Vatican Official Refutes Intelligent Design

The News Herald ^ | Nov 18, 2005 | NICOLE WINFIELD (AP)

[x5452]

We are in fact discussing here the statements made by a vatican employee.

The pope get's discretion over him.

[1_Of_We]

"If you want to teach it in schools, intelligent design should be taught when religion or cultural history is taught, not science."

Perhaps the 'Theory of Evolution' should also be taught in religion or cultural history classes also. Not many (if any) scientific 'facts' exist to support the 'Theory of Evolution'.

[webboy45]

Random mutation isn't scientific either. It's pure speculation, dogma of the religion of nothingness. If random mutation is going to be taught then ID should also be taught.

[conserv13]

Genesis is not meant to be taken literally. Its a folk tale.

[x5452]

The cardinal, Christoph Schönborn, archbishop of Vienna, a theologian who is close to Pope Benedict XVI, staked out his position in an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on Thursday, writing, “Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not.”

http://www.acepilots.com/mt/2005/07/10/leading-cardinal-redefines-churchs-view-on-evolution/

"Only when we meet the living God in Christ do we know what life is. We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary." -Pope Benedict

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2005/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20050424_inizio-pontificato_en.html

[conserv13]

“Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not.”

I don't believe that.

[Strategerist]

Random mutation isn't scientific either. It's pure speculation

Random mutations happen all the time and they can be observed.

[x5452]

That's all well and good, but that doesn't qualify you, or anyone else who doesn't beleive that, to work for the Vatican.

[Getready]

That was because Christ, who intervened in nature,
creating food, walking on water(without pontoons mind you), becoming undead, calming storms with his word, said that what we now call the "Old Testament" was indeed Gods word, and that Gods word stands forever and cannot be broken...

the Jews of his time argued with him cause they felt their
word (Old Testament) was Gods word, and argued from it
to try and disprove Jesus (known as the Christ, or anointed one)
Where in the world did you get the idea that the Jews
(other than the unbelieving Jews) thought that the
"Old Testament" was not Gods word?

[Strategerist]

The Vatican has a chief astronomer?

Yep. They even have their own large telescope in Arizona, and a world-class meteorite collection.

[Duffboy]

Indeed, I am without faith as regards the bible , fairy tales, the boogy man and believing I can shoot par golfing.
Call me practical.
Remember, Peter asked Jesus " can walk on water'?
Jesus supposedly replied, when Peter tried it and almost drowned, 'ye. of little faith".
I contend if a person believes he/she can walk on water that person has plenty of faith!

[hosepipe]

Intelligent design is Agnostic Creativism..

Evolution is Dialectic Scientific Material sub-Marxism..

[sinkspur]

So?

[Duffboy]

Are you saying Charles Darwin and Karl Marx got together to " fool the masses'? ( the Origin of the Species was published in 1860, well before Marx's 'Communist Manifesto".)

[Diamond]

Genesis, as well as much of the bible was written circa" 600bc.

The original basis for this late of a date for Genesis authorship, namely, that writing had not evolved until about 1000 BC, is thoroughly discredited.

Cordially,

[Coyoteman]

Not many (if any) scientific 'facts' exist to support the 'Theory of Evolution'.

False. Here are two definitions, followed by lots of facts. You may not like them, but the entire photograph consists of facts. And that is just the most photogenic of the lot--there are tens of thousand more where those came from.

Data: factual information, especially information organized for analysis or used to reason or make decisions

Fact: when an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact

Figure 1.4.4. Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison (only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). (Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)

(A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
(B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
(C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
(D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
(E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
(F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
(G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
(H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
(I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man," 300,000 - 125,000 y
(J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
(K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
(L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
(M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
(N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

---

Your judgement of what is and is not a scientific fact appears to be clouded by religious belief and dogma; here are definitions of those terms as well:

Belief: any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith

Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof

[hosepipe]

[ Are you saying Charles Darwin and Karl Marx got together to " fool the masses'? ( the Origin of the Species was published in 1860, well before Marx's 'Communist Manifesto".) ]

What I sayin is... Is Jesus GOD.?..

If he WAS, he still IS, if he WASN'T he still ISN'T

[Humvee]

Much of Genesis has its roots in Babylonian mythology - and there are two creation stories in Genesis. Substantial portions of the Old Testament were writen during the Babylonian exile, thus source materials were "borrowed."

[SoothingDave]

And his scientific points and arguments that life was not intelligently designed are...? Just more rhetoric.

The only "rhetoric" here is your attempt to twist what was said. He only said ID was not science and should not be taught as such. He never said he did not believe life was intelligently designed.

Only that such a thing is belief and not science.

SD

[unlearner]

refute - to prove to be false or erroneous; overthrow by argument or proof

If it is possible for a Vatican official to actually refute ID, it must be falsifiable after all.