Evolution In The Classroom

[pzona]

G-d says they will choose to believe a lie.

There’s another fundamental mistake God is making, saying that people can “choose” to believe.

 

[rossum]

Evolution is unprovable,

Correct. No scientific theory can ever be proved. Gravity cannot be proved, quantum mechanics cannot be proved and evolution cannot be proved.

it is a mathematical impossibility,

False. Your creationist sources are lying to you. Firstly we can observe evolution happening - your creationist sources will probably call it microevolution but it is still evolution. Secondly unless you show your calculation we do not know what your mathematical model leaves out. All creationist models I have ever seen are false because they include random mutation but omit natural selection. Any mathematical model that omits natural selection is not a model of evolution and so any numbers it produces are worthless.

there are no transitional forms,

False. Again your creationist sources are lying to you. Why do you persist in using sources that break one of the Commandments?

look at the quotes from the Museum of Natural History in London

Do you mean the quote from Dr Patterson? The one that goes:“In several animal and plant groups, enough fossils are known to bridge the wide gaps between existing types. In mammals, for example, the gap between horses, asses and zebras (genus Equus) and their closest living relatives, the rhinoceroses and tapirs, is filled by an extensive series of fossils extending back sixty-million years to a small animal, Hyracotherium, which can only be distinguished from the rhinoceros-tapir group by one or two horse-like details of the skull. There are many other examples of fossil ‘missing links’, such as Archaeopteryx, the Jurassic bird which links birds with dinosaurs (Fig. 45), and Ichthyostega, the late Devonian amphibian which links land vertebrates and the extinct choanate (having internal nostrils) fishes. . .”

• Patterson, Evolution (1978) pp 131-133
  There is a notorious creationist misuse of a different quote from Dr Patterson which is about as convincing as the Bible quote “There is no God”. Again your creationist sources are misleading you.

but the biggest issue is it calls G-d a liar.

No, evolution calls certain creationists liars and certain interpretations of the Bible incorrect.

rossum

 

[reggieM]

How did male and female evolve at the same time at the same place with all the rights parts necessary to reproduce? Chance?

The desire to live apart from God causes people to put their faith in the accident-fairy, who makes mutations occur simultaneously and evolution to fulfill purposes of design.

 

[rossum]

The desire to live apart from God causes people to put their faith in the accident-fairy, who makes mutations occur simultaneously and evolution to fulfill purposes of design.

Your ignorance of Biology renders me speechless.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

renders me speechless.

rossum

That might be a good thing…

 

[rossum]

How did male and female evolve at the same time at the same place with all the rights parts necessary to reproduce? Chance?

No, not chance alone. Natural selection was involved, and natural selection is not a chance process.

This is one of the questions still being worked on. See Evolution of sexual reproduction and the references therein for a summary.

rossum

 

[reggieM]

That might be a good thing…

Exactly – it would be a very good thing, but I can guarantee that the condition of speechlessness will not prevent him from the endless task of Darwinian propagandizing, even for a few minutes.

 

[reggieM]

No, evolution calls certain creationists liars and certain interpretations of the Bible incorrect.

Interesting. Evolution is a theological system that provides the correct interpretation of scripture for believers.

There we have it – as clear as can be.

Let’s just note that the lies and cover-ups about the neutrality of evolution towards religion have finally been exposed.

Let’s expect this all to be covered-up and denied once again though. Then things can return back to normal --with the pretense that “evolution says nothing about religion”.

 

[liquidpele]

Interesting. Evolution is a theological system that provides the correct interpretation of scripture for believers.

There we have it – as clear as can be.

Evolution shows some truth, and as John Paul II said, truth cannot conflict with truth. Just like Galileo showed that a particular interpretation was just plain wrong, evolution is doing the same whether you want to accept it or not.

 

[reggieM]

Just like Galileo showed that a particular interpretation was just plain wrong, evolution is doing the same whether you want to accept it or not.

What Catholic teaching is evolution showing to be “just plain wrong”?

 

[tjm190]

Interesting. Evolution is a theological system that provides the correct interpretation of scripture for believers.

There we have it – as clear as can be.

Let’s just note that the lies and cover-ups about the neutrality of evolution towards religion have finally been exposed.

Let’s expect this all to be covered-up and denied once again though. Then things can return back to normal --with the pretense that “evolution says nothing about religion”.

Right- just like the fact that the Earth is round is a theological system that provides the correct interpretation of scripture for believers.

 

[tjm190]

What Catholic teaching is evolution showing to be “just plain wrong”?

No Catholic teaching, just the literal interpretation of scripture.

 

[edwest2]

The bible also said a lot of other stuff. Perhaps you shouldn’t take it all literally.
freethought.mbdojo.com/stupidbible.html

You’re asking how male and female evolved? Sigh. I get the impression you’re thinking of fully formed humans already. Forget Genesis for a second, and look through my lens. We weren’t human at the point where a lot of our attributes evolved. For example, think of something like a microscopic worm… the founding species of the animal kingdom perhaps. You think the differences between male and female were really that big at that point? Sure, they’re big now, but it’s been about 2 billion years so a lot of evolving has been going on. In fact, it didn’t even have to be that simple of an original species… some animals can even change back and forth (findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n9_v137/ai_8784789/), and how in the world do you explain hermaphrodites?

For those of you considering Theistic Evolution worthy of belief, please reread the above. And keep in mind, according to Stephen Jay Gould, if evolution could be rewound, things would have turned out differently.

We are not some casual, meaningless product of evolution.

Peace,
Ed

 

[reggieM]

Right- just like the fact that the Earth is round is a theological system that provides the correct interpretation of scripture for believers.

No, it’s just like the fact that evolution claims to teach the origin and nature of human beings – in contradiction to the infallible teaching of Catholicism.

 

[tjm190]

No, it’s just like the fact that evolution claims to teach the origin and nature of human beings – in contradiction to the infallible teaching of Catholicism.

Origin- descended from primates
Nature- (Evolution is mostly silent here- this is a biological/philosophical question)

 

[edwest2]

Evolution shows some truth, and as John Paul II said, truth cannot conflict with truth. Just like Galileo showed that a particular interpretation was just plain wrong, evolution is doing the same whether you want to accept it or not.

And here again, the evolution is a fact/true appears again. If it’s a fact, why do you need the approval of any religious authority? I hope you understand that some of us here view this theory as science-fiction at best or an ideology with a few scientific elements attached.

The more I see posts like this, the more convinced I am that science has nothing - zero - to do with it.

Peace,
Ed

 

[tjm190]

And here again, the evolution is a fact/true appears again. If it’s a fact, why do you need the approval of any religious authority? I hope you understand that some of us here view this theory as science-fiction at best or an ideology with a few scientific elements attached.

The more I see posts like this, the more convinced I am that science has nothing - zero - to do with it.

Peace,
Ed

Did you look at what he was responding to? He brought up evolutions explicit Papal approval when it was claimed that evolution was incompatible with Catholicism. Evolution does not ‘need’ the Pope’s approval to be valid, nor to be compatible with Catholicism- but it does somewhat rule out the possibility that faith in God and acceptance in evolution are mutually exclusive.

 

[edwest2]

Did you look at what he was responding to? He brought up evolutions explicit Papal approval when it was claimed that evolution was incompatible with Catholicism. Evolution does not ‘need’ the Pope’s approval to be valid, nor to be compatible with Catholicism- but it does somewhat rule out the possibility that faith in God and acceptance in evolution are mutually exclusive.

“explicit Papal approval”? To be used only when it supports the theory of evolution. This is repeated over and over and over again as if the Church has said nothing else about evolution. The Church, we are led to believe, only says positive things about evolution. That’s wrong. Referring to the secularly famous quote from Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict added, “But it is also true that evolution is not a complete, scientifically proven theory.”

I’m getting tired of this “by any means necessary” approach to selling what is obviously an ideology that borrows a few scientific ideas. What I mean is: Praise Darwin. Evolve beyond belief. on billboards. Or: Man Created God. on the sides of buses.

To paraphrase a certain TV judge: Don’t pour water on my leg and tell me it’s raining.

Peace,
Ed

 

[liquidpele]

And here again, the evolution is a fact/true appears again. If it’s a fact, why do you need the approval of any religious authority? I hope you understand that some of us here view this theory as science-fiction at best or an ideology with a few scientific elements attached.

The more I see posts like this, the more convinced I am that science has nothing - zero - to do with it.

Peace,
Ed

We don’t need approval from any religious authority. However, you are religious so I’m pointing out that even those that share your religion accept it as truth. You think science has nothing to do with it, but I’m not arguing to convince you. You can believe whatever you want. I’m arguing so some of the poor people that might be reading this thread don’t believe your ridiculous assertions.

 

[liquidpele]

For those of you considering Theistic Evolution worthy of belief, please reread the above. And keep in mind, according to Stephen Jay Gould, if evolution could be rewound, things would have turned out differently.

We are not some casual, meaningless product of evolution.

Peace,
Ed

So what? You think God would no longer hand out souls and love us if you had 6 eyes and 8 legs? Besides, that’s speculation. All we know is that it looks undirected and that there was no intent, but that’s because science is empirical so it should not make any claims on purpose or intent. You can actually debate that. The part you’re insane to debate is that evolution happens at all.