Why do so many Catholics accept evolution as fact?

[edwest2]

Someone will have to explain to me how bacteria adapting to the resistance of medication, HIV immune resistance and the like has anything to do w/macro evolution?

Bacteria have a built-in ability to transfer genetic material between each other. It’s called Horizontal Gene Transfer.

“Horizontal gene transfer is the primary reason for the spread of antibiotic resistance in bacteria[5][6][7][8][9] and plays an important role in the evolution of bacteria that can degrade novel compounds such as human-created pesticides[10] and in the evolution, maintenance, and transmission of virulence.[11] This horizontal gene transfer often involves temperate bacteriophages and plasmids.[12][13] Genes that are responsible for antibiotic resistance in one species of bacteria can be transferred to another species of bacteria through various mechanisms such as F-pilus), subsequently arming the antibiotic resistant genes’ recipient against antibiotics, which is becoming a medical challenge to deal with.”

So, bacteria don’t evolve. They are still bacteria. Viruses have a similar ability.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

But slightly different human beings. I don’t have the same genes as my mother or my father. I am different.
Evolution doesn’t happen in one day. To liken it to a human’s growth, we can look at each stage of life as being analogous to evolution. A newly fertilized embryo is significantly different versus an old man physically speaking. And if you took photos of the person from conception to death in one second intervals, you’d see barely any difference between any two consecutive photos. But if you looked at them in 1 year intervals you’d see the differences coming over time.

So it is with the evolution of species. A baby will not be majorly different than its parents generally speaking. And each consecutive baby will not be much different than the other. But when you look at it over the long run, you notice the differences. One of the posters linked an article that had a picture of hominid skulls over a long period of time. Each skull compared to the successive one wasn’t too much different. But you could see clear differences by looking at the first and the last. Evolution is slight differences compounding over time and producing an individual that’s a little different and who’s offspring will be different.

It’s kind of like geological processes. A new island is forming in the Hawaiian chain right now. If you look at it today and then tomorrow you’ll see no difference in it and maybe say “It’s not even above the water. How can it be becoming an island?” But bit by bit it’s growing and will eventually become an island after a long time. That’s kind of how it is with evolution, but due to it’s random nature we don’t know what will come of evolution one million years from now like we know the end result of a geological process. But we can look at the past with the fossil record and see where it’s been.

A big question I’d have to anyone doubting evolution is: What about dinosaurs?

Man has not changed in thousands of years. There are beautiful sculptures from ancient Egypt to name one example.

Ed

 

[mVitus]

Ed, the descriptiom.of.horizontal.tranfer you used mentions evolution in it as aiding their evolution. It makes no sense to use a process of evolution against evolution.

 

[edwest2]

Bacteria remain bacteria, just as dogs remain dogs, but with a generational cycle of 20 minutes or less, can mutate very rapidly.

There are bacteria that eat petroleum fuels and others that can live inside nuclear reactor cores. If that’s not evolution, what is?

ICXC NIKA

Horizontal Gene Transfer and adaptation.

Ed

 

[mVitus]

Man has not changed in thousands of years. There are beautiful sculptures from ancient Egypt to name one example.

Ed

Skulls are gradually thinner. And evolution takes a long time. Saying man hasn’t changed hugely in a few thousand years is like saying a child looks the same as last week.so they must not.be aging.

 

[mVitus]

Horizontal Gene Transfer and adaptation.

Ed

Adaptation is a part of evolution…

 

[edwest2]

Well, just look at bacteria when they become drug resistance to see that evolution is true.

Bacteria have the built-in ability to exchange genetic material.

“Horizontal gene transfer is the primary reason for the spread of antibiotic resistance in bacteria[5][6][7][8][9] and plays an important role in the evolution of bacteria that can degrade novel compounds such as human-created pesticides[10] and in the evolution, maintenance, and transmission of virulence.[11] This horizontal gene transfer often involves temperate bacteriophages and plasmids.[12][13] Genes that are responsible for antibiotic resistance in one species of bacteria can be transferred to another species of bacteria through various mechanisms such as F-pilus), subsequently arming the antibiotic resistant genes’ recipient against antibiotics, which is becoming a medical challenge to deal with.”

They don’t evolve. They remain bacteria.

Ed

 

[rossum]

Genetic changes within the body most often, if the cell is viable and undetected by the immune system, result in tumors.

Whoever told you that was grossly misinformed, and you should not rely on anything from that source in future.

The great majority of mutations are neutral, having no effect. Some mutations do cause cancers, but those mutations are among the minority that have some effect.

If we understand evolution to happen in a similar fashion, but on a macro level, natural selection on a basis of random mutation would not actually result in the increase in sophistication that is observed in the natural order.

Why not? Natural selection selects the rare mutations that happen to improve the adaptation of the organism to its environment and then spreads copies of that mutation through the population in future generations. Improvements that initially arise by chance are selected and spread.

A materialist would have to assume a natural biological force, along the lines of the physical law of thermodynamics, to explain why this is.

Thermodynamics works and is correct. Natural selection also works and is also correct. Genetic algorithms can be programmed into computers and will find solutions to problems. See NASA’s antenna for one example.

rossum

 

[mVitus]

Bacteria have the built-in ability to exchange genetic material.

"Horizontal gene transfer is the primary reason for the spread of antibiotic resistance in bacteria[5][6][7][8][9] and plays an important role in the evolution of bacteria …

They don’t evolve. They remain bacteria.

Ed

Bold added.

 

[edwest2]

Ed, the descriptiom.of.horizontal.tranfer you used mentions evolution in it as aiding their evolution. It makes no sense to use a process of evolution against evolution.

A horse remains a horse. Bacteria remain bacteria because of a built-in ability. They are always bacteria.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Adaptation is a part of evolution…

I don’t think so. Look at the Inuit.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Bold added.

That is promoting a belief system. Bacteria remain bacteria.

Ed

 

[mVitus]

African and Indians have darker skin and lived in sunnier regions than White Europeans. One example of adaptation. And the Inuits had fur clothing so intelligence is an important adaptation.

 

[rossum]

Man has not changed in thousands of years. There are beautiful sculptures from ancient Egypt to name one example.

Some of man’s DNA has changed though. The ancient Egyptians did not have inherited resistance to the Black Death because the Black Death did not arrive in Europe until later. Modern Europeans, and other populations descended from them, do have inherited immunity to Y. pestis because most of those who didn’t have it were killed by the plague. In some places about two thirds of the population died. The survivors nearly all had some immunity in their DNA. Their descendants still have that immunity which the ancient Egyptians did not have.

Human DNA is changing all the time.

rossum

 

[rossum]

They don’t evolve. They remain bacteria.

So, you have no problem with humans and chimpanzees descending from a common ancestor: “they didn’t evolve, they remain mammals”.

Have you any idea how wide a range the description “bacteria” covers?

It covers about the same range as “eukaryote”, which includes every animal, every plant, every fungus as well as a various single-celled organisms like algae, paramecium and amoeba. In effect, what you are saying here is that you have no issue with humans evolving from something like an amoeba because “They remain eukaryotes.”

You need to learn more about the different taxonomic classifications and the size of the range each classification covers.

rossum

 

[edwest2]

Some of man’s DNA has changed though. The ancient Egyptians did not have inherited resistance to the Black Death because the Black Death did not arrive in Europe until later. Modern Europeans, and other populations descended from them, do have inherited immunity to Y. pestis because most of those who didn’t have it were killed by the plague. In some places about two thirds of the population died. The survivors nearly all had some immunity in their DNA. Their descendants still have that immunity which the ancient Egyptians did not have.

Human DNA is changing all the time.

rossum

But they’re all human beings.

Ed

 

[mVitus]

But they’re all human beings.

Ed

How quickly do you think evolutionosts say change happens? I think there may be misunderstanding.

As Rossum gave the example of 1+1+1+…1= 100,000 so it is with evolution. Little change compounding over a long time give end results that differ from a long time ago and then those end results continue to change bit by bit.

 

[rossum]

But they’re all human beings.

Yes. We are also all primates, mammals, synapsids, tetrapods, vertebrates, deuterostomes, bilaterans, animalia and eukaryotes.

Every species has variation in its DNA, and that variation will change the DNA over time. Just because it is not immediately visible does not mean that the change is not happening.

Watch a blade of grass for half an hour, can you see it grow? Is it growing?

Change is not always immediately visible.

rossum

 

[edwest2]

How quickly do you think evolutionosts say change happens? I think there may be misunderstanding.

As Rossum gave the example of 1+1+1+…1= 100,000 so it is with evolution. Little change compounding over a long time give end results that differ from a long time ago and then those end results continue to change bit by bit.

Nope. There is no reason for great morphological changes. The process has no goal.

vertebrates.si.edu/fishes/coelacanth/coelacanth_wider.html

Ed

 

[goout]

I just want to point out that this discussion does matter.

Erroneous ideas about the senses of scripture, the nature of inerrancy, the nature of inspiration, the relationship between faith and reason…these things all drive people away from the Church. We have a well reasoned case to be made in these areas, and most of us are helpless to make it. If I learned the Church that some people articulate, I would run screaming from it also.

As a complete Catholic people from top to bottom, we have done a horrendous job at catechesis. Absolutely awful. How do we expect anyone to be Catholic when we ourselves don’t know how to articulate what the Church teaches?