Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I consider both sciences to be provisional. I would argue that the hard experimental science of physics is more reliable than the component of geology that studies the history of earth. You could argue otherwise but only in another thread.Do you consider geology and physics to be unreliable (in the context of your original post re: determining age of things in the Earth)?
Is bacteria a bug?Nope, they are correct on that point.
Do you think that evolutionary science teaches otherwise?
Cool... So how do you know this? How can we check that you're not making it up? What is a soul? how does it work? what does it do? How can we check that it exists and/or is doing what it is supposed to do? How can we check that your version of ensoulment is correct and not some alternative version?Are you asking for the mechanics of soul creation? God wills the human soul into existence. The corporeal substance changes from non-living to living. The exact moment of ensoulment is unknown. However, at the moment the substance evidences any property specific to living organisms then ensoulment has occurred. We also know that that corporeal substance left to its natural development will be nothing other than a human being.
Is bacteria a bug?
I consider both sciences to be provisional. I would argue that the hard experimental science of physics is more reliable than the component of geology that studies the history of earth. You could argue otherwise but only in another thread.
Is bacteria a bug?
I consider both sciences to be provisional. I would argue that the hard experimental science of physics is more reliable than the component of geology that studies the history of earth. You could argue otherwise but only in another thread.
Cool... So how do you know this? How can we check that you're not making it up? What is a soul? how does it work? what does it do? How can we check that it exists and/or is doing what it is supposed to do? How can we check that your version of ensoulment is correct and not some alternative version?
So many questions...
An exercise in rational thinking on the plausibility that evolution theory fully explains the human being?...
This is simply an exercise in rational critical thinking.
You made the claim that creation is a 'superior explanation' - if you don't agree with my criteria for a good explanation, either criticise them or give your own criteria - IOW define what you mean by 'explanation'.
Man ... science must be a drag when it comes to the things of God.Cool... So how do you know this? How can we check that you're not making it up? What is a soul? how does it work? what does it do? How can we check that it exists and/or is doing what it is supposed to do? How can we check that your version of ensoulment is correct and not some alternative version?
So many questions...
I'm going to again ask that you stay on topic. I will allow for the sake of argument that the earth is any age you care to assert.Regarding rock dates:
Are you challenging the nuclear decay rates, or mechanisms?
Are you challenging the studies of mineral formation and properties?
Are you challenging the state of contaminant migration and diffusion in minerals?
Because these things are critical to the usefulness of the rock dating techniques.
Man ... science must be a drag when it comes to the things of God.
Bacteria are bugs in some colloquial speech. So, yes, in casual discussion one might say a bacterium is a bug. Since "bug" can also refer to beetles, or insects, or any such creepy-crawly, again in colloquial speech, you see why it helps in a discussion on science to attempt to use technical vocabulary to minimise ambiguity.Is bacteria a bug?
I'm going to again ask that you stay on topic. I will allow for the sake of argument that the earth is any age you care to assert.
Nope. You misquote the original post. There was no period; no period, no sentence. Good try though. Could we move on from the trivial? Got any arguments?This:
Q: 'So now we're throwing physics and geology into the mix of unreliable science in your view?'
A: 'All science.'
1) Divine revelation, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the constant teaching of the Magisterium.o [1] how do you know this? [2] How can we check that you're not making it up? [3] What is a soul? [4] how does it work? [5] what does it do? [6[ How can we check that it exists and/or is doing what it is supposed to do? [7] How can we check that your version of ensoulment is correct and not some alternative version?
Where's the overlap with science that we can check? You said there was an overlap. Where is it?
The use of the passive voice leaves one wanting. Who does the "considering"? Once "considered", is it fixed? If not then your sources as evidence of direct observation of speciation are pretty much useless as evidence. And fundamental logic tells us that the first observation of a thing is not necessarily the first instance of a thing.Speciation means that the evolution of a population has progressed to the degree that it is considered ..
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?