Is The World Old Or Young? Can We Trust Scientific Reasoning?

[freesoulhope]

Thier is difference between macro evolution and micro evolution. The difference being that only one of them is observable.

 

[freesoulhope]

PhilVaz:

free << The evolution your talking about is micro evolution. >>

Reptile to Mammal is microevolution?
Reptile (or Dinosaur) to Bird is microevolution?
Invertebrate to Vertebrate is microevolution?
What about Fish to Amphibian (Tetrapod), microevolution?

Below is microevolution I’ll grant:

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/finches.gif

However, the examples Rossum gave are Macroevolution if the term means anything.

Phil P

Phil vaz, i have excepted that there is actually scientific evidence sugesting evolution, for example lets say hypophetically that there are fossils that present them selfs as intermediates between the whale and the cow. Now, there are certain fossils that are called intermediates or “in betweens” because they fit with the dawinian theory of evolution, it fits with the process of a being changing over a period of time. This is legit evidence.

Now my qeustion to you is, shouldnt there be thousands Upon thosands of intermediates between, lets say, a sea Creature like a whale and a land animal like a reptile? If so, where are they?
Another qeustion i have is, Why do we presume that intermediates are actually intermediates? Is this undestanding guided by the theory of evolution or is it an independant regognition, that shows the fossils to be intermediates, and just so happens to fit the evolutionary theory?. Id like to see you anwser that one my freind.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Science is all about reproduceable results.

Scientific “reasoning” is more like speculating than it is like reasoning. Semi-educated guesses. Computer models of dubious validity. Use of selective data. The more that money (government grants) becomes an issue, the nastier the politics tends to be.

With respect to the age of the world, about all that can be done is to say things like: “We found this fossil at this location… not sure what it really means.”

The notion that the continents move around and that there are tectonic plates is a recent discovery.

Almost no one acknowledges that the planet Earth is 7000 miles in diameter and that the interior is liquid at several thousand degrees.

Take out a piece of ordinary paper, 8 1/2" x 11", and draw a circle about 7" in diameter. Draw a line across the diameter and put an arrow head at each end; label the line 7000 miles. Then draw arrows on both sides of the circumference line and label it 40 miles… that 40 miles is the thickness of the Earth’s crust. The entire interior is liquid. And very hot. Then add a very faint, very thin line around the circle; maybe in the color blue, and label it 4 miles… that is the Earth’s atmosphere. Now put a pin through center and spin the so that at the equator it’s moving at about 1000 miles per hour. (scale speed)

And, bombard the sphere with a lot of radiation – cosmic rays from outer space and solar wind/solar corpuscles from the sun. And also give the Earth a magnetic field that directs the radiation into “magnetic funnels” at the two poles. Move the magnetic poles slightly - so that it moves about one degree per year. And about evey 100,000 years change the polarity of the poles.

And the continents move. And there are 1000 leak points above the water and a couple of thousand underwater.

Now with all that activity, which disrupts everything on the Earth’s surface, … how old is the world?

 

[zian]

This world (= planet Earth) ??

About 4.5 billion years old.

Thanks for asking.

 

[freesoulhope]

Cheeky

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

freesoulhope:

Does that mean science is true with out Qeustion, and that it would actualy be a sin to hold to a young earth creationist or anti evolutionist veiw point and challenge science on a literal interpretation of the bible considering it is Gods hand that has guided us to understand evolution?. This is what your implying isnt it?( maybe i got it wrong?) Cuase if human science is Guided by God, to teach and protest against it and raise doubts about it in society in relation to the bible, would be in contradiction to Gods will, dont you agree? i mean this is what your saying isnt it?

Everything in creation is God-guided - that doesn’t mean that all creation is as it should be. We live in a fallen world, and so, a world in which we make many errors of many kinds.​

Creation reveals God - that does not make it a perfect revelation of God

The sciences are a great gift from God. but that does not make them all-perfect; what man does, never can be perfect; it is always provisional, incomplete, in need of revision. ##

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

buffalo:

I consider myself a definite creationist in that the author of creation is God. All Catholics should be creationists by definition.

Now young earth? theistic? quite another question.

Whether the earth is old or young does not affect my faith. God can do it whatever way He wants. His creation is not subject to my approval.

I rule out any type of atheistic evolutionary ideas.

I do not subscribe to gottle’s of patg’s new hermeneutics. I follow the Catechism which requires we listen to the literal.

(116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83)

Acknowledging the need to heed the literal sense is not what divides us - it’s common ground.​

The problem - a problem - is in sorting where to go in understanding the text from that starting-point.

For instance:

The words:

• John says Im a liar

vary in meaning according to how one punctuates them. Yet the words are constant.

the writing:

• 10

can be correctly taken as meaning half of twenty, or half of four - depending on which base one reads them in.

The Bible is full of texts of which the meaning is less “obvious” than may seem:

Why not be “literal” & believe Our Lord had uterine brothers, for instance ?
Or that Jesus in Revelation is both a lion and a lamb ?
Or that God is armed with:

• bow
• arrows
• spear
• sword
• shield

• just as we read in the Bible ?

He has a chariot, a tent, a house, messengers, sons, clothing; he sleeps, laughs, roars, rejoices, has nostrils, ears, mouth, eyes…all this is in the Bible, literally so.

And some people trouble to try to underestand why, and what it means Which is a pretty complex task sometimes. As one would expect. ##

Revelation, the true Word of God trumps all. Science is its servant not its master. Faith and reason are not opposed. Wrong reasoning can be opposed to Revelation until it’s reconciled.

I say let the young and old earthers who have much more knowledge than I continue to duke it out. I believe it to be healthy.