Dear Flanders and Hall. I'm a biologist at the end of my Phd in one of the most prestigious universities in the world. I was a raging atheist for more than 15 years, and I converted to Catholicism last year. I've worked with evolution during my whole career. I very much welcome catholics who are willing to scrutinize the evolutionary hypothesis and expose it for what it is: a philosophical account of biological change, with a very bad metaphysics. However, the way you guys described some of the evolutionary narratives do not correspond to what the darwinists themselves believe. I think it is very important if we want to be taken seriously in our criticism that we understand the details of out enemies' assertions before we launch a full blown attack. I have my own channel on science and philosophy, and I would be happy to participate in a pod cast with you if you want, because this is an important topic for catholics and I see more and more lay catholics, theologians and priests embracing the whole evolutionary framework without any questioning. Please let me know if you would be interested in having a chat about this. God bless you.

The appendix is now considered important to the auto-immune system. Just because we can’t see what a thing is for, doesn’t mean it serves no purpose.

Thank you for not shying away from this topic! Pax Christi

I’m so happy I found your channel. I’m new to the church and have been in total bewilderment of the things going on in the church. Your videos have brought me great peace. God bless

My mom was Catholic. My dad agnostic who believed science was all we needed to understand the world. I never really felt any tension between faith and science. They seemed perfectly compatible, and I always thought my father’s views were lacking the necessary Creator of the laws and order of the universe so science could work. I was a Christian who believed in evolution for years. It is only in recent years, upon examining more of the science, that I realized the theory of evolution as it is popularly understood (and expressed in this video) is actually incorrect according to the science. Natural Selection occurs. Admitted. Mutations occur. Admitted. Morphological changes in biological forms have occurred throughout the history of life on the earth. Admitted. BUT, natural selection plus random mutations plus time are INSUFFICIENT to account for the origin of life or for the species changes in life’s history. The biology of cellular information processing systems shows these are NOT the mechanisms which can account for these things. For more information on this, please find “James Tour Origin of Life” in KZfaq, read Suzan Mazur’s book where she interviews major scientists who may or may not be believers, but who reject the neoDarwinian understanding. Also see James Shapiro’s book “Evolution: A View from the 21st Century” where he explains the need to change from the current paradigm. Finally, books by The Discovery Institute, including those by Michael Bebe, Stephen Meyer, and Douglas Axe, offer excellent critiques of the popular view of evolution. We need a new word for the phenomenon that makes life possible and species changes possible. Rather than the theory of evolution, we should call it the theory of innovation, for that is what is occurring. Creative problem solving through innovative new body plans is going on. And yes, however controversial to use the term, it is all intelligent design. No other explanation than a Mind can account for the new information, the engineering, the coded language processing, etc. that are going on in life.

Overcoming evolution theory is I think one of the greatest challenges of our time.

Please buy and watch the video series, "Foundations Restored, A Catholic Perspective on Origins". Fr. Ripperger is one of the speakers in case you are skeptical. Wayne

Thank you for a very informative discussion. I have learned something important. Your shows help me to understand better the things I have always held to be true and helps me to share the Catholic Faith in a more coherent way. Thank you so much. God really provides help for His people in every age. May God continue to guide you.

You are so thorough in every video topic I’ve seen you cover. Thank you both for your work

This would have gone over better if Ken had better familiarity with geology and theories of evolution. Instead, it was a talk I could never share and still maintain credibility.

Martin Luther, redefined what the sacrament of confession meant. He used blessing during mass for vinial sins. He said it is the same thing. He said if the Pope can give indulgences. Why does he not forgive all of Christdom for free. Which ignores that it's alms giving and penance for sins, not just the Pope saying you are forgiven.

Try to get a round table with this guest (super smart guy!) and Robert Sungenis or someone from Kolbe Institute. Would love to hear about current trends / topics that are floating around.

Very glad you did the show, as anti-christ evolutionary theories are foxing around the church.

There was some good content in terms of backstory to challenge evolution, but too many times throughout this talk it’s asked, “where are they getting that number?” And the response is, “I don’t know!” If you don’t know the premises you’re refuting very well, then the argument kinda falls flat. Otherwise very good. I’m loving your videos, Timothy. Keep them going. And please consider putting them on podcast platforms!

Igneous rocks are 'volcanic' rocks. There are three broad categories of rock: igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic. Just a correction (23:30-ish).

Pius XII was addressing polygenesis - accepted by most scientists until about 1970. Today no scientist (that I know of) holds this to be true. Amazingly, most scientists believe in one man and one woman beginning the human race. In other words, they believe in Adam and Eve.

Thanks for this video Timothy!

For the record, the embryo drawings by Ernst Haeckel were determined to be fraudulent. For some reason, the drawings are still discussed in the school textbooks even though they are known to be fraudulent.

As a college student I'm facing evolutionist propaganda practically every class. I have an anthropology teacher who says not only is evolution true but religion supports it. I wish you guys sourced all the material so that I can use it in my papers against my biased professor and challenge his hubris.

My family and I were at the zoo a few years ago watching the chimps and some woman comes over next to us and says to her 3 year old girl, "Sweetie, these chimps are 98% human." Then, I kid you not, the same chimp picks up a turd, looks at us and starts to eat it like a banana. I grinned and said, "Well, there's your 2%." :-D

Thanks so much guys!!

Please do more videos on this topic!

small note on Lutheranism. Confession is present within Luthers Catechism(though added in later, based off some of Luthers teachings) as a "little Sacrament". Its not given the same gravity as an actual Sacrament. Its a bit hard to describe. Technically any Lutheran can go to confession with their Pastor and actually go through such a process.

I died laughing at the monkey reference and how they broke the type writer and shit on it 😂

Professor David Gelernter, Yale University, is the computer science guy you’re thinking of.

Great show!!!

Richard Dawkins says his 200 millionth great grandfather was a fish. I think we're done here lmao. 🐟🐟🐟

"And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty years; being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was of Heli, who was of Mathat, 24 Who was of Levi, who was of Melchi, who was of Janne, who was of Joseph, 25 Who was of Mathathias, who was of Amos, who was of Nahum, who was of Hesli, who was of Nagge, 26 Who was of Mahath, who was of Mathathias, who was of Semei, who was of Joseph, who was of Juda, 27 Who was of Joanna, who was of Reza, who was of Zorobabel, who was of Salathiel, who was of Neri, 28 Who was of Melchi, who was of Addi, who was of Cosan, who was of Helmadan, who was of Her, 29 Who was of Jesus, who was of Eliezer, who was of Jorim, who was of Mathat, who was of Levi, 30 Who was of Simeon, who was of Judas, who was of Joseph, who was of Jona, who was of Eliakim, 31 Who was of Melea, who was of Menna, who was of Mathatha, who was of Nathan, who was of David, 32 Who was of Jesse, who was of Obed, who was of Booz, who was of Salmon, who was of Naasson, 33 Who was of Aminadab, who was of Aram, who was of Esron, who was of Phares, who was of Judas, 34 Who was of Jacob, who was of Isaac, who was of Abraham, who was of Thare, who was of Nachor, 35 Who was of Sarug, who was of Ragau, who was of Phaleg, who was of Heber, who was of Sale, 36 Who was of Cainan, who was of Arphaxad, who was of Sem, who was of Noe, who was of Lamech, 37 Who was of Mathusale, who was of Henoch, who was of Jared, who was of Malaleel, who was of Cainan, 38 Who was of Henos, who was of Seth, who was of Adam, who was of God."

could not help but crack up when you said that Chimps are "nuts"

Transitional stages, must be common ancestor. Hmm. Sounds like the Q document, which “must” exist because reasons.

Excellent show and topic 🔥⛪💜!!! Thank you both 🎓!!! Check out the Kolbe Center, Br Andre Marie has an interview with Joseph Gedney that is amazing! Am trying to organise a debate between Dr Robert Sungenis and Trent Horn on this topic. If anyone can get through to Horn any assistance is welcome ☺! No reply so far.... Crickets...

Hey guys, thank you for the video. I realize the intentions are good, but it seems like there wasn't a real serious presentation of the evolutionists position. Many times it was said that "I cannot understand how they arrived to that conclusion (about planetary composition, the formation of rocks, etc.)". That isn't an argument. I am a practicing Catholic, but just because a theory is co-opted by enemies of the Church doesnt mean that it is untrue.

Seeing two professional-looking men fumble around with topics they obviously didn't research beforehand with all the grace of a middle schooler who forgot to study for an exam, is as insulting as anything can be to those who are scientifically literate in even the basics of geology and biology. Its sad to see our great Catholic intellectual tradition reduced to this. Would Aquinas have so little integrity to not even investigate the claims of his interlocutors? Or would he have looked into their best arguments and proofs? It does the Catholic world a disservice to have apologists like this and Father Ripperger who don't even understand what they fight against when they do so.

Pope Pius XII said it was not apparent how polygenism could be reconciled with original sin. Not evolution as a whole.

Completely off topic: Greatest dragon movie ever made: REIGN OF FIRE with Matthew McConaughey (channeling Sgt. Rock) and Christian Bale (just a great actor in every role).

Gelernter was applying mathematics to what genetic scientists have recently learned about the rate of occurrence in time of genetic mutation. There simply hasn’t been enough time.

Don’t forget we’re also 70% salmon!

21:25 Kennedy, Issac Newton was normal??? Was that before or after a lifetime of alchemical and magical experiments and him reaching out to the fallen angels for secret knowledge? He was known as the Last Alchemist.....

21:22 - Newton was a non-trinitarian and deeply into hermeticism. Take that as you will.

I want to make a correction of a factual nature. At 7:46, you quoted part of the paragraph below, from Pius XII's Humani Generis: "When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own." Now, you started your quote with the bit that says "Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled...". And when you did so, you sort of bracketed in (or maybe Denzinger bracketed it in for you?) that the opinion being referenced is evolution. As a matter of fact, though, the theory of evolution as such is not what Pius was referring to. Instead, as you can see at the start of the paragraph, he was referring to the position of *polygenism* (a position he describes in the second sentence). Now, one might say this is just an academic distinction to make, because there is often the impression that if the theory of evolution is true, it would entail that polygenism is true. However, there have been arguments rather persuasive to me to the effect that this is not the case. I would point you to Ed Feser's treatment of this issue (edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-i.html), as well as Josh Swamidass' The Genealogical Adam and Eve for an explanation of such arguments. Essentially, if there were anatomically modern (and thus, genetically compatible) human-like creatures (essentially, just like us but without the rational soul), there would be nothing to rule out the possibility that Adam and Eve's descendants couldn't have breeded with them (you might object to such an idea on moral grounds, but remember: one would only have to maintain that this happened, not that this is how it should have happened), and thus that the children that resulted from said breeding would be given a rational soul, would inherit original sin through generation, etc, *even though they would contain genetic material that originated outside the family of A&E*.

Actually, those so-called red blood cells were blobs of iron oxide with the general shape and size of blood cells! Also, the iron oxide and being deep inside the bone structure could preserve protein fibers for millions of years, at least according to her.

From a fellow Protestant: "You'd be surprised how many 'conservative' papists try to argue Rome is better because you can more freely accept evolution." In my experience, this is true. Many well-meaning Catholics assume that evolution is dogma at this point. We can only pray that, like the Arian heresy, this will eventually be condemned. Sadly, if it's ever condemned, it will probably be condemned by scientists first and then the Catholics will catch up to save face :facepalm:

Argon dating. Lead dating and deuterium dating for rocks

Do you know about Robert Sungenis work on Geocentrism? The Church was right, Galileo was wrong. Check it out. He is very good on Genesis.

But what if macroevolution is observable but humans don't live long enough to witness it?

30min Origin of species in Darwin's "Origin of Species" is God. "There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one"

Keep going, soon you'll be looking into the globe earth theory.

come on guys. the new athidiots just went away. its conversations like this that dont accurately describe the opposing side that cause them to return

It's called TONIC. Not pop or soda.

BECAUSE I'm not a total and complete idiot, I don't believe in evolution.

Theory of Evolution meets Law of Entropy.

I enjoy the theological topics on this channel, but this was painful to watch. Neither of these guys sounds like he knows the first thing about the topic. Search for David Berlinski, he makes a terrific case against evolution. Unfortunately not Catholic.

Quote from The Literal Interpretation of Genesis by Saint Augustus of Hippo "It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation."

The elements come from the birth and death of stars. I don't see any problem with the 'Big Bang' theory because the maths point in that direction. Clearly, once it is accepted that God's hand directs the process we can accept what seems logical until a better explanation arises. The Big Bang is consistent with 'Ex Nihilo' creation in my mind. Atheism seems to tend towards reductionism. Very interesting that Scrooge was modelled on Malthus.

soda

Ought not listen to OTT

You can empirically observe evolution. It's just a change in allele frequency over generations. Also, evolution and abiogenesis(the study of the origin of life itself) are not related fields and I would agree the evidence for it is non existent.

It gay

Reasons why there is no god: 1) Life does not need to have a meaning. 2) All religions are shaped by the culture of that specific geografical area hence any god is made in the image of people: this means that god is just in your brain. 3) You just follow your family's religion as you were indoctrinated from the very beginning of your life. Your family was indoctrinated by their parents and so on until the days when religious education was mandatory. This much depends on the area where you were born. Basically what you know does not exist: it has just been told you to believe in it since when you were young and not able to do a critic about life. 4) If religion books were cancelled, they would have re-written differently (e.g. would a re-written version of the Bible - the word of god - describe that sun goes around the earth nowadays?). Instead, if scientific researches were cancelled they would have re-written in the same way cause they are based on objective evidence. 5) 4,200 religions in the world: how do you prove yours is the true one and on which evidence you discredit the others? 6) The most popular religions just coincide with the most dominant/rich/colonialist countries as they were spread by force/political influence 7) When people could not cure themselves they relied on witchcraft. Once science found the cure, witchcraft got extinguished. By analogy, religion works in the same way as witchcraft as it is just an irrational method of compensation for material life problems and it disappears when issues are fixed materially. Religion just gives you the illusion to obtain something that you will never get. 8) If you say "what was there before universe?", then I say, "what was there before god" ? 9) It has already been demonstrated by science that organic matter can be generated by inorganic matter (check the Miller-Urey experiment) 10) Big bang: explosion which determined life and continuous spreading of energy nowadays. Human production/reproduction is just an expression of that energy keeps spreading. Before the big bang there was neither space nor time, hence a god couldn't exist. Extra point: We are all here discussing because of CONSCIOUSNESS. Humans are the only ones who are provided with CONSCIOUSNESS in such a way that they can think, plan, construct even under long-term outlooks. CONSCIOUSNESS is therefore a system of defence to better allow our survival and it is the result of an evolved brain which took millions of years to develop to this level: it's not a gift of God... Please feed consciousness with reasoning instead of superstitions and useless beliefs because thank to this refined defensive system we have finally managed to understand how we came here. The rest is just useless faith which might even undermine our specie by diverting the natural purpose of our consciousness...