Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peer-Reviewed Articles Supporting Intelligent Design

The list below provides bibliographic information for a selection of the peer-reviewed scientific publications supportive of intelligent design published in scientific journals, conference proceedings, or academic anthologies:
Code: 
Stephen C. Meyer, “The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories,” Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Vol. 117(2):213-239 (2004) (HTML).
Michael J. Behe, “Experimental Evolution, Loss-of-Function Mutations, and ‘The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution,’” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 85(4):1-27 (December 2010).
Douglas D. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 341:1295–1315 (2004).
Michael Behe and David W. Snoke, “Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues,” Protein Science, Vol. 13 (2004).
William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II, “The Search for a Search: Measuring the Information Cost of Higher Level Search,” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, Vol. 14 (5):475-486 (2010).
 
Ann K. Gauger and Douglas D. Axe, “The Evolutionary Accessibility of New Enzyme Functions: A Case Study from the Biotin Pathway,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2011(1) (2011).
Ann K. Gauger, Stephanie Ebnet, Pamela F. Fahey, and Ralph Seelke, “Reductive Evolution Can Prevent Populations from Taking Simple Adaptive Paths to High Fitness,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2010 (2) (2010).
Vladimir I. shCherbak and Maxim A. Makukov, “The ‘Wow! Signal’ of the terrestrial genetic code,” Icarus, Vol. 224 (1): 228-242 (May, 2013).
Joseph A. Kuhn, “Dissecting Darwinism,” Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, Vol. 25(1): 41-47 (2012).
Winston Ewert, William A. Dembski, and Robert J. Marks II, “Evolutionary Synthesis of Nand Logic: Dissecting a Digital Organism,” Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 3047-3053 (October, 2009).
Douglas D. Axe, Brendan W. Dixon, Philip Lu, “Stylus: A System for Evolutionary Experimentation Based on a Protein/Proteome Model with Non-Arbitrary Functional Constraints,” PLoS One, Vol. 3(6):e2246 (June 2008).
Kirk K. Durston, David K. Y. Chiu, David L. Abel, Jack T. Trevors, “Measuring the functional sequence complexity of proteins,” Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 4:47 (2007).
David L. Abel and Jack T. Trevors, “Self-organization vs. self-ordering events in life-origin models,” Physics of Life Reviews, Vol. 3:211–228 (2006).
Frank J. Tipler, “Intelligent Life in Cosmology,” International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2(2): 141-148 (2003).
Michael J. Denton, Craig J. Marshall, and Michael Legge, “The Protein Folds as Platonic Forms: New Support for the pre-Darwinian Conception of Evolution by Natural Law,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 219: 325-342 (2002).
Stanley L. Jaki, “Teaching of Transcendence in Physics,” American Journal of Physics, Vol. 55(10):884-888 (October 1987).
Granville Sewell, “Postscript,” in Analysis of a Finite Element Method: PDE/PROTRAN (New York: Springer Verlag, 1985).
A.C. McIntosh, “Evidence of design in bird feathers and avian respiration,” International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, Vol. 4(2):154–169 (2009).
Richard v. Sternberg, “DNA Codes and Information: Formal Structures and Relational Causes,” Acta Biotheoretica, Vol. 56(3):205-232 (September, 2008).
Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig and Heinz Saedler, “Chromosome Rearrangement and Transposable Elements,” Annual Review of Genetics, Vol. 36:389–410 (2002).
Douglas D. Axe, “Extreme Functional Sensitivity to Conservative Amino Acid Changes on Enzyme Exteriors,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 301:585-595 (2000).
William A. Dembski, The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).

Again, for a more complete list of peer-reviewed pro-ID scientific publications, please download the full bibliography.
 
buffalo said:
Peer-Reviewed Articles Supporting Intelligent Design
Click to expand...
Sure, I’m looking at them and the abstracts, and they are all designed to confirm Intelligent Design, not disprove evolution.

I believe God intelligently could have designed evolutionary mechanics, just like he designed the law of gravity.
 
buffalo said:
the sun alters the decay rate.
Click to expand...
Reference please. Does that men that you no longer consider 14C dates accurate? After all the sun has been around for at least 50,000 years. Or does your sun only affect decay rates before that date?
buffalo said:
If RC dating returns values within its maximum range it must be considered.
Click to expand...
The dates I showed you for the Amitsoq Gneiss were all within the range of their respective methods. You must consider them.

rossum
 
buffalo said:
Peer-Reviewed Articles Supporting Intelligent Design

The list below provides bibliographic information for a selection of the peer-reviewed scientific publications supportive of intelligent design published in scientific journals, conference proceedings, or academic anthologies:
Code: 
Stephen C. Meyer, “The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories,” Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Vol. 117(2):213-239 (2004) (HTML).
Michael J. Behe, “Experimental Evolution, Loss-of-Function Mutations, and ‘The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution,’” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 85(4):1-27 (December 2010).
Douglas D. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 341:1295–1315 (2004).
Michael Behe and David W. Snoke, “Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues,” Protein Science, Vol. 13 (2004).
William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II, “The Search for a Search: Measuring the Information Cost of Higher Level Search,” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, Vol. 14 (5):475-486 (2010).
Click to expand...
OK, now you have hit on “appeal to authority.” I think you got all the common fallacies covered now.
 
anon65111186 said:
You have to have reason and a soul to be human, those animals had neither so could not properly be called our ancestors.
Click to expand...
Agreeing that they are not our ancestors, I just wanted to clarify that animals do have souls. Ours is spiritual - God’s breath.
 
anon65111186 said:
we shouldn’t accept or reject ideas based on their source. Good sources may produce bad results, and bad sources may produce good results.
Click to expand...
I’m not a philosopher, but fallacies such as ad hominems have to do with logical arguments. It seems we are discussing ideas and conceptual frameworks that wrap themselves around raw data and create a fact.

Since no one here is collecting the raw data (a bone), and what information is available has been well processed by an ideological system (a number of rational good guesses based on the current vision of the universe), the credibility and overriding philosophical beliefs of the person making any particular claim would be of key importance.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
the credibility and overriding philosophical beliefs of the person making any particular claim would be of key importance
Click to expand...
Those things are important in determining if character or bias has influenced the the results of a specific theory or test.

Nevertheless, we are talking about arguments, and some here have come to the conclusion that evolution is utterly incompatible with the Catholic faith, and expect others to believe that.

That is an argument, which can be either reasonable or not. The reason they have for supporting such an argument is it comes from atheists, and so is false, necessarily, like people who hold atheistic beliefs of necessity create biased theories or science.

Discredible people have been known to say true things, and credible people have been known to say false things.

A person’s character or beliefs simply do not undermine arguments, they simply can’t. To believe so would be to commit a logical fallacy, whether you were trying to construct a logical argument or not.

The laws of logic apply whether you intend to use the laws of logic or not, kind of like gravity.
 
Last edited:
Techno2000 said:
Why does the soup need God to keep it in existence ?
Click to expand...
Metaphysics 101, without God nothing would exist. He continues to hold all things in existence, at each and every moment. If God were to withdraw His presence from anything, it would cease to exist.

That is because all beings other than God are contingent, meaning they rely on something else for their existence.
 
Now I was thinking in Mass just now, (since today is a holy day of obligation of Our Lady’s immaculate conception), what if the first Adam was conceived in the manner of the new Adam, Christ?

Note that this is just my speculation, based on assuming a Greco-Latin literary interpretation of the Hebrew literature.

Technically God could have conceived Adam in the womb of an animal/biological ancestor who had no soul. The symbol for this animal is the dust, the earth, from which the animal gets all it’s components.

He could have taken Adam’s DNA and Chromosomes, which is the essential building blocks, represented by his “rib” and inserted it likewise into another animal, and thus Eve was “formed”.

In this way the first Adam was like the animal ancestors in every way but lacking an immortal soul. Just as God became man, animals became human in Adam.

We are told we can symbolically read Genesis as the Church does, and this might be one way to imagine it.

Both would be miracles of course, on the level of the immaculate conception or conception of Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Yes, so now we must research what is more accurate for the dino bones, dating of the rocks or the bones themselves.
 
It seems to me evo supporters appeal to authority all the time as well as blind faith.
 
anon65111186 said:
Metaphysics 101, without God nothing would exist. He continues to hold all things in existence, at each and every moment. If God were to withdraw His presence from anything, it would cease to exist.
Click to expand...
So God’s influence on evolution is very powerful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top