- What made former evolutionists doubt the theory of evolution? What made former creationists doubt the theory of creation?
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- Blog : "http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com". Debating evolutionists for 15 years +.
- Answered Apr 15
- I was an evolutionist twice over and am now a full fledged young earth creationist for the second time.
First time, I had become a Christian and learned that the Bible was the word of God and found things in the Bible that clearly didn’t match up with what I had learned to believe earlier in childhood as an evolutionist.
I gave up trying to reconcile both at about age ten, at which time I had also found some serious difficulties in evolution as such:
- origin of DNA information
- origin of mind and of language.
When I became a Catholic, I was very admiring of Jesuits, still am, and was even for some time a bit fond of Teilhard de Chardin. I was willing to give up my strong stance against evolution, which had been socially costly in my teens, and started taking in things like considering Cro-Magnon and Neanderthals as pre-Adamites.
About 12 years later, I read St Augustine’s City of God and cease that compromising, which had been already weakened while I was reading St Thomas Aquinas in a situation involving much solitude.
As to theoretical part, I’d say that the definite clinch was its inability (it is still unable) to explain human language, but there is also this external part of it conflicting with Christianity, not just with Bible but also with Church Fathers and Scholastics.
- Andy Heilveil
- 16h ago
- All evolution has to do to explain human language is demonstrate that it is beneficial to reproduction.
I step back a bit from neurophysiological understandings of how language is produced in the brain (which by itself is actual proof of the biological foundation of language) and look at how it is used in human society.
Language is used to:
- ) coordinate hunting efforts
- ) coordinate other group efforts which are beneficial to the members.
- ) influence the behaviors of others
- ) demonstrate dominance
- ) entice mates
All of the above have measurable effect on the likelihood and frequency of reproduction and hence are positively selected for by evolution.
Gorillas can learn sign language, hence language per se is not limited to humans.
What more do you need to see that human language is adequately explained by evolution?
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- 11m ago
- “All evolution has to do to explain human language is demonstrate that it is beneficial to reproduction.”
The thing is, this explains why language would survive and spread if it could be produced.
But genetic changes have no chance of explaining how it could be produced in the first place.
The rest of your answer is just elaboration on what I am anyway admitting.
“Gorillas can learn sign language, hence language per se is not limited to humans.”
Sorry, I missed this.
Gorillas or chimps have been learned basically noun series. Some verbs too.
But they cannot be taught to use a noun as subject and a verb as predicate. And especially not to negate predicate, put predicate into past tense etc.
Language is really limited to humans, as far as biology is concerned.
I just looked up your credentials a bit. You are not likely to know exactly what language means, even.
- Other blogs, same writer
- A thread from Catholic.com (more may be added)
- Answering Steve Rudd
- Have these dialogues taken place? Yes.
- Copyright issues on blogposts with shared copyright
- I think I wrote a mistaken word somewhere on youtube - or perhaps not
- What is Expertise? Some Things It is Not.
- It Seems Apocalypse is Explained in a Very Relevant Part
- Dialoguing Mainly with Adversaries
- Why do my Posts Right Here Not Answer YOUR Questio...