R
rossum
Guest
Enlightenment can be found at Evolution 101, or alternatively take up meditation and join a Buddhist monastery.
rossum
Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true
- Status
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
aka Evolution.
A
Aloysium
Guest
I guess the argument goes, things change therefore evolution is true.Right, flounders,frogs,butterflies takes weeks…but other things take millions of years.
A
Aloysium
Guest
See what I mean?buffalo:
aka Evolution.
T
Techno2000
Guest
It’s so simple… you don’t have worry about all those pesky details . :crazy_face:Techno2000:
I guess the argument goes, things change therefore evolution is true.Right, flounders,frogs,butterflies takes weeks…but other things take millions of years.
G
goout
Guest
The conflation of science and religion.Aloysium:
It’s so simple… you don’t have worry about all those pesky details . :crazy_face:Techno2000:
I guess the argument goes, things change therefore evolution is true.Right, flounders,frogs,butterflies takes weeks…but other things take millions of years.
“Oh, you accept some science that seems to contradict the bible, you are making science a dogma”.
No.
Science and religion are not to be conflated, they are integrated in a healthy perspective.
Can the two of you see the difference?
This is a serious question for both of you:
do you know the difference between conflation and integration?
Last edited:
B
Bradskii
Guest
I’m bemused that you can argue against something you clearly don’t understand and a little light headed due to hypoxia after reading The Longest Sentence This Month.
C
Cruciferi
Guest
Just Stop it. Your veiled ad hominem attacks are unnecessary and rude.
Be respectful and stop name calling. I’m Catholic not fundamentalist.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
I have yet to see how an “I have yet to see…” remark constitutes an anti-evolution argument. Sure it might be posed as an objection to evolution in the sense that it raises a question or issue that has yet to be fully resolved by the advocates for evolution, but that hardly makes it an anti-evolution argument.buffalo:
Thank you, buffalo, for proving my point that all anti-evolution arguments are of the form "I don’t see… "LeafByNiggle:
I have yet to see …
In fact, any diligent evolution advocate or scientist ought to be formulating just these kinds of questions or potential problems in attempting to prove evolution true. “I have yet to understand why…” or “This is a serious unanswered question…” ought to be integral to the process of arriving at any well-thought out position, no?
To dismiss that kind of due diligence as "anti-” whatever is rhetorical flimflam. You may as well accept evolution on pure faith if that is how you will treat questions or objections to its claims. At that point it ceases to be an open scientific endeavor and enters the realm of dogmatism. The next step is calling for dissenters to be fined, jailed or executed. Oh, yeah, we have that kind of dogmatic authoritarianism happening in science in several areas these days.
So it isn’t surprising that any objections are dismissed as anti-evolution. Even scientists can be prone to dogmatism if their pet theories are threatened.
Why not simply answer the objections with good evidence or reasons, rather than slip into the “people who disagree with my position are simple-minded, ignorant or malicious” trap?
Notice, this is not an anti- science-ought-to-be-dogmatic argument, so much as a are-you-sure-you’ve-thought-this-through kind of observation.
In my experience, dogmatic thinkers need to be approached like rabid dogs – very carefully – because they seem to think every little objection is a life threatening attack, which puts them on the offensive. So, back doors into their heads to turn on lights when they aren’t prepared can be very effective.
G
goout
Guest
I’ll repeat myself, even though it does not seem to be effective. But for the listening audience which is abused by the misrepresentations of Catholicism here:goout:
Just Stop it. Your veiled ad hominem attacks are unnecessary and rude.
Be respectful and stop name calling. I’m Catholic not fundamentalist.
We have obligations as a thinking human beings and as Catholic thinking human beings. These obligations go beyond brute assertions of license that masquerade as freedom.
You are not free to misrepresent the faith. You are not free to evangelize ignorance of science and reason.
That is not the freedom the Church allows you, it is license. License is an abuse of freedom.
Fundamentalism robs the faith of it’s life. It scandalizes those who are looking for God in the Catholic Church.
Today’s Gospel is instructive and should give some of you pause to reflect.
C
Cruciferi
Guest
- I have not misrepresented the Faith
- I’m free to disagree with Scientific Theory
- Evolution and your opinions are not Dogma
The Church has not declared evolution as definitive. I’ll disagree still.
Their Faith is founded on Scientific Theory? Maybe YOURS is but not mine.
How about you go reflect? Fast from CAF like you’re supposed to.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Let me ask you a question…
Is it possible for someone to be able to make a definitional distinction between conflation and integration i.e., know the difference, but still get the two confused (or conflated) in some areas of understanding?
Some areas of life just aren’t so clear that sorting out and integrating doesn’t mean all conflation has been resolved.
Morality is a perfect example. Being pro-life can wrongly integrate and conflate a whole lot of messy and confused ideas. Some people even think they are crystal clear in how they have integrated their beliefs about killing with their beliefs about respecting life. Perhaps they are, but the mere fact that they think so might be an indicator that they haven’t, especially if they become defensive and tell anyone who disagrees to shut up because they can’t possibly know what they are talking about.
T
Techno2000
Guest
The nose of a Seal is integrated and connected to a thousand other part of the animal.Something like that, just doesn’t take a walk backwards and becomes a smelless blowhole.
C
Cruciferi
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Here. Have some. There’s fresh bologna being served everywhere.
Here. Have some. There’s fresh bologna being served everywhere.
A
Aloysium
Guest
Actually, evolution turns very valid science into a dogma.
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
Yeah… I wish I could smell that, but I only have a blowhole now.(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Here. Have some. There’s fresh bologna being served everywhere.
B
buffalo
Guest
It is worse for butterflies as the larvae turns into total goo with no structures. It should die right there, instantly.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Don’t worry random mutations figured it all out.Techno2000:
It is worse for butterflies as the larvae turns into total goo with no structures. It should die right there, instantly.
A
Aloysium
Guest
Those are very big words. You can conflate them and get an inflation of the congregation. Or does that happen when you integrate them? Both I guess.
Any truth that denies a basic assumption holding up a hypothesis will cause to fall. The fact that what is happening right here began with one man, basically invalidates a fundamental premise of evolutionary theory, which is that mankind evolved as a group. That the formation of the person was not the result of random events knocks down directly one of the two pillars of evolution. One could argue that final causes do not belong in the realm of science; however, to claim that natural selection is the scalpel by which species, persons with a suitable brain to express their rational soul in particular, were formed is shear nonsense.
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
They love to be the smartest people in the room.But they are the ones that got Bamboozled by phony artistic renderings of evolution .
- Status