Evolution and Faith

@owens07 (325)
Puerto Rico
February 12, 2007 9:38am CST
People are often misled to believe that science tells us one thing about life origins and the Bible tells us something else. Then we're told that we can have our cake and eat it too. Embrace your spirituality but you must allow for evolution, theistic evolution. Nonsense! Theistic evolution is no more science than creationism, so why bother? The theory of evolution doesn't say anything about God starting evolution off (see abiogenesis) The truth of the matter is evolution, macro evolution that is, is far more controversial that many would have us believe. No one really disputes micro evolution, changes within a species. That's something we can all observe. Macro evolution, one species evolving into an entirely new species is where the huge debate lies. "It is therefore of immediate concern to both biologist and layman that Darwinism is under attack. The theory of life that undermined nineteenth - century religion has virtually become a religion itself and, in its turn, is being threatened by fresh ideas. The attacks are certainly not limited to those of the creationists and religious fundamentalists who deny Darwinism for political and moral reasons. The doubts about Darwinism represent a political revolt from withing rather than a siege from without." B. Leith, The Descent of Darwin: A handbook of Doubts about Darwinism (1982). pg. 11 "Just as pre- Darwinian biology was carried out by people whose faith was in the Creator and His plan, post - Darwinian biology is being carried out by people whose faith is in, almost, the deity of Darwin. They've seen their task as to elaborate his theory and to fill the gaps in ti, to fill the trunk and the twigs of the tree. But it seems to me that the theoretical framework has very little impact on the actual progress of the work in biological research. In a way some aspects of Darwinism and the neo- Darwinism seem to me to have held back the progress of science. " Colin Patterson, The Listener[senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, London]
2 responses
@useradd (46)
• Canada
13 Feb 07
"Creationists often assert that "macroevolution" is not proven, even if "microevolution" is, and by this they seem to mean that whatever evolution is observed is microevolution, but the rest is macroevolution. In making these claims they are misusing authentic scientific terms; that is, they have a non-standard definition, which they use to make science appear to be saying something other than it is." Quoted from the following site. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html#what
3 people like this
@owens07 (325)
• Puerto Rico
13 Feb 07
Keep in mind that there are many scientists with Ph.Ds in such areas as microbiology, genetics, and biology that are creationists and who also have a clear concept of these terms.These concepts rarely if at all part of the debae. And yes I'm am quite familiar with that site that every proponent of evolution and his or her mamma site from. It's far, far from having an ounce of objectivity when it comes to trying to sell darwinian sheep on the supposed evidence for evolution. I'll elaborate next time when I'm not so busy.
@jricbt (1454)
• Brazil
15 Feb 07
Waiting your "elaborations" and if you know the site, pick anything there that will think you can refute and open a discussion. I am waiting.
1 person likes this
@owens07 (325)
• Puerto Rico
16 Feb 07
Hopefully, by now you've seen the discussion are started on thermodynamics and Talk Origins. Do you want to move to a different topic or stay with this one?
@smacksman (6053)
12 Feb 07
I am comfortable with the theory of evolution over millions of years. I am also comfortable with the estimates of the age of the earth and the universe. The battle between the Church and Darwin is beyond me!
1 person likes this