Scientists Unveil Missing Link In Evolution

[Toughguy]

greg_b;5226348]

So let’s see, who should I believe…

The majority of scientists (many who are Catholic and have support of the Vatican) who have spent years of their lives doing lab and field research, peer reviewed papers, working off centuries of research, and who acknowledge that evolution is a conclusive piece of evidence

or…

a bunch of random anti-evolution ranters on this catholic forum who don’t even know what the word “theory” means and believe that our scientific system is run by an all powerful satanic-atheist-Illuminati organization led by Lord Xenu, and who will deny each and every piece of evidence thrown in front of them and keep demanding more, knowing full well that even God himself appearing before them saying evolution is real will not even convince them.

Ummmm, the second one.

Did you see the link I provided earlier from 1912? Or how about this one:

denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

And this one:

invasivespeciesinfo.gov/animals/afrhonbee.shtml

And this one:

usatoday.com/news/health/2006-02-25-francepoultry_x.htm

And this one:

gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/mcintosh041599.html

And many, many more.

Perhaps we just don’t see how an old monkey, proves anything? Can you please explain to us idiots? Thanks.

 

[greg_b]

greg_b;5226348]

Ummmm, the second one.

Did you see the link I provided earlier from 1912? Or how about this one:

denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

And this one:

invasivespeciesinfo.gov/animals/afrhonbee.shtml

And this one:

usatoday.com/news/health/2006-02-25-francepoultry_x.htm

And this one:

gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/mcintosh041599.html

And many, many more.

Perhaps we just don’t see how an old monkey, proves anything? Can you please explain to us idiots? Thanks.

None of those has anything to do with the topic at hand. No serious scientist believes in man-made global changes or Y2K, but they all agree on evolution.

 

[Toughguy]

God help us if the anti-evolutionist extremists take over this country. 20 years from now the Asian countries which fully understand science (and have more stable economies than we do) will have cures for most cancer, and be talking on their satellite cell phones to their relatives living on the moon. This country, meanwhile, will look like the movie “idiocracy”

What does evolution have to do with rocket science?

 

[Toughguy]

If you deny evolution, then you start down the slope of denying all science.

Prove that moronic statment. Science and religion both existed long before Darwin. Are you for real, or just harrassing us?

 

[buffalo]

Buffalo is a good sign of someone who is a conspiracy theorist/believer in pseudo-science

1. Denial of any evidence presented
2. Using strawmen arguments
3. Changing the subject
4. Claiming that you “just can’t know” the given subject

I see these sad and pathetic excuses used all the time whether we talk about Roswell, Masons running the Vatican, man-made global warming or other nonsense

Perhaps you could go back over my many posts and give me examples of these.

 

[Toughguy]

None of those has anything to do with the topic at hand. No serious scientist believes in man-made global changes or Y2K, but they all agree on evolution.

Both are false. And what it does have to do with the topic at hand, is that even science, makes mistakes.

 

[Riseof_Rome]

Prove that moronic statment. Science and religion both existed long before Darwin. Are you for real, or just harrassing us?

I beleive that he is making that statement in reference to those who reject evolution just because the Bible doesn’t mention it, not because it is scientifically unproven.

 

[greg_b]

Evolution has been pretty much been a proven scientific fact. The evidence is overwhelming. If you are gonna deny evolution, then there is no reason you cannot deny the Earth going around the sun or that gravity exists.

Again, it’s like saying the Trinity is complete bull but that you are OK with everything else about the faith. It’s just not possible.

 

[buffalo]

I beleive that he is making that statement in reference to those who reject evolution just because the Bible doesn’t mention it, not because it is scientifically unproven.

But the Bible does mention adaptation in various ways.

I am not sure Geg_b understands the distinction between macro and micro evolution (aka adaptation)

 

[greg_b]

But the Bible does mention adaptation in various ways.

I am not sure Geg_b understands the distinction between macro and micro evolution (aka adaptation)

macro and micro evolution are both scientific valid truths

 

[a_priori]

Paleontologists are not scientists. Physicists are scientists. Chemists are scientists. Paleontology is a psuedoscience based on unverifiable speculation. There is nothing in this speculative art like the elegant dance of mathematical theory with experiment that we see in General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics, true sciencific theories. Paleontology is nothing but 19th Century psuedoscience posing as real science and it’s time to come to terms with this fraud for what it is. It doesn’t matter if basic science is used in the methods. Sure they use chemistry, take measurements, use analytical language to describe things. They even use math and computer programing, but so what. The same methods are used in criminology but again so what, at the highest levels of knowledge criminology and paleontology are not science. At least in criminology the theory and evidence can be matched to reach a true conclusion, such is not possible with sparse fragments of fossilized bones scattered across the planet, buried in strata over millions of years. Macroevolution is romantic 19th Century speculation that has gotten away with posing as science for too long. By the way I’m not an academic, I don’t buy the conceit that only an expert in a certain field can make an assessment of that field in line with the greater picture, especially if I think fundamental premises are false. You may have me on some arcane aspect of your art, but I don’t accept the fundamental premises that describes macroevolutionary theory as science.

I now understand your frame of reference. Thank you.

 

[Ridgerunner]

DARWIN THEORY IS PROVED TRUE; English Scientists Say the Skull Found in Sussex Establishes Human Descent from Apes.

query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F05E0DF163FE633A25751C2A9649D946396D6CF

The real missing link!

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/9/97/Sepatbirthmjbonhamcarter.jpg

Well, you might be right, but personally, I think Joe Biden is the missing link. I think he’s right between the rat creature and the ape-guy on the scale.

 

[Riseof_Rome]

Evolution has been pretty much been a proven scientific fact. The evidence is overwhelming. If you are gonna deny evolution, then there is no reason you cannot deny the Earth going around the sun or that gravity exists.

Again, it’s like saying the Trinity is complete bull but that you are OK with everything else about the faith. It’s just not possible.

That example does not hold because the Trinity is a doctrine of our faith, evolution is not. Evolution is ACCEPTED as fact, but is not proven. Don’t fall into the liberal trap of counting your eggs before they hatch.

 

[buffalo]

Evolution has been pretty much been a proven scientific fact. The evidence is overwhelming. If you are gonna deny evolution, then there is no reason you cannot deny the Earth going around the sun or that gravity exists.

Again, it’s like saying the trinity is complete bull but that you are OK with everything else about the faith. It’s just not possible.

Oh boy - here we go again. You are aware that Galilieo was wrong in that the sun was the center of the universe? Heliocentrism is wrong. The two left standing are geocentricity and acentricity,

Are you aware that mathematically it cannot be proven that the sun revolves around the earth ad vice versa? The only way to know for sure is to look from outside this frame of reference.

Now gravity must exist for it is testable, repeatable and predictable.

 

[Riseof_Rome]

Oh boy - here we go again. You are aware that Galilieo was wrong in that the sun was the center of the universe? Heliocentrism is wrong. The two left standing are geocentricity and acentricity,

Are you aware that mathematically it cannot be proven that the sun revolves around the earth ad vice versa? The only way to know for sure is to look from outside this frame of reference.

Now gravity must exist for it is testable, repeatable and predictable.

Of course Heliocentrism cannot be mathematically proven. Because it does not concern mathematics. Explain how you figure heliocentrism is wrong…

 

[Robert_Bay]

GENERAL REMINDER

Participants are strongly reminded that charity is essential to our discussions here.

If you wish to review the subject, please see Charity for specifics, or CAF rules for an overview, both of which are located in the Rules of the Road sub-forum.

 

[buffalo]

macro and micro evolution are both scientific valid truths

I would like to see testable, repeatable and predictable evidence of speciation.

You will not be able to provide the evidence, so that leaves us with best fit theories. That is what evolution does with common descent. Let us take the pieces of the puzzle we do have and with an a priori vision put them together. Any materialist evolutionist will admit the a priori view that they cannot and will not allow the divine foot in the door. Therefore macro is not a valid truth.

 

[buffalo]

Of course Heliocentrism cannot be mathematically proven. Because it does not concern mathematics. Explain how you figure heliocentrism is wrong…

Incorrect - the math and physics work both ways. There are other threads on this so I would refer your to them so as not to further disrupt this thread.

Galileo advanced that the sun was the center of the universe. It is not.

 

[greg_b]

I would like to see testable, repeatable and predictable evidence of speciation.

You will not be able to provide the evidence, so that leaves us with best fit theories. That is what evolution does with common descent. Let us take the pieces of the puzzle we do have and with an a priori vision put them together. Any materialist evolutionist will admit the a priori view that they cannot and will not allow the divine foot in the door. Therefore macro is not a valid truth.

I have provided you plenty of macro links, you just stick your head in the sand each time and say “la la la I’m not listening”

Chew on the following…

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0804713.htm

"Vatican evolution congress to exclude creationism, intelligent design

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Speakers invited to attend a Vatican-sponsored congress on the evolution debate will not include proponents of creationism and intelligent design, organizers said.

The Pontifical Council for Culture, Rome’s Pontifical Gregorian University and the University of Notre Dame in Indiana are organizing an international conference in Rome March 3-7 as one of a series of events marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s “The Origin of Species.”

Jesuit Father Marc Leclerc, a philosophy professor at the Gregorian, told Catholic News Service Sept. 16 that organizers “wanted to create a conference that was strictly scientific” and that discussed rational philosophy and theology along with the latest scientific discoveries.

He said arguments “that cannot be critically defined as being science, or philosophy or theology did not seem feasible to include in a dialogue at this level and, therefore, for this reason we did not think to invite” supporters of creationism and intelligent design.

Father Leclerc was one of several organizers speaking at a Sept. 16 Vatican press conference about the congress, part of the culture council’s “Science, Technology and the Ontological Quest,” or STOQ project.

He reiterated that evolutionary theory “is not incompatible with the teachings of the Catholic Church or the Bible’s message.”

---

So who are you going to trust more… The Catholic Church and her scientists or a bunch of anti-Catholic fundamentalists who deny every piece of evolution and believe that Jesus rode a Dinosaur into Jerusalem (And no, I did not make up that last part. Many actually believe that)

 

[buffalo]

I have provided you plenty of macro links, you just stick your head in the sand each time and say “la la la I’m not listening”

Chew on the following…

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0804713.htm

"Vatican evolution congress to exclude creationism, intelligent design

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Speakers invited to attend a Vatican-sponsored congress on the evolution debate will not include proponents of creationism and intelligent design, organizers said.

The Pontifical Council for Culture, Rome’s Pontifical Gregorian University and the University of Notre Dame in Indiana are organizing an international conference in Rome March 3-7 as one of a series of events marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s “The Origin of Species.”

Jesuit Father Marc Leclerc, a philosophy professor at the Gregorian, told Catholic News Service Sept. 16 that organizers “wanted to create a conference that was strictly scientific” and that discussed rational philosophy and theology along with the latest scientific discoveries.

He said arguments “that cannot be critically defined as being science, or philosophy or theology did not seem feasible to include in a dialogue at this level and, therefore, for this reason we did not think to invite” supporters of creationism and intelligent design.

Father Leclerc was one of several organizers speaking at a Sept. 16 Vatican press conference about the congress, part of the culture council’s “Science, Technology and the Ontological Quest,” or STOQ project.

He reiterated that evolutionary theory “is not incompatible with the teachings of the Catholic Church or the Bible’s message.”

---

So who are you going to trust more… The Catholic Church and her scientists or a bunch of anti-Catholic fundamentalists who deny every piece of evolution and believe that Jesus rode a Dinosaur into Jerusalem (And no, I did not make up that last part. Many actually believe that)

Vatican-backed conference snubs creationism

…The Discovery Institute’s president, Bruce Chapman, said he wasn’t surprised intelligent design was kept out. But in an e-mail, he said the conference didn’t speak for the Vatican as a whole, where he said evolution and intelligent design "remain in serious and fruitful dialogue."Indeed, some influential cardinals have indicated they support intelligent design, including Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn of Vienna, a close collaborator of Pope Benedict XVI.