In studying the Big Bang (not the late night Pay-per-view,) I found that I did not have the knowledge base necessary to truly understand the physics. My knowledge of vectors and calculus is wanting.
A year ago, I made mistakes in an evolution debate because I did not understand the necessary microbiology. There are a lot of things that I’d like to understand, but I don’t have the necesary groundwork. Frustrating.
Science must seem an awful lot like a religion to some people. Consider the scientist as high priest. From his lofty towers he makes pronouncements.
“Thou shalt not travel faster than the speed of light.”
“The universe started with the Big Bang 9 billion years ago.”
“All life evolved from the primordial soup due to happenstance and Chemistry.”
Etc. You get the idea.
From time to time these pronouncements change. The High Priest of Particle Physics consults his modern oracle, the Cloud chamber and pronounces that “Parity has been invalidated.”
WTF?
The average person must take the scientist’s word for these things just as the serf had to take the word of a priest 400 years ago. He does not have the knowledge to judge for himself. In order to acquire this knowledge IN JUST ONE NARROW RUBRIC of science, a decade or more of study and an advanced degree is often required. Just like the days of old, if one wishes to share in the knowledge one must become a priest to do so.
John Q. Public must hunger for knowledge that the necessities of daily life preclude him from understanding. Even if he does study enough to understand oh, advanced calculus in order to understand quantum physics (or even basic magnetism a la Maxwell’s equation for chrissake,) how can he ever attempt to lay down the same effort and sacrifice to understand Oh, let’s say Biology.
There is not enogh timne in a life to understand it all. It’s hopeless, and, IT’S HARD! One must take the current malleable word of the High Priest.
How seductive is it then when one hears the current scientific doggerel parroted by a “Creation Scientist,” or other who insist that the heathen scientists are making it far more complicated than necessary? That the truth is simple, and understandable?
“Unsolved Mysteries” on the Discovery Channel as well as a host of other Pop-science tells us that scientists don’t really understand, that there act is not together.
How unreasonable then is it to doubt? On the surface Occam’s razor suggests that these simpler, easier, and more satisfying answers are just as valid. Why not embrace them?
My purpose here is not to argue that science is unreasonable or arbitrary. It’s proofs are testable and accessible to one willing to make the investment. Religion may make similar claims, but Science delivers the goods.
But, I understand the frustration and the temptation of pseudo-science.
And, I wonder if the popular and easy pseudo-science and creationism might not serve a valid role.
Does it force the scientist to come away from his seemingly exclusionary quest for esoteric knowledge to show the layman why it is correct, why it is necessary?
Is he forced to make us understand so that our views are not filled will the false and easy knowledge of pseudo-science?
In this way, and unwittingly does the creation pseudo-scientist actually promulgate the spread of knowledge to the truly curious?
Enquiring minds want to know.