Our Tithing Story

Just about anyone who has attended even a handful of LDS testimony meetings has heard a testimony from  a member of the congregation that goes something like this: "We were really struggling financially. It came down to a moment when we had to decide whether to pay our tithing or pay a bill. We decided to pay our tithing first. Then the day we had to pay the bill, a check for the exact amount we needed arrived in the mail. I know that this happened because we paid our tithing and put the Lord first."


I have always felt the Holy Ghost testify that these types of testimonies about the Law of Tithing are true, but I had never had this kind of experience. I have never doubted that the Law of Tithing is a commandment from Heavenly Father and that He keeps His promise made in Malachi 3:8. This has been a part of my testimony for a very long time. I have had moments where I could see the blessings of paying tithing throughout my life, but I hadn't had the financial blessing described in some many testimonies of others. 


Well, Juliann and I had reached that financial struggle. Our struggle was nothing in comparison to what many other people have had to struggle through, but for us it was still stressful and worrisome at times. 


It began with SUU deciding to make some big changes that have had a large impact on a lot of students. There was an 11% tuition increase for the 2011-2012 year. Coupled with this blow was a new policy that tuition would be due about a month before the start of a  semester. Failure to pay tuition before the deadline would result in a student being dropped from all the classes they were currently enrolled in with no guarantee for re-enrollment in those classes for that semester. (Sounds really greedy, right?)


 We are very grateful for the Pell Grants that we receive to attend school, but each year the amount that we receive gets smaller. Smaller Pell Grants plus increased tuition equalled a hard hit to our pocketbook for fall semester. We were pretty good at saving money throughout the semester, but as the deadline for spring tuition payment approached were realized that this could the time when we were the most poor that we had ever been. At one point we calculated that after paying tuition, we would have about $4 in our bank account. 


Then, the windows of heaven opened and our blessing began to pour out. As we began to save money on food by eating our food storage, our first little miracle arrived. There was an event at the stadium at the school called The Snow Bowl. It is basically an opportunity for kids from California to play football in the snow (Don't ask me why this is appealing to them). Well, the snow they wanted came; in very large quantities. 


I had put in extra hours at work so that we could paint a football field for this event, but snow tends to make football fields very difficult to see. To remedy this, after a full morning of clearing snow off the campus Eli, my boss, Sam, my coworker, and I spent a couple of hours freezing as we blew snow off every line on the football field. However, our hard work did not go unnoticed. The athletic director saw what we were willing to do for this event and rewarded each of us with $20 in Pizza Hut Pizza Bucks. 


The freezing continued as I then finished a long work day clearing snow off of all of the bleachers and seats in the stadium so that the parents could watch their precious little ones freeze their butts off playing football in the snow. Again, my effort did not go unnoticed. Once again as a gesture of gratitude, the athletic director gave me $20 in Pizza Hut Pizza Bucks. Those of you who know Juliann well can easily imagine her excitement when I told her that I was given $40 in Pizza Bucks that day and that we wouldn't have to eat just rice or pasta dishes for the next week and a half. 


The day after tuition was due, was a payday for us. Since that day is a Saturday, however, Juliann's work paid her the day before. The next little miracle happened when I found out that my work (which often pays me on the following Monday when this occurs) paid me the day before as well. Then, we were comforted by the fact that we would at least have a lot more than just $4 in our bank account after paying tuition.


Today was the dreaded day when spring tuition was due. It turned out to not be painful at all. The miracles continued. When we went to look at our final bills, prepared to drain our savings, our amounts that were due were substantially lower than what they were before. Today we were awarded Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants. According to Chapter 7: Financial Aid and Scholarships in SUU's general catalog, Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants are awarded to students that have "exceptional need." FSEOG funds are very limited and are awarded to Pell Grant recipients, on a first-come, first-served basis. 


We had never even heard of these grants and therefore had not applied for them. Somehow the school just knew that we had an exceptional need and gave us these extra funds. With these grants added to our Pell Grants, our bills were easily paid. Now, we have little to worry about with money still in our savings account and $20 left in Pizza Bucks.  


Some people may say that this experience was all just good luck. Some people may call it good fortune. Others may say that it was all coincidence. I know though that it was a direct answer to prayers, a blessing from paying our tithing, and now our tithing story added to our testimonies.


    

  

Reflections From the Garden: Toma'to and Topa'to

This year has been a new experience for me; Juliann and I have started a garden. Well, two gardens actually: one that consists of two large pots from Walmart with strawberries (left over from my aphid experiment), a jalapeno plant, a serrano pepper plant, and two tomato plants which we call our patio garden, and another that we planted at one of the houses that SUU owns which for convenience I will refer to as el jardin magnifico. In el jardin magnifico we, along with three other people from the SUU Grounds, have planted pumpkins, cucumber, zucchini, lemon squash, butternut squash,  cantaloupe, corn, green beans, carrots, beets, radishes, onions, tomatoes, and a wide array of peppers. So far I have really enjoyed the gardening experience. There is a sort of thrill that comes with watching the plants grow.

As a part of this new experience, I have decided to post about thoughts that come to me while thinking about our gardens. These posts will be titled Reflections From the Garden.

When we began our patio garden, we chose one of our tomato plants because it already had a fairly large tomato growing on it. As we have been nurturing our little tomato buddy, it hasn't been growing very tall  or adding many more leaves. Instead, it has been focusing all of its effort on growing that tomato. That tomato will be used as its means of reproduction. By a loose comparison, that tomato could be considered its offspring or child. Some scientists would say that it is focusing on that means of reproduction in order to pass on its genes into the next generation. For me, however, it was a reminder of my parents. That little tomato plant was devoting nearly all of its energy into providing for its child. Rather than trying to grow and increase its chance of survival, it was trying to increase the chance that its offspring would be successful. Thinking of the devotion that this plant had toward its offspring brought me feelings of gratitude for my amazing Mom and Dad. They always put the needs and wants of my siblings and me above their own. They did a wonderful job nurturing us to be successful. They were our Toma'to and Topa'to. Thank you Mom and Dad. I LOVE YOU!      

The last of the History and Literature of Biology Posts

Using the website www.xtranormal.com, I made this video for my historical figure presentation.

Reaction Paper Series - Paper 10

Sexism in Science

 “It is complicated because they did not think of her as a thinker, but they did not think of her as a woman either. Because a woman must not think and a thinker must not be a woman!” This commentary by Paris University Physics Professor, Francoise Balibar, describes the society in which the most famous female scientist, Marie Curie, lived. Obviously, Marie Curie was in fact a woman, but almost as apparent as her gender was her brilliant mind.

Marie Curie is quite deserving of the recognition she received for her scientific advancements, but to consider her an oddity would perpetuate the same fallacious thinking that existed throughout her lifetime. Likely, there are equally as many brilliant female scientists as there are male scientists. Quite possibly, other women would have made important scientific advancements had there not been a prevailing sexism in science.

Besides her brilliance and determination, Marie Curie had another advantage: she was married. She wasn’t just married to any man; she was married to a renowned physicist, Pierre Curie. Pierre recognized the brilliance and persistence possessed by his wife. The 1903 Nobel Prize for Physics was originally proposed for Pierre Curie and Henri Becquerel only. It was Pierre who stood up for Marie to have her recognized for her vital work in the isolation of radium. The work was done regardless of who received credit, but because of her husband, Marie Curie was recognized for her abilities. This recognition allowed her to receive a second Nobel Prize on her own after Pierre’s tragic death.            

Hopefully, sexism no longer persists among the science community, if it does, the fact that scientific journals are filled with the work of great female scientists along with their male colleagues at least supports that sexism in science is waning. If it persists in the least, for the sake of scientific advancement, the world needs men like Pierre Curie who will fight sexism and give proper recognition to those who deserve it. Even more so the world needs women like Marie Curie who will overcome the odds and make their work known. The combined force of brilliant men and women makes the future of science full of possibilities.

Reaction Paper Series - Paper 9

Courage For Progress

            Whether or not they can tell you what the equation means or even what the variables stand for, if you mention E=mc² just about any moderately educated person could tell you that it came from Albert Einstein. Arguably, The Theory of Relativity is Albert Einstein’s greatest legacy. However, in the science community it is debated that Jules Henri Poincare almost developed the special theory of relativity at the same time as Einstein. Regardless of the debate, the fact remains that Einstein’s name is forever attached to this marvelous theory. According to Warwick University Professor of Mathematics, Ian Stewart, Poincare had similar ideas about special relativity on his mind and had written down pertinent equations, but he lacked something that Einstein had: courage. Stewart says, “Einstein was courageous enough to risk his reputation.” In Einstein’s case his courage really paid off.

            However, in science courage to risk your reputation does not always pay off like it did for Einstein. The mention of Lamark in a biology classroom immediately brings to mind his discredited hypothesis of heredity involving the inheritance of acquired traits. Since the evidence brought forth from Darwin and others discredited Lamark’s hypothesis, he is merely known for what is sometimes considered a laughable idea. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, like Einstein, had the courage to risk his reputation in order to introduce a hypothesis that could change the view of reality. Unlike Einstein, however, Lamarck’s hypothesis was discredited and he died in poverty and obscurity.

            Lamarck’s courage did not go completely unnoticed. He was recognized by some early evolutionists as a great zoologist and a forerunner of evolution. Charles Darwin himself said, “Lamarck was the first man whose conclusions on the subject excited much attention…he first did the eminent service of arousing attention to the probability of all changes in the organic, as well as in the inorganic world, being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition.” Lamarck’s courage to risk his reputation led to a noteworthy contribution to the evolution of the Theory of Evolution.

            The risk of publishing hypotheses is that a scientist could potentially become publicly known as an Einstein or a Lamarck, either a prominent scientific genius or a laughable scientific failure. Despite the personal risk, there is a greater risk to scientific progress if the fear of a damaged reputation persists among scientists. Potentially the Theory of Relativity could have been discovered sooner had Poincare presented his ideas or, conversely, the Theory of Evolution could have been delayed had Lamarck withheld his ideas. Great leaps in scientific progress are made because of scientists like Einstein and Lamarck who have the courage to risk their reputation for scientific progress.  

Reaction Paper Series - Paper 8

Stirring Rationally

            Antoine Lavoisier was an 18^th century chemist sometimes referred to as the father of modern chemistry and the executioner of alchemy. According to Professor of Chemistry Peter Atkins, irrational stirrer might also be an appropriate title.  In the book, On Giants’ Shoulder’s, Professor Atkins contrasts modern chemistry with the chemistry of the18^th century, “Lavoisier really heated and stirred and splashed blindly and we today, when we look at our splashings and stirrings and heatings, see in our mind’s eye the changes in the positions of the atoms that we are stirring around. So he stirred irrationally but hopefully; we stir rationally.” Rather than showing disrespect towards the great Lavoisier, Atkins simply points out that chemistry, and all sciences for that matter, are now done based on scientific knowledge.

            The great and notable scientists build the foundation of scientific knowledge for their respective fields. On that foundation, other great scientists were able to use that scientific knowledge, experiment with it, and explore new ideas that further built onto and expanded scientific knowledge. In this way, science has been built as a progressive stairway to truth and understanding about the natural world.

            The previous work of remarkable scientists thus places a responsibility on current and future scientists. Scientists now have the great responsibility to learn as much as possible from the available scientific knowledge. Then, that knowledge, must applied to explore more ideas, develop further experimentation, and add to the stairway. The legacy of science and the pursuit of truth must go forward as each generation of scientists work to be rational stirrers.   

Reaction Paper Series - Paper 7

The Lone Genius vs. The Collective

Eureka! The famous word associated with history’s legendary naked epiphany. However, once the image of a streaking Sicilian leaves the mind’s stage, the meaning behind the word and the awe of the legend are present. Whether it is true or not that a law of buoyancy was discovered in a bath tub, the fact remains that in ancient times a law that still holds true today (and always will on the planet we inhabit) was recorded in very clear terms by Archimedes. Its discoverer is so obvious that his law of buoyancy is commonly known as Archimedes’ principle. 

Archimedes’s principle is ingenious, but whether or not he can be described as a scientific genius is debated. In Melvyn Bragg’s book, On Giants’ Shoulders, the argument of the “lone genius” versus “the collective” is presented. On one side of the argument is the idea that there are rare human beings that have such brilliance that they are able to see the world or a problem in a very unique way. They can have completely original thoughts that influence vast amounts of people. These are the “lone geniuses.” On the other side of the argument is the counter idea that all scientific development comes from a group. Along with this idea is the notion that if the credited scientist had not made the discovery or invention, someone else would have. In “the collective” view there are not a few geniuses, but instead, a series of brilliant men and women.

If Archimedes was a “lone genius,” then he alone could have discovered this law of buoyancy during his time and it is rightly named after him. The recorded history of Archimedes illustrates that he was indeed a unique thinker. He made many more discoveries and invented many more things than just Archimedes’ principle. He seems that he does deserve the title of a genius. It doesn’t take a genius, however, to understand that history is often biased. The recorded history of Archimedes also shows that he was a man of prominence. “The collective” side of the argument presents the possibility that another unique thinker could have come up with the same buoyancy law. Imagine if instead a science student is taught Spandecles’ principle. There is the possibility that this imaginary Spandecles could have independently discovered the same buoyancy law before, at the same time, or after Archimedes. If Spandecles made his discovery before or at the same time as Archimedes his discovery could have gone unnoticed if he wasn’t as prominent as Archimedes. If he made his discovery after Archimedes, he could have realized that Archimedes had beaten him to the punch. As a side note, would Spandecles also have incorporated streaking into his publication of the buoyancy law?  The streaking could have contributed to Archimedes being known for this law of buoyancy discovery.

            There is strong support for both sides of the debate. Since the list of historical prominent scientists is fairly short (Bragg only discusses 12), it is reasonable to accept that there were “lone geniuses.” We have profound scientific developments because there were and still are today unique individuals who can think in a way that others cannot. Although, the existence of scientific journals and other means of communication of scientific knowledge demonstrate the power of “the collective” in scientific development as well. It is most likely that both sides of the debate are in harmony with each other. The discoveries made by ”lone geniuses” coupled with the work of other brilliant people working collectively can result in at least genius moments for any scientist.