Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

15 thoughts on “120-The Change 10

  • Debbie Pietrzykowski

    I loved this series! It is so timely. Thanks for taking time away from the timeline to cover this. So many of us who have grown up in the West with Christian traditions don’t really appreciate how different life was before the Christians were on the scene to affect culture. May we do the same today!

  • Cheri Fields

    This is the best presentation of the history of science and Christianity I’ve ever run into. And I’ve read and heard quite a bit!
    I’ve been listening to your show off and on depending on the topic and my mood since last year’s podcast awards and have really enjoyed it. This series on the impact of Christian thinking on society was already so good I sent my minister husband and our pastor the iTunes link already. Plus, it’s not just for history buffs. We all need to understand these things.
    Now, with my focus on God as Creator, I’m going to find a way to highlight this episode and I pray many Believers (especially young ones) find their faith strengthened.
    Thanks for being so brave and for doing such amazing research on our behalf. 🙂

        • Lance Post author

          Interesting you ask that.
          May I ask if you listened to any of the other “The Change” series, or just this episode?

        • Lance Post author

          Haven’t heard back from you regarding my inquiry. Wanted to follow up.
          I asked you if you’d listened to any other of the episodes in “The Change” series.
          The reason I asked is because many of the episodes leaned on several other source, Schmidt’s being one of the more prominent.
          While I produced the original scripts for them several years ago, so my memory is foggy, I think I used the same methodology for many episodes; “gleaning.”
          I do a lot of reading and research, cull notes, then compile and produce a script.
          But the final form is my own words, even if at times those words parallel an source or author’s closely. We are, after all, reporting the same events and a similar analysis. To my knowledge, I’ve never “duplicated” anyone’s words without attribution.
          If you’ve found something contrary to that, please, please inform me so that I may correct.
          Also, I’ve gone in to each of the scripts for “The Change” series and identified that How Christianity Changed the World by Schmidt was a major source used in research for the material.
          I’m sure there were be some who want to do additional study on the subject and will find his work a boon.

          • Jack

            Hi Lance,
            This is Anonymous – this time without cowardly hiding behind anonymity and a throwaway email address. Apologies for my delayed response, my use of a throwaway email meant that I was not notified of your reply until I manually checked this page. In answer to your question: no, I have not listened to the other episodes of The Change, I came to this one ahead of how far I actually am through the podcast (~episode 85).
            In regards to the issue of plagiarism raised by my prior comment, I think I should begin by explaining what led me to make it in the first place. Basically, I disliked what I perceived as a strong anti-Catholic bias in your coverage of the Galileo affair. After reading your reply to Mrs Rhonda, I began preparing a comment outlining how the Jesuits had favoured Tycho’s geo-heliocentric model that was observationally identical to Copernicanism, rebutting the John Montgomery analysis of Luther’s “fool” remark, and pointing out that there were scriptural arguments for geocentrism (as bizarre as they look to us today). However, after searching online and finding a few paragraphs that were lifted word for word from Schmidt’s book, I let my emotions get the better of me and made what I can now see was a rather immaturely phrased accusation. By the standards of a university or a court, I’m almost certain that this episode would be considered copyright infringement. That being said, given the non-profit nature of the podcast, and and its usefulness in fulfilling the largely apologetic purpose of Schmidt’s book, I don’t think he’d mind, and I would wish to back down from my previously accusatory tone. To that end, I don’t think it would do any harm to contact him and get his official approval.
            Kind regards,
            Jack Hughes AKA “Anonymous”

          • Lance Post author

            Dear Jack,
            First, thank you for the gracious and may I say, generous manner of your reply.
            So –> Yeah, I went and took a closer look at the script for episode 120.
            I need to take a closer look at all of them because while not identical to Schmidt, they’re simply not of the same format as the rest of the podcast episodes.
            As I said in the previous email, when I write the scripts, I usually cull form several sources and mash it all together.
            With The Change series I had fewer sources to work from, and it looks like I leaned way to much on that one resource.
            As I said, I hope it’s just that one episode, but if it proves that there are other episodes in that series like that, I’ll need to redo them as well.

            Jack – thanks for calling that out.
            I will indeed attempt to contact the author and notify him.

  • John wright

    I am loving your podcast and recommending it like mad. As a teacher I am very impressed with your depth of knowledge and the clarity if your delivery.
    I thought the change series was excellent and thought provoking.
    I think this book would challenge some of your under lying assumptions on capitalism. ( for example there us no such thing as a free market!)
    I think that this book might be an integrating take on science and faith.
    This is an outstanding book written by a Christian with a science background.
    I would welcome your opinion of it.
    Thanks again for the hard work that you put in, week after week.

    • Jack

      That’s good to hear. Hopefully I it doesn’t prove to be too much of of a burden. This hadn’t occurred to me when writing my previous comments, but I suspect that for this topic in particular it might be very difficult to find sources more concerned with accuracy than persuasion – this is a topic where writers on both sides can display some pretty blatant axe-grinding. Good luck!

      • Lance Post author

        Jack, wanted to let you know I was able to track down Dr. Schmidt’s eddress pretty easily and sent him an email. He replied & we’re in a quick back and forth dialog. Would love to have him out if he’s in the area to speak at our church.