Pope Francis declares Evolution and Big Bang theory are right

[bhavv]

Lel evolution, I didn't come from a chimpanzee!

I mean look, I can prove its false. No jar of peanut butter has ever evolved into a leopard.

 

[Arakhor]

I know. Monkeys being around proves we didn't "evolve" from monkeys, right? Just saying...

 

[BvBPL]

I could go with that. But science really does understand a lot more than those who say "Behold! A miracle!", doesn't it?

Given that science is an abstract human endeavor and those who say behold are presumably actual people that seems to be an unfair comparison.

 

[Kyriakos]

I know. Monkeys being around proves we didn't "evolve" from monkeys, right? Just saying...

As noted, Darwin did not argue that humans evolved from any species later on concurrently existing with them (ie remaining the same species). So even if humans can be said to have evolved from something on that general area, it would have been connoting a 'common ancestor' species, which is neither human nor 'ape'.

That said, afaik in biology there are ties theorised of humans to other (to some degree) 'common ancestors', so you might as well (while remaining in the only bounded parts of a hyperbole) try to argue we should view ourselves as plants

 

[Zack]

Huh. I always thought our common ancestor was God's magic wand.

 

[Kyriakos]

^No, god only is tied to humans #1.

 

[Arakhor]

Well, I wouldn't mind being a highly-evolved, deep sea trench fern. If there were six of us, we could film a sitcom and call it Fronds.

 

[timtofly]

I'm a rather relative idiot. But at least I'm not stupid enough to think that the planet on which I stand is 6,000 years old and/or rests on a turtle or zebra or whatever.

Time is also relative, and makes fools of us all.

 

[bathsheba666]

Well, I wouldn't mind being a highly-evolved, deep sea trench fern. If there were six of us, we could film a sitcom and call it Fronds.

Have coffee at Central Perch ?

 

[Borachio]

Given that science is an abstract human endeavor and those who say behold are presumably actual people that seems to be an unfair comparison.

Given that I was using "science" as shorthand for the scientific community, I'd say nay.

But if your point is the straightforward one that abstract human endeavours can't actually talk, then yea.

As a point it's fairly incontrovertible (fairly in the sense of absolutely), but it lacks depth, imo.

Still, yeah. Good point.

 

[El_Machinae]

In fact, there is a LOT of information out there. A mind-boggling amount. Even dedicated experts in a field have a difficult time synthesizing all the available literature on a topic. Now, this is from a biologist's perspective, but even being an expert on one gene means there's a lot that's known about that gene that you don't know.

 

[Borachio]

Isn't there a view that says that there's ONLY information "out there"?

That information is in fact what reality is?

 

[El_Machinae]

Yes, but that's just a heuristic. It's a true statement, within certain viewpoints, but it's not 'true' true. It's like saying that reality is composed solely of fields. Sure, okay. But basketballs still exist

 

[Harv]

Huh. I always thought our common ancestor was God's magic wand.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the wand, and the wand was with God, and the wand was God.

All this time I thought it said word!

 

[Kyriakos]

Yes, but that's just a heuristic. It's a true statement, within certain viewpoints, but it's not 'true' true. It's like saying that reality is composed solely of fields. Sure, okay. But basketballs still exist

If they exist then

-PlatoSocrates likely would argue they exist as idols of the Eidos (eternal category/archetype) of a basketball (sic)

-Parmenides likely would argue they exist as one of the myriads of false facets sensed or theorised on just ONE thing being there

-Heraklitos possibly would claim that they are one of the dull manifestations that the primordial Fire was bound to shape into, due to some sequence started/caused by who knows what

-and Democritos might claim that they are just arrangements of atoms, themselves having no 'reality' since only the atom and the void is 'real'.

Then more fun starts with endless iterations of those main positions. By the time you get to boring theophilosophy stuff like Descartes, the basketball just exists if the benevolent god wants to make sure you are able to identify it - cause it matters hugely to god, much like to best korean god.

 

[Squonk]

I don't know what's the news. RCC didn't oppose evolution for a long time, JP2 already claimed it's "more than a theory", and when it comes to the big bang theory, pope Paul wanted to make it Catholic official stance, until he was convinced the church shouldn't associate itself with any scientific theory, even if it seems right and proper.

It's some protestants in USA that have problems with science. RCC doesn't.

 

[Kyriakos]

Making the BBT 'official church stance' would imo be even more of an error than the church just staying out of it.

 

[Farm Boy]

True, but the general media picture of the RCC in the USA is pretty hilarious. I mean, they deserve some of it, but it's not like there's a lot of accuracy in distinguishing between Baptists, Presbyterians, evangelicals, and the Catholics of different flavors, etc. They kinda follow the Pope because he gets a fancy hat and a centralized voice makes easy blurbs easy.