1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Rice Professor

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by MadMax, Jan 4, 2010.

  1. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    I've mentioned this person here before...a guy I know. The subject matter is why I included this in D&D. I don't really intend to debate anything stemming from this, frankly. I think I'm posting it to simply counter the notion that a person of faith has to be blind to science or an idiot...which I read quite a bit on this board and elsewhere.

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6795911.html

    The laws of science
    Jim Tour wanted to be a trooper. But now he’s a leading scientist at Rice, building on groundbreaking work of nanotechnology pioneer Rick Smalley

    By ERIC BERGER
    HOUSTON CHRONICLE
    Jan. 3, 2010, 4:46PM

    As a teen pumping gas on a highway north of New York City, Jim Tour dreamed of becoming a state trooper. It beat filling tanks.

    The notion of Tour as a highway cop is almost laughably discordant with present-day reality. Three decades later, the trim, intense, 50-year-old Tour has established himself as one of the leading, if not premier, scientists at Rice University.

    And he's learned to dream big.

    Four years after Nobel laureate Rick Smalley's untimely death, it is the prolific Tour who as much as anyone has carried on Smalley's groundbreaking legacy in the science of nanotechnology.

    Confirmation came last month when, among the more than 720,000 scientists who authored chemistry papers in academic journals during the last decade, Tour found himself among the 10 most-cited authors in the world.

    This means the 135 papers he wrote during the last decade had one of the 10 highest rates at which other scientists “cited” them in the references of subsequent research papers.

    And small wonder. Tour's work spans an incredible breadth, from building tiny cars and trucks out of molecules, to making computer memory from graphite, building tiny missiles that carry drugs to tumors and trying to cure radiation sickness.

    “He is just incredibly creative as a chemist,” said Wade Adams, director of Rice's Smalley Institute for Nanoscale Science and Technology. “He makes molecules dance.”

    But it's not all about the chemistry. Though Tour is clearly passionate about chemistry, he is passionate about God. In a world that increasingly associates scientists with atheism or agnosticism, Tour derives his inspiration from deep faith.

    He wakes up each morning at 3:30 a.m., he says, to spend his first two hours with his Bible. “I read the Bible from Genesis Chapter 1 to Revelation Chapter 22, and when I'm done I start again,” Tour said. “I've been doing this for over 30 years. There is this amazing richness. I take a passage and I say, ‘Lord speak to me.' And then it just comes alive.”

    Attracted to law enforcement but ineligible to attend New York's state police academy because of color blindness, Tour then considered forensic science. But his dad suggested he stick to basic chemistry to keep his options open.

    By the time he got to Syracuse University, Tour was hooked, especially on organic chemistry, the chemistry of carbon and life. “I just loved organic chemistry,” Tour said. “I would just spend hours and hours on Friday nights. I'd find an empty classroom and sit there and just write chemical structures and dream up syntheses of how I could build them. I understand that's not the normal reaction to organic chemistry.”

    In time Tour became a fine organic chemist, synthesizing molecules for vaccines and other applications, and joining the faculty at the University of South Carolina.

    A breakthrough
    By 1998 he had a breakthrough and an epiphany while tinkering in the field of molecular electronics, which seeks to build electronic components from the ground up with molecules — rather than from the top down with silicon. If fully realized, because of the small size of molecules, the field of molecular electronics has the potential to revolutionize computer technology.

    Working with electrical engineer Mark Reed, Tour created the first reversible electronic switch out of molecules, a stunning achievement that landed him in the journal Science and caught the attention of Rick Smalley. The epiphany came when Tour realized he could transcend organic chemistry by turning his talents at synthesizing complex molecules toward materials science.

    After offers and counter-offers, Tour ended up at Rice in a brand-new building fully devoted to nanotechnology, one of the country's first on an academic campus.

    Sitting in his immaculate office, it's clear that one of Tour's strengths is organization as he manages multiple research projects. His desk? Clear. His conference table? Clear.

    Tour also seems to derive motivation from naysayers.

    During the last few years he has garnered widespread acclaim for his nanocars, literally molecules that look and move like cars. “At first people laughed at us, saying it wasn't really a car because it didn't have a motor,” he said. “So we made a motorized car, and they laughed because it was so slow.”

    The first nanocar motor turned over just 1.8 times a minute. A recent version makes 3 million revolutions per second.

    “So now we've got one that rotates faster than you could ever build a macroscopic car,” he said, his eyes twinkling.

    Tour credits his success, in part, to hard work. Six days a week, Tour says, he leaves for his office at 6 a.m., setting aside Sundays. Breakfast and lunch, most days, is dried dates and nuts. So meals take about a minute. After a midday break for 20 minutes at Rice's on-campus chapel, it's back to work until he leaves for home around 6 p.m.

    Students contribute
    He also cites his students' contributions to his success. With a budget of $1.25 million annually from the Army, Navy and industrial grants, Tour has about two dozen graduate and postdoctoral students working under him.

    “Besides his extraordinary abilities as an instructor, he is also a mentor of leaders,” said Jorge Seminario, an engineering professor at Texas A&M University who studied under Tour at South Carolina. “In every step of his leadership, he is teaching his associates and students how to be organized and look for the success of the project.”

    And, finally, Tour credits his success to his faith. When he speaks about this, Tour's angular features sharpen. He closes his eyes. His voice becomes more emotive. “I believe, fundamentally, that God creates us all,” he said.

    Colleagues say that Tour, a Messianic Jew who attends West University Baptist Church, does not wear his religion on his sleeve, but that he will bring it up if asked. And if asked, he does not hold back.

    As part of those views, Tour says he neither understands nor accepts the notion of macroevolution, that new species evolve on their own.

    “I've asked people to explain it to me, and I still don't understand it,” he said. “I hear their explanations and I don't understand it. I understand better than most people how molecules come together, what they can and cannot do. … And I don't understand how macroevolution occurs.”

    Tour does not espouse “intelligent design,” which holds that certain features of living things are best explained by God, but he says not accepting macroevolution has caused problems for him in academia.

    “When appointments are not made, when fellowships are not granted on this basis, that hurts,” he said. “I'm willing to stand up and say I don't see any clothes on that emperor. I'm being very open. That bothers a lot of people. I don't know why. I'm telling you it's just been in the recent past. I've been a professor now for more than 20 years. I never saw it before.”

    The Rice administration has remained steadfast behind Tour.

    And some of his students, such as Ashley Leonard, who just earned her Ph.D., say Tour's faith helps make him a more complete mentor. “I always felt his doors were open to us,” she said. “I'm sure his faith created some of that hospitality there.”

    It's his faith that also has probably allowed Tour to take chances as a researcher, to not be afraid to fail.

    That's led to some successes and failures. After Smalley, Robert Curl and Harold Kroto did their Nobel Prize-winning work to synthesize buckyballs, spherical arrays of 60 carbon molecules, it was Tour's lab that found a way to produce buckyballs in large quantities.

    On the other hand, his lab then failed in its efforts to produce diamonds, another form of carbon, by crushing buckyballs.

    “We've done some pretty wild things,” Tour said. “But once in awhile you win. Once in awhile you hit something and the world says, ‘How did you think of that?'

    “The answer is: We think of a lot of crazy things, and we try a lot of crazy things. I've been hurt by thinking too small, but I have never been hurt by thinking too big.”

    eric.berger@chron.com
     
  2. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,167
    Likes Received:
    48,334
    I certainly don't think a person of faith is blind to science or an idiot but I do question to what extent that faith shapes how one interprets science. In this case I would be curious about what Dr. Tour's specific objections are towards Macroevolution and also if he doesn't believe in Intelligent Design then what are his thoughts on speciation. Does he believe in the Young Earth idea?
     
  3. DaDakota

    DaDakota Balance wins
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    128,638
    Likes Received:
    38,868
    Nice read, sounds like a very interesting man.

    DD
     
  4. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,167
    Likes Received:
    48,334
    I did a quick Google Search of "Dr. Jim Tour Evolution" and this link is the first thing that came up:
    http://www.jmtour.com/?page_id=27

    I'm not going to post it all as its fairly long but an interesting read. To sum up he is skeptical regarding Evolution but also doesn't see how Intelligent Design or Young Earth Creationism can be scientifically proven. He basically punts on the scientific question of creation and speciation.

    I find it troubling though that he goes on about feeling persecuted by academia regarding his questioning of Evolution. I would say if he is having grants and other things denied because of his view that is sad as it sounds like his research isn't specifically dealing with Evolution so I don't see how his views on that should matter. At the sametime though from what I understand of Evolutionary science is that there is a lot of ferment in it in regards to the mechanisms and the timing of it. Dr. Tour seems to be arguing that it is fixed and those questioning it a linear Darwinian model of are persecuted when that doesn't seem to be the case.

    I also find it troubling the last part of his piece where he quotes Victor Frankl:
    [rquoter]“If we present a man with a concept of man which is not true, we may well corrupt him. When we present man as an automaton of reflexes, as a mind-machine, as a bundle of instincts, as a pawn of drives and reactions, as a mere product of instinct, heredity and environment, we feed the nihilism to which modern man is, in any case, prone.

    “I became acquainted with the last stage of that corruption in my second concentration camp, Auschwitz. The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment—or as the Nazi liked to say, ‘of Blood and Soil.’ I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some Ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers [emphasis added].”
    [/rquoter]

    Its a powerful statement but I don't think that Evolution leads automatically to a nihlistic view of humanity. Where we came from I don't think necessarily defines who we are or that if we evolved from other organisms that doesn't mean that a soul doesn't exist.
     
  5. Invisible Fan

    Invisible Fan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    45,954
    Likes Received:
    28,046
    There's different schools of thought just like there are different approaches to solving problems. I don't think his acceptance of the prevalent view of evolution is necessary for him to interpret his field.

    There are potential problems should he use his credentials to object to a field outside his own, like an economist interpreting climate science. Though I doubt (not sure) he's looking for that kind of battle.
     
  6. DaDakota

    DaDakota Balance wins
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    128,638
    Likes Received:
    38,868
    We were enginered by the Alien beings from a distant star system....didn't you guys get the memo?

    DD
     
  7. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    DD, are you suggesting God outsourced our manufacture?

    Pat Buchanan will not be pleased.
     
  8. DaDakota

    DaDakota Balance wins
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    128,638
    Likes Received:
    38,868
    God was busy trying to shop for his wife's Christmas gift, and had to outsource our development.

    Unfortunatly, the Aliens forgot our tolerance chipset and we have been fighting each other forever because of it.

    God could fix it, but he wants the Aliens to learn a lesson on product quality control.

    ;)

    DD
     
    #8 DaDakota, Jan 4, 2010
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2010
  9. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    35,975
    Likes Received:
    36,809
    It's an interesting read, but several points.

    1. Sounds like he should stick to his field, nanotechnology.
    2. I'm not seeing evidence of persecution, in terms of his chosen field. That's a very difficult gig to land (the one he has at Rice.)
    3. MadMax makes the good point that faith and science are in no way mutually exclusive. So many scientists I know are people of faith.
    4. Why point #3 has anything to do with skepticism of evolution has never been clear to me.
    5. Why evolution (which has more evidence than Newtonian gravity) is seen as incompatible with a deep religious faith will always elude me. To me, they remain entirely compatible. What a beautifully engineered mechanism evolution is!
     
  10. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    I can only speak to #2. I know he's expressed in the past that, until recently, he never felt persecuted by "hard science" guys....that they were able to recognize that his answers to the unanswered questions were as good as anything else. He would say it was the "soft science" guys who gave him the most trouble...he thought that was because they had their own Bible in the works of Skinner and Freud. I don't know what he's perceived about all that which has changed.

    I absolutely can say this...he's the most intelligent man I've ever met. He is leaps and bounds smarter than I am, and he's one of the few people in the world i've been around where I've "felt" that as we're having a conversation. In some ways, I think that's beautiful and amazing...in other ways, i think it's limiting for him.
     
  11. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    I don't care what anyone believes as long as they don't try to force others to think the same.

    Don't "believe" in evolution? Fine. Just leave that POV out of the science classroom.

    As for Dr. Tour? Sounds to me like he's being deliberately obtuse about his rationale for not understanding macroevolution principles.
     
  12. Air Langhi

    Air Langhi Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2000
    Messages:
    21,937
    Likes Received:
    6,686
    Because faith and science are on the opposite end of the spectrum. Science requires facts while faith requires faith.
     
  13. Shovel Face

    Shovel Face Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    724
    Likes Received:
    44
    Hmm... evolution relies on radomness, people don't want to think they exist only by chance. But if there is meaning behind the chaos then it is a beautiful, intelligent design.
     
  14. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    35,975
    Likes Received:
    36,809
    Very interesting, MadMax. And I apologize for glossing over the part where you said you knew him pretty well.

    The social science folks are sometimes more aggressive at universities in terms of trying to herd people (a la the names you mention.) I've definitely seen "hard scientists" be really competitive and turf oriented also, but it's usually just about their field of choice. If an evolutionary biologist hears a nano-science person talking about evolution, there is usually just a shrug.

    Sounds like a fascinating contact anyway. :)
     
  15. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    35,975
    Likes Received:
    36,809
    Assuming you mean randomness, not sure I would agree with that. As currently understood, evolution depends on a beautiful (yes, perhaps designed) mechanism by which nature takes advantage of the natural mutations that arise from replicating genetic information over and over and over. To me it's beautiful and not random.
     
  16. JayZ750

    JayZ750 Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2000
    Messages:
    25,432
    Likes Received:
    13,390
    I'd agree. Either he is, or the article is making it sound as if he is.

    Certainly, the details of it are complex and require study, but what does he "not understand". It's hard to imagine someone of his intelligence can't "understand" the concept in general, which isn't really that confusing. Try google.

    As B-Bob noted, there is so much evidence for evolution, it's silly. Micro-evolution and macro-evolution.

    On a somewhat random note, there is a series on National Geographic called Explorer that had a show called "Monster Fish of the Congo" that was pretty interesting. First, it makes you realize how amazing the Congo River is - large stretches of the river are over 500 feet deep. I bring it up here, though, because the Congo River is apparently the Galapagos Islands on steroids when it comes to studying evolution - just so happens that all the animals are underwater. There is a crazy large number of fish species down there.
     
    #16 JayZ750, Jan 4, 2010
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2010
  17. Rocket River

    Rocket River Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    65,033
    Likes Received:
    32,738

    I thought the memo said. . . OH THERE IS NO REASON . . We just lucky!!!

    Rocket River
     
  18. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    35,975
    Likes Received:
    36,809
    :eek:
    "My God, it's full of fish."
    [​IMG]
     
  19. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    I can't say I know him well.
     
  20. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    I THINK he's talking more about origin of life than evolution...that gets globbed under evolution often, though, in discussions.

    I THINK he's saying he doesn't understand how inanimate molecules suddenly become animate. How something that isn't living all of a sudden is a living being.
     

Share This Page