To Find God in All Things: Grandeur in an Evolutionary View of Life
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 ноя 2024
- Prof. Kenneth R. Miller (Brown University)
This recording was made at the Society of Catholic Scientists Conference-Origins-April 21-23, 2017. To see other videos and learn more about the Society of Catholic Scientists, visit www.catholicscientists.org.
Has Dr Miller read and refuted Dr Behe’s latest book?
have you?
We know little about the mysteries of the universe
if a creationist says that, you all clutch your pearls and scream "God of the Gaps! hiss hiss!"
Sam Harris believes a lot of stupid things.
fax 💯 📠
I saw a clip of Miller on the Colbert show. He made the comment that, as a Catholic, he believe that "Jesus Christ is the creator of all that is, seen and unseen." This was at the exact same time that he was going around giving lucrative lectures on the so called Collapse of Intelligent Design. Soooo...his "Jesus" is dumb and design free? Wow, what a miracle for such a Deity to create all that is seen, and unseen!
In the same clip Colbert talked about the primal pond as if, of course, we all know it is gawd's truth scientific fact. There is ZERO evidence for that, or that life ever comes from anything but life and life of the same kind - though they keep trying, and failing, to create life in labs with intelligent design. Miller didn't speak up and educate the public to the real truth, but sat there in silent assent.
Let's look at what some secular scientists have had to say that disagrees with evolutionism.
We are told that beneficial mutations are an essential mechanism for evolution to occur, but H. J. Muller, who won a Nobel Prize for his work on mutations, said....
"It is entirely in line with the accidental nature of mutations that extensive tests have agreed in showing the vast majority of them detrimental to the organism in its job of surviving and reproducing -- good ones are so rare we can consider them all bad." H.J. Mueller, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 11:331.
.
Anyway, mutations are isolated, random, events that do not build on one another like Legos, and certainly have no ability to create totally new DNA as, for ex., would be needed to turn a leg into a wing.
.
As for natural selection, it does not lead to evolution, either. What does NS select from? What is already in the genome. It shuffles pre existing information or may cause a loss of information, not the new info you would need to turn a fin into, say, a foot. That is why no matter what it selects from in a fish or bird or lizard or bacteria or monkey or tree or flower you will still have a fish, bird, lizard, bacteria, etc.
.
But, if you can, give data - not just theories presented as facts in the conveniently invisible past - that a Life Form A turned into Life Form B as the result of NS. In other words show that a species in any genus went to the next level in the Animal Kingdom (ditto for plants) to become a new Family. There are trillions of life forms on this planet. We're told it happened in the unverifiable past, over and over and over.
.
Why don't we see any species in any genus transitioning to become a member of a new animal or plant family today?
.
If there is no evidence that any life form's descendants transitioned to become a different family than its ancestors, then there is no evidence for evolution. It's just that simple. But feel free to cite data revealing any such evidence if you can.
.
Bowler, Peter J., Review of In Search of Deep Time by Henry Gee (Free Press, 1999), American Scientist (vol. 88, March/April 2000), p. 169.
"We cannot identify ancestors or 'missing links,' and we cannot devise testable theories to explain how particular episodes of evolution came about. Gee is adamant that all the popular stories about how the first amphibians conquered the dry land, how the birds developed wings and feathers for flying, how the dinosaurs went extinct, and how humans evolved from apes are just products of our imagination, driven by prejudices and preconceptions."
.
"There are only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation, that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with the only possible conclusion that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God. I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible; spontaneous generation arising to evolution." (Nobel Prize winner Wald, George, "Innovation and Biology," Scientific American, Vol. 199, Sept. 1958, p. 100)
.
"The pathetic thing about it is that many scientists are trying to prove the doctrine of evolution, which no science can do." (Dr. Robert A. Milikan, physicist and Nobel Prize winner, speech before the American Chemical Society.)
.
"Hypothesis [evolution] based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts....These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest."
(Sir Ernst Chan, Nobel Prize winner for developing penicillin)
.
On this webpage you can see Nobel Prize winning scientists, other secular scientists - including some world famous evolutionists - admitting there is no evidence for evolution. You can see them calling evolution a kind of religion, something that leads to "anti knowledge", etc. Notice how many of these secular scientists acknowledge evidence for a Creator.
freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1435562/posts
.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed shows the politics of Neo Darwinism which harasses and expels those in academia and the media who even hint that there MIGHT be evidence for a Creator.
ruclips.net/video/4HErmp5Pzqw/видео.html
.
As a former atheist and evolution believer, I once had no idea what was outside the box of what I had been told over and over since grade school
.
Anyone reading this: You are not an ape update. You were created in the very image and likeness of the Creator. He is your Father and loves you and wants you to know Him, and love Him too. Why trade in those fantastic truths for a bunch of mumbo jumbo pseudo science that even secular scientists can't get consensus on? Rhetorical Q.
@@battmann5083 You really are misunderstanding the debate.
I am not an expert on evolution but it is compatible with Catholicism. You really have need of reevaluating your world view.
@@battmann5083 I cannot seem to be able to see your comments please if possible do it again (I saw it in the notifications but not on the videos comments were I need to respond or not).
Ya man, the debate is that either God made us according to Genesis or that evolution disproves God. The entire purpose of it is to show that science and Faith are compatible and don’t need to be reconciled as there is no inherent contradiction. It shows that science has evidence for a Creator when taken in a philosophical perspective, it shows that God is so grand and amazing that He allowed our bodies to develop according to the laws of physics and science. I don’t know if this is any consolation but, I am 15 years old and I can see God in science and how He is Truth, both in Catholicism and Science. There is no contradiction, in fact there’s support for God. God Bless you, brother!!
@@luismagana9256 No offense taken but I am a woman not a man. Yes, I see he had purpose for his debate, but I feel it totally relies on believing contradictory things, on cognitive dissonance. The first law of logic is that two contradictory statements cannot possibly both be true. Evolutionism and the Bible make totally contradictory claims.
I believe, as do many, that there is no science in evolution, but that it is a pseudo science religion. Let's look at what some scientists working in the secular realm, even Nobel Prize winners, even some world famous evolutionists, have had to say that disagrees with evolutionism. freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1435562/posts?page=41
Science supports the Bible, not evolution. Allow me to demonstrate that:
The evidences for the Bible are too numerous to mention and include areas such as archaeology, history, fulfilled prophecies and, yes, science.
Let's start with DNA. All DNA is always just a copy of a copy of a copy and so on which replicates what has already been seen in nature. Yes, it can be altered to a limited extent, but no original, novel, strands of DNA are ever created and, further, no one has any data to show how any DNA got here. This matches the Bible which says creation has halted.
And btw, fish don't have DNA instructions for legs, and lizards don't have DNA instructions for feathers, wings etc. Since no new DNA is ever created, only altered to a very limited extent, where would they get it from? Oh, wait, I'm sure evolutionism has lots of...theories....on that. But the Bible says things were created fully formed and fully functional, so there ya go with DNA fulfilling an expected prediction.
Another example of how creation has been halted is seen when you look at the taxonomic groupings of animals and plants, ascending from species to family, to class, to order, to phylum, to kingdom. No plants or animals ever go higher than the creation of a new species, no matter what Darwin, or evolutionary peer reviews, claim happened in the invisible and unverifiable past.
Hundreds of thousands of species of beetles stay beetles, thousands and thousands of species of trees, bees, bacteria, fish, lizards, whatever, stay trees, bees, bacteria, fish, lizards, whatever. That stasis matches what the Bible says, also, about creation having been halted. Plants and animals stay in their "kinds" i.e. families. This is what the Bible would predict, life forms sticking to their own "kind" i.e. taxonomic family.
The Bible talks about a Great Flood. So we could predict the following: There should be countless billions of fossils all over the planet. There are. Now, fossils are created when life forms are suddenly buried with water, then rapidly covered with sediment. To give you an idea of their vast numbers, consider that there are billions of fossils of just one kind of ocean dwelling nautiloid, alone, in the Grand Canyon alone. And, speaking of ocean dwelling creatures, 98% of all fossils on land are marine. Now how did all that ocean water get everywhere? Marine life forms washed all over the earth would be predicted for a world wide Flood.
You can find extinct marine life form's fossils in incredible numbers on most any mountaintop, like trilobytes for example, and all kinds of sea shells, etc. In addition there are hundreds of Great Flood legends all over the world from the Aborigines to the Cherokees to Peruvians. Though they are not totally identical they all tell of a humanity that sinned, and a righteous person who took his family and some animals onto a boat to survive the punishment of a great deluge.
Bible predictions would leave no room for a Geologic Colulmn. Guess what? There never was any Geologic Column, or any Cambrian, Jurassic, Triassic etc. periods. Those are all fictional. Real science uses real data. The real data shows the fossils are jumbled or, you could say, awash. For just one of countless examples, you can find giant sharks next to dino bones in America. So called lowest level Cambrian, deep sea, fossils are found at every level on the planet from Canada to New Zealand. When I say every level, that includes the hills of mid America, for instance, and most mountain tops in the world.
If you think there is a Geologic Column, go on a search for photos of one showing the lowest level Cambrian fossils at the bottom, and asecending layers of fossils matching the GC charts. Close ups now, not some distant photos of mountains ranges or rock piles they CLAIM have GCs in them.
If we demonstrate there is no GC, we are then are told "plate tectonics" moved the fossils around. Plate tectonics are used to create theories piled on hypotheses that are heaped on speculation to fit the evolutionary narrative. As usual in evolutionism, their theories and hypotheses and speculations and conjectures are presented as fact, not as faith.
But we have some real data! Common sense and universal experience, and scientific research, let us know what erosion does. Now some of those deep sea life creatures' fossils, like trilobites, are supposed to have gone extinct two hundred MILLION years ago. Yet, around the planet, we see that their fossils are not uncommonly found in mint condition. Google "Trilobites on mountains." The real scientific data, and common sense, tell us those fossils would be nothing but dust and rubble in all that time. But the Bible would predict they could still often be intact because the Flood was only several thousand years ago.
Huge cities with pyramids bigger than Egypt's, and with giant statues, found sunken in oceans around the world, also testify to the Flood.
And we're also supposed to buy it that dino bones lasted 75 million or so years? That narrative is still promoted even though they keep finding more and more soft tissues, including flesh with liquid blood in it, in dinosaur bones all the time. There always is some unverifiable, never supported by actual data, "theory" given for why such things lasted, of course. The actual data from forensic science - which makes it clear those materials could not survive more than a few thousand years - and common sense are ignored.
Art works, and historical accounts, around the world, which show dinos, sometimes with people, are also ignored or else the false claim is made, with no justification at all, that they must be fake. www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ Yes, Noah would have taken dinos on the Ark. Juveniles, no doubt. They all started out in eggs about the size of a football.
For the statistics on the Ark and "How could all those animals fit onto it?" see this video with all the science and mathematics, and the destruction of false preconceptions about it and the kinds of animals on it: ruclips.net/video/6Ma-LP0UDtw/видео.html
And btw, I have sometimes had evolution believers to demand that they be shown bunny bones with dino bones. This vid goes over the Ashley Phosphate fossil beds which show a vast, 18 inch deep, jumble of fossils including those from dinos, people, rabbits, horses, rhinos, whales and on and on.
ruclips.net/video/nY7jlSJ2xZ4/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ZoogZdYIYUQ/видео.html
Irreducible complexity is also evidence of the truth of the Bible which claims instant creation of all life forms. I will give you my favorite example, though all life is irreducibly complex.
Google a picture of the bacterial flagellum and its motor and whip. www.google.com/search?q=picture+of+bacterial+flagellum&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS773US773&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=dC7YTCeV1YNfdM%253A%252C4O_9N-ONtL9L6M%252C_&usg=AI4_-kQpHDtdqhZWJOCaDPU9Hh3WS7-nQw&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwie2pPWhvLeAhXGT98KHf3NCxQQ9QEwAnoECAQQCA&biw=1366&bih=626#imgrc=dC7YTCeV1YNfdM: Now if the b.f doesn't move, it doesn't do its job and is useless. It isn't going to move anywhere until both the motor, and whip on the motor, are completely formed and attached together. So, while those 2 parts are just "evolving" nubs and stubs, what good are they? What "co option" purposes could they serve? If you can't even imagine the answers, how is mindless "evolution" going to make it happen?
Why and how would evolution keep those two, partial and incomplete, parts in limbo for eons until they are complete and connected and ready to work together? Well, it's not going to happen. There is zero evidence it ever happened, too, of course. In fact, there is zero evidence the b.f. has ever been anything but exactly what it is right now. Some claim a simpler life form evolved into the b.f., by something they call "co option" but as usual there is zero data to support any such claim. In evolutionism you ignore, or spin, the actual data and present data-free, evidence-free, scenarios which defy the real data in order to support an evolutionary narrative.
Again, irreducible complexity, which indicates incredible intelligence, not to mention unimaginable power, is seen at every level in life forms. The Bible presents a picture of life forms created instantly, fully complete and fully functional. That's what irreducible complexity in living examples, and the fossil record, reveal.
If the Creator went to all that "trouble" to create that little, high tech, irreducibly complex nano machine called a bacterial flagellum, how much more does He care about you, in whom He placed it?