Slashdot Mirror


Pope Francis Declares Evolution and Big Bang Theory Are Right

HughPickens.com writes: The Independent reports that Pope Francis, speaking at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, has declared that the theories of evolution and the Big Bang are real. "When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so," said Francis. "He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment." Francis explained that both scientific theories were not incompatible with the existence of a creator – arguing instead that they "require it." "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve." Experts say the Pope's comments put an end to the "pseudo theories" of creationism and intelligent design that some argue were encouraged by his predecessor, Benedict XVI who spoke out against taking Darwin too far.

19 of 669 comments (clear)

  1. Haleluja ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Haleluja ...

    1. Re:Haleluja ... by stealth_finger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or the whole irreducible complexity deal - (blood clotting requires some 30 chemicals in just the right proportions and cannot have come about through gradual changes - remove one of those and the smallest cut causes the organism to bleed to death, remove another and the clotting never stops and all blood turns solid).

      Of course it can. Creatures without the right chemicals in the right places bleed to death from minor injury before getting chance to reproduce. Others with solid blood never get to reproduce either. The ones with the right balance survive long enough to pass the traits onto the next generation. If some god had set the chemical balance right then why does it fuck up in a bunch of different circumstances? Blood clots are a thing and so is haemophilia, it's not either too thin to clot, just right or too thick to move like some Goldilocks porridge deal. This is as redundant as the pathetic something as perfect as the human eye (which is far from perfect) or any eye for that matter don't just pop into existence argument.

      What species are shown as 'just appearing' with no previous chain? Citation very much needed.

      You need to get over the idea that everything has to be made by someone(thing) because who the fuck created your creator? The God God? And then who made him? It's turtles all the way down no matter how you look at it.

      You also need to have the confidence to say 'I/We don't know' instead of attributing all unknowns to some god.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  2. Re:Tip of the iceberg by jgtg32a · · Score: 5, Funny

    Keeping an open mind is good but make sure your brain doesn't fall out.
     
    What state are you in, your dealer appears to have some great stuff?

  3. thank goodness that argument is settled. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    As a theoretical physics doctoral candidate I've spent many a night staring into the ceiling hoping the pope would confirm the fundamental compoent of everything from my undergraduate education to my last twelve grant proposals. My boyfriend, a medical doctor, is equally relieved to understand his approach to antibiotics has been validated in the context of the theory of evolution and not as medical science once assumed to 'the aetherous ichor of daemons betwixt these foul realms.'

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  4. Not actually a new stance by dywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have a feeling this only seems newsworthy because most folks here are more acquainted with American Catholicism, which tends be very very influenced by American protestentism (ie, evangelicals) and thus very very conservative in some areas (especially science).

    The Catholic Church has not been opposed to these things for some time, regardless of the feelings of certain members of the Church who didn't bother to learn their Catechism very well. Granted, the Church does an end run around them by essentially saying "if it is so, then it is so because God made it so", which is fairly standard religious belief around and not really out of hte ordinary.

    But the point is, the Church's actual teaching is that there is no conflict between the Church's spiritual beliefs and teachings and these sciences, and thus the Church does not reject these scientific theories.

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    1. Re:Not actually a new stance by hibiki_r · · Score: 5, Informative

      Maybe we live in different Americas? Here in Missouri, if it says Baptist at the door, you can expect young earth creationism. And the worst part is, that's not even the worst of what they'll teach you. A friend of mine was OK with the YEC bullshit, but she ended up leaving her church, and really, her family, when she figured out the kinds of things that were being taught to her daughters.

  5. Cool, but nothing new by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Vatican has accepted Evolution doesn't conflict with theology for decades now, and the Big Bang theory was was proposed by a Catholic Priest.

    The problem is, most of the biblical literalists don't consider Catholicism to be a valid branch of Christianity.

    1. Re:Cool, but nothing new by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Georges Lemaître. Apparently his being a priest led to some accusations that he was using science to promote Christian dogma.

  6. Re:Tip of the iceberg by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thank you, I was just thinking: "You know, if there were space aliens in here, this whole book would be even more believable."

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  7. Re:Only YEC denies it by aBaldrich · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary is wrong as usual. Francis did not say that these two theories are Truth. Nobody claims that a falsifable theory is The Truth, nor that it is "right". The Pope only said that they are not in contradiction with the common christian faith. Nothing less... and nothing more.

    --
    In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
  8. Re:Tip of the iceberg by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's how we know Scientology is real. I'm not saying it's because of aliens, but.... aliens.

  9. Re:Tip of the iceberg by khr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's actually a lot of potentional scientific correct stuff in the Bible

    As they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

  10. Re:Tip of the iceberg by VAXcat · · Score: 5, Funny

    HA! That reminds me of what Terry Carr, a science fiction writer, once said, that if the Bible was released as an Ace Double, it would have been titled "War God of Israel", with the flip side called "The Thing with Three Souls".

    --
    There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
  11. Re:Only YEC denies it by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This has been mainline Christian thought, even among evangelicals, for decades. YEC's get the spot-light because they're zany, but this has already been accepted for a good while now.

    You can read in Hawking's "A Brief History of Time", his popular science book from the 80's, his conversations with the Pope in the 70's during which the Pope "concedes" time after the Big Bang to science. Hawking gets a little happy about then explaining how time didn't exist until just an infinite moment after the Big Bang, but that's besides the point.

    No, the theologically interesting part here is:

    we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.

    The bit about magicians and magic wands are a throw away softening statement as nobody has ever imagined the Abrahamic God as requiring magic devices. More concisely then:

    we run the risk of imagining God was ... able to do everything. But that is not so.

    That may well be the most controversial thing a Pope has ever said. And has the potential to re-focus Christians on what Jesus was talking about - they've become lost in Old-Testament vengeance in the most recent millennium. Long gone are the days of Constantine not being able to fight wars of conquest because his army was full of Christian pacifists.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  12. Re:Tip of the iceberg by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Informative

    The bible distinguishes between 'The Lord' and 'God'

    The reason for this is much more mundane. In the original Hebrew, God has many names depending on whether God is being referred to as someone who judges sins, as merciful, etc. These don't all translate perfectly from Hebrew to English so sometimes "Lord" is used and sometimes "God" is used - depending on the translation. No need to bring in space aliens and further complicate matters when a simple translation explanation will do.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  13. Re:Only YEC denies it by halivar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not about being allowed; it's about not being a bore. I have vigorous and enthusiastic debates with religious friends, including about evolution, but I know my audience. I only argue with friends and random strangers on the internet.

  14. Re:Tip of the iceberg by risom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's actually a lot of potentional scientific correct stuff in the Bible.

    The point about science is the process, not the result. There may be correct content in the bible, but that does not make it scientific.

  15. Let me butt in one second. by neoritter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Evolution and the Big Bang Theory have been accepted theories in the Catholicism for just about as long as they were around (last century or so). In fact the Big Bang Theory was proposed by a Catholic priest! Pope John Paul II said that evolution was the most probable theory and referenced a predecessor Pope's words as agreeing with him.

    The article itself thankfully references this fact:

    But Pope Francis’s comments were more in keeping with the progressive work of Pope Pius XII, who opened the door to the idea of evolution and actively welcomed the Big Bang theory. In 1996, John Paul II went further and suggested evolution was “more than a hypothesis” and “effectively proven fact”.

    Though they did seem to want to keep perpetuating the myth that the Church was ever anti-science. When it's just not true.

  16. Finally, some rational thought. by LoRdTAW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back in 7th grade I was attending Catholic school. We had a teacher who was very, very religious but at the same time a good science teacher. How was this possible? She taught us a few memorable things: first off the creation in genesis took 7 days for god (7 th day was rest, chillin and having a beer hopefully). But who said a day for god is the same for us? In her words she said a day for god could be millions or billions of years to us. That made sense. Another thing that stuck out was that all of the physical processes we see are rules laid out by god. So basically, the laws of physics were created by god. Evolution? A natural process that god created. So here was a very godly woman who also was a firm believer in science because science is a gift from god. So the two can certainly coexist.

    A while back I was talking to a religious guy I know from the local dive bar I used to frequent (religious guy at the bar, go figure. a regular hypocrite was more like it). We got in talking about science and during the course, he bought up the opinion that science is against god. But I bought up the counter of, why would god bestow such an awe inspiring field of study only to restrict us from pursuing it? He gave us a giant sandbox to play in and we refuse it? To me it would be rude to declining a gift from god. He started to see my point and said: "you know that makes sense. don't know if I like it but it makes sense". You could see he sorta understood the point.

    So you can argue that all of science is merely a creation and gift from god. To deny it is to deny gods gift and possibly, god itself. Though there are some who will refuse any of those beliefs, if they are in a position of power be it a school board, politician or preacher, they have a self interest in that denial (control).

    Disclaimer: I am agnostic. I doubt there is a god. Or perhaps there is a god but not in the way we traditionally think, a person. Perhaps the laws behind our universe are god. Or we are a 3d projection of a 2d hologram or inside a giant computer simulation. We don't know and perhaps, we never will know. And if there is a god as we picture, I am sure he/she is not the dick they are made out to be in various man made books. And to be honest, I really don't care either way. I just live my life and enjoy it :-)