0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I'm pretty sure Darwin was a religious guy, but you should check that.
Evolution is an observation. Theism is an invention. They are compatible because they have absolutely nothing in common, therefore no possible conflict. Scientists accept a hypothesis for as long as it is consistent with observation, explanatory, and predictive. There is a scientific hypothesis that evolution has been going on for a long time. This is consistent with observation, and is explanatory, but it is not particularly useful for prediction because the mechanism of evolution involves an enormous number of variables and the effects can take a very long time to appear: so far we have only been able to predict some generalities such as the emergence of antibiotic resistance. Theism is not much concerned with observation, explanation or prediction. Nor, apparently, about selfconsistency, likelihood, or mechanism. It is about the presumption of authority. Charles Darwin was a devout theist whose observations led to a fairly comprehensive model of past evolution.
Charles Darwin was a devout theist whose observations led to a fairly comprehensive model of past evolution.
I wonder if certain forms of bacteria might be considered "most advanced" given their high rate of evolutionary change and extreme competition. Based on the amount of genetic material they have, many plants (and amoebas) might be considered most complex...
I’ve often wondered why creationists don't get so bent out of shape by other scientific ideas that are not corroborated by the Bible - what is it about evolution that is such a bee in their bonnet? Why not electromagnetism? Why isn't gravity controversial? Christians, even those who identify as fundamentalists, have managed to reconcile their beliefs with other scientific concepts, or so it would seem. You don’t see heated debates in the state legislatures or school boards over teaching photosynthesis or even the heliocentric solar system. Some Christians might even feel that the Biblical description “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light” is entirely compatible with the big bang. They can choose to see the Biblical description as an apt metaphor, or the big bang as the physical manifestation of God’s will.
It seriously freaks creationists out, and then they double down on the religion and toss out anything that calls it into question; specifically and especially evolution.
the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported, (and that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become)
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
were there any societies that worked a 5, 8 or 10 day cycle?