Darwin's Theory of Evolution is not scientific

  • Thread starter Thread starter Uriel1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Aloysium said:
I am rather surprised that no one in any of these threads has been able to describe how God caused it all to happen. Once we are doing more than juxtaposing words, but actually try to formulate what did occur, we find that we go back to Genesis. We are no longer speaking of evolution, unless of course that god is deistic and solely transcendent to His creation, carrying on in accordance to the clockwork he would have established. God not only caused it all, but causes it all. As He gives matter the properties that make it what it is, so too He brings into existence those more complex forms of being such as plants, animals and we ourselves, each one a spiritual psychosomatic unity. It is always best to view this subject in terms of creation if one is interested in understanding the world and its origins - same basic evidence, but a very different story.
Click to expand...
I really do not have any desire nor the time to continue on with this, so we’ll just have to agree to disagree. We have known now for well over a century that life forms evolve over time, but if someone doesn’t want to believe that, that’s their right. Plus geneticists know much about the mechanism that’s involved in the evolutionary process but that’s not binding on anyone.

Fortunately, the Church no longer has a problem accepting the basic ToE as long as God is believed to have been behind it.
 
Aloysium said:
The raw data actually favours creation.
Click to expand...
I truly wish you were right on this, but you simply are not. One believes God created all on the basis of their faith, not on objectively-derived evidence.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
Given that we do not find any evidence for the existence of intermediate organisms,
Click to expand...
If an organism reproduces, it is an “intermediate organism”. Plus gaps are constantly being filled with new finds and better understandings of their relationships.
 
Aloysium said:
God not only caused it all, but causes it all.
Click to expand...
Does God also cause miscarriages and serious birth defects? If so, why would He do that? “original sin”? punish a baby for what Grampa did?

To me, that doesn’t make any sense. Anyhow, gotta go.
 
Aloysium said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
If you are speaking only of physical processes that lead to the body of modern man, then yes, that is a proper branch of science. If one tries to use “science” to make philosophical claims about the ultimate cause of our existence, that person is stepping outside the rules of science.
Click to expand...
We are a unity of body and spirit, The spirit is said to be the form of the body. As persons are each one individual expression of mankind, one being existing in relation to everything that is other to the self. Everything includes God, the Source of our existence and all its components. These, at the end of our lives will decompose back to the earth that we are, currently it’s existence one with our own.

The rules of modern science, although they encompass the largest and smallest of things, are like the a street light illuminating a very small area of existence. What is most important and lost in our ignorance lies outside its scope. While it is very good about describing the physical processes occurring in our bodies, to extrapolate that information onto what went on at the beginnings, ignoring what are the basic causes, leads us to the illusion of evolution.

The raw data actually favours creation.
Click to expand...
That depends on what rules you are playing under.
 
When there are no deleterious recessive genes, there is no natural law against what developed into incest. These which have accumulated since the fall of mankind, are the reality of random mutations, beyond the fanciful imaginings of evolution’s proponents. We are asked to go forth and multiply, and the risk of malformation resulting form intercourse goes against what God demands. When there was no wrong, there was no rational guilt, nor shame. But in the world as it has been for very many generations, it is morally wrong to engage in sexual activity with a sibling. Even in this day and age, where empowerment is a goal, the power dynamics in the family that come into play in such situations, is likely to keep this as a social taboo, where others have fallen. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ, loving and respecting each other.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
40.png
Aloysium:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
If you are speaking only of physical processes that lead to the body of modern man, then yes, that is a proper branch of science. If one tries to use “science” to make philosophical claims about the ultimate cause of our existence, that person is stepping outside the rules of science.
Click to expand...
We are a unity of body and spirit, The spirit is said to be the form of the body. As persons are each one individual expression of mankind, one being existing in relation to everything that is other to the self. Everything includes God, the Source of our existence and all its components. These, at the end of our lives will decompose back to the earth that we are, currently it’s existence one with our own.

The rules of modern science, although they encompass the largest and smallest of things, are like the a street light illuminating a very small area of existence. What is most important and lost in our ignorance lies outside its scope. While it is very good about describing the physical processes occurring in our bodies, to extrapolate that information onto what went on at the beginnings, ignoring what are the basic causes, leads us to the illusion of evolution.

The raw data actually favours creation.
Click to expand...
That depends on what rules you are playing under.
Click to expand...
Those rules are formed through our relationship with reality - God, nature and one another. There is a truth and we decide which rules to subject ourselves to. There is a more comprehensive, better explanatory vision of the world and its history - it is creation.
 
benjamin1973 said:
Even if God set all these things into place, it doesn’t matter much to us, unless we can find a way to benefit from our understanding.

Let’s assume that God created all that exists. Fine. How does that help us stop disease, or create GMOs that grow better, or cure genetic damage?
Click to expand...
Understanding design yields important benefits to our own designs. Biomimicry is flourishing now. And a whole lot of appendices and tonsils would still be in people.
 
Metis1 said:
Does God also cause miscarriages and serious birth defects? If so, why would He do that? “original sin”? punish a baby for what Grampa did?

To me, that doesn’t make any sense. Anyhow, gotta go.
Click to expand...
Yes. Once the protection of bodily immortality and freedom from sickness was withdrawn we started devolving. Add to that our own sinful behaviors that spread disease, reckless use of chemicals all lead to these things. We live in a fallen world.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
The raw data actually favours creation.
That depends on what rules you are playing under.
Click to expand...
Those rules are formed through our relationship with reality - God, nature and one another. There is a truth and we decide which rules to subject ourselves to. There is a more comprehensive, better explanatory vision of the world and its history - it is creation.
Click to expand...
I’ll say it again. It depends on which rules you mean. When you are playing baseball you play under the rules of baseball. When you play the game of science, you play under the rules of the scientific method. If you don’t want to play that game, that is fine. But don’t crash a game of science insisting we play by your rules.
 
Metis1 said:
40.png
Aloysium:
God not only caused it all, but causes it all.
Click to expand...
Does God also cause miscarriages and serious birth defects? If so, why would He do that? “original sin”? punish a baby for what Grampa did?

To me, that doesn’t make any sense. Anyhow, gotta go.
Click to expand...
God is Existence itself, as the Trinune Godhead who brings everything into existence. God is Love is Justice. All that is not love will perish. Disobedient to His will to love, we disconnect ourselves from His healing graces. It isn’t so much a punishment as it is a natural consequence of humanity’s decision to become gods without God. Becoming one of us, He in fact makes our deepest desire, to be one in Him, possible. I could go on with this but I too have to go.
 
The game of science will lead you from the truth. I actually do play that game, but with respect to the real world of doing things - applied science. That’s not what happens here, where evolutionary illusions are being spun as something other than what they are - stories.
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
I’ll say it again. It depends on which rules you mean. When you are playing baseball you play under the rules of baseball. When you play the game of science, you play under the rules of the scientific method. If you don’t want to play that game, that is fine. But don’t crash a game of science insisting we play by your rules.
Click to expand...
There you have it! The search for truth should not be limited by man made rules. The result of this has been scientism and many have been fooled. It is a setup.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
I’ll say it again. It depends on which rules you mean. When you are playing baseball you play under the rules of baseball. When you play the game of science, you play under the rules of the scientific method. If you don’t want to play that game, that is fine. But don’t crash a game of science insisting we play by your rules.
Click to expand...
There you have it! The search for truth should not be limited by man made rules.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I agree. That is why I am a Catholic. But when I play baseball, I do limit my play to the rules of baseball. Since this thread is about whether evolution is scientific, the only considerations should be the rules of science.
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
Since this thread is about whether evolution is scientific, the only considerations should be the rules of science.
Click to expand...
But the rules of science rule out the supernatural. The best one can do is empirical science. Evo does not qualify, so it is ruled out. I often have posted ID and Evo belong in mandatory philosophy class. Only empirical science in science class.
 
Last edited:
“The physical sciences, then, depend on the validity of logic just as much as metaphysics or mathematics. If popular thought feels ‘science’ to be different from all other kinds of knowledge because science is experimentally verifiable, popular thought is mistaken. Experimental verification is not a new kind of assurance coming in to supply the deficiencies of mere logic. We should therefore abandon the distinction between scientific and non-scientific thought. The proper distinction is between logical and non-logical thought.” C. S. Lewis
 
So, have your conclusions been peer reviewed by scientific experts in the field of evolutionary biology and genetics? Publications? Experiments? Method of study?

I guess my Catholic education was wrong too, because we were taught - wait for it - evolution.
 
I do not trust the theories of evolution or the Big Bang. It seems ridiculous that we came from an ancestor inferior to us. That doesn’t seem to make sense metaphysically.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top