Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true


The difference between created life and un-created life is not in degree but in kind.

The word “first” always modifies an event in time. Therefore, the use of the word as descriptive of beings in eternity is meaningless.


That is the first step in the scientific process. (Well done!) Now take the second step. Gather more data and try to confirm the hypothesis. Are there any identifiable portions of advanced DNA in the most primitive life forms? What about artificial selection where very unnatural characteristics are selected for and evolve? Is the atrocity known as the modern English Bulldog part of God’s plan? What is the proposed mechanism by which advanced characteristics appear at the proper time? What is the cause and effect? This theory has more problems than evolution.


I agree with this post and it is the general idea of what I would’ve written in response to @Edgar.


This is a much more reasonable explanation. I would add that God’s plan does not merely play out in time, but involves His active involvement as Creator of all time and place, Divine Artist and Father.


I have provided exactly the same amount of evidence as evolutionists have for their assumed limited gene pool. So, you first.


Circling the wagons?


Rather pejorative. Nothing is more beautiful to a female bulldog than a male bulldog.


Supporting data has been gathered - much of it reported in this very thread.

  1. I’m not quite sure what you are referring to, so I will assume you mean organisms like bacteria. One would not expect there to be “advanced” DNA, as there is in a human zygote, that would code for the phenotype of more complex forms. They would be the first to be created, forming the environment suitable for the more complex kinds of living forms that followed. DNA, by the way is the tip of an ontological iceberg that is the thing in itself; it is what is observable directly by the senses and their technological extensions.

  2. Again, I don’t understand what you are getting at. There has been random degradation of the genomes of various kinds of creatures since the fall. The breakdown in the information carried by the DNA would result in “unnatural” characteristics arising and being passed on.

  3. As I understand your post, this is an elaboration of what you were getting at in the previous question. I believe that they have a lot of congenital issues. It would be as much a part of God’s plan as would be war - what human beings do with what they have been given, putting self-interest above love.

  4. I’m not going to post the link yet another time to the NASA twin study. The cellular mechanisms that involve DNA are associated with the organism’s relationship with its environment and we see considerable changes that permit the organism and its offspring to live more harmoniously within the greater system of which they are components.

  5. God is the Cause and this here is the effect.


I am referring to o_milly’s hypothesis that everything we have been calling “evolution” is just a rearrangement of genes that were already present in the first organisms. It is a nice theory, but there is no experimental data to support it.

How can you call the changes “degradation” when the later life forms are proving more successful than their ancestors?

But if those changes make the creature less successful at breeding, they don’t get passed on for long.

If you are speaking of the English Bulldog, it got that way because people selected them for those congenital issues. There are other instances of evolution from artificial selection producing creatures that have no natural advantage other than the fact that they have been arbitrarily preferred by man. Without that artificial interference, such congenital issues would have died out in the wild. But we can create an artificial environment and the creatures will evolve to adapt to it. Many experiments show this.


Not a word reported on this thread.


And there lies the problem. It is well exploited.


Recognize that lab experiments are INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED and what happens in the lab is different than what happens in the wild.


Yes. The sun moves and it was stopped. In 1917 it miraculously danced.


I strongly disagree.


Hmmm - it seems God’s Revelation (unchangeable) is being ignored or reinterpreted. The weak link is provisional historical science which by its own definition has a limited say about the universe. Then we add in faulty or incomplete human reasoning.

In the case of Revelation we have the protection of the Holy Spirit.


Evolution has the gaps. And now we know they are like the distance between galaxies. It is getting worse for evo every day.

There will always be at least one gap.


I do not think Adam had a belly button. Why would he need one?


Another au contraire.

The Lederberg experiment

So the penicillin-resistant bacteria were there in the population before they encountered penicillin. They did not evolve resistance in response to exposure to the antibiotic.


They might have evolved resistance in response to exposure to something in nature that was similar to penicillin.

Also the mutation needed is small enough that the probability of it appearing randomly is reasonable.

Actually, this experiment supports evolution more that not. It has always been the premise that genetic variation exist, and this just shows that premise is true. From the very first line of your citation:

In 1952, Esther and Joshua Lederberg performed an experiment that helped to show that many mutations are random, not directed.

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