S
StAnastasia
Guest
So you admit you don’t have a proof for the theory of gravity? Then how can you ask for a proof for the theory of evolution?
- Status
S
StAnastasia
Guest
John, who has argued that humanity arose directly from apes? I’ve worked wtih biologists for thirty years, and I’ve never heard that claim. Did you juxt make it up?
The evolution of hominids from our common ancestor with modern apes too at least five million years. Pope Benedict XVI agrees with me on this.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Twinc, this is not a substitute for you earning a solid scientific education, but it is a start. This in this cladogram you can see that amphibia split off from the group that led to mammals (including humans) more than two hundred million years ago.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
T
twinc
Guest
all very seemingly clever stuff like science fiction and a lot like the geological column found only in text books - twinc
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Here’s a cladogram that shows how far back our last common ancestor with amphibians lived – more than 350 million years ago. Our last common ancestors with chickens and lizards lived 325 million years ago, and out last common ancestor with hedgehogs, cows, cats, dogs, and horses around 105 million years ago!
StAnastasia
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Having trouble with the world of science?
J
John_oxios
Guest
Never heard that claim? then what is it you’re claiming? You use a quote out of Context,
Try reading Darwin, if you want to say different types of plants evolved from crossbreeding and hybrids from that all well and good. The Church accepts that.
But if want to say Man comes from that same primordial ooze… Sorry, the odds of that hapening are astronomical. I don’t hve to prove gravity, it is an axiom (Accepted TRuth), it follows laws of Science, in fact Newton, defined Gravity so well it can’t be refuted. It is something all Science agrees on; Gravity has a systematic explanation, Which Evolution does not.
Show me that kind of proof, without the holes, Show me the actual mixing of the kinds, show me the so called tree of evolution without the guesses, suggestions, and that claim that Evolution states etc… etc… As far as DNA c’mon, one little, DNA is unique to each and every Human being, we can tell our parents, and even go back farther to ancestors to see our roots. Every cell is a three billion letters long, To suggest the That this happened by coincidence of nature is highly unlikely.
We are similar, similarity is not sameness in fact 1% of our DNA is what separates us from one another.
If your trying to say that one particular animal, accidentally develops an acute advantage, and that advantage over other same kind animals and that, that, over 1 billion yrs develops into a **another kind **of creature all together. And that you want me to disprove that? Well I can’t, but you can’t prove it either.
But the odds are against you. the Burden of proof is yours.
Jesus said, “In the beginning He created them Male and female”
There is no mixing of the kinds.
DNA is a code; all codes we know the origin of are designed; therefore DNA is designed.
“One extra atom” at the birth of the universe could have wiped out entire galaxies, or even the whole cosmos.
cosmicfingerprints.com/
D
God Bless,
John
S
StAnastasia
Guest
So John, you have avoided the question at least twice now. Are you avoiding my question because in fact you don’t have a proof for the theory of gravity? It’s a good theory, and I accept it as the most cogent explanation for why my pen fell to the floor when it rolled off the table.
StAnastasia
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello,
This is a story not an explantion.
clad⋅o⋅gram [klad-uh-gram, kley-duh-]
–noun Biology.
a branching diagram depicting the successive points of species divergence from common ancestral lines without regard to the degree of deviation
Where does the deviation occur? where doe the random mutation occur?
Where, how, when did one of these animals need to become better? To have to mutate? Explain how an Antelope changes into a giraffe genetically? “The only time that the word evolution means a random purposeless process is in biology in which is somebody trying to sell you an idea contrary to experience”
“Naturalistic Evolution is the only instance where the word evolution refers to a truly random blind process.”
Science:
The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
If we say evolution happened randomly… That’s not science, because you can’t reproduce it, you can’t investigate it, you just have a story of ‘Here’s what happened,’ you can’t make it happen over again- you don’t understand how the Giraffe’s neck got to be what it is, you just have a "Well here’s the way it is, just accept it. perry.fingerprints.s3.amazonaws.com/index.htm
And that’s the problem of evolution, we suppose to just accept it.
Language is the basis of all created facts, And God said…
God bless,
john
S
StAnastasia
Guest
John, no antelope ever evolved into a deer (see the cladogram). Instead, the bovids (cattle) deer and pronghorns share a common ancestor, and together these groups share a common ancestor with giraffes. In turn, all these groups share a common ancestor with whales and hippopotami.
Phylogeny of the Ungulates
“The ungulates and their relatives are a puzzling group, including animals as diverse as whales and hippos, elephants and hyraxes, horses and tapirs, giraffes and sheep. What they have in common is that many of them walk around on their toenails. The phylogeny (family relationships) of the ungulates is a constantly shifting terrain, but genetic analysis is beginning to help sort out this enigmatic group of animals.”
images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.whozoo.org/mammals/Hoof/hoofphylogeny.jpg&imgrefurl=http://whozoo.org/mammals/Hoof/hoofphylo.html&usg=__8vrIsbiGlsr-agfKdv5EuEJmXEA=&h=640&w=619&sz=39&hl=en&start=72&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=C8NF4qwXbqyNmM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=133&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgiraffe%2Bcladogram%2Bantelope%26ndsp%3D18%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US
fficial%26sa%3DN%26start%3D54%26um%3D1This cladogram expresses the relationship nicely:
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello,
What question is that? Gravity is not a question it is based on sound proven theory of science. Disprove gravity, Prove isaac Newton wrong? point to the holes in it?
You make gravity sound like purgatory! Just because people don’t believe in it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Fact is even the Old testament Jews, and the jews today believe in a place where men are refined by God’s light before entering heaven, but to a Jew this period would last only one year, where as in eternity God says one day is as a thousand.
Are you trying to turn my inability to fully explain an accepted Scientific truth, based on scientific law and Fact, to propose your ‘story’ of evolution. Look it up, at least you can do that with Gravity. Evolution, I dunno… nor does anyone else without telling a ‘story’ with no explanation, just accept it, why not just tell me the story of Pinocchio is based on evolution?
.
At least I could explain the physics of how the force made your pen roll off the table and how why it fell, at what speed it fell at and where it would be at any point in its fall, at what force it hit the ground and could repeat those results over and over again,( I could make a graph and explain each and every step, with no gaps in it), That is explainable, but your going to base a story with gaps so big it defies explanation?
How come insects never evolved into something bigger? better, how is it they haven’t overcome their size through evolution?
Evolution? I dunno, then again nobody does, it’s a story which can’t be reproduced, I can’t, you can’t nor can anyone investigate it, because it is not based on science, we are just suppose to accept it because?
God created man by his word, through him all things were made… it is not a random process, it is intelligent design.
God bless,
John
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello,
And you know that as a fact? But I thought I wrote Giraffe?
Doesn’t the story go that some animal i.e. antelope, couldn’t reach the leaves on the trees and the one with short necks died away, while the others with longer necks developed Longer necks and became the stronger of the species to survive?
Whales who walk on their toes? Hmm now that’s a BIG FISH story! IF I ever heard one!
Its still just a story, or more like an expression of faith.
It takes more faith to believe in evolution, than to believe that God Created the Worlds, did you know Moses got the order of Creation right approx 3200 yrs ago?
What are the odds of that?
God bless,
John
S
StAnastasia
Guest
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree, John. You and I inhabit different intellectual worlds, that probably don’t intersect at many points. I have to take a break, as I need to prepare a paper for an upcoming conference session on theology and evolutionary biology.
In brief, no – whales don’t walk on their toes. I’m not sure why you think they do, as their finger bones have been incorporated into their front flippers, and their toe bones may have disappeared entirely. As you may know, whales are descended from terrestrial animals (see below).
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/whaleevolution.gif
J
John_oxios
Guest
That’s misleading! Show me the reference for this one!
Exactly what kind of Catholic are you? A Convert? Cradle? Lapsed?
First you say you never heard of it now you bring it up as an acceptable Church teaching?
Homo Sapien, Is made in the image of God, God first breathed Life into Adam and Eve, who were created, not evolved. There may have been ‘human like’ beings before modern man, But the Church holds true to the Belief of Adam and Eve, the creation story in Genesis.
If here was no first Adam? How could Christ be the second Adam, if there was no first sin, then there is no original sin.
Rom 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
(1Cr15:22) For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.
{1Cr15:45} Thus it is written, “**The first man Adam **became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit
{1Ti 2:13} For Adam was formed first, then Eve;
There is no genealogy of Christ as in Luke,
Luk 3:23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,…
Luk 3:38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
God bless,
John
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Cradle Catholic. Theology professor (historical theology). And while no scientific theory (gravity, plate tectonics, cell theory, heliocentrism) is “church teaching,” evolution is accepted by most Roman Catholics and by the last two popes. But as I said, John, our intellectual worlds probably won’t intersect at many points of agreement.
Later,
StAnastasia
J
juliamajor
Guest
As far as Genesis goes this is what must be believed.
1.Creation by God of all things.
2.The special creation of man
3.the formation of the first woman out of man
4.Unity of the human race.
5.original state of happiness of our first parents in a state of justice,integrity and immortality.
6.the divine command laid upon man to prove his obedience
7.the transgression of the Divine command at the instigation of the devil under form of a serpent.
8.fall of our first parents from their primeval state of innocence.
9.the promise of a future redeemer.And that’s it. nothing about evolution or"evilution" depending on your outlook.
1.Creation by God of all things.
2.The special creation of man
3.the formation of the first woman out of man
4.Unity of the human race.
5.original state of happiness of our first parents in a state of justice,integrity and immortality.
6.the divine command laid upon man to prove his obedience
7.the transgression of the Divine command at the instigation of the devil under form of a serpent.
8.fall of our first parents from their primeval state of innocence.
9.the promise of a future redeemer.And that’s it. nothing about evolution or"evilution" depending on your outlook.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Julia, most of my fellow theologians – especially the non-literalist ones – would contend that there is significant room for interpretation here. For example 3, 5, 7, and 8 would be interpreted contextually. It would be the rare theologian who would argue for a literal snake in the literal garden, and for a literal Adamic costecotomy.
StAnastasia
G
grannymh
Guest
What is historical theology?
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hi,
Costectomy?
first there is a gar-den, then there is no ‘gar-den,’ then there is?
There is really no mystery there, When we split from our Jewish brethren, we began to lose their insightfulness into the Hebrew Scriptures. Jerome was right to study with The Hebrew scholars of his day.
Code:
The Garden is paradise : 'being in full communion with God'The snake represents something life threatening entering the garden, its imagery. Could it have been a literal snake? Moses wasn’t wrong with the order of Creation, could you prove him wrong here? Is Satan represented simply by the image of the snake as a threatening poisonous being?
Try reading the ‘Chumash,’ Jewish commentary, In the commentary, in Jewish thought it is believed that the snake pushes Eve against the tree of knowledge, and tells her just as you have not died by touching it neither will you die by eating of its fruit.
Christ is the tree of life, through whom all eternal life comes, which Adam and Eve did not tarry around, because they knew not death.
The Tree of Knowledge represents independence outside of God.
God bless,
John
- Status