Given the principles of evolution, natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc, do you think belief in the supernatural will die out or become a m

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
inocente said:
I think young earth creationists are those who say the earth is < 10000 years old.

But there are so many different types of creationism. Perhaps Cosmo or GQ has an article on how to choose a creationism that’s just right for me.

Jill: Dad, I brought Jack home to meet you.
Dad: Are you in the one true creationism, Gap Creationism, Jack?
Jack: No sir, Day-age Creationist born and raised sir.
Dad: Then you cannot marry my daughter, be off with you. Jill, you’re grounded.

:hmmm: So you say teaching evolution stifles religion. Yet the Catholic University of America’s School of Theology and Religious Studies is teaching evolution to seminarians. - trs.cua.edu/Science-for-Seminaries/biology-evolution.cfm

How come?

BTW speciation blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/
Click to expand...
If the Church is teaching evolution, I don’t stand by Her. How about those Baptists?
 
inocente said:
The eye produces a digital output down the optic nerve. The exact digital coding is still being worked out but various details are known. For instance, some codes re!ate to line recognition, which in computers is done by a simple algorithm (kernel matrix).

Scientists are using this to help the blind see, and since sound uses similar encoding, to help the deaf.

Tell me, what has creationism ever done to help the blind or the deaf? I think nothing, your designer can’t fix the many faults in its poor design. Science can. If your supernatural can’t help the blind see where science can, your supernatural is irrelevant to the human condition.
Click to expand...
Gave them hope. Help them carry their cross. Believe me, science cannot cure blindness, especially the spiritual kind. I lot of “science” is just smoke and mirrors.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Buddhism will ultimately fail just as Protestantism is failing because there are too many contrary sects from which to choose.
Click to expand...
Although the Methodists seem to have a good solid Christ-based religion. I can’t speak for the other Protestants. But Buddhism just ain’t a religion in my book. It’s just a bunch of steps!
 
IWantGod said:
I accept both. It makes no sense to me to deny God’s existence. Equally, it makes no sense to deny the natural theory of evolution.
Click to expand...
Why? It was made up in the late 1800s by a guy who wanted to eat his way through the world. It is a theory, nothing more. Why are you so sold on it? Propaganda.
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
Why? It was made up in the late 1800s by a guy who wanted to eat his way through the world. It is a theory, nothing more. Why are you so sold on it? Propaganda.
Click to expand...
You accept other scientific theories, why would you discriminate against the theory of evolution? Perhaps it is you who has bought into the propaganda that science is at war with Christianity.
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
Believe me, science cannot cure blindness…
Click to expand...
‘The researchers behind the “exciting” project are now planning to conduct human trials in an effort to restore sight to blind or partially sighted people.’ express.co.uk/news/science/753001/cure-for-blindness-restore-sight-riken-centre

'Can you believe this?” Elizabeth asked a few minutes later. Ahead of her, Christian walked with Jean Bennett, whose lab at Penn produced the gene-laced fluid that gave Christian sight. “It happened so fast,” Elizabeth said. Just three days after his first eye was treated, Christian could see her. “I went from wondering if my son would ever know what I looked like to … well, this,” she said, gesturing at him walking unaided. “It’s like a miracle.”

Christian’s miracle was hard-won. It rose from 20 years of unrelenting work by Bennett and her collaborators, who identified the genetic mutation that crippled Christian’s retina, then figured out how to sneak a good copy of that gene into his eye. Bennett started trials for the therapy merely hoping “that we could detect some hint of improvement.” Nine years later she is astonished that it seems to have worked so well.’

In June 2015 she went to Oxford Eye Hospital, lay on a table, surrendered to anesthesia, and, 10 hours later, awoke with a bionic eye. In what was “without doubt the most complex operation I’ve ever done,” says surgeon Robert MacLaren, the Oxford team slipped between her retina’s delicate layers a freckle-size microchip laden with 1,600 tiny photodiodes. MacLaren’s clinical trial is exploring whether this chip, known as the Alpha, can replace the dead photoreceptors (the famous rods and cones) in the center of Lewis’s retina by translating light into bursts of current that the existing neural network will relay to the brain.

When they turned on the device, Lewis told me last November, “I couldn’t believe it. Suddenly—oh, my God—there’s something there.”
nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/09/blindness-treatment-medical-science-cures/

I’m not sure how it’s possible to be so wrong.
 
IWantGod said:
With your attitude naive people might think that science is the tool of the devil. I disagree. I think you are paranoid.
Click to expand...
You are sold on the propaganda. The schools do a good job with non-critical thinkers.
 
Bradski said:
‘The researchers behind the “exciting” project are now planning to conduct human trials in an effort to restore sight to blind or partially sighted people.’ express.co.uk/news/science/753001/cure-for-blindness-restore-sight-riken-centre

'Can you believe this?” Elizabeth asked a few minutes later. Ahead of her, Christian walked with Jean Bennett, whose lab at Penn produced the gene-laced fluid that gave Christian sight. “It happened so fast,” Elizabeth said. Just three days after his first eye was treated, Christian could see her. “I went from wondering if my son would ever know what I looked like to … well, this,” she said, gesturing at him walking unaided. “It’s like a miracle.”

Christian’s miracle was hard-won. It rose from 20 years of unrelenting work by Bennett and her collaborators, who identified the genetic mutation that crippled Christian’s retina, then figured out how to sneak a good copy of that gene into his eye. Bennett started trials for the therapy merely hoping “that we could detect some hint of improvement.” Nine years later she is astonished that it seems to have worked so well.’

In June 2015 she went to Oxford Eye Hospital, lay on a table, surrendered to anesthesia, and, 10 hours later, awoke with a bionic eye. In what was “without doubt the most complex operation I’ve ever done,” says surgeon Robert MacLaren, the Oxford team slipped between her retina’s delicate layers a freckle-size microchip laden with 1,600 tiny photodiodes. MacLaren’s clinical trial is exploring whether this chip, known as the Alpha, can replace the dead photoreceptors (the famous rods and cones) in the center of Lewis’s retina by translating light into bursts of current that the existing neural network will relay to the brain.

When they turned on the device, Lewis told me last November, “I couldn’t believe it. Suddenly—oh, my God—there’s something there.”
nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/09/blindness-treatment-medical-science-cures/

I’m not sure how it’s possible to be so wrong.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a bunch of bull.
 
IWantGod said:
With your attitude naive people might think that science is the tool of the devil. I disagree. I think you are paranoid.
Click to expand...
I never said science “is the tool of the devil.” Your post has been reported.

Ed
 
inocente said:
Science can. If your supernatural can’t help the blind see where science can,
Click to expand...
Science just builds bigger bombs to kill the blind, the deaf and the fit and healthy.
your supernatural is irrelevant to the human condition.
Click to expand...
The bible has around two thousand passages that refer to justice for the poor, refugees, the oppressed, widows and orphans. Tragically, we ignore the word of God, when we allow around twenty thousand children to die every day as a result of grinding poverty and preventable disease.
 
Supposing it took around 1800 random mutations for the eye to evolve in incremental steps. This should then apply to every other body part. In theory some clever person should be able to map out maybe a couple of thousand incremental steps for the evolution of the skull. They should also be able to say how each random incremental step gave an advantage for natural selection to work on.

Then repeat for around 500 muscles, 200 bones, 500 ligaments and a1000 tendons.

There is no way blind nature could put all this together without God. The search for God is far more important than evolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top