On the contrary, I do believe in evolution, just not so much in Evolution. Technically that still leaves the system expressed as theory. If natural selection is self-guiding, what is the mechanism, and how do we explain evolutionary dead-ends?
Last comments: Just because there unanswered questions doesn’t invalidate the theory (if it pleases you). The scientific method requires acceptance of new information and adjustment of formerly held views as necessary; one hopes resulting in a closer approach to the truth. As far as the mechanism for Natural Selection is concerned, my understanding is that it is largely survival of the fittest and chance mutation.
“On the contrary, I do believe in evolution, just not so much in Evolution. Technically that still leaves the system expressed as theory. If natural selection is self-guiding, what is the mechanism, and how do we explain evolutionary dead-ends?” ~ steve8714
Good stuff.
Here’s more:
Undeniable truth of life # 23. Evolution cannot explain Creation. — Rush Limbaugh (1980’s)
“...evolution does take place, but it doesn’t explain Creation. Obviously, it can’t ..” Rush Limbaugh Facts, Science Smash the Global Warming Myth February 28, 2007
[][][]
“No science is ever frightening to Christians. Religious people don’t need the science to come out any particular way on IQ or AIDS or sex differences any more than they need the science to come out any particular way on evolution...If evolution is true, then God created evolution. ... Although God-believers don’t need evolution to be false, athiests need evolution to be true. “. — Ann Coulter (from her 2006 book, “Godless”)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1646185/posts?page=31#31
[][][]
But “Which theory of evolution are you talking about?
“...What is the significance of such a theory? To address this question is to enter the field of epistemology.
A theory is a metascientific elaboration distinct from the results of observation, but consistent with them.
By means of it a series of independent data and facts can be related and interpreted in a unified explanation.
A theory’s validity depends on whether or not it can be verified; it is constantly tested against the facts; wherever it can no longer explain the latter, it shows its limitations and unsuitability. It must then be rethought.
Furthermore, while the formulation of a theory like that of evolution complies with the need for consistency with the observed data, it borrows certain notions from natural philosophy.
And, to tell the truth, rather than the theory of evolution, we should speak of several theories of evolution.
On the one hand, this plurality has to do with the different explanations advanced for the mechanism of evolution, and on the other, with the various philosophies on which it is based. Hence the existence of materialist, reductionist, and spiritualist interpretations. What is to be decided here is the true role of philosophy and, beyond it, of theology.
Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter are incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground the dignity of the person. ...”
Excerpted from:
Theories of Evolution - John Paul II http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1575742/posts?page=70#70
[][][]
The Fractured Fairy Tale of Darwinian Evolution
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2540831/posts?page=36#36";
[][]
“The most important truths are indeed “self evident,” that is, evident to the higher self. ...”This is why you cannot prove the existence of God to such a logic-bound individual, any more than you could prove it to a dog. Religious truths are conveyed through symbolism and analogy (with the assistance of grace), more like a great work of art than a mathematical equation. Although not merely logical, it would be a grave and simplistic error to suggest that the great revelations are illogical, any more than a Shakespearean sonnet or one of Beethoven’s symphonies are illogical. Rather, they are translogical.... “ Here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2540831/posts?page=38#38