program 7 18 11 - asa3.org · title: program 7_18_11.vp author: lyn created date: 7/19/2011...

Program Contents

General Information ........................................................................................................................... 1

2011 ASA Annual Meeting Schedule .......................................................................................... 2

Abstracts

PLENARY SESSIONS

Mary Schweitzer ............................................................................................................................... 6William Hurlbut.................................................................................................................................. 6Gareth Jones .................................................................................................................................... 6Katharine Hayhoe ............................................................................................................................. 6Dorothy F Chappell........................................................................................................................... 6Steven Bouma-Prediger.................................................................................................................... 7

GLOBAL MEAT CONSUMPTION: HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ETHICAL CONCERNS

Martin M Root ................................................................................................................................... 7Steven G Hall.................................................................................................................................... 7Jerry L Risser.................................................................................................................................... 7James Thobaben.............................................................................................................................. 8

PROBING THE PAST: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PALEONTOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGY

Keith B Miller..................................................................................................................................... 8Ken Wolgemuth ................................................................................................................................ 8Stephen O Moshier........................................................................................................................... 9James K Hoffmeier ........................................................................................................................... 9

THE ETHICS OF NEUROSCIENCE AND REPRODUCTION

Heather Looy .................................................................................................................................... 9William M Struthers........................................................................................................................... 9Brian T Greuel ................................................................................................................................ 10

METHODOLOGICAL NATURALISM: GLORIFYING GOD THROUGH SCIENCE?

Joseph Spradley ............................................................................................................................. 10Robert C Bishop ............................................................................................................................. 10Ronald L Numbers.......................................................................................................................... 10Bruce L Gordon .............................................................................................................................. 10Kathryn Applegate .......................................................................................................................... 10

SEEKING GOD’S WISDOM FOR SCIENCE TEACHING

Denis O Lamoureux........................................................................................................................ 11Keenan Dungey .............................................................................................................................. 11John Staver..................................................................................................................................... 11Mark Winslow ................................................................................................................................. 11Stephen M Contakes ...................................................................................................................... 12Bryce Sullivan................................................................................................................................. 12Douglas Hayworth........................................................................................................................... 12Pilju Kim Joo and Joshua J Song ................................................................................................... 13Bryan Clarke................................................................................................................................... 13

ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP

Peter M J Hess ............................................................................................................................... 13Thomas L Walters........................................................................................................................... 14John Munday .................................................................................................................................. 14

*Oscar Gonzalez .............................................................................................................................. 14*David W Hoferer ............................................................................................................................. 14Don W Korte Jr and Mary H Korte .................................................................................................. 15Ray Williams................................................................................................................................... 15

*Student or early career scientist presenting a paper through donated scholarships.

SEEKING WISDOM IN SCIENCE

Peter Payne.................................................................................................................................... 15Dominic Halsmer ............................................................................................................................ 15Matthew M Huddleston ................................................................................................................... 16Robert S Geddes ............................................................................................................................ 16George L Murphy............................................................................................................................ 16David S Newman............................................................................................................................ 16Jason Hine...................................................................................................................................... 17Michael Sleasman .......................................................................................................................... 17

WITNESSING GOD’S GLORY AND SOVEREIGNTY IN CREATION

Donald N Petcher ........................................................................................................................... 17Paul H Lange.................................................................................................................................. 18Pamela L Bryant ............................................................................................................................. 18

GOD’S WILL AND ORIGINS

Gregory S Bennett .......................................................................................................................... 18David Wilcox and David W *Hoferer ............................................................................................... 18Wayne K Dawson ........................................................................................................................... 19

WORLDVIEW PERSPECTIVES AND CREATION DEBATES

Richard F Carlson........................................................................................................................... 19Stephen C Dilley ............................................................................................................................. 19Paul H Seely ................................................................................................................................... 19

SEEKING GOD’S WISDOM: THE LIFE OF THE INDIVIDUAL

Edwin Yamauchi ............................................................................................................................. 20Joseph Lechner .............................................................................................................................. 20

*Bethany Sollereder ......................................................................................................................... 20William M Jordan ............................................................................................................................ 21

POSTERS

Caleigh Bates and Christine Williams ............................................................................................. 21Virginia R Bracht............................................................................................................................. 21

*Hui-Yiing Chang.............................................................................................................................. 21Manika Clemente, David Lee, and Annie Poirier............................................................................. 22Valerie Francis and Elyse Masson.................................................................................................. 22Taylor Gevry and Joanna Helm ...................................................................................................... 22Michael Guebert ............................................................................................................................. 23Jay L Hollman................................................................................................................................. 23Katey LePage and Morgan Manchester.......................................................................................... 23Craig Rusbult .................................................................................................................................. 23Kyle Tretina and Laura Frantz ........................................................................................................ 24

TEST OF FAITH

Ruth Bancewicz .............................................................................................................................. 24

Presenters’ Contact Information ................................................................................................ 25

ASA Business Meeting Agenda .................................................................................................. 27

Index of Presenters .......................................................................................................................... 28

*Student or early career scientist presenting a paper through donated scholarships.

General Information

ASA Book RoomBook tables featuring books of interest to attendees will be in the Fine Arts Center. Hours are as follows:

Saturday: 10:00 AM–5:30 PM Wentz Concert Hall LobbySunday: 12:45 PM–5:30 PM Wentz Concert Hall LobbyMonday: 10:00 AM–2:00 PM Madden Theater Lobby

The North Central College Bookstore is open Monday to Friday, 9 AM–4 PM; Saturday, 10 AM–2 PM.

Emergency Phone NumbersWard Hall Information Desk: 630.637.5846 8 AM –10 PM

Campus Safety: 630.637.5911 10 PM – 8 AM

Plenary SessionsAll plenary sessions, except the Sunday morning session, will be held in the Wentz Concert Hall in the Fine Arts Center (FAC).The Sunday morning session will be held in Centennial Hall on the third floor of the White Activities Center (WAC).

Friday: 7:30 PM Mary Schweitzer, “Dinosaurs under the Microscope: A New Look at Old Dinosaurs”Saturday: 8:30 AM William Hurlbut, “Stem Cells, Embryos and Ethics: A Continuing Controversy”

1:15 PM Gareth Jones, “Glorifying God in a Scientific Milieu: The Contrasting Domains ofNeuroscience and Reproduction”

8:00 PM Katharine Hayhoe, “Climate Change: Why Are Science and Faith in Conflict?”Sunday: 10:30 AM Dorothy F Chappell, “Challenges, Changes and Chalices in the Natural Sciences”

1:30 PM Steven Bouma-Prediger, “One Example of Science-Faith Synergy: How We CanGlorify God and Serve Humanity by Caring for the Earth”

Special EventsFriday: 9:00 AM Workshop: Science and Scripture: Interpreting the Information –FAC Room 114

1:00 PM Workshop: Helping Your Congregation Deal with Religion-Science Issues–FAC Room 138

9:00 PM Fellowship Mixer –Wentz Concert Hall LobbySaturday: 10:00 AM Symposium: Global Meat Consumption: Health, Environmental and Ethical Concerns

–Madden Theater10:00 AM Symposium: Probing the Past: Contributions from Paleontology and Archaeology

–Wentz Concert Hall2:30 PM Symposium: Bioethics –Wentz Concert Hall6:45 PM ASA Business Meeting –Wentz Concert Hall9:00 PM Students and Early Career Scientists Reception –FAC Room 114

Sunday: 9:00 AM Worship Service –WAC Centennial Hall6:45 PM Women in Science Gathering –FAC Room 1147:30 PM “Test of Faith” –FAC Madden Theater7:30 PM Communications Meeting –FAC Room 1147:30 PM Career Progression for Christians in Science: Panel Discussion –FAC Room 1389:00 PM InterVarsity Reception –FAC Room 138

Monday 9:00 AM Symposium: Methodological Naturalism: Glorifying God through Science?–FAC Madden Theater

Check-outMonday: 2:00 PM If you are staying on campus, please return your room keys to the NCC staff

Many thanks to …Program Chair Rod Scott and Local Arrangements Chair Ray Lewis.

We are especially thankful for the donors who contributed to the Students and Early Career Scientists’ Scholarship Fund.

The ASA SpiritThe American Scientific Affiliation encourages thoughtful and provocative scientific presentations and discussions. Presentersand discussants are expected to maintain a humble and loving attitude toward individuals who have a different opinion.

North Central College, Naperville, IL 1

2011 ASA Annual Meeting Schedule

• All sessions except those on Sunday morning will be held in the Fine Arts Center (FAC). Sunday morning breakfast, worship,

and plenary session will be held in the White Activities Center (WAC).

• All meals except for Sunday morning breakfast are in the Kaufman Dining Hall.

• Abstracts for each session are listed on the page numbers in parentheses.

Thursday, 28 July 2011

3:00 PM–9:00 PM Lodging registration at the Residence Halls

3:00 PM–9:00 PM ASA meeting registration, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall Lobby

Friday, 29 July 2011

7:30 AM Breakfast –All meals except for Sunday breakfast are in the Kaufman Dining Hall.

8:15 AM–9:00 PM Lodging registration at the Residence Halls

8:15 AM–9:00 PM ASA meeting registration, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall Lobby

8:30 AM–5:30 PM ASA/Affiliation of Christian Geologists Geology field trip

8:30 AM–12:00 PM Morton Arboretum field trip

9:00 AM–4:00 PM Workshop 1: Science and Scripture: Interpreting the Information –Terry Morrison, FAC Room 114

12:00 PM–1:00 PM Lunch

1:00 PM–4:30 PM Workshop 2: Helping Your Congregation Deal with Religion-Science Issues –George Murphy, FAC Room 138

1:00 PM–5:00 PM Fermilab field trip

1:00 PM–5:00 PM Wheaton College field trip

5:30 PM–6:45 PM Dinner

7:00 PM Welcome and Introductions, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

� Randy Isaac, ASA Executive Director

� Susan Daniels, ASA Executive Council President

� Dorothy Chappell, Wheaton Representative

� Rod Scott, Program Chair

� Ray Lewis, Local Arrangements Chair

7:30 PM Plenary Session I, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

Moderator: Keith Miller (6)

Mary Schweitzer, “Dinosaurs under the Microscope: A New Look at Old Dinosaurs”

9:00 PM Fellowship Mixer, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall Lobby

Saturday, 30 July 2011

7:15 AM Breakfast

8:00 AM Devotions: Bob Geddes, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

8:30 AM Plenary Session II, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

Moderator: Brian Greuel (6)

William Hurlbut, “Stem Cells, Embryos and Ethics: A Continuing Controversy”

9:30 AM Refreshment Break, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall Lobby

2 2011 ASA Annual Meeting


Parallel

Session I

I-A. Seeking God’sWisdom for ScienceTeaching

–Room 114 (11–13)

Moderator: Sara Miles

I-B. EnvironmentalStewardship

–Room 138 (13–15)

Moderator: Darren Craig

I-C. Symposium: GlobalMeat Consumption:Health, Environmental andEthical Concerns–Madden Theater (7–8)

Moderator: Jay Hollman

I-D. Symposium: Probingthe Past: Contributionsfrom Paleontology andArchaeology–Wentz Concert Hall (8–9)

Moderator: Steve Moshier

10:00 AM Denis O Lamoureux“Teaching Science andReligion: Some Mid-CareerReflections andSuggestions”

Peter M J Hess“Replacing ‘HumanExceptionalism’ with anIntegrated EnvironmentalEthic”

Martin M Root“How Does What We EatCreate Chronic Disease?”

Keith B Miller“The Study of Paleontologyand the Creation Mandate”

10:30 AM Keenan E Dungey“Beyond Two Books:Metaphors for theRelationship betweenScience and Religionin the 21st Century”

Thomas L Walters“All Data Are Equal, butSome Are More EqualThan Others”

Steven G Hall“Environmental and EthicalImplications of MeatConsumption”

Ken Wolgemuth“Radiocarbon—Methodsof Dating Materials forBiblical Archaeology andEarthquakes in theDead Sea Area”

11:00 AM John Staver“Defeating the Teaching ofCreationism in the PublicSchool Science Classroom”

John Munday“Earth Day: Origin andDevelopment”

Jerry L Risser“Animal Rights orResponsible Stewardship?”

Stephen O Moshier“Physical Geography of theEastern Nile Delta during theBronze Age: Implicationsfor the Location of theRed/Reed Sea”

11:30 AM Mark Winslow“The Role of FaithStructures in MediatingChristian UniversityBiology-Related Majors’Reconciliation of Evolutionand Personal ReligiousBeliefs”

James Thobaben“Food as a Moral Object:The Ethics of Eating”

James K Hoffmeier“The Location of theRed/Reed Sea in the Lightof Recent ArchaeologicalWork in Egypt”

12:00 PM Lunch

1:15 PM Plenary Session III, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

Moderator: Brian Greuel (6)

Gareth Jones, “Glorifying God in a Scientific Milieu: The Contrasting Domains of Neuroscience and Reproduction”

Parallel

Session II

II-A. Seeking God’sWisdom for ScienceTeaching (cont’d)

–Room 114 (11–13)

Moderator: Sara Miles

II-B. EnvironmentalStewardship (cont’d)

–Room 138 (13–15)

Moderator: Heather Whitney

II-C. Seeking Wisdom inScience

–Madden Theater (15–17)

Moderator: James W Sire

II-D. Symposium:The Ethics of Neuroscienceand Reproduction–Wentz Concert Hall (9–10)

Moderator: Brian Greuel

2:30 PM Stephen M Contakes“Chemistry as a Source ofWisdom: The ChemistryCurriculum as a Tool forExploring Faith-ScienceDialogue”

Oscar E Gonzalez“How to EngageEvangelicals inConservation:The Implementation ofCreation Care in Peru”

Peter Payne“Does the Success ofScience by Itself ProvideStrong Support forNaturalism?”

Heather Looy“’Reorientation’ Therapiesand Same-Sex Desire:Are they Effective andEthical?”

3:00 PM Bryce Sullivan“Christian Faculty atChristian Colleges andUniversities: Sine QuaNon?”

David W Hoferer“Conservation and Christ:Insights for Participatingin the Redemption of theWhole World”

Dominic Halsmer“MetaphysicalConsiderationsEnhance ReverseEngineering Studies”

William M Struthers“The Reproductive Brain:Neurosexism and theEthics of Sexuality”

3:30 PM Beverage Break, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall Lobby

4:00 PM Douglas Hayworth“Challenges in Establishingan ASA HomeschoolScience ResourcesWebsite”

Don W Korte Jr andMary H Korte

“Caring for Creation atConcordia UniversityWisconsin: Bluff Restorationand the Concordia Centerfor EnvironmentalStewardship”

Matthew M Huddleston“Myth and Mystery:Fostering New Avenues ofDialogue for Faith andScience”

Brian T Greuel“Epigenetic Mechanisms inHuman Reproduction andDisease: An Ethical Analysis”




4:30 PM Pilju Kim Joo andJoshua J Song –“Role ofPUST for North KoreanAgricultural Developmentand Food Security throughLife Science Research”

Ray Williams“Science and God’sEarth-Protect Mandate”

Robert S Geddes“Fossils from Space:A Believer’s Challenge orBlessing”

Panel Discussion� Heather Looy� William M Struthers� Brian T Greuel� Gareth Jones� William Hurlbut

5:00 PM Bryan Clarke“Researching Science andReligion: Thoughts aboutEngaging in the Classroom”

5:30 PM Dinner

6:45 PM ASA Business Meeting, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall (29)

8:00 PM Plenary Session IV, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

Moderator: Steve Moshier (6)

Katharine Hayhoe, “Climate Change: Why Are Science and Faith in Conflict?”

9:00 PM Students and Early Career Scientists Reception with Katharine Hayhoe, FAC Room 114

Sunday, 31 July 2011

7:30 AM Deluxe Continental Breakfast at White Activities Center, first floor

9:00 AM Worship Service, White Activities Center, Centennial Hall, third floor

Jennifer Powell McNutt

10:00 AM Break, White Activities Center, first floor

10:30 AM Plenary Session V, White Activities Center, Centennial Hall, third floor

Moderator: Rod Scott (6–7)

Dorothy F Chappell, “Challenges, Changes and Chalices in the Natural Sciences”

12:00 PM Lunch

1:30 PM Plenary Session VI, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall

Moderator: Ray Lewis (7)

Steven Bouma-Prediger, “One Example of Science-Faith Synergy: How We Can Glorify God and Serve Humanity by

Caring for the Earth”

2:45 PM Beverage Break, FAC/Wentz Concert Hall Lobby

2:45 PM Poster Session, Wentz Concert Hall Lobby (21–24)� Caleigh Bates and Christine Williams, “The Use of Genetic-Based Research in the Combat of Neglected

Tropical Diseases: The First-World Response to the Majority World Problem”

� Virginia R Bracht, “An Evaluation Scheme to Increase the Effectiveness of Development Work”

� Hui-Yiing Chang, “Temporal ‘Centrality’ of Earth’s Existence in the Universe?”

� Manika Clemente, David Lee, and Annie Poirier, ”Alternative mRNA Splicing and the Expansion of the Human

Proteome”

� Valerie Francis and Elyse Masson, “The Absence of CCR5 Co-receptors and HIV Resistance”

� Taylor Gevry and Joanna Helm, “Genetic Conservation and the Reintroduced Gray Wolves of Yellowstone”

� Michael D Guebert, “Serving Humanity through Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Technology:

Serving and Learning through a Year-Long Course Sequence”

� Jay L Hollman, “Science in the Prevention of Chronic Disease: A Mixed Review”

� Katey LePage and Morgan Manchester, “Genetics and Personalized Medicine”

� Craig Rusbult, “Thinking Skills Education: Using Design Method and Scientific Method”

� Kyle Tretina and Laura Frantz, “Race and Medicine: Enelapril”

Parallel

Session III

III-A. Witnessing God'sGlory and Sovereigntyin Creation

–Room 114 (17–18)

Moderator: Dave Sikkenga

III-B. God's Will and Origins

–Room 138 (18–19)

Moderator: Marilyne Flora

III-C. Seeking Wisdom inScience (cont’d)

–Madden Theater (15–17)

Moderator: Dillard Faries

III-D. WorldviewPerspectives andCreation Debates–Wentz Concert Hall (19–20)

Moderator: Robert Bishop

4:00 PM Donald N Petcher“Quantum Openness andthe Sovereignty of God”

Gregory S Bennett“God’s Providence in Nature:The Forgotten Doctrine in theRelationship betweenScience and Faith”

George L Murphy“Kenosis and the Inspirationof Scripture”

Richard F Carlson“Biblical Portraits:Creation and Worldview”




4:30 PM Paul H Lange“Prayers for Healing:Does God ChangeHis Mind?”

David Wilcox andDavid W Hoferer

“Dysteleology, Holoteleology,or Intelligent Design”

David S Newman“Uncertainty, Determinism,Scientific Method, and theWisdom of Franz Boas”

Stephen C Dilley“’Making Converts toEvolution’: MethodologicalNaturalism as a RhetoricalWeapon in theOrigin of Species”

5:00 PM Pamela L Bryant“The Magnitude of God”

Wayne K Dawson“A New Entropy Modelfor Biopolymer Folding:Yet Another Sign of theDivine Ingenuity inGod’s Creation”

Paul H Seely“An Answer to Whitcomb andMorris’s The Genesis Flood”

5:30 PM Dinner

6:45 PM Women in Science Gathering –FAC Room 114

7:30 PM Communications Meeting

–Randy Isaac, presiding

–Room 114

Career Progression for Christians in Science:Panel Discussion

–Room 138

Test of FAITH: Introductory Resources on

Science and Christianity –Ruth Bancewicz

–Madden Theater (24)

9:00 PM InterVarsity Reception –hosted by Terry Morrison, FAC Room 138

Monday, 1 August 2011

7:30 AM Breakfast

8:30 AM Devotions: Bob Fay, Madden Theater

Parallel

Session IV

IV-A. Seeking God’s Wisdom:The Life of the Individual

–Room 114 (20–21)

Moderator: Dave Fisher

IV-B. Seeking Wisdom in Science(cont’d)

–Room 138 (15–17)

Moderator: Thomas Roose

IV-C. Symposium: MethodologicalNaturalism: Glorifying God throughScience?–Madden Theater (10)

Moderator: Robert Bishop

9:00 AM Edwin Yamauchi“Physicians in the Biblical World”

Joseph Spradley“Methodological Naturalism inAncient and Medieval Science”

Robert C Bishop“God and Methodological Naturalismin the Scientific Revolution”

Ronald L Numbers“When God Disappeared from Science”

Bruce L Gordon“In Defense ofMethodological Neutrality”

9:30 AM Joseph Lechner“His Father’s World”

Jason Hine“The Fractal Nature of theSpiritual Journey—A Metaphor”

10:00 AM Bethany Sollereder“The Burden of Proof:Harry Rimmer and the Legacyof Scientific Apologetics”

Michael Sleasman“Technology, Dispositional Values, andVirtue: Proposals for AddressingEmerging Technologies in Bioethics”

10:30 AM Refreshment Break, Madden Lobby

11:00 AM William M Jordan“Christian, Engineer, andEntrepreneur: How AreThey Related?”

Kathryn Applegate“Science Has Limits:Why Methodological NaturalismIs a Good Thing”

Panel Discussion

12:00 PM Lunch

2:00 PM Check out closes

2:00 PM Yerkes Observatory field trip


Monday, 1 August 2011

Abstracts

Friday, 29 July 2011 7:30 PM

Dinosaurs under the Microscope:A New Look at Old Dinosaurs

Mary Schweitzer

In the summer of 2003, after a 3-yeareffort, the remains of MOR 1125,an exceptionally well-preservedTyrannosaurus rex, were finally broughtin from the field. This dinosaur wasalready special, because its locationat the very base of the Hell Creekformation made it the geologicallyoldest Tyrannosaurus rex ever found.Little did we know then just howspecial it really was!

This talk will chronicle the story of1125, affectionately labeled “B-rex,”from the field to the headlines. It isthe first dinosaur to show histologicalevidence for gender and reproduction(it’s a girl) and to show the presenceof truly soft tissues preserved overgeological time. This dinosaur and allwe have learned from it have openedthe possibility of understanding extinctorganisms in deep time at a level wehave previously thought impossible.

Saturday, 30 July 2011 8:30 AM

Stem Cells, Embryos and Ethics:A Continuing Controversy

William Hurlbut

After more than a decade of debate,discord, and political maneuvering, thecontroversy over embryonic stem cellresearch continues. President Obama’sexecutive order increasing the numberof cell lines available for federalfunding has been challenged in courtand awaits final ruling; several celllines approved under President Bushare no longer considered ethicallyprocured; and though there has beenencouraging progress with non-embryonic, alternative sources ofpluripotent stem cells, technicalchallenges remain and there arerenewed calls for “cloning” to produce

patient-specific cell lines for therapeu-tic use. Moreover, public frustrationwith the pace of progress with embry-onic stem cells, and promising studieswith adult stem cells (including fetalcells) have added troubling ethicalissues of their own.

What is needed is a comprehensivepolicy, grounded in coherent moralprinciples and solid science, that willopen a way forward with consensus—but, given the current political climate,we may instead be heading for contin-uing controversy.

Saturday, 30 July 2011 1:15 PM

Glorifying God in a Scientific Milieu:The Contrasting Domains of

Neuroscience and ReproductionGareth Jones

Whenever one encounters Christianconcerns about reproduction (includ-ing genetics) the emphasis is invariablyplaced on the assertion that thisamounts to intrusion into divine terri-tory. This is a realm in which humansshould exercise great caution, becauseit represents a crucial stage in theformation of a newly constitutedhuman being. Additionally, it placesonerous control in the hands of humanbeings, whose proclivity is to destroyand deface rather than build up. On theother hand, there is generally far lesstheological concern about intrusionsinto another center of human existence,the brain. And yet, arguably, this mayhave far-reaching influence on anindividual’s standing before God, bothfor good and ill. I shall argue thatintrusions in both spheres representsignificant control by human beings asthose who image God, and that from aChristian perspective both representpotential means for glorifying God andserving humanity.

In both areas, what shines through asof crucial importance is that embryo,fetus, and adult are all viewed in theirwholeness rather than as machines tobe deconstructed. This immediatelypresents a challenge of major propor-tions to the scientific community,

since science’s power emanates fromits ability to dissect and analyze thesmallest of components in their isola-tion. A possible consequence inbiomedicine is to lose sight of theindividual in their integrity andcohesion, sometimes referred to astheir “soulness.” By the same token,science can be employed to enhancethe human condition: to overcomedisease and debility, to improve theliving conditions of individuals andcommunities, and even to change(improve?) aspects of human nature.The theological basis of these aspira-tions will be outlined, from whichI shall conclude that we are called tolive in hope rather than in fear, a hopebased on the hope we have in Christ.


Climate Change: Why Are Scienceand Faith in Conflict?

Katharine Hayhoe

Our planet is currently warming ata rate unprecedented in human history.The vast majority of evidence suggeststhat heat-trapping gases produced byhumans are the primary driver of theserecent changes. Despite the extraordi-nary scientific consensus on this topic,however, 66% of evangelical Christiansand 60% of all Protestant pastorsdisagree with this conclusion. Whatare the origins of this remarkabledisconnect between traditional conser-vative Christian values and anti-environmental ideology? And—moreimportantly—what does science tell usabout the consequences of persistingin this denial?

Sunday, 31 July 2011 10:30 AM

Challenges, Changes and Chalicesin the Natural Sciences

Dorothy F Chappell

The exciting world of science attracts,engages and energizes creative think-ing for new eras of progress found inexploration of the frontiers of thenatural world. Creativity and geniuscelebrated properly perpetuate the joyof discovery and invention. The stimu-


PLENARY SESSIONS

lating dynamics captured in scientificinvestigation create cycles of thoughtthat profoundly mark each humangeneration with new technology,communication marvels, survivalstrategies, and literacy about intrica-cies known only to those who exploreand test the natural world.

Ensuring the future of science in theUnited States after recent decades ofdecline and change in scientific literacyis essential to the future welfare ofglobal communities. Investments in theculture of science from education totechnological developments and purescientific investigations of the naturalworld, among many other things,raise the visibility of science andincrease the confidence of citizens touse science for the good of populationsaround the world.

The vitality of science as a respectedand inviting career is influenced byeconomic, political and sociologicalfactors and involves robust engage-ment by societies in the scientificenterprise. The joy of discovery shoulddirect the promotion of science wherelegitimate career aspirations, inspira-tion of imagination and creativity arecommon experiences, and successfulcollaborations are developed. Thefrontiers of exploration elucidated byscience should revolutionize educationwhere informal and formal learningconverge and open the portals ofcreativity and discovery. Science train-ing should include advocacy andunderstanding of the challenges andchanges in economics, politics andsocieties that influence scientificinquiry. Perpetual enlivenment ofscientific engagement is tied directlyto the provision for prosperity of scien-tific investigation.

Sunday, 31 July 2011 1:30 PM

One Example of Science-FaithSynergy: How We Can Glorify God

and Serve Humanity byCaring for the EarthSteven Bouma-Prediger

Regardless of what people think aboutvarious ecological degradations, e.g.,global climate change, the Bible affirmsthat we humans are called to serve andprotect the earth. But what exactly doesthat mean? How should we serve andwhat should we protect?

It takes more than good intentions tofulfill the biblical call to be earth-keepers. It takes, among other things,sound scientific knowledge of entropyand energy flow, niches and the nitro-gen cycle, keystone species and plantsuccession. Christian earthkeepers, inother words, need basic knowledgeabout how the world works and theinterconnectedness of all creaturesgreat and small. Caring for the earth isone important example of science-faithsynergy—of science enhancing thewitness of faith and faith motivatingscience to seek shalom.


How Does What We Eat CreateChronic Disease?

Martin M Root

In this presentation, I will discuss howcomponents of the current typicalWestern diet contribute to the onsetof the common chronic diseases,the cardiovascular diseases, diabetes,and the cancers. Starting from a dietthat confers low risk to these diseases,we will see how adding commoningredients of the Western, andespecially American, diet increasesrisk. The possible mechanisms ofthese risks will be discussed.

While still under criticism and review,the newest Dietary Guidelines forAmericans 2010 is a reasonable startingpoint. Some of the best evidence forthe efficacy of this diet comes frominternational studies in countrieswhere the chronic diseases so commonin our country are much less common.In addition, we find that foods and notnutrients in pills seem to work best.And while genomics may hold answersin the decades to come, simple publichealth messages such as lower saltand trans fat and sugar can save liveshere and now.

One of the most surprising lessonsto come out of research on diet andchronic disease in the last 20 yearsis the convergence on a single dietarymessage for two very different diseasefamilies, the cardiovascular diseasesand the cancers. We will explore how

a single set of dietary recommenda-tions, less meat and more fruits andvegetables and more exercise, affectsthe different pathways that lead tothese two families of diseases.


Environmental and EthicalImplications of Meat Consumption

Steven G Hall

Americans eat more meat than theydid a century ago. They also eat moreanimal products than do citizens ofmany less-affluent countries. This diethas health implications such asincreased rates of obesity, cardio-vascular diseases, and cancer.However, the implications for theenvironment are also significant.For example, scientific studies suggestthat beef raised in confined animalfeeding operations (CAFOs) mayrequire 20–40 times (4000%) moreresources than the grains fed (e.g.,corn, soy) cattle. In this case, thesegrains could potentially be eatenby humans.

Other animals may be better converters(chicken and some fish may bring theratio down below 300%), but all willexperience some loss of energy andhigher costs in terms of resources(energy, water, land) when comparinganimals to the plants they consume.This is further exaggerated for carni-vores such as salmonid fish species.

A related issue is that animals confinedin CAFOs may be exposed to higherlevels of pathogens and wastes,resulting in lower quality of life forconsumers, as well as the need forhigher use of antibiotics and otherinterventions. Compassionate andconservative people should considereating less meat, not only for the healthbenefits but also for environmental andethical reasons.


Animal Rights orResponsible Stewardship?

Jerry L Risser

As societies transition toward greaterurbanization, the agrarian connectionsto the animals that serve as humanfood have become distant memories.This has shifted the way we view

GLOBAL MEAT CONSUMPTION: HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ETHICAL CONCERNS


Symposium:

GLOBAL MEAT CONSUMPTION:

HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL AND

ETHICAL CONCERNS

livestock dramatically. In one sense,it has created a paradigm of humanrelationships to animals that identifiesmore with pets than farm animals,and leads inexorably toward notionsof animal rights and liberation. Yet,in another sense, the detachment hascorresponded with the developmentof vast intensive livestock operations,so-called “factory farms,” that create,among other issues, great concernsabout the welfare of the animals insuch facilities that often go unrecog-nized by the consumer. Both shouldconcern Christians.

The extension of the concept of rightsto animals threatens the primacy ofhuman dignity, particularly in theso-called “marginal cases” wherehuman sentience is in doubt. Yetthe way we treat livestock that willultimately be our food also reflectsupon our humanity, and particularlyin the way in which we approach thecreation over which God has grantedus dominion.

This presentation will seek to definethe salient issues of contemporaryfood-animal welfare. It will furtherdescribe the predominant philosophi-cal and theological arguments in favorof animal rights, with responses, bothsecular and Christian, that rebutthese positions. It will engage a viewgrounded in the responsible steward-ship tenets of the dominion mandateof Scripture, granting a distinct moralstatus for animals but maintaining the“bright line” of separation ontologi-cally from human beings. It willpropose an animal ethic consistentwith this view, including its practicalimplications.


Food as a Moral Object:The Ethics of Eating

James Thobaben

Eating is a moral act that usually iscasually performed with little ethicalconsideration in late modern westernsociety. Even Christians—at this time,in this society—people who aresupposed to offer up their bodies as“living sacrifices,” rarely consider themorality of food as the source of thevery elemental blocks that make up thephysical body that is supposed to beoffered to God. This has certainly not

always been the case—as Jesus speak-ing on Levitical purity (Mark 7:18–19),the Last Supper, the admonition ofPaul in Rom. 14:21, severe restrictionby ascetic hermits, behavioralstandards in many monastic communi-ties, seasonal fasting in the Catholicand Orthodox traditions, and morerecently, community expectationsamong early Puritans and then thosein the Wesleyan-Holiness movementindicate.

Christians are now being asked (andare asking themselves), “Has thisaspect of human physicality beeninappropriately ignored as a moralconcern?” Questions are raised bythose associated with the so-calledGreen Movement, but also by Chris-tians in the Global South who wondernot if those in the West should bedeprived but if believers in that portionof the world in which the faith israpidly growing should be supportedby other believers (2 Corinthians 8).

In this presentation, the history ofChristian “moral eating” is brieflyexplored, and consideration is givento whether “eating” should assumegreater prominence in the communitydiscourse of Christians as a behaviorrequiring ethical accountability—as a matter of personal purity, justiceamong humans and toward the earth,and mercy for other believers.


The Study of Paleontologyand the Creation Mandate

Keith B Miller

As God’s image bearers we are calledto exercise servant lordship overa diverse and dynamic biosphere.Our growing understanding of thehistory of that creation must bebrought to bear on our stewardshipmandate. The distribution and inter-relationships of species in modernecosystems is a result of the evolution-ary response of organisms to theirdynamically changing environments.The current biosphere is a consequenceof its history. That evolutionary history

is recorded in the fossil record, andinterpreted through the science ofpaleontology.

Paleontology gives us a window intothe changing life and ecosystems ofthe past. This history is otherwise onlyknown by God, who has given us thetools to have a glimpse into his pastcreative work. The ability to see thepast, as well as to anticipate the future,places us in a unique position withinGod’s creation. We become witnessesof God’s work over time, and partici-pants in God’s continued creativeactivity in the present. We are agentsof change in the natural world, andknowing its past has important impli-cations for how we exercise our poweras God’s image bearers today.

Another important consequence ofour ability to bring ancient organismsto life is that we can participate withGod in looking at all that has beenmade and declaring it good. Everynew discovery of the past creation isan opportunity to worship God andbear witness to God’s goodness,power and glory.


Radiocarbon Methods of DatingMaterials for Biblical Archaeology

and Earthquakes in theDead Sea AreaKen Wolgemuth

Radiocarbon (C-14) is a trace isotopeof carbon that is formed in the upperatmosphere by cosmic rays bombard-ing nitrogen atoms, and then isincorporated into carbon dioxidethat is taken into the biosphere. Howthe decay of C-14 with its half-life of5,730 years can be applied as a datingmethod to wood, charcoal, bones, coralreefs, and other recent carbon-bearingmaterial will be described.

Because cosmic ray bombardment fromthe sun varies with time, radiocarbonages calculated from the measuredvalues in old samples must becalibrated against calendar yearsderived from tree rings, sedimentaryvarves, coral growth, and other radio-active isotopes (Uranium andThorium). Radiocarbon dating isapplicable to 45,000–50,000 years withgreater uncertainty as C-14 decays to


PROBING THE PAST: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PALEONTOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGY

Symposium:

PROBING THE PAST:

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM

PALEONTOLOGY AND

ARCHAEOLOGY

less that 2–5% of modern carbon inthe atmosphere.

Radiocarbon dating and varve-counting of lake sediments along theDead Sea fault and plate boundaryhave been investigated in the lightof the earthquakes mentioned in theBible. Examples shown will illustratethe usefulness of this dating methodapplied to events recorded in the Bible,and counteract objections by young-earth advocacy organizations.


Physical Geography of the EasternNile Delta during the Bronze Age:

Implications for theLocation of the Red/Reed Sea

Stephen O Moshier

Surface geology was surveyed ina portion of the northwest Sinai, Egypt,coinciding with excavations atTell el-Borg from 2000 to 2007 underthe direction of James K. Hoffmeier,Trinity International University.Excavations at Tell el-Borg andadjacent Tell Hebua have confirmedNew Kingdom temple inscriptionsand murals that depict the region asthe starting point of the ancient“Ways of Horus,” the militarizedcoastal road between Egypt and theland of the Philistines (modern Israeland Palestine).

Historical satellite imagery (includingdeclassified photos from cold-war-eraspy programs) reveals surface featuresthat were obscured in recent years byurbanization and agricultural projects.At the same time, an extensive opencanal system for the Al-Salam agricul-tural project reveals subsurfacedeposits representing ancient environ-ments that existed in the region duringthe Bronze Age, when the region wasunder the influence of the now defunctbranch of the Pelusiac Nile.

Coordinating the geological survey andsatellite imagery with GPS/GIS tech-nology resulted in a paleogeographicmap of the study area for the BronzeAge. The map reveals differentpositions of the Mediterranean coast-line with associated lagoons and theexistence of Pelusiac Nile distributariesand wetlands. The existence of“extinct” inland bodies of water in the

area, along with correlations betweenthe ancient names of excavations sitesand place names in Exod. 14:1–4,provides some compelling candidatesfor the location of the Red/Reed Sea.Alternative Red/Reed Sea sites basedupon geological reasoning will beevaluated, as well.


The Location of the Red/Reed Seain the Light of Recent

Archaeological Work in EgyptJames K Hoffmeier

Since the 19th century, Egyptologistsand explorers have been interested intracing the route of the exodus and thelocation of the Red/Reed Sea of theExodus narratives. These investiga-tions have resulted in differentreconstructions, which, in turn,have been presented in Bible atlasesover the decades.

During the occupation of Sinai from1967 to 1982, Israeli geologists andarchaeologists conducted surveys andexcavations that resulted in some newtheories about the route of the exodusand the location of the Red/Reed Sea.The return of Sinai to Egyptian sover-eignty ushered in a new era of researchin Sinai. Some important discoverieshave been made, one of the mostimportant of which was the uncoveringof Tjaru (Sile), Egypt’s fortified frontiertown.

Beginning in 1994 and ending in 2008,I directed archaeological surveysaround and excavations at Tell el-Borg(N. Sinai), along with geological andpaleo-environmental fieldwork underStephen Moshier (Wheaton College).This paper will present new evidenceto suggest that Yam Suf of the Biblebe equated with the Ballah Lake(s)on the eastern frontier betweenEgypt and Sinai.


“Reorientation” Therapies andSame-Sex Desire:

Are they Effective and Ethical?Heather Looy

“Reorientation” or “reparative” thera-pies intended to help people shift fromhomosexual toward heterosexualdesires and behaviors are highlycontroversial. Opponents argue they(a) don’t work, (b) attempt to treatsomething that is not inherentlyharmful, and (c) have potentiallyserious harmful effects. Proponentsclaim that such therapies must bean option for those who experienceprofound conflict between their sexualdesires and their conscience or values,and that evidence of flexibility insexual orientation suggests that someindividuals with same sex attractionscan experience genuine change.

I briefly review (a) the history andcurrent consensus and controversyregarding sexual orientation andchange therapies, (b) the scientificevidence for the stability of sexualorientation and the possibility ofpsychotherapy as a means to altersexual desire, and (c) the moralassumptions and ethical implicationsof various positions on this topic.


The Reproductive Brain:Neurosexism and the

Ethics of SexualityWilliam M Struthers

Over the past 20 years, there has beena renewed interest in the differencesbetween men and women. Of interestare recent brain imaging studies whichexamine the neurological differencesbetween men and women in how theyprocess sensory information, performcognitive tasks, and respond emotion-ally. The rise of this emphasis on maleand female brain differences extendsinto a variety of domains and can beunderstood as a form of what is called“neurosexism.” Neurosexism is theidea that neuroscience researchsupports sexist attitudes. A morerecent manifestation of the classic

THE ETHICS OF NEUROSCIENCE AND REPRODUCTION


Symposium:

THE ETHICS OF NEUROSCIENCE

AND REPRODUCTION

nature/nurture debate withinpsychology, neurosexism providesa contemporary example of how scien-tific research is used in the ethicalarena. When these dissimilaritiesbetween men and women are attrib-uted to brain function, it can becomea slippery slope with respect to sexualethics.

In this presentation, a model of sexual-ity which extends from the genetic tothe spiritual and sociological will bepresented. A review of the scientificliterature on gender and sex differenceswill be provided and an emphasis onthe reproductive aspects of the brain(those that are involved in sexualorientation and intimacy) will becovered. The model presented willattempt to provide a way to addressgender differences in psychologicalphenomena such as cognition,behavior, and affect, that respectsthe common and distinct aspects ofhuman sexuality as seen througha Christian theological lens.


Epigenetic Mechanisms inHuman Reproduction and Disease:

An Ethical AnalysisBrian T Greuel

Epigenetics is the study of heritablealterations in gene expression notcoded in the actual DNA sequence ofany gene(s), but arising from modifica-tions to DNA and chromatin structure.In particular, abnormal changes in themethylation state of DNA or in themodification of associated histoneproteins may have profound impactson embryo and trophoblast develop-ment and lead to the development ofphenotypes or disease states thatextend to future generations. Nutri-tional factors, exercise, stress levels,and exposure to environmental toxinshave all been associated with heritable,epigenetic changes in gene expression.Assisted reproduction technologiesmay also lead to an increase indisorders resulting from epigeneticalterations to developing gametes andearly embryos. The ethical implicationsof lifestyle choices and technologicalpractices that impact human reproduc-tion and disease through their effectson epigenetic mechanisms will beconsidered in this presentation.

Monday, 1 August 2011 9:00 AM

Methodological Naturalism inAncient and Medieval Science

Joseph Spradley

Some of the most important ideas ofthe scientific revolution in the seven-teenth century emerged in the earlycenturies of the Christian church.These concepts made it possible formodern science to transcend its ancientGreek heritage, which was limited byits dichotomy between the heavens andthe earth, deification of the heavens,and lack of empirical emphasis.Early Christian contributions includeideas related to inertia, gravity, thephysical nature of the heavens, and theimportance of empirical evidence, all ofwhich exhibited a new methodologicalnaturalism that influenced Galileo andothers in the scientific revolution.Particular emphasis will be placed onthe work of John Philoponus in thesixth century and Hildegard of Bingenin the twelfth century, who werearguably the first Christian male andfemale scientists.


God and Methodological Naturalismin the Scientific Revolution

Robert C Bishop

As a practice, what we now call“methodological naturalism” wasidentified with the new experimentalphilosophy of such leading lights ofthe Scientific Revolution as Boyle andNewton. They had serious theologicalreasons for their methodologicalapproaches to studying creation.Ultimately, their goal was not simplyto understand how creation workedbut to glorify God and demonstrate hiswisdom.


When God Disappearedfrom Science

Ronald L Numbers

Starting with Buffon (1707–1788), I willdescribe how God was removed fromscience by the end of the 19th century.


In Defense ofMethodological Neutrality

Bruce L Gordon

I argue that, while much currentlip-service is paid to methodologicalnaturalism, it did not operate as a rigidconstraint on rigorous scientific theori-zation in the past, and it is not, in fact,a constraint much evident in thetechnical apparatus of modern physicaltheory. Using examples from physicsand biology, I argue that science isbest served by methodologicallyneutral assumptions, not criteria thatfavor naturalistic presumption overits denial.


Science Has Limits:Why Methodological Naturalism

Is a Good ThingKathryn Applegate

Methodological naturalism, the scien-tific practice of limiting the explanationof natural phenomena to only naturalmechanisms, is a wise and powerfulmeans of investigating the createdorder. This limitation is not a defect inscience but rather a spur towardthorough examination of the phenome-non in question. For the scientist whois a Christian, a commitment to God’sprovidential upholding of all thingsallows free exploration of the worldwith full confidence that whateverprocess one studies, from the birth ofstars to the inner workings of cells, oneis never in danger of explaining awayGod’s activity in the world.


METHODOLOGICAL NATURALISM: GLORIFYING GOD THROUGH SCIENCE?

Symposium:

METHODOLOGICAL NATURALISM:

GLORIFYING GOD THROUGH

SCIENCE?


Teaching Science and Religion:Some Mid-Career Reflections and

SuggestionsDenis O Lamoureux

The relationship between science andreligion continues to be a struggle forevangelical students. On Sundaymornings, they hear of the historicityof Adam and Eve and Noah’s Flood,but during the week at university,they are faced with the scientific factsthat humans evolved and that therenever was a global flood. Conse-quently, most of the evangelicalstudents entering my class have theirfaith and science in separate compart-ments. Yet, intuitively they know suchan approach is misguided.

Employing a constructivist pedagogy,I introduce a variety of classic modelson the relationship between scienceand religion (Ian Barbour, JohnHaught, and John Polkinghorne). Butthe most important aspect of the courseis to challenge their assumption ofconcordism—the belief that the Biblealigns with modern science. Theseprinciples are presented slowly andrespectfully in nearly every class, sincethey challenge years of home school,Christian school, and Sunday schoolindoctrination. In addition, studentsare introduced to a biblical under-standing of intelligent design (contra

so-called “intelligent design theory”),freeing them from the false dichotomyof design vs. evolution. Finally,primary readings of Galileo’s herme-neutics (“Letter to Christina,” 1615)and Darwin’s religious beliefs (Auto-

biography, 1876), coupled witha critique of the naïve positivism ofRichard Dawkins, lead nearly everyevangelical student toward a healthyand complementary relationshipbetween modern science and theirfaith in only thirteen weeks.

Audio/slide lectures of the first sixhours of the course with the class notesand class handouts are available onlineat www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/chrtc_350_1st_six_hours.htm


Beyond Two Books: Metaphors forthe Relationship between Scienceand Religion in the 21st Century

Keenan E Dungey

Even before the dawn of modernscience, Christians have used the“Two Books” metaphor to describe therelationship between knowledge of theworld and knowledge of God. SinceGod, the Author of all truth, wroteboth books, then our science should bein harmony with our religion. Peter M.J. Hess has reviewed the history of thismetaphor and the decline in itspopularity. Additional metaphors havebeen used in western culture, includingthe warfare hypothesis, Gould’s“non-overlapping magisteria,” and theuse of a bridge, to illustrate possibledialog between science and religion(The Center for Theology and theNatural Sciences).

For three years, undergraduates atthe University of Illinois Springfieldhave studied the relationships betweenscience and religion and haveproposed their own metaphors toillustrate these relationships. In thispresentation, I will describe thesemetaphors, categorize them accordingto Barbour’s typology for relatingscience and religion, and discuss theiradvantages and disadvantages.By widening the list of possiblemetaphors, I hope to provide opportu-nities for our culture to explore newways to relate science and religion.


Defeating the Teaching ofCreationism in the Public School

Science ClassroomJohn Staver

Writing in the January 28, 2011 issue ofScience, Berkman and Plutzer assertthat, while science consistently defeatscreationism in the courtroom, science islosing to creationism in the classroom(pp. 404–5). Schwab (School Review 81,1973) explains why: “Scholars, as such,are incompetent to translate scholarlymaterial into curriculum” (p. 501).Schwab’s bold assertion, set forthalmost 40 years ago, not only remainsvalid today, but also extends to teach-ing and to communicating with thepublic at large.

Schwab maintained that fouradditional domains of expertisebeyond subject matter expertise arerequired: Teachers-teaching; learners-learning, the context-setting for teach-ing and learning, and curriculumdevelopment as a process. Moreover,the representatives of these domains ofexpertise must work collaboratively tosucceed. If advocates of evolution areto defeat creationism in the classroomand win the support of the citizenry,then they must accept Schwab’s asser-tion and my generalization of it.

My strategy for success centers onutilizing research-based knowledgefrom science, theology, and the fouradditional domains of expertise andresearch-based strategies for interact-ing with learners of all ages and faithswho exhibit sympathy toward, quietlysupport, or openly argue for includingsome form of creationism (e.g., intelli-gent design) in the public schoolscience curriculum. Examples of suchknowledge are (1) authority and limitsof Holy Scripture; (2) setting reason-able versus unreasonable goals;(3) influence of learners’ prior knowl-edge; (4) teaching problem-solving;(5) learning via scaffolded, guidedinquiry; and (6) change theory.


The Role of Faith Structures inMediating Christian University

Biology-Related Majors’Reconciliation of Evolution and

Personal Religious BeliefsMark Winslow

The goal of this study was to explorehow Christian biology-related majorsat a Christian university reconcile theirperceived conflicts between evolutionand religious beliefs, and how theirfaith, as a structural-developmentalsystem for ordering and makingmeaning of the world, plays a role inthe mediating process. This naturalisticstudy utilized a case study design of15 participants specified as under-graduate biology-related majors orrecent biology-related graduates froma midwestern Christian universitywho had completed an upper-levelcourse on evolution.

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews that investigatedparticipants’ faith structures and their



SEEKING GOD’S WISDOM FOR

SCIENCE TEACHING

views on creationism and evolution.Fowler’s theory of faith developmentand Parks’ model of college students’faith systems were used extensively.Data analysis revealed patterns thatwere organized into themes and sub-themes, which were the majoroutcomes of the study. Most partici-pants were raised to believe increationism, but came to accept evolu-tion through an extended process ofevaluating the scientific evidence insupport of evolution, negotiating theliteralness of Genesis, recognizingevolution as a nonsalvation issue, andobserving professors as role models ofChristians who accept evolution.

Participants’ faith structures, whichplayed an important role in partici-pants’ reconciliatory process, are thefocus of this paper. The rich descrip-tion of this study lends heuristic andnovel insights to educators seekingan understanding of the complexprocesses by which Christianbiology-related majors approachlearning about evolution and seekreconciliation between their under-standing of evolution and theirpersonal religious beliefs.


Chemistry as a Source of Wisdom:The Chemistry Curriculum as a Toolfor Exploring Faith-Science Dialogue

Stephen M Contakes

This paper presents a scheme forsystematically exploring science-faith-technology-ethics-dialogue ina chemistry curriculum. Central to thisstrategy is the first-semester generalchemistry course, which may be usedto equip students with the founda-tional philosophical and theologicaltools needed to meaningfully relatetheir faith to contemporary science.The reason is that chemistry’s centraltheoretical paradigm, atomic-moleculartheory, is noncontroversial, has a richhistorical relationship with Christiantheology, and lends itself to discussionof the nature of science and therelationship between natural andrevealed theology. With this ground-ing, students are prepared to furtherexplore issues such as radioisotopedating and the age of the earth, theanthropic principle, chemistry-basednatural theologies, biomolecular

sequences and evolution, scientificatheism, Christian environmentalism,and technological ethics in upper-division chemistry courses.

Historical case studies spread through-out the curriculum are used to furtherdevelop selected faith-science topicsand to illustrate how select Christianchemists’ faith impacted the researchthey pursued and their scientificpractices. Formal lab-based discussionsprovide opportunities to help studentspractice ethically responsible scienceand reflect on how scientific practiceinfluences spiritual formation.

A capstone course reviews, system-atizes, and integrates students’understanding of contemporaryfaith-science scholarship and exploresethical, pastoral, and sociologicalissues associated with the widespreaduse of chemical technologies includingchemical weapons, “the pill,” psycho-active drugs, chemically intensiveagriculture, plastics, fossil fuels, dual-use chemicals, and biotechnology.


Christian Faculty at ChristianColleges and Universities:

Sine Qua Non?Bryce Sullivan

This paper addresses some of thetheoretical and practical considerationsrelated to hiring Christian faculty forChristian universities. In an effort todetermine the faculty hiring practicesand procedures at Christian collegesand universities in the United States,deans or chief academic officersselected from institutional membersof the Lilly Network of Church-RelatedColleges and Universities (Lilly) orfrom the Council for Christian Collegesand Universities (CCCU) weresurveyed by email.

Out of a total of 180 institutionssurveyed, responses were receivedfrom 51 institutions for an institutionalresponse rate of 28.3%. There were 26unique responses from Lilly Networkinstitutions, 28 from CCCU institu-tions, and 3 responses from institutionsbelonging both to CCCU and Lilly.

The benefits and challenges associatedwith the Christian hiring policies werevaried. Some respondents reporteddifficulties locating enough qualified

Christian candidates, and othersreported no difficulties in this regard.Some schools that did not require thehiring of Christians stated that theirChristian mission and culture did notsuffer. Other respondents thought thathiring Christian faculty was the sinequa non of being a Christian univer-sity. These and other issues will bediscussed in the paper.


Challenges in Establishing anASA Homeschool Science

Resources WebsiteDouglas Hayworth

Establishing a high-quality website toadvise Christian homeschool teachers(parents) about science is a criticallyimportant fulfillment of our ASAmission. We are uniquely qualified andpositioned to inform and adviseparents about the scientific content andChristian perspectives presented tothem in available homeschoolingcurricula. In addition, we own or haveaccess to a large repository of informa-tion that could be made available tosupplement homeschool learning.

I volunteered to lead the ASAHomeschool Science Resources projecttwo years ago and worked mostly onmy own for the first year to developand design the website. The projectwas officially approved by the ASAcouncil in March 2010 and an anony-mous donor provided funding.

The project is moving forward, but theprogress has been slow as we continueto work through a variety of philo-sophical, pedagogical, content-design,logistical, and practical issues. I willdiscuss these issues (and hopefullyobtain useful feedback about them)by addressing the following typesof questions: Against what sciencestandards do we measure whenreviewing textbooks? What subject-topic classification is best? What formatis best for writing and presentingreviews and resources? How do wedesign an easy-to-navigate and search-able website on a limited budget? Howdo I enlist volunteers and effectivelycommunicate with them to delegatetasks? How do we negotiate withcurriculum publishers to providetextbooks for review? Ultimately, howcan we recruit qualified ASA members



to examine and write informative,detailed reviews of textbooks?


Role of PUST for North KoreanAgricultural Development and

Food Security throughLife Science Research

Pilju Kim Joo and Joshua J Song

The Pyongyang University of Scienceand Technology (PUST) is the firstinternational research and educationalinstitution to operate in North Korea.The university’s goal is to be a world-class higher education institution thatwill train generations of North Koreanstudents—who have been shieldedfrom many international influences—in the technical skills and knowledgerequired to make positive contribu-tions to a global community. PUST willbe unique with its international faculty,all-English instruction, and havingfaculty members financially supportedby external sources.

Over the next five years, PUST plans torecruit approximately 250 Christianfaculty members from prestigiousuniversities and research institutionsin the United States and elsewhere inorder to expose PUST students to thebest thinking in the educational world.These faculty members will lead in theclassroom and in research laboratoriesas permanent faculty members, adjunctfaculty members, or special lecturerswho rotate in and out of campus ona carefully planned basis.

Volunteers may teach in one of threeacademic departments: the School ofElectrical and Computer Engineering,the School of International Finance andManagement, or the School of Agricul-ture and Life Sciences. In the future,three more departments will be added:the School for Architecture, Engineer-ing, and Construction (AEC), theSchool for Public Health and Environ-mental Sciences (PHES), and theIndustrial Cluster, which will allowinternational corporations to trainPUST students.

To apply for a faculty position orto request additional information,please email [email protected] [email protected].


Researching Science and Religion:Thoughts about Engaging

in the ClassroomBryan Clarke

My study researches student engage-ment with issues related to theinteraction between science andreligion. The researcher’s backgroundin teaching both science classes andreligion classes and as a chaplainbecame part of the context for research-ing student tension between scienceand religion at the university.

The genesis of this research specificallyunfolded with questions in theresearcher’s own classroom practiceand university experiences as hewatched students grapple withquestions about creation and evolution.From these questions and this context,the connection was made between thequestions students were raising toeducational hermeneutic frameworksthat might affect student typologicalframeworks.

As this research progressed, it devel-oped into a quest to understand howscience and religion typologies couldbe utilized in survey form as a toolto increase student understandingand classroom discussion. Thus,the purpose of the research projectcentered upon the creation ofa workable survey instrument tohelp students and teachers betterunderstand the interactions betweenissues of science and religion.

This survey was applied to studentstaking science and religion courseCHRTC 350 at the University ofAlberta, and their responses reveala fascinating process of grappling withtheir own frameworks of understand-ing and some shifts in their thinking.The result of this research opensavenues to explore the relationship ofeducational pedagogy to the scienceand religion classroom, deflating anoften binary approach that upholds thefalse dichotomy of science or religion.


Replacing “Human Exceptionalism”with an Integrated

Environmental EthicPeter M J Hess

Earth’s biosphere is poised on thebrink of the sixth mass extinction eventduring the past 450 million years,this one of human making. Althoughthe factors underlying our loomingecological crises are diverse, onein particular stands at the root: thedoctrine of “human exceptionalism.”Born of an antiquated notion of theAbrahamic traditions that humanswere created to rule over the earth,human exceptionalism has under-girded the philosophy that Homo

sapiens—alone of all species—isexempt from biological constraints.This attitude leads to the inevitablefailure of our ecological stewardship,and may very well prove fatal to ourspecies and to our planet mates.

Can we unearth the roots of an alterna-tive theological story that integratesHomo sapiens more fully into creation?Starting from the Pauline convictionthat “all creation is groaning together”(Rom. 8:22), I will look at poetic andtheological resources within the RomanCatholic tradition that challengehuman exceptionalism. I will comparesome insights of Gerard ManleyHopkins, Alice Meynell, and KarlRahner on the relationship betweenGod, humanity, and evolving creation.

In the words of Karl Rahner, SJ,“The point at which God in a final self-communication irrevocably and defini-tively lays hold on the totality of thereality created by him is characterizednot as spirit but as flesh. It is this whichauthorizes the Christian to integratethe history of salvation into the historyof the cosmos” (Hominization [1958],55). Creation is the domain of God’sredemptive work, capable of bearingthe Incarnation and, in turn, of beingtransfigured by it. Integrating human-ity into the evolutionary creation storyis essential to articulating a coherentenvironmental ethic.





All Data Are Equal, but Some AreMore Equal Than Others

Thomas L Walters

All academic disciplines and individ-ual academicians adopt mechanismsfor arriving at conclusions by gatheringdata and analyzing that data.This paper argues that the differencesamong academic disciplines in the wayconclusions are reached has little to dowith analytical processes and almosteverything to do with the processesfor determining and selecting data.

Within specific academic disciplines,individuals may vary in their approachto collecting and viewing data, whichwill affect their conclusions. We willconsider how the mindset of the inves-tigators may affect their conclusions,depending on whether they are arealist, idealist, or instrumentalist.

This paper will address the selectedtopic of environmental stewardship,and of how seeking the truth aboutthe environment with a mindset ofpreserving God’s creation may affectthe data gathering and conclusionsof research.

The paper will also address “SeekingWisdom through Scientific Endeav-ors”—through the relevance of datacollection and mindset to individualsuccess toward approaching wisdom.


Earth Day: Origin and DevelopmentJohn Munday

Earth Day began in the mind offounder John McConnell, son ofa Pentecostal evangelist, in the late1960s. He aimed to promote globalpeace and justice by forging agreementaround a global holiday devoted to“Earth care.” By the winter of 1969,he had an agreement from the City ofSan Francisco and supporters in othercities to hold the first Earth Day onMarch 21, 1970. This date was chosento coincide with the spring equinox,making Earth Day a global geophysicalholiday which all people couldcelebrate independent of national,political, and creedal differences.

Another movement originated bySenator Gaylord Nelson planned

an “environmental teach-in” set forApril 22, 1970. Its name was changedin the planning stage to Earth Day;subsequently, Nelson claimed to be thefounder of Earth Day. The result eversince has been confusion and politicaltension about which day is Earth Day.

Today, more than 40 years later, EarthDay is celebrated on both days bydifferent groups of people. An annualceremony takes place at the UnitedNations Peace Bell in New York on thespring equinox, and at other citiesaround the world. The other morepopular day in April is well establishedin the environmental culture withmany celebrations and activities.These and other details about EarthDay’s origin and development will beexplored, with reference to extensivepersonal communications withMcConnell, books about bothMcConnell and Nelson, and to othermaterials in environmental archives.


How to Engage Evangelicals inConservation: The Implementation

of Creation Care in PeruOscar E Gonzalez

The environmental crisis in which weare living demands that it is necessaryto take action. Scientists and techni-cians may understand well the urgencyof a response to conserve nature,but civil society has to participate.The current approach to society withtechnical reasons is not enough toconvince people that everybody has toconserve the Earth. An environmentalethic is needed. Religion can be a goodsource for environmental ethics andChristianity has the doctrine ofcreation care that can be used fora calling to action.

I explain the applicability of creationcare doctrine among the evangelicalChristians in a third-world country,Peru. This is a country that has a hugebiodiversity, but also huge environ-mental problems and with a risingpopulation of evangelicals. Eventhough Peru has a population of morethan 80% Roman Catholic, evangelicalshave a stronger sense of communityand ties with the local church. Thereare several rural communities closeto important conservation areas that

have an important population ofevangelicals.

There are alternatives and oppositionto creation care which I will addressand comment on, providing a defenseand justification of this doctrine in thiscontext. Finally, I will give examples ofpositive outcomes of the applicabilityof creation care, such as churchesworking together with conservationistsfor the sake of nature and the glory ofGod.


Conservation and Christ:Insights for Participating in theRedemption of the Whole World

David W Hoferer

A challenge in conservation biologyis to reconnect fragmented habitats sothat individual members of all speciesliving in those areas may move fromone area to the next. This can connectnesting sites with feeding sites, providefor the expansion of small populations,and also provide for gene flowbetween populations that were discon-nected due to human activity. While allof these reasons for reconnectinghabitats are important, what is oftenoverlooked is the importance ofhealthy habitats for people. Investingour time, money, and energy intothe conservation of a turtle or insectspecies, for example, is seen to competewith the ethical demands for the elimi-nation of poverty, the education ofchildren, and the mission of connectingpeople with Christ for salvation fromsin. However, the emerging field ofecopsychology has offered newinsights into our interconnectednesswith the rest of nature.

Experiences with nature reduce stressin people, allow for faster recoverytimes from stressful situations, increaseattention and focus, and have beenfound to be important in the psycho-logical development of children.Mentally, humans respond positivelyto experiences with nature. Far fromtaking needed efforts away fromimproving people’s lives, then,the efforts of conservation biologistsprovide for the restoration of naturaland human communities. This isconsistent with an understandingof the work of Christ from Colossians,in which we are told not only that all



things came into existence throughChrist, but also that those same thingsare redeemed by Christ.

Reconnecting fragmented habitats isabout reconnecting human beings withthe whole of their environments andwith the Christ who reconciles all tothe Father. The dualism of believingthat human needs are separate fromthe needs of natural communities canbe overcome by understanding thathumans need healthy habitats that arereflective of the redemptive work ofChrist for the whole world.


Caring for Creation atConcordia University Wisconsin:

Bluff Restoration and theConcordia Center for

Environmental StewardshipDon W Korte Jr and Mary H Korte

A basic Christian understanding ofbiblical environmental stewardship,coupled with a Lutheran interpretationof vocation, has guided ConcordiaUniversity Wisconsin’s efforts toprotect creation as part of her missionof “helping students develop in mind,body, and spirit for service to Christ inthe Church and in the World.”

In Phase I of her Renewed by theWaters campaign, Concordiacompleted a $10 million bluff stabiliza-tion project, created access to the LakeMichigan beach, constructed an amphi-theater on the bluff’s top, plantednative prairies, and created perchedwetlands and offshore freshwatercommunities as part of the environ-mental restoration effort.

In Phase II, the new $4.2 millionLEED-certified Concordia Center forEnvironmental Stewardship (CCES)opened in summer 2010. The CCESincludes laboratories, classrooms, andlecture halls which were built toemphasize sustainability. This projectis not only protecting a unique part ofGod’s creation but is also providingdistinctive educational opportunitiesto share our Christian beliefs regardingour responsibility as stewards of God’screation with Concordia students, areaschools, and the community.

Concordia’s bluff stabilization projectwon the American Society of Civil

Engineers (ASCE) Outstanding CivilEngineering Award of Merit in 2010and was one of five finalists for theInternational Award the same year.This presentation highlightsConcordia’s unique campus project increation care and sustainability.


Science and God’sEarth-Protect Mandate

Ray Williams

Almost universally it is recognized thatGenesis 1 conveys a mandate from Godfor humankind to function as royalrepresentatives, having dominion overcreation with the inherent responsibil-ity to protect the earth. This scripturalcommand is not a metaphoric orallegorical message; instead, it isa direct instruction for humankindto act as responsible stewards of theearth’s environs. Significantly, themandate is imbedded in a narrativethat describes the transformation of theearth and the creation of humankindin the “image of God.”

Over the millennia, scientific discover-ies have verified the harmony thatexists between the biblical creationaccount and the physical world. Unfor-tunately, the interpretation of Genesis 1is still an unsettled issue and confusionabounds concerning the so-calledcreation days.

Organizationally, the author of Genesisdivides the earth’s transformation, andits filling with life forms, into eight“And God said” episodes. The analysisof Genesis 1 presented herein explainsthe “episode” versus “day” relation-ship by analyzing the account’s literarystructure, the use of the Hebrew wordyom, and the context of the “eveningand morning” refrain.

This fresh viewpoint adopts a literalinterpretation of the text and one thatharmonizes with the conclusions ofmodern science. Also, it recognizes thatthe author used a dual-pattern literarydevice to describe, in eight episodes,the earth’s transformation whilea sequence of “days” was inserted, as arefrain, to prescribe a living pattern forhumankind. This Dual-Pattern inter-pretation enables the full impact of theEarth-Protect mandate to be realized.


Does the Success of Science byItself Provide Strong Support

for Naturalism?Peter Payne

The success of science suggests that inthe normal order of nature, everythingcan be explained according to the lawsof physics. Does this provide strongsupport for naturalism? This paper willgive a philosophical critique of theclaim that it does. (1) A gapless normalorder of nature accords well with theChristian conception of God. (2) Thisdoes not imply a gapless history, i.e.,it does not imply that God neverdoes miracles. (3) Strong support fora thesis, e.g., naturalism, requires thatthere are no alternative explanationsthat accord well with the evidence inquestion, and that it has some priorplausibility. Christian theism meetsthe first condition. The latter goesbeyond this paper, but it will touchupon several arguments that purportto show that a Christian thesis lacksprior plausibility.


Metaphysical ConsiderationsEnhance Reverse

Engineering StudiesDominic Halsmer

With recent successes in the applica-tion of reverse engineering techniquesto natural systems, this approach isbeing adopted on a more widespreadbasis, especially in biology. Reverseengineering encompasses a broadapproach that asks many questions.How does the system work? How wasit formed? How does it relate to othersystems? What is its function orpurpose? Has it experienced damageor corruption from its initial state?How has this corruption affected itsfunctionality?

These kinds of questions are bestanswered by considering the wealth ofinformation that comes not only fromdirect dissection and analysis of thespecimen, but also from the broadrange of background informationregarding the specimen. In the case of




natural systems, this will typicallyinvolve metaphysical considerations.

Methodological naturalism commonlyholds sway in the modern scientificenterprise, and for good reason.Appeals to the supernatural aretypically not thought to be productivein the scientific method. However,scientific work can be roughly dividedinto three stages: data-collection,data-interpretation, and theory-building. And although reverseengineering makes extensive use ofall three of these stages, only the firststage necessarily omits metaphysicalconsiderations. When it comes to thereverse engineering of natural systems,such as the living cell, or large collec-tions of cells, data interpretation andtheory building are likely to beenhanced by metaphysical interpreta-tions. The historic Christian worldviewasserts that humankind was createdby God, but suffered corruption. It issuggested that metaphysical consider-ations may be helpful when conductingsuch reverse engineering studies.


Myth and Mystery:Fostering New Avenues of Dialogue

for Faith and ScienceMatthew M Huddleston

Against the backdrop of generallyperceived antagonism between scienceand religion, there have been manylaudable attempts to reconcile Chris-tian faith and modern science in recentyears. Unfortunately, progress withinboth scientific and church communitieshas been frustratingly slow. Tworelatively new avenues for extendingthis dialogue are argued for here.

First, I will demonstrate the inherentmythic component to major researchprojects by showing how scientistsroutinely, and often unknowingly,invoke the specific language of mythicnarrative to attach meaning, value,ethics, and even eschatological hopesto their scientific research. Specificpositive and negative examples of thispractice from the fields of physics andastronomy will be presented in detail.I will then describe how those in thefaith community could aid scientists inrecognizing and thoroughly examiningthis mythic component of their work.

Secondly, I will examine the criticalrole of naturalistic “paradoxes” inscientific innovation over the years(focusing on physics and astronomy)and show how those paradoxes closelyparallel specific “mysteries” rooted inChristian orthodoxy. The establisheduse of paradox to spur science forwardwill be presented as a model forChristians to approach their faith froma discovery-based perspective. Insteadof clamoring for dominance, scienceand Christianity, finding similarfrontiers to human understanding,can adopt a healthy sense of humilityin their common quest for truth.


Fossils from Space: A Believer’sChallenge or Blessing

Robert S Geddes

If evidence for extraterrestrial life is tobe discovered in the foreseeable future,it seems fated to be in the form ofan ancient microbial fossil. A review ofancient microbial life forms on Earthshows that such a discovery would notonly be socially arousing but scientifi-cally controversial. Despite manyrecent analytical advances, there stillexists much disagreement over theauthenticity of specific ancient(Precambrian) fossil microbes.

A parallel debate surrounds theputative microfossils discovered inMartian meteorite ALH 84001. In the15 years since its spectacular presiden-tial pronouncement, the controversyover its authenticity shows no sign ofabating. An extraterrestrial discoveryof this kind will impact the Christiancommunity with the question: “Whythe fuss?” First of all, it may takedecades for the scientific community toconfirm such a discovery as authentic.Secondly, while challenges to the faithcommunity are most often raised byscientists and journalists, Christiantheologians appear primed to welcomeand accommodate such a discovery.

Confirmation of an extraterrestrialmicrobe neither degrades nor reducesthe Christian understanding of human-ity’s spiritual place in the cosmos.In fact, it would likely broaden andenrich it. Similarly, the sense of spiri-tual wonder and responsibility thatcomes from admiring the starry skies,

long lost in the lights of the civilizedworld, may well return.


Kenosis and theInspiration of Scripture

George L Murphy

Some biblical statements about thephysical world seem, in the light oftoday’s scientific knowledge, to beincorrect. The “firmament” of heavenand the waters above it in Genesis 1are well-known instances. St. Paul’sbelief that biological death of humansis a result of sin is an example ofgreater theological significance.

This poses important questions forthose who take the authority of Scrip-ture seriously. There have been threetypes of responses. We can reject somemodern scientific views, read thoseviews into the Bible by suitably inter-preting the text, or say “The Bible isnot a textbook of science” and declarethe question a nonproblem. If we wantto take both Scripture and modernscience seriously, none of theseresponses is adequate.

Philippians 2:7 refers to the kenosis,the emptying or self-limitation, of theSon of God which was involved infully assuming human nature.This concept has been applied to God’sactivity in creation by a number oftheologians. I will argue here that itis also relevant to the activity of theHoly Spirit in inspiring biblical writers.Just as God, in the Incarnation,accepted the limitations of a humanbeing in a particular culture, so Godaccepts and works within the limitsof the knowledge of the world thatexisted in the cultures in which thescriptures were written. We willconsider implications of this conceptas well as some objections to it.


Uncertainty, Determinism,Scientific Method, and the

Wisdom of Franz BoasDavid S Newman

Deterministic, ontological thinkingprevailed in science throughout the19th century. But the seed of uncer-tainty was planted by the newdiscipline of statistical physics.



Relativity challenged the notion thatscientific theories are “the” laws ofnature, but the new theory was stilldeterministic and still regarded as“ontologically true.”

Quantum theory appears to placeprobability, and therefore randomness,into the heart of physics, but there isnow an alternative view with strongexperimental support: Decoherenceexplains how the deterministiclinearity of the quantum dynamics ofa supposedly isolated system is madenonlinear by interaction with itsenvironment, and how probabilityin the form of Born’s probability ruleenters quantum physics naturallywhen a quantum system is observed.In complex systems, probability entersdeterministic systems naturallythrough nonlinear chaos, because wecan never specify initial and boundaryconditions exactly.

The “synchronic” data used in statisti-cal analyses and common to the naturalsciences is contrasted with the“diachronic” data obtained in order toconstruct a meaningful scientificaccount of a culture, society, orindividual. Franz Boas and his manystudents stressed the primacy ofdiachronic data for all the humansciences, data in the form of narrativefrom study subjects or field notes ofinvestigators—case studies.

The extensive implications of theseobservations for science, theology,and philosophy will be discussed.


The Fractal Nature of theSpiritual Journey—A Metaphor

Jason Hine

Concepts such as hope, despair, grace,love, evil, free will, and faith arefrequent pillars of religious discussion,but these concepts are rarely thesubject of scientific thought. And thisis rightly so, for science currently lacksa useful frame of reference for theseand other metaphysical concepts.Such a frame of reference, if one werefound, could help facilitate conversa-tions between scientific and religiousviewpoints.

A study of the fractal commonlyknown as the Mandelbrot set suggeststhat certain kinds of fractals may

be useful as a basis for developinga metaphorical frame of reference inwhich the concepts of hope, despair,etc. are likened to patterns found nearthe fractal’s edge. This paper exploresthis potential frame of reference, start-ing with an abbreviated overview ofthe Mandelbrot set’s construction andmathematical characteristics. By takingsome of these characteristics as analo-gous to certain aspects of the spiritualjourney, key representations are devel-oped and fashioned into a metaphori-cal model. Examining this metaphorreveals it as having several surprisingstrengths as well as severe limitations.

I conclude with thoughts on themetaphor’s possible relevance andusefulness to current science-faithdiscussions, and I suggest ideas forfurther exploration.


Technology, Dispositional Values,and Virtue:

Proposals for AddressingEmerging Technologies in Bioethics

Michael Sleasman

The notion of value-ladenness intechnology has gained a level ofgeneral acceptance within philosophyof technology and many quarters ofengineering ethics, particularly thosepertaining to information and commu-nication technology. Despite thegrowing relationship between informa-tion and communication technologyand the biological and medicalsciences, little attention has been givento these insights within the context ofbioethics, and particularly Christianbioethics. Simply blaming technologyfor the evils of society or assuming thatthe technology in question is neutral,to name two common strategies,does not give adequate attentionto the sophisticated nature of thetechnologies involved.

Given the rising convergence of NBIC(nanotechnology, biotechnology, infor-mation technology, and cognitivesciences) and the increasingly complexethical issues raised by dual-useemerging technologies, it is no surprisethat Christian bioethics is facing diffi-culty addressing these newly evolvingrealities—they differ in significantways from their medical ethicsantecedents.

This paper will develop the conceptof value-ladenness in technology bymeans of a proposal of dispositionalvalues and suggest resources withina Christian virtue tradition to assist innavigating the complex issues raisedby emerging technology discussionsin bioethics.


Quantum Openness and theSovereignty of God

Donald N Petcher

Quantum mechanics (by mostaccounts) exhibits a striking opennessor incompleteness that results in theunpredictability of the outcomes ofspecific events on the quantum level.This strange quantum behavior hasbeen used to support a general open-ness not only in creation, but also inGod (open theism). On the other hand,some in the Reformed camp argue thattheological determinism is necessary,and based on known science, evenpsychological determinism may beneeded to bring about God’s purposesin his creation, because the quantumworld is too small in scale to berelevant for explaining events in thebrain. Such questions raise others,particularly in regard to our moralresponsibility before God.

In this talk, I will put forwardan argument that the combination ofquantum openness and the assumptionof a holistic (nonreductive) creationsuggests a psychological openness(e.g., free will) from the standpointof creation, while still allowing fortheological determinism from thestandpoint of God. Thus I will arguethat our scientific knowledge does notsubstantially constrain our theologyof God, nor how he deals with hiscreation. Nevertheless, this opennessin creation clearly points to God’sinfinite wisdom in creating, givinghim the glory.

WITNESSING GOD’S GLORY AND SOVEREIGNTY IN CREATION


WITNESSING GOD’S GLORY AND

SOVEREIGNTY IN CREATION


Prayers for Healing:Does God Change His Mind?

Paul H Lange

From Monday through Saturday,most physicians view the phenomenonof human diseases and their treatmentin scientific (e.g., reductionist) ways.Then on Sundays, they squirm in theirpews while the congregation prays forhealing. Much of this “cognitive dissi-dence” occurs because physiciansassume that among other things,these prayers are asking God to changethe natural laws governing biologicalprocesses and disease (i.e., “changingGod’s mind”).

Over the years, in my capacity asan academic cancer surgeon, I havedeveloped a variety of methodsto introduce medical colleagues andtrainees to this subject and its resolu-tion. This paper will describe thesemethods and my experiences. Brieflythey entail (1) succinctly exposing themto the sophistication that exists amongbelieving scientists and theologiansabout Divine Action (DA), for example,the work on DA emanating from theVatican Observatory and CTNS, and(2) elucidating the many necessities forprayer other than physical healing.


The Magnitude of GodPamela L Bryant

I am a physical scientist by training,but in the course of working atHoward Payne University, I oftenteach biochemistry to pre-med studentsand astronomy as a general sciencecourse. It never ceases to amaze mehow undergraduate college students,no matter their major, compartmental-ize God and fit him into their world.They struggle to comprehend thisworld and develop an awareness ofsize. Isaiah 40:12 (ContemporaryEnglish Version), “Did any of youmeasure the ocean by yourself orstretch out the sky with your ownhands? Did you put the soil of theearth in a bucket or weigh the hills andmountains on balance scales?” Yet,with their naked eye, they can see onlya very few things and must use instru-ments to try and understand, rank,order, compare, and measure the invis-

ible so they can comprehend theirfunction and place in their world; yet,what about God, where does he fit?Isaiah 40:18 (Holman ChristianStandard Bible), “To whom, then, willyou compare God? What image willyou compare him to?”

Through my courses at Howard Payne,I help expand the students’ view ofsize from string theory, to the atom,to molecules, to bacteria, to mites,to protein molecular motors, to man-made machines the size of mites, tothemselves, to large animals, to themoon, to the earth, to the solar system,to nebula, to the galaxy, and beyond.This presentation, using numbers,expands the imagination and drawsthe audience into the vast magnitudeof God. Psalms 33:6, 8b, 9 (AmplifiedBible), “By the word of the Lord theheavens were made, and all the hostof them by the breath of his mouth …Let all the inhabitants of the worldstand in awe of Him. For He spokeand it was done: He commanded andit stood fast.” As we venture from thesize of the quark to the size of theuniverse, the revelation of “God’s size”leaves the audience with humility,awe, and a sober understanding ofGod’s powerful omnipotence.


God’s Providence in Nature:The Forgotten Doctrine

in the Relationship betweenScience and Faith

Gregory S Bennett

The doctrine of God’s providenceprovides a critical framework forscience and faith discussions, and caninclude the following: What is God’srelationship with nature? Has Godalways preserved the properties of hiscreation throughout time? What hascaused nature to be the way it is? Whatconstitutes “natural” secondary causesand mechanisms? Is evolution one ofthose secondary causes?

Science and faith discussions arenormally framed either from mecha-nisms that ignore or discount God’sinvolvement in nature or from the doc-trine of creation itself. As Christians,

we cannot accept the former, but asscientists we find the latter inadequateto help us understand God’s relation-ship to scientific mechanisms.

In studying God’s created order, akanature, scientists assume predictabilityin what they study. Without predict-ability, experiments cannot reachconsistent conclusions. Replication ofinvestigative studies cannot be done.Thus, scientists focus on God’sordinary providence. This focus is asmuch a study of God’s work as is thestudy of miracles (God’s extraordinaryprovidence). God has preserved,governed, operated, and directedeverything in nature since time began.Providence provides a mechanismfor understanding God’s work innature other than direct interventionas a Creator.

This presentation will explore a modelfor understanding how Providenceunderpins all scientific study. Thismodel will show how an improvedunderstanding of Providence helpsscience/faith discussions, how it givesa deeper appreciation for seeing God atwork, and how it improves a person’sability to witness God’s glory in nature.


Dysteleology, Holoteleology, orIntelligent Design

David Wilcox and David W Hoferer

All are familiar with the claim that thecausal linkages of natural processesexclude the designer’s hand—thatrandom processes have brought all intoexistence, leaving no room for purpose(dysteleology). Christians mustdisavow this, believing in the TriuneGod who designed everything withpurpose.

The ID movement looks for breaks incausal chains in nature to show theintervention (and existence) of thedesigner. However, finding God onlyin our areas of ignorance is poor theol-ogy and self-defeating.

Genesis proclaims God’s power—hecalls all into existence by his fiat Wordof power. But “all” includes time, anintrinsic part of the material cosmos.God’s commands were not spoken“in” time, but outside of it, in eternity.We experience time passing, pastbeginnings and future ends. But God’s




fiat speaks to all space and time froman eternal moment.

The creation’s eschatological consum-mation has occurred. Thus, purposecan be seen flowing from ordainedends back to necessary causes.Creation’s wave washes back to theBig Bang, but causal chains remainintact, the past determines the future,and science can still investigate causal-ity. Science requires effects to followcauses without exterior constraints,not the absence of final cause in thesystem. To consider dysteleologynecessary for science shows philosoph-ical naïveté—or ideologicalcommitment.

Holoteleology says all is designed, andfinds evidence of God’s hand inparadoxical outcomes of the process,not in causal breaks. This view morelogically, biblically, theologically, andscientifically explains God’s relation-ship with the cosmos, and fullysupports scientific investigation.


A New Entropy Model forBiopolymer Folding: Yet Another

Sign of the Divine Ingenuity inGod’s CreationWayne K Dawson

Previously, I have shown that theentropy of a folded biopolymer can bedivided into local and global contribu-tions using the cross-linking entropy(CLE) model, in which the cross-links,in the case of RNA, are the base-pairstacking interactions and, in the case ofproteins, it is the spatial arrangementof the protein secondary structureelements. The local contribution resultsfrom freezing out of conformationaldegrees of freedom, and this, in turn,results in a nonlinear change in theglobal entropy and the folding time ofa biopolymer. I have also shown thatthe free energy landscape of the modelis largely funnel-shaped, using thisentropy model which is highly success-ful at making structure predictions.

Here, I wish to consider how thismodel impacts the ongoing debatesabout evolution, intelligent design,and creation. First, our lack of adequateknowledge about the basic thermo-dynamics of these systems makes any

discussion about probabilities largelyprecarious. Though the model seemsmore likely to favor evolution, all sideshave argued their position from aflawed model of the thermodynamics.Second, while this reveals yet anothergrain in the enormous warehouse ofour ignorance, it also reveals the divineingenuity of God in creating such com-plex systems from such profoundlysimple chemical behavior.


Biblical Portraits:Creation and Worldview

Richard F Carlson

An artist can employ considerablefreedom in creating a portrait of aperson. The artist can choose to empha-size certain qualities of that person.Hence, multiple portraits of the sameperson can look quite different,whether done by a number of artistsor even by the same artist.

In this paper I will explore the implica-tions of the writers of the Bible inpresenting to us multifacited picturesor portraits of events and even ofpeople. I will discuss the implicationsof differing portraits of Jesus in thefour Gospels, and the differingaccounts of creation that comprise thefirst two chapters of Genesis. My thesisis that the two Genesis creation narra-tives (found in 1:1–2:3 and 2:4–25)present two portraits that differ in barefacts and yet together result in acomplete and coherent worldviewstatement reflecting the ancientHebrew understanding of their relationto God, to their world, and to eachother, and furthermore, God’s relationto all that exists. The sacred biblicalauthor painted two different portraitsof creation in order to accomplish this.

As a result, we need not agonize overthe bare facts of the two accounts andhow they, in some places, contradictthe current scientific understandingsin cosmology, earth science, or biology;instead, I will argue that it is moreappropriate to concentrate on theunderlying message of the twoaccounts—the worldview of theancient Hebrews.


“Making Converts to Evolution”:Methodological Naturalism

as a Rhetorical Weaponin the Origin of Species

Stephen C Dilley

A close inspection of the Origin of

Species shows that Darwin strategicallyand progressively deployed method-ological naturalism (MN) in the sixeditions of the Origin in order tomaximize the effectiveness of his “onelong argument.” That is, Darwin usedMN in the Origin between 1859 and theearly 1870s in a manner sensitive to theshifting views of his audience in orderto bolster his theory and to marginalizespecial creation from the scientificdiscussion. In particular, Darwin’sexplicit use of methodological natural-ism in later editions of the Origin wasanimated less by epistemic reasons andmore by expedient ones. Thus, whileDarwin personally may have hadsound epistemic grounds for method-ological naturalism, his progressivedeployment of the method in theOrigin seems to have been mainly forthe purpose of winning converts to histheory and ostracizing special creationrather than making a strong empiricaland philosophical case (per se) forevolution.


An Answer to Whitcomb andMorris’s The Genesis Flood

Paul H Seely

This year is the fiftieth anniversary ofThe Genesis Flood by Whitcomb andMorris. It is the foundational book inthe “creation science” movement.Unfortunately, its supporters write offthe scientific evidence that tells usthere was no global flood in the time ofNoah. They believe the divine inspira-tion of Genesis guarantees that thehistory and science in the Floodaccount is factually inerrant, and theyare committed to following a straight-forward interpretation of the accountwithout any compromise.

Rather than offering a local flood inter-pretation, which “creation science”followers would regard as a compro-mise, I will stand on their ground andinsist they follow a straightforwardinterpretation of the Bible. I will then

WORLDVIEW PERSPECTIVES AND CREATION DEBATES


WORLDVIEW PERSPECTIVES AND

CREATION DEBATES

point out seven places in the Floodaccount where Whitcomb and Morrisdid not follow a straightforward inter-pretation but, in fact, compromisedthe Word of God; and their followersstill do. I will also show that if thesecompromises, i.e., contradictionsof Scripture, were interpreted ina straightforward way, their theory ofa global flood that killed all terrestriallife except those on the ark wouldcollapse.

I will also tell how creation scientiststhemselves scientifically confirmedthat one of Whitcomb and Morris’sprimary interpretations of the Biblewas a compromising contradictionof Scripture.

This information will give those whoare committed to scientific integrityan approach which has a chance ofimpacting Answers-in-Genesis-typethinking because it is based upon their

presuppositions.


Physicians in the Biblical WorldEdwin Yamauchi

It is striking that almost all the refer-ences to physicians in both the Old andthe New Testament with the exceptionof “Luke, the beloved physician”(Col. 4:14) are negative. In no placein the Old Testament do we read thata doctor or medicine healed the sick.It is Yahweh who healed. In the earlychurch, it was Christ who was the onlyreliable Healer.

Why this should be the case becomesclear when we examine the status ofmedicine in the ancient world. InMesopotamia, most diseases andailments were ascribed to demons.In Egypt, though we have specialistscalled dentists, x-ray examinations ofroyal mummies indicate that they werenot able to effect any remedy for toothdecay. Though Hippocratic medicaltraditions in Greece rejected super-natural causes for epilepsy, theirrational theory of four humors wasbased on philosophy and not on empir-ical evidence. Dissection of cadaverstook place only briefly in Hellenistic

Alexandria. As a result, for nearlytwo thousand years, the most commonremedy was venesection (bleeding ofthe veins). Jewish medicine asrecounted in the Talmud was compli-cated by the desire to keep the Torahrules about the Sabbath and rules ofpurity. Christianity contributed to theconcept of the anargyroi (“withoutsilver”) physicians who treatedpatients for free, and the rise of the firsthospitals in the fourth century.

This survey raises the hermeneuticalquestion of the two horizons ofviewing the Bible in their originalcontexts, and applying its principlesin the contemporary setting. We seethat some attitudes must be viewedas descriptive and not prescriptive.


His Father’s WorldJoseph Lechner

Maltbie Davenport Babcock (b. 1858)graduated from Auburn TheologicalSeminary in 1882 and was assigned toLockport (NY) Presbyterian Church ashis first pastorate.

“Lockport” was so named because aseries of five consecutive locks werebuilt here in the 1820s to raise the ErieCanal some seventy feet up theNiagara Escarpment. This same harddolomite formation is very prominentat Niagara Falls. Once boats hadascended the final lock at Lockport,they could travel at the level of LakeErie all the way to Buffalo.

Rev. Babcock’s church was one blocknorth of the locks, and the escarpmentwas approximately one mile north ofhis church. Babcock was fond of goingfor long walks along the cliffs, whichafforded him a panoramic view of thesurrounding farmlands and of LakeOntario on a clear day. When settingout on these jaunts, he would habitu-ally tell his secretary that he was going“out to see my Father’s world.”

Babcock died in 1901 on a cruise to theHoly Land, shortly after accepting apastorate in New York City. Hiswidow published a book of his letters,sermons, and poems. At least nine ofthe poems have been set to music.“This Is My Father’s World,” which

was inspired by hikes along theNiagara Escarpment at Lockport, hasbecome a favorite of English-speakingChristian congregations in general andof ASA members in particular.

This presentation will include bothvintage and contemporary photos ofLockport and the Erie Canal. If timepermits and a piano is available, partic-ipants will be invited to sing This Is My

Father’s World.


The Burden of Proof:Harry Rimmer and the Legacy of

Scientific ApologeticsBethany Sollereder

Harry Rimmer was certain. He wascertain of his science, and certain ofhis Bible. This fundamentalist preacherof the 20s and 30s deeply influencedevangelical culture by insisting thatthe Bible and “true science” couldnever conflict since they were bothbased on absolute fact.

Using Rimmer as a case study, thispaper investigates how the mid-19thcentury shift toward a popular scien-tific culture influenced evangelicalapologetics in the early 20th century.By adopting the Enlightenment rheto-ric that science points to absolute truth,fundamentalists submitted Scriptureto the tests of empiricism and builtan apologetic framework to match.The apologetic strategy was toconvince people intellectually thatthe Bible was true and to wait forthe spiritual conversion to follow.

The trend to understand humans asprimarily rational, and truth as scien-tific, has continued in much of theChristian scientific writings right upuntil today. From testable creationmodels to hermeneutical methodswhich emphasize the scientificaccuracy of the Bible, evangelicalshave continued to advance argumentsdeeply shaped by rationalist modelsof truth. In a postmodern culture,however, this limited view of truthmakes evangelical apologetics increas-ingly irrelevant. This paper willconclude by proposing a few ways inwhich scientific apologists can testifyto the faith in ways that do not alienatepostmoderns.


SEEKING GOD’S WISDOM: THE LIFE OF THE INDIVIDUAL

SEEKING GOD’S WISDOM:

THE LIFE OF THE INDIVIDUAL


Christian, Engineer, andEntrepreneur:

How Are They Related?William M Jordan

Within ASA there have been manypresentations that have attempted torelate Christian faith to the practice ofengineering. The growing Business asMission movement includes entrepre-neurship by Christians in thedeveloping world as one component ofthe movement. Technical entrepreneur-ship is a very vibrant field ofprofessional development, as well asresearch. However, the combination ofChristian technical entrepreneurshiphas been rarely explored.

This paper will examine technicalentrepreneurship (TE) from a Christianperspective. The differences betweenTE in the developed world and in thedeveloping world will also beexplored. Among the topics to bediscussed are

Is there a theology of technology? Istechnology morally neutral or is itvalue laden? Can technology be valueladen with Christian principles?

Is Christian technical entrepreneurshipmore than just technical entrepreneur-ship done by a person of Christianfaith?


The Use of Genetic-Based Researchin the Combat of Neglected

Tropical Diseases:The First-World Response to the

Majority World ProblemCaleigh Bates and Christine Williams

Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs)are a group of thirteen disablingconditions that are among the mostcommon chronic infections in theworld’s poorest populations. Despitetheir global impact, NTDs have beenseverely disregarded in currentscientific research and global healthinterventions. Within the fraction ofresearch directed toward NTDs, thestudy of genetics has been successfully

integrated into the investigation ofvarious parasitic helminthes.

The platyhelminth Schistosoma spp. isthe causative agent of the devastatingNTD, schistosomiasis. Affecting thelives of over 207 million people, thepathology of schistosomiasis is causedby the host immune response toparasitic eggs, resulting in fever,diarrhea, abdominal pain, and organdamage. In a promising genetic study,Freitas et al. (2007) identified the genefor the growth factor homologSchistosoma mansoni inhibin/Activin(SmInAct) and its importance in theembryogenesis of the S. mansoni. Theessential role of SmInAct was verifiedas S. mansoni eggs subjected to RNAinterference and knockout of thegrowth factor aborted at a much higherrate than untreated eggs. While novaccine has yet been discovered forschistosomiasis, this genetic interven-tion in the schistosome life cycle couldpotentially aid in disease preventionand eradication.

Christian scientists must confrontneglected tropical diseases as theyravage the unified Body of Christ.First Corinthians 12:25–26 affirms,“[The body’s] parts should have equalconcern for each other. If one partsuffers, every part suffers with it.”Thus, this Christian response ofcompassion to human sufferingrequires responsible stewardship withavailable resources, ultimately seekingthe hope that comes through divinerestoration of creation.


An Evaluation Scheme toIncrease the Effectiveness of

Development WorkVirginia R Bracht

Thorough critiques of developmentprojects designed to aid under-developed communities can helpa development worker or agency focuson initiatives and technologies whichcause real positive change. Here,an evaluation scheme for measuringthe effectiveness of water developmentprojects is put forth. This scheme takesinto consideration several aspects ofcommunity development whichcontribute to a project’s success,including a cost-benefit analysis andscoring systems for sustainability,

gospel ministry, education, andbehavioral change.

The cost-benefit analysis is in termsof how many person-days of cleanwater per project cost are anticipateduntil significant repair is expected.The sustainability score measuresthe likelihood of a project to outlastexternal assistance. Gospel ministryis a measure of what emphasis thedevelopment worker puts on ministryduring the intervention, and assumesthat, for a Christian developmentworker, the primary purpose is toshare the love of Christ. As with thegospel ministry score, the educationscore is a measure of the effort putforth by the development worker toinclude education about clean water,disease transmission, and sanitation.Behavioral change, the ultimate goalof any development work, is the mostimportant aspect but often the hardestto measure. This score asks thequestion, How has the interventioncaused real positive change in thetarget community?

Using this scoring system, develop-ment workers and agencies caneffectively learn from past successesand failures, and it helps them to focuson those projects and technologiesmost workable in their region.


Temporal “Centrality” of Earth’sExistence in the Universe?

Hui-Yiing Chang

Researchers who are interested in theintersection of faith and science havedebated on the spatial centrality ofEarth’s existence in the universe;Earth is immobile in space andoccupies a central position. It is alsopossible that Earth exists duringa “central” epoch during the universe’slifetime.

In quintessence models of the universe,the density of nonrelativistic matterdecreases more rapidly than thedensity of dark energy. Therefore, thematter density far exceeded the darkenergy density in the distant past,while the dark energy density isexpected to far exceed the matterdensity in the distant future. We areliving in a period of “coincidence,”where the dark energy and matter

POSTERS


POSTERS

densities are comparable. The coinci-dental period occupies differentfractions of the total lifetime of theuniverse under different circumstancesin the phantom dark energy andphantom cyclic models of the universe.

The purpose of this presentation is toprovoke thinking and research on thetiming of God’s creation and its impli-cations.


Alternative mRNA Splicing and theExpansion of the Human Proteome

Manika Clemente, David Lee, and

Annie Poirier

As the human genome and proteomehave been analyzed, the proteome hasbeen found to be larger than thegenome. In short, there are moreunique proteins than there are genes toencode them. This puzzle was largelysolved by the discovery of alternativemRNA splicing, a mechanism bywhich a single gene can generate avariety of different protein molecules.

When an mRNA transcript is spliced,segments of it are removed and thoseremaining are joined to form one of itsnumerous potential mature transcripts.Each of these transcripts can poten-tially specify a different polypeptide.The mature mRNA transcriptproduced is dependent on the mode ofalternative splicing employed. Thesevarious splicing mechanisms allow forgreat complexity and variation withinthe proteome.

Numerous perspectives are heldconcerning the way in which theprocesses of alternative mRNA splicingshould affect one’s worldview. Aboveall, we believe the topic should beapproached with the firm acknowledg-ment that God is responsible forcreation in all of its complexity(Ps. 139:14), regardless of the specificmechanisms he has used to achieve it.Alternative splicing involves intricateprocesses that some argue showevidence of design. Others, however,contend that the inefficiency ofconstructing large segments of mRNA,which must be removed before themolecule is useful, detracts from thetheory of Intelligent Design. Still othersleave this debate behind and focus onthe contribution of alternative splicing

to the complexity and variety of theproteome as a wonderful reason forworship of the Creator.


The Absence of CCR5 Co-receptorsand HIV Resistance

Valerie Francis and Elyse Masson

Human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency disorder(HIV/AIDS) is a debilitating diseasewhich not only eventually causesdeath, but also disrupts entire commu-nities, leaving orphans and disablingwhole generations so that they areunable to function in the nationaleconomy.

HIV is caused when the HIV, an RNAvirus, enters the body and attacksCD4+ cells of the immune system. Thevirus enters the cell and incorporatesits own DNA into the host genome.It then promotes DNA transcription inorder to self-replicate, an action whichalso kills the host cell. AIDS developsonce CD4+ cell levels drop below acertain level. However, this processcan only occur if the virus is actuallyable to enter the cell. In order for thevirus to bind to the cell surface, certainsurface proteins, such as the CCR5protein, must be present. Resistance toHIV occurs when these proteins areabsent. Currently, research is under-way to find treatments for HIV whichcould involve blocking CCR5 expres-sion. These methods include the use ofsiRNAs and ribozymes to degrade orcleave specific RNA molecules beforethey are expressed. Additionally,intrabodies could be used to decreasethe expression of certain surfaceproteins, and zinc finger nucleaseshave the potential to target and editcertain DNA sequences in order toprevent the transcription of a normalsurface protein.

Research to find an effective treatmentfor HIV/AIDS is extremely important,especially in the light of our call asChristians to promote human dignityand care for the poor and oppressed.Since Christ entered into our sufferingin the Incarnation, it is now ourresponsibility to enter into the suffer-ing of others and, through Christ, workto bring his justice and love whereoppression and pain currentlydominate.


Genetic Conservation and theReintroduced Gray Wolves of

YellowstoneTaylor Gevry and Joanna Helm

Through the techniques and ideals ofconservation genetics, the reintroducedgray wolves of Yellowstone are beingobserved and tested for genetic diver-sity. In 1995–1996, sixty-six graywolves were reintroduced into theYellowstone region. This controversialreestablishment of the wolf populationhas provided scientists with an oppor-tunity to study a growing populationgenetically from its beginning.

Four different studies were analyzed toassemble a concise summary of thestatus of the Yellowstone gray wolves.A Christian response to the reintroduc-tion as well as to the four studies isalso addressed.

• The first study to be analyzedshowed that just a year after reintro-duction, the genetic viability anddiversity of the packs was comparableto wild packs. This analysis was doneusing microsatellite markers.

• The second study tested for wolf-coyote hybridization by assessing thepresence or absence of a specific loopon the mtDNA of coyotes, whichwould mean inadequate opportunitiesfor breeding or feeding. However, nosubjects tested showed signs of hybrid-ization.

• The third study attempted toestimate the population size of thewolves using non-invasive samplingand microsatellites.

• The final study occurred ten yearsafter reintroduction and showedevidence of increased geneticdiversity and viability, even higherthan wild packs.

The studies show the success so farof this reintroduction. On the spiritualside, this reintroduction is also deemeda success due to its restoration ofcreation in not only the wolf popula-tion but the Yellowstone basinecosystem as well.


POSTERS


Serving Humanity throughWater, Sanitation andHygiene Technology:

Serving and Learning througha Year-Long Course Sequence

Michael D Guebert

Since 2003, students and faculty atTaylor University have participated inan international service-learning coursesequence focusing on internationalcommunity development and appro-priate technologies of water resources,sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) toimprove health in rural communitiesof Guatemala. During this three-weekJanuary course, Water Resources andAppropriate Technology, studentsparticipate in technical projects, includ-ing well-drilling, well-head protection,pump installation/repair/mainte-nance, roof-catchment cisterns, latrinedesign and construction, water qualitytreatment/protection, low-fuel stoves,community health and environmentassessments, and hygiene and sanita-tion education. Students also gaincross-cultural experience, interpersonaldevelopment and communication, andpersonal integration of their call toglobal service.

Prior to the trip, students preparetechnically and cross-culturally duringthe fall semester in three requisitecourses: Hydrogeology, Introduction toCross-Cultural Service, and MissionsTechnology. Students learn to site anddrill a well. They read, research,discuss, and write on topics of waterresources, health, and sanitation.They also read about communitydevelopment, cross-cultural communi-cation, personal assessments, and thecharacteristics of the host country,Guatemala.

Following the trip during the springsemester, students may continue studyin three optional courses: World WaterResources, Preparation and Strategyfor World Mission, and InternationalCommunity Development. Thesecourses expand students’ understand-ing of the need, potential, andcomplexity of water resources, issuesof rural and urban internationalcommunity development, and strate-gies for addressing the concerns.Some graduate students in environ-mental science cap their experience

with a six-month graduate internshipin international water resources andcommunity development conductedthrough one of several partnerinstitutions.


Science in the Prevention ofChronic Disease: A Mixed Review

Jay L Hollman

Data from population studies in theearly 1990s suggested that vitamins,specifically anti-oxidants such asvitamins C and E would reducethe risk of cancer and heart disease.Lowering homocysteine thruB vitamins was to reduce vasculardisease. Unfortunately, when random-ized trials were completed by themiddle of the last decade, it was clearthat vitamin supplements were noteffective at reducing chronic disease.

The food industry has endeavoredto produce healthier foods but createdtrans-fats that probably increased therisk of vascular disease. The foodindustry has added refined sugarwhich is a risk factor for obesity,metabolic syndrome, and type 2 diabe-tes and has added salt which increasesour risk of developing hypertension,heart disease, and stroke.

Prescription drugs are supposedto reduce the risk of chronic disease,and to a large extent, the statin drugs,which reduce LDL-cholesterol,do reduce the risk of cardiovasculardisease. Newer drugs such astorcetrapib and ezetimibe do not haveclear benefits. The diabetic drug,rosiglitazone, effectively lowersaverage blood sugar, but increasescardiovascular events. Diet drugsRedux and Meridia were bothwithdrawn from the market.

The best science would now suggestthat a combination of exercise, lowbody fat content and a healthy diet,consumption of fruits and vegetablesespecially in their natural presentationwith limited consumption of animalproducts, is the best protection againstchronic disease. What is clear is thata person cannot be fat, lazy, and eata rich diet and expect to be rescued byvitamin supplements, food technology,or the pharmaceutical industry.


Genetics and Personalized MedicineKatey LePage and Morgan Manchester

Personalized medicine, also referred toas pharmacogenetics, involves thestudy of patient responses to differentdrug treatments due to hereditarytraits. Currently, there are a few widelyused treatments that specifically takeadvantage of the application ofpharmacogenetics. These treatmentsinclude the cancer treatment drugsGleevec and Herceptin. Gleevec is themolecular targeted agent STI571 that isspecifically directed at the constitutivetyrosine kinase activity of bcr-abl.Bcr-abl is an oncogene present in 95%of people diagnosed with chronicmyelogenous leukemia (CML).Herceptin is a monoclonal antibodythat targets Human Epidermal growthfactor Receptor-2 (HER-2). Theoverexpression of this receptor isresponsible for 30% of the diagnosedcases of breast cancer. The clinicalapplication of pharmacogenetics leadsto many ethical issues that need to beconsidered. These ethical issuesinclude equality in availability of treat-ments to all socioeconomic classes andprivacy issues that accompany proce-dures involving personal genetics.While treatments using these scientificadvancements offer great opportunitiesfor the treatment of debilitatingdiseases including cancer, Christiansespecially have a responsibility toconsider the ethical implicationsregarding these applications ofpharmacogenetics as this type of treat-ment is becoming increasinglywidespread. Future research in thisfield continues to be promising in theefforts to mitigate many other sideeffects.


Thinking Skills Education:Using Design Method and

Scientific MethodCraig Rusbult

Creativity and critical thinking arecombined for goal-directed problemsolving in a wide range of areas(engineering, architecture, medicine,mathematics, music, art, literature,philosophy, history, business, athletics,law, science, etc.) to design a product,

POSTERS


strategy, or theory. This includesalmost everything we do in life.How can we help students improvethese skills? What are the similaritiesand differences between science anddesign? Why should we teach designbefore science?

During and after my PhD work,I’ve developed educationally usefulmodels of Scientific Method andDesign Method, and strategies forusing them effectively to help studentslearn thinking skills. For an overviewand sampler of ideas about scienceand design, plus links, go toasa3.org/ASA/education/think/scientific-method.htm#ism


Race and Medicine: EnelaprilKyle Tretina and Laura Frantz

Carl Linnaeus, as well as a numberof 18th-century naturalists, used theconcept of race to distinguish popula-tions in different areas on the basis ofdiffering physical characteristics suchas skin color and facial features. Racialclassification today can affect access toresources, the distribution of incomeand wealth, political power, residentialliving patterns, and interpersonalrelationships.

Recent research found evidence ofgenetic clusters that correspond togeographically similar populationswhich in turn also correspond to majorgeographic regions, but the differencesbetween these groups are limited(Rosenburg et al., 2002). However, thebias in this study’s sample collectionwas exposed and Serre and Paabo(2004) found that “when individualsare sampled homogenously fromaround the globe, the pattern seen isone of gradients of allele frequencies,rather than discrete clusters.”

The infamous promiscuity of human-kind as proposed by many scientists,such as Darwin, has been shown tohold true and resulted in the continu-ous confluence of genetic informationbetween neighboring populations.However, race as a form of populationthinking in medicine persists, largelydue to correlations of race to anincrease in the frequency of medicalconditions such as heart disease. Here,enelapril is used as a case study to

perform a theological and utilitariananalysis on the use of race as a form ofpopulation thinking, its consequencesfor genetic racialization, and considera new paradigm for drug studies.


Test of FAITH:Introductory Resources on

Science and ChristianityRuth Bancewicz

Christians working in science andengineering are often asked to leadstudy groups or give talks on scienceand faith in a number of settings. Theseare perfect opportunities to explode themyths about conflict between scienceand faith, enable Christians to worshipGod as they discover more about hisworld, and encourage Christian youngpeople to pursue careers in science.

The range of resources available forteaching on science and faith is largelylimited to books and articles, butpresentations and group study todayuse video, story, discussion and inter-active activities. Preparing high qualityteaching material can be an oneroustask, and many are discouraged by lackof time or experience.

The “Test of FAITH” resources weredeveloped to equip scientists and otherChristian leaders to teach groups ofnonscientists about the relationshipbetween science and faith in both theUSA and UK. The centrepiece of thematerial is a documentary in whichChristian scientists and theologiansrespond to the question, “Does sciencethreaten belief in God?” Contributorsinclude Francis Collins, JenniferWiseman, Rosalind Picard, Sir JohnPolkinghorne, Bill Newsome, AlisterMcGrath, Deborah Haarsma, DenisAlexander, Simon Conway Morris, ArdLouis and Cherith Fee Nordling.

This seminar will introduce the “Testof FAITH” video, print and onlineresources (including a 30-minuteshowing of part 1 of the documentary).Time will be allowed for discussion oftheir use in the classroom and moreinformal settings.


TEST OF FAITH

TEST OF FAITH

Presenters’ Contact Information

Kathryn ApplegateThe BioLogos Foundation6549 Mission Gorge Rd #251San Diego CA [email protected]

Ruth BancewiczThe Faraday InstituteSt Edmund’s CollegeCambridgeCambridgeshire [email protected]

Caleigh BatesBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Gregory S Bennett8715 S 68th East AveTulsa OK [email protected]

Robert C BishopPhysics DepartmentWheaton College501 College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Steven Bouma-PredigerReligion DepartmentHope CollegeHolland MI [email protected]

Virginia R Bracht12517 Apache Ct NEAlbuquerque NM [email protected]

Pamela L BryantHoward Payne University1000 FiskBrownwood TX [email protected]

Richard F Carlson4004 Damson CtColumbia MO [email protected]

Hui-Yiing Chang104 Amberwood CirNashville TN [email protected]

Dorothy F ChappellDean of Natural andSocial SciencesWheaton College501 College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Bryan Clarke11033 89th AveEdmonton AB T6G [email protected]

Manika ClementeBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Stephen M ContakesDepartment of ChemistryWestmont College955 La Paz RdSanta Barbara CA [email protected]

Wayne K Dawson2-39-34 UtsukushigaokaNishi, Aoba-kuYokohama, KanagawaYokohama [email protected]

Stephen C DilleyDepartment of PhilosophySt Edward’s University3001 S Congress AveAustin TX [email protected]

Keenan E DungeyUniversity of Illinois SpringfieldMS HSB 314Springfield IL [email protected]

Valerie FrancisBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Robert S Geddes12 Skylark DrHamilton ON L9A [email protected]

Taylor GevryBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Oscar E GonzalezGomez del Carpio 135Barrio MedicoSurquilloLima 34 [email protected]

Bruce L GordonThe King’s CollegeThe Empire State Building350 Fifth Ave Ste 1500New York City NY [email protected]

Brian T GreuelJohn Brown University2000 W University StSiloam Springs AR [email protected]

Michael D GuebertEarth and EnvironmentalSciences DepartmentTaylor University236 W Reade AveUpland IN [email protected]

Steven G HallLouisiana St University andLSU Agriculture Center143 EB Doran Bldg Stadium DrBaton Rouge LA [email protected]

Dominic HalsmerCollege of Science andEngineeringOral Roberts University7777 S Lewis AveTulsa OK [email protected]

Katharine HayhoeDepartment of Political SciencesTexas Tech UniversityPO Box 41015Lubbock TX [email protected]

Douglas Hayworth4490 Tullocks Woods TrlRockford IL [email protected]

Joanna HelmBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Peter M J HessDirector, Religious CommunityOutreachNational Center for ScienceEducation420 40th St Ste 2Oakland CA [email protected]

Jason N Hine34470 Sunlight DrYucaipa CA [email protected]

David W Hoferer627 Oak StDenver PA [email protected]

James K HoffmeierTrinity Evangelical Divinity School2065 Half Day RdDeerfield IL [email protected]

Jay L Hollman4412 Lake Lawford CtBaton Rouge LA [email protected]

Matthew M Huddleston5085 Smith Springs PkyAntioch TN [email protected]

William Hurlbut480 Whiskey Hill RdWoodside CA [email protected]

Gareth JonesDepartment of AnatomyUniversity of OtagoPO Box 913Dunedin 9054New [email protected]

Pilju Kim JooDirector, Research andDevelopmentPyongyang University of Scienceand Technology (PUST)PyongYangNorth [email protected]


William M JordanBaylor UniversityOne Bear Place #97356Waco TX [email protected]

Don W Korte JrDepartment of Natural SciencesConcordia University Wisconsin12800 North Lake Shore DrMequon WI [email protected]

Mary H KorteDepartment of Natural SciencesConcordia University Wisconsin12800 North Lake Shore DrMequon WI [email protected]

Denis O Lamoureux#1106 8510-111 StEdmonton AB T6G [email protected]

Paul H Lange8576 Sand Point DrSeattle WA [email protected]

Joseph Lechner12 Crestview DrFredericktown OH [email protected]

David LeeBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Katey LePageBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Heather LooyDepartment of PsychologyThe King’s University College9125 - 50th StEdmonton AB T6B [email protected]

Morgan ManchesterBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Elyse MassonBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Keith B Miller1740 Fairview AveManhattan KS [email protected]

Stephen O MoshierGeology and EnvironmentalScienceWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

John Munday1204 Murray DrChesapeake VA [email protected]

George L Murphy538 Cynthia LnTallmadge OH [email protected]

David S Newman6228 E Green Lake Way NorthSeattle WA [email protected]

Ronald L NumbersHilldale Professor of the Historyof Science and MedicineDepartment of Medical Historyand BioethicsUniversity of Wisconsin1300 University AveMadison WI [email protected]

Peter PaynePO Box 421Mount Hermon CA [email protected]

Donald N Petcher13440 Scenic HwyLookout Mtn GA [email protected]

Annie PoirierBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Jerry L Risser8241 Belcrest CtIndianapolis IN [email protected]

Martin M Root214 Wintergreen LnBoone NC [email protected]

Craig Rusbult102 N Orchard St #302Madison WI [email protected]

Mary H SchweitzerN Carolina State University3135 Jordan HallCampus Box 8208, MEASRaleigh NC [email protected]

Paul H Seely1544 SE 34th AvePortland OR [email protected]

Michael Sleasman2065 Half Day RdDeerfield IL [email protected]

Bethany Sollereder12704-102 AveEdmonton AB T5N [email protected]

Joshua J SongPresident of YUST PUSTFoundation (YPF)Wineetka IL [email protected]

Joseph SpradleyPhysics DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

John Staver442 Lourdes LnLafayette IN [email protected]

William M StruthersPsychology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Bryce SullivanCollege of Arts & Sciences1900 Belmont BlvdNashville TN [email protected]

James ThobabenAsbury Theological Seminary204 N Lexington AveWilmore KY [email protected]

Kyle Tretina4 Wheaton Ctr #401Wheaton IL [email protected]

Thomas L WaltersAzusa Pacific University901 E Alosta AveAzusa CA [email protected]

David Wilcox615 Farmland WayCoatesville PA [email protected]

Christine WilliamsBiology DepartmentWheaton College501 E College AveWheaton IL [email protected]

Ray Williams1147 Wesley Mountain DrBlairsville GA [email protected]

Mark Winslow4104 Bristol LnEdmond OK [email protected]

Ken Wolgemuth9910 S 66th East AveTulsa OK [email protected]

Edwin Yamauchi807 Erin DrOxford OH [email protected]


ASA Business Meeting AgendaSaturday, 31 July 2011, 6:45 PM, Wentz Concert Hall

1. Call to order and opening prayer Susan Daniels

2. Introduction of staff Randy Isaac

3. Future meetings Randy Isaac

4. Introduction of newly elected Fellows Randy Isaac

5. Recognition of fifty years of ASA Membership Randy Isaac

6. Remembrances Randy Isaac

7. Secretary/Treasurer Report Hal Poe

8. State of the ASA Randy Isaac

9. Offering for the ASA Susan Daniels

10. President’s comments Susan Daniels

11. Closing Prayer Susan Daniels


Index of Presenters

A Applegate, Kathryn.......................................................................................................... 5, 10, 25

B Bancewicz, Ruth.............................................................................................................. 5, 24, 25Bates, Caleigh................................................................................................................. 4, 21, 25Bennett, Gregory S.......................................................................................................... 4, 18, 25Bishop, Robert C............................................................................................................. 5, 10, 25Bouma-Prediger, Steven ............................................................................................... 1, 4, 7, 25Bracht, Virginia R ............................................................................................................ 4, 21, 25Bryant, Pamela L............................................................................................................. 5, 18, 25

C Carlson, Richard F .......................................................................................................... 4, 19, 25Chang, Hui-Yiing ............................................................................................................. 4, 21, 25Chappell, Dorothy F ...................................................................................................... 1, 4, 6, 25Clarke, Bryan................................................................................................................... 4, 13, 25Clemente, Manika ........................................................................................................... 4, 22, 25Contakes, Stephen M...................................................................................................... 3, 12, 25

D Dawson, Wayne K........................................................................................................... 5, 19, 25Dilley, Stephen C............................................................................................................. 5, 19, 25Dungey, Keenan E .......................................................................................................... 3, 11, 25

F Francis, Valerie ............................................................................................................... 4, 22, 25Frantz, Laura......................................................................................................................... 4, 24

G Geddes, Robert S............................................................................................................ 4, 16, 25Gevry, Taylor................................................................................................................... 4, 22, 25Gonzalez, Oscar E .......................................................................................................... 3, 14, 25Gordon, Bruce L.............................................................................................................. 5, 10, 25Greuel, Brian T............................................................................................................ 3, 4, 10, 25Guebert, Michael D ......................................................................................................... 4, 23, 25

H Hall, Steven G ................................................................................................................... 3, 7, 25Halsmer, Dominic ............................................................................................................ 3, 15, 25Hayhoe, Katharine......................................................................................................... 1, 4, 6, 25Hayworth, Douglas .......................................................................................................... 3, 12, 25Helm, Joanna .................................................................................................................. 4, 22, 25Hess, Peter M J............................................................................................................... 3, 13, 25Hine, Jason N.................................................................................................................. 5, 17, 25Hoferer, David W................................................................................................... 3, 5, 14, 18, 25


Hoffmeier, James K........................................................................................................... 3, 9, 25Hollman, Jay L................................................................................................................. 4, 23, 25Huddleston, Matthew M................................................................................................... 3, 16, 25Hurlbut, William ......................................................................................................... 1, 2, 4, 6, 25

J Jones, Gareth............................................................................................................ 1, 3, 4, 6, 25Joo, Pilju Kim .................................................................................................................. 4, 13, 25Jordan, William M............................................................................................................ 5, 21, 25

K Korte, Don W, Jr.............................................................................................................. 3, 15, 26Korte Mary H ................................................................................................................... 3, 15, 26

L Lamoureux, Denis O ....................................................................................................... 3, 11, 26Lange, Paul H ................................................................................................................. 5, 18, 26Lechner, Joseph.............................................................................................................. 5, 20, 26Lee, David ....................................................................................................................... 4, 22, 26LePage, Katey................................................................................................................. 4, 23, 26Looy, Heather................................................................................................................ 3, 4, 9, 26

M Manchester, Morgan ....................................................................................................... 4, 23, 26Masson, Elyse................................................................................................................. 4, 22, 26Miller, Keith B .................................................................................................................... 3, 8, 26Moshier, Stephen O .......................................................................................................... 3, 9, 26Munday, John.................................................................................................................. 3, 14, 26Murphy, George L ........................................................................................................... 4, 16, 26

N Newman, David S............................................................................................................ 5, 16, 26Numbers, Ronald L ......................................................................................................... 5, 10, 26

P Payne, Peter ................................................................................................................... 3, 15, 26Petcher, Donald N........................................................................................................... 4, 17, 26Poirier, Annie................................................................................................................... 4, 22, 26

R Risser, Jerry L ................................................................................................................... 3, 7, 26Root, Martin M................................................................................................................... 3, 7, 26Rusbult, Craig ................................................................................................................. 4, 23, 26

S Schweitzer, Mary........................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 26Seely, Paul H................................................................................................................... 5, 19, 26Sleasman, Michael .......................................................................................................... 5, 17, 26Sollereder, Bethany......................................................................................................... 5, 20, 26Song, Joshua J ............................................................................................................... 4, 13, 26


Index of Presenters

Spradley, Joseph............................................................................................................. 5, 10, 26Staver, John .................................................................................................................... 3, 11, 26Struthers, William M ...................................................................................................... 3, 4, 9, 26Sullivan, Bryce................................................................................................................. 3, 12, 26

T Thobaben, James ............................................................................................................. 3, 8, 26Tretina, Kyle .................................................................................................................... 4, 24, 26

W Walters, Thomas L .......................................................................................................... 3, 14, 26Wilcox, David .................................................................................................................. 5, 18, 26Williams, Christine........................................................................................................... 4, 21, 26Williams, Ray................................................................................................................... 4, 15, 26Winslow, Mark................................................................................................................. 3, 11, 26Wolgemuth, Ken................................................................................................................ 3, 8, 26

Y Yamauchi, Edwin ............................................................................................................ 5, 20, 26


Index of Presenters

program 7 18 11 - asa3.org · title: program 7_18_11.vp author: lyn created date: 7/19/2011...

Documents