ISBN: 978-0-9800076-0-2 Size: 6"x9" Length: 156 pages Retail Cover Price: $22.95

Settled Science is a detailed description of the very long journey from the Big Bang to supernatural worlds created by man’s imagination. The book’s purpose is to provide non-scientists with understandable scientific answers to two very profound questions people have always wanted to know: where did the universe come from, and how did we get here? There have been so many books and articles published on the topic of evolution they could stock a bookstore, but the information in them usually is so highly technical and difficult to understand that lay people have given up trying. In contrast, I believe you will find Settled Science not only informative and interesting but also understandable.

Here I would like to discuss two related questions that are less profound but just as controversial and divisive

1. Is human morality and religion genetic?
2. Should Intelligent Design theories be taught in the biology or science classes of public schools?

These hotly debated questions have grown out of the explosive culture wars begun when Charles Darwin first introduced his ideas on evolution in his book On the Origin of Species, published in 1859.

When evolution theory is debated in the public square, antagonists usually cite reasons other than religious ones for their opposition. They often argue that it is only a theory, not fact, has too many unexplained gaps, and relies too heavily on “chance” to be true. Living things, they say, are too complex for “chance” events to have produced them. However, underlying all these secular reasons is a religious one. The most powerful opposition to the theory of evolution has always come from some, but not all, religious leaders who perceive it as a threat to their religious beliefs, and believe its inclusion in public school curricula has undermined the moral values of schoolchildren. The societal division between believers and non-believers of the theory will likely continue until one of two things happen. Either science overturns the theory on the basis of new evidence, which is unlikely given the vast amount of scientific evidence supporting it, or these religious leaders finally declare it to be compatible with their particular religions, accept it, and move on. In a hundred lifetimes harmony might prevail, but I seriously doubt it.

Although I have no special insight in how to reconcile such divergent opinions, I believe education can help reduce extremism on both sides. I would like to share with you some of my thoughts about this complex issue for you to consider before, during, and after your reading of Settled Science.

Again, the reason given most often by those opposing the teaching of evolution in schools is that it weakens school children’s religious beliefs, making them less moral because the critics believe morality flows from religious beliefs. However, most biologists know that altruistic and other moral behaviors evolved in apes and some other animals long before humans appeared. Instinctive moral behaviors of humans were inherited from the same ancestor species that chimpanzees and bonobo apes evolved from long before humans acquired the ability to think or speak. Numerous documented cases of chimps and bonobos exhibiting these behaviors cannot be rationally disputed. Humans expanded their moral behaviors when they evolved psychological needs. Psychological needs can only be satisfied through human relationships that depend on mutual respect and mutual respect, of course, is built on moral behavior. Evidence clearly shows that human morality was well established long before the advent of religious practices, which proves anyone can be as moral or immoral as anyone else, whether he or she practices religion or not. In my opinion, school children should be taught that morality practiced without a promise of a reward for doing so is more virtuous than only doing so to receive praises from others, new recruits from the ranks of the most vulnerable among us, or for promised supernatural rewards either in the here and now or after death. After all, acts of helping others advances our own self interest and, therefore, do not require us to have religious beliefs before performing them. Most in the religious community resent criticisms of their particular religious beliefs and practices and demand they be allowed to freely express them. However, many of these same individuals have no qualms about hurting the feelings of others when they publicly identify and “pray for,” “bless,” or try to “save” others who do not share their beliefs.

Another popular argument usually made to counter the idea that man evolved over time is that belief in a supernatural world by humans is universal and, therefore, had to have been implanted by a supernatural spirit when man was “created,” so scientists should stop trying to prove otherwise. However, even some religious scholars recognize that science and technology are man’s secular attempts to understand and control only the natural world, and his place in it, and religions are attempts to define and reconcile with a supernatural one. These oftentimes conflicting pursuits have been ongoing ever since man began to think, so the current battle over the theory of evolution is a natural one. The evolutionary development of abstract thinking, imagination, and self-consciousness in humans eventually led some to develop an awareness of the many difficulties and dangers from predators, other humans, and natural events like earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, wildfires, and floods they experienced in their daily lives, and even to become aware of the possibility of their own death. While attempting to explain and cope with these horrible realities, some eventually came to believe that within them was a spirit that would live on after their death that would not experience these difficulties. Ingenious leaders then devised religious beliefs that connected acceptable or prohibited behaviors in the present with the quality of the lives individuals would experience in an afterlife. For their own reasons, some good and some bad, the leaders decided which behaviors were acceptable and which ones were not. Many beliefs became accepted by many due to coercion and because they offered hope for a better life. Of course, many probably only pretended to believe in order to avoid public ridicule, punishment, or death, just as many do today.

Since a majority of people around the world do profess to believe in some kind of mystical or religious doctrine that seems irrational to others that don’t, the question is often asked, could all professing these beliefs be lying or is religion and mysticism, for some, genetic and, therefore, not subject to reasoned analysis? Whenever large groups of people gather in outdoor arenas to pray for rain, some bring raincoats and umbrellas and some do not. Why not? Religion is not genetic but spirituality is, at least to some extent. There are several thousand different religions practiced around the world today, each with its own written or unwritten doctrines and required ceremonial rituals that have to be learned and performed by each new generation from the previous one. All are founded on the two pillars of human imagination and hope for a better life. For any religious group to be successful it must have a significant number of members that possess strong tendencies to believe in supernatural spirits. Like all animals, humans inherit their physical and mental traits and instinctive behaviors, but unlike other animals, humans also inherit many psychological needs and tendencies. Scientists have now discovered some direct evidence that the tendency to believe in supernatural spirits is at least partially genetic by identifying a gene variation strongly associated only with individuals having this tendency, which helps to explain why the tendency is found in all population groups around the world, even ones that have been separated and isolated from other human groups for thousands of years. Like all genetic variations, the tendency exists on a continuum between individuals who strongly believe an eternal supernatural world exists in real time alongside our natural world, both created and controlled by the same eternal spirit(s) that selectively dispenses favors to some and punishment to others, and other individuals that could not believe in supernatural spirits for any reason or under any conditions. Just as having sexual thoughts triggers the production and release of sex hormones, scientists think some individuals inherit a particular combination of gene variations that become activated when these individuals are having certain spiritual thoughts causing the release of seratonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine which are brain chemicals that produce feelings of ecstasy and a sense of well-being. During periods of anxiety, other chemicals are released that reduce some of the harmful effects of stress. Many individuals experiencing these feelings believe they are a gift from a benevolent spirit as a reward for having these particular supernatural beliefs which, of course, reinforces the beliefs.

Some researchers believe the stronger spirituality genes were favored by natural selection for humans because they provided more psychological comfort to the more fearful and anxious individuals who were more likely to form and join groups. Living in groups, of course, provided more safety from hostile humans and animal predators, and a greater access to food and mating partners, which improved their chances of living longer and having more offspring.

Individuals who have inherited strong spirituality genes necessarily believe their particular view of the supernatural world and their interpretation of the spirits’ directives are the only true ones, and cannot understand why others choose not to believe as they do and, therefore, judge them to be stubborn, immoral, and dangerous, and individuals who have few or none of the spiritual genes consider the ones that do either stupid, uneducated, or mentally ill. Disrespect for the beliefs of others produces tension within and between groups that often results in hard feelings when individuals or groups try to convert the other. Extremists are not content just trying persuasion or applying group pressure and frequently resort to force, either violent or governmental, in a misguided attempt to exterminate competing ideologies. Human history and today’s news accounts from around the world document some of the horrible consequences of these futile attempts. In time, scientists will likely identify other gene variations that contribute to this tendency and using the techniques of epigenetics or genetic engineering might be able to modify them, but for the foreseeable future the only hope for truly tolerating and understanding human differences is through education and, in my opinion, reading Settled Science is a very good start!

Since so many people around the world do have, or claim to have, religious beliefs, it is very difficult for public officials to make policy decisions without first understanding how these decisions will affect them. Whether in a democracy or dictatorship people having strong religious beliefs greatly influence political decisions affecting their economies, legal systems, educational structure and curricula, and even some medical practices.

As for requiring Intelligent Design in public schools, it is my opinion that if adopted by school boards it should be offered in classes other than science ones because it is clearly not science. In my opinion, Intelligent Design is just an ugly first cousin of Creation Science, which is an ongoing attempt to poke holes in the theory of evolution and offer supernatural explanations for how living things arrived on Earth. The effort to persuade school boards to require teaching Creation Science in biology classes of public schools failed because the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that it is religion and that teaching it in government run schools would violate the constitutional principle prohibiting governmental establishment of any religion. While still very controversial, it is my belief that ingenious opinion makers then devised the theory of Intelligent Design which also attempts to undermine confidence in evolution theory, but does not claim a supernatural being created living things, only something very intelligent participated in it. They say it is unknown what this intelligent force was or is but that it had to have been involved with the creation of life because living things are so complex they could not have evolved by chance. In the Afterword of Settled Science I have written a fictional letter to a committee advocating teaching Intelligent Design in biology classes warning that if they are successful a full examination of the Intelligent Designer’s designs and their programmed behaviors will show how perfectly fit for killing and devouring each other they are, which will reveal the Designer’s nature to be incredibly cold and cruel, not at all like the one the committee’s supporters always portray. My letter describes, in horrific detail, some of the many examples everyone observes around them daily but usually choose to ignore. Read Settled Science and my “Letter to the Committee” and decide for yourself whether Intelligent Design or the theory of evolution is more rational.