Neo-Darwinian evolution is in trouble INSIDE the scientific community

[Subduction Zone]

i asked you a very simple question: if we will find a gene in 2 far species but not in some species between them (in other words: non hierarchy), then evolution is false? yes or no? it's very simple.

And I already answered this. If you want a more detailed answer do you remember your previous error on the article involving ERV's?

 

[Ronald]

This is not a matter of "looking into someone's heart". When it comes to the sciences the beliefs of those active now is well known. As for your "list" those were not creationists. Creationism and Christianity are not one and the same.

I think it's an honest assessment that traditional Christianity preaches that God created the heavens and the earth finished, not evolved. Changes within the organism (micro-evolution) is really adaptive mechanisms, part of the design of the kind. This theistic evolution distorts Genesis and is something of a modern compromise. Christians compromise on many issues. These are rationalizations, excuses, a liberal movement. There have been many obvious attempts to change history and the various groups (revisionists) continue to chip away at the orthodox beliefs. Gay priests in churches are an example of these compromises.

But let me elaborate on my previous list just so readers can be more informed.

1. 
   William Ockham, a philosopher, theologian who contributed works in physics as well in the Medieval Era. He said, “ Only faith gives us access to theological truths”. “The ways of God are not open to reason for God has freely chosen to create the world and establish a way of salvation within it apart from any necessary law that human logic or rationality can uncover.”
   >I think this quote clearly supports my explanation that only a born again Christian can discern scripture.
   
2. Sir Francis Bacon, philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, and author. He served both as Attorney General and as Lord Chancellor of England. After his death, he remained extremely influential through his works, especially as philosophical advocate and practitioner of the scientific method. He is known as the Father of Scientific Method.
   
   
3. Johannes Kepler, astronomer, mathematician whose works were motivated by his faith in God. He laid the foundations for which Newton followed.
   
   
4. Rene Descartes, philosopher, mathematician and scientist. In his work, “Meditations on First Philosophy”, Descartes sets forth two proofs for God's existence.
   >> I should suggest atheists check out his proofs!
   
5. Blaise Pascal, mathematician, physicist and Catholic theologian
   
   
6. Robert Boyle, natural philosopher, chemist, physicist. A devout Anglican
   
   
7. Gottfried Leibniz, mathematician and philosopher. He developed differential and integral calculus. Leibniz concluded that our universe is the best possible one that God could have created …
   
   
8. Isaac Newton, mathematician, astronomer, physicist, philosopher. “Newton wrote many religious tracts dealing with the literal and symbolic interpretation of the Bible, including a manuscript sent to John Locke disputing the fidelity of 1 John 5:7 and its fidelity to the original manuscripts of the New Testament, remained unpublished until 1785.”
   
   
9. Carl Linneaus, botanist, physician, zoologist. His father was a Lutheran minister. He went to study theology, Greek and Hebrew but ended up not following in his father’s footsteps and becoming a minister. This didn’t mean he didn’t believe in God.
   
   
10. Daniel Bernoulli, X mathematician, physicist. Not sure about this one’s faith.
    

11. Louis Pasteur, biologist, microbiologist, chemist. He was a Catholic.

“His grandson, Louis Pasteur Vallery-Radot, wrote that Pasteur had only kept from his Catholic background a spiritualism without religious practice, although Catholic observers often said Louis Pasteur remained throughout his whole life an ardent Christian, and his son-in-law, in a biography of Louis Pasteur, writes: Absolute faith in God and in Eternity, and a conviction that the power for good given to us in this world will be continued beyond it, were feelings which pervaded his whole life; the virtues of the gospel had ever been present to him. Full of respect for the form of religion which had been that of his forefathers, he came simply to it and naturally for spiritual help in these last weeks of his life.”
Wikipedia
12. William Tomson Kelvin, mathematical physicist and engineer. He contributed to the formulation of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics. He was a devout Christian who actually believed in a young earth.

13. George Washington Carver, botanist. Christian.

14. William Henry Bragg, X -- not sure about this one

15. Robert Millikan X -- not sure about this one either

16. John Boyd Orr, teacher, doctor, biologist, awarded the Nobel Prize Prize for Nutrition and work in Agriculture. A Christian with 3 year degree in theology at the University in Glasgow.

17. John Eccles, neurophysiologist. Awarded Nobel Prize for Physiology/ Medicine. A Roman Catholic/ Deist

18. Max Planck, physicist, Nobel Prize winner for Quantum Theory of Physics. Lutheran

19. John Polkinghorn, physician, theologian, Anglican Priest

Only 3 on the list I could not confirm as Christians. 1 was a theistic/evolutionist

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think it's an honest assessment that traditional Christianity preaches that God created the heavens and the earth finished, not evolved. Changes within the organism (micro-evolution) is really adaptive mechanisms, part of the design of the kind. This theistic evolution distorts Genesis and is something of a modern compromise. Christians compromise on many issues. These are rationalizations, excuses, a liberal movement. There have been many obvious attempts to change history and the various groups (revisionists) continue to chip away at the orthodox beliefs. Gay priests in churches are an example of these compromises.

But let me elaborate on my previous list just so readers can be more informed.

1. 
   William Ockham, a philosopher, theologian who contributed works in physics as well in the Medieval Era. He said, “ Only faith gives us access to theological truths”. “The ways of God are not open to reason for God has freely chosen to create the world and establish a way of salvation within it apart from any necessary law that human logic or rationality can uncover.”
   >I think this quote clearly supports my explanation that only a born again Christian can discern scripture.
   
2. Sir Francis Bacon, philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, and author. He served both as Attorney General and as Lord Chancellor of England. After his death, he remained extremely influential through his works, especially as philosophical advocate and practitioner of the scientific method. He is known as the Father of Scientific Method.
   
   
3. Johannes Kepler, astronomer, mathematician whose works were motivated by his faith in God. He laid the foundations for which Newton followed.
   
   
4. Rene Descartes, philosopher, mathematician and scientist. In his work, “Meditations on First Philosophy”, Descartes sets forth two proofs for God's existence.
   >> I should suggest atheists check out his proofs!
   
5. Blaise Pascal, mathematician, physicist and Catholic theologian
   
   
6. Robert Boyle, natural philosopher, chemist, physicist. A devout Anglican
   
   
7. Gottfried Leibniz, mathematician and philosopher. He developed differential and integral calculus. Leibniz concluded that our universe is the best possible one that God could have created …
   
   
8. Isaac Newton, mathematician, astronomer, physicist, philosopher. “Newton wrote many religious tracts dealing with the literal and symbolic interpretation of the Bible, including a manuscript sent to John Locke disputing the fidelity of 1 John 5:7 and its fidelity to the original manuscripts of the New Testament, remained unpublished until 1785.”
   
   
9. Carl Linneaus, botanist, physician, zoologist. His father was a Lutheran minister. He went to study theology, Greek and Hebrew but ended up not following in his father’s footsteps and becoming a minister. This didn’t mean he didn’t believe in God.
   
   
10. Daniel Bernoulli, X mathematician, physicist. Not sure about this one’s faith.

11. Louis Pasteur, biologist, microbiologist, chemist. He was a Catholic.

“His grandson, Louis Pasteur Vallery-Radot, wrote that Pasteur had only kept from his Catholic background a spiritualism without religious practice, although Catholic observers often said Louis Pasteur remained throughout his whole life an ardent Christian, and his son-in-law, in a biography of Louis Pasteur, writes: Absolute faith in God and in Eternity, and a conviction that the power for good given to us in this world will be continued beyond it, were feelings which pervaded his whole life; the virtues of the gospel had ever been present to him. Full of respect for the form of religion which had been that of his forefathers, he came simply to it and naturally for spiritual help in these last weeks of his life.”
Wikipedia
12. William Tomson Kelvin, mathematical physicist and engineer. He contributed to the formulation of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics. He was a devout Christian who actually believed in a young earth.

13. George Washington Carver, botanist. Christian.

14. William Henry Bragg, X -- not sure about this one

15. Robert Millikan X -- not sure about this one either

16. John Boyd Orr, teacher, doctor, biologist, awarded the Nobel Prize Prize for Nutrition and work in Agriculture. A Christian with 3 year degree in theology at the University in Glasgow.

17. John Eccles, neurophysiologist. Awarded Nobel Prize for Physiology/ Medicine. A Roman Catholic/ Deist

18. Max Planck, physicist, Nobel Prize winner for Quantum Theory of Physics. Lutheran

19. John Polkinghorn, physician, theologian, Anglican Priest

Only 3 on the list I could not confirm as Christians. 1 was a theistic/evolutionist

Again, evidence that any of these people made the gross error of being creationists. If you want to claim that any of the more recent ones were science deniers the burden of proof would clearly be upon you. The earlier ones could not be properly called creationists since that strange belief is a reaction to the theory of evolution. Worse yet Linnaeus (note spelling) realized that man belonged to the same order as other apes long before Darwin's time.

Lord Kelvin is perhaps the only legitimate creationist on the list. He based his rejection of evolution on a huge error he made when he tried to calculate the age of the Earth.

​

 

[Speedwell]

Only 3 on the list I could not confirm as Christians. 1 was a theistic/evolutionist

Yes, you are willing enough to claim them as "Christians" when it suits your rhetorical agenda. When it doesn't, they'll go back to being "Bible-hating, Christ-denying (epithet for communist)(epithet for homosexual) lovers" just like the rest of us.

 

[Ronald]

Again, evidence that any of these people made the gross error of being creationists. If you want to claim that any of the more recent ones were science deniers the burden of proof would clearly be upon you. The earlier ones could not be properly called creationists since that strange belief is a reaction to the theory of evolution. Worse yet Linnaeus (note spelling) realized that man belonged to the same order as other apes long before Darwin's time.

Lord Kelvin is perhaps the only legitimate creationist on the list. He based his rejection of evolution on a huge error he made when he tried to calculate the age of the Earth.

​

Again, you don't know, you cling to a hope that only legitimate scientists in their right minds could only be evolutionists. You can't accept that most of them were creationists so you distort and try to revise history, negate a part of that person that made them so incredibly gifted scientists. You can't change who they were or what they believed. You try to remove the Giver from the gifted, but you fail. The TOE fails, it has no power and little influence ... it is dying and you, in acts of desperation struggle along with it to stay afloat. You're gonna drown.
The fact is only 9% of the world's population are atheists and of course evolution is their only option. After all of the efforts for over 150 years, with it being taught in schools, it has not gained ground, it's stayed about the same. It only has caused Christians to compromise their origins and interpretation of Genesis. It has no power and little weak human influence behind it, this is why. On the other side, you have an all powerful God who influences, changes and saves lives and it is His world you are living in. Everything is His. He keeps your heart pumping. Imagine that, a rebellious person who pursues this active protest to promote anti-God theories and tout, "God doesn't exist" and seeks all venues to push the TOE down the world's throat ... and He still keeps your heart beating. How mercifully kind to His enemies. Of course you wouldn't call yourself an enemy since you don't think He exists. But Jesus said, "If you've seen Me, you'll seen the Father, I and the Father are ONE.
"He is the image of the invisible God ... For by Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities, all things were created by Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together". Col 1:16, 17

There are numerous scriptures stating that God created everything and most of those scientists knew this a believed it, otherwise they would have been considered heretics or not Christians at all. This has always been a fundamental belief, you cannot remove it from the Bible, but some distort it and compromise. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ..." Gen. 1:1 and that's it. Theistic Evolution is sadly a distortion and compromise. He made everything finished in 6 24-hour days and rested on the 7th and that's that.

 

[pitabread]

The TOE fails, it has no power and little influence ... it is dying and you, in acts of desperation struggle along with it to stay afloat.

As I've repeatedly explained to you, the theory of evolution is an applied science. It's not going anywhere.

The idea that the Theory of Evolution is somehow 'failing' or 'dying' or whatever is just misguided wishful thinking on the part of creationists. It has zero bearing in reality.

Especially since, in the U.S. at least, belief in creationism has been declining for a couple decades now. And given that creationism has zero real-world application outside of tourism, merchandising, and donations, popular support is the only thing which can sustain it.

If I was a creationist, I'd be concerned.

 

[Ronald]

Yes, you are willing enough to claim them as "Christians" when it suits your rhetorical agenda. When it doesn't, they'll go back to being "Bible-hating, Christ-denying (epithet for communist)(epithet for homosexual) lovers" just like the rest of us.

Don't you claim to be an Christian (Anglican)? Why would I have reason to think anything else but what you claim? My agenda is to spread the gospel. Do you have a problem with that? Do you hate the Bible? Are you a Communist? Wow, the animosity is thick. ??

 

[Speedwell]

There are numerous scriptures stating that God created everything and most of those scientists knew this a believed it, otherwise they would have been considered heretics or not Christians at all. This has always been a fundamental belief, you cannot remove it from the Bible, but some distort it and compromise. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ..." Gen. 1:1 and that's it. Theistic Evolution is sadly a distortion and compromise. He made everything finished in 6 24-hour days and rested on the 7th and that's that.

That dog won't hunt. You are trying to turn this into a cosmic theist vs. atheist controversy, when it is really nothing more than conflict between a Protestant religious minority with a political agenda and everybody else, theist and atheist alike.

 

[Ronald]

As I've repeatedly explained to you, the theory of evolution is an applied science. It's not going anywhere.

It's not a science, it's a theory, backed by a lot of guessing, assumptions, an empty mechanism that doesn't work.

 

[pitabread]

It's not a science, it's a theory, backed by a lot of guessing, assumptions, an empty mechanism that doesn't work.

Well... you're wrong: Evolutionary principles and their practical application

Also: Applying evolutionary biology to address global challenges | Science

And: The great opportunity: Evolutionary applications to medicine and public health

Etc...

 

[Ronald]

That dog won't hunt. You are trying to turn this into a cosmic theist vs. atheist controversy, when it is really nothing more than conflict between a Protestant religious minority with a political agenda and everybody else, theist and atheist alike.

Think what you may. I cover all areas of controversy, from a one-celled animal to the universe. I'm am just supporting the OP with details, exposing the flaws.

 

[Speedwell]

Don't you claim to be an Christian (Anglican)? Why would I have reason to think anything else but what you claim? My agenda is to spread the gospel. Do you have a problem with that? Do you hate the Bible? Are you a Communist? Wow, the animosity is thick. ??

Pull the other one. If your agenda was to spread the Gospel, that's what you would be doing. But I've lived in the Bible Belt as a non-YEC Christian; I know better.

 

[Ronald]

Well... you're wrong: Evolutionary principles and their practical application

Also: Why is phylogenetics important?

And: The great opportunity: Evolutionary applications to medicine and public health

Etc...

We'll soon see.

 

[pitabread]

We'll soon see.

Why when I read this, it sounds like a cartoon villain voice in my head?

Regardless, evolution is an applied science now and has been for decades. The fact that it's a useful science with real-world implications is why it's going to continue to be taught.

Heck, there's an entire journal dedicated to applied evolution: Evolutionary Applications - Wiley Online Library

It's not dying, it's not disappearing, it's not going anywhere. If anything, it's been gaining more relevance in the last couple decades particularly with respect to modern genomics, computational biology and applications thereof in medicine and agriculture.

Meanwhile, creationist support (in the U.S.) has been declining for a couple decades now and given the demographic support (i.e. older people make up the bulk of support for creationism) suggests that creationism will continue to decline as demographics shift.

 

[Astrophile]

William Tomson Kelvin, mathematical physicist and engineer. He contributed to the formulation of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics. He was a devout Christian who actually believed in a young earth.

Lord Kelvin (1823-1907) was born William Thomson; he took the title of 1st Baron Kelvin when he was ennobled. He used scientific methods, based on the transport of heat through the Earth, to make various calculations of its age; he was not a Biblical young earth creationist. His first attempt, which was published in 1864, yielded an age between 20 and 400 million years, and this was in fair agreement with estimates based on sedimentation rates and the thickness of the succession of sedimentary rocks. His final attempt, published in June 1897, reduced this estimate to between 20 and 30 million years, and this was in good agreement with the time for which the Sun could continue to radiate if it generated energy solely by contraction; this is still known as the Kelvin-Helmholtz time-scale.

Although Lord Kelvin's age for the Earth was only about 1/200 of the present value, it was between two thousand and five thousand times the young earth creationist value. Moreover, although Lord Kelvin opposed Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, he accepted the reality of some sort of evolutionary process, and proposed that the first living thing had arrived on Earth in a meteorite. (It was never clear where this first living thing had come from.) Finally, for the first decades of the 20th century, biologists and geologists were willing to accept that living things had evolved from primitive life-forms to advanced animals like ourselves within Lord Kelvin's time-scale for the earth.

 

[Astrophile]

William Henry Bragg, X -- not sure about this one

Robert Millikan, X -- not sure about this one either.

From The religion of William H. Bragg, Nobel Prize winner for his work in X-ray diffraction ,

'Religious faith to W.H. Bragg was the willingness to stake his all on the hypothesis that Christ was right, and test it by a lifetimes's experiment in charity ... Bible reading was obligatory.'

From Robert Andrews Millikan - Wikipedia , 'A religious man and the son of a minister, in his later life Millikan argued strongly for a complementary relationship between Christian faith and science.'

However, neither Bragg nor Millikan appear to have been young earth creationists. Perhaps you ought to follow their religion rather than your present Biblical literalism.

 

[sfs]

My agenda is to spread the gospel.

Then you're doing an absolutely terrible job of it. You repeat ludicrous falsehoods about science and you make up fantasies about the motives of those who disagree with you. It's hard to imagine a better way of convincing outsiders that Christianity has nothing to do with truth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again, you don't know, you cling to a hope that only legitimate scientists in their right minds could only be evolutionists. You can't accept that most of them were creationists so you distort and try to revise history, negate a part of that person that made them so incredibly gifted scientists. You can't change who they were or what they believed. You try to remove the Giver from the gifted, but you fail. The TOE fails, it has no power and little influence ... it is dying and you, in acts of desperation struggle along with it to stay afloat. You're gonna drown.
The fact is only 9% of the world's population are atheists and of course evolution is their only option. After all of the efforts for over 150 years, with it being taught in schools, it has not gained ground, it's stayed about the same. It only has caused Christians to compromise their origins and interpretation of Genesis. It has no power and little weak human influence behind it, this is why. On the other side, you have an all powerful God who influences, changes and saves lives and it is His world you are living in. Everything is His. He keeps your heart pumping. Imagine that, a rebellious person who pursues this active protest to promote anti-God theories and tout, "God doesn't exist" and seeks all venues to push the TOE down the world's throat ... and He still keeps your heart beating. How mercifully kind to His enemies. Of course you wouldn't call yourself an enemy since you don't think He exists. But Jesus said, "If you've seen Me, you'll seen the Father, I and the Father are ONE.
"He is the image of the invisible God ... For by Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities, all things were created by Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together". Col 1:16, 17

There are numerous scriptures stating that God created everything and most of those scientists knew this a believed it, otherwise they would have been considered heretics or not Christians at all. This has always been a fundamental belief, you cannot remove it from the Bible, but some distort it and compromise. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ..." Gen. 1:1 and that's it. Theistic Evolution is sadly a distortion and compromise. He made everything finished in 6 24-hour days and rested on the 7th and that's that.

You keep making the same error of conflating creationism and Christianity. Worldwide most Christians accept the fact of evolution. There is no need to read Genesis literally. In fact your belief is rather arrogant. You are trying to tell God how he had to make the Earth. Meanwhile scientists, and this includes Christian scientists are merely interested in how our world was made. Christian scientists approach the problems with trying to find out how God made this world. They seem to have a much truer Christian humility than creationists do.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

What can you name that 'began to exist', rather than just being a re-arrangement of what already existed?

 

[Astrophile]

There are numerous sites on the internet that go into detail about this prophecy.
Signs of the End - The Great Sign of 2017
You have Stellarium, check out that date yourself.

I don't know whether you know about the Jewish rebellion against Rome in 66-73 AD, and the destruction of the temple and the sacking of Jerusalem in August 70 AD. The rebellion was described by Josephus in his book The Jewish War. If you care to look at Stellarium for 27th August 70 AD, three days before the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans, you will find that the Sun was in Virgo, with the Moon east of Spica, i.e. at the feet of Virgo, and Venus, Jupiter and Mercury west of the Sun and between it and Regulus (the brightest star of Leo). In addition, Saturn was east of the Moon, and between it and Antares (alpha Scorpii).

Unfortunately I can't download Stellarium for this date, so that you will have to look at it for yourself. Of course, nobody could actually have seen this planetary alignment, but astronomers knew enough about the movements of the Moon and the planets to know where they were in the sky at any particular time.

As another interesting fact, the island of Patmos, where John was living when he wrote Revelation, is about 170 km from the island of Rhodes, the home of Hipparchus (ca. 190-120 BC), the greatest observational astronomer of antiquity.

I don't want to make too much of this. Revelation is a very strange and difficult book, and the occurrence of this planetary alignment just before the fall of Jerusalem was, in astronomical terms, no more than a coincidence. However, you may find the coincidence interesting.