Conference on Evolution

[StAnastasia]

“work quietly with evolution every day”? How do they do that? Comparative genomics deals with currently living organisms. Period. So-called synthetic biology - a trial and error process - deals with currently living organisms. I don’t think anyone works with macro-evolution every day. And if bacteria can be found in nature that are already resistant to natural and synthetic antibacterials, I think that puts micro into question as well.Evolution, as described here, does not appear to be involved in day to day biology.
Peace,Ed

Oh, they do. My department works and consults with biologists at the University of California, Stanford, CU Boulder, Harvard, UT Austin, Oxford and Cambridge, and other places, and with paleontologists at UCMP. They are constantly talking and writing about their evolutionary projects. I suppose it’s possible that they are all mistaken, and that you alone, Ed, know the truth about what they actually work with.

But let’s humor them: lets let them and all their colleagues believe that they are actually working with evolutionary explanations. Let’s let it be our little secret – just you and me, Ed – that all these PhDs don’t know the least thing about which they are speaking, writing, and teaching with. Then, when the time is right, you can publish your magnum opus about the true nature of the world, and when the cat’s finally out of the bag, I’m sure they’ll humbly come round.

StAnastasia

 

[James_Edward]

StAnastasia’s response to my post :

to correct things one has to begin by addressing and redressing the flawed geology. That done the Church’s Magisterial teaching will fall back into place.

was:

That will never happen – the bishops are not that stupid.

I would like to think that this remark was not intended to be taken literally – the bishops would be stupid to restore the teaching Magisterium of the Church?

But if not, what does it mean – that the bishops would be stupid to challenge the untested principles of geology? I know it’s not their domain, but by not questioning them originally they allowed the meaning of Original Sin to be denatured: the doctrine which gave the rationale for Baptism, Redemption, the Eucharist, Adam the first man and the Immaculate Conception. Shouldn’t Catholics looking for salvation want their meaning to be restored? Those geological principles having now been invalidated provides the basis for hoping a return to orthodox Magisterial teaching will not be too long delayed. Of course, a largely atheistic scientific community does not share this hope and will do all in its power to prevent the truth from getting out.

James

 

[StAnastasia]

I would like to think that this remark was not intended to be taken literally – the bishops would be stupid to restore the teaching Magisterium of the Church?James

No, you misunderstand. I know the bishops are not stupid enough to reject every scientific discovery of the last five hundred years simply to accommodate your misunderstanding of theology. I know personally a number of the bishops who work with questions at the interface between science and religion. There is probably no need for a collision between your world view and theirs. The bishops work and speak for the Church, and your anti-scientific fantasy is confined to an Internet forum, so I anticipate no negative interaction.

StAnastasia

 

[edwest2]

Oh, they do. My department works and consults with biologists at the University of California, Stanford, CU Boulder, Harvard, UT Austin, Oxford and Cambridge, and other places, and with paleontologists at UCMP. They are constantly talking and writing about their evolutionary projects. I suppose it’s possible that they are all mistaken, and that you alone, Ed, know the truth about what they actually work with.

But let’s humor them: lets let them and all their colleagues believe that they are actually working with evolutionary explanations. Let’s let it be our little secret – just you and me, Ed – that all these PhDs don’t know the least thing about which they are speaking, writing, and teaching with. Then, when the time is right, you can publish your magnum opus about the true nature of the world, and when the cat’s finally out of the bag, I’m sure they’ll humbly come round.

StAnastasia

“evolutionary projects”? What? Are they evolving something? Do these projects involve millions of years? This looks like vague smoke and mirrors.

Peace,
Ed

 

[StAnastasia]

“evolutionary projects”? What? Are they evolving something? Do these projects involve millions of years? This looks like vague smoke and mirrors.Peace,
Ed

Ed, these scientists are studying past, current, and future trends in evolution. I searched for “evolution” on PubMed Central (pubmedcentral.nih.gov/), the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) free digital archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature. Here are the first twenty of 5,649 articles involving evolution. As you say, it may be all smoke and mirrors, but these will give you some clues as to what these scientists at least sincerely believe they are writing about.

StAnastasia

Items 1 - 20 of 112966
Page of 5649Next

1arwinian evolution in the light of genomics
Eugene V. Koonin
Nucleic Acids Res. 2009 March; 37(4): 1011–1034. Published online 2009 March. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp089.
PMCID: PMC2651812
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–3.8M |

2:The ancient Virus World and evolution of cells
Eugene V Koonin, Tatiana G Senkevich, and Valerian V Dolja
Biol Direct. 2006; 1: 29. Published online 2006 September 19. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-1-29.
PMCID: PMC1594570
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–2.0M |

3arallel adaptive evolution cultures of Escherichia coli lead to convergent growth phenotypes with different gene expression states
Stephen S. Fong, Andrew R. Joyce, and Bernhard Ø. Palsson
Genome Res. 2005 October; 15(10): 1365–1372. doi: 10.1101/gr.3832305.
PMCID: PMC1240078
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–659K | Supplementary Material |

4:The Loci of Evolution: How Predictable is Genetic Evolution?
David L Stern and Virginie Orgogozo
Evolution. 2008 September; 62(9): 2155–2177. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00450.x.
PMCID: PMC2613234
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–371K | Supplementary Material |

5:Rapid Pathway Evolution Facilitated by Horizontal Gene Transfers across Prokaryotic Lineages
Wataru Iwasaki and Toshihisa Takagi
PLoS Genet. 2009 March; 5(3): e1000402. Published online 2009 March 6. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000402.
PMCID: PMC2644373
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–828K | Supplementary Material |

6:Evolution of complexity in RNA-like replicator systems
Nobuto Takeuchi and Paulien Hogeweg
Biol Direct. 2008; 3: 11. Published online 2008 March 27. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-3-11.
PMCID: PMC2390529
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–10M | Supplementary Material |

7:Facilitated Variation: How Evolution Learns from Past Environments To Generalize to New Environments
Merav Parter, Nadav Kashtan, and Uri Alon
PLoS Comput Biol. 2008 November; 4(11): e1000206. Published online 2008 November 7. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000206.
PMCID: PMC2563028
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–755K | Supplementary Material |

8ynamic Correlation between Intrahost HIV-1 Quasispecies Evolution and Disease Progression
Ha Youn Lee, Alan S. Perelson, Su-Chan Park, and Thomas Leitner
PLoS Comput Biol. 2008 December; 4(12): e1000240. Published online 2008 December 12. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000240.
PMCID: PMC2602878
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–738K |

9:Selectionism and Neutralism in Molecular Evolution
Masatoshi Nei
Mol Biol Evol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2006 July 19.
PMCID: PMC1513187
Published in final edited form as: Mol Biol Evol. 2005 December; 22(12): 2318–2342. Published online 2005 August 24. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msi242.
Manuscript: | Abstract | Full Text | PDF–426K |

10:Evolutionary Plasticity of Polycomb/Trithorax Response Elements in Drosophila Species
Arne Hauenschild, Leonie Ringrose, Christina Altmutter, Renato Paro, and Marc Rehmsmeier
PLoS Biol. 2008 October; 6(10): e261. Published online 2008 October 28. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060261.
PMCID: PMC2573935
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–1.1M | Supplementary Material |

11:The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution
Eugene V Koonin
Biol Direct. 2007; 2: 21. Published online 2007 August 20. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-2-21.
PMCID: PMC1973067
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–467K |

12:Animal Cell Differentiation Patterns Suppress Somatic Evolution
John W Pepper, Kathleen Sprouffske, and Carlo C Maley
PLoS Comput Biol. 2007 December; 3(12): e250. Prepublished online 2007 November 1. Published online 2007 December 14. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030250.
PMCID: PMC2134960
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–333K |

13:Extensive parallelism in protein evolution
Georgii A Bazykin, Fyodor A Kondrashov, Michael Brudno, Alexander Poliakov, Inna Dubchak, and Alexey S Kondrashov
Biol Direct. 2007; 2: 20. Published online 2007 August 16. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-2-20.
PMCID: PMC2020468
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–422K |

14:A burst of protein sequence evolution and a prolonged period of asymmetric evolution follow gene duplication in yeast
Devin R. Scannell and Kenneth H. Wolfe
Genome Res. 2008 January; 18(1): 137–147. doi: 10.1101/gr.6341207.
PMCID: PMC2134778
| Abstract | Full Text |

15:Comparable contributions of structural-functional constraints and expression level to the rate of protein sequence evolution
Maxim Y Wolf, Yuri I Wolf, and Eugene V Koonin
Biol Direct. 2008; 3: 40. Published online 2008 October 7. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-3-40.
PMCID: PMC2572155
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–623K | Supplementary Material |

16:Highly efficient concerted evolution in the ribosomal DNA repeats: Total rDNA repeat variation revealed by whole-genome shotgun sequence data
Austen R.D. Ganley and Takehiko Kobayashi
Genome Res. 2007 February; 17(2): 184–191. doi: 10.1101/gr.5457707.
PMCID: PMC1781350
| Abstract | Full Text |

17rotein co-evolution, co-adaptation and interactions
Florencio Pazos and Alfonso Valencia
EMBO J. 2008 October 22; 27(20): 2648–2655. Published online 2008 September 25. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2008.189.
PMCID: PMC2556093
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–280K |

18arwinian Evolution on a Chip
Brian M Paegel and Gerald F Joyce
PLoS Biol. 2008 April; 6(4): e85. Published online 2008 April 8. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060085.
PMCID: PMC2288630
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–360K | Supplementary Material |

19:The mode and tempo of genome size evolution in eukaryotes
Matthew J. Oliver, Dmitri Petrov, David Ackerly, Paul Falkowski, and Oscar M. Schofield
Genome Res. 2007 May; 17(5): 594–601. doi: 10.1101/gr.6096207.
PMCID: PMC1855170
| Abstract | Full Text |

20:Emerging principles of regulatory evolution
Benjamin Prud’homme, Nicolas Gompel, and Sean B. Carroll
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 15; 104(suppl. 1): 8605–8612. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0700488104.
PMCID: PMC1876436
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–1.5M |

 

[James_Edward]

In connection with my post concerning Maciej Giertych’s invalidation of evolution theory, StAnastasia writes :

Young scientists will be lining up at podiums all over the world to make their careers by declaring the refutation of a theory that has apparently only gotten stronger every year since 1859!

Why does StAnastasia believe that the theory has got stronger since 1859? Could it not be because there are far many more people trained to believe in evolution than there were when Darwin published “Origins”. Students of the earth sciences not to mention physics and its derivative disciplines are expected to subscribe to evolution theory. Not to do so means risking research funds and a refused diploma. In consequence no structure exists to contest it.

With the much greater number of fossils now available, more theories **from an evolution perspective **have been advanced to account for them . Proposed transitional and intermediate fossil abound. Such a synthetic situation is inevitable: it is the law of large numbers and the massive textbook industry orientated towards supporting evolution gives a helping hand. Perhaps this scenario answers your point why students are not lining up to refute evolution. The one thing that has not changed is the lack of proof for macro-evolution. After 150 years of searching, that elusive proof is still not forthcoming despite the Nobel prizes waiting to be picked up. Of course, to justify the enormous effort and cost of university research, funding from both the Government and private sector, the official conclusion is that due to convergent evidence the theory is much stronger. But it has to be admitted even by the evolutionary hierarchy that no individual evidence is sufficiently strong to claim it as a definitive proof.

On the other hand, those opposing evolution theory on purely scientific grounds have the definitive proof to support their position. They rely upon convergent proof: not evidence. The most obvious is Berthault’s peer-reviewed experiments and field analyses invalidating the principles of stratigraphy. The refutation of the single principle of superposition is sufficient to eliminate the use of fossils to record evolution. It is compounded by the demonstration that rocks form as a function of the time it takes for the sediment to deposit: allowing the possibility for organisms that have become fossils to have lived relatively contemporaneously.

Until such time as the evidence against evolution is allowed to be promoted, the dice loaded in favour of evolution whatever its defects will continue to win the game.

James

 

[grannymh]

No, you misunderstand. I know the bishops are not stupid enough to reject every scientific discovery of the last five hundred years simply to accommodate your misunderstanding of theology. I know personally a number of the bishops who work with questions at the interface between science and religion. There is probably no need for a collision between your world view and theirs. The bishops work and speak for the Church, and your anti-scientific fantasy is confined to an Internet forum, so I anticipate no negative interaction.

StAnastasia

Would you please do me a favor? Please PM me some names of the Bishops who work with questions at the interface between science and religion and where they are located. Don’t worry about addresses. I have access to a U.S. Catholic directory. It is outdated that is why I need the city location. I’ll keep my source confidential.

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred from the moment of conception.

 

[edwest2]

Ed, these scientists are studying past, current, and future trends in evolution. I searched for “evolution” on PubMed Central (pubmedcentral.nih.gov/), the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) free digital archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature. Here are the first twenty of 5,649 articles involving evolution. As you say, it may be all smoke and mirrors, but these will give you some clues as to what these scientists at least sincerely believe they are writing about.

StAnastasia

Items 1 - 20 of 112966
Page of 5649Next

1arwinian evolution in the light of genomics

7:Facilitated Variation: How Evolution Learns from Past Environments To Generalize to New Environments
Merav Parter, Nadav Kashtan, and Uri Alon
PLoS Comput Biol. 2008 November; 4(11): e1000206. Published online 2008 November 7. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000206.
PMCID: PMC2563028
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–755K | Supplementary Material |

8ynamic Correlation between Intrahost HIV-1 Quasispecies Evolution and Disease Progression
Ha Youn Lee, Alan S. Perelson, Su-Chan Park, and Thomas Leitner
PLoS Comput Biol. 2008 December; 4(12): e1000240. Published online 2008 December 12. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000240.
PMCID: PMC2602878
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–738K |

9:Selectionism and Neutralism in Molecular Evolution
Masatoshi Nei
Mol Biol Evol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2006 July 19.
PMCID: PMC1513187
Published in final edited form as: Mol Biol Evol. 2005 December; 22(12): 2318–2342. Published online 2005 August 24. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msi242.
Manuscript: | Abstract | Full Text | PDF–426K |

10:Evolutionary Plasticity of Polycomb/Trithorax Response Elements in Drosophila Species
Arne Hauenschild, Leonie Ringrose, Christina Altmutter, Renato Paro, and Marc Rehmsmeier
PLoS Biol. 2008 October; 6(10): e261. Published online 2008 October 28. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060261.
PMCID: PMC2573935
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–1.1M | Supplementary Material |

11:The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution
Eugene V Koonin
Biol Direct. 2007; 2: 21. Published online 2007 August 20. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-2-21.
PMCID: PMC1973067
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–467K |

12:Animal Cell Differentiation Patterns Suppress Somatic Evolution
John W Pepper, Kathleen Sprouffske, and Carlo C Maley
PLoS Comput Biol. 2007 December; 3(12): e250. Prepublished online 2007 November 1. Published online 2007 December 14. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030250.
PMCID: PMC2134960
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–333K |

13:Extensive parallelism in protein evolution
Georgii A Bazykin, Fyodor A Kondrashov, Michael Brudno, Alexander Poliakov, Inna Dubchak, and Alexey S Kondrashov
Biol Direct. 2007; 2: 20. Published online 2007 August 16. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-2-20.
PMCID: PMC2020468
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–422K |

14:A burst of protein sequence evolution and a prolonged period of asymmetric evolution follow gene duplication in yeast
Devin R. Scannell and Kenneth H. Wolfe
Genome Res. 2008 January; 18(1): 137–147. doi: 10.1101/gr.6341207.
PMCID: PMC2134778
| Abstract | Full Text |

15:Comparable contributions of structural-functional constraints and expression level to the rate of protein sequence evolution
Maxim Y Wolf, Yuri I Wolf, and Eugene V Koonin
Biol Direct. 2008; 3: 40. Published online 2008 October 7. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-3-40.
PMCID: PMC2572155
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–623K | Supplementary Material |

16:Highly efficient concerted evolution in the ribosomal DNA repeats: Total rDNA repeat variation revealed by whole-genome shotgun sequence data
Austen R.D. Ganley and Takehiko Kobayashi
Genome Res. 2007 February; 17(2): 184–191. doi: 10.1101/gr.5457707.
PMCID: PMC1781350
| Abstract | Full Text |

17rotein co-evolution, co-adaptation and interactions
Florencio Pazos and Alfonso Valencia
EMBO J. 2008 October 22; 27(20): 2648–2655. Published online 2008 September 25. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2008.189.
PMCID: PMC2556093
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–280K |

18arwinian Evolution on a Chip
Brian M Paegel and Gerald F Joyce
PLoS Biol. 2008 April; 6(4): e85. Published online 2008 April 8. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060085.
PMCID: PMC2288630
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–360K | Supplementary Material |

19:The mode and tempo of genome size evolution in eukaryotes
Matthew J. Oliver, Dmitri Petrov, David Ackerly, Paul Falkowski, and Oscar M. Schofield
Genome Res. 2007 May; 17(5): 594–601. doi: 10.1101/gr.6096207.
PMCID: PMC1855170
| Abstract | Full Text |

20:Emerging principles of regulatory evolution
Benjamin Prud’homme, Nicolas Gompel, and Sean B. Carroll
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 15; 104(suppl. 1): 8605–8612. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0700488104.
PMCID: PMC1876436
| Abstract | Full Text | PDF–1.5M |

Gene sequencing, genetic knock out experiments and speculation about the past are not evolution. This is all genetic engineering. Looking at DNA, RNA and proteins as nothing more than machinery and tinkering with it in an effort to see what would happen if part 23 is replaced by part 45 or if part 86 is removed, what is the effect on the organism. Manipulation of currently living organisms would be a case of intelligent redesign.

Horizontal gene transfer is a built-in ability. It does not require evolution. Plus, no matter how much bacteria or viruses modify themselves, they always remain bacteria and viruses.

On the macro level, the odds of other organisms adding information that can be integrated into the organism’s machinery and that leads to a positive functional result is virtually impossible to happen va trial and error in nature. Now, man is going in and by swapping parts or eliminating parts, hoping to stumble on something useful (i.e. marketable and profitable).

No evolution.

Peace,
Ed

 

[StAnastasia]

On the macro level, the odds of other organisms adding information that can be integrated into the organism’s machinery and that leads to a positive functional result is virtually impossible to happen va trial and error in nature. Now, man is going in and by swapping parts or eliminating parts, hoping to stumble on something useful (i.e. marketable and profitable).

No evolution.Peace,Ed

The point is that the authors of these thousands of studies sincerely believe they are studying evolution. They are the ones who receive the funding, and that is never likely to change – we’ve got to humor them. Your and James Edward’s Noah’s Ark scientists will never have their research funded. Perhaps that’s sad, but it is as close to a fact as we’re going to get here.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

Would you please do me a favor? Please PM me some names of the Bishops who work with questions at the interface between science and religion and where they are located. Don’t worry about addresses. I have access to a U.S. Catholic directory. It is outdated that is why I need the city location. I’ll keep my source confidential.Blessings,granny.

Grannymh, I’ll have to gather a list when I’m at work tomorrow. For now try this.

StAnastasia

"The heated evolution versus creationism controversy is one battle in the culture wars that U.S. Catholics can watch from the sidelines. As church officials recently put it: “The church does not need to fear the teaching of evolution.”

That clear evaluation came in a letter from Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo of Richmond, Va., chair of the Committee on Science and Human Values of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The Dec. 6, 2004, letter, sent to all U.S. bishops, said: "The media report with some frequency attempts to eliminate the teaching of evolution in public schools or to introduce the teaching of ‘creationism’ … or other theories without scientific standing as part of the science curriculum. Sometimes ‘creationism’ is placed on a par with evolution.
Related Results

“The church does not need to fear the teaching of evolution,” he continued, “as long as it is understood as a scientific account of the physical origins and development of the universe.”

 

[James_Edward]

If StAnastasia instead of replying to the substance of a post makes such comments as:

…your misunderstanding of theology…your anti-scientific fantasy is confined to an Internet forum

it would be wiser to remain silent. Abuse is the antithesis of knowledge.

James

 

[edwest2]

The point is that the authors of these thousands of studies sincerely believe they are studying evolution. They are the ones who receive the funding, and that is never likely to change – we’ve got to humor them. Your and James Edward’s Noah’s Ark scientists will never have their research funded. Perhaps that’s sad, but it is as close to a fact as we’re going to get here.

StAnastasia

“sincerely believe” that the word evolution is the correct label even though their current research involves tinkering with currently living things? They are just adding and subtracting parts to (A) see if genes and expressed proteins can be manipulated by addition, subtraction or rearrangement and (B) see if they can make a buck with it.

I think evolution is the incorrect word. Intelligent genetic manipulation appears more accurate.

Peace,
Ed

 

[StAnastasia]

I think evolution is the incorrect word. Intelligent genetic manipulation appears more accurate.Peace,Ed

Why don’t you propose this to them?

 

[StAnastasia]

If StAnastasia instead of replying to the substance of a post makes such comments as: it would be wiser to remain silent. Abuse is the antithesis of knowledge.James

Look who’s talking – the one who has abused scientists! If the shoe fits…

 

[Namesake]

Gene sequencing, genetic knock out experiments and speculation about the past are not evolution. This is all genetic engineering. Looking at DNA, RNA and proteins as nothing more than machinery and tinkering with it in an effort to see what would happen if part 23 is replaced by part 45 or if part 86 is removed, what is the effect on the organism. Manipulation of currently living organisms would be a case of intelligent redesign.

Horizontal gene transfer is a built-in ability. It does not require evolution. Plus, no matter how much bacteria or viruses modify themselves, they always remain bacteria and viruses.

On the macro level, the odds of other organisms adding information that can be integrated into the organism’s machinery and that leads to a positive functional result is virtually impossible to happen va trial and error in nature. Now, man is going in and by swapping parts or eliminating parts, hoping to stumble on something useful (i.e. marketable and profitable).

No evolution.

Peace,
Ed

You seem to believe that you know so much about science, yet you do not submit your ideas to refereed peer reviewed journals or other similar forums for publication. Why is that?

 

[StAnastasia]

You seem to believe that you know so much about science, yet you do not submit your ideas to refereed peer reviewed journals or other similar forums for publication. Why is that?

Namesake, I’ve been asking Ed the same question for months. It is one thing to complain against “big science” on an obscure Internet forum not read by the scientists in question, but mainly by fellow travelers against science. It is quite another thing to earn some qualifications and take the case against evolution to the scholarly community.

StAnastasia

 

[FrancesMarx]

I searched a bit on this topic but didn’t find anything?

Was Jesus aware of the Continents Americas, Australia?

These continents are playing big roles after 2000 years, why Christ did not mention them then? Is there a christian explanation behind this?

 

[buffalo]

I searched a bit on this topic but didn’t find anything?

Was Jesus aware of the Continents Americas, Australia?

These continents are playing big roles after 2000 years, why Christ did not mention them then? Is there a christian explanation behind this?

Since Christ was Divine He certainly was familiar with His creation. First off, the Bible is not the total words and works of Jesus. He as the Bible states did and said so much more than can be written. Therefore we do not know for certain whether or not He spoke of this and other things. Second, He is under no obligation to tell us everything.

 

[StAnastasia]

I searched a bit on this topic but didn’t find anything? Was Jesus aware of the Continents Americas, Australia? These continents are playing big roles after 2000 years, why Christ did not mention them then? Is there a christian explanation behind this?

There is no reason to suppose that Jesus, the man from Nazareth, had heard of these continents, as it would be fifrteen hundred years before the Eurasian reconnaissance of the rest of the world would begin to reveal the existence of these and other landmasses.

StAnastasia

 

[buffalo]

There is no reason to suppose that Jesus, the man from Nazareth, had heard of these continents, as it would be fifrteen hundred years before the Eurasian reconnaissance of the rest of the world would begin to reveal the existence of these and other landmasses.

StAnastasia

Are you asserting did not possess Divine knowledge and that He is not the 2nd person of the Trinity?