Evolution?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Crusading_Canuk
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Crusading_Canuk

Guest
Hi, first off this is probably in the wrong part of the forum, if so could somebody please move it to a more appropriate section. I believe in Creationism and intelligent design, but how are we as Catholics supposed to react to scientific discoveries like the Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens? How are we supposed to reconcile these with the book of Genesis? Again I believe Adam and Eve were the first true people (and nothing will cange that) but what to think of this scientific evidence?
 
Crusading_Canuk said:
Hi, first off this is probably in the wrong part of the forum, if so could somebody please move it to a more appropriate section. I believe in Creationism and intelligent design, but how are we as Catholics supposed to react to scientific discoveries like the Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens? How are we supposed to reconcile these with the book of Genesis? Again I believe Adam and Eve were the first true people (and nothing will cange that) but what to think of this scientific evidence?
Click to expand...
The Church accepts Evolution, as long as we do not remove God from the equation, so if we accept Evolution, we accept Theistic Evolution.
 
I have the exact quote somewhere but a Cardinal back in the time of Galileo made a statement to the effect that when scientific fact runs up against Bible interpretation you may want to reexamine the interpretation. I do not think God gave us the power of reason and placed evidence of say evolution to mess with our minds.
 
Crusading_Canuk said:
Hi, first off this is probably in the wrong part of the forum, if so could somebody please move it to a more appropriate section. I believe in Creationism and intelligent design, but how are we as Catholics supposed to react to scientific discoveries like the Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens? How are we supposed to reconcile these with the book of Genesis? Again I believe Adam and Eve were the first true people (and nothing will cange that) but what to think of this scientific evidence?
Click to expand...
You mean the so called “missing links” between man and the ape? First of all I too accept that Adam and Eve were the first two people. I don’t think much of the scientific evidence. I believe that God creates the human soul at conception, and no scientific evidence can prove or refute that. It is Church teaching.

Now, back to the Neanderthals: In 1911 a French anatomist called Marcellion Boule carefully studied a neanderthal skeleton. A hunched over, misshapen creature with bent legs and face, thrust forward in a stance similar to that of a gorilla.
Artists had a field day depicting neanderthals in that manner in their illustrations, we all saw these pictures when we were growing up.

However, in 1957 a team of anatomists re-examined Boule’s original skeleton and found a serious source of error. The Neanderthal man has suffered from a severe case of arthritus.
  • it was not genetic in origin
  • it was not typical
    We now know that ancient people walked and stood erect almost exactly as we do today.
    In one grave archeologists found the body of an elderly neanderthal who had had his forearm amputated years before, in his youth ( imagine surgery 60,000 years ago!)
    He had been cared for all his life. In another site a neanderthal had been buried with flowers.
    Neanderthals are now called Homo Sapiens, they were not a separate species. The brain size is on average1,250 ccs. Apes and ape-like creatures have brain cells of 450 ccs on average.
    In 1970 astonishingly new forms of homo erectus almost 2,000,000 million years old complete with tools.
    There is more and I am not up to date.
 
Crusading Canuk,

The Church doesn’t accept Evolution as a proven fact, but it does accept it as a THEORY. As does the scientific community; it is a THEORY.

Science can only “prove” what the mind is predisposed to look for, and so the more people use the term “evolution”, the more we begin to see things through that lens. For the past few decades, teachers and others with social influence have been casually talking about Evolution as though it were proven FACT. My kids hear it in school all the time. The word “evolution” is used in an off-hand way, even when it isn’t required to explain the facts. **What many people don’t know is that there are a number of highly-reputable CREATION SCIENTISTS out there who have shot many gigantic holes in evolutionary theory…but nobody seems to be giving them a microphone **(we can discuss “why not?” until the cows come home, but I bet it has alot to do with the fact that much of the modern economy is trusting in the idea that there is no God).

The biggest problem I personally have with the THEORY of Evolution is that it defies the second law of thermodynamics; all systems degrade over time. This is why Adam and his immediate offspring lived for several hundred years, and why people have such a shorter lifespan today. It’s like photocopying a page out of your Bible, and then photocopying that photocopy, etc., etc. Each time you try to create an exact copy, something gets lost in translation. Eventually, you will end up with a page with many unreadable words. This is why we have more genetic diseases than ever before. This is why it’s not okay to marry a close relation these days; if your gene pools are the same then the same “words” will be missing from both “pages”. This also explains why Biblical characters living thousands of years ago were able to marry their immediate relations (even brothers and sisters if you go back far enough)…because their DNA was a “clean page” without errors.

Evolutionary THEORY, on the other hand, would have you believe that people are BETTER and more perfect than they were thousands (millions?) of years ago. I don’t know about you, but I’ve seen enough contrary evidence just in the past 40 years to debunk that idea!!! 😉
 
Crusading_Canuk said:
Hi, first off this is probably in the wrong part of the forum, if so could somebody please move it to a more appropriate section. I believe in Creationism and intelligent design, but how are we as Catholics supposed to react to scientific discoveries like the Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens? How are we supposed to reconcile these with the book of Genesis? Again I believe Adam and Eve were the first true people (and nothing will cange that) but what to think of this scientific evidence?
Click to expand...
Animation. Many people believe that the first Human Beings animated and sharing in the Likeness and Image of GOD were Adam and Eve regardless of early Humans.

Some believe in the literal Interpretation of Scripture (Myself included)

Some believe that Neanderthals are created by overactive artists depicting them as apelike when in fact their skeletons do not reflect these features. (Myself included)

Science is filled with inexact opinion. In many cases , Science and so called evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
 
Crusading Canuk, I’m a literalist too. You might consider studying the philosophical foundations of science instead of explaining scientific “evidence”. Peter Kreeft’s “Socratic Logic” has a great section on the logic of science.
 
Crusading Canuk,

Here’s a link to a wonderful website you might want to bookmark:

icr.org/
 
Most scientists agree Homo Sapiens at a certain point in time starting advancing rapidly, new techs/ideas/tactics/etc. They dont know why or how it happened. My belief is that was the moment God gave men souls (Adam and Eve) and we went from “apes” to men.
 
AngloCatholic1 said:
The biggest problem I personally have with the THEORY of Evolution is that it defies the second law of thermodynamics; all systems degrade over time.
Click to expand...
For what it’s worth, this is not correct; it’s no more a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics than my building a house out of a pile of bricks is. Bricks cannot form a house by themselves, but they are not a closed system: I act on them with my own two hands, applying energy. Similarly, the Earth is not a closed system, it receives massive amounts of energy from the sun. What the Second Law of Thermodynamics states is that the total entropy of a closed system – here, the Earth + the Sun, not counting starlight etc. – must increase over time.
 
AngloCatholic1 said:
The Church doesn’t accept Evolution as a proven fact, but it does accept it as a THEORY. As does the scientific community; it is a THEORY.
Click to expand...
Are you 100% sure this is what the church accepts or does not accept? Our parish had a head of the Vatican Observatory come to speak. He said they can trace everything back to the “big bang”.

The Church teaches us the Bible is not a historical nor scientific collection of books.
 
dconklin said:
Are you 100% sure this is what the church accepts or does not accept? Our parish had a head of the Vatican Observatory come to speak. He said they can trace everything back to the “big bang”.

The Church teaches us the Bible is not a historical nor scientific collection of books.
Click to expand...
The big bang theory (which I accept) is diefferent from evolution (which I am still on th efence with). You can have the big bang theory and non evotution. The bang theory makes more sence then evolution of the animal kingdom. There also appears to be more clear evidence for the bang theory and would make more sence in explaining creation in Genesis.
 
I had evolution taught to me in about half of my college courses. Very interesting stuff, but also very loose and fast scientifically. If they find a pinky bone or a jaw bone belonging, in their judgement, to a new species of primate then it is declared the missing link and they paint a nice picture of a man looking ape. Now how exactly do they know precisely what that animal looks like based on simply a knucklebone?

I haven’t finished calculating yet, but I am beginning to arrive at my conclusion that the majority of species on the earth all share a similar negative evolutionary adaptation, being a specialist. A specialist is a species which can survive only in a very limited environment or on only a very limited selection of foods. Koalas and pandas are notable mammals. When you get into invertebrates the list becomes incredible. One of my favorites of the moment is the species of shrimp that swims into the mouth of fish and cleans their teeth. Which evolved first, the predator that doesn’t consume prey or the prey that swims into the mouth of predators? That is a pretty extraordinary evolutionary dilemma.

I believe if evolution really happens it is because God sets things up to run on their own without his constant intervention. Even still, I think speciation is divinely guided, because the driving principle of “survival of the fittest” which evolution depends on falls flat on its face from my reckoning.
 
Very easy: God said: Let be life. And the Big bang became. From that point the built in ‘organic’ form worked with a few correction. Just we had to understand that the word in Genesis yom is not a 24 hour period but any kind of period. God formed the body of Adam through the evolution, then created his immortal spirit and breathed into him.
 
white_sheep said:
I had evolution taught to me in about half of my college courses. Very interesting stuff, but also very loose and fast scientifically. If they find a pinky bone or a jaw bone belonging, in their judgement, to a new species of primate then it is declared the missing link and they paint a nice picture of a man looking ape. Now how exactly do they know precisely what that animal looks like based on simply a knucklebone?

I haven’t finished calculating yet, but I am beginning to arrive at my conclusion that the majority of species on the earth all share a similar negative evolutionary adaptation, being a specialist. A specialist is a species which can survive only in a very limited environment or on only a very limited selection of foods. Koalas and pandas are notable mammals. When you get into invertebrates the list becomes incredible. One of my favorites of the moment is the species of shrimp that swims into the mouth of fish and cleans their teeth. Which evolved first, the predator that doesn’t consume prey or the prey that swims into the mouth of predators? That is a pretty extraordinary evolutionary dilemma.

I believe if evolution really happens it is because God sets things up to run on their own without his constant intervention. Even still, I think speciation is divinely guided, because the driving principle of “survival of the fittest” which evolution depends on falls flat on its face from my reckoning.
Click to expand...
Take a look here: IDvolution.org
 
buffalo said:
Take a look here: IDvolution.org
Click to expand...
Ok, I will. It looks like it is on cellular mechanics and whatnot. A topic I enjoy. DNA, RNA, protein synthesis, and most cellular structures are irreducibly complex and speak to the fact that they must have been created. He could have turned the reins loose after that, a position I would like to believe, really, it is just very difficult to see how speciation can occur within constant help.
 
There is no need for me to add to the many sensible replies by more techinical info but what I would like to stress is simply this,be very careful fellow Catholics that you are not deceived by the vast output of those who are really trying in subtle ways to bring God down by their so called theories of evolution.
The amount of Catholics that I know personally who that believe we are evolved and not created(because maybe God planned it this way) is disturbing to say the least.
I recommend the following two well researched books on the lies of evolution;

The Darwin Myth(The Life And Lies Of Charles Darwin) by, Benjamin Wiker,PH.D and published by Regnery Publishing,INC,Washington,DC.(available on Amazon) and…

The Rise Of The Evolution Fraud by M.Bowden,published by Creation-Life Publishers,San Diego,California.
 
Just a thought.

What kind of evidence for change in Biology would any of you expect to find to explain how two Human beings are the ancestor of nearly seven billion of us and all the diversity we have?

African, white, asian and oriental - thats a lot of diversity from two people.

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top