Evolution and Darwin against Religion and God

  • Thread starter Thread starter John121
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Alright, let’s include God. A man is founding standing over the body of another man with a bullet wound to the head, a smoking pistol in his hand and a note in his pocket saying “Kill this guy”. The accused goes into court and says “God killed the man and framed me.”

Tell me how I can falsify that claim.
 
Evolution has no utility. That is why scientists are literally taking the genome apart right now. It’s the only way they are going to learn something that’s useful.
 
I’ve already demonstrated that claim is wrong. You just simply rejected it out of hand. At this point I don’t think you’re willing to even consider the evidence. You’ve decided, based upon your personal interpretation of the Magisterium, that evolution is false.
 
So you didn’t read the quote from the Church document I provided? It is very clear. You are arguing with the Church, not me.
 
I did, and it is speaking from a theological position. But no science can invoke God and have any explanatory power at all. I can’t even sort out how one would introduce God into the methodology of any theory or study. “Black holes are formed by the collapse of super massive stars, and because of God.”

You’re not rejecting evolution. You are rejecting every scientific theory in existence.
 
You are arguing with the Church, not me. The Church, whose task it is to interpret Scripture correctly, can combine what science tells us and Divine Revelation. It’s like saying Jesus Christ did not actually raise the dead or rise from the dead Himself. If you want to put a wall around science, that’s you. The Church has no such limitation. I accept what the Church is telling me. You are free to reject it.

I study scientific developments on a regular basis.
 
No, I’m arguing with you. So far as I know, the Church isn’t demanding that every research paper include in its methodology “and by God’s hand as well”. The Church is working from a theological point of view, directing Christians in how they interpret scientific theories. For the Church, obviously, evolution by blind forces alone is wrong, but that is a theological interpretation. Operationally, science would lose all utility if with every utterance scientists had to invoke God. You and I both know that’s not how science works.

Nothing the church has said says evolution, and in particular human evolution, didn’t happen. Clearly it did (as my post about HERVs demonstrates). You’re overintrepreting the statements, and furthermore, using it to basically ignore all the evidence.
 
Evolution has no utility right now. Please avoid broad brush ‘you reject it all’ statements. You know what’s important right now? Genetic knock-out experiments. Gene editing. Bioinformatics. Evolution is useless.
 
And I’ve already demonstrated that your claim is wrong, and even if it were true it would be irrelevant to its explanatory power. This is probably the weakest anti-evolution argument I’ve ever been confronted with.
 
It explains nothing. It is a series of ‘what if’ stories. It has no explanatory power. Scientists are looking for real-world answers right now. Evolution will not explain or give them anything useful. That is why they are taking the genome apart - to get actual answers.
 
niceatheist said:
They are very specifically insertion of viral genes into the germ line
Click to expand...
There are a number of challenges to this.

Because they are highly functional and a very high number of them I put my money on common design rather than common descent. We actually need them and may have been there originally.
 
edwest211 said:
Evolution has no utility right now.
Click to expand...
I’m awarding you a ‘Buffalo’ for that. Anyone making a claim that evolution has no utility has to accept evolution in the first instance for the claim to make sense.

Bullet meet foot.
 
There are no problems. Those genes are detritus in germ lines from viruses. How exactly they shape gene expression and protein production is the complex bit (there is some suggestion that at least some HERVs may in fact be responsible for diseases in humans, so so much for “needing” them). A large bulk of ERVs in most organisms appear to be just that, detritus, that play no biological role per se, but simply are along for the ride due to neutral selection.
 
edwest211 said:
It explains nothing. It is a series of ‘what if’ stories. It has no explanatory power. Scientists are looking for real-world answers right now. Evolution will not explain or give them anything useful. That is why they are taking the genome apart - to get actual answers.
Click to expand...
And you know I’ll just disagree with you no matter how many times you make this claim. It’s just simply wrong that evolution has no explanatory power or utility, but even if it were true it would in no way make it less a viable, indeed the only viable explanation for what we see in biology.
 
niceatheist said:
that at least some HERVs may in fact be responsible for diseases in humans, so so much for “needing” them).
Click to expand...
The thinking is they are degenerate.

Mounting evidence is they do not belong in the junk category.
 
Nowhere in any of this is there a claim they are “degenerate”. It’s just a form of horizontal gene transfer, one of the very few ways that it can happen in multicellular organisms (bacteria and archaea can do things much more directly).
 
But ID explains nothing. ID can’t even really identify what would need intelilgent intervention. IC is utter failure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top