Loaded Question

[Guest guest]

Ok, I usually try to stay REAL FAR away from creation vs. science. However,

I have always wondered, if we came from Adam & Eve, then why do we have

people of color, and isn't the whole Adam & Eve theory kind of a big incestuous

" thing? " Conversely, science says we came to be through evolution. The last

time I checked, to evolve is to begin as one thing and then over time evolve

into a bigger & better thing (if you will in plain English) so, if we evolved

from primates, why do we still have primates??

Maybe I'm just really stupid about the whole understanding of things, but

these are things that no one has really been able to answer for me over the

years.

PLEASE don't flame me, I'm in no way suggesting one theory is right and the

other wrong. I'm just more curious to see if anyone else has ever had the

same thought as I, or something similar..

Cristi

[Guest guest]

Group:

This is an honest question. First, a preface. I recently authored a chapter

for an upcoming book (which will remain nameless) that detailed the chemical

basis of life and subsequently disease. I opened the chapter with the

standard discussion of the Big Bang Theory followed by Hubble’s confirmation

of universe expansion and discussed Penzias and 's discovery of

radiation in space which further proves Lemaître’s Big Bang Theory. I

followed this with the standard college biology discussion of chemical

evolution followed by biological evolution. In two reviews I was blasted for

wanting to teach paramedics the scientific theories of the origin of life

instead of the religious creation model. While I do not want to get into a

Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in modern

health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing science

theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs an

important role in society by setting standards for acceptable behavior.

But, am I being naïve to believe that the vast majority of EMS education

programs present the science ad simply leave the creationism to the

churches.

This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled

E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

Midlothian, Texas

 

" Is it ignorance or apathy?  I don't know and I don't care! "

-Jimmy Buffett

[Guest guest]

Why can't both theories be right. Evolution is a process. The chemical and

biological aspects of how we are is scientific fact.

Many things that we do in the medical profession can be explained by science,

but there are things that cannot. How do we explain the look of those patients

who are going to die, and they know it. How do we explain changes in patients

that we have done everything we can think of. Everything tells us this is not

going to be a good outcome, but the patients live.

We teach the science but must understand the other aspects of what our care

delivery must encompass.

It is hard to teach the science without teaching the humanity of what our job

is.

My personal opinion.

" Bledsoe, DO " wrote:

Group:

This is an honest question. First, a preface. I recently authored a chapter

for an upcoming book (which will remain nameless) that detailed the chemical

basis of life and subsequently disease. I opened the chapter with the

standard discussion of the Big Bang Theory followed by Hubble’s confirmation

of universe expansion and discussed Penzias and 's discovery of

radiation in space which further proves Lemaître’s Big Bang Theory. I

followed this with the standard college biology discussion of chemical

evolution followed by biological evolution. In two reviews I was blasted for

wanting to teach paramedics the scientific theories of the origin of life

instead of the religious creation model. While I do not want to get into a

Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in modern

health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing science

theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs an

important role in society by setting standards for acceptable behavior.

But, am I being naïve to believe that the vast majority of EMS education

programs present the science ad simply leave the creationism to the

churches.

This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled

E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

Midlothian, Texas

" Is it ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care! "

-Jimmy Buffett

[Guest guest]

bbledsoe@... wrote:

> I was blasted for wanting to teach

> paramedics the scientific theories

> of the origin of life instead of the

> religious creation model.

Hey Dr. Bledsoe, You should point your reviewers to

Dover, PA and a 2004 law suit. It can be expensive to

try to teach religion in the guise of science.

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/13928874.htm

--

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

A better question would be: " Why even go that deep for paramedic

education? " It would appear that it just opens a can of worms that do

nothing but distract from the process of educating paramedics.

Henry

" Bledsoe, DO " wrote:

> Group:

>

> This is an honest question. First, a preface. I recently authored a

> chapter

> for an upcoming book (which will remain nameless) that detailed the

> chemical

> basis of life and subsequently disease. I opened the chapter with the

> standard discussion of the Big Bang Theory followed by Hubble’s

> confirmation

> of universe expansion and discussed Penzias and 's discovery of

> radiation in space which further proves Lemaître’s Big Bang Theory. I

> followed this with the standard college biology discussion of chemical

>

> evolution followed by biological evolution. In two reviews I was

> blasted for

> wanting to teach paramedics the scientific theories of the origin of

> life

> instead of the religious creation model. While I do not want to get

> into a

> Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in

> modern

> health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing

> science

> theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs

> an

> important role in society by setting standards for acceptable

> behavior.

> But, am I being naïve to believe that the vast majority of EMS

> education

> programs present the science ad simply leave the creationism to the

> churches.

>

> This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled

>

> E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

> Midlothian, Texas

>

> " Is it ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care! "

> -Jimmy Buffett

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

My guess is the good doctor is making a good faith attempt at teaching

EMT/paramedic students the " why " portion of pre-hospital emergency

education, as opposed to old and tired " technical Chimp " approach.

One good aspect of education is it's applicable to life in general,

not just to our trade.

Alfonso R. Ochoa

>

> A better question would be: " Why even go that deep for paramedic

> education? " It would appear that it just opens a can of worms that do

> nothing but distract from the process of educating paramedics.

>

> Henry

>

[Guest guest]

>

> We teach the science but must understand the other aspects of what

our care delivery must encompass.

>

> It is hard to teach the science without teaching the humanity of

what our job is.

>

> My personal opinion.

>

Agreed. This might be a shot in the dark, but this is perhaps why

medicine is considered both a science and an art.

Alfonso R. Ochoa

[Guest guest]

> While I do not want to get into a

> Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in modern

> health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing science

> theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs an

> important role in society by setting standards for acceptable behavior.

It all depends on the institution. For example, Loma University

School of Medicine in California teaches the creation model. However,

this is to be expected since they are affiliated with the Seventh-Day

Adventist Church.

I would say the safest bet is to introduce the scientific model with a

notation that the following prose is based on the currently accepted

theory. That way, you are giving yourself an out in the unlikely

event that the entire theoretical base is scraped tomorrow and not

alienating those with religious faith of any sort.

Alfonso R. Ochoa

[Guest guest]

We are looking to the future. For parity with the other allied health

professions and nursing, we have to produce EMS providers better versed in

the sciences. This was an attempt to provide material that is very basic for

those attending nursing or medical school.

First, I appreciate the feedback. Sometimes, when writing, it is easy to get

out on a tangent. I never meant to get into a theological discussion. The

last thing we need in EMS is people practicing on faith. As Mark Twain wrote

in his book 'Following the Equator', " Faith is believing what you know ain't

so. " Religion and science can peacefully co-exist as long as both sides are

tolerant. When somebody is critically-ill or -injured, they need the best

scientific-treatment. There is nothing wrong with their religious

representatives or mystics helping with their emotional health.

Also, the publishers go to great lengths to avoid religion. In fact, in the

section of text that was reviewed we use the term " B.C.E. " (before the

common era) instead of " BC " which has an overtly Christian bias. While

Christianity prevails in the western world, I have to remember that these

texts are translated into other languages so I have to remain

religion-neutral.

Thanks to all. I will continue with the current direction and keep those

initial paragraphs in. Nobody argues the chemistry or biochemistry.

BEB

Re: Loaded Question

A better question would be: " Why even go that deep for paramedic

education? " It would appear that it just opens a can of worms that do

nothing but distract from the process of educating paramedics.

Henry

" Bledsoe, DO " wrote:

> Group:

>

> This is an honest question. First, a preface. I recently authored a

> chapter

> for an upcoming book (which will remain nameless) that detailed the

> chemical

> basis of life and subsequently disease. I opened the chapter with the

> standard discussion of the Big Bang Theory followed by Hubble’s

> confirmation

> of universe expansion and discussed Penzias and 's discovery of

> radiation in space which further proves Lemaître’s Big Bang Theory. I

> followed this with the standard college biology discussion of chemical

>

> evolution followed by biological evolution. In two reviews I was

> blasted for

> wanting to teach paramedics the scientific theories of the origin of

> life

> instead of the religious creation model. While I do not want to get

> into a

> Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in

> modern

> health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing

> science

> theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs

> an

> important role in society by setting standards for acceptable

> behavior.

> But, am I being naïve to believe that the vast majority of EMS

> education

> programs present the science ad simply leave the creationism to the

> churches.

>

> This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled

>

> E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

> Midlothian, Texas

>

> " Is it ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care! "

> -Jimmy Buffett

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

An interesting point here...if creationism is proven, the big question

still is, where did the original hydrogen come from? Playing the

Devil's Advocate for a moment, excuse the pun, how is it that Penzias

and 's discovery of radiation in space proves Big Bang? Perhaps

an omnipotent one wants to keep us guessing and arguing like some parlor

game, over whether or not He/She/Etc. exists. Just because I think the

argument is unprovable, where did the original atoms and hydrogen gas

come from?

I guess I like God as Burns in Oh God! The movie... " I'm not gas.

I find it very offensive. "

While intelligent design seems to have its issues in the courts, the

human machine seems to be both amazingly fragile and

strong....considering only the trauma of birth and what we overcome or

might not during that period of our life. Perhaps this would have been

a consideration to insert...

On the other question, I have never ever seen creationism taught in an

EMS course, nor do I think it should be. It just seems standard that

creationism and evolution would be discussed down the hall in theology

class or philosophy, at least that is where I would put them.

If you are truly a believer, than you know your faith makes you an elect

people -- whether Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. This election by a

deity has different meanings to those who worship but ultimately your

eternity will be decided by your belief system, not by what

Bledsoe puts in some books, unless there is another new church down in

Midlothian I haven't heard about.

I mean egad, last time I looked at one of the Bledsoe textbooks, he had

semi-positive mentions of those crazy ideas of helicopter EMS AND CISM.

What is coming to this world!?!?!

Re: Loaded Question

Why can't both theories be right. Evolution is a process. The chemical

and biological aspects of how we are is scientific fact.

Many things that we do in the medical profession can be explained by

science, but there are things that cannot. How do we explain the look of

those patients who are going to die, and they know it. How do we

explain changes in patients that we have done everything we can think

of. Everything tells us this is not going to be a good outcome, but the

patients live.

We teach the science but must understand the other aspects of what our

care delivery must encompass.

It is hard to teach the science without teaching the humanity of what

our job is.

My personal opinion.

" Bledsoe, DO " wrote:

Group:

This is an honest question. First, a preface. I recently authored a

chapter

for an upcoming book (which will remain nameless) that detailed the

chemical

basis of life and subsequently disease. I opened the chapter with the

standard discussion of the Big Bang Theory followed by Hubble’s

confirmation

of universe expansion and discussed Penzias and 's discovery of

radiation in space which further proves Lemaître’s Big Bang Theory. I

followed this with the standard college biology discussion of chemical

evolution followed by biological evolution. In two reviews I was blasted

for

wanting to teach paramedics the scientific theories of the origin of

life

instead of the religious creation model. While I do not want to get into

a

Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in modern

health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing science

theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs an

important role in society by setting standards for acceptable behavior.

But, am I being naïve to believe that the vast majority of EMS education

programs present the science ad simply leave the creationism to the

churches.

This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled

E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

Midlothian, Texas

" Is it ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care! "

-Jimmy Buffett

[Guest guest]

Interesting points to consider:

----------------------------------

From: Scientific American, September 1999

" Scientists and Religion in America "

" Whereas 90% of the general population has a distinct belief in a personal

god and a life after death, only 40% of scientists on the B.S. level favor

this belief in religion and merely 10 % of those who are considered

'eminent' scientists believe in a personal god or in an afterlife. "

----------------------------------

From: Nature, 394(6691):313, 23 July 1998

" Leading Scientists Still Reject God "

A recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that

72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a

personal God.

----------------------------------

From: Skeptic, vol.6 #2 1998

" Do You Believe in God? "

In multiple studies, there is a negative correlation between theism and

morality. By Franzblau's 1934 study, there's a negative correlation between

religiosity and honesty. Ross 1950 shows atheists and agnostics are more

likely to express their willingness to help the poor than the deeply

religious. 1969 Hirschi and Stark found no correlation in lawbreaking by

churchgoing children and non-churchgoing children.

This same Skeptic published the results of another study that compared

professions and likelihood of believing in God. The general public was just

over 90% likely to believe in God. Scientists in general were just under 40%

likely. Mathematicians were just over 40% likely, biologists just under 30%,

and physicists were barely over 20% likely to believe in God.

Re: Loaded Question

Dr. Bledsoe,

I think the focus of basic science education should include

discussion on scientific inquiry and how science functions to develop

a scientific theory through reproducibly investigating a question.

It is important that students understand why most of the religious

statements can not be assessed by scientific inquiry, not a weakness

of science or religion, but there is no way to reproducibly challenge

biblical statements. The greatest service would be to provide a

scientific education with enough detail to understand why science and

religion are not juxtaposed, but can address different issues in life.

Finally, this is really important for the scientific community as a

blurred understanding of scientific inquiry only stands to devalue

science, and we(people) have gained so much from science!

~ Bates

[Guest guest]

<<snip>>

Religion performs an important role in society by setting standards

for acceptable behavior. But, am I being naïve to believe that the

vast majority of EMS education programs present the science a(n)d

simply leave the creationism to the churches(?)

This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled <<snip>>

_____________________________

Maybe it's because of all the excrement being agitated in

neighboring Kansss, or maybe it's a result of that rocket science

you Texans infoicted upon the White House, but this sort of

unnecsary conflation is increasingly commonplace. I recall being

asked a bunch of questions in an interview at a Jesuit medical

school in the mid 1970s about my views on abortion, and respoinding

then that I didn't think men had much of a standing to venture

prescriptive opinions in these matters--they didn't much take to

that response, but were even less enamored when I told them, after

additional pressure for a definitive statement, that I thought it

should be legal until the fetus achieved the age of majority and

hence of legal standing in the courts.

Ths was only recently a matter that bred much consternation on a

decidely scientific list of research types, stimulated by some

intersting comments from the Dalie Lama about religion needing to be

more maleable to ewmpirical discovery. I said in that context

(among other things, that

" Theology and religious doctrine are not, in philosophical terms,

synonyms. Theology is an element of metaphysical discourse dealing

with the relationship of humans and human life with concepts of the

divine; religious doctrine involves the catechism and practices of

one or another specific sects. Theologic views are weakest when

they are advanced as if epistemologic apologetics--that was the Dali

Lama's point and it is one readily accepted by most theological

scholars. QED.

" Science, on the other hand, can become weak to the point of

irrelevance when advanced in areas *other* than epistemology--this

is equally well understood and accepted by most folks schooled in

both science and philosophy. There is also a noteworthy set of

philosophic critiques of scientism, the view you would appear to be

advancing if it were organized sufficiently to afford it systematic

status. There are various views and apologetics regarding

scientism, too, and they parallel in many respects the partitionings

of deterministic stances (e.g., " hard " determinism, " soft "

determinism; et cetera) that are so crucial to evaluating such

immensely troubling matters as the applicability of scientific

approaches productive in the physical sciences to realms in which

matters such as volition and choice may be argued to play causal

roles. It becomes a very complex, dynamic, and interacting set of

arguments and issues, all variations on themes that have kept the

philosophical mind engaged for at least the last few millennia. It

is doubtful that they'll be reconciled by e-mail this week. "

In other words, good fences make good neighbors . . . a very

intelligent student type later wrote me backchannel, noting that he

knew from other writings that I was a practicing Catholic (we

practice 'cause Catholics can never get it right--that's part of the

fundamental belief system, you know). . . he asked, quite sincerely,

how I could reconcile those things. My answer, excerpted below, was

basically that I can't, but then, I no longer try:

" I promise to give you a more detailed answer when time avails

itself, but the short one is this: One doesn't reconcile faith and

skepticism, any more than the checks and balances designed into our

constitutional form of government were meant to be " reconciled " one

to the others. Bush doesn't get that with regard to domestic

surveillance and most folks locked into hard core scientism don't

get that with respect to faith. The tension between these frames

drives the educated man in his wrestling with that little portion of

the universe accessible to our senses--we demand precision and

confirmation for that which we can observe and manipulate, yet we

must have some faith that those things we cannot apprehend are also

somehow subject to some sort of order.

" Science is a very powerful epistemic frame respecting those

elements of our perceived universe where causation remains subject

to forces conditioned in physical ways . . . even the emergence of

life and its ongoing propagation fall into this realm, a fact that

fundamentalists find difficult to swallow. But many affairs,

especially those sorts of affairs that form the essential human

condition, become increasingly complicated by the nasty, nasty

problems of volition and choice. I sometimes demonstrate this to

undergrads by standing atop a table dropping chalkboard erasers

repeatedly to the floor, explaining as I do that each will fall

reliably along a plumb line to the earth's center of gravity,

accelerating at 32 feet per second for each second it falls, and

will strike the linoleum with a force equal to the product of its

mass and its velocity at impact--this we can know because such

behavior is uniform and forms a Galilean conditional genetic

relationship wherein any deviations are the function of outside

forces acting directly upon it. Pretty cool to figure all that out,

but it doesn't really help us to understand us.

" You see, the one thing that the eraser will never do is *decide* to

slow down, turn left, hesitate, or stop--it can't. We can. How we

make decisions can be *somewhat* revealed by the scientist's

epistemic frame, but since we make them so often on the basis of

things like faith and belief and perception, what those decisions

will be, why they take the forms that they do, and perhaps most

importantly, what those decisions *should* be and how to get them to

take the form that they *should* are subjects of entirely different

epistemic frames--frames less precise, less manipulable, less

comforting to those whose egos are sufficiently fragile to demand

control. Many take refuge in a defiant atheism, reassuring

themselves that relegating all such things to chance and/or the " not

yet known " is an act of courage rather than an act of

cowardice . . . of course, even that distinction falls into the

ethereal realm of value judgements and ascriptions that science

can't explain for us. Frustrating, isn't it?

" Faith, to me, is accepting that I do not know and cannot know a

great number of things--for those, I must make a choice of how I

will elect to act. I am a member of the Catholic community, not

because I believe dogmatically that all those glorious stories are

the truth of our genesis and our fate--quite to the contrary, I

confess at least twice annually that I can't buy the story as if it

were fact and don't think I should. I support stem cell research,

strongly advocate the right to choice in reproductive matters, and

think the Church has no place in politics. But I have not missed

mass on a day of Holy Obligation in more than a decade, either, no

matter where on the planet I might be. I tell my sons, as my father

told me, that this is the faith that has sustained our people for

two thousand years, a belief that there is a benevolence well beyond

our instincts and impulses that we cannot comprehend but must

acknowledge and seek to embody if we are to achieve decency and

worth . . . faith in its principles is something different than

belief in the stories as if fact.

" Theology unravels when it argues itself as if history,

epistemology, or cosmogony; science fails when it argues itself as

if philosophy, ethics, or moral reasoning. Good fences, and all

that. "

Sorry for the extra long post, but it wasn't exactly a simple

question . . .

[Guest guest]

A better question would be: " Why even go that deep for paramedic

education? " It would appear that it just opens a can of worms that do

nothing but distract from the process of educating paramedics.

________________________

Maybe it's too deep for the *training* of paramedics, but is paramount

in their *education*. Think I'm splitting hairs? COnsider this

conundrum:

Your 16 year old daughter comes home from registration for her junior

year in high school. She has a question for you about course

selection. " Hey, Dad, " she asks, " do you think I oughta' enroll for

Sex Education or Sex Training? " Still think I'm splitting hairs?

Educating a medic means preparing them to deal with the contexts and

implications of the actions theyy will be trained to execute. I think

this stuff is pretty crucial to that domain . . .

[Guest guest]

What a lovely story and should I ever have daughters I will have to

remember it, BUT there is a distinction here.

Ultimately religion and creationism will only be proven, on a case by

case basis, and not until the end of our individual life. It is then

when we either become food for worms, enter some manner of eternity,

even if it is only to return to earth.

Given the difficulty most practicing medics have with med math, that's

right practicing medics, not students, it seems that trying to overcome

issues of culture, heritage, and faith to teach creationism or big bang

in the paramedic classroom is just a way to open the door to political,

religious, and other problems and lose valuable time. We already have

to cram things into 640 some hours because the national standard of

1000+ is 'acceptable'. Do we need to lose one hour discussing this

topic?

I have no issue with anyone opening a can of worms, just as long as they

can get the worms back in the can. This entire discussion is just a

little absurd and seems like it is pot stirring for the sake of

stirring. As Teddy Roosevelt said muckrakers are very useful, as long

as they know when to stop raking ...

Re: Loaded Question

A better question would be: " Why even go that deep for paramedic

education? " It would appear that it just opens a can of worms that do

nothing but distract from the process of educating paramedics.

________________________

Maybe it's too deep for the *training* of paramedics, but is paramount

in their *education*. Think I'm splitting hairs? COnsider this

conundrum:

Your 16 year old daughter comes home from registration for her junior

year in high school. She has a question for you about course

selection. " Hey, Dad, " she asks, " do you think I oughta' enroll for

Sex Education or Sex Training? " Still think I'm splitting hairs?

Educating a medic means preparing them to deal with the contexts and

implications of the actions theyy will be trained to execute. I think

this stuff is pretty crucial to that domain . . .

[Guest guest]

Those of you that know me know that I'm NOT religious, by any means. I don't

know what happened to create us, other organisms, or the universe. Like Cristi,

I have questions about all of them.

Dr. B, I applaud you for including so many different theories in your book.

You are opening minds to new possibilities. If the students do not have a

specific belief, they may after reading your words, whether it be religious or

scientific. If not, may it serve to make them more familiar with a patient's

beliefs so they can be stronger patient advocates - that's ALWAYS a good thing.

Cheers,

Lala EMT-B

---------------------------------

Yahoo! Mail

Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Guest guest]

I can tell you which one I would pick if it is someones daughter other

than mine. Not splitting hair of course.

hjb

docgist wrote:

>

> A better question would be: " Why even go that deep for paramedic

> education? " It would appear that it just opens a can of worms that do

> nothing but distract from the process of educating paramedics.

> ________________________

>

> Maybe it's too deep for the *training* of paramedics, but is paramount

>

> in their *education*. Think I'm splitting hairs? COnsider this

> conundrum:

>

> Your 16 year old daughter comes home from registration for her junior

> year in high school. She has a question for you about course

> selection. " Hey, Dad, " she asks, " do you think I oughta' enroll for

> Sex Education or Sex Training? " Still think I'm splitting hairs?

>

> Educating a medic means preparing them to deal with the contexts and

> implications of the actions theyy will be trained to execute. I think

>

> this stuff is pretty crucial to that domain . . .

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I will have to side with Danny in the way of response. I am now a

Christian and this is what I choose for many reasons which involve

family, friends and work. I have not always walked this path, but at age

42 it is the path I was led to.

I have used Dr. Bledsoe's text as a student and as an educator and have

respect for his comments and ideas. The information he has referred to

will not change my mind in regard to the quality of the text and I will

continue to use them, but I will also continue to be a Christian with

the beliefs that come with that.

Re: Loaded Question

Why can't both theories be right. Evolution is a process. The chemical

and biological aspects of how we are is scientific fact.

Many things that we do in the medical profession can be explained by

science, but there are things that cannot. How do we explain the look of

those patients who are going to die, and they know it. How do we

explain changes in patients that we have done everything we can think

of. Everything tells us this is not going to be a good outcome, but the

patients live.

We teach the science but must understand the other aspects of what our

care delivery must encompass.

It is hard to teach the science without teaching the humanity of what

our job is.

My personal opinion.

" Bledsoe, DO " wrote:

Group:

This is an honest question. First, a preface. I recently authored a

chapter

for an upcoming book (which will remain nameless) that detailed the

chemical

basis of life and subsequently disease. I opened the chapter with the

standard discussion of the Big Bang Theory followed by Hubble’s

confirmation

of universe expansion and discussed Penzias and 's discovery of

radiation in space which further proves Lemaître’s Big Bang Theory. I

followed this with the standard college biology discussion of chemical

evolution followed by biological evolution. In two reviews I was blasted

for

wanting to teach paramedics the scientific theories of the origin of

life

instead of the religious creation model. While I do not want to get into

a

Bible/Torah/Koran throwing match, I must seriously ask whether in modern

health care education creationism is taught over the prevailing science

theories I am not making this a religious argument. Religion performs an

important role in society by setting standards for acceptable behavior.

But, am I being naïve to believe that the vast majority of EMS education

programs present the science ad simply leave the creationism to the

churches.

This is a serious inquiry and I am truly puzzled

E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

Midlothian, Texas

" Is it ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care! "

-Jimmy Buffett

[Guest guest]

Would it not be a better world if Jew and Muslim could live side-by-side in

harmony? Can Christians not peacefully co-exist with Pagans? Why must

Shiites kill Sunnis and vice-versa? The Roman Catholic Church of my youth

was responsible for thousands of deaths during the Crusades. Hitler killed

millions of Jews because he did not like their religion.

Why is it that some humans feel they must share their religion with others?

Is it because they are searching for reassurance that their beliefs are

real? How many of you get excited when you see two Mormon kids, on their

requisite mission, wearing a white shirt and tie pushing their bicycles up

the driveway? Do you invite them in for tea and crumpets (or beer and

barbecue) or don't answer the door and pretend you are away? I have never

had two Jews come down my driveway and invite me to temple or offer a

discount circumcision.

One of the beauties of true science fiction literature is that people

peacefully co-exist together. No religions, no poverty, no discrimination.

Perhaps I am too much of a geek.

But, being the simple-minded fellow I am, I have determined that the

solution to any philosophical or epistemological can be found in the

writings of either Mark Twain or Jimmy Buffett.

" Where's the church, who took the steeple?

Religion's in the hands of some crazy-ass people,

Television preachers with bad hair and dimples,

The God's honest truth is it's not that simple.

It's the Buddhist in you, it's the Pagan in me

It's the Muslim in him, she's Catholic ain't she?

It's that born again look, it's the WASP and the Jew

Tell me what's goin on, I ain't got a clue. "

Jimmy Buffett

" I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can ever

be religious--except he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep them

shut by force. "

Mark Twain

" If Christ were here now, there is one thing he would not be--A Christian. "

Mark Twain

" Mosques and churches are plenty, graveyards are plenty, but morals and

whisky are scarce. The Koran does not permit Mohammedans to drink. Their

natural instincts do not permit them to be moral. "

Mark Twain

" When I asked him [Tom Sawyer] what a Muslim was, he said it was a person

who was not a Presbyterian. So there is plenty of them in Missouri, though I

didn't know it before. "

Mark Twain

[Guest guest]

I can tell you which one I would pick if it is someones daughter other

than mine. Not splitting hair of course.

__________________________

.. . . which makes amply clear the fact that you understand the

distinction. BTW, I stopped splitting hairs after I had to pay a

transplant guy megabuscks to reseed my receding hairline.

[Guest guest]

What a lovely story and should I ever have daughters I will have to

remember it, BUT there is a distinction here. <<snip>>

____________________________________

Here's the point, and it is an important one . . . as a medic we

teach you deal with coronaries and fractures and other injuries and

illness; when you go out to work, though, you're dealing with people-

-full of fears and hopes and superstsitions and beliefs--who are

experiencing those coronaries and fractures and injuries and illness

in the context of being people. Your technical skills provide an

important foundation and decide whether you are a competent medic,

but your capacity to apprehend, understand, respond to, and

*appreciate* the human context surrounding each encounter whether

you are an exceptional medic.

At the end of the day, your technical skills aren't what the citizen

you serve evaluates--in most cases, you'll have to screw it all up

pretty miserably for them to think you incompetent. But what they

will latch onto like those target locking systems in an F-14 is how

you relate to them and their situation. People who respond with

compassion built on a breadth of understanding and comprehension

change lives, even as life slips away. *That's* what all those

educational things are about--context and character.

Training builds skills; education builds comprehension. Training

brings competence; education builds compassion. Training makes you

adequate; education can make you awesome. The downside is that

training is straightforward while education is complex and

convoluted. Training is about learning answers; education is about

posing questions. A good education is about considering fleeting

answers to enduring questions--you can end up more confused than

when you started. You'll just be confused in a much more systematic

way about much more important things at much more complex levels.

The most important lesson of a good education distills to a simple

maxim: Don't believe everything you think. Most importantly, learn

to separate what you truly believe from what you believe to be

true. Both are important, but both are distinct.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 16-Mar-06 10:44:14 Central Standard Time,

csuprun@... writes:

An interesting point here...if creationism is proven, the big question

still is, where did the original hydrogen come from? Playing the

Devil's Advocate for a moment, excuse the pun, how is it that Penzias

and 's discovery of radiation in space proves Big Bang? Perhaps

an omnipotent one wants to keep us guessing and arguing like some parlor

game, over whether or not He/She/Etc. exists. Just because I think the

argument is unprovable, where did the original atoms and hydrogen gas

come from?

One of the more interesting ideas that I got from a very devout Christian

who was also a very good biologist:

" Let There Be Light " would be the easiest way to explain the 'big bang'

theory to a bunch of semi nomadic shepherds in the midst of one of the driest

deserts of the world...

He also pointed out that, despite the Bishop of Ussher, God's Time (no

matter which god you are talking about) is never man's time...

I suspect that my old professor would be aghast at some of the efforts of

the Creationists, pointing out that they are requiring their God to be both

perfectionist and compulsive....when a much simpler way would be for

God/Nature/whatever was the creationist to simply set the matter in

motion...and let

evolution take it's course....S/HE is omniscient and omnipotent, therefore

setting up the initial conditions needed to provide for the eventual Human

race...

Oh, and somewhere back there, Humans and Chimpanzees most likely shared a

common ancestor...we are both primates with around a 99% DNA congruence...it is

well accepted among biologists that we did not 'descend from apes', as many

of the scoffers/creationists would phrase it...

ck

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

This thread, which has a zillion posts, is yet more proof of my basic

premise:

EMS FOLKS HAVE TOO MUCH TIME WITH NOTHING TO DO.

=Steve , LP=

krin135@... wrote:

>

>In a message dated 16-Mar-06 10:44:14 Central Standard Time,

>csuprun@... writes:

>

>An interesting point here...if creationism is proven, the big question

>still is, where did the original hydrogen come from? Playing the

>Devil's Advocate for a moment, excuse the pun, how is it that Penzias

>and 's discovery of radiation in space proves Big Bang? Perhaps

>an omnipotent one wants to keep us guessing and arguing like some parlor

>game, over whether or not He/She/Etc. exists. Just because I think the

>argument is unprovable, where did the original atoms and hydrogen gas

>come from?

>

>

>

>One of the more interesting ideas that I got from a very devout Christian

>who was also a very good biologist:

>

> " Let There Be Light " would be the easiest way to explain the 'big bang'

>theory to a bunch of semi nomadic shepherds in the midst of one of the driest

>deserts of the world...

>

>He also pointed out that, despite the Bishop of Ussher, God's Time (no

>matter which god you are talking about) is never man's time...

>

>I suspect that my old professor would be aghast at some of the efforts of

>the Creationists, pointing out that they are requiring their God to be both

>perfectionist and compulsive....when a much simpler way would be for

>God/Nature/whatever was the creationist to simply set the matter in

motion...and let

>evolution take it's course....S/HE is omniscient and omnipotent, therefore

>setting up the initial conditions needed to provide for the eventual Human

race...

>

>Oh, and somewhere back there, Humans and Chimpanzees most likely shared a

>common ancestor...we are both primates with around a 99% DNA congruence...it

is

>well accepted among biologists that we did not 'descend from apes', as many

>of the scoffers/creationists would phrase it...

>

>ck

>

> S. Krin, DO FAAFP

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Jesus wasn't a Christian, but he would have made a good Buddhist...

-Ray Wylie Hubbard

>>> bbledsoe@... 3/16/2006 1:23 pm >>>

Would it not be a better world if Jew and Muslim could live

side-by-side in

harmony? Can Christians not peacefully co-exist with Pagans? Why

must

Shiites kill Sunnis and vice-versa? The Roman Catholic Church of my

youth

was responsible for thousands of deaths during the Crusades. Hitler

killed

millions of Jews because he did not like their religion.

Why is it that some humans feel they must share their religion with

others?

Is it because they are searching for reassurance that their beliefs

are

real? How many of you get excited when you see two Mormon kids, on

their

requisite mission, wearing a white shirt and tie pushing their bicycles

up

the driveway? Do you invite them in for tea and crumpets (or beer and

barbecue) or don't answer the door and pretend you are away? I have

never

had two Jews come down my driveway and invite me to temple or offer a

discount circumcision.

One of the beauties of true science fiction literature is that people

peacefully co-exist together. No religions, no poverty, no

discrimination.

Perhaps I am too much of a geek.

But, being the simple-minded fellow I am, I have determined that the

solution to any philosophical or epistemological can be found in the

writings of either Mark Twain or Jimmy Buffett.

" Where's the church, who took the steeple?

Religion's in the hands of some crazy-ass people,

Television preachers with bad hair and dimples,

The God's honest truth is it's not that simple.

It's the Buddhist in you, it's the Pagan in me

It's the Muslim in him, she's Catholic ain't she?

It's that born again look, it's the WASP and the Jew

Tell me what's goin on, I ain't got a clue. "

Jimmy Buffett

" I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can

ever

be religious--except he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep

them

shut by force. "

Mark Twain

" If Christ were here now, there is one thing he would not be--A

Christian. "

Mark Twain

" Mosques and churches are plenty, graveyards are plenty, but morals

and

whisky are scarce. The Koran does not permit Mohammedans to drink.

Their

natural instincts do not permit them to be moral. "

Mark Twain

" When I asked him [Tom Sawyer] what a Muslim was, he said it was a

person

who was not a Presbyterian. So there is plenty of them in Missouri,

though I

didn't know it before. "

Mark Twain

[Guest guest]

Dr. Bledsoe, if you are sincere about knowing the answer, email me

personally at shah_emt@.... I have been told before that this

forum is not the place to discuss religion.

F.Y.I. Muslims and Jews were living peacfully till you know who

decided to kick Muslims out of Jerusalem to accomodate europe's unwanted.

There was no single Sunni-Shia riot in Iraq till you know who arrived

at the scene.

Under Muslim rulers of India, Hindus were a protected sister community

for 200 yrs till the British arrived and found it profitable to make

Muslims and Hindus hate each other.

Anyone else who has more questions is invited on March 25, 2:00 p.m.

to an open house at 8830 Old Galveston Road (Hwy 3), 77034, ph:

.

OR

An Interfaith Education Forum on Freedom of speech vs. religion in

cooperation with the Interfaith Ministries, the Boniuk Center for the

Study and Advancement of Religious Tolerance, and the Houston Rabbinic

Association,a panel discussion in Rice University's Herring Hall, Room

100 on Tues March 21 @ 0700 p.m.

Now I have opened a can of worms for sure.

Shahla Wahid EMT

>

> Would it not be a better world if Jew and Muslim could live

side-by-side in

> harmony? Can Christians not peacefully co-exist with Pagans? Why must

> Shiites kill Sunnis and vice-versa? The Roman Catholic Church of my

youth

> was responsible for thousands of deaths during the Crusades. Hitler

killed

> millions of Jews because he did not like their religion.

>

> Why is it that some humans feel they must share their religion with

others?

> Is it because they are searching for reassurance that their beliefs are

> real? How many of you get excited when you see two Mormon kids, on

their

> requisite mission, wearing a white shirt and tie pushing their

bicycles up

> the driveway? Do you invite them in for tea and crumpets (or beer and

> barbecue) or don't answer the door and pretend you are away? I have

never

> had two Jews come down my driveway and invite me to temple or offer a

> discount circumcision.

>

> One of the beauties of true science fiction literature is that people

> peacefully co-exist together. No religions, no poverty, no

discrimination.

> Perhaps I am too much of a geek.

>

> But, being the simple-minded fellow I am, I have determined that the

> solution to any philosophical or epistemological can be found in the

> writings of either Mark Twain or Jimmy Buffett.

>

> " Where's the church, who took the steeple?

> Religion's in the hands of some crazy-ass people,

> Television preachers with bad hair and dimples,

> The God's honest truth is it's not that simple.

>

> It's the Buddhist in you, it's the Pagan in me

> It's the Muslim in him, she's Catholic ain't she?

> It's that born again look, it's the WASP and the Jew

> Tell me what's goin on, I ain't got a clue. "

>

> Jimmy Buffett

>

> " I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception

can ever

> be religious--except he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep

them

> shut by force. "

> Mark Twain

>

> " If Christ were here now, there is one thing he would not be--A

Christian. "

> Mark Twain

>

> " Mosques and churches are plenty, graveyards are plenty, but morals and

> whisky are scarce. The Koran does not permit Mohammedans to drink. Their

> natural instincts do not permit them to be moral. "

> Mark Twain

>

> " When I asked him [Tom Sawyer] what a Muslim was, he said it was a

person

> who was not a Presbyterian. So there is plenty of them in Missouri,

though I

> didn't know it before. "

> Mark Twain

>

[Guest guest]

And yet bad Budhists are killing minorities in Burma.

>

> Jesus wasn't a Christian, but he would have made a good Buddhist...

>

> -Ray Wylie Hubbard

>

> >>> bbledsoe@... 3/16/2006 1:23 pm >>>

> Would it not be a better world if Jew and Muslim could live

> side-by-side in

> harmony? Can Christians not peacefully co-exist with Pagans? Why

> must

> Shiites kill Sunnis and vice-versa? The Roman Catholic Church of my

> youth

> was responsible for thousands of deaths during the Crusades. Hitler

> killed

> millions of Jews because he did not like their religion.

>

> Why is it that some humans feel they must share their religion with

> others?

> Is it because they are searching for reassurance that their beliefs

> are

> real? How many of you get excited when you see two Mormon kids, on

> their

> requisite mission, wearing a white shirt and tie pushing their bicycles

> up

> the driveway? Do you invite them in for tea and crumpets (or beer and

> barbecue) or don't answer the door and pretend you are away? I have

> never

> had two Jews come down my driveway and invite me to temple or offer a

> discount circumcision.

>

> One of the beauties of true science fiction literature is that people

> peacefully co-exist together. No religions, no poverty, no

> discrimination.

> Perhaps I am too much of a geek.

>

> But, being the simple-minded fellow I am, I have determined that the

> solution to any philosophical or epistemological can be found in the

> writings of either Mark Twain or Jimmy Buffett.

>

> " Where's the church, who took the steeple?

> Religion's in the hands of some crazy-ass people,

> Television preachers with bad hair and dimples,

> The God's honest truth is it's not that simple.

>

> It's the Buddhist in you, it's the Pagan in me

> It's the Muslim in him, she's Catholic ain't she?

> It's that born again look, it's the WASP and the Jew

> Tell me what's goin on, I ain't got a clue. "

>

> Jimmy Buffett

>

> " I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can

> ever

> be religious--except he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep

> them

> shut by force. "

> Mark Twain

>

> " If Christ were here now, there is one thing he would not be--A

> Christian. "

> Mark Twain

>

> " Mosques and churches are plenty, graveyards are plenty, but morals

> and

> whisky are scarce. The Koran does not permit Mohammedans to drink.

> Their

> natural instincts do not permit them to be moral. "

> Mark Twain

>

> " When I asked him [Tom Sawyer] what a Muslim was, he said it was a

> person

> who was not a Presbyterian. So there is plenty of them in Missouri,

> though I

> didn't know it before. "

> Mark Twain

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>