Evolution

[mortify]

Peace be with you,

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1616134' date='Aug 2 2008, 07:32 PM']Again, no. The change from one species to another can be achieved by natural selection alone.[/quote]

Natural selection does not cause any change, it only acts as a [i]f[/i]ilter weeding out non-viable changes.
[quote]Eventually an animal can become so different from its original that it is classified as a new species. And yes, mutation is random (at least from what scientists can see so far), but mutation plays only a minor role in evolution. And thus randomness is only a minor part of evolution. And yes, natural selection does guide evolution and yes it can explain the apparent design in creation just like chemistry and physics can explain the apparent design in crystal formations.[/quote]

I honestly don't think you know what you're talking about.

[quote]From what I can tell, (and I mean no offense) you know very little about evolution. I suggest reading up on it some. Even just the wikipedia articles on it. (read "introduction to evolution" before you read the "evolution" article)[/quote]

No offense taken.

There are worse things to be ignorant of.

[quote]I do mind. Because I don't have sources to quote. I'm good at remembering what something says, and not so good at remembering where to find it again if I need to. It's a troublesome thing. But if I see it again, I'll bring it here. [/quote]

Guess the importance of referencing your statements never sunk in when you were in school, or perhaps you just can't back it up. Either way, it doesn't reflect highly of your methods, if you intend to call a teaching of the Fathers "silly" you better be prepared to defend yourself.
[quote]I don't even know who this Dr. person is, so pardon me if I'm skeptical.[/quote]

Being skeptical is convenient, especially since you can't back up anything you say.

[quote]Also, lets say that man was directly created by God body and soul directly out of the earth (instead of out of another creature). So what? That means that man didn't evolve.[/quote]

It means the evolution of man is false.

[quote]But every other creature on earth could have. This is actually a concept I've been tinkering with - that God allowed evolution to take it's course and just before man was going to evolve from ape, He directly intervened and created us Himself.[/quote]

Frankly, I'm [b]skeptical[/b] of your ability to [i]tinker[/i] on this concept!

Edited August 3, 2008 by mortify

[Farsight one]

[quote name='mortify' post='1616178' date='Aug 2 2008, 09:22 PM']Natural selection does not cause any change, it only acts as a [i]f[/i]ilter weeding out non-viable changes.[/quote]Natural selection does not itself directly cause changes, but it does result in them.
[quote]I honestly don't think you know what you're talking about.[/quote]In what regard? What I said there I learned mostly from Ken Miller - the evolutionary biologist (and Catholic) who pretty much single handedly "decided" the result of the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. I don't have evolutionary biology credentials (and neither, I assume, do you), but he sure does and I should hope info I got from him is accurate. Again, check the wiki entries on evolution.

[quote]There are worse things to be ignorant of.[/quote]I would actually claim otherwise (ignorance of God notwithstanding), but I think that's for another time.

[quote]Guess the importance of referencing your statements never sunk in when you were in school, or perhaps you just can't back it up. Either way, it doesn't reflect highly of your methods, if you intend to call a teaching of the Fathers "silly" you better be prepared to defend yourself.[/quote] See, now you're just being rude. I explained why I didn't have sources and that I'd give them if I found them. Have a little patience.


[quote]Being skeptical is convenient, especially since you can't back up anything you say.[/quote]It's not convenient. I truly had no idea who he was. People cite random "doctors" all the time who have no credentials on the subject nor even an authentic doctorate. (Kent Hovind anyone?) It was natural of me to be skeptical, but now that I know who he is, I stand corrected on his authority. That doesn't change what I said at all. And again, you're being rude and condescending.

[dairygirl4u2c]

QUOTE(mortify @ Aug 2 2008, 09:22 PM) *
--Natural selection does not cause any change, it only acts as a fiddler weeding out non-viable changes.--
Natural selection does not itself directly cause changes, but it does result in them.


he's right, it doesn't cause changes. it's basically a portion of a bell curve getting wiped out, leave the rest of the new bell curve to form a new bell curve. and the process repeats itself until you're a completely different animal. ie, you don't get thumbless kids from cutting your thumbs off. but, if people wihtout thumbs dn't breed, the thumbless people are gone.

[Servant of the Secret Fire]

[quote name='mortify' post='1616102' date='Aug 3 2008, 01:58 AM']Dr Ludwig Ott in _Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma_ states:
[b]"The Fathers concur in teaching that God immediately created the first man, both as to body and to soul."[/b]
The first man's immediate creation from earth flagrantly contradicts the theory of evolution.[/quote]

But what does "immediate" mean here in this context? It seems to me that such a word must be very carefully used when talking about the creative actions of God, since He is outside of time. Secondly, if possible, I would like to see a source which shows that the Fathers authoritatively taught that the creation of Man was direct from dust to human body. You say so in your sentence, but that is not necessarily what Dr Ott meant by "immediately created" as he makes no mention of earth, and as I say it is not clear what "immediate" means in this context.

The change from ape (or whatever) to man is "immediate" in the sense that either you have Man, body and soul, or you don't - there is nothing in between.


[quote name='Farsight one' post='1616134' date='Aug 3 2008, 02:32 AM']Also, lets say that man was directly created by God body and soul directly out of the earth (instead of out of another creature). So what? That means that man didn't evolve. But every other creature on earth could have. This is actually a concept I've been tinkering with - that God allowed evolution to take it's course and just before man was going to evolve from ape, He directly intervened and created us Himself.[/quote]

While I don't rule out the idea that man is in fact an exception to evolution as you suggest, I take issue with the implication that God is only at most "indirectly" involved in evolution. So many people from young earth creationists to Richard Dawkins seem to think this and I cannot understand why. Well, Dawkins may have some excuse given his total ignorance of religion but anyway .... even to the extent that "random" mutations are involved - can we really speculate as to how such events appear to God? (And please don't take this as I just think it is really important to avoid such implications in order to fully convey the wonder of Creation. )

[nowak.chris]

I think we need to distinguish from natural selection, which is observable limitation of genetic material (such as is used in breeding dogs/horses/whathaveyou) and evolution, which is a speculative theory on an increase in genetic material being incorporated into the pool of natural selection.

The Church obviously allows for evolution in its teaching, I remain unconvinced that it is at all logical.

[Farsight one]

[quote name='nowak.chris' post='1616474' date='Aug 3 2008, 02:18 PM']I think we need to distinguish from natural selection, which is observable limitation of genetic material (such as is used in breeding dogs/horses/whathaveyou) and evolution, which is a speculative theory on an increase in genetic material being incorporated into the pool of natural selection.

The Church obviously allows for evolution in its teaching, I remain unconvinced that it is at all logical.[/quote]Natural selection IS evolution, though. But evolution is not natural selection.

It's kind of like "All Catholics are Christian, but not all Christians are Catholic". All natural selection is evolution, but not all evolution is only natural selection.

And no, it's not a speculative theory. Scientists would call it a hypothesis if it was. "Theory" in the science world is superior to "fact". A theory is an attempt to explain how an observable phenomenon happens. Remember, they still call them "the theory of gravity" and "cell theory". Evolution is not, as some people would like you to believe, some sort of completely different understanding of "theory".

[mortify]

Peace in Christ

[quote name='Servant of the Secret Fire' post='1616418' date='Aug 3 2008, 11:08 AM']But what does "immediate" mean here in this context? It seems to me that such a word must be very carefully used when talking about the creative actions of God, since He is outside of time.[/quote]

Dr Ott was familiar with the theory of evolution and addressed it in the book I quoted from. The phrase "immediate" is used in contrast to evolution, which supposes a process of change from one species to another. In other words, he's saying the Church Fathers taught that Adam was created from earth without a bunch of intermediary species in between, he was not making a reference to time, i.e. God instantly made Adam from earth as oppose to molding him for several hours.
[quote]Secondly, if possible, I would like to see a source which shows that the Fathers authoritatively taught that the creation of Man was direct from dust to human body. You say so in your sentence, but that is not necessarily what Dr Ott meant by "immediately created" as he makes no mention of earth, and as I say it is not clear what "immediate" means in this context.[/quote]

I hope my explanation above concerning "intermediate" helped, however in the same chapter Dr Ott says the following:

[b]"According to the [u]immediate[/u], literal sense, God created the body of the first man immediately out of inorganic material ("from the slime of the earth") and vivified it by breathing into it a spiritual soul."[/b]

[KOIfriend]

I believe 6-day Creationists are more evolved in Evolutionists, because we can actually read!

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='KOIfriend' post='1622032' date='Aug 8 2008, 07:50 PM']I believe 6-day Creationists are more evolved in Evolutionists, because we can actually read![/quote]
...Budge?

[KOIfriend]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1622033' date='Aug 8 2008, 09:51 PM']...Budge?[/quote]
Who?

Looks like I meet the [url="http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/xenophobe.jpg"]Xenophobe[/url]

[img]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/xenophobe.jpg[/img]

by [img]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/fwlogo.gif[/img]

Edited August 9, 2008 by KOIfriend

[Farsight one]

[quote name='KOIfriend' post='1622032' date='Aug 8 2008, 08:50 PM']I believe 6-day Creationists are more evolved in Evolutionists, because we can actually read![/quote]
Anyone that knows a darn thing about literature knows that simply reading a text doesn't tell you a thing. How confusing are Yeat's poems or Shakespeare's comedies if all you do is read them?

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='KOIfriend' post='1622034' date='Aug 8 2008, 07:52 PM']Who?

Looks like I meet the [url="http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/xenophobe.jpg"]Xenophobe[/url]

[img]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/xenophobe.jpg[/img]

by [img]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/fwlogo.gif[/img][/quote]

Self-censored for charity's sake.

[JustJ]

[quote name='mortify' post='1615610' date='Aug 2 2008, 01:12 AM']I don't have a problem with a literal understanding of genesis, but who knows.

Evolution that doesn't have God guiding it is against Church teaching.[/quote]
From the viewpoint that says that God guided evolution, he had to have guided all living endeavors since life began.

Which I guess isn't really being argued here, so...

[KOIfriend]

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1622415' date='Aug 9 2008, 09:43 AM']Anyone that knows a darn thing about literature knows that simply reading a text doesn't tell you a thing. How confusing are Yeat's poems or Shakespeare's comedies if all you do is read them?[/quote]

I HATE SHAKESPEARE AND YEAT! THEY SMELL LIKE ELDERBERRIES!

[KOIfriend]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1622434' date='Aug 9 2008, 10:54 AM']
Self-censored for charity's sake.[/quote]

Lighten up buddy! I'm here to make this place light!

[MissScripture]

[quote name='KOIfriend' post='1622663' date='Aug 9 2008, 01:51 PM']Lighten up buddy! I'm here to make this place light![/quote]
And failing miserably. Which makes me think that's not really your motive. But that's just my opinion.

[KOIfriend]

[quote name='MissScripture' post='1622665' date='Aug 9 2008, 03:53 PM']And failing miserably. Which makes me think that's not really your motive. But that's just my opinion. [/quote]

You're right. I'm here just to have some fun at the expense of some people who take themselves to seriously! My goodness, if I became this stuck up on a message board, I would be fit to stick a fork into!

My goodness. You guys are hilarious!

Daaa, Daaaaaa, Daaaaaaaaa, Da da, dadadadadada!

[MissScripture]

[quote name='KOIfriend' post='1622670' date='Aug 9 2008, 01:56 PM']You're right. I'm here just to have some fun at the expense of some people who take themselves to seriously! My goodness, if I became this stuck up on a message board, I would be fit to stick a fork into!

My goodness. You guys are hilarious!

Daaa, Daaaaaa, Daaaaaaaaa, Da da, dadadadadada![/quote]
WHAT? THIS IS JUST A MESSAGE BOARD? OH MY GOODNESS! THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR POINTING THAT OUT! I am SO glad you CAME to show us all the LIGHT! Thank you!

[KOIfriend]

[quote name='MissScripture' post='1622677' date='Aug 9 2008, 04:00 PM']WHAT? THIS IS JUST A MESSAGE BOARD? OH MY GOODNESS! THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR POINTING THAT OUT! I am SO glad you CAME to show us all the LIGHT! Thank you![/quote]

Your welcome.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='KOIfriend' post='1622678' date='Aug 9 2008, 02:02 PM']Your welcome.[/quote]
Wow! You are SO my new hero!