The Gregorian University, Notre Dame, and the Pontifical Council for Culture are currently (March 3-7) holding their convention called "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories." There are many highly regarded scientists and others who discuss both the science and philosophy of evolution. There are other workshops in this series and one will be coming to Notre Dame in December 2009. That will discuss the political and social ramifications of evolution. Information on the plans is on a Notre Dame webpage HERE.
Most of the comments describing the conference have been dismissive, to put it kindly, of Intelligent Design Theory whenever it is mentioned, which seems to be often. The spokespersons also mix Young Earth Creationism in with Intelligent Design Theory, which are two different things. Once committed to keeping out any mention of ID in the conference itself, the organizers now say it will be discussed as a cultural or philosophical phenomenon, not as science. I, on the other hand, hope there may be follow-up articles or videos of the presentations. Perhaps there is something they know that would convince me of random materialistic, naturalistic evolution, and I like to listen to both sides.
But whether or not the persons involved in this conference understand that ID allows for evolution (which it does), they are absolutely opposed to the idea that God would touch His creation after the Big Bang. There is no room to allow for any other discussion--that would NOT be science.
The problem is, science is not cooperating with Darwin. For example, there is an article by Anderson et al., "A stem batrachian from the early Permian of Texas and the origin of frogs and salamanders," Nature, 453 (May 22, 2008): 515-518, about evolution of existing amphibians, such as frogs and salamanders. The authors admit origins of these animals are controversial due to "large morphological and temporal gaps in the fossil record." And, "recent molecular analyses are also controversial," meaning the sequenced genomes do not match with previous scientific interpretation of evidence.
The facts of science are so astounding, we should be glad the Lord could make us at all. In my theology, God created in the way He thought best. And in light of what He has done, we need to contemplate how very good He is.
Most of the comments describing the conference have been dismissive, to put it kindly, of Intelligent Design Theory whenever it is mentioned, which seems to be often. The spokespersons also mix Young Earth Creationism in with Intelligent Design Theory, which are two different things. Once committed to keeping out any mention of ID in the conference itself, the organizers now say it will be discussed as a cultural or philosophical phenomenon, not as science. I, on the other hand, hope there may be follow-up articles or videos of the presentations. Perhaps there is something they know that would convince me of random materialistic, naturalistic evolution, and I like to listen to both sides.
But whether or not the persons involved in this conference understand that ID allows for evolution (which it does), they are absolutely opposed to the idea that God would touch His creation after the Big Bang. There is no room to allow for any other discussion--that would NOT be science.
The problem is, science is not cooperating with Darwin. For example, there is an article by Anderson et al., "A stem batrachian from the early Permian of Texas and the origin of frogs and salamanders," Nature, 453 (May 22, 2008): 515-518, about evolution of existing amphibians, such as frogs and salamanders. The authors admit origins of these animals are controversial due to "large morphological and temporal gaps in the fossil record." And, "recent molecular analyses are also controversial," meaning the sequenced genomes do not match with previous scientific interpretation of evidence.
The facts of science are so astounding, we should be glad the Lord could make us at all. In my theology, God created in the way He thought best. And in light of what He has done, we need to contemplate how very good He is.
~~~~~~~~~
Picture from Work of God's Children Educational Project,
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. You do not have to agree, but please be civil. Thanks for your interest.