Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The scientific community will not tolerate any criticism of the general theory of evolution … that all life on earth evolved from microbes. It is a scientific dogma that cannot be challenged.
 
What evidence is there that eggs come from chickens? Has this ever been observed? I don’t think so!
 
Hugh_Farey said:
I do not think God acts contrary to the laws he has decided to organise his creation by.
Click to expand...
You know which laws God decided to organise his creation by? Wow, this makes you unique in all of human history! I knew you were smart, but not THAT smart!
 
Last edited:
Scott2 said:
I mean how many kids grow up in fundamentalist-type families having been told not to believe evolution who then go on to drop their faith because they’ve accepted the science-based evidence?
Click to expand...
It works both ways. I had the opposite problem.
I’ve been told at school that evolution is as true is e=mc2. So when I gained maturity I begin to question some of the logic but it was very difficult to find information easily because everyone just assumes it is true. That made me think there is an underlying agenda and that they are trying to hide something. If scientists believe they have a robust theory why not be open about it? It happens in other scientific disciplines. Eg in medical science, there are clear guidelines as to what we think we should do, the evidence for it, the strength of evidence.

To be honest I became religious only after I marveled at how complex and intricate and intertwined biological systems are that I concluded there must be intelligent design and I couldn’t find satisfied answers from evolutionists.

And I don’t think it takes long to explain these data to the lay people. I reckon one a4 page can summarise what I want to see. @hugh_farey

Eg
RNA genesis: we think it happened by molecules randomly smacked together. It happen 1000 to 10000trillion years ago. It took maybe 5000 years. Evidence comes from retrospective evidence and prospective evidence. Consensus of Strength of evidence is weak.

Primates evolution to humans. It happened by spontaneous mutations and genetic shifts. It happened 5million years ago. It took maybe 4 million years for speciation. Evidence is only retrospective and comes from fossil records. Strength of evidence is strong.

Obviously I’ve just made up those data because I don’t know the data and I don’t know why evolutionists have to obfuscate such knowledge. Just lay it out in an open and clear way for us!
 
Last edited:
I’ve been away from this forum for a few weeks and I can see that this debate has flared up into an unquenchable flame🔥. This is good and refreshing to see and actual debate that doesn’t seem like it came from a prearranged script, there’s real passion on here and I’m impressed. Well, I have to go to bed because I have to attend Liturgy tomorrow but I will reiterate my former statement that I believe that there’s no conflict between science and religion and that I prefer the theory of speciation over adaptation, which Darwin himself seemed to favor. And by the way, Darwin only became an agnostic after one (or two; brain fart!) of his children died and his theory didn’t have anything to do with it as he was a very religious man in his youth and developed his theory many years prior to that. Anyway, bless you all and take care, for now.
 
It wouldn’t surprise me if you are in fact an atheist masquerading as a Catholic. Many of your opinons are decidely atheistic.
 
Techno2000 said:
If it took fundamentalist to open the eyes of Catholics about this matter, then I applaud them.I learned about the flaws of Darwinism from EWTN 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
I first noticed the flaws in ToE when studying evolution science - the endless assumptions that are made render it laughable. I have a friend who is a medical doctor; she studied evolution science and described it as “pathetic”.
 
When Genesis was written, no one had heard of hominids, so obviously the text was referring to humans. And then there are the genealogies in the Old and New Testaments, not to mention Jewish tradition.
 
No problem - all we evolutionists need to do is recalibrate our timeframe from billions of years to trillions of trillions. Easy.
 
I think it’s called the Pontifical Academy of Science, aka the Pontifical Academy of Atheists.
 
Sorry, bit if that professor of theologian denied evolution, he qualifies as a kooky fundamentalist … who probably didn’t even understand the basics of evolution … and probably had no friends.
 
Last edited:
Polemics aside and another GENUINE question from me.

How do pairs of structures usually evolve? Eg eyes, ears, limbs.
Do thy evolve as one first and then became two or do they evolve from zero to two directly?
 
Glark said:
The scientific community will not tolerate any criticism of the general theory of evolution … that all life on earth evolved from microbes. It is a scientific dogma that cannot be challenged.
Click to expand...
Do you have a scientific theory to replace it, or just more probabilistic arguments for design?
 
Glark said:
I think it’s called the Pontifical Academy of Science, aka the Pontifical Academy of Atheists.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you are not convincing me at all, and I don’t have a biased agenda against theism. It’s not like i don’t have everything to gain from having strong evidence of design.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
hugh_fary says it is by blind guided chance… If something guides chance is it really by chance?
Click to expand...
Buffalo! You’re a bad bovine! Hugh_Farey says no such thing. Your simplistic re-interpretation of complex ideas to render them meaningless is typical of the deliberate misrepresentation that creationists resort to.
 
Glark said:
Yes they do - I’ve observed it with my own eyes. And It’s a perfect example of Punctuated Equilibrium in action!
Click to expand...
You clearly haven’t studied the theory of evolution. And that’s what people are going to think. You are not going to win anyone over with this argument.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top