Rainforest Trip

Rainforest trip: check! I’ll be honest, before I considered signing up for this semester abroad, I didn’t even know Australia had rainforest. Now I can tell the difference between complex notophyll vine forest and simple microphyll fern forest without blinking an eye. What a difference a year makes, eh? While we are on the subject, I’ll give a few quick notes about the remarkable habitat diversity found in North Queensland. The various soil, rain, and wind conditions provide support a plethora of forest structures. Most people think of rainforest as thick jungle with near impenetrable undergrowth and an abundance of vines, and some of it is, but more often it is something else entirely that can only be adequately described after careful observation. For example, the canopy could be dominated by convoluted fig trees (known as “stranglers”), the appropriately named paperbarks, or even deciduous cedars. It could also have numerous gaps or few, which is often indicative of the level of recent cyclone damage. The understory is sometimes quite easily navigable. After years of study, scientists now have a better understanding of why these things occur. The study of the relationships between geologic factors, habitat types, and native wildlife, known as landscape ecology, is truly a fascinating area of study!

Perhaps more interesting is the animals themselves. My personal favorite is the Lumholtz’s tree kangaroo, a truly amazing marsupial that spends most of its life high in the trees, eating various leaves and stems. It was one of the few things we didn’t see on the trip. Two cassowaries (the breathtaking flightless bird I mentioned in an earlier post), a delightfully awkward emu, a couple of coppery brushtail possums, several pademelons (small, hopping rainforest kangaroos), sugar gliders (the marsupial equivalent of a flying squirrel) and last, but certainly not least, a 10-foot amethystine python with a partially digested pademelon (we think) inside! So cool. An equally interesting part of the trip was meeting people who have lived in, studied, and cared for the Australian rainforest most of their lives. The owners of all of the hostels and campgrounds we stayed at had a working knowledge of basic ecology and the lifestyles of the native wildlife. Even Jack, our “professor” for the trip, owns property in North Queensland, from which he studies tropical bird communities. Over the past 10 years or so, he has been part of a volunteer-led reforestation project designed to reduce future damage to rainforest wildlife by connecting isolated habitats. Bottom line, it’s nice to know that there are people out there who actually care about this stuff. Understanding the world is great and all, but, in my opinion, research doesn’t do much good if it’s never applied to real world situations whenever appropriate. These people understand that, and hopefully you will too by the end of this blog!

Now that we are about halfway in the semester, I think it’s about time I started answering the questions I laid out at the beginning of the blog. In order to know the difference between scientific and experiential truth, we’ll need to investigate the history and methods of science and religion.

First of all, let me say that the history of science and religion is complicated. Some Christians label modern scientists as anti-religion or even demonic, while some scientists bemoan the way that religion has restricted and continues to restrict the advancement of human knowledge and the betterment of society in general. Clearly, lumping large and diverse groups of people into a big ol’ mental boxes and calling it a day isn’t going to get us very far. In order to understand and cooperate with people that are different from us, we need acknowledge differences, while simultaneously trying to find some common ground.

 Admittedly, I haven’t studied this a whole lot, but as a naïve undergrad, I like to think that all great scientists are united by an insatiable curiosity, whereas great religious leaders strive to find meaning in the existence of humanity and the universe itself. The purpose of the scientific method is to better understand the intricate inter-workings of the natural world by stripping away cultural biases, observational misconceptions, and supernatural explanations: in short, to learn about the natural world in terms of the natural world, by looking at the natural world. And in case you haven’t noticed, it’s been quite successful. The purpose of religion, on the other hand, is to describe how to live a life worth living in an incredibly hectic and confusing world. It accomplishes this primarily through tradition, story, and teachings, and for many people, it does this quite well.

To summarize, we have two disciplines that have distinctly different purposes and methods. These methods are not interchangeable. To illustrate, I will share two anecdotes; one personal, one hypothetical. I’ve heard a scientist friend of mine remark, “I’ll believe in God when I see the evidence for it. Until then, I’ll remain agnostic.” The problem with this is that it treats faith like a science experiment. You can’t get supernatural insights if you are only looking at the natural world.  Simple logic, right? However it goes both ways. It is, by definition, impossible to get scientific insights from religious principles or texts. Think of it this way. Imagine a scientist comes to you and says, “Hey, I had an amazing revelation today! Atoms are mostly empty space. That means that God cares more about nothingness than actual matter!” You would respond, “You’re nuts!” and not think twice about it. Scientists feel the same way about creation science. Not because they hate the concept of God or Christianity (most don’t), but because such arguments do an injustice to the system they follow and the community they are a part of.

Please understand that my goal here is not to take sides, but to build bridges. It pains me to see two groups of people with rich histories and so many resources at their disposal hating each other for no good reason. Perhaps if we, as a race, stop demonizing each other, we can work together to accomplish that which we do agree on. Such as the continuation of life on this planet as we know it. Peace.