Or, from the other end, if you belong to the militant atheist subgroup that believes religion is attempting to make claims in the scientific realm and simply cannot coexist with science. Dawkins, for instance. The late Stephen Gould had no trouble with “separate realms”, and renowned paleontologist Robert Bakker sees no problems in the coexistence of religion and science to the extent that he himself is an ecumenical Christian minister.
I learned evolution better in Catholic middle school than I did in public high school. 'Course, I learned just about everything better in Catholic school than public school.
My son goes to a catholic high school, and I have two friends who each teach biology in (other) catholic schools. He learns (and they teach) evolution as established science. As friedo says, the idea of creationism as science is a fringe view not shared by most Christians, as is the promotion of a literal interpretation of the bible.
Assuming you mean “species of human ancestor” (Pre-Men), I would be very surprised if anyone claimed standing upright was related to having sharp teeth. If the skull is all that is available, some deduction about posture can be made by the angle that the spinal column exits the skull (more towards the bottom implies upright; more towards the back implies not upright).
Science does not involve itself with “truth”. Science involves itself with observable facts and theories. A theory is as good as it gets in science.
We have observed it happening, so the probability is 100%.
Wow. Gravity is a theory, pretty much all of science is a theory. Don’t try to coin your own version of the word theory to be extra convincing to the ignorant. Please share with the world what mechanism explains change over time in animals (and humans of course as we are simply animals.) Your nobel prize is waiting. I’ll give you a hint, its not magical super ghost daddy in the sky did it.
The Catholic church certainly does not accept evolution, as per understood by science. Catholic doctrine, as well as others, preach whats called theistic evolution::
Oh, theyre wishy-washy about it, but they refuse to leave our the guiding hand of supernatural forces. That’s no evolution Darwin or anyone since would see as a valid scientific theory. Its theistic garbage. Maybe not as bad as creationism, but its in the same ballpark of superstitious feel good drivel.
That may be, but I’ve never heard of any Catholic school teaching anything but regular old evolution by natural selection. As others have said, science and religion are kept separate. And there aren’t any Biology professors at Georgetown University doing experiments to prove “theistic evolution”.
By guiding hand, do you mean that there’s the belief that God interferes in evolution all the time, since the beginning? I don’t think that’s (necessarily) a part of theistic evolution, I’d like to see a cite.
Do you not believe in spelling either?
This is a non-sequitur. From what I can see, it is perfectly possible and consistent to “accept evolution, as per understood by science”, and to hold to a philosophy of theistic evolution, and nothing I see in the Wikipedia article you link to suggests that the Catholic church’s position is inconsistent with that.
In biology class at a Jesuit high school in 1970, I was taught standard evolution with no religious overtones at all. At a Jesuit college in 1972, my general biology course was taught by a priest and a nun. Evolution was covered without any reference to divine intervention.
Yep, that was pretty much the case at my public high school. Our text book had a chapter on the origins of man, but we just skipped over it. I grew up in a pretty conservative area and I can recall other kids griping when a biology teacher would deign to talk about evolution. So my guess is most science teachers just didn’t want to deal with any possible outrage from the community.
Theistic evolution isn’t a scientific theory, or generally advanced as one by its proponents. It is not intended to supplant evolution, but reconcile religion with it without interfering with the practice of science. It appears to be about the viewpoint you would expect to be adopted by scientists who have religious faith, or theologians who recognize the value of science. Hence, members of that camp include people like Robert Bakker and Francis Collins (leader of the HGP, NIH director), whose scientific credentials would be difficult to impugn.
At worst, you can accuse them of baking intellectual pretzels.
I suspect I would have received a better eduction in evolution if I had gone to a Catholic school instead of the public school I attended. In my public school we spent very little time on evolution and skipped that chapter of the textbook, IIRC.
As I recall, in public high school I took an “advanced bio” course back in the late 60s that was essentially biochemistry. Things like origins from the “primordial soup”, and the Krebs cycle figured heavily. Not much about actual animals in any sense. The regular bio course covered that stuff, and I recall getting taught evolution without much controversy, or without much emphasis, either. We cut up frogs and learned a lot of taxonomy.
The Catholic school I went to was funny. Religion was almost never mentioned during any course except for our “Morals” class. We did have a chemistry teacher who would say a little prayer before class but that was it. At the time I still wasn’t sure of my beliefs so I would go along with it but after a while I’d just sit there and twiddle my thumbs.
I went to a Catholic high school, plaid skirts and all. We were taught “normal” science like in any other school. In fact, the most beloved priest at our school was also the physics teacher.
Hey - I went to public school in Texas and learned full-on, no weasel words, evolution. And this was in 10th grade biology way back in 1976. This wasn’t even in the big city, it was out in the mid-size city of San Angelo out on the plains of West Texas.
I hope that public education here hasn’t regressed, but I’ll find out soon - I have a 7th grader now.
This seems to me to say that Catholicism came from Christianity…
Since peter was the first Pope so to speak, I would be interested in what other sect of Christianity came first.
If you just meant that there are many sects of Christianity today, my bad for being unable to follow what you meant.
If you think that Christianity came from the Jewish faith, I withdraw my question as we can’t hear each other.
Did you even bother to read your own cite?
:rolleyes: