Pope Benedict XVI spoke before the participants of a conference of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences held in Rome in recent days * Among the participants: Stephen Hawking
The Catholic Church's position on the creation of the universe is consistent with that of the empirical sciences, Pope Benedict XVI said on Friday. "To say that the origin of the universe and its development are the result of the work of a creator does not mean that creation only concerns the beginning of the history of the world and of life," he told participants in the opening conference of a five-day conference dealing with evolution, which was organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. One of the prominent participants in the conference is the British astrophysicist Stephen Hawking.
In a press release issued by the Vatican last Friday, it was stated that Papier received members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences who gathered in Rome for the "Scientific Insight into the Evolution of the Universe and Life" conference.
At the beginning of his words, the Pope claimed that both Pius XII and John Paul II clarified the point that "there is no contradiction between the understanding of creation according to faith, and the evidence of the empirical sciences. Philosophy in its early days offered a picture that explained the origin of the universe on the basis of one or more elements of the material world. First (genesis) this was not seen as creation but as a change or transformation."
"In order to develop and develop, first of all the world needs to 'be', and thus it needs to come from nothing into being. It must be a creator, in other words, the first being must be such according to the essence".
"To say that the infrastructure of the universe and its development are within the scope of the thrifty wisdom of a creator does not mean that the creator acted only at the beginning of the history of the universe and life. The meaning is that the Creator created these developments and supported them, and preserved them all the time."
While he mentions that Galileo "saw nature as a book written by God in the same way that the Bible was written", the Pope commented that "this image also helps us understand that the world is far from being created out of chaos, reminiscent of an ordered book, this is the cosmos." "The distinction between simple living beings and spiritual beings is the action of Almighty God ('capax Dei'), and points to the existence of a soul subordinate to a superior being." This is the reason, he concluded, "that the Magisterium of the Church has consistently confirmed that 'every spiritual soul is created immediately by the hands of God, it is not created by the parents - and it is also immortal.' This point of anthropological distinction invites its exploration by modern thought."
Benedict said that Galileo Galilei, the Italian astronomer who was found guilty of heresy by the Catholic Church in the 17th century for saying that the earth revolves around the sun, also believed that nature "is a book written by God" and that scientific discoveries do not invalidate this view of the universe. The previous Pope, John Paul II, admitted in 1992 that the Catholic Church had made a serious error of judgment in condemning Galileo.
The president of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Nicola Cavivo, said on Friday that the Vatican conference will focus more on the evolutionary process than on the origin of living beings, or the creation of the world", although he admitted that the issues may come up indirectly.
According to him, research in the field of the origin of the universe and the evolution of life in recent years has "significantly expanded our understanding of the universe" but "left many questions open", explains Kavivo. The conference is the latest initiative in a concerted effort to open a dialogue between scientists and theologians.
In September, the Catholic Church announced an initiative to hold an interdisciplinary conference to mark the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's book, The Origin of Species, to be held in Rome in March 2009. The president of the Pontifical Council for Culture, Gianfranco Ravassi, reiterated the statement that the theory of evolution is not incompatible with the way it teaches The Catholic Church and the Jewish people.
The Pontifical Academy of Sciences recently revealed its plan to install a life-size marble statue of Galileo in the Vatican courtyard next year. However, the current pope has a history of boycotts and difficulties with scientists, who did not forget his comment before being appointed to the position, and in his former name as Cardinal Josef Ratzinger that Galileo's trial was logical and just. In September 2006, he spoke strongly against the theory of evolution during a speech in Germany, saying that according to the theories derived from Darwin's work, the universe is "a random result of evolution and therefore, in the bottom line, something illogical." Earlier this month, the Pope warned against scientists driven by financial networks for the arrogance of playing God instead of striving to carry out research that will benefit humanity.
According to the Italian news agency, the church has accepted the theory of evolution since 1950, but not in the way that scientists understand it. The Pontifical Academy of Sciences takes the approach of "theistic evolution" - that is, recognizing evolution as a legitimate scientific approach to describing God's creation - with certain reservations. The Church recognizes the ability of a species to evolve from another species, but refuses to recognize evolution as an explanation for the origin of the world and life. The Church accepts the principle of the origin of species regarding plants and animals other than man, but insists that man, and especially his soul, were created by one divine process. Likewise, the idea that inanimate matter can be the source of a living organism was rejected by the church. Finally, Catholic Christianity sees between evolution and Darwinism, which it rejects because of the principle of natural selection.
Hawking spoke last year about his own beliefs on the subject. "I am not religious in the usual sense," said the scientist. "I believe that the universe is governed by the laws of science. It is possible that God is the one who established them, but he does not intervene to break them"
to the press release of the Vatican
On the same topic on the science website:
- The origin of the universe - translation of Stephen Hawking's lecture at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, December 2006
- The Anglican Church apologizes to Darwin
- The Pope justified the treatment of Galileo and was banned from the university in Italy
- Pope Benedict XVI retracted his predecessor's words: it is impossible to prove evolution
- Scientists urge Benedict to acknowledge evolution
- The Pope who acquitted Galileo and accepted evolution (news about the death of John Paul II)
64 תגובות
Yehuda,
Evolution takes place in everything, both from natural selection and from artificial selection. Even in molecules there is natural selection, especially in ideas (memes) and theories. But this is already concepts for the advanced, and it is more important to first understand the idea of evolution in living things.
To Roy Cezana
It is a mistake to think that evolution exists only among living things. In my humble opinion, when a certain factor is affected by its environment and there is variable pressure on it, we have evolution.
For example the evolution of cars. Initially, locomotives, but when the internal combustion engine was opened in the environment, it caused pressure that worked in the direction of developing cars as above now when alternative energy sources are discovered then the cars will change accordingly.
I wrote an article on "evolution of theories". Here on the science site. For those interested - on Google.
The article shows how the growing knowledge of the universe pressures the theory in the direction of change or replacement.
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
provided,
Very few comments are censored within the talkbacks, and your comments have not been censored at all so far.
There are many answers to your questions, and if you read the books suggested to you, you will surely find them. For now, I will briefly answer some of them:
human evolution -
There are 'subspecies' of humans, scattered all over the world. They all underwent evolution that helped adapt them to the environment. The Eskimos have evolved to increase their fat reserves and the Africans have evolved to have a wider and stronger distribution of melanin in the skin. The Europeans have undergone an evolution that allows them to enjoy dairy foods even in their adulthood, and so on.
You may argue here that these are all still human, and you would certainly be right. But where do we draw the line? Mutations have already been demonstrated in humans that resulted in the loss of the entire face (similar to the Chihuahua dog). These people could have children, who were also endowed with the same trait. Are these people too? And if the mutation was maintained in a certain population, until after a few thousand years all the people in that society were covered with hair from head to toe - were they still human? or monkeys? Is this a new species, or a subspecies? And does it matter?
In short, these diagnoses are very problematic, so we try to avoid them. We know that in evolution variations of different species can be obtained, and that those variations can accumulate to such an extent that after a few million years we no longer see similarities between the original population and the new population.
Another example can be found in lizards that were moved from one island to another, and within thirty-six years they changed their body shape: their heads grew to better chew the sturdy plants on the new island, and new organs developed in their intestines and helped to slow down the passage of plant food so that they could digest it better . Give these lizards another thousand years, and they will most likely evolve into a completely different species.
After all, evolution applies to any population group. Crayfish are different from river to river. They evolved according to the environmental conditions and the natural selection that was applied to them. The same with humans, with bacteria and with the hoofs. This is not a process that happens overnight, but over the course of millions of years, and in many cases we can find series of fossils that demonstrate the stages of transition along the way (for example, when a land mammal evolves into a modern-day whale, you can find fossils of the stages of transition, when the legs become more and more degenerate each stage).
Hope I answered your question,
Roy.
Without delving into this discussion, I have realized two things over the years. One, science and the Torah can coexist, the other, as science expands as an explanation for life, God's place as an explanation for life shrinks. As an extension of the second, God has always been the logical explanation for one step before the scientific front.
The same person who discovered the mind saw one day how they take the mind, put out its eye and accept religion.
If you don't behave normally, you will really block.
For the very reaction, the Muslims execute atheists, at least you haven't reached that stage yet, but Porosh claims that this period (absolute rule of the ultra-Orthodox, not through panchayats like Olmert) will arrive in ten years....
Evolution always applies, even if you don't believe in it, just as gravity applies everywhere even if you don't believe in it.
Bacteria do not arise suddenly, bacteria basically divide and it is enough that a negligible amount of them had some variation, and for some reason, the bacterium migrated to another habitat, it can pass on the mutation (provided it did not kill it) to all its descendants because apart from the exceptions - the mutants - they will also be identical to it. Give the process millions of generations (and with bacteria it's literally hours or days) and you'll get diverse populations, some of which will evolve into sandalwood.
As for the last two comments, you were probably disappointed that I'm not like all the secularists who sell their souls to the ultra-Orthodox in order to get peace of mind for a moment.
And this last one, too, is waiting within the framework of scientific freedom of thought and the rules of free discussion
For the approval of the website management. You probably managed to convince all the Muslim preachers who spread their words on the Internet - censor censor!
So I didn't understand, is always sick or when it suits her? Applies to everyone or as she pleases?
One bacterium went to sleep and got up as a sandal or was there a stage before?
One person who didn't know at all became an idiot in a trillion years?
One man who thought he was a scientist suddenly discovered that there is a mind, just give it time.
What word exactly? good week?
post Scriptum. You didn't win anything special but you probably used one of the suspicious keywords.
Nice, you managed to convince all the Christian preachers who spread their sayings on the internet, and that our pans translate them later.
Bacteria will turn into sandals, if you just give them enough time. If you claim that the changes occurred within a bacterium, then the changes within the mammals that bring you pronghorns, lions, elephants and humans also occurred within the mammals. All vertebrates, for example, originate from an ancestral pair of vertebrates from which we inherited four limbs, a spine, etc., but this does not make humans and tigers the same animal.... But they evolved into completely different species, what they have in common is that their babies suckle milk in their first life.
These are bacteria, but the relationship between them is like the relationship between two distant types of mammals, you just don't see it with the eye, but even in the kingdom of bacteria, the process is the same process.
The difference between adaptation or microevolution, as some of the commenters say, and evolution is only in the minds of the haters, give microevolution enough time, and from time to time you will destabilize the balance through natural disasters of one kind or another that vacate ecological niches, and you will see that the change is evident.
It's just that the animals we know have probably not changed during the existence of the human race, and we perceive this momentary state (from a geological point of view of course) as if this is what should be and what has been all along.
Read Gould's books and Richard Dawkins' books, and you will know what evolution is and how it works. Many of them came out in Hebrew.
And one more thing, the law always applies, even the people who live in almost any type of climate, do not escape it, due to epidemics. According to one of the studies chimpanzees had a type of AIDS 2 million years ago that almost wiped out the species and the few chimpanzees that had a natural vaccine for the disease survived, and from them the species developed anew. Since this is a longer period than the time of man's existence, they have already had time to differentiate back - and the difference between themselves, if you want to call it races, is greater than that of humans.
What did I gain that my comments are suspended and waiting for the approval of the website management?
To Mr. Avi Blizovsky,
I read the article you recommended and your response and I was left with questions and doubts, below:
There is a serious confusion of concepts between evolution and adaptation. Evolution is development and development
means a change for the better of something relative to the previous situation, adaptation is a private product as a response to different conditions. The Eskimo is better suited to life in cold conditions than I am, but no one claims that he is a different species from man. Evolution claims that a species can change into something else, but there is no bacteria that became a sandal, all the changes in it happened within a bacteria.
It is improbable and contradicts the principles of science that a law will sometimes apply and sometimes not. Why did the law stop working on the river cancer? Where did the cancer get insurance against mutations?
The theory claims on the one hand a clear and inherent trend in all species and on the other hand claims no trend
and only apply to some of them.
The theory claims that the trend is survival and culture, are many Europeans who avoid having children, genetically different from me?
The positing of evolution against "creationism" is wrong. What we are cannot develop and therefore
That he is new is created regardless of evolution or degeneration.
There are more, but I will limit myself to this. good week.
post Scriptum. Regarding the column, you know the story about the rabbi walking into a controversial Cicciolina performance. Suddenly he started shouting "I can't see, I can't see". They saw his clothes and said to him, "Sir, if you cannot see such a show, no one is forcing you, you are welcome to leave." "No" said the rabbi. "I can't see because the page is hiding me..."
provided,
Before I rework existing stuff, read the article Misconceptions of Evolution that I translated from the UC Berkeley website.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/misconcets-about-evolution-130805/
And to update the article, we will only add that the concept that man is the top is a misconception, every creature alive today is at the top.
The concept that evolution always goes forward is also incorrect, many of the degenerate bacteria today are descendants of more developed bacteria. Steven J. Gold explained in one of his books that the reason everything is going in a more complex direction is because there is a lower barrier below - below which it is impossible to define a living being, but there is no upper barrier for upward complexity. And so you see all those who have degenerated (and there are examples of animals that lost their sight when they moved to dark caves), as if they were ones that had not yet progressed, and who are you to decide for nature what is more important - a thinking mind or a mind that uses the same areas more or less to sense A developed smell. Both things progress equally.
Hello to Mr. Avi Blizovsky,
If you agree that as of today, man is the senior evolutionary product, and on the assumption that the process is consistent and applies to all species, then all creatures are in one direction of development of which man is the peak.
From this it follows that the bacterium within some period of time also aspires and therefore someday will reach, to be a human
And we, due to the same process, become something else, much more sophisticated, at the same time. but the bacterium,
Having other properties, a bacterium remains and we also remain similar. Since Newton, for example, has man changed in anything in terms of his structure? As we know, every living thing eventually dies, therefore it can be concluded from your words that there is no creature that "fits". Are the chimpanzees who communicate today "at the level of intelligence of children"
Will they reach youth level when my children watch them? And finally, allow me not to claim that the chair hides you from seeing that no page obstructs my vision. Best regards,
To be provided and how we have seen the change of species - viruses in general, the AIDS virus in particular. The connection between today's AIDS virus and that of 40-50 years ago is like between a buffalo and a giraffe... And of course we must not forget the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics, which resulted in the fact that within a few hundred generations, the entire species became a completely different species, because those who do not adapt to the new environment die.
Evolution has indeed not stopped, and alongside species that are in danger of extinction we see other species whose spread man actually encourages through his actions, such as all types of vegetation used all over the world for agriculture, as well as the animals for food, as well as the camels, the cat, the dog....
Other macaques did not evolve into a type of human, because a basis is also required for this, for example a certain weight of brain, which they do not have. By the way, chimpanzees have human ability, they are able to communicate with humans by tapping on a computer with symbols drawn on it or using standard sign languages, of course their level of intelligence is like that of children, but that's enough.
You cannot see because the pillar (beside which stands a priest, rabbi or kadi) hides you.
By the way, the human brain uses the same parts of the brain for thinking that in a parallel development, the dogs have a developed sense of smell.
Greetings,
With your permission, I will address the topic of the article, evolution and not from the Christian direction, its lost:
Question: Is evolution over? For if it is the inherent process (miraculously and not trivially)
In all living beings in our world it is supposed to continue. If so, we were supposed to throughout the years in them
We have already predicted, to see even a hint of change in any species. According to this theory, man was not always like this, but evolved into that, and what then, did his development stop? Was it not likely that we would find
All kinds of people at different levels of development? Why didn't macaque monkeys evolve as well
For some kind of admism? And more: according to the theory, there is also an opposite process of development,
Is the slug anti-evolution of a homeless donkey?
Matter-of-fact, rational and impersonal responses are welcome, all the best.
girl next door:
Maybe you didn't notice, but even though I knew that even if I didn't praise Roy, he wouldn't try to give me a sprout in my head and even though I knew that if I criticized your words, I would be kidnapped because the honesty was from you and onward - I chose the less easy option.
so that's it.
I say I'm just honest and you'll say I'm a masochist and I won't care at all what you say because I've already gotten to know you.
To Roy
First, I didn't mean to hurt you, but only to express my protest against the censorship policy you employ.
The phenomenon of the cynical and despicable use made of Rabin's murder for the purposes of a political witch hunt and incitement against all kinds of publics who do not identify with the delusions of extreme neglect, the idolatrous worship of "Rabin's legacy" - and how such a situation became possible, is a subject for historical sociological psychological research on the subject of mass psychosis, and it has nothing to do with it. with politics.
In the same way, you could argue that the rise of fascism in Europe, the persecutions of the Inquisition, McCarthyism, the Damascus plots, the witch hunt in Salem, the case of the Jewish doctors in Stalinist Russia, the genocide in Cambodia and Rwanda and of course the Holocaust and much more, are all "political phenomena".
To Michael
And what a tear-jerking novel is woven on this site...
Just do yourself a favor and keep your tongue in its natural place!
Isn't chocolate ice cream better?
Roy:
I don't know what the deleted comments are, but since the neighbor repeated the content of at least one of them and dared to compare you to Hugin and even claim that Hugin surpasses you in every parameter, I will allow myself to complete what should have appeared in your response and did not appear for reasons of modesty:
Your articles, Roy, are also an unfailing source of inspiration for every science enthusiast who frequents the site, and this is in addition to your factual and scholarly responses.
The comparison between you and Hugin shows complete opacity
neighbor,
The place of the article you are suggesting - about the connection between Rabin's murder and political persecution - is on general news sites such as Ynet, and not in the Hidan. This is a political article, but 'Hidan' does not interfere in politics and does not cover only elements of it that may affect science.
If it's any comfort to you, my father also refused to publish my articles that dealt with purely politics, and I actually support his decision.
As for the quality of the articles, I actually disagree with you. In the last year we also started publishing articles by Ran Levy and Amnon Carmel - both talented and fascinating writers, whose writings I really enjoy reading. All articles are reviewed and edited (sometimes by scientists who check the reliability of the article's scientific content). And don't forget that everything is free - no money!
I'm sure that my father would be happy to help you, as a concerned reader who wants to raise the level, in writing articles that match the site's topics.
Enough, in the end I will delete all your comments as well as mine.
Enough of the teasing.
You should explain to the readers that you are responding here to my comments that are in another article. This is a new and interesting phenomenon.
Does this smell like a conspiracy?
To the neighbor - absolutely last response. What happens in the USA definitely affects Israel, see the example of the recent recession. Secondly - the opinion on scientific matters is the most important thing for the science site, and if that does not interest you, you are welcome to look for better sites (I doubt you will find). As for your demand for an investigation - This is not a scientific investigation, but the social sciences which is a softer field and subject to subjectivity, and in any case, it is not related to science as I understand it, and meanwhile I am the owner of the site.
Hello father
What you are doing here in your comments, i.e. trying to make it seem like I supported a conspiracy theory regarding Rabin's murder, is a disgraceful and McCarthyist act.
Those who read you may think that I expressed support for the conspiracy theory as if Yigal Amir did not commit the murder and of course that never happened.
I hope you are doing this in good faith and not on purpose. And I expect a correction and an apology from you.
All I suggested was to use the website to publish an article on the subject of the exploitation of the murder for the purposes of incitement and political persecution, and between that and the conspiracy theory of Barry Hamish and others, there is nothing.
I'm sure that if you polled the surfers on whether they would look for conspiracy theories about the Rabin murder on the Hidan website, they would tell you no. By the way, the numbers speak for themselves. The other commenters respond to the topics of the articles. I think that I have exhausted my response. I only deleted your comments that are not on the site.
Sorry?
There was nothing inappropriate in my comments.
The deletions were made for petty ego reasons, and nothing more!
In my opinion, with this policy you simply cut the branch you are sitting on. You need readers and commenters more than they need you.
It's not Roy. I deleted because the comments were inappropriate, and I don't want to give a hand to conspiracy theories. You want to claim things related to Rabin's murder, others want to deny the importance of vaccines and others - too many - evolution, and there are also global warming deniers. There will simply be no end to it, what's more, our starting point is that conspiracy theories are nonsense.
To Roy
Could you please explain what exactly in my penultimate comment you had to censor?
Is it slander to claim that Hogin surpasses you in every parameter of intelligence?
Are the children browsing the site likely to be traumatized as a result of this sensational news?
As I said - your claim that so far you have only censored 5 comments is false. From personal information.
Hope comment 7 deleted
By the way, in the picture the Pope looks like a pervert.
Hop. Comment 7 deleted.
Roy,
Higgs deserved that I shut his mouth. After a very long time he snorts against me. He slanders my honesty and credibility.
Interesting that you left his slippery tongue!
I said thank you, on my own behalf, because someone like me knows what the legality of the boomerang is. And you let me go! Thank you.
Gentlemen,
I understand your concern, but I want to assure you that I don't delete messages just because I don't like them. Certainly and certainly I don't delete lightly (in fact, in the entire year-and-a-half that I've been writing on the site, I've deleted maybe five messages from 'registered' users, including the two today). The talkbacks are meant for exchanging opinions and ideas, and God forbid I shut up one of the users.
but…
The talkbacks of the Hidan site were not intended to be used for defamation, or as a place to practice swearing that is not worthy of being written down. If any of the talkbackists slanders an unknown person, the message will be deleted immediately. If any of the talkbackists chooses to curse other users just because he feels like it, the message will be removed. This is not censorship, but observance of simple rules of discussion - and in extreme cases of defamation, public law as well.
Thousands of children, teenagers, adults and the elderly visit the site every day. There is no reason for a 10-year-old child to enter the site to look for material for schoolwork, and come across a list of curses exchanged between the talkbackists. The site has its quiet dignity. I only ask that you maintain this respect.
Hoping another year will pass before I have to delete another post,
Roy.
Higgs, on the internet it's called a troll
Censorship of comments is cowardly and cowardly behavior.
HOG_IN OUT
You have turned this site into your own private blog bombarding everyone here with unlimited spam hoses.
This will be called a terrorist of senseless words that sabotage the atmosphere and the atmosphere of the surfers.
Danish,
Allow me to calmly respond to your upset response.
Even if you won a tiny fraction of my enlightened, educated and informed inner peace with a great right! The sublime of your achievement, for this hour.
Hugin
Roy,
Thanks.
Hugin
The picture of the Pope scares me... It seems as if he has just finished drinking the blood of Jesus and taking advantage of an innocent child.
Roy Cezana
You have a good enough reason to stand up to an annoying commenter and block the oppressive chatter, as most of the commenters who peeked and were offended will testify. The lady dares to untie her tongue, apparently accustomed to such an endless display of rudeness. As its name is, it is thought of in its translation into the English language.
Roy,
Hugin's reactions are sometimes frightening - a feeling of looking inward into madness itself. Sometimes I am disgusted by the fact that instead of talking, it produces "noise", from the bothersome harassment of a tiresome demand for attention.
Having said all that, your response 18 scares me much more. What are your reasons for deleting comments? (if I have more to ask). I really hope they don't mention the reasons I mentioned at the beginning of my response...
Dear Roy
We appreciate your work on the site, just don't overdo it with the censor's scissors.
I don't know what you cut and you must have done it with a lot of thought.
But remember, censorship should only be after warnings and only if all the ketsin have been consumed.
Of course my response is only a suggestion.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
The last messages have been deleted. I ask the commenters to keep clean language on the site.
And is it bad that more questions pop up?
So what is God? = the total forces in nature are those we know and those we do not know. God is greater than the universe we know (which is itself a part of God) therefore a person can know parts of God by learning and understanding the laws of nature, but as one goes deeper into the research more questions emerge...
a thinker
are you still here You wrote that you were going. You are not to be trusted.
Be honest, do you understand everything you write? or vice versa.
orangutan
"A wise man will learn from everyone, even from the fool.
A proud fool will not learn either from the wise man or from the fool and not even from himself...so full is he...that there is no room for the Spirit to come into him, not even for the grace that blows to empower him..."(ASK).
And yet.. Dear Magnibush.. I will respect your appreciation, even if you deny to Hogin that you are unable to recognize her spirit and value, let's face it.. your insults are small for her.. because..
By the way, did you happen to read Philip Pullman's trilogy: His Dark Materials? (The Amber Binoculars, The Golden Compass, The Exquisite Knife).
Hugin
The heads of the church are at least trying to bridge the gaps between their religious beliefs and the prevailing scientific teachings. And to confirm this, what is happening between the rabbis, the leaders of Orthodox Judaism in Israel?
Unfortunately, I think that most of them are still in the mindset of the leaders of Christianity in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Namely, denial and condemnation of science and original self-thinking.
I sympathized to some extent with those who commented that it was superficial, but I'm more inclined to think that this is really good news.
The church partially accepted the evolution in 1950. The previous Pope admitted the mistake the Church made with Galileo and now the Pope is taking further steps towards science. I think there is an important process here. The science website deals with science and perhaps some of us would like everyone to accept only the correctness of science, but we have to be realistic and understand that what we need is not a sweeping agreement of everyone but a process in which we all, as humanity, gradually move towards more up-to-date and accurate worldviews - this is also evolution.
To Hugin, I didn't like the book "ANGELS & DEMONS" the most.
It contains many "as if scientific" regrets.
For me, throughout the story I was against Robert Langdon (this irrational man. Alek studies symbols and cults) and I was in favor of the Illuminati who wanted to destroy the Catholic Church in the Vatican.
And DA, joining Da Vinci 🙂
"
WELCOME TO THE CLUB, Yoel.
Please meet Hugin.
Every other word is unnecessary!
"
Or in my wording: every word of hers is unnecessary!
Hugin, etc.
They told me: Who has it not yet contributed to, or has it contributed before promoting something?
In short - Tartaram...
WELCOME TO THE CLUB, Yoel.
Please meet Hugin.
Every other word is unnecessary!
Why should such nonsense be published here?
A conference, a demonstration, a protest,... a demonstration..
I was told. Who has this before ever to promote something?????
Give tangible/real evidence.
When there is no creature /man/ looking into it, everything else..Zevmosh, is of no real use.
Hugin
By the way, those who have read Dan Brown's book: "On Angels and Demons".. are invited to give their opinion in relation to this article.. I would be happy to satiate satisfaction... from the "graduated" academic scholars???
And a difficult question: what do today's children have to learn from the "giants" besides idle and futile wars?
I would appreciate it if I could, gentlemen.
Hugin: A student?/a scholar?/a scholar??
for life
On the one hand, I'm glad you agree with my response. This church sometimes gets on my nerves.
On the other hand, I ask myself:- Is this really just the first time I'm talking sense???
I would appreciate it if you would respond even when you think I am not speaking rationally so that we can clear up the dispute.
May you and all the people of Israel have a good day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Good morning to Yehuda Svardamish
Well, this is the first time (I follow you) that you talk sense.
Well done, go on like this.
Unfortunately, people like Hawking play into the hands of the aforementioned Pope, who is one of the greatest extremists among the Popes.
A scientific conference should be held that will decide to avoid any contact with the fucked up church until Giordano Bruno, Galileo and others are canonized.
Don't forget that this "righteous" Pope is one of those pushing to make Pope Pius XII a saint. To remind you, the above sat quietly in the Holocaust when millions of Jews were murdered.
Only great pressure from Jewish rabbis makes him consider changing this "sanctity".
The previous commenter shows me how much effort is being made there in the Vatican to connect evolution and creation. But the very conference mentioned above is an achievement for the Pope, and therefore participation in it should be avoided.
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
We have come to good times. The religious (at least the Christians among them) already finally understand that evolution cannot be denied, since it makes as much sense as denying that the earth revolves around the sun. So now they try to go with and feel without.
What does His Holiness the Pope actually mean? Something like this: Yes, there is evolution, but not really. Just a little bit of evolution, maybe actually a bit more than we once thought, but still it's not really a complete evolution, but a partial evolution like that, something that can sort of allow us to sound like people who have a clue what they're talking about, but still won't negate our imaginary God …
One day they will build a huge marble statue of Darwin in the courtyard of the Vatican and in the courtyard of the Rebbe of Wiznich...
so what?
We have those who claim that gays cause earthquakes.