Conference on Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Annie39 said:
But there must be incontrovertible evidence in the fossil records that there was a creature who gave birth to its evolutionary descendent.
Click to expand...
The fact that you’re even saying this tells me you still don’t understand the basic concepts involved. Every creature’s child is its evolutionary descendent! But no creature’s child is going to be so incredibly different from its immediate parent as to make it a whole other species. The incremental changes we on the evolution side have been talking about take hundreds of thousands – even millions – of years to “stack up” to what we think of as a change of species.
Evolution so they say happened eons ago…Nor is there any incontrovertible evidence for same.
Click to expand...
You keep saying that as if its true, when it’s not – you’re just ignorant of the data that exists today which constitutes the “incontrovertible evidence” you’re supposedly looking for (even while you constantly deny the possibility that it could exist).
…it seems that your search for the truth regarding Creation has been curtailed by a book that you are just sure if I read it, I’ll see the light. I’ll tell you why this can’t happen.
Click to expand...
Then your mind is closed and there is no point continuing, is there? You’ve taken the stance of the “believer” and abandoned the stance of the scientist.
A couple of years ago I was given material by evolutionists who thought that if I just read that material I’d be won over. I read their material but discussed it with anti-evolution scientist as well. They had what might be called alternative explanations. This sir, made the evolutionists MAD (like bulls seeing red). How dare I get other opinions?
Click to expand...
And yet, here I am offering to send this favorite book of mind free of charge to a scientist of the opposing viewpoint for the precise purpose of seeing whether he can give a plausible alternative to common descent as an explanation for the evidence contained in this book.
I have given up reading evolution theories and now am open to PROOF.
Click to expand...
No…you only pretend to be.

–Mike
 
StAnastasia said:
I have an earnest suggestion for Annie and Ed and Buffalo:

You are never ever going to get the world’s scientists to dump science and replace it with a world view based on an ancient Mesopotamian myth. Try as you might on obscure internet fora, it’s just not going to happen. A more satisfying experience for you might be to get the various Fundamentalist Catholic colleges and universities to host their own conferences, research programs, journals, chairs, etc. You might include Christendom College in Virginia, Ave Maria University in Florida, the Franciscan Univedrsity of Steubenville, and a number of others. You could even invite Protestant Fundamentalist colleges, although they might not be happy to consort with the anti-Christ!

If you did this, you could develop your own Mesopotamian science free from the kinds of bother you have to put up with from mainstream scientists. You could hold conferences on the 6,000 year-old earth, the global flood survived by Noah, light from stars that only appear to be billions of light years away, and so forth.

This is of course only a suggestion, but it might work. It might solve a variety of problems at once, and absolve you from having to try incessantly to convince Catholic (and other) scientists to abandon their life’s work, which will never happen. Let me know what you think about this idea.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
I must say your post is as fascinating as it is revealing. For those who don’t quite understand what the person going by “StAnastasia” has revealed I’d like to comment. This person (a woman I think) is admitting that for her this subject is religious in nature, not scientific. She lets us know that like Richard McBrien and his ilk she is the spiritual descendent of Henri Bremond, George Tyrrell and that evolutionist fraud Teilhard de Chardin. (Don’t ya know THEY weren’t “fundamentalists”) Truth to these folks is changing and moldable and that is the kindest description I can give it. Those people I named were modernists and were condemned as such by the Church. They absolutely hate the True Faith. Anyone ever hear of the Piltdown man fraud? Teilhard was intricately involved in that. “Good ol’” Teilard knew that the Piltdown was a fraud from the get go but it took science 40 years to discover that little unmoldable truth.

A note to those who are not frauds but sincerely believe in evolution. Antievolution scientists want to discuss evolution on scientific terms, not on religions terms. I recommend that you hear them out there is no reason to fear.

Annie
 
Annie39 said:
Anyone ever hear of the Piltdown man fraud? Teilhard was intricately involved in that. “Good ol’” Teilard knew that the Piltdown was a fraud from the get go but it took science 40 years to discover that little unmoldable truth.
Click to expand...
Whatever Teilhard de Chardin was, he was a good palaeontologist. That much is proven by his publication record.

I also believe that he was a man sincere in his theology, who tried to live a good and holy life, and whose ideas encourage us to live in peace and to seek ways to communicate across divisions and to develop separately and together, all of which is positive in a divisive world. He died in the faith, a priest in the Jesuit order.

You say ’ “Good ol’” Teilard knew that the Piltdown was a fraud from the get go’, but have you got any evidence for this or are you merely libelling him on hearsay, or because you dislike his theology? Or perhaps you think Stephen Gould is an ultimate authority on the matter? Some of Teilhard’s ideas might have been untraditional, but that does not justify libel. You should know before you make statements like this that the historical consensus is that Charles Dawson was responsible for the fraud and that Teilhard had no hand in the forgery. To state as a fact that a man was a fraudster without compelling evidence is an act that lacks charity and common decency.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
 
StAnastasia said:
Then why do you reject the conclusions of scientists?
Click to expand...
Questioning or rejecting conclusions has nothing to do with my love for science. Are you asking me to check my intelligence at the door and just have blind faith they are right? Or just accept the argument from authority or popularity?
 
hecd2 said:
Yep - that’s correct. And to reinforce this let me quote from my website which has an article on this very topic here:

"Evidence for fusing of two ancestral chromosomes to create human chromosome 2 and where there has been no fusion in other Great Apes is:
  1. The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2.
  2. The remains of the sequence that the chromosome has on its ends (the telomere) is found in the middle of human chromosome 2 where the ancestral chromosomes fused.
  3. the detail of this region (pre-telomeric sequence, telomeric sequence, reversed telomeric sequence, pre-telomeric sequence) is exactly what we would expect from a fusion.
  4. this telomeric region is exactly where one would expect to find it if a fusion had occurred in the middle of human chromosome 2.
  5. the centromere of human chromosome 2 lines up with the chimp chromosome 2p chromosomal centromere.
  6. At the place where we would expect it on the human chromosome we find the remnants of the chimp 2q centromere
Not only is this strong evidence for a fusion event, but it is also strong evidence for common ancestry; in fact, it is hard to explain by any other mechanism."

Go here for more details and explanations of terms like telomeres and centromeres.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
Click to expand...
I am willing to sit on this one as time goes on the more dissimilar chimps and humans get.
 
buffalo said:
Are you asking me to check my intelligence at the door and just have blind faith they are right? Or just accept the argument from authority…?
Click to expand...
You tell 'em! Catholics ask me to do this all the time. It’s so annoying! 😛

–Mike
 
buffalo said:
Questioning or rejecting conclusions has nothing to do with my love for science. Are you asking me to check my intelligence at the door and just have blind faith they are right? Or just accept the argument from authority or popularity?
Click to expand...
You say you love science, and yet you reject the conclusions of scientists. 100,000 biologists work with evolution every day, producing a huge volume of research, discoveries, discussions, conference proceedings, and so forth, year after year, decade after decade. So-called “creation science” has produced precisely zero. If you prefer to follow the latter, that’s your choice.
 
StAnastasia said:
You say you love science, and yet you reject the conclusions of scientists. 100,000 biologists work with evolution every day, producing a huge volume of research, discoveries, discussions, conference proceedings, and so forth, year after year, decade after decade. So-called “creation science” has produced precisely zero. If you prefer to follow the latter, that’s your choice.
Click to expand...
Thanks for assenting to a free-will choice.

Physics and cosmology as well as the science of the Divine, agree with Creation. So perhaps your 100000 equals my 100000. Maybe it is time to stop using the argument from popularity.
 
StAnastasia said:
You say you love science, and yet you reject the conclusions of scientists. 100,000 biologists work with evolution every day, producing a huge volume of research, discoveries, discussions, conference proceedings, and so forth, year after year, decade after decade. So-called “creation science” has produced precisely zero. If you prefer to follow the latter, that’s your choice.
Click to expand...
This reminds me of an old saying - "eat $#%*, billions of flies can’t be wrong.😉
 
buffalo said:
Physics and cosmology as well as the science of the Divine, agree with Creation. So perhaps your 100000 equals my 100000. Maybe it is time to stop using the argument from popularity.
Click to expand...
Buffalo, do you still not understand that creation has nothing to do with science? It is a theological concept.
 
Annie39 said:
A note to those who are not frauds but sincerely believe in evolution. Antievolution scientists want to discuss evolution on scientific terms, not on religions terms.
Click to expand...
Annie, do you not understand that evolution is a scientific concept, not a theological one? Creation is the theological idea, and it does not stand in conflict with evolution.
 
It’s unfortunate to see a Science Separatist Movement here, on a Catholic Forum. Science is glorified, and God and His Creation are out of bounds to what is erroneously called science. Pope Benedict said science and religion are complementary, all I see here are statements of support for a ruling Technocracy.

Atheists are comfortable with what they call Cultural Christianity or what I call Meaningless Christianity. People go to Church and put up Christmas Trees but it all means nothing. Even Richard Dawkins puts up a Christmas tree, but it is meaningless, a cultural artifact like an old toy no longer being made.

Our outward expression of faith happens in the real world every day, it is not confined to a building. But the Science Separatists go into their labs and bow down to their god who they long for. The Bible tells us, from the fullness of the heart the mouth speaks.

Give glory to God’s Creation and His miraculous works. Do not be deceived by Ultra-Orthodox Scientism which exalts man above God, and leads to error.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
It’s unfortunate to see a Science Separatist Movement here, on a Catholic Forum. Science is glorified, and God and His Creation are out of bounds to what is erroneously called science. Pope Benedict said science and religion are complementary, all I see here are statements of support for a ruling Technocracy.

Atheists are comfortable with what they call Cultural Christianity or what i call Meaningless Christianity. People go to Church and put up Christmas Trees but it all means nothing. Even Richard Dawkins puts up a Christmas tree, but it is meaningless, a cultural artifact like an old toy no longer being made.

Our outward expression of faith happens in the real world every day, it is not confined to a building. But the Science Separatists go into their labs and bow down to their god who they long for. The Bible tells us, from the fullness of the heart the mouth speaks.

Give glory to God’s Creation and His miraculous works. Do not be deceived by Ultra-Orthodox Scientism which exalts man above God, and leads to error.
Click to expand...
I think you need to understand what the problem here is. You are saying (if I recall correctly) that the universe was literally created within the last 10,000 years. That is not true. You are also saying that humanity literally shares no common ancestry with the rest of the animal kingdom, even primates. That, too, is not true. You are welcome to believe these things. For that matter, you are welcome to believe any falsehoods you want. I don’t care what you personally choose to believe. But if you’re going to insist that believing in these falsehoods is essential to salvation, you’re going to run into problems with anybody possessing even a shred of intellectual integrity (which I hope includes me), because I don’t think there’s anybody out there who is even the slightest bit interested in worshipping or obeying a god who requires us to believe and teach a falsehood as if it were true.

–Mike
 
buffalo said:
Gee, after all this time you would think I would have gotten it by now.🙂
Click to expand...
Does that mean you haven’t gotten it? You have 104 posts left to express your understanding of it, before this thread gets shut down.
 
mpartyka said:
I think you need to understand what the problem here is. You are saying (if I recall correctly) that the universe was literally created within the last 10,000 years. That is not true. You are also saying that humanity literally shares no common ancestry with the rest of the animal kingdom, even primates. That, too, is not true. You are welcome to believe these things. For that matter, you are welcome to believe any falsehoods you want. I don’t care what you personally choose to believe. But if you’re going to insist that believing in these falsehoods is essential to salvation, you’re going to run into problems with anybody possessing even a shred of intellectual integrity (which I hope includes me), because I don’t think there’s anybody out there who is even the slightest bit interested in worshipping or obeying a god who requires us to believe and teach a falsehood as if it were true.–Mike
Click to expand...
Mike, in addition to the lack of integrity, there is a fundamental dishonesty of Ed and his ilk that I find hard to square with their Catholicism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top