Don John of Austria Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Evolution obvioussly does occur, germs are evolving to be resistant to Drugs as we speak, however the origins of life cannot be explained by evolution, mud cannot simply become life, we can't construct even a virus from scratch( and they're not even alive). Likewise there are some staggeringly giant holes in evolutionary theory, still on some level it is certianly true, it can be demonstrated and experimentaly proven. Now weather Humans evolved ( as Gods method of Creation) or if he created Man as an individual act of Creation is much more debateable. Thedude ---yes Carbon dating has been vastly overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 [quote name='ironmonk' date='Nov 19 2004, 01:02 PM'] Evolution does not contradict Genesis at all. Provided that when we say "Evolution" we don't mean Darwinism. Darwinism is foolish and not very well thought out. And provided that Genesis is looked at in the proper light - The Catholic Light. The Catholic Church is the only belief system that has a harmony of both scriptures (NT & OT). God Bless, ironmonk [/quote] I disagree with you on Darwin's theory being wrong, but I shall assume you are either ignorant (which isn't bad) of the theory or reject it for some other theory (which, again, isn't bad). Unless of course you are refering to Darwinism as atheistic (forgive my spelling) evolution, in which case you are right. Evolution doesn't contradict Genesis at all, even the Prot. Bible I have (It was free) says so. I belive what it said was "Evolution and Genesis? The main theme of Genesis isn't how or in what order things happened, but WHAT made them happen. What you should take away from these three chapters is the universe was made and God made it, not how God made it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 [quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 19 2004, 06:32 PM'] Balthazor, Darwin's theory did in fact include references to whites as the highest in the evolutionary chain. of course this wouldn't refer to modern darwinism, but charles darwin did consider the white race as the highest of the human evolution chain. [/quote] Al, From what I have read of Darwin, I own a few copys and he is my favorite area of Bio *nerd*, I have seen no support for what you are saying. There is a theory of Social Darwinism *which is the title applied to this* which takes Darwin's theories and applies them to socitiety. Darwin's theories were purely biological, not soc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bookwyrm Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 They won't even let us read The Descent of Man in public school because it is too racist. While Darwin was applying his theory to biology, not society, he was still implying that other races were biologically inferior to whites. -Shannon P.S. My favorite subject is bio, too!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 seeing as everyone must have descended from one man and one woman, i can't see how darwinism can even be compatible with Catholic teaching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Nov 19 2004, 09:13 PM'] I disagree with you on Darwin's theory being wrong, but I shall assume you are either ignorant (which isn't bad) of the theory or reject it for some other theory (which, again, isn't bad). [/quote] Darwinism (his theory) is wrong. I am not ignorant. Nor do I expect you to be able to comprehend (which isn't bad) something so scietific and logical as the proof to Darwinism being a fallicy. I've already stated it in this thread. Eve came from Adam... in Darwinism, that could not have happened. God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theoketos Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 [quote name='Balthazor' date='Nov 19 2004, 04:05 PM'] Iron, Social Darwinism was the basis for descrimination and racism. Darwin did not think up social Darwinism. It was someone else who decided that some people are more evolved or better than others, it twists the theory of evolution to suite it's own needs. Much like people use isolated parts of the Bible to justify whatever action they want. I am not correcting you mind you, I am just adding to your opening thought. God Bless, Balthazor [/quote] Um... Darwin did lament that the "aborginal races" were stronger because they did not have the medicines that the "white people" had, and thus thier race was becoming stronger, which is Ironic, because both he and his offspring were sickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 [quote] And if there was evolution, then something has to tell the organism to evolve. For example a light sensitive freckle cannot all the sudden turn into an eye... and there is no middle ground or transition period. Darwinism claims this. Any animal's camoflage... proof that a higher being made them... animals are not smart enough to know to move into something that looks like them... such as a rattlesnake in leaves... a fish on the bottom of the floor of the sea.... the scorpion fish which looks like coral... etc...[/quote] Max, both of those comments show a misunderstanding of Darwin's (and Wallece's) theory. Read up on it and than reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 can you have darwinism in which there are still two original human beings who were perfect humans and from which every single human being alive today came from (there can never be any man on earth that is not a son of adam or woman that's not a daughter of eve) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Nov 20 2004, 12:30 AM'] Max, both of those comments show a misunderstanding of Darwin's (and Wallece's) theory. Read up on it and than reply. [/quote] Wrong. There is no way to develop irreducibly complex structures in a Darwinian way. Read up on it, then come talk. God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now