Book Review: Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis by Fr. Patrick O'Connell, B.D.

Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis by Fr. Patrick O'Connell, B.D.

When reading a book about the "science of today" it is important to know what "today" is. This book was first published in 1959, with a second edition coming out in 1968. The copy I have was printed in 1993 by Tan, a traditionally-minded Catholic publisher. The book is unabashedly pro-Church (as in the Roman Catholic Church) and is also a serious effort to understand and use scientific research in supporting the author's arguments.

Father Patrick O'Connell was a missionary in China throughout the time that the Peking Man fossils (assumed to be a "missing link" species between apes and man) were discovered. Those fossils were subsequently lost in 1941 during the Japanese occupation. O'Connell attributes the loss to a cover-up of fraudulent fossils, though the scientific community (with its bias towards evolutionary interpretations) did and still accepts Peking Man as legitimate. It is interesting to note that the site was opened back up for excavation after the war and no additional fossils have been found, even to the present day (the present day being January 2020).

O'Connell argues against evolution a lot (about half the book) and also discusses the antiquity of man and evidence for Noah's flood. He sites many findings from paleontology and archaeology to back up his claims that Biblical account is highly compatible with scientific discoveries. His rhetoric is often a little too heavy handed, calling "absurd and ridiculous" claims that men were descended from apes or that mankind on Earth goes back half a million years. The style of writing would be off-putting for those not already sympathetic to his conclusions.

Which is a shame because O'Connell makes a lot of good arguments and ties together information from various disciplines (paleontology, archaeology, astronomy, and literary analysis of biblical and other ancient texts). He has read and discusses works from all sides of the arguments. He remains staunchly Catholic and argues that science and faith can be reconciled. He does a convincing job of that. And the interdisciplinary approach is indispensable for understanding complicated topics like evolution and human history.

Slightly recommended. The information is a bit old and the rhetorical style is a bit harsh.

If you want a reconciling of modern science with biblical faith, Seven Glorious Days is a much better book, though it is strictly focused on the Genesis creation account. See my review and the discussion of Seven Glorious Days on A Good Story is Hard to Find podcast.

Book Review: Seven Glorious Days by Karl W. Giberson

Seven Glorious Days: A Scientist Retells the Genesis Creation Story by Karl W. Giberson

The creation account given in the first chapters of the Book of Genesis were written thousands of years ago by an author with a very different world view and a very different knowledge base than anyone could have now. The style is poetic and sparse, giving only the broadest outlines of unseen times. Reading it as a scientific text, or indeed a literal text, is perilous and ill-advised. But is it far from the scientific understanding of today?

Author Karl Giberson teaches both science and religion and has grappled with the relationship between the two throughout his career. In this book, he reformulates the text of the seven days of creation. He retains the poetic sense while adding in more contemporary expressions of what happens each day, or "epoch of creation" as Giberson calls them. The revision respects the religion in the text. God creates according to "the Logos of creation," a term Giberson uses to emphasize the order and rationality (i.e. the understandability, especially in a scientific sense) of the origin of the material universe.

The main body of the book goes through each epoch and discusses the scientific understanding of those times. He starts naturally with the Big Bang, summarizing not only the technicalities of what happened as science has come to understand it, but also the controversies scientists went through to come to that understanding. He recounts the attempts to rename the Big Bang with a more scientifically respectable name. Compared to "quantum mechanics" and "general relativity," "Big Bang" sound like something that happens after a superhero punches someone. Giberson goes through the story of how the primordial gases slowly condensed into stars that turned the omnipresent hydrogen atoms into heavier, more diverse matter. Such stars exploded, casting out new elements that would recondense into other stars and planets. He discusses the importance and impact of the four fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force) in the formation of the universe. And that's just the first day/epoch.

The book is very informative and does a very convincing job weaving together the ancient Genesis account with the modern scientific account of the development of the universe. The text doesn't get too deep into the details of either the theology or the science which would probably make the book ten times as long and only comprehensible to academics. At 190 pages, it is readable and engaging and well worth the reader's time.

Highly recommended.

Movie Review: Star Trek III (1984)

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock directed by Leonard Nimoy.

This summer has lots of sequels and remakes coming out, so I'm reviewing the earlier works and seeing if they will inspire me to see the new films! 

The story of this movie follows directly from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, so if you haven't seen that (which you really should) be warned that spoilers are ahead. I'll blather on about why I chose this to provide a little buffer between this spoiler warning and the actual spoiler.

After reviewing Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan and Ghostbusters, both from 1984, I had to decide which Star Trek movie to watch. Seeing Stark Trek III was made in 1984, making it sync up both with two other 1984 movies and with this week's number three Star Trek reboot movie, I could not resist revisiting this film I haven't seen probably since the 1980s.

Admiral James T. Kirk and crew are headed back to Earth after their harrowing encounter with Khan. All are still grieving the loss of Spock, who sacrificed himself to fix the warp drive, letting the Enterprise escape the blast radius of the Genesis Device. The Device was designed to be used on a lifeless planet to make it habitable. The explosion has indeed created an Earth-like planet. Spock's coffin, a torpedo tube fired from the Enterprise, was caught in the planet's gravity and landed on the planet. A science vessel with Kirk's son David and the Vulcan Saavik investigate the planet. They discover life form reading right by Spock's coffin! David and Saavik beam down to investigate.

Meanwhile, the crew of the Enterprise are informed the Genesis Device is is a political hot-potato--they shouldn't discuss it with anybody and travel there is restricted. The only problem is McCoy. He has been acting very Spock-like. After talking with Spock's father, Kirk realizes that Spock has transferred is katra or soul to McCoy and that should be brought to Vulcan along with Spock's body. If not, Spock will truly be gone. Realizing how desperate the situation is, Kirk and his main crew members steal the Enterprise and head off to the Genesis planet, where more complication ensue, because the Klingons have shown up and want their own doomsday device.

So the plot is rather busy and does look contrived at points (stealing the Enterprise by jury-rigging an automation system to run the whole ship from the bridge has so many problems with it). The Klingons are one dimensional but still fun (the Klingon commander is played by Christopher Lloyd, who played Doc Brown in Back to the Future!). The story serves to get Spock back from the dead and sets up the light-hearted Star Trek IV. So it's a good transition film but not a great film by any means. Watching it once or twice is plenty.

As for Star Trek Beyond, it looks action-packed and exciting...



This movie looks like it shares the Enterprise in peril and dealing with death elements from The Search for Spock. On the other hand, this movie looks to have tons of action (which I guess is natural considering the director is from the Fast and Furious franchise), which should be fun in a summer blockbuster way. I'm a little worried that it will lack depth (which I guess is natural considering the director is from the Fast and Furious franchise). Star Trek Beyond probably will be a more entertaining film, maybe even a better film that Star Trek III. If I set my expectations to low, maybe I'll have a stunning experience.

Book Review: The Book of Genesis Illustrated by R. Crumb

The Book of Genesis Illustrated by R. Crumb

Genesis is the source for many illustrated books. Noah's Ark is probably the most popular story in toddler books. Other stories are less kid friendly (like Noah's drunken nakedness) and even less graphic friendly (like the genealogies). This book depicts the entire fifty chapters and aims at a mature audience. It's a big ambition with mixed results.

Crumb does a great job communicating the emotional impact in the stories through the expressions on people's faces. The settings have a fine Middle Eastern appearance that adds to the stories. Even so, I find his style not to my taste. The women have unattractive faces, even though Sarah and Rachel are supposed to be quite beautiful. Also, a lot of women are topless or unclothed (much of it gratuitous) with only occasional male nudity. His commentary at the end of the book makes him sound sympathetic to feminism but his art does not look sympathetic. The combination is odd. He does give rich detail to many of his panels and it's amazing to see dozens of different faces in the genealogies.

This book is worth reading once but I'm sure I'll not come back to it.