Spring Soccer Returns
Last Tuesday night was Dylan’s first soccer game of the year. This is a somewhat different team from last year's U12 (under 12 years of age) championship team. Some kids did not return to soccer, and others are playing travel soccer, which is a competitive level above AYSO.
It’s good to be outside again. It was warm enough for shorts, but cool enough to need a sweatshirt. Perfect weather for watching outdoor sports.
Dylan’s footwork is far superior to what it was last year. We can tell that he has been practicing, and he has even outdone what he did during winter indoor soccer. Dylan has far more control and command of the ball now. Not only does he hustle like he did last year, but he can pass the ball and control the flow of the game.
Dylan’s team lost 4-1, so they are off to a tough start defending their title. Now that Dylan has a trophy, that sense of urgency to win has relaxed a bit in me. I can enjoy the game a bit more for what it is. I think that Dylan has relaxed a bit as well. He did not take this loss hard, not like he did last year in Spring and Fall soccer.
If you watch professional soccer, they use the entire field at once, and anyone can strike or attack at any time. At the AYSO level, it’s an isolated game; the ball makes short advances, rarely moving larges distances in a single play. Kids far from the ball are not potentially part of the play. When Dylan sat out the 4th quarter, I watched a bit of the nearby U14 game. I could really see a difference in the style of play at that level; they make longer passes, and the ball moves much more quickly and farther at a time. I’m looking forward to seeing Dylan’s improvement in the years to come.
buck on 04.22.06 @ 12:36 AM EST [link]
Time Keeps Tick, Tick, Ticking in my Head
New film updates time-travel tales - Science - MSNBC.com
My favorite science fiction stories involve time travel. I have blogged this link for no other reason than just that.
buck on 04.22.06 @ 12:24 AM EST [link]
The Age of the Universe
To paraphrase my Bible study friend Randy, whenever the Bible and science disagree, ther must be something wrong about the assumptions of science. For example, scientists tell us that the Earth is billions of years old. Biblical scolars tell us that the Earth is about 6,500 years old. Each side looks at the other and says "you are stark, raving mad."
Another inconstant constant?
"If this constant [mu] (set at 1,836.1526726) actually varies over time, it could mean that atoms behaved slightly differently during the infancy of the universe. Generally, scientists assume that the laws of physics are unchanging across time and space. But if laws and constants turn out to be bendable, physicists might have to rethink the conventional wisdom on matters ranging from the age and evolution of the universe to time travel and way-out power possibilities."
What the article says is that a subatomic ratio once thought unbendable . . . well, is bendable. The age of the universe is not what scientists thought it would be. One of the classic assumptions of physics may have turned out to be wrong, just like Randy said.
buck on 04.22.06 @ 12:18 AM EST [link]
Falling Through the Thin Ice
Did you read my April 6, 2006, commentary on the Florida State University professor who claims that Jesus Christ actually walked upon ice instead of water? It looks like I was not the only one to express frustration at constant scientific attempts to explain away the miracles of the Bible.
Cosmic Log: April 1-7, 2006 - Cosmic Log - MSNBC.com
"In fact, in today's Associated Press report on the research by Nof and his colleagues, the Florida State University professor says the hate e-mail has been coming in at the rate of one message every three minutes accusing him of blasphemy or just plain stupidity."
MSNBC does an excellent job of quoting from a large variety of views on the topic ranging from "It is time that scientists stop trying to contradict the statements and facts of the Bible and learn to accept it as the Way, the Truth and the Life" to "Jesus was a good person with a good message for the time he lived in, and he helped revolutionize religion all over the world, but he was not the son of God, because God doesn't exist." Of course, I personally agree far more with the first sentiment than the second sentiment, but I also believe in balance of opinion. For me, it is important to understand what non-believers actually believe. That puts perspective upon what it is that I believe and why I believe it.
Let me say that I am a fan of science. I believe in research, experiments, and I have no problems with the exploration of the wonders of our universe. I personally have contributed to science by independently discovering very large Proth prime numbers using the idle time on my PC. I can relate to science's need to explain in scientific terms what they cannot explain by mere faith.
Again, that's the whole point of the Bible: faith. It is salvation by grace through faith. I cannot possibly explain how the world was created in the way in which the Bible describes, I just have faith that it did.
buck on 04.22.06 @ 12:07 AM EST [link]
Thursday, April 20th
Religion Without Divinity
listening to: FM 90.7 -- Andrews University -- Classical
Interviewing Tom Cruise can be risky business - Gossip: The Scoop - MSNBC.com
When Tom Cruise's Swedish antagonist attacks Scientology, Tom replies, among other things, "Scientology is a religion without divinity." That immediately hit me as profound, but possibly incorrect. How can religion be without a divine object? I went to the trusty Dictionary.com website and looked up "religion." Definitions three and four read as follows:
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
So, Tom would be correct in saying "religion without divinity." There really is such a thing. After all, I said he was "possibly" incorrect.
And you may be asking why I am reading Tom Cruise celebrity news? Well, he just has this charming train wreck quality about him.
buck on 04.20.06 @ 10:13 PM EST [link]
Wednesday, April 19th
Hatred or Righteous Anger?
Anti-gay church sparks free-speech fight - U.S. Life - MSNBC.com
"Proclaiming 'God hates fags' and 'Thank God for dead soldiers,' the small band of evangelicals from Topeka, Kan., has ignited a firestorm by spreading its gospel of damnation at the funerals of AIDS victims and slain soldiers."
These are the type of so-called Christians that get all the press.
So, is this what Jesus would have done 2,000 years ago? Grabbed his multi-colored sign and yelled at the processions of wailing mourners and the donkeys upon which they rode? We all know He overturned the moneychangers table at the temple in a fit of righeous anger, but would He have carried signs and shouted at people? He certainly preached bold messages, and declared the scribes and Pharisees to be hypocrites over and over, but did He set this kind of example?
It's hard to believe that our Savior would have told men of His day how much God hated them. Condemned their sin, most certainly, but hated them? This was the same Jesus who spoke to adulterers and tax collectors and lepers. He even convinced a dying man on a nearby cross to follow Him, if only for a few short hours until the man himself died and joined Christ in glory.
Again, speaking boldly about the Gospel is one thing, but where does the line cross into righteous anger (where I struggle badly -- again, Bryon and anger do not co-exist well), and where does that line cross into hate?
buck on 04.19.06 @ 11:04 PM EST [link]
Monday, April 17th
Shall We Rewrite History as Well?
listening to: Nickelodeon - Sponge Bob Square Pants
Should using the birth of Christ to date time (BC/AD) be replaced by a secular dating method (BCE/CE)?
"The Kentucky Board of Education has voted to take the first step in redefining how America dates time. The board voted to include a new secular system of dating the calendar, BCE (Before Common Era) and CE (Common Era), and added it to the BC (Before Christ) and AD (Anno Domini, Latin for "in the year of our Lord") method."
Is this a joke? I thought Kentucky was one of the conservative states. I'm trying to find this documented on the Kentucky Board of Education web site, but have not been successful yet . . .
buck on 04.17.06 @ 08:11 PM EST [link]
e-mail: ubuckone@earthlink.net
