Sentences with phrase «understand than evolution»

Not exact matches

Cardinal Ruini spoke of «false interpretations» of cosmic and biological evolution which «contribute more than a little to a purely naturalistic understanding of man» and which also lead to «the denial of the existence of a personal God distinct from the world» and the denial of «the transcendence of the human subject, made in the image and likeness of God».

Will we not then be forced to say that the evolution of God is no more and no less than the evolution or development of man's understanding or consciousness of God?

If you could understand science than you would see the lack of «accident» and the beauty of scientificly inevitable evolution both in life and the universe.

To understand how it can be both, it is necessary to understand that evolution can be used in more than one way in biology.

In fact, your silly questions prove nothing other than your lack of understanding of evolution and the beginning of life.

Perhaps if you actually learned about evolution from a source other than a creatinist website, you'd understand what you were talking about.

The first of these is made up of the evolutionary biologists themselves; the second consists of those who believe that evolution requires a materialist, and hence atheistic, interpretation (evolutionary materialism); the third group comprises the proponents of Intelligent Design Theory (IDT); and the fourth is the evolutionary theists, those who consider Darwinian evolution not only compatible with biblical faith, but an illuminating framework for arriving at a deeper understanding of God than is implied in the notion of a designer.

Matthew knew what John knew — John did not have a higher evolution of understanding of who Jesus claimed to be than the other apostles — it is just in the wisdom of God as He used each writer to convey understanding to the folks who received the letters and for our benefit in the ages to come that Matthew focuses on different things than John.

The nine benchmarks also accept the contemporary understanding of time, the role of unpredictability (novelty), persuasion as a higher form of power than coercion, and the priority of evolution and change (instability) over equilibrium or stasis.

There is no danger, therefore, that evolution if it is understood in a truly metaphysical and theologically correct way, will teach us to think less of the first human being than was thought in earlier ages.

Kauffman's understanding of evolution seems much more conducive to theistic understanding than is Dawkins» approach.

And, hopefully people who actually want to «prove evolution wrong» by studying PE and its contributing process will help further define our understanding of evolution to make it even more accurate and comprehensive than it is today.

Fortunately Mary, there are people out there who actually understand evolution, who have studied evolution and who have doc.umented and taught evolution, so that those of us with even a rudimentary education on the topic can dismiss your comment as nothing more than the desperate and childish attempt to cling to religion even as the rest of the world grows up and embraces reality.

For this reason I have realized this: a chimpanzee does not understand math (regardless of how many hours I spent trying to teach them this) because of it's anatomy, yet I do understand math because of my anatomy (and education of course), I as a mere mortal (unlike yourself) know that my faculties must be somehow limited and that there are concepts that no matter how much I try to use my retarded brain I will never understand them because I don't have the god lobe in the ole brain like you do, none the less I keep on thinkin» in a finite fashion hoping that my future children might have a little more range than I since they too will be a «tarded snapshot in a timeline of cognitive evolution.

@Ed What was objectionable in your earlier statement is that you were implying that while gravity is a known fact that is still less than 100 % understood (hence the term «theory of gravity»), evolution is somehow controversial within biology and is called a theory for some very different reason.

He understood evolution better than Darrow and saw that it was only hypothesis, not proven theory.

I understand evolution and the Big Bang theory (better than you, I warrant).

He enunciated more clearly than anyone how creative evolution of living organisms can not be understood if the elements composing them are conceived as individual entities that maintain exactly their identity throughout all the changes and interactions, as is the case with the parts of a machine.

The study also asked whether the non-acceptors» ability to improve their understanding of evolution through teaching was any weaker than their ability to improve their understanding of the less emotive, but related topic, basic genetics.

The study by the University of Southern California «exemplifies a real opportunity for the oncology community, one that embraces an integrated approach to understanding cancer progression and developing therapies that exploit evolution rather than ignore it,» said Anderson.

This close - up view should help astronomers understand how collisions, which were once far more common than they are now, influenced star formation and the evolution of galaxies in the early universe.

Understanding the beach mouse example was a better predictor of good responses to questions about evolution in general than was performance on the course as a whole.

Hedges adds that because these fungi share more genes with animals than with plants, comparisons will help «help understand the early evolution of animals» as well.

It is hard to argue that a simpler life with more exercise, fewer processed foods, and closer contact with our children may well be good for us, but rather than renouncing modern living for the sake of our Stone Age genes, we need to understand how evolution has — and hasn't — suited us for the world we inhabit now.

But after discovering a novel group of giant viruses with a more complete set of translation machinery genes than any other virus known to date, scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute (DOE JGI), a DOE Office of Science User Facility, believe that this group (dubbed «Klosneuviruses») significantly increases our understanding of viral evolution.

The study of planetary atmospheres other than the Earth's, and in particular the study of the role of plasma - neutral interactions in their evolution, could contribute to our understanding of the long - term space weather (referred to also as space climate) effects and finally the origins of life itself (Yamauchi & Wahlund 2007).

This portion of the spectrum, which is more energetic than most radio waves yet less energetic than visible and infrared light, holds the key to understanding a great variety of fundamental processes, including planet and star formation, and the formation and evolution of galaxies and galaxy clusters in the early Universe.

That's not less than a milestone in human r / evolution... Most of us won't possibly understand yet what this will bring to our eyes and minds in terms of freedom and health benefits.

For one thing, it implies that the principles of evolution — competition, innovation, reproduction, and adaptation — are more useful for understanding the inner workings of the financial industry than the physics - like principles of rational economic analysis.

In fact, the evolution (sorry, Digivolution) system is so much more complex than Pokemon, there are guides up on GameFAQs specifically to help you understand it and get the Digimon that you want!

So, while neither any climate model nor any climate data set I'm aware of show any signs of chaotic behaviour of climate (rather than weather), and the major climate variations we know of can all be understood without needing to resort to chaos, I simply find no reason to believe there is chaos in climate evolution.

I understand the resistance to evolution because people are so insecure, they would rather continue to be wrong than to admit that they have changed their mind.

This is why I get angry when AGWers equate those that disbelieve in AGW with creationists; the principles behind evolution are much easier and more intuitive to understand than climate science is.