Physics 111Honors

Description

• exposé

Physics 111 Honors Common Exam 2 Fall 2002 Name: Section: Closed book exam. Only one 8.5′′× 11′′ formula sheet (front and back side) can be used. Calculators are allowed. Use the scantron forms (pencil only!) for the multiple choice problems. Circle the answers on the examination sheet as well, and return it together with the scantron form. Use the back of these pages, or attach your own pages with solutions for problems which require calculations.

• equilibrium position after the jump
• answers on the examination sheet
• mechanical energy emec of the system cannot change
• change of potential energy during the hike
• frictional force
• spring
• box
• system

Sujets

• Exposé
• Common
• Energy
• Spring
• PositioN
• Test (assessment)
• English modal verb
• Changé
• System

Informations

• Publié par: idwe0
• Nombre de lectures: 27

Extrait

Approval Page
J Donnelly iA CRITIQUE OF EVOLUTION WITHIN CATHOLICISM AND ITS
SUBSEQUENT LINKS WITH FUNDAMENTAL CHRISTIANITY
JOHN DONNELLY DIP.PHIL., B.D., H.DIP.ED., DIP. MISSION STUDIES,
M.ED.,
FREEDOM BIBLE COLLEGE AND SEMINARY
THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DOCTORAL DISSERTATION COMMITTEE IN
PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DOCTOR OF
THEOLOGY DEGREE
J Donnelly iiCONTENTS

Page
Acknowledgements iv
Thesis Statement v
Introduction 1
PART ONE: EVOLUTION AND CATHOLICISM
Chapter 1: A Short History of Evolution Theory 3
Chapter 2: Evolution and Catholicism – The Current Position 34
Chapter 3: Can Evolution Blend with Catholicism? 54
Chapter 4: Why Evolution Can Never Become Part of Catholic Doctrine 66
Chapter 5: Why Catholics Should Reject Evolution 91
PART TWO: SOME PHILOSOPHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND EFFECTS
OF EVOLUTION WITHIN CATHOLICISM
Chapter 6: Why Evolution is Pseudoscience – Some Philosophical Considerations 105
Chapter 7: Dangerous Effects of Evolution 130
Chapter 8: A Lesson from History 140
PART THREE: CATHOLICISM AND BIBLICAL CRITICISM –
A NEED TO RETURN TO THE SCRIPTURES
Chapter 9: Moses and the reliability of the Pentateuch 167
Chapter 10: Two Different Accounts in Genesis? 175
PART FOUR: CONCLUSION
Chapter 11: Evolution, Catholicism and Fundamentalism 184
Bibliography 212
J Donnelly iiiACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the following people: Amy Joy Reilly who helped
me with advice on editing; Vidis my wife who kept encouraging me when things
were going slowly, enabling me to recommence; my parents John and Alice who also
were a source of encouragement and who goaded me on; my pupils who were so
interested in this theme and created even more enthusiasm in me; my daughter
Clodagh who has never ceased to ask questions about evolution and kept me on my
toes.
J Donnelly iv
THESIS STATEMENT
Evolution is a defunct belief system, which has adversely affected Catholicism, but
the key to eradicate this is a return to the fundamental doctrine of Special Creation
found in the Scriptures.
J Donnelly vJ Donnelly viA CRITIQUE OF EVOLUTION WITHIN CATHOLICISM AND ITS SUBSEQUENT LINKS
WITH FUNDAMENTAL CHRISTIANITY
Introduction
Evolution is a defunct belief system, which has adversely affected Catholicism, but the key to eradicate this
is a return to the fundamental Doctrine of Special Creation found in the Scriptures. Many Catholics assert
that the Catholic Church regards evolution as a fact thinking, “evolution is acceptable as long as God was
involved”. On the contrary, I submit that evolution, when correctly defined, cannot be casually regarded as
scientific fact. The objective truth, known from scientific evidence and theological arguments, contradicts
evolution. I also submit that Catholic doctrine has always favoured ex nihilo creation (not Darwinian
Evolution) as found in the book of Genesis and that this demonstrates a fundamentally Christian approach.
This thesis will provide evidence that in general Catholic doctrine goes against evolution even though some
Church theologians seem to state otherwise. Relevant documents will be examined to show the anti-
evolution (Creation) theme. The aim of this thesis is not to critique all of the evolution bias within
Catholicism but to point out the weakness of the evolution position and by doing so, evolution argument
and bias will be exposed. It will also be shown that Catholicism has always had links with fundamental
Christianity, demonstrating that Catholicism needs to go back to its origins and follow a more focused or
fundamental teaching from the Bible against evolution dogma. Because Catholicism has not primarily
focused on the Bible it finds that it has a lot of problems as a church today. This thesis is not an argument
for Catholic doctrine in general but rather it is a critique of the philosophy/theology surrounding the topic
of evolution, demonstrating the orthodox position which the Catholic Church has always had in relation to
evolution, while pointing out the various errors that have crept into Catholicism. It is hoped that the
conclusions to this thesis may open the debate, particularly in the Republic of Ireland which is a
predominantly Catholic country.
The thesis consists of three parts. Part 1 deals with the critique of evolution. Part 2 has some philosophical
considerations arising out of the critique and the dangers of evolution theory. Part 3 demonstrates that the
J Donnelly 1Pentateuch was indeed edited or written by Moses and that the Genesis account of creation is one unit.
Part 1 Chapter 1 exposes the false science of the evolution theory. Some scientific and technical language is
used. The next four chapters are somewhat more theological in that they treat of the position of the Catholic
Church. There is much historical information interspersed with scientific fact debunking modern evolution
theory. This leads naturally into Part 2 in that having critiqued evolution for the first five chapters the next
three deal with the exposition of the nature of evolution from a philosophical standpoint and the consequent
dangers of supporting such a widespread belief system. Part 3 turns to Scripture because the modern day
attack on the Bible in general and the book of Genesis in particular has caused a lot of people to doubt the
word of God. The two chapters in this section try to restore confidence in Genesis and the author/editor as
Moses.
Having defended the credibility of Scripture I then conclude in the final section by stating that the Catholic
Church, in relation to the whole area of evolution, must indeed return to the fundamentals of The Christian
faith. This is because the onslaught of evolution must be met head on. If evolution is no longer a fact of
science then more authority is put on Scripture/Genesis as representative of simple but factual evidence. I
argue that this can aid the Catholic Church in giving answers to her flock in the domain of faith, morality
and direction in life. I try to show that the general Fundamental Christian position in the creation/evolution
debate can be a sure way of bringing in the new evangelisation the Catholic Church has been looking for.
Various bible translations are used throughout this paper
J Donnelly 2PART 1
EVOLUTION AND CATHOLICISM
Chapter 1: A Short History of Evolution Theory
Despite having its heritage in ancient Greece, the theory of evolution was first brought to the
consideration of the scientific world in the nineteenth century. The most carefully considered view of
evolution was expressed by the French biologist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, in his Zoological Philosophy
(1809). Lamarck thought that all living things were endowed with a vital force that steered them to
evolve toward greater complexity. He also thought that organisms could impart to their offspring traits
acquired during their lifetimes. As an example of this way of thinking, Lamarck suggested that the long
neck of the giraffe evolved when a short-necked ancestor took to browsing on the leaves of trees instead
of on grass.
This evolutionary model of Lamarck's was invalidated by the discovery of the laws of genetic
inheritance. In the middle of the twentieth century, the discovery of the structure of DNA revealed that
the nuclei of the cells of living organisms possess very special genetic information, and that this could
not be altered by ‘acquired traits’. In other words, during its lifetime, even though a giraffe managed to
make its neck a few centimetres longer by extending it to upper branches, this trait would not pass to its
offspring. In short, the Lamarckian view was simply refuted by scientific findings and went down in
history as a faulty assumption.
However, the evolutionary theory formulated by another natural scientist, who lived a couple of
generations after Lamarck, proved to be more influential. This natural scientist was Charles Robert
Darwin, and the theory he formulated is known as “Darwinism”