Where do you find Evolution saying otherwise? I think that comes from you.
I thought the Bible said that God created man from the dust of the earth.
Geologist. That explains it.
:nunchuk: :stretcher: :crutches: :blackeye:
Et tu Brutus? :tsktsk:Where do you find Evolution saying otherwise? I think that comes from you.
I thought the Bible said that God created man from the dust of the earth.
Geologist. That explains it.
You studied geology, therefore feel qualified enough to speak on the subject of biology.
Yeah.
youtube.com/watch?v=2W3CofLozi8
Peter Plato my friend. I’m confused are you for ID/creationism?
Why? If you get 10,000 decks of cards together, shuffle them all together and flip them all, the order they came up in is a 1/(10000!) chance, an infetismally small likelihood of it happening. but no one says that that result was designed to occur. It was random.
As a geologist, I can actually tell you that the chance of wind and the elements carving Mt. Rushmore is not just extremely small. Its zero.
i’m doing just fine in the logic category, thanks. This was just an attempt to jab back at me for my suggestion that you take classes anyway. But the thing is my suggestion was out of a genuine desire to help.
I know it does not. But your compatriots are saying that it does.
They’re also not self replicating. This is besides the point. I was merely pointing out that lots of things that are not designed have a tendency towards developing in similar ways and that, therefore, convergent evolution is not indicative of design.
Once again, ID does not use the scientific method. They perform no experimentation, a necessary component of the scientific method. Hence, it is not science.
There are some Catholics that are adamant that abortion is ok too. Do we really care about those who deviate from the formal definition of a thing?
Who’s trying to convince these students that theistic evolution is not real? I don’t see anyone doing that.
I already know what the Church teaches, thanks. The Church teaches that theistic evolution is A-OK.
No he isn’t. He’s brought up as a representative of atheism. People interested in real science actually tend to shy away from him a bit. There’s a reason he writes popular books - he wasn’t much of a biologist, ironically most often leaning towards the less well-accepted ideas. He’s not actually that well respected among other biologists.
How about instead of playing games, you answer the guy’s question?
Yes, and well over half of them are suing or threatening to sue to have their names removed from the list because they were deceived into adding their names in the first place. this is just another in a long line of examples of ID advocates being dishonest to the point of evil - not like a child afraid to admit he broke something, but a group of people getting together to PLAN to intentionally mislead lots of people to their own ends.
Intuition has no place in science. If your decision is that life must be designed because intuitively it seems that way, then that excludes it from being science right there. One must test to prove it has been designed and THEN conclude that it is or is not based on the evidence.
Why would they become more alike over time? Evolution does not suggest that they would.
Our faith does not contradict the scientific evidence of evolution.
Actually, the bible says dirt, not nothing. But either way, what is the process by which God used to make man then? Whether out of dirt or out of nothing, He still could have used evolution as the process by which he created man.
Catholic teachings does not say that we die without our eternal soul. Animals don’t have eternal souls. They don’t die. Plants don’t have souls at all (I think), and they don’t die.
Evolution, for one, is a whole lot more than “the genetic material is similar”. Secondly, evolution does not state that God didn’t create us. It merely attempts to explain how.
Let me guess. You took one intro to geology class in college for your general science elective and now decided to say “I studied geology” to lend weight to your claims. Well I also studied geology and got an entire degree in it in two years. Not only can you find these “inbetween species”, but they are so abundant that many places pretty much give them away. I have some in a box under my bed and there are literally some sticking out of the rock used to build part of my home. They are extremely plentiful.
Since you claim to be a geologist I am wondering if studying geology is useful in archaeology because I want to be a archaeologist/historian.
I am for the truth and for the right of each person to seek and find it. I am not against correction of error, but not correction based upon presumptions of what others may know just because of their background. Some of the wisest, most brilliant people I have encountered were uneducated and simple folk.
The following just seems an unwarranted and unsolicited stab from someone who admits not knowing much about science into the side of someone who just may know more…
… thus, my comment.
I’ll tell you two things. Actually three - Indiana Jones is NOT what archaeologists do. Geology and archaeology work can be quite tedious. That doesn’t make it not worth it. I’m just making you aware.Since you claim to be a geologist I am wondering if studying geology is useful in archaeology because I want to be a archaeologist/historian.
Your claims against ID are impressive.
No one said they couldn’t have a valid opinion. The problem is that this is not a matter of opinion, hence we should be deferring to experts who actually know the subject on which they speak.