Pardon me. You have provided the “where” Homo sapiens point to and the approximate date. And you have given an approximate date for Homo* sapiens sapiens. *This is interesting information answering the question “when?” However, that is not the question I asked.
Premise number 3 is the beginning of the Nicene Creed said during the Catholic Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
I’m simply using whatever current scientific definiton of those organisms are, and comparing them with the “true men” mentioned in HG. The precise definition of Homo sp. (any particular species of the genus Homo) is irrelevant; what’s important is that there are commonly accepted scientific definitions of Homo sp., definitions that need not correspond exactly to the theological definition of “true men” – because the theological definition of “true men” is not limited to the empirical definition used by scientists in defining Homo sp.
Is RNA as complex as DNA?
No - it is used as a messaging molecule at the service of DNA.
RNA and DNA are very similar in terms of chemical composition, with just a few minor differences. E.g., both RNA and DNA have four nuclebases, with three of the nucleobases being the same. One major difference is that RNA is mostly single stranded, whereas DNA occurs in the form of two DNA strands bonded together in a double helix. So you could say that DNA is more complex, because it has a double helix structure.
If a person accepts the premise that creation comes from Intelligence and Will then
I am speaking from a scientific position. I assure you, in the scientific field definitions are not irrelevant.I’m simply using whatever current scientific definiton of those organisms are, and comparing them with the “true men” mentioned in HG. The precise definition of Homo sp. (any particular species of the genus Homo) is irrelevant; what’s important is that there are commonly accepted scientific definition of Homo sp., which need not correspond exactly to the theological definition of “true men” – because the theological definition of “true men” is not limited to the empirical definition used by scientists in defining Homo sp.
I could mentioned that Homo sp. has characteristic x; but that tells me little, if anything, about whether all specimens of Homo sp. are “true men” in the Catholic sense – unless, of course, you’re suggesting that when scientists define who is Homo sapiens sapiens, that they are also defining who is a “true man”.
If scientists have that ability to determine who fits into the theological category of “true man”, then that would be something remarkable.
Would not the “true Man” be described in Genesis 2:7: “Then the LORD God formed a man****c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”
Believing that a personal God is the Creator is the first step. This may sound nit-picky but there are some advocates of intelligence who do not accept the Divine Revelation of the existence of two real persons as founders of humanity and therefore original sin did not occur. (eventually Jesus becomes a prophet and not the Savior of all people)
Mine quoting does not work with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
Thank you for pulling me back from the precipice of sola catechisa.
On the other hand, it is important that readers understand that a part of a sentence from a single paragraph in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition may be interesting and appropriate in its singular expression. Nonetheless, if one is actually interested in Catholic teaching on the human person, then one has to look at the whole context of paragraphs 355 - 421 and not just a nugget.Thank you for pulling me back from the precipice of sola catechisa.
Before one can believe in a personal God as the Creator, one has to first believe that a creator exists.
Cool. ID is not a science by any definition of the word.
Your claim is design does not exist or that it cannot be detected?
My claim is that idea of intelligent design is not amenable to the scientific process to prove or to disprove. It is sometimes mistakenly thought of as scientific in some circles.
Is intelligent design a scientific theory?
Yes. The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.