Sorry folks. Things have been a little crazy lately. School started back up this week, and I’ve recently come across a plethora of web-related jobs. The will to post was sucked away.

The Personal

But I’m back today with some really exciting news. (Well, for us at least). My wife’s been trying to get a job as an elementary teacher. It hasn’t exactly been an easy road. Lots of candidates and few positions. Nonetheless, she terribly impressed some people in the school district last semester during her student teaching, and had a handful of interviews during the summer. Nuttin’ happened. So she took a job as a teacher’s aide. (They pay Chinese workers in an iPod factory more). As school started, it was just a matter of wait and see.

A few days ago, she learned that the school had two second graders too many. She had to wait a couple of days to make sure no one withdrew, and has now been offered the job. Much rejoicing has been had in our household, and partying into the late hours of the night1.

The Provocative

I’m boring you… It’s not that you don’t care, but you’ve got your own lives and jobs to worry about. So let’s talk about something controversial. Was this the “Hand of God“? It’s a question that I’ve had on my mind for years. How does God work? I don’t think there’s one answer, and so I’ll point out up front that undoubtedly many folks have different ideas on the subject. I’m not claiming to have the answer. Still, with my view perhaps in the minority, I think it fair to throw it out in the hopes that it might be more widely discussed.

Before asking if God gave my wife her job, let me share another story on how some claim to see God at work. We have some friends2, who shared a story about a couple on their honeymoon. They arrived at one of their hotels mid way through the week, only to discover that the place had gone out of business months earlier. Making matters worse, one of those ubiquitous conventions of some type or another was in town, and seemingly every place around was booked solid. Magically, a really nice place on the beach at a good price fell into their lap. “It was totally a God thing” my friend explained.

Really? A God thing?

It’s certainly not unusual for a Christian to hold this view. My experience is that in practice, the honeymoon example is getting far out on a thin limb. I imagine there are lots of Christian’s who would find that statement troubling. It’s akin to the God who got me a sweet parking space today at school. (And God, if you work that way, please forgive me and ignore what I say. I could really use that parking space at school. Getting one’s a nightmare!)

But while Christians gladly accept chance for trivial occurrences, we tend to invoke God for the big things. Like getting that first real job or meeting one’s spouse.

I do not. Largely because I find chance comforting. If God gets the honeymooner’s a hotel, why not do something for those in Asia when the Tsunami came ashore. Let’s not forget, there were a handful of honeymooners when it hit. Rhetorically I ask, “Does God love some honeymooner’s more than others?” Is God just if He intervenes in the world to make sure somebody gets a hotel room or a job, and then chooses to do nothing as massive catastrophes approach?

For what it’s worth, my view of God at work in this world goes something like this. Through his spirit, he has the power to transform lives. And I believe God is at work largely through the interactions of people, particularly (but not necessarily limited to) His people.

The Example

So here’s how I see my wife’s case. During her student teaching, she impressed a principle and an influential teacher. Those interactions — that she was known and liked — were what got her the job. (People, with free will, hired her). But as a matter of faith, I believe God can be very present and active in those interactions. (I say can be because I also believe we have the ability to shoot ourselves in the foot and close God out).

So when no job came, and she took the job as a teacher’s aide, God was still present. She had every opportunity to do wonderful things for others as an aide. At the last minute a real job came through. Her opportunities changed with the job, but remain nonetheless.

Do you see what I’m saying? For the believer, how do we say that God gave us this job? Could my wife not have served God as a teacher’s aide? As a secretary? It seems to me that in large part, she wants to be a teacher because she feels that her gifts lie in that area.

The Scripture

Certainly there’s scriptural precedence Christians viewing things that come their way as being the result of God. Right off my head I’m thinking of James 1:17:

Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

I really don’t think you have to read it that way though. If you read the chapter for its context (always a good idea) it seems obvious enough that this statement is in stark contrast to the temptation of evil. Here’s a little more of the context from James 1:

When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

Don’t be deceived, my dear brothers. Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows. He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

The point is that a honeymooning couple is a good thing, regardless of whether they have some ups or downs with a hotel room on the trip. So is my wife’s new job as a teacher. You can read this passage as speaking to the root of good and evil — not that each and every specific “good thing” that happens is part of a predestined plan by God.

The Conclusion

I hope I’ve been gentle enough with this topic. I stated it at the beginning, and I’ll state it at the end. My view is not the only view, and frankly it’s a little more nuanced than I could convey, even in a lengthy post like this. But I do hope that Christians will be careful, and put a little more thought into the implications on how they attribute the good things in their life to a higher power.

While I was off having fun in the Davis Mountains, my wife had a job at a local steak house. She found that she didn’t care much for the food industry. What she didn’t realize is that she should have been working at the Applebees in Hutchinson, Kansas, where they leave $10,000 tips on a $26 tab.

I went tried to go birding last weekend. The west Texas heat was so oppressive, and the bird activity so abysmal, that I quickly turned my focus to photographing butterflies, dragonflies, and some other cool stuff.

I’m just now getting around to putting the pictures up. There are some really nice ones, like this guy — a Roseate Skimmer (Orthemis ferrugineas).

Roseate Skimmer — Orthemis ferrugineas

In addition to the insects, I also managed to get several nice shots of a really cool reptile, and several of birds. So be to check out the whole album.

If there’s any work that cats willingly do, it’s eventing new ways of laziness. And The Bruce is no exception. One of his favorite things to do is pick the spot on the floor where the afternoon sun comes through the windows. At the very time when my wife and I are burning up and wish to close the blinds to keep the heat out, this bizarre creature in a solid fur coat goes and sits directly in the sun…

Mexican ground squirrel
Spermophilus mexicanus

My wife has taken a job as a teacher’s aide with a local elementary, as she awaits that first real teaching job. Yesterday, a teacher had caught something on the playground and put it in a fish bowl. Taking a look at it, she asked him, “Do you know what that is?” He answered it was a ground squirrel. “Do you know what kind?” He didn’t. “I believe it’s a Mexican ground squirrel. I think the scientific name is Spermophilus mexicanus… I’m married to a biologist,” she added as way of explanation.

Spermophilus mexicanus. My heart swelled with pride. How did she learn such valuable information? I haven’t forced her to remember any taxonomy. Naturally, as any good biologist does, I use it where ever I can, mainly for myself so that I can remember. But how she remembered it, I confess, I do not know.

That evening after telling me the story, she asked if I thought there was a risk of rabies. “There certainly is,” I replied. “There’s a risk of plague too.”

My wife looked at me in surprise. Like most people probably do, she thought plague was something of the past that doesn’t affect the U.S. Though I remembered few details, I knew it was still around in the fleas of some rodents, and that each year a small number of Americans get infected.

I decided to do the most basic of research. From the CDC’s site on plague, I learned that Spermophilus mexicanus is likely a perfect vector.

Rock squirrels and their fleas are the most frequent sources of human infection in the southwestern states. For the Pacific states, the California ground squirrel and its fleas are the most common source.

What the CDC left out was the classification of those two squirrels. Spermophilus variegatus and Spermophilus beecheyi respectively. Thus they are very closely related to Mexican ground squirrel. The CDC continues:

Many other rodent species, for instance, prairie dogs, wood rats, chipmunks, and other ground squirrels and their fleas, suffer plague outbreaks and some of these occasionally serve as sources of human infection.

Now, not wanting to sound alarmist, I should note that the chances of getting infected are very low.

In the United States during the 1980s plague cases averaged about 18 per year. Most of the cases occurred in persons under 20 years of age. About 1 in 7 persons with plague died. [and elsewhere] In the U.S., 1 to 40 cases reported annually (avg = 13 cases) by western states, 1971-1995.

There also have been very few cases of plague that have turned up in Texas, though apparently God is smiting New Mexico and Arizona.

Still, it might be a good time for the teacher to let the poor critter go. Perhaps parents would feel a little better with a hamster, no?

Liang Bua 1’s asymmetrical skull

In 2004, scientists announced the discovery of a new species of small hominid which lived on the island of Flores (Indonesia), which they dubbed Homo floresiensis. The media, ever the bastions of scientific truth and accuracy, immediately popularized the discovery by calling H. floresiensis hobbits.

Recently however, a debate has flared up on what H. floresiensis really is. In particular, one of the specimens has a very asymmetrical skull which some scientists are now claiming is the result of disease. Other features of the skull, which were originally reported to be distinct from modern day humans, are now being challenged as falling within the range of modern day and prehistoric humans from that region of the world.

I don’t have anything to add to that discussion. Anthropology and human evolution are hardly my area of specialty. For a quick read about the situation though, MSNBC has the details. For a thorough but technical account, John Hawks’ anthropology blog provides (as always) a great deal of information on the controversy.

Here’s what I find so terribly interesting about the whole thing. It’s a beautiful example of how science works! Some scientists find some data, put the pieces together, go through the process of peer review, and publish a claim — “hobbits” on Flores! Some other scientists review their data, find that they may be a better explanation than “hobbits on Flores” and publish a rebuttal. A skirmish begins. People take sides and scientists take their best shots at each other in trying to explain these finds. Egos are perhaps bruised and battered along the way, but in the end, what we learn about these fossils is far more robust because of the scrutiny they receive.

In short, this is a beautiful example of science at work. This controversy and debate is not a sign that there’s something terribly wrong with science or the original researchers, but rather it’s exactly what healthy science is supposed to do.

Yet, I would bet everything I own on the predictable creationist rejection of this find. Whatever the consensus comes to be, creationists will use this debate, this robust discussion, to say to their followers, isn’t science sick. Science is damned if they get it wrong — that the fossils turn out not be a new species, H. floresiensis — because creationists will forever use it as an example of incompetence. But even worse, if science decides that H. floresiensis really is deserving of classification as a unique species, creationists will point to the controversy as proof that we’re wrong.

Does anyone doubt this? When creationists commonly go back 80 and 100 years to point to controversies or hoaxes (piltdown man, Nebraska man, etc) that existed in the past, and completely ignore that science has long ago fixed its mistakes, I have no doubt they’ll do exactly the same with H. floresiensis.

It’s really sad to me. At it’s highest levels, it’s incredibly dishonest — which is something that creationist leaders should know better than. For the most part though, it’s simply a matter of ignorance. Many people don’t understand how science works. They don’t understand that the controversy is a good thing, not a bad thing.

This debate on how exactly to classify H. floresiensis is a great teaching moment for those willing to learn. We should all sit back and be content to see what happens. Whatever direction it takes, the answers, as well as the process, will lead us closer to the truth.

Because of eye candy like this. You just can’t see little buggers like that in the states (though we’ve certainly got eye candy of our own).

And if you’ve never seen the Ben Cruachan Blog before, you should bookmark or RSS it. Getting a dose of bird pictures from down under is fun.

Having a blog is great, but occasionally it does bring out the internet weirdos. Like this morning, when someone contacted me not once, but twice.

At 4:08 am (CST):

hi.. was goin thro ur website n got intrested in it.. m also a christian n am a research student. my thesis is on vespa mandarinia( asian giant hornet) n i desperately need information on its physiology,habitation n behaviour..Well i m from India.. n m a Naga..UR PLACE IS D ONLY Christian state in INDIA..I SHALL B VERY GRATEFUL if ull give me information on d above said topics.. Thanking you ..

And then at 5:38 am (CST):

hi…ope u got ma msg..eagerly waitin 4 ur reply n ur help

Now there’s this incredibly small place in my heart that worries I’m unfairly making fun of someone… But that place shrinks by the minute when I consider than any real grad student should have no problem going to the primary literature to search for what they need. Also, a quick perusal of the site should show that I’m no entomologist. It’s my guess that Google led the poor fellow here, and after that didn’t turn up enough information, it was a quick plea for help.

If you ask me, I detect a high school student with a research paper due in a few days.

This one’s just fun. My wife told me about a video she’d seen the other day. The band sets up a series of treadmills that run in opposite directions, on which they can walk across to perform some very interesting choreography. The entire thing was filmed in one take too. The band is named Ok Go, and the song is “Here It Goes Again.” Enjoy.

I’ve got a bit of confession to make. I hate country music and country musicians — with a passion. Is that fair? Probably not. Am I biased? I’d have to say so. Am I committing the cardinal sin of stereotyping a large group of people based on the actions of a few? Guilty as charged.

It’s hard not to with stories like this one. Did you hear about Troy Gentry? The guy’s being prosecuted for killing a black bear with a bow and arrow. Now I’m not opposed to hunting (though I’m a lot happier when the prey has hooves and a white-tail - technical schematic here.) So what could be so horrible to deserve prosecution for the manly action of hunting a fearsome predator with a bow and arrow?

Perhaps shooting a tame bear in a cage, then tagging it and doctoring video to make it look like you shot it in the wild… Which is what he and the ranch owner reported to the state of Minnesota.

His defense sounds like it’s going to be a real winner.

“Troy absolutely denies that he knowingly and willfully did anything illegal, and is confident that he will be exonerated,” said his Minneapolis-based attorney, Ron Meshbesher, who said Gentry has never been interviewed by authorities. “They don’t know his side of the story. He was told it was proper and legal to kill the bear.”

Don’t you love it? Words like knowingly and willfully, proper and legal. No one’s denying that poor Troy protected his family by killing the ranch pet in the cage. They just say he didn’t know it was wrong. Apparently, it’s not even the killing that was illegal. It was doctoring the tags and reporting it to the state — and that’s what prosecutors will have to show Gentry knowingly did to win a conviction.

You know, for some reason I’m not as angry at lying to the state. It’s clearly wrong, but I mean, it’s just Minnesota. It’s the killing that infuriates me. Hunters, a question: Why do people hunt with bow and arrow instead of a gun? I think I know the answer, but someone can correct me if I’m wrong. It’s a challenge, it’s a lot harder, and I can imagine that the excitement and satisfaction of taking prey with these tools is a lot greater. And I respect that.

But drawing your bow and arrow on a caged animal? I don’t give a rat’s behind if it’s legal or not. It’s shameful.

Now I have to admit that I didn’t even know who Troy Gentry was before this story. He’s half of the popular (with who?) duo Montgomery Gentry. But upon a little investigation, he quickly fit right into my stereotype of all that’s wrong with country music. For example, in an article on an upcoming album that would make Stephen Colbert very proud, the writer expresses:

This album reflects a deeper exploration of the issues Eddie Montgomery & Troy Gentry have always deemed important: family, religion & the US Armed Forces.

What else is there really?

It’s the smarminess of country music that I can’t stand. It’s the “family values” that look an awful lot like softcore pornography. (Possibly not safe for work, but incredibly educational if you’ve not flipped through CMT recently). Country music has become one more way that culture gets entwined with religion.

Now I’m not advocating that we abandon popular forms of music, including country music if that’s what you like (though your ear for music has obviously been bludgeoned beyond repair). I personally love a vast array of rock music, though I clearly recognize that some of it doesn’t share my moral values.

It’s just that I prefer my decadence to be clearly labeled as such.