B
buffalo
Guest
wasn’t it you who said - what does the current Pope say?
Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true
- Status
G
goout
Guest
Ok thanks for posting that.goout:
New info.
The walking dead: Fossils on the move can distort patterns of mass extinctions
Using the fossil record to accurately estimate the timing and pace of past mass extinctions is no easy task, and a new study highlights how fossil evidence can produce a misleading picture if not interpreted with care.
When they examined the cores, the results were “somewhat unnerving,” said Michal Kowalewski, Thompson Chair of Invertebrate Paleontology and the study’s principal investigator.
The walking dead: Fossils on the move can distort patterns of mass extinctions -- ScienceDaily
You should find a solid earth science teacher to help you interpret what you posted.
Catholicism has the richest intellectual tradition of any faith and I hope you will participate in it.
B
buffalo
Guest
Why do you think I do not? Specifically?
Yes, we Catholics must consider the formal, efficient, material and final causes. Secular science has cut out the formal and final causes. That is where much of the problem lies.
M
Metis1
Guest
You can call it anything you want but either way it’s not compatible with Catholic teachings nor the Golden Rule of “do unto others…”. Demeaning someone merely because they disagree with you is unethical by almost any basic moral standard and invites a give & take that’s hardly compatible with having a serious discussion.
M
Metis1
Guest
This is a Catholic website, so let me recommend you actually honor the fact that demeaning others is not what any observant Catholic should do. Maybe show these two posts I’ve commented on to your priest and ask him his opinion.
Or are you actually Catholic or maybe belong to another denomination?
M
Metis1
Guest
The trouble with that, as has been previously stated, is that there simply is no objectively-derived evidence for there being a creator-god. Now I believe in God but it’s based on faith plus a set of experiences I’ve had that went on for roughly three years. However, my faith and my experiences do not meet the standards for scientific evidence that would be necessary to declare it as such.
E
edwest211
Guest
Before Darwin’s book, I wonder how atheists justified themselves.
P
PickyPicky
Guest
Mostly they kept quiet about it. Even in Victorian times to be atheist was to risk social exclusion. In earlier times, of course, it risked death.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Spare me the condescension and take a break from all the self-aggrandizing.
O
o_mlly
Guest
This thread is now going nowhere slow and the “flying monkeys” have taken over so Dorothy and I are going home. Com’on Toto.
E
edwest211
Guest
But… but… that’s how these threads always go.
Last edited:
S
STT
Guest
It seems reasonable to accept as a mater of the fact, we look similar, that there is a relation between us, so called evolution .Evolution as a field of science is however not that exact to show that there was no intervention.
A
Aloysium
Guest
I wouldn’t expect the thread to go anywhere.
But, hopefully your participation has helped you clarify your ideas, get closer to the truth and others to sort out their ideas.
I find speaking about creation, our existence in the midst of all this wonder, encourages me in my meditations and contemplation of the Word of God. It can be a form of prayer and a way to reach out to others, to go beyond the appearances created by the mind, to the Truth itself.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
A
Aloysium
Guest
And, as a consequence science, in its modern version, has nothing to say about the creation of mankind. The spirit is not an add-on to a material process, but that which gives life to the basic elements of the earth. Those elements, to which He gives existence, did not randomly come together by their own given, inherent will, the forces of nature, but we were directly brought together by Him into the unity that is the person. Exclude God, and we do not only ignore the true purpose of our existence, that which is hidden among the weeds of earthly illusions and the search for transient goods; we fail to acknowledge the eternal Cause of our existence, at our beginning and right here and now.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
This is not a consequence of what I wrote. Science has nothing to say on the matter of God. But it does have a lot to say on the matter of observations of physical objects, alive or dead, and how they act and have acted. The physical bodies of early man are such objects and are a proper study of science.LeafByNiggle:
And, as a consequence science, in its modern version, has nothing to say about the creation of mankind.
S
STT
Guest
Great. We are in the same page then.
Yes. But it cannot say that there was no intervention.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Again, that is not being said by any scientists. However scientists do exclude divine intervention from scientific theories, not because it is impossible, but because it is not testable, and therefore not a proper hypothesis when doing science.LeafByNiggle:
Great. We are in the same page then.
Yes. But it cannot say that there was no intervention.
E
edwest211
Guest
Good to know. That’s why there is a divide.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
What divide do you mean? Religious people and scientists? Remember that the Catholic Church was the chief guardian and promoter of science during the dark ages. Many of the most significant advances in science have been accomplished by Catholic priests. So I don’t know what divide you mean.
- Status