Belief in evolution leads to what in the real world

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom_of_Assisi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kev << Wow, I’ve just been reading all the material philvaz has been putting into these evolution threads. How can you put so much time into this and still be a faithful servant? I’d be worried that my duties as a father, husband, lector, CCD teacher >>

Well, I’m single for one. 😃 And I find the whole creation-evolution-intelligent design thing fascinating. It is a challenge trying to reconcile the science with orthodox Catholic faith. It takes just a couple of hours every day sitting at this computer. I’ve been trying to quit… :cool: :eek:

Yeah, I’ve left at least 10 notes in every evolution discussion we’ve had the past 8 months. I’ve been on the board from the beginning (May 2004). But I’m not the only one, there is rossum, Orogeny, wanerius, and a few other names here who participate in the science discussions and know a lot more about these subjects.

All it takes is reading and printing out a few dozen TalkOrigins articles, and a few books, then you too can respond to every creationist argument that comes up.

Phil P
 
I don’t understand why people seem to feel that acceptance of the possibility of evolution implies an abrogation of the sense of God and appreciation for His wonders.
 
Phil, sincerely appreciate your dedication to the subject, really, but suppose you put same time and effort into an Alpha program. Maybe just take half the time. You see what I mean, there is fulfillment in other pursuits which might serve to bring others to God. Especially someone with your drive and focus. Again, ask Jesus by name. Maybe this is your calling, but someone with your gifts has the potential to accomplish so much more.
 
Kev << Maybe this is your calling, but someone with your gifts has the potential to accomplish so much more. >>

Well sure, how about a 3D Catholic video game that takes the world by storm and converts everyone to Christ? 😛 VazGames.com

I am designing such a game with a 3D artist in Virginia who works for American Life League. We are using the Torque 3D engine. It will take a little bit a work though to catch up to Halo 2, so I should really quit the boards.

Phil P
 
serendipity said:
I don’t understand why people seem to feel that acceptance of the possibility of evolution implies an abrogation of the sense of God and appreciation for His wonders.
Click to expand...

because evolution, as scientists teach, happens automatically (or naturally if you will)…so if we adhere to evolution we have no need to believe in God. Hence, why atheists claim that they can be intellectually fulfilled post-Darwin.
Now do you understand? To believe in evolution, but then to privaetly insert God somewhere in the process does not fit with modern day cosmology
 
40.png
PhilVaz:
Hello, do you know anything about science or the scientific method?Phil P
Click to expand...
Wow, Phil, you should be proud of your intelligence! From one of my posts you deduced that I have never finished high school, I live in a cardboard condo, and I collect aluminum cans for a living. Thankyou for your generosity.

Just kidding. Anyway, listed below is the scientific method. Could you please explain how far scientisits have taken the evolution hypothesis through the method? Concentrate, in particular, on steps 3 and 4. Thanks Phil.
  1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
  2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.
  3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
  4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.
The scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of the scientist’s bias on the outcome of an experiment. That is, when testing an hypothesis or a theory, the scientist may have a preference for one outcome or another, and it is important that this preference not bias the results or their interpretation. The most fundamental error is to mistake the hypothesis for an explanation of a phenomenon, without performing experimental tests. Sometimes “common sense” and “logic” tempt us into believing that no test is needed.
 
40.png
asquared:
for the record I hold and believe all the Catholic church teaches, submit to its earthly authority as granted by Jesus Christ, and am politically liberal in the classic sense (not the sense attributed to certain brands of American politics). Liberal in the sense of reserving to individuals that which belongs to them, and limiting governments to exercising only those functions which legitimately belong to government.
Click to expand...
Amen to that. 👍

Scullinius
 
Tom of Assisi:
because evolution, as scientists teach, happens automatically (or naturally if you will)…so if we adhere to evolution we have no need to believe in God. Hence, why atheists claim that they can be intellectually fulfilled post-Darwin.
Now do you understand? To believe in evolution, but then to privaetly insert God somewhere in the process does not fit with modern day cosmology
Click to expand...
No I do not understand. I was taught about the theory of evolution in Catholic schools as a respectable theory. It in no way made me question the existance of God, since the time scale used in the Bible rarely referred to in exact amount of days in the Old Testament, but rather in accordance with symbolic improtatnce; se ven is a holy and number that represents a covenant; 40 years represents a generation ect.

Besides, as articulated in Inherit the Wind, the Scopes Monkey Trial play, as well as by many biblical Catholic scholars how are days measured without the rising and setting of the sun?

I also can not respond to the survey because I do not consider myself “conservative” or “liberal” in a neat little pigeon hole boxed. I am registered as an independent politically, and find that much problems in both political camps. And religiously, find may practices and interpretations that some who call themselves “conservative” advocate were just as absent in the original Church as new practices or interpretations that those who call themselves “libeeral” advocate.

Likewise, there are some practices and interpretations that both “conservatives” and “liberals” advocate which are consistent with early practices of the church. These terms detract from dialogue on the real issues.
 
40.png
serendipity:
No I do not understand. I was taught about the theory of evolution in Catholic schools as a respectable theory. It in no way made me question the existance of God, since the time scale used in the Bible rarely referred to in exact amount of days in the Old Testament, but rather in accordance with symbolic improtatnce; se ven is a holy and number that represents a covenant; 40 years represents a generation ect.

Besides, as articulated in Inherit the Wind, the Scopes Monkey Trial play, as well as by many biblical Catholic scholars how are days measured without the rising and setting of the sun?

I also can not respond to the survey because I do not consider myself “conservative” or “liberal” in a neat little pigeon hole boxed. I am registered as an independent politically, and find that much problems in both political camps. And religiously, find may practices and interpretations that some who call themselves “conservative” advocate were just as absent in the original Church as new practices or interpretations that those who call themselves “libeeral” advocate.

Likewise, there are some practices and interpretations that both “conservatives” and “liberals” advocate which are consistent with early practices of the church. These terms detract from dialogue on the real issues.
Click to expand...
The actual time of Biblical events has little to do with whether or not apes turned into people. You may have received this "re"education while you were in school, but, alas, that does not make it true. Evolution…whether a “respectable” theory or not–happens automatically…hence the term “natural selection”–it happens naturally!!! Environmental pressures exert themselves on random genetic changes and mutations during sexual (or even asexual) reproduction.

By liberal religious practices…I meant cafeteria Catholics…or hetrodox “thinkers” if you prefer…
 
Stevo << 3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. 4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments. >>

Well sure, predictions and confirmations of those, and experiments supporting evolution. That’s what you want.

They are all spelled out here in excruciating detail. At one point I printed all this out and summarized it here. Plenty of predictions, confirmations, and experiments supporting evolution there.

Now you do understand the difference between this science, and miracles like the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, and the other miraculous events mentioned in the Bible? That was the point I was trying to make in response to your post. 👍 So to ask “did God use evolutionary creation to accomplish the resurrection” is a little silly, right? 👍 👍

Phil P
 
40.png
PhilVaz:
Stevo
Now you do understand the difference between this science, and miracles like the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, and the other miraculous events mentioned in the Bible? That was the point I was trying to make in response to your post. 👍 So to ask “did God use evolutionary creation to accomplish the resurrection” is a little silly, right? 👍 👍

Phil P
Click to expand...
Phil,

I thought Tarzan was Lord of the Apes…when did you get the job?

👍 👍 👍 👍
 
Xavier Tucker is about 75 years old. He lives in a nice shack down by the big lake,(Texoma). He has lived there all his life and has fished that lake most of the days he was there. He sells bait and hamburgers & rents a couple of nice rowboats to keep a nickle in his pocket.

Last summer I was killing time talking to “Tuck” and asked if during his life time he had seen a new type of fish appear. He said yes! I said WHAT? He said yes when the State Game Wardens started to pour in some new-fangled type of bait fish to feed the big’uns. But that was the only new fish to appear.

So I decided the next day that God has decided that He has all the different animals He needs, and there is enough trouble with those!
So don’t expect evolution to produce any new animals right now.
 
TomA << Phil, I thought Tarzan was Lord of the Apes…when did you get the job? >>

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/homin2.jpg

Plagiarized Errors and Molecular Genetics by Edward Max

Is it disgusting and incomprehensible to know we come from ape-like creatures? Yeah a little, but you get used to it. :rolleyes: God made everything ultimately. No big deal. 😛

Seriously dude, read this Creation-Evolution debate and tell me who you think did the better job?

My opinion the intelligent designer-creationists started off well (Johnson and Behe opening), but Ken Miller (Catholic biologist) blew them all away with his charts. Actually the video makes this clear, but the audio and transcript are there.

Phil P
 
40.png
PhilVaz:
Well sure, how about a 3D Catholic video game that takes the world by storm and converts everyone to Christ? 😛 VazGames.com

Phil P
Click to expand...
That sounds like a riot! Something different than the horrid “shoot them all up” games and maybe a little more instructional too. Is this for real? Something you intend to market and distribute? Or am I being very gullible here…forgive me, if I am missing a joke.
 
serendip << Is this for real? Something you intend to market and distribute? >>

It’s for real, the 3D artist contacted me, and we’ve spoken on the phone. He works for American Life League. He has lots of ideas for games. We’re using Torque 3D engine, quite a bit to learn since the code there is 500,000 lines. :eek: You can buy it for $100. I’m learning the “TorqueScript” to use this engine. My previous games are about 3000 lines so its a little daunting. He’s an artist, he needed a programmer, so we’re combining forces…

I’m thinking Grand Theft Pope: Vatican City, the sedevacantist game. Just kidding, that’s a joke I like. 😃

Phil P
 
40.png
PhilVaz:
TomA << Phil, I thought Tarzan was Lord of the Apes…when did you get the job? >>

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/homin2.jpg

Plagiarized Errors and Molecular Genetics by Edward Max

Is it disgusting and incomprehensible to know we come from ape-like creatures? Yeah a little, but you get used to it. :rolleyes: God made everything ultimately. No big deal. 😛

Seriously dude, read this Creation-Evolution debate and tell me who you think did the better job?

My opinion the intelligent designer-creationists started off well (Johnson and Behe opening), but Ken Miller (Catholic biologist) blew them all away with his charts. Actually the video makes this clear, but the audio and transcript are there.

Phil P
Click to expand...
Thanks bud,

I’ll read through the stuff before next weekend and I’ll let you know what I make of it.

In the mean time, vote on my evolution (what’s next?) poll…remember a vote for Tom is a vote for enlightenment :tiphat:
 
40.png
Stevereeno:
Wow, Phil, you should be proud of your intelligence! From one of my posts you deduced that I have never finished high school, I live in a cardboard condo, and I collect aluminum cans for a living. Thankyou for your generosity.

Just kidding. Anyway, listed below is the scientific method. Could you please explain how far scientisits have taken the evolution hypothesis through the method? Concentrate, in particular, on steps 3 and 4. Thanks Phil.
  1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
  2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.
  3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
  4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.
The scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of the scientist’s bias on the outcome of an experiment. That is, when testing an hypothesis or a theory, the scientist may have a preference for one outcome or another, and it is important that this preference not bias the results or their interpretation. The most fundamental error is to mistake the hypothesis for an explanation of a phenomenon, without performing experimental tests. Sometimes “common sense” and “logic” tempt us into believing that no test is needed.
Click to expand...
Stevereno,
You have cut to the heart of the matter. The proof for the theory of evolution is NOT there. There are too many holes, unexplained aspects.
For example, no evolutionist has explained why the fossil record does not include, in continuous order, all the intervening links between species. Realistically looking at the fossils there are huge jumps from one so called ancestor of a particular animal to the final animal itself. Yet according to the theory of evolution there should be a long continous chain of fossils joining the ancestor with the modern day animal, with each fossil showing a tiny variation from the one before. But this is simply NOT how the fossil record is found. Not only are there huge gaps between the so called ancient and modern species, but the so called links are the same all over the world, the millions of other links between the ancient and modern species are not found.
It is also of great concern that when strata of fossils are found in the WRONG ORDER according to the evolutionary theory, this fact is NOT put into the text books. In some particular places attempts have been made to explain it according to rock disturbance that pushes an older layer up over a younger layer, even when geologists admit there is no evidence for this having happened.
Time does not permit me to go into the most damming evidence against evolution- the structure of the cell. What I would ask people to do is study the issue of IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY and how this applies to certain structures within the single cell. Scientist have only become fully aware of this issue in recent years but its impact on the theory of evolution is dramatic.
 
40.png
rjs1:
It is also of great concern that when strata of fossils are found in the WRONG ORDER according to the evolutionary theory, this fact is NOT put into the text books. In some particular places attempts have been made to explain it according to rock disturbance that pushes an older layer up over a younger layer, even when geologists admit there is no evidence for this having happened.
Click to expand...
Instead of just throwing out assertations such as this, why not give us your source for the information? Isn’t that the best way to make your argument?

Peace

Tim
 
I’d say the main conclusion from this poll is that most of the people who post here self-identify as conservative.

I think the thing to calculate is [A/(A+B)]/[C/(C+D)]

A = Evolution believers who are liberal
B = Evolution believers who are conservative
C = Evolution non-believers who are liberal
D = Evolution non-believers who are conservative

When I saw the poll this ratio is about 4:1, indicating that evolution believers are more likely to be liberal. Usual disclaimers about small and/or self-selecting samples apply. And right now this calculation is extremely sensitive to the value of C, which is currently only 1, which makes the denominator really close to zero.
 
Evolution believers are more likely to be liberal when compared to non-believers, but I think it’s worth noting that conservatives are more likely to believe in evolution than not within the framework of the poll.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top