Science is most definitely a human construct. It is the body of human knowledge about the world we live in, much of it right, but some of it wrong, which is why we must be careful about how we use it.
Gravity does work the way Newton said it did. Einstein corrected Newton and maybe someday someone might correct Einstein. We know that science is correct because we test it to see if it is correct. If science cannot be tested, it is not science. “'Survival of the fittest” cannot be tested and thus is not science. Other types of knowledge besides science can also be tested, but not the same way that science is.
If science says it’s true, who are we to say it is wrong as you said? What I find hard to fathom is belief that the universe somehow created itself out of nothing. GOD and GOD alone has the power, knowledge, and love to create the universe and us, so if GOD does not exist, neither do we.
Ofcour4se I cannot dictate what you and T think, but I am sick of you saying that there is no evidence that GOD created the universe when that is just not true. First and foremost, If the universe has not existed forever, and certainly humans did not create it, then GOD must have created it.
Secomd, if the universe is composed of only the physical, then everything is the result of chance, so the good and the rational are non-existent. However we know that the universe is rational and good. This is against the teaching of Darwin that the world is based on survival of the fittest and Dawkins of the Selfish Gene.
“I’ve eaten all the bugs I can find in this tree. There is a predator that might catch me if I went down to the ground. I’ll just try jumping to the next tree instead.”
How’s that?
Squirrels jump from one tree to another. Some lizards jump from one tree to another. Leafhoppers and some other insects jump between branches (over shorter distances).
There’s tons of evidence that we can’t interpret and maybe never will. Who really understands quantum physics? And you bet I’ve thought the complexity of the world, especially the natural world, which seems precise and ordered and NOT created by chance. (I retain a wee bit of skepticism about the random mutation explanation). I believe that the evidence CAN be ascertained through the scientific method, but not through faith
But God and faith are intangible. Science cannot measure the intangible. It took several thousand years to identify radio and other invisible waves. Perhaps in a few more thousand someone will find a way to see God? (I doubt it) But God does not want to be found. He is a God of faith and must always be so until or unless he chooses to show Himself. But you really do not want to be here if that happens.
Thar is not true. My statement isa conclusion based on evidence, that is facts in the situation. If I say, All humans are moral. I am a human, therefore I am mortal, that is a logical conclusion. We do not have to wait untiI I die to know that I am mortal.
Of course, you do not have to agree with my conclusions, but it is insulting to say that these conclusions are not based on clear evidence because they are…
I’ve seen a few fall. And they do a decent job of controlling their falls, but something like a flying squirrel can control a fall to a greater extent than Gray Squirrels, and most birds can control falls even more effectively. Getting a bit better at controlling a fall would be an obvious reason for getting more wing-like arms.
If you have to be convinced that species who spend time in trees tend to jump from branch to branch and even tree to tree then the problem isn’t with us. The problem lies with your abject ignorance of those species.
All other criticisms stem from this fact. Meaning that
it cannot have foresight to build complex systems (And probability is against finding them)
It cannot build interdependent systems (Ecology)
it cannot just change from one system to another (eg endothermic and ectothermic)
It cannot just invent a feather without precencept of flight
Humanity is supposed to be God’s ultimate creation not the pinacle of random deviation
The last one is pure theology and flies against Darwin (et al)
1-5 assume no guidance from God, because evolution, as it stands, does not allow for guidance from God. (and we all know why)
Therefore if you are going to claim Theistic Evolution (as opposed to the current version) there must be a mechanism for God to control it. rather than some vague providential notion that he knew it would happen.
I hope this is clear enough
The caveat is that, as I cannot argue God with a scientist. I have to argue science, which throws up all the claims about “not knowing what I am talking about” (whether I do, or claim to, or not) The purpose of a feather is subject to opinion.not conjecture.
Thanks for these, Richard, I’ll give them some thought.
A quick (non-pedantic) point of order, God’s knowledge of a event in advance is his foreknowledge, God’s activity in and through an event is his providence.
For example, God saying to Jeremiah “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (Jeremiah 1:5) is a reference to his foreknowledge.
But when Joespeh says, “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives” (Gen 50:20), he’s talking about God’s providence.
Using the correct terms is helpful for ensuring against misunderstandings.
That’s an important distinction, and Joseph is a great example of the latter. God’s providences can be difficult (how long was Joseph in prison?). But good always comes from it!
Richard, you are right on the money. The fact is that that there us a mechanism that controls or guides evolution and it is called ecology, most notably in the form of climate change. Sadly, the mechanism which Darwin proposed to provide guidance for evolution, Survival of the fittest, does not because it is an unscientific myth that sounds good, but is false.
Evidence of GOD’s guidance is that the universe is rational, while random chance is not. Random chance is part of the mechanism of evolution, but change is rationally guided so it is rational. GOD does not have to guide directly to guide.
The purpose of feathers originally was to provide warmth. The are excellent insulators. The avian dinosaurs are examples of how organisms evolved by adapting to the environment.
