Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are we resorting to an ad hominem?

Perhaps you could select one point you disagree with and we can discuss it.
 
No, I’m sorry. What you are spewing is not true. It scandalizes people. That’s a sin.
This is not ad hominem. It’s simply observing the facts and speaking to them.
The pseudo-scientific stuff you are posting is more superstitious than paganism, and more dangerous ad misleading, because you are doing it in the name of the Church.

You should just be silent.
 
buffalo said:
That is what the data shows. Natural Selection is a conservative process not a creative one. It acts to preserve what the life form started as. It allows enough adaptation to deal with environmental pressures. As we see with Darwin’s finches their beaks returned to their former shape. It is rather brilliant and needs oodles of information to work.
Click to expand...
So after all 000000000 these years we still can’t see Darwin’s theory in action.Chicken still producing only Chicken…Pigs still producing only Pigs … Crows still producing only Crows…
 
Sure but wouldn’t Darwin’s theory account for this? Eyes evolved to take advantage of visible light…something that many many types of species would have been exposed to no? I personally don’t believe that the physical world is a random event, but the biological world is guided by God’s creation. In this model, you can have random mutation, guided by a created world.
 
buffalo said:
That is what the data shows. Natural Selection is a conservative process not a creative one. It acts to preserve what the life form started as. It allows enough adaptation to deal with environmental pressures.
Click to expand...
And random mutation is not a conservative process: it introduces new variants. Those new variants which are useful are helped by natural selection. Evolution includes both the newly generated changes from random mutation and the (mostly) conservative effect of natural selection.

As environments change, so the populations living in those environments adjust. Slowly changing environments have slowly adjusting populations. Faster changing environments have faster changing populations. Cyclically changing environments have cyclically changing populations.

rossum
 
Techno2000 said:
So after all 000000000 these years we still can’t see Darwin’s theory in action.Chicken still producing only Chicken…Pigs still producing only Pigs … Crows still producing only Crows…
Click to expand...
So, after ten minutes I can tell you that grass does not grow. I observed it closely for all of ten minutes and the blade of grass I was observing did not get any longer.

And DNA sequencing will tell you that there are differences between ancient chickens, pigs and crows. Chickens and pigs especially since those are domesticated species. Just because you cannot see the differences externally does not mean that those differences do not exist.

Can you tell a human with the lactase persistence mutation from one without it by external observation?

rossum
 
What the fossil record shows is abrupt appearance, stasis and variation within.
 
Last edited:
Once God is introduced as a guide, blind unguided chance goes away. Remember, evolution has no foresight.
 
Did you miss my post where Pope Benedict stated it cannot be proven using the scientific method?
 
Keep in mind the Church has fought against evolution since the beginning.
 
I’m not arguing for that per se. I’m saying that evolution can still occur in a created world where God has set conditions and laws for it to unfold, even in a biologically random way.
 
What do you consider DARWIN’S theory of evolution? Because what the theory of evolution that is considered the paradigm involves a lot of material that Darwin didn’t know about. Like genetics, for instance.
 
edwest211 said:
Did you miss my post where Pope Benedict stated it cannot be proven using the scientific method?
Click to expand...
Nor can the theory of gravity be proven by the scientific method. All scientific theories are provisional and open to being replaced by a better theory.

As and when you have a better explanation for the change over time in the genomes of a population then a Nobel Prize awaits you. Until then, evolution id the best explanation we currently have.

Pope Benedict has a good understanding of science. Unfortunately some others do not have such a good understanding.

rossum
 
I can prove gravity at any time. Evolution? No. Pope Benedict made it clear, the theory cannot be verified. Cardinal Schoenborn added his thoughts and additional information about other statements made by Pope John Paul II regarding this topic. It seems, in general, that these comments were ignored here.
 
Last edited:
Rhubarb said:
What do you consider DARWIN’S theory of evolution? Because what the theory of evolution that is considered the paradigm involves a lot of material that Darwin didn’t know about. Like genetics, for instance.
Click to expand...
It’s amazing that he got as much right as he did considering he didn’t know what a gene was.
 
edwest211 said:
I can prove gravity at any time. Evolution? No.
Click to expand...
Ed, you are not reading carefully what both the Pope and myself said.
edwest211 said:
Pope Benedict made it clear, the theory cannot be verified. (emphasis added)
Click to expand...
Both gravity and evolution can be verified. Neither the theory of gravity nor the theory of evolution can be proven. You are being careless about your use of the word “theory”. Please don’t, since it is crucial to the Pope’s point.

The fact of evolution is shown every time a new animal is conceived or an old animal dies: genes are added or removed from the population, so changing the overall genetic make-up of that population.

Currently Einstein’s theory of gravity has some known faults, which is why scientists are working on a replacement, the theory of Quantum Gravity. There are no such known problems with the theory of evolution.

rossum
 
edwest211 said:
I can prove gravity at any time. Evolution? No. Pope Benedict made it clear, the theory cannot be verified. Cardinal Schoenborn added his thoughts and additional information about other statements made by Pope John Paul II regarding this topic. It seems, in general, that these comments were ignored here.
Click to expand...
What about the fossil record and the lineage of human ancestors (australopithecines, Homo erectus, Homo habilis) that anthropologists have painstakingly assembled from it? Do you think that is simply a hoax? What were these creatures if they weren’t our ancestors?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top