Category Archives: science

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen (2011)

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen is a quirky lighthearted film about a sheik’s ambitious project to construct a dam, create a river and introduce salmon to it so he can pursue his fishing hobby. In the desert. At a time of strained Anglo-Arab relations, the British government sees the project as an opportunity to improve its public image, so fisheries expert Dr Alfred “Fred” Jones (Ewan McGregor) is assigned to work with the sheikh and his representative Ms Harriet Chetwode-Talbot (Emily Blunt).

The movie is actually based on a novel by Paul Torday, which, judging by these quotes seems like it would be an interesting read. From a purely filmmaking perspective, though, I think the production team tried to do slightly too much with the film; switching rapidly between comedy, drama, romance, political comment, spiritual reflection and cultural insight. As a result, the film comes across somewhat disjointed at times which is unfortunate for a premise with such grand vision.

At the heart of the sheik’s vision is a deep appreciation for the beauty and wonder of the natural world. The sheik says he wants to build the project for the glory of God but he fears doing it for the glory of man, because of man’s hubris. But I would say to the sheik, why can’t it be both (assuming the environmental impact is managed correctly!)? God’s command to man was to exert a loving dominion over the earth:

Genesis 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

and

Genesis 2:15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

That’s something we don’t always get right in the same way we struggle to love others. Nevertheless, to the extent that we do science and care for the world, I think we can embrace an healthy appreciation for  human capacity, as long as we recognize that we are harnessing physical laws, chemistry and biological processes built into a universe that is not ours and which we ourselves did not create. We are stewards. Albeit imperfect ones. (This helps us avoid hubris.)

Dr Jones, as the man of science, also shares the sheik’s passion for both nature and fishing. We join in as the camera glories in the teeming life beneath our waters, the writhing energy of fish, and the privilege of enjoying the natural world. At times, the film’s conversations dance playfully around questions of science and faith, not pushing one way or the other instead preferring to observe nature as it is (perhaps the book is bolder in this respect?).

The Christian worldview attributes the beauty and goodness of creation to the beauty and goodness of a god who lovingly creates and sustains everything. The creation account of Genesis 1 celebrates a good God filling his good creation with an abundance of life:

Genesis 1:20-23 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.”

As the God of the Bible creates a finely-tuned universe with a finely-tuned planet which allows waters to teem with fish and humans to thrive, so too the sheik harnesses the knowledge and understanding of the natural world to create a new ecological system with the conditions necessary for life to thrive; introducing life to a world where there was no life.

A Borrowed Flame: Genesis, Gervais & Space-Jumping

Following Felix Baumgartner’s successful space jump, and the shooting of a 14 year old girl in Pakistan this week, Ricky Gervais tweeted:

Dear Religion, This week I safely dropped a man from space while you shot a child in the head for wanting to go to school. Yours, Science.

Gervais’ tweet is the kind of light-hearted comedy we expect from Gervais, but the quote also reflects a common approach to the science-religion discussion in which science and religion are somehow cast as opposites. Here, Gervais lauds science for achieving something spectacular while religion is blamed for violence, presumably to show that science is better and religion should be rejected.

Andrew at A Borrowed Flame, however, responds to the Tweet, astutely arguing that Gervais’ use of the words ‘religion’ and ‘science’ is fundamentally flawed:

Firstly, it anthropomorphs two different things as if they are the same kind of thing (a category error). Religion is false plural. You can no more say that ‘religion’ does something than you can say that ‘politics’ does something. You might talk about what a particular religion has done (or its adherents, e.g. the Taliban, evangelical Christians) just as you could talk about particular political parties or ideologies (e.g. socialists, liberals) , but the way Gervais uses it hear (and indeed, as it is often used by New Atheist writers) is simply fallacious.

And this:

It is also mistaken to suggest that science does anything. We do science. Even when we say things like ‘science tells us that…’ it’s a kind of shorthand for ‘our scientific experiments have led to think that…’. Indeed, the firearms which the Taliban use are just as much a product of scientific endeavour as balloons which float to the edge of the atmosphere, jump-suits and parachutes. We do science, and we use knowledge gained via the discipline of science to do other things.

Read the rest here.

Russell Crowe signs for Noah movie

Recent news reports confirm that Russell Crowe has been signed for Darren Aronofsky’s take on the biblical epic of Noah’s Ark, nine years after Peter Weir’s sea-faring epic Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World. Director Aronofsky says:

“I think it’s really timely because it’s about environmental apocalypse which is the biggest theme, for me, right now for what’s going on on this planet,” Aronofsky told SlashFilm.com in 2008. “So I think it’s got these big, big themes that connect with us. Noah was the first environmentalist. He’s a really interesting character.” (Christianity Today)

Yes, the environment was certainly a big concern of Noah – not in the way Aronofsky suggests of course, but rather when the rains would start. According to the Bible, Noah preaches repentance to escape a coming judgement, like Jonah and Jesus and Paul after him, because “the Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.” (Genesis 6:5)

While the movie will be an interesting addition to the biblical epic genre, I really just want to know whether the movie will show a local flood or a global flood! And how and when those pesky fossils were formed! But just as I shouldn’t expect the Noah movie to answer all of my specific questions, we should approach the study of the book of Genesis with some degree of care. Over on Theologica, Danny offers a helpful list of common assumptions we should take into account when studying Genesis. Here’s one such highlight:

It’s not about me and my questions.  We expect this to be addressed to us and answer our questions and the big questions of our time.  But it that wasn’t its purpose.  The age of the universe and methodology of creation are key questions for us.  But it isn’t giving us the answer to our questions.  It’s addressing the questions and needs of someone else.

It’s not written in MY time.  It isn’t in easy to understand modern English.  It’s in a dead form of Hebrew.  And whether that is convenient to admit or not, it isn’t as clear as we’d like with what we’d like it to say.  And we don’t just have the debate over the genre and context of chapters, but debate over the narrow or broad understandings of specific words as well.

I probably don’t “land” where Danny does on all issues of creation, but the list is certainly worthwhile reading for anyone interested in the creation/evolution debate. The movie is sure to generate much more debate as the March 2014 release date approaches.

Prometheus (2012) and the story of us

BBC Future writer Quentin Cooper has written a piece on human origins in  science fiction films. Ridley Scott’s upcoming Prometheus is being kept tightly under wraps but Cooper sees Prometheus as the latest attempt for a simple story about our origins:

What is clear though is that as well as, like Alien, taking terror off terra firma and out among the stars, Prometheus is a voyage into our origins as humans, and where we fit into the cosmic order.  That’s if there is one to fit into, be it with aliens, gods, or alien gods. Scott describes it as “not just a scary movie but a really interesting evolutionary story”. Doubly scary then, given that some people seem to find anything “evolutionary” more alarming than a xenomorph bursting out of your stomach.

Cooper observes the scientific story casts humans as simply part of a large cast of 9 million other species. This apparently fuels our appetite for human-centered “creation myths” which he attributes to make believe and describes them as strange. Thus, the final option for the explanation of life is one of extra-terrestrial intervention, popular among science fiction films as Cooper shows. Far from solving the problem, the alien-seeding (akin to panspermia) merely relocates the origin of life question to different environments much more difficult to observe than our own planet.

In contrast, the account of origins presented in the Bible casts God as intending, making and observing his finished creation, much like an artist crafting his work. While humans are presented as the pinnacle of the created order, being created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26), they are nevertheless dependent on God for existence and thus ought to derive their meaning for existence from him. Dane Ortlund has compiled a list of messages of the Bible in one sentence, from various Christian thinkers. Some of them are longer than one sentence, but here are a few highlights:

Mark Dever: God has made promises to bring His people to Himself and He is fulfilling them all through Christ.

Kevin DeYoung: A holy God sends his righteous Son to die for unrighteous sinners so we can be holy and live happily with God forever.

John Frame:God glorifies himself in the redemption of sinners.

In this way, the Christian story of us offers neither the human-centeredness of creation myths nor the accidental casting choices of chance but the grand story of a loving God and a wayward people.

While Cooper’s article was probably written before the release of this trailer, his primary observation is on song – note the line “How far would you go to get your answers?”. Here’s the trailer:

Believing in A Beautiful Mind (Part 2)

In part 1, I commented briefly on some of the beliefs expressed by characters in A Beautiful Mind:

  • reductionism or materialism can be used to justify one’s urges
  • beliefs don’t necessarily need to be grounded in science to be valid
  • meaning and significance are found in relation to others

As viewers we follow John Nash through this transformation.

A comment about the production of the movie itself – the plot is loosely based on the story of John Nash, a Nobel-prize winning mathematician.  Most Hollywood biopics tinker with events, characters and timing, to make a point or to give a story more dramatic flow or impact. A Beautiful Mind is no exception. Please consider these thoughts in relation to the movie characters and not necessarily to the actual persons.

Now we turn to Alicia, who is the primary transforming force in the story and is  at times, mildly existentialist:

It’s called “life,” John. Activities available; just add meaning.

and angry at God:

Alicia: Guilt over wanting to leave…Rage…against John, against God, and…But…then I look at him…and I force myself to see the man that I married. And he becomes that man. He’s transformed into someone that I love. And I’m transformed into someone who loves him. It’s not all the time, but…it’s enough.

This is understandable. Putting it mildly, these are difficult times, and we find ourselves in these times from time to time as we seek meaning in the hard (or mundane) things of life. Alicia is, to her credit, honest and doesn’t allow her frustrations to dwell. At other times, Alicia asserts that God is responsible for beauty in the world:

Alicia: God must be a painter. Why else would we have so many colors?

Alicia perceives beauty in the appearance of light and within the context of the story it wouldn’t be too big a stretch to say the physics which govern it as well. Mathematicians and scientists see the world in a unique way – finding enjoyment and seeing beauty in nature, in the stars, in the patterns and laws which govern the physical world. Only a Nash could say any mathematical solution is elegant. Only they could see nothing wrong in developing a mathematical description for a mugging.

The fact that we can describe the phenomena and their relationships within the universe through the laws of physics and expressing these interactions precisely in a language – mathematics – is indicative of an ordered, rationally intelligible universe. One we would not expect to appear by chance – less so, one in which we humans could live in order to make these very observations. Nor must the laws of this universe exist by the necessity of it’s own nature. In other words, the universe didn’t need this particular configuration.

The scientific minds in A Beautiful Mind have room for God in their thinking and appreciate his handiwork, but their foundation for their worth is slightly misplaced. If God exists and he created us for his purposes, our lives are already imbued with meaning and significance and worth.

“…you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being.” Revelation 4:11

We don’t need to create our own meaning. We don’t need to rely on achievements or success for our worth as humans, though those things may be good. What we do already matters. If there is a god, everything matters and we ought to be properly related to him – Christianity claims we do this through Jesus. Our very reason for being, and that which we perceive as beautiful, find their source in the mind of God. The Most Beautiful Mind.

Recommended resource – God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?, John C. Lennox