Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dan123 said:
The Galapagos islands are simply where Darwin did his research. There’s more than 100 years of research, evidence, and refinement since then.
Click to expand...
And what they saw is the finches’ beaks returned to the mean when the pressure was relieved.
 
And if the pressure wasn’t relieved would they have eventually hit a genetic ‘wall’ and been unable to adapt further? Your argument is basically there can be small changes but lots of small changes can’t add up to big changes, all while you have no trouble accepting that wolves over time can become poodles.
 
goout said:
Bp Barron gives an excellent exposition of the sense of scripture in different places,

Theology of the Body might be the best example of Catholic Sripture exposition. And TOB deals directly with Genesis in great depth.
Click to expand...
You must be aware that much of today’s Catholic leaders and talkers have discredited scripture because of the pressure from the evolution camp. In other words, they have caved.

They do not need to.
 
Dan123 said:
’m willing to believe you aren’t aware of research on evolution but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. There’s never been a time in history when access to information was more widespread and available. Here’s a huge list:
Click to expand...
No problem with micro-evolution (aka adaptation).
 
buffalo said:
You must be aware that much of today’s Catholic leaders and talkers have discredited scripture because of the pressure from the evolution camp. In other words, they have caved.
Click to expand...
I’m not aware of any such thing. Can you name any at all?
 
Right, but thousands of small changes can’t add up to large changes? If you separate two populations of the same animal geographically for long enough is it inconceivable that they’d genetically drift in different directions enough that they could no longer interbreed? Would they be the same animal or different at that point? Are you aware of any experiments that have demonstrated the ‘wall’ an animal will hit when trying to adapt? What’s the biggest a dog can get? What’s the largest wingspan a sparrow can have?
 
As a professional researcher, the internet has its problems. Sometimes, it is difficult to separate credible information from information that is not. I’ve seen speculation morph into “facts.” I had to confront a poster who published what read like a real news article about why my company did something. The bottom line question was: “Were you there?” Of course, I received no response. He wasn’t.
 
Absolutely wouldn’t disagree with that. I linked PBS for being one of the better resources.
 
Dan123 said:
Right, but thousands of small changes can’t add up to large changes?
Click to expand...
That is the unproven claim. But it doesn’t happen. The fossil record shows abrupt appearance, STASIS, and limited variation within.
 
Dan123 said:
Are you aware of any experiments that have demonstrated the ‘wall’ an animal will hit when trying to adapt? What’s the biggest a dog can get?
Click to expand...
Dog breeeders will tell you they have just about exhausted their efforts. It is getting harder and harder to ARTIFICIALLY UNDER CONTROLLED CIRCUMSTANCES to get more breeds. It is worse in the wild.
 
We’re on different wavelengths. I am not disputing the science, but asserting that it has been organized in such a fashion as to result in a distortion of reality. It’s somthing like this:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Where the top picture is analogous to reality, the second, a correct but incomplete undertsanding that can be obtained through science, and the last representing the Darwinistic version of the reality.

I have no disputs with the evidence that is actually building against simplistic evolutionary theories that see all this in which we are engaged as a natural consequence of random mutation and natural selection, all beginning in a primordial soup.
 
Last edited:
I agree. What is being sold here is incomplete. Only the Church contains the fullness of the truth.
 
Yeah you keep repeating that but it doesn’t make it true. The fossil record shows gradual change with periods of relative stability and periods of wider divergence. This is to be expected, when the environmental pressures are relatively stable there’s no reason you’d expect large changes, and likewise when the environment changes rapidly previously desirable traits may become liabilities and a new definition of ‘fit’ emerges, such as any kind of extinction event.

I guess to respond more specifically, why would you say fossils found deeper in the Earth and which date to earlier times in Earth’s history look so different than the animals we have today? Why do they look fairly similar to the fossils directly above and below them but further and further from the animals further from them in the geological record?
 
The layers of rock are not uniform in all places. These layers, or strata, can be mixed up or in the “wrong” order. There are trees that go through several rock layers. They got there rapidly. Had they been buried slowly by sediment, they would have rotted away. They are called polystrate fossils.
 
Last edited:
Remember, fossilization is rare and happens by rapid burial in flood sediments.
 
Indeed, they’re a neat geological feature that we understand fairly well. You can sometimes for example see a second set of roots form or the existing roots curve upwards. That’s often due to volcanic deposits that covered the existing ground layer but didn’t kill the tree. Other times tectonic movement or shifts will move layers after it’s all covered over and fossilization has already occurred enough to preserve the shape. While young earth creationists point to these often, it’s a well studied phenomenon.
 
Flood sediment is one of the more common things that cause fossilization but not the only one. Regardless I’m not sure how that addresses why we see layers of creatures that look less and less like modern creatures the further down you go, but why they still look very similar to the creatures above and below them.
 
Last edited:
Dan123 said:
Flood sediment is one of the more common things that cause fossilization but not the only one. Regardless I’m not sure how that addresses why we see layers of creatures that look less and less like modern creatures the further down you go, but why they still look very similar to the creatures above and below them.
Click to expand...
Check out some of the flume experiments and how the layers are formed.
 
For those interested:

Biological Relativity

Denis Noble makes the case in Dance to the Tune of Life: Biological Relativity that the Modern Synthesis, while undoubtedly productive for a time, is a misconception of reality that has reached the limits of its explanatory power. The problems are fundamental. No amount of cosmetic surgery is going correct them.

Progress in processes that are not neo-Darwinian cannot be credited to the explanatory power of the Modern Synthesis. It is insufficient to do so. Most of these “new trends” are not new nor are they trends. They have been known and studied quite apart from neo-Darwinism for a long time. Symbiosis and symbiogenesis, for example, have been investigated for over a century while being dismissed and discouraged by proponents of the Modern Synthesis.

Awareness or mentions of these processes by neo-Darwinists fall far short of serious investigation. It is true that these processes have been bolstered or confirmed by evidence from molecular biology, but that evidence generally contradicted the view of the Modern Synthesis. The Modern Synthesis is no longer synonymous with evolutionary biology, molecular biology, or any of the multiple disciplines currently contributing to our understanding of evolution. Denis Noble advocates for a new and integrative systems approach that encourages and sheds light on the sweeping array of questions and investigations that are now moving
evolutionary biology forward.

Loading…

www.envevo.org
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top