentiment that we can't really know anything for sure, so whatever anyone believes as their truth is just that, goes a long way in providing the security for which people are looking.

But, are we sure we can't know anything for sure? If so, then we are sure of at least one thing, which means that it is possible to know something for sure. Of course if we aren't sure we can't know anything for sure, then it is again possible that we might know something for sure. My point here is that while statements like the one above are comforting in their apparent humility and inclusion, they are actually empty and a little silly at their foundation. Our culture wants to keep having conversations about how there really is no absolute right, or truth, when that statement itself is an absolute. So, I propose we abandon the idea that we can't discover the truth and just have an honest conversation about what we believe and why. Maybe then everyone will be a little more evangelic and we can actually have some decent discussions.

Take heart

I have the impression at times that a fair amount of people feel the world should be just. No one has actually come right out and said this to me in plain English, but I certainly perceive that to be the case based on their reaction to events appearing to be unjust. Actually, I also believe the world should be just. The rub is I know it's not. This is interesting to me because at no time in history have humans experienced a natural environment where justice is the predominant outcome, and it makes me wonder where we got the idea that it should be. It's really as if the concept came from another reality altogether.

One particular brand of injustice seems to bother people very much, and this is when bad things happen to good people, and to a slightly lesser extent, when good things happen to bad people. I can still remember an analogy one of my high school teachers used to help us remember that two negative numbers multiplied together produce a positive number; when a bad thing happens to a bad person, that's a good thing. I still remember this for a reason.

I believe we are particularly bothered by this occurrence of injustice for the simple reason that we'd like to believe we have the power to remove bad things from our life. Not that we necessarily want to make all the sacrifices associated with being a good person (I mean who really wants to be nice all the time, and quit swearing, and go to church every Sunday morning), but that if we were to do those things we would be rewarded with some sort of force field around our lives. After all, if we're going to go to all that trouble to be good, we're entitled to something for it.

But let's face it, we can't really be good. We might never show any anger or aggression, but we can't stop ourselves from feeling bitterness or resentment, or maybe even worse from feeling numb. We might be able to train ourselves not to swear, but we'd have a hard time not cursing someone silently at some point. And we can certainly make a habit of going to church on Sundays, but there's nothing fundamentally different about a church building and a movie theatre or place of business. To try to manufacture this type of "good" is not only tiring and frustrating, it's impossible.

This is where Christian spirituality departs from all other major religions. It recognizes without argument that we can't really be good just by trying. So Jesus shows up on earth and says, "I've come so you can have real and eternal life, more and better than you ever dreamed of." In other words, a good and lasting life. He then goes on to show how this is possible. You really have to read the book, it's quite interesting.

But, one might be thinking, bad things certainly happen to Christians. Certainly; I can personally attest to that. In fact, Jesus guaranteed they would. He said, "In this world you will have trouble." That's pretty clear. Christians have neither had their humanity removed, nor have they been removed from this present state of being, so it makes perfect sense that even in the midst of Jesus teaching them to live a better life, disaster can and will strike to a greater or lesser degree.

The really fascinating part comes after Jesus' guarantee. He says, "But take heart, for I have overcome the world." Marx would have tagged this as an opiate, and I can see why. Jesus freely acknowledges that the world is no good and that even his own followers are going to have problems, but then goes on to encourage them in the knowledge that he has already taken care of everything regardless of what happens in this life, and even suggests there will be a time and place without such a thing as trouble. But, unlike an opiate which wears off in time, Jesus said his words will never pass away. So, he is sort of like an opiate that never wears off...only without the drawbacks of being a heavy narcotic and with the added bonus of being the truth. I can take heart in that.

Unheard is sweeter

For the last few weeks I've ridden around in my truck without electronic sound of any kind; no cd, no radio, nothing. I wish I'd done this as the result of some sort of stoic choice, or commentary on the value of listening to pop music, but I didn't. My stereo deck quit working, and there's a small possibility that I may have broken it, but there's absolutely no way to know for sure. In the end though I ended up without the ability to produce artificial noise in the car. Riding around in a completely silent vehicle is awkward enough by yourself, but when you have someone riding with you, it's really just purely uncomfortable. Sometimes I'd role the windows down pretending to get some fresh air, but really just looking for some background noise.


At first all I could notice during this experience is how twitchy it made me to have no sound in the car. But, after several weeks of procrastination, I think I started to adjust a little to the situation and began instead to notice how much I needed that artificial sound. Then I started considering my daily activities. When it gets too quiet or too loud at work, I put my headphones on. I like to watch TV for a little while when I get home. Then I turn some music on if I'm reading or on the computer. In fact, as I write this I'm listening to a song containing the line "Let's tune out by turning on the radio."

I wonder a little at this reluctance to exist in silence. What of Keats who said "Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard Are sweeter: therefore, ye soft pipes, play on"? Is it possible I'm missing some of life's sweeter melodies by constantly attacking my conscious mind with things being heard? I believe I may be. In the future I think I'll willingly turn the stereo off in my truck every now and again, and maybe even with someone else in there with me. Then I'll turn to them and say, "Sweeter melodies", and we'll drive on in cozy silence.

Riders of scooters

To those of you riding scooters, please do not try to compensate for the innate uncoolness of your scooter by looking smug while you pass my truck that is obviously attempting to melt the ice caps while simultaneously burning the rain forest and drilling for oil in the Alaska wildlife refuge. If you feel you must compensate for you mode of transportation, try using another technique. I suggest goofy humor. Wear a sombrero, for instance. Or, if that's too dangerous, how about a one of those ties that look like a fish, and finish it off with comically oversize sunglasses? That way you can feel good about saving the planet, and I can feel good about the chuckle I get from seeing you. It's a win-win.

Multiple choice billboards

I saw a billboard today advertising for a local gym. It read, "Change your body. Change your life." Obviously these two statements were meant to be associated and even causal. But what if they weren't? What if the sign were meant to be multiple choice? I think that would be better.

An extremely original association

It's October, so I've been watching some baseball. I have to admit I'm not what would be classified as a baseball "fan". I happen to quite like the game itself, but my palette for the major leagues has been tainted by the lack of a salary cap, rampant free agency, and steroid scandals. So, when October rolls around each year, I have no idea who the teams are that are playing for the championship. But, FOX starts broadcasting the games in the evenings and since I have all of six channels to choose from (one of which is PBS), and they play in place of Seinfeld re-runs, I start watching the various series. It turns out they can be quite exciting, though it was a little tragic to see the Mets fan and his ten year old daughter literally weeping after their loss in the game that decided who would go to the World Series from the National League.

But one of the most striking things I've noticed this year is how incredibly valuable a single can be. Something as seemingly insignificant as reaching the first of four bases can quite often be the pivotal point in a game. I started doing some looking and found that some of the greatest comebacks in the history of baseball have been initiated by a single. Why? Well, because it gives the person coming after a chance to perform. Sometimes this person will hit the game winning home run, made possible by the seemingly small contribution in front of them. This makes the single as or more valuable than the home run.

I will now perform a feat that few before me have attempted (okay, it's been completely and possibly overdone, but let's pretend it hasn't). I will associate the game of baseball to life.

The single encourages me to do the seemingly small things that give others a chance to succeed. It reminds me that the apparently unnoticed task done well can inspire and encourage, often doing so in anonymity, but always with the possibility of far reaching benefits. When people are given the chance to do well, they often times do just that...and that's how, to use a fairly dramatic statement, the world is changed for good. I'd say do everything you can to give the person behind you a chance. Who knows, maybe they're a home run hitter and just need a few swings.

Reality snob

My wife and I were talking last night about the difficulties life seems to foist upon us almost constantly. To be more accurate, we were whining about it and lamenting the fact that it isn't easier and happier. In the midst of this I was reminded of a statement from Don Miller's book "Searching for God Knows What". At some point he (Don) is speaking with a very successful business man and for whatever reason the conversation turns to gambling. The business man very kindly states that all of the successful people he knows never gamble, but instead work hard, accept the facts of reality, and enjoy life. "But," Don says, "the facts of reality stink." His friend responds, "Reality is like a fine wine; it will not appeal to children." Don then goes on to say he's become quite snobby about the subtleties and nuances of reality.

I don't know that I'm quite a reality snob, and sometimes it feels like my reality comes out of a box someone got at the local gas station, but I will admit that considering life in this way helps me a good deal. Instead of operating on the premise that life is supposed to be heavily sweetened lemonade, or maybe at worst an Arnold Palmer so it has just a touch of tartness, considering it a wine allows me to notice its boldness, its complexity, its potency, and of course my wife would mention its strong chocolate undertones...which sometimes turn into overtones.

As a child, one taste of a good wine would have sent me running for the Coca-Cola. But, we all know that stuff is just killing us slowly.

A true fan

They say truth is better than fiction. I must agree. I couldn't make this stuff up on my best day.

A friend of mine was sharing about a guy he knows who plays fantasy football through the system in Las Vegas. This basically means that he likely spends a lot of money on his fantasy football league (henceforth referred to as FFL), and so probably a fair or commensurate amount of time on it as well.

For those of you who are not "in the know" about FFL, it is essentially an invention of the very desperate and very wishful sporting fan mind. At some pivotal point in human history, a group of fans decided that they needed another connection with their sport. The result of this longing is a game in which contestants "own" their own team (in the case of FFL it's a football team), and then draft real players to belong to their team before the real season starts. Then, each fantasy (or as some have termed it "pretend") team is awarded points based on the real life performance of its players. The fantasy teams play one another each week, and then a champion is declared at the end of the year. The prize for the champion can range anywhere from sweet, sweet bragging rights, to a large sum of money and in some cases a championship ring and trophy. Yes, it's a big, fancy, game of make-believe with a yearly revenue mark in the neighborhood of $1.5 billion; which is just a little less than the GDP of Mongolia.

So, my friend is telling me about this guy who plays in an FFL league through Vegas. Fall comes along one year and it turns out he and his wife are expecting a baby at any time. As luck (or a very powerful being with a sense of humor) would have it, his wife goes into labor on the day that his league is drafting players for their team. Clearly, this is a very important day for him. It is in fact so important that while his wife is preparing to bring forth a living being, he is on his cell phone, calling in his draft picks to Vegas!

This got me thinking though (after I had of course worked through the natural stages of denial, pity, mirth, and tearful laughter). Obviously most people would agree that this person's priorities were out of line. However, this conclusion (which I believe is quite right) is drawn from the premise that a marriage and a child's life are more important than a game, which is not a particularly difficult conclusion to draw based on our understanding of marriage and the value of human life, both of which are derived from our perspective on the world. But, the man on the phone, given his perspective, considered his choice to be the correct one. What if our perspective were also different? Would our choices also be different than they are now? One might here mention eternity, but that's awfully heady, and I don't think we need even go that far. What if our perspective involved a few hundred years, or our children's children? Would our values be different and therefore our priorities re-aligned? I have to believe they would be; and that we might in fact find ourselves partly horrified and partly amused at the number of hospital parking lots we've stood in, making phone calls to Vegas, building an imaginary dynasty.

Inspired by major sporting events occurring every four years

In reading through my last couple of posts I realized that I was at that time commenting on the winter Olympic Games. In considering what I might talk about this evening, I noticed that I will probably be talking a little about the World Cup. So, given the current trend, once the Cup finishes up in the next few weeks, I will be on schedule to make another post sometime in the summer of 2008. Feel the anticipation.

I really do appreciate the World Cup because it gives me, the typical American sports fan the opportunity to watch some really quality soccer (and I will continue to call it soccer for the reason stated above), which is a very rare thing. Of course, being an American and a sports fan I will not argue the point that soccer can be a bit dull at times. I watched the Mexico/Iran match this morning and at times found myself very seriously considering the notion that perhaps the rules had changed and the teams might actually be trying not to score...that whoever was able to best fake a career ending knee injury and then moments later run at world class speeds...or perhaps which coach smoked the most cigarettes, would determine the winning team. But of course I was proved wrong in a flurry of activity from Mexico, and then was able once again to witness the miracle of soccer; satisfaction with nearly an hour and a half of boredom and disappointment for a minute and a half of elation. The contrast between this and basketball is almost too shocking internalize. I very much agree with Adam Gopnik on the point that Americans like basketball and virtually the rest of the world likes soccer, and that this is an indication of the differences between the American culture and just about every other culture in the world. Actually, I think Gopnik was referring specifically to the differences between the U.S. and France, but I'll just go ahead and finish the thought out. By the way, if you haven't read "Paris to the Moon", I highly recommend it.

There is however one thing I'd like to see changed about the American coverage of the World Cup. Could we maybe get some people who aren't Americans to announce the game? I freely admit that I know nothing about the sport, but I sure would like to listen to someone talk who does, and I can sure tell that the people who are announcing it right now can't do too much more than point out which team is kicking it where. I think maybe someone from the British Isles would be excellent.

Difficult

We took a drive today. We covered a good deal of ground in the southern portion of Ada County and northern portion of Owyhee County. We saw some very beautiful country and got a little local culture. There really is nothing like watching people shoot rifles out of their pick-up truck.

This was all very nice, but probably not worthy of a posting here. However, we also visited a nature trail. Well, that's at least about as close as I can come to describing it with a phrase from the common vernacular. I believe it described itself as a "faith adventure", but that doesn't really do it justice either. In fact, I don't know that I'll really be able to do the experience justice with words alone. It's quite possible that the only way to really understand what I'm talking about (and that's not to say that you'll understand the "nature trail" itself, because I've been there and I don't think I really understand it) is to actually visit the place. I will however briefly attempt to describe it, and then I'll provide directions for getting there.

As I mentioned before, the place is akin to a nature trail. It begins very near the Snake River, winds along its banks for a few hundred yards, and then takes a jog toward the sagebrush covered hills to the north of the river. It then loops back along the bottom of the hill to where it began. In total it is perhaps a mile long. This is where its similarities to anything I've ever seen before end. As I also mentioned before, the area describes itself as a faith adventure, and it definitely has a theme based in fundamental Christianity, but there is so much to it that has nothing at all to do with...well with anything I could understand.

Placed along the trail are what I can only describe as exhibits, like something you might encounter in a museum. But these were unlike any exhibit in any museum. There is one with statues of zoo animals, one with bronze sculptures of children playing baseball with other bronze statues standing around, though it's clear that the other statues were not designed to be included with the baseball players. Another has a group of plaster birds standing around a sign that says "Bird Sanctuary". Further down the path is a bench you can share with Mark Twain, which shares space with small, beige, statues of boys and girls carrying very large, colored, shiny spheres and has you looking out over the river. The trail then moves through an "enchanted forest", complete with little metal deer, gargoyles, dwarves, a bridge that doesn't cross anything and that you don't have to walk over, but which of course houses a troll. The enchanted forest then ends at the foothills, and the trail begins to work its way back toward the beginning of the trail. This portion of the trail is where the Christian theme comes out...though it is certainly not the only theme, as evidenced by the bronze buck with a sign behind it that says, "I have come out of the forest so that you may see how beautiful I am", and of course the somewhat commonplace at this point beige children with their awkward looking spheres. There are three crosses visible on the hill above the trail, as well as a very large, synthetic rainbow a little higher up, symbolizing God's promise not to destroy the earth by water again. There are also displays for the resurrection, a chapel open for prayer, and a display with the theme of Jesus as the shepherd. The trail then ends where it began. However, now you see that there are animal pens here containing pigs and chickens...and peacocks running loose around the various buildings. All along the path are dozens of little bird houses on posts with different themes and little placards attached to the posts with phrases meant to encourage and inspire. These placards display such things as "Isn't it a great day?" or "Awake, alert, alive!" or "God answers prayer" and dozens of others...some which make slightly less sense, like "Exercise to the forefront".

This is of course a completely private enterprise, built simply for people to come and experience. It is completely outfitted with lights along the entire trail so people may visit at night if they like. It is also without a doubt the strangest walk I have ever taken.

To visit, take highway 45 south from Nampa, ID. Just before the road crosses the Snake River you'll notice a gas station on your left. Turn as if going into this gas station, but just before you reach the pumps you'll notice a little road to the right going down toward the water. This will lead you to a museum about the ferry crossing that used to exist at that place, and to your left you will find the area about which I have spoken.

As a side note, I would like to say that I have found the Olympic event of Ice Dancing the most humorous of the games. Not that the actual event itself is all that funny (it actually looks very tough and combines two activities for which I have zero ability), but between the outfits and the commentary, I've gotten several good chuckles. The outfits of the Italian team have been especially brilliant, with the pink v-neck taking the award for "Most Unlike an Athletic Uniform In the History of Sport". The commentary has included such phrases as "romance in their bodies", "pleasing to the eye without arresting it", and "extremely pleasurable to watch"...all of which I would love to seen incorporated into Monday Night Football at some point in the coming year.

Bad news

I realize I've been out of the game for some time now and that my public is probably wondering where I've been and when, oh when I'll make another post. I would really very much hate to disappoint either of the people who occasionally glance at this in times of desperate boredom.

Firstly I'd like to make just an ever so brief comment on the Ohio Board of Education. I heard the story on NPR the other morning concerning their repeal of standards that encouraged teachers to present the theory of evolution critically. In this report, board member Martha Wise is quoted saying that it is unfair to mislead children about the nature of science and that the standards for critically presenting the theory of evolution are "bad news". Is this really the kind of logic going into these decisions? Is there a reason anywhere in these arguments, or do we just get vague statements like "the nature of science" and declarations like "it's bad news"? If anything is unfair to the children it's being taught a theory as if it were proven fact and having decisions made for them without reason or rationale. I have no idea what the nature of science is, but I'm fairly sure it would include investigating all theories and presenting the strengths and weaknesses of each. These types of decisions are promoted by judicial bullying and cemented by fear. There is no logical reason not to teach the theory of creationism in public schools. It is not unconstitutional and it is not unscientific to do so, and I have not heard one good argument to convince me otherwise. Teaching that a "higher energy" designed and created the universe is very, very far away from teaching that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, and is still further away from any of the theistic religions in the world. Simply because a theory involves an event outside our understanding does not necessarily mean the theory is "unscientific". The fact of the matter is that no one knows how life originated on this planet and every theory we currently have available must always remain a theory because there must have been an event or a set of events that we cannot fully explain. Hence we have the big bang theory, the theory of creation, the autocatalytic set theory, and even Francis Crick's incomplete theory of directed panspermia, in which he states that an alien race might have planted life here on earth. Why can we not see that to accept any one of these theories as truth requires some level of faith and that to single one of them out because it requires faith in a higher being is illogical? Why don't we just explain to the kids that some people believe things happened this way for these reasons, and that others believe they happened this way for these reasons? At least then we could stop lying to them (and maybe ourselves) and covering it up with phrases like "the nature of science".

I would also like to offer my congrats to those men who participate in the sport of the two man luge without any apparent coercion. A more compromising position for a man to find himself in on network television, I do not believe one could find and I appreciate you making that sacrifice for the sake of your sport.