Das aktuelle NMG-Thema – Amfibien? Amphibbien? Amphibien? – beinhaltete einige Rechtschreib-Herausfordungen. Und was soll Metamorfose? Mettamorphose? Metamorphose? bedeuten?
Viel interessanter ist es, wenn man die Sache anpacken kann. Und genau das durften die Kinder am 5. Juni tun. Das Allerbeste: Die Exkursion fand am späten Abend statt!
Continue reading “Kualquappe? Kaulkuape? Kaulquappe?”
The Trump generation – including me – won’t be around when London and Houston sink. Along with Jakarta, Manila, Shanghai and half of the Netherlands. Nor when the last wild polar bear and Atlantic puffin has died because of habitat loss.
And the Greta generation have time to adapt to the changing climate without too much inconvenience: relocate to higher ground, stop holidaying in the Canary Isles, consume less meat, wear thick pullovers in winter and drive electric cars. In fact they will even benefit from new developments in sustainable energy sources and environment-friendly technology.
So what’s the fuss?
Continue reading “Climate change won’t affect us. So why strike?”
I recently attended a lecture (in German) by Hans-Ruedi Stadelmann, a retired astrophysicist cum theologian, on the subject of ‘A contemporary image of God?’
Continue reading “The God ‘Evolution’”
A Facebook friend (# 1) shared this image from the AtheistRepublic, adding the caption: “Controversy alert! (But I’ll still listen if you disagree. 
😂)”.
After several other comments, one from me triggered the following exchange:
Me: I’m a scientist who can’t quite manage to stretch my faith to believe there’s no God behind this wondrous world.
# 1: See, that does fascinate me. I can perfectly understand why lots of people need to ascribe a coherent, humanlike intelligence to the design of the universe; the incontrovertible facts of science tend to be explained in relatively complex language, and one really does need to concentrate. Where I’m interested is when genuinely intelligent people with a sound grasp of scientific principles also have this need. I get quite irritable when anthropomorphic viewpoints are described as facts, so I’d love to know why you, in particular, believe there must be a god. But only if you have time one day, and can be bothered! 😁
Me: Not sure this is the place for apologetics. But here goes: Continue reading “Stand up for science!”
This book discusses many aspects of the common tension between scientists and believers, with some vivid illustrations but no hard and fast answers. It is written in a chatty style, appropriate and intelligible for teenagers, though perhaps a bit patronising and on one occasion moralising. Laing comes across as honest and open, respecting opposing views. He presents the believer’s position plausibly without attempting to force anyone to accept it; instead, he encourages young people to examine the evidence, think things through and form their own convictions. Continue reading “Is God Really Legit? Making Sense of Faith and Science, by Neil Laing”
Der berühmte Sicherheitsexperte Bruce Schneier behauptet in einem Nebensatz seines Artikels Memo to the Next President, dass die USA unter einem Mangel an Naturwissenschaftler leidet, weil “science isn’t valued in a country full of creationists”. Also, es gibt in Amerika zu viele, die an einen Schöpfer-Gott glauben, und solche Leute betreiben keine Naturwissenschaft. Continue reading “Steht Gott im Weg des Fortschritts?”