Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part Three


I find people do not respond to reasoned arguments. One could say that they aren’t understood. It’s a bother and one’s own view is always more attractive. Most of us want to have our say. A big part of it boils down to the difficulty we have in understanding one another. Where there’s a collection of words that triggers something that the person is in conflict with, out comes the opinion, often not having anything to do with what the particular post was attempting to address.

Even in your response, you want to put down the use of memes. The point of the comment that you were responding to had to do with how all science in some respects is like a dream. Most theories of evolution, as part of what we do all the time to keep our mental stability, close the book on reality, rather than offering a conduit to the truth. The theory acts like the meme that you are criticizing, closing communication in favour of the appearance of truth. Something like that anyway.


We were created at a point in time as were atoms and molecules, later prokaryotes and eucaryotes, multicellular organisms - plants then animals. Temporally it appears the ground was laid for the ontological hierarchy that underlies our existence. We need an environment in which to participate. The information derived from creative activity within each level was utilized ultimately to bring mankind into existence. We are a new type of being, different from the simplicity of atoms and molecules, which are unified, subsumed in our individual unified existence. Although different from other organisms, we share a physical nature since we live in and are a part of pretty much the same environment. Our spirit contains attributes not only of the material “soul” of atoms, but also those of a vegetative and senstive nature.


No one was ever convinced to change their mind by a meme. All memes do is give comfort to those who already agree with you and convince those who don’t agree that you are not interested in convincing them.

Memes do nothing to help understanding, only to polarize.

Yes, memes do have a point, but they do not support their point. As I said, they do not convince anyone. So it is just a waste of your time to post them. Just out of curiosity, have you ever witnessed a real debate, either on TV or in a high school debate class? They never use memes, and for good reason.

It would be nice if you actually tried to support a point like this rather than just blasting it out there and expecting it to do something.


I never said God and evolution are mutually exclusive.


It was just a joke, and ridiculing those on the creationist side, and how they supposedly see things, not Jesus. It is not how Catholics who believe in evolution see Jesus. God is the God of evolution and saying He couldn’t or didn’t use evolution limits God’s power and glory.


Perhaps so, but nevertheless



You are right, they are a waste of time, so one last good one… and let’s get to the real debate.


Those 50,000 generations of bacteria are in a lab. Dr. Lenski’s lab. They are the Long Term E. coli Experiment.

You would do better to check sources before posting. That way you will not make so many errors.



Your unsupported personal opinion is worth very little against the massive amount of scientific evidence for evolution in general and primate evolution in particular.



Someone may actually want a reasoned discussion. That person may want to try somewhere else. There isn’t enough agreement, even among those on the same side of the debate to narrow a discussion down to the one or two common points of interest needed for a debate. I have no idea what you envision as evolution. So what you are going to get is a shotgun approach - this is what I think. If you want me to respond to some belief you have, state it and I will give you as much a thoughtful critique as I can muster. Alternatively, pick something I’ve said that sounds wrong or is not understandable, and I will try to clarify as best I can.

Edited to provide an example: In reference to the point you are addressing, our thoughts allow us to see the structure that underlies the appearance. The idea of atoms refers to some aspect of reality. We can understand through experimentation that they exist and how they behave. We further develop visual renditions of those properties. Such mental images help us connect to that level of what is, to understand and manipulate what we have labelled the physical world. It may however, prevent us from getting closer to their truth. Like the blind men and the elephant, different perspectives give us a different understanding. If we adhere too strongly to one point of view, we are closing ourselves off from others that may enlighten us further. We do need a coherent sense of who we are in the world and sometimes good news is too fragmenting to that sense, that we run from it. That would be the short of the long response to your question.


They were not hauled in the lab.

Is your claim that life in the past (now dead) can be hauled in the lab?

That is what the Pope was stating. 10,000 generations in the past is a one time event and we cannot do emprirical research on them.


Your unsupported pagan creation story is unsupported empirically.

We have Revelation, in other words, we were told what happened.


So you think he needed to take full size dinos?


Macroevolution is inconsistent with our observations and Revelation as well.


. . . and to reason, actually, when we contemplate the reality of our own individual existence.


He is referring to the bacteria that became another species, the Pope however was indeed talking about previous generations over a long period of time. This experiment Rossum is referring to was over 30 years or so, and since the generations of bacteria are relatively short, there were about 50,000 generations at the time of the study.


Actually no, like Rossum said we observed macroevolution in a laboratory.

How is is inconsistent with revelation? Did God reveal that Galapagos species all were made as they are with no evolution?


The idea about the light joke is that creationists believe dinos and humans were altogether until the flood, and so the extinction of dinosaurs happened during the Moses flood event.

Jesus would be effectively saying to those dinos, no more room on the arc.

It’s silly but has a point.


That said, we do have spleens, livers, brains, hearts, bones and muscles like animals. Like them as well, we have perceptions, feelings and automatic reactions. We are hardwired to live within a limited earthly environment. We take a microcosm with us when we go underwater or out in space. Whether we took it with us when a flood covered the earth, will be left for another discussion. The truth of who we are lies in our being a spiritual soul. The matter that constitues our body is incorporated from the time of conception from matter that is other, becoming self within the relationship that is our existence. That being does not come from any pre-existing organism but is created by God Himself, from Adam onward in time.


I was thinking about these sorts of views when I commented:

I would label myself as a creationist, but I don’t think that view is likely.

On the other hand, because it speaks to mankind’s relationship with God, it would hold much more truth than Darwinism which rests on on materialism and necessity.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit