Why do so many Catholics accept evolution as fact?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread is rapidly evolving, but will likely still take millions of years to mutate…
 
edwest2 said:
The evolutionary model has no practical use today.
Click to expand...
False. Evolution is used to help prevent or delay the development of resistance in bacteria, insects, weeds and others.

For example, the advice to always finish the full course of pills has a good evolutionary basis. If the pills are not finished then the least susceptible/most resistant bacteria will survive to reproduce.

rossum
 
Techno, you are correct in that carbon dating has restrictions post about 50k.

Other tools are used for dating older things. Rossum has written on it.

Edwest, bones can and do survive if preserved adequately.
yes, they are rare, due, mainly , to Geomorphology. But there are still a few kicking around. Australian Megafauna is a rich discovery due to recent sites where bones have been preserved.

Just how might a Diprotodon be preserved. Well he might cark it in a peat bog, or a eutrophic creek. If he is lucky, his minerology might become swapped out for that of amorphous opal. There are some great fossilised bones that are opalised in Australia.

Here is Eric the Pliosaur
io9.gizmodo.com/5987941/eric-the-pliosaur-one-of-the-most-interesting-fossils-on-the-planet
 
Another question is why do some Catholics have such a huge problem with It?
 
mVitus said:
When it comes to Genesis as a literal interpretation, please explain dinosaurs and the rest of the fossil record. There aren’t any cave paintings of T-Rexes and the vast variety of fossils would be a madhouse to all exist at once.
Click to expand...
Any explanation of dinosaur fossils would just be a guess about what happened, since none of us were there. Thankfully the origins of life and the universe itself are recorded for all of us in Sacred Scripture (Genesis 1-2).
 
edwest2 said:
The evolutionary model has no practical use today. I would ask those who think the Church has nothing to say, and those who do, to decide to pick one. What does the Church accept? And why is that important?

Ed
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. It’s practical use lies in the dehumanization of unborn children and ultimately all of us, a necessary part of consumerist society. The truth is that the evolutionary model reduces mankind to molecules, albeit pretty much infinitely complex. It says little about our creation, of which scripture is clear, concise and speaks to all people in every era, if they can hear.
 
Techno2000 said:
Could you please show us some Transitional Fossils ?
Click to expand...
Erm… you need to open your eyes first. Most of the top row of that picture are obviously transitional. All the Australopithecines are transitional between earlier primates and later Homo. The Homo skulls in that row are transitional between Australopithecines and later Homo species on the lower row. The first two skulls in the lower row are transitional within genus Homo.

You do not say what definition of “transitional” you are using. The scientific definition is:

A transitional fossil is any fossilized remains of a life form that exhibits traits common to both an ancestral group and its derived descendant group.

Note that this definition is given in terms of groups; it is not dependent on an individual fossil having had descendants. It is generally impossible to tell from a fossil how many descendants, if any, that particular organism had.

For example, modern birds are probably not directly descended from Archaeopteryx, but that does not affect the status of Archaeopteryx as a transitional fossil. It has traits from the ancestral group: teeth, feathers and a bony tail combined with traits from the derived group: wings and flight adapted feathers. It is a mixture of characteristics from dinosaurs and birds, so it is a transitional between dinosaurs and birds. Modern birds probably descended from an earlier close relative of Archaeopteryx.

rossum
 
PluniaZ said:
Any explanation of dinosaur fossils would just be a guess about what happened, since none of us were there. Thankfully the origins of life and the universe itself are recorded for all of us in Sacred Scripture (Genesis 1-2).
Click to expand...
Actually no. Genesis is a myth creation story. An ancient people, whom didn’t know how things worked, had tales such as this to explain why things were. Like the story of Noah it is used to explain things to children because the adults didn’t know. There are plenty of creation stories around, I am thankful to my seventh grade history class for show us many different creation stories.
 
Aloysium said:
I beg to differ. It’s practical use lies in the dehumanization of unborn children and ultimately all of us, a necessary part of consumerist society. The truth is that the evolutionary model reduces mankind to molecules, albeit pretty much infinitely complex. It says little about our creation, of which scripture is clear, concise and speaks to all people in every era, if they can hear.
Click to expand...
Yes, it can and is being used to convince people to dehumanize human beings. Since we are told we are just biological machines, we are accountable to no one, much less a higher being.

Ed
 
NM505StKate said:
. . . There are plenty of creation stories around, I am thankful to my seventh grade history class for show us many different creation stories.
Click to expand...
Making a blanket assumption, I am guessing their symbolism was not explored, yet alone the truth to which they speak, which I would add is most concisely and correctly seen in Genesis. You were being indoctrinated into relativism and the idea that the Divine is a manifestation of imagination, which if you pursued the sciences, would go on to be described as being fundamentally neurophysiological. You say that you are Catholic, so you may not have bought the whole lock, stock and barrel.
 
We have textbook examples above of the conflation of science and faith.
The two are integrated. They inform one another.

Please note that conflating science and faith is also what atheists do, although with different conclusions.
Neither allows the proper sphere of competence for faith and reason (or science).
 
Aloysium said:
Making a blanket assumption, I am guessing their symbolism was not explored, yet alone the truth to which they speak, which I would add is most concisely and correctly seen in Genesis. You were being indoctrinated into relativism and the idea that the Divine is a manifestation of imagination, which if you pursued the sciences, would go on to be described as being fundamentally neurophysiological. You say that you are Catholic, so you may not have bought the whole lock, stock and barrel.
Click to expand...
Well it was at a Catholic school where we learned about different native creation stories. History class probably isn’t the place to go deep into symbolism let alone a seventh grade class. It was the nun showing us different cultures (gasp). Actually the manifestation of imagination fits rather well.
 
edwest2 said:
Yes, it can and is being used to convince people to dehumanize human beings. Since we are told we are just biological machines, we are accountable to no one, much less a higher being.

Ed
Click to expand...
Well we are biological machines. Thoughts are chemical responses as are emotions. Quite frankly it is fascinating to ponder it,
 
goout said:
We have textbook examples above of the conflation of science and faith.
The two are integrated. They inform one another.

Please note that conflating science and faith is also what atheists do, although with different conclusions.
Neither allows the proper sphere of competence for faith and reason (or science).
Click to expand...
If I may ask what do you mean integrated?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top