Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part Three

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
benjamin1973 said:
If you were a little more clever, you’d see that the thing you just quoted is a partial support for your position: that Science cannot ever supplant philosophical or religious positions due to limitations in observation.
Click to expand...
That is not my position. I am all for erroneous philosophical or religious positions being corrected by accepting scientific facts (as St. Augustine advised). Truth cannot contradict truth.
 
Last edited:
Glark said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Your implication in your last sentence is debatable. But your dismissal of the official teaching of the Catholic Church in favor of your private interpretation of scripture is strictly protestant. Luther also thought that things that the Catholic Church taught were patent nonsense.
Click to expand...
Do you doubt that the CCC presents microbe-man evolution as a fact?
Click to expand...
Nowhere in the CCC will you find the tern “microbe-man.” That is your invention.
 
Well, one of the tenets is that God breathed life into matter. In man’s case, that means being alive and experiencing life. But how would you know if a living thing made in a lab was really experiencing, or just seemed to because of its mechanical responses to its environment?

There’s a term, “philosophical zombie,” that I think would be of great use to Catholics who want to show the limited scope of science. A philosophical zombie is a human body that in all ways mimics the behavior of a fully-sentient human being, but is missing one thing-- it doesn’t actually experience what things are like (qualia)-- it is basically an elaborate machine.

So my question is this: if they did make organic life in the Lab, would you believe it was as conscious as it seemed to be, or would you take the position that we’ve essentially created an organic machine, that it’s not alive in the Biblical sense?
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
Nowhere in the CCC will you find the tern “microbe-man.” That is your invention.
Click to expand...
That’s true, and it doesn’t use the word" evolution" either, but microbe-man evolution is obviously implied by the text.

To wit:
"283. The question about the origins … of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of … the development of life-forms and the appearance of man.
  1. The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated by a question of another order, which goes beyond the proper domain of the natural sciences. It is not only a question of … when man appeared, but rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin …"
 
Last edited:
benjamin1973 said:
So my question is this: if they did make organic life in the Lab, would you believe it was as conscious as it seemed to be, or would you take the position that we’ve essentially created an organic machine, that it’s not alive in the Biblical sense?
Click to expand...
Sorry, not interested in answering this hypothetical. Man will never produce life in a lab. Only God can produce life.
 
Cells protect genes more than rest of genome (of course evo did it)

A new study, published in Genome Research, has shown for the first time that MMR is targeted (emphasis mine) to particular regions of the genome, and preferentially repairs genes.

The research was carried out in the Department of Plant Sciences, together with colleagues from Zhejiang University (China) and Lahore University of Management Studies (Pakistan).

www.ox.ac.uk

Cells protect genes more than rest of genome | University of Oxford

Researchers at the University of Oxford have discovered that a cellular mechanism preferentially protects plant genes from the damaging effects of mutation.
www.ox.ac.uk www.ox.ac.uk
 
Last edited:
rossum said:
Then the climate got drier, and savannah started to develop. That was a new opportunity in a new environment, and some animals adapted to that new environment.
Click to expand...
Ok ,so that kicked the Okapis random mutations into high gear, and the friendly Giraffe appeared… I get it now.
 
Last edited:
As I said before, it’s possible that all the Universe is alive, and that primordial organisms aren’t actually elemental after all.
 
buffalo said:
Cells protect genes more than rest of genome (of course evo did it)

A new study, published in Genome Research, has shown for the first time that MMR is targeted (emphasis mine) to particular regions of the genome, and preferentially repairs genes.

The research was carried out in the Department of Plant Sciences, together with colleagues from Zhejiang University (China) and Lahore University of Management Studies (Pakistan).

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-01-05-cells-protect-genes-more-rest-genome
Click to expand...
This article is kinda a contradiction :

Whilst DNA sequence mutation is the fundamental fuel of species evolution, mutations in genes are often harmful.
 
Techno2000 said:
DNA sequence mutation is the fundamental fuel of species evolution, mutations in genes are often harmful.
Click to expand...
Those changes (mutations) in the genome resulting from the intervention of God’s angels lead to the diversity that comes with adaptation.
Those that happen because something has gone wrong (random mutations) are bad.
True species represent a particular soul created by God as is everything from the smallest sub-particle, and ours being the eternal spirit of God
 
Last edited:
benjamin1973 said:
As I said before, it’s possible that all the Universe is alive, and that primordial organisms aren’t actually elemental after all.
Click to expand...
The entire universe exists. Each atom is itself. Each protein is a form of being, informed by a structure that determines its electrochemical properties. Each cell is an individual being, existing whole as itself, composed of molecules. We are individual whole beings, composed of trillions of cells, each in turn made up of complex molecules and atoms, all informing our existence as relational beings, whole in ourselves, persons united with all else in love.
 
Last edited:
I’m not seeing it. The CCC has other things to say.

295 "We believe that God created the world according to his wisdom.141 It is not the product of any necessity whatever, nor of blind fate or chance. We believe that it proceeds from God’s free will; he wanted to make his creatures share in his being, wisdom and goodness: "For you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created."142 Therefore the Psalmist exclaims: “O LORD, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all”; and "The LORD is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made."143
 
Unicorns are in the Bible. I have not seen the Tooth Fairy there, though I do have direct evidence of the tooth fairy. My milk teeth did turn into money overnight. 😀

rossum
 
Techno2000 said:
Whilst DNA sequence mutation is the fundamental fuel of species evolution, mutations in genes are often harmful.
Click to expand...
Remember that “often” is not “always”. Beneficial mutations are rare, but they do happen.

rossum
 
It did happen because we still have the descendants of the organism(s) where the mutation appeared.

You are evidence that your great^150-grandmother existed. It is the same for mutations.

rossum
 
rossum said:
It did happen because we still have the descendants of the organism(s) where the mutation appeared.
Click to expand...
But only a theory as to how they got there.
A theory that cannot be tested and for which we have no reliable witnesses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top