evolution question

[TheMadnessInMe]

Sorry, WHY can't a human and ape be grouped scientifically?

Because the Bible says in Genesis 1:24-27 "Then God said, 'Let the earth produce living creatures according to their KINDS: livestock, creatures that crawl, and the wildlife of the earth according to their KINDS.' And so it was. So God made the wildlife of the earth according to their kinds, and creatures that crawl on the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. Then God said, 'Let US make man in Our image, according to Our likeness. They will rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the livestock, all the earth, and the creatures that crawl on the earth.' So God created man in His own image; He created him in the image of God; He created them male and female."

If, as a Catholic, you believe in the inerrant truth of the Bible, then you should of course believe that God has the power and capability to bring about the various animal KINDS. Kind, translated miyn (meen) from Hebrew means "From an unused root meaning to portion out; a sort that is species." Even since the beginning of time, writers like Moses were able to use scientific terms to label the creation. Notice that God created MAN separate from the other animals. When we look at fossils and even Charles Darwin says, "I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science." Or when he says the often told line of, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light...and for the correction of spherical and chronomatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

The scientific establishment has told the lie long enough. Fossils aren't factual evidence that connects humans to apes or monkeys. That's just what secular science wants people to believe. If you tell a lie long enough...

If this is true of apes/monkeys to man, why don't we see evidence of transitional fossils being found tying every species together? There's just not enough fossils on earth to support that claim. Again, at best, it's unprovable but falsifiable theorems. We didn't come from an evolutionary tree. We came from an evolutionary orchard, where each KIND, evolved within their own species - microevolution.

 

[Armoured]

Because the Bible says in Genesis 1:24-27 "Then God said, 'Let the earth produce living creatures according to their KINDS: livestock, creatures that crawl, and the wildlife of the earth according to their KINDS.' And so it was. So God made the wildlife of the earth according to their kinds, and creatures that crawl on the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. Then God said, 'Let US make man in Our image, according to Our likeness. They will rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the livestock, all the earth, and the creatures that crawl on the earth.' So God created man in His own image; He created him in the image of God; He created them male and female."

If, as a Catholic, you believe in the inerrant truth of the Bible, then you should of course believe that God has the power and capability to bring about the various animal KINDS. Kind, translated miyn (meen) from Hebrew means "From an unused root meaning to portion out; a sort that is species." Even since the beginning of time, writers like Moses were able to use scientific terms to label the creation. Notice that God created MAN separate from the other animals. When we look at fossils and even Charles Darwin says, "I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science." Or when he says the often told line of, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light...and for the correction of spherical and chronomatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

The scientific establishment has told the lie long enough. Fossils aren't factual evidence that connects humans to apes or monkeys. That's just what secular science wants people to believe. If you tell a lie long enough...

If this is true of apes/monkeys to man, why don't we see evidence of transitional fossils being found tying every species together? There's just not enough fossils on earth to support that claim. Again, at best, it's unprovable but falsifiable theorems. We didn't come from an evolutionary tree. We came from an evolutionary orchard, where each KIND, evolved within their own species - microevolution.

Did you see how I used the word "scientifically "? You've given a literalist Biblical reason apes and humans can't be grouped, not a scientific one. Can you give a scientific one?

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

Please show how they use creationism to do biology.

Gladly! One of the central themes in biology is the germ theory. Some of the great names of biology include Louis Pasteur, Joseph Lister, and Robert Koch. It's often left out that these great contributors towards biological science were also Christians. They based their theories on Biblical truths to formulate predictions on germ theory. They used the Scriptures as their guide. Using verses from Leviticus and Deuteronomy, they theorized that when God commanded the Jews to clean one's hands, their instruments, and other objects, indirectly, God was instructing the Jews on the art of purification. This wasn't just spiritual...it was medical! Even though the Jews or anyone for that matter didn't have a name for what was being practiced, God knew better and suggested cleanliness out of love for His people. In Levitical law, God also told man about other disease-fighting techniques such as quarantine, sanitation of body wastes, and disinfection well before the age of microscopes and the Golden Age of Microbiology!

Thousands of years after the creation and implementation of Levitical and Deuteronical Laws, Carl Fliermans solved Legionnaire's Disease basing his hypothesis on Biblical claims in 1977. Oh and by the way, he's Presbyterian. So you see, you can make incredible findings in science just like a secularist, by basing theories and predictions off of Biblical truths. God reveals Himself through the clues left by physical science such as this.

 

[florida2]

Here's just a very VERY recent example of this sort of bullying and indoctrination in America today....

http://www.khou.com/story/news/loca...nt-says-teacher-taught-god-not-real/74723050/

Can't see bullying and indoctrination - looks like encouraging critical thinking to me.

If you're too scared to think critically about your ideas and beliefs you obviously don't trust them very much.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

If you're too scared to think critically about your ideas and beliefs you obviously don't trust them very much.

Wow this is simply baffling considering the evidence that proves that science can be carried out using both worldviews for the betterment of science. Further, the same can be said for you. You obviously don't trust in the mathematical physics and mathematics of how great the improbability is that information and thus intelligence came from energy! Just admit it Darwinism/Neo-Darwinism is secular theology.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

Can't see bullying and indoctrination - looks like encouraging critical thinking to me.

Okay, Komrade! This sort of thinking is exactly opposite of what America stands for. Thank you for solidifying my notion that there is suppression of thought and academic freedom in America. Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Inquiry? What's that?

 

[Armoured]

Gladly! One of the central themes in biology is the germ theory. Some of the great names of biology include Louis Pasteur, Joseph Lister, and Robert Koch. It's often left out that these great contributors towards biological science were also Christians. They based their theories on Biblical truths to formulate predictions on germ theory. They used the Scriptures as their guide. Using verses from Leviticus and Deuteronomy, they theorized that when God commanded the Jews to clean one's hands, their instruments, and other objects, indirectly, God was instructing the Jews on the art of purification. This wasn't just spiritual...it was medical! Even though the Jews or anyone for that matter didn't have a name for what was being practiced, God knew better and suggested cleanliness out of love for His people. In Levitical law, God also told man about other disease-fighting techniques such as quarantine, sanitation of body wastes, and disinfection well before the age of microscopes and the Golden Age of Microbiology!

Thousands of years after the creation and implementation of Levitical and Deuteronical Laws, Carl Fliermans solved Legionnaire's Disease basing his hypothesis on Biblical claims in 1977. Oh and by the way, he's Presbyterian. So you see, you can make incredible findings in science just like a secularist, by basing theories and predictions off of Biblical truths. God reveals Himself through the clues left by physical science such as this.

Pasteur et al debunked Biblically derived theories like spontaneous generation of lower creatures, but I don't think you care to hear that the discoveries they're noted for aren't Bible based.

 

[Armoured]

Okay, Komrade! This sort of thinking is exactly opposite of what America stands for. Thank you for solidifying my notion that there is suppression of thought and academic freedom in America. Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Inquiry? What's that?

you're free to enquire and speak all you like. You're not free to demand reality conform to your expectations. Not the same thing.

 

[Armoured]

Wow this is simply baffling considering the evidence that proves that science can be carried out using both worldviews for the betterment of science. Further, the same can be said for you. You obviously don't trust in the mathematical physics and mathematics of how great the improbability is that information and thus intelligence came from energy! Just admit it Darwinism/Neo-Darwinism is secular theology.

What's the mathematical probability of God creating the universe in 6 literal days? Is it more or less likely than the scientific model? Be sure to show your working...

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

You're not free to demand reality conform to your expectations. Not the same thing.

Again, just asking for some equal "air time" in the classrooms. ALL theories should be taught otherwise it's academically dishonest to censor other theories just because secularists believe it's the only one that "makes sense."

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

Pasteur et al debunked Biblically derived theories like spontaneous generation of lower creatures, but I don't think you care to hear that the discoveries they're noted for aren't Bible based.

Source? It should be noted that Louis Pasteur also debunked Evolution in 1864...before it was cool. The Father of micro-biology PROVED life must come from life. He revealed this through scientific observation by the way.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

Btw, Dr. Andrew Fabich is a microbiologist and also has several published scholarly articles and is a self-identified Creationist that used a Creationist worldview to approach his research on E. Coli. He's been cited by many renown science institutions. He rejects macroevolution. He claims that the information in E. Coli was always there and never evolved over 30,000 generations like other secular biologists would have people believe.

 

[keith99]

Again, just asking for some equal "air time" in the classrooms. ALL theories should be taught otherwise it's academically dishonest to censor other theories just because secularists believe it's the only one that "makes sense."

Before becoming a theory a hypothesis has to be tested.

Please give us some tests that could falsify the creation myth.

The Plum Pudding model of atomic structure is no longer taught in science class, nor is the aether as the transmission medium for light or that everything is composed of the 4 elements of earth, air, fire and water or that illness is caused by either demons or the body's humors being out of balance.

Why should the Christian creation myth be taught in science class? Anthropology class perhaps, but I don't think you would like the treatment it will get there.

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

Btw, Dr. Andrew Fabich is a microbiologist and also has several published scholarly articles and is a self-identified Creationist that used a Creationist worldview to approach his research on E. Coli. He's been cited by many renown science institutions. He rejects macroevolution. He claims that the information in E. Coli was always there and never evolved over 30,000 generations like other secular biologists would have people believe.

I found this comment very amusing. Take a few minutes to read;

Fabich, A. J., Leatham, M. P., Grissom, J. E., Wiley, G., Lai, H., Najar, F., ... & Conway, T. (2011). Genotype and phenotypes of an intestine-adapted Escherichia coli K-12 mutant selected by animal passage for superior colonization. Infection and immunity, 79(6), 2430-2439.

Lead author Andrew J. Fabich acknowledged that there was a spontaneous mutation that was superior to native E. coli.

Hence, mutations that enhance metabolic efficiency confer a colonization advantage.

He just denies that evolution is evolution.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

Why should the Christian creation myth be taught in science class?

The same reason the ToE myth is taught in schools. Because what passes for science today would make Sir Isaac Newton blush and turn in his grave. Because the scientific establishment can be bought with tax dollars to skew data and spread disinformation faster than can be read by legitimate experts. Because if tax dollars are going to be used to pass out grants for research and keep alive a dead notion of molecule-to-man "science", then the least they can do is at least entertain another "fairy tale" to tell kids in the classrooms. That's why.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

He just denies that evolution is evolution.

LOL! So exactly what are YOUR credentials to question the Ph.D in his respective field that's published and also cited in secular work? I can't WAIT to hear this!

 

[keith99]

The same reason the ToE myth is taught in schools. Because what passes for science today would make Sir Isaac Newton blush and turn in his grave. Because the scientific establishment can be bought with tax dollars to skew data and spread disinformation faster than can be read by legitimate experts. Because if tax dollars are going to be used to pass out grants for research and keep alive a dead notion of molecule-to-man "science", then the least they can do is at least entertain another "fairy tale" to tell kids in the classrooms. That's why.

Rubbish, utter rubbish. Postulate a great conspiracy because you have no rational argument. Being totally lacking in scientific training does anything but make someone a legitimate expert.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

Rubbish, utter rubbish. Postulate a great conspiracy because you have no rational argument. Being totally lacking in scientific training does anything but make someone a legitimate expert.

I challenge you to do your research on peer-review. Not just on peer-review being a form of censorship, but also scholarly articles being written about the demise of peer-review articles. Further, that whole scientific journals can be tainted by corruption and political pressure. We again look no further than what is happening with "climate change" and the fallacies with that whole theory simply to push a political agenda.

This is called "science" today...what a joke.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/28/pumpkins-cause-climate-change-energy-department/

Or this....

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/27/scientists-claim-high-co2-levels-are-making-people-dumber/

And this....

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...nt-give-gop-internal-docs-on-climate-research

Which then leads to this....

http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/10/26/us-congress-to-investigate-noaas-temperature-adjustments/


I'd encourage you to also read up on the history of peer-review and how tax dollars now buy the data that private business or government want. If these companies or the government are unhappy with the results of the studies....the revocation and lack of investing in any given university's science programs then becomes a powerful sway over the scientific establishment as seen here...

http://iai.asm.org/content/77/4/1273.long

There is another story by Suzan Mazur on Peer-Review censorship when she interviewed David Noble on the practice. I'd encourage you to look up the story at some point but this site also references the story in addition to other cited works on the science establishment's bureaucracy.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/science/censorship-in-science-journalism/

Unsure if this link will work but....

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...view-as-censorship/+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[myarogancewasblottedout]

the conspiracy is quite obvious.
it goes like this (and this is my own thinking)
science is used by workers and university-hermits.
workers pay tax
governments collect tax
schools are funded by government
schools teach science.

just think before moses asked for tithes, the government wanted everything including people. atleast now %30 is max.

 

[TheMadnessInMe]

It's quite simple. Secularists have declared war on religion. It's not enough that they feel pressured to defend their evolutionary science. They now have to attack religion and those who carry their faith on their sleeve.

As a prior serviceman, I know all too well how invaluable communications nodes are to the enemy. You can't fight a war in disarray and without the capability of organizing an army or giving orders to the troops. This religious war is a lot like that. If you silence the enemy (Creationists/ID theorists) through censorship and dragging them to court using the ACLU, then you can better conduct your war and complete your mission. In this case the mission is to spread the lie that molecule-to-man evolution is a FACT and there is no God.