Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

“happy to be horny”

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#35173 Jul 23, 2012
forreal wrote:
<quoted text>I have never heard so many rattlesanke twisting liars in my like!!! The Iron age was created way before Jobs day!!! In the Book of Deut 3:11 King og bed was made of IRON!!!!IRON!!!! IRON!!!!LOL scientists are FOOLS!!!!
Sort of kills the motivation to be king if you still have to sleep on an iron bed...

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#35174 Jul 23, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> The fact you associate Scripture with Mother Goose is beneath contempt.
Yes, I think he forgot to genuflect when he mentioned scripture.

So you worship scripture more than you do God. Interesting.

“happy to be horny”

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#35175 Jul 23, 2012
Those Romans were pretty meticulous record keepers, so much so that we know the weather at the battle of Cannae, their shipping and trade routes, the name and birthplace of the standard bearers for the legions, taxes collected, ad ifinitum, seems a bit funny that there is barely a reference to anyone remotely sounding like a "son of god" wandering around in their midst???I complain often and loudly about the poor job my local newspaper does but I'm pretty sure even they would take notice if a guy who could heal the sick, walks on water and turns water into wine was chilling in the hood. It might only be two column inches under the intercounty softball scores but it would be in there. The fact is that back then self-scribed messiahs were literally a dime a dozen and you couldn't swing a cat without hitting a "king of kings" in the nuts, jesus just had a better publicist. If "Fred" from Nazareth could of pulled off a couple of killer card tricks it might of been him that they decided to mythologize so many years later.Bonus Fact: Imagine how many guys would be called Fred in Mexico!

Level 4

Since: Apr 12

United States

#35176 Jul 23, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok I'll use quotes from scientific and non religious Sources..
Explosion is a metaphor often used with big bang so I am sure you can find lots of sites which mention the "explosion" of big bang. But if you read a little further, these sites will usually explain that it is not really an explosion.
Also, you said "nothing exploded" which is wrong.
KJV wrote:
1) http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm
"About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe"
Read a little further and you will see this:
"This occurance was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all of the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other."
Not an explosion, eh?
Also this:
"At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point."
Which is not "nothing"
KJV wrote:
2) http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/features/ne...
"The energy released in a cosmic gamma-ray burst detected in December 1997 is the most energy ever detected from an explosion in the Universe, perhaps making it the most powerful explosion since the creation of the Universe in the Big Bang."
This is not about Big Bang; this was about an explanation about an explosion detected on Dec 14, 1997 which is being compared metaphorically to the Big Bang.
The word "Big Bang" in the paragraph that you quoted is a hyperlink, and if you click on that it will take you to this site:
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/dict_ad.htm...
where it explains Big Bang thus:
"A widely accepted model of the Universe that assumes that the observed expansion of the Universe originated about 13.7 billion years ago, when the Universe was very hot and very dense. It successfully explains the cosmic microwave background and the ratio of hydrogen, helium, and other light elements, as well as the expansion of the Universe."
Expansion get it?
KJV wrote:
3) http://www.exploratorium.edu/origins/cern/ide...
"The universe began, scientists believe, with every speck of its energy jammed into a very tiny point. This extremely dense point exploded with unimaginable force, creating matter and propelling it outward to make the billions of galaxies of our vast universe. Astrophysicists dubbed this titanic explosion the Big Bang. "
The first sentence that you quoted - "The universe began, scientists believe, with every speck of its energy jammed into a very tiny point."
It says that all energy was jammed into a very tiny point (therefore matter as because of mass-energy equivalence). That is not "nothing", is it? That defeats your contention that "nothing exploded"
Even though it says that the singularity "exploded" in the beginning of the page, if you read down you will see the following:
"There's another important quality of the Big Bang that makes it unique. While an explosion of a man-made bomb expands through air, the Big Bang did not expand through anything. That's because there was no space to expand through at the beginning of time. Rather, physicists believe the Big Bang created and stretched space itself, expanding the universe."
Again, they are explaining this is not a conventional explosion, but is an expansion.
KJV wrote:
4) http://www.rubak.com/article.cfm...
"The overall Big Bang theory states that ."
This is a personal web site hardly a scientific source; snipped it for space.
Do you agree that the phrase you used "Nothing exploded" is a caricature? I have proved it to you based on the evidence that you provided. It was not nothing, and it was an expansion, not explosion.
You need to be more careful before you go against widely accepted scientific theories. Here are a couple of sites for you:
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_theory.h...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

Level 4

Since: Apr 12

United States

#35177 Jul 23, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
What's the matter Ticky you ticked off because I yet again posted the requested articles that show it was not I that invented the big bang explosion.
There are many others but there is no room on here for all of them all.
If you were really ignorant of the scientific theory of Big Bang, then this is the opportunity to learn. See my previous post to you.

However if you choose to continue with the caricature of yours, that is willful ignorance; there is not a lot anyone can do about that.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#35178 Jul 23, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> DH is a joke.
Liberal scholars committed to theological naturalism.
Not one iota real hard evidence exists for any of it.
19th century notions of ancient literacy completely refuted by archeological evidence.
The evidence is in the text ITSELF! And it's been known in mainstream Christian theological institutes and seminaries for over 100 years that the Pentateuch was written by several authors (probably 5) and not by someone named "Moses."

The hard evidence is the text itself, which can be taken apart into its different component stories.

Those interested can read the evidence in detail for the Documentary Hypothesis here:
"The Documentary Hypothesis, and the identity of the Pentateuch's authors"
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.h...

Again, TAUGHT IN ALL MAINSTREAM CHRISTIAN SEMINARIES, etc. Not sure what planet YOU live on!

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#35179 Jul 23, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Rules are rules.
I don't do the condemning I do the pointing out that if you don't change your believe you will be in trouble.
Still making threats you cannot support!

You don't know if the rules you live by are God's, you also have no idea if there really is eternal punishment for non-believers. What you better be hoping is that you are wrong -- because since your religion is as valid as any other that exists, or has existed, you are condended to more versions of Hell than you would even realize. Gotta love your hypocracy! So entertaining.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#35180 Jul 23, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text>Historians reject resurrection as actual history because of an anti supernatural bias.
Err, no. Nonsense as usual.

Historians reject the Resurrection because it is common human experience that when people die, THEY STAY DEAD, i.e. no one "resurrects."

That's why they have a natural and rational bias against a story obviously written by ancient human beings working a religious agenda.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#35181 Jul 23, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Physics yes. Darwin evolution as it reelates to macro change aat macro levels. No. it is assumption.
Not an assumption, but a CONCLUSION based on 150 years of fossil, geological and DNA evidence.

As Ted said to you earlier, don't you ever get tired of being WRONG all the time? LOL

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#35182 Jul 23, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You well never get the chance.
Sorry but only those in heaven will be in lightened.
Another old joke.
Man dies and goes to Heaven is being shown around by St. Pete. Everywhere they go the man sees bhuddists working with Catholics working with Jews working with Muslims ... it's amazing to him.

In one small corner of Heaven the man is surprised to find a brick wall. "Hey St. peter, what's this?"

"Shhhhhh!" says Peter. "There are a few Evangelicals, very few, that actually made it to Heaven. They are over there." He points over the wall. "They like to believe they are the only ones here."
Sound familar?
forreal

Corpus Christi, TX

#35183 Jul 23, 2012
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
And you are living proof that the nut doesn't fall far from the tree.
Ted you arose from the dead you are a mircale!LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
forreal

Corpus Christi, TX

#35184 Jul 23, 2012
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
So a news story about David Copperfield means that one day he will be revered as a God? You sure you aren't interested in this Bridge I have in Brooklyn? One owner? Good deal!
if the storys were not true they would have stone them to death and yet they didnt cause they were telling the truth!

Level 4

Since: Apr 12

Allentown, PA

#35185 Jul 23, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You're the frightfully stupid one for thinking all matter that ever did and does exist could fit on to a pins head and you call that sound science.
Yes keep drinking the Koolaid.
And you have no difficulty in clinging on to a belief that there is a human shaped entity sitting outside of time and space (whatever that means), who created the entire universe with all the matter and energy, all the billions of stars and planets, all the black holes and empty space, all the life in the universe, all this with just a thought?
And that too without a single shred of evidence? All to be believed on faith based on a 2000 year old book which cannot be questioned? How ridiculous is that?
The scientific model is based on evidence, not faith. That is why even when something appears counter intuitive, scientists accept them because evidence points that way.
forreal

Corpus Christi, TX

#35186 Jul 23, 2012
lisawow wrote:
<quoted text>Sort of kills the motivation to be king if you still have to sleep on an iron bed...
it kept hot during the winter months!LOL

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#35187 Jul 23, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Physics yes. Darwin evolution as it reelates to macro change aat macro levels. No. it is assumption. <quoted text> OK. <quoted text> If you use scientific method for supernatural claims then you only arrive at your original conclusion. Science is limited to what normally happens in time and space.
Not so. If you understood the history of evolutionary thought, which pre-dates Darwin by centuries, it was the large scalle changes, what you like to think of as 'macro' that drove the search for answers. The idea of small changes accumulating into the larger changes wasn't confirmed until we re-discovered Mendel's work. Physics supports the changes at each level, not macro vs micro, but the changes. Geology, paleontology, chemistry, even climatology, astronomy, and cosmology all support biological evolution on both macro and micro.

in fact, according to biolgists the idea of macro vs micro is one made up so creationist can save face after they decided there was too much evidence to keep denying evolution. So they drew this imaginary line and keep pushing that line. To real scientists, there is no difference. The whole idea of 'species' is a man-made label for us to use when catagorizing things. Nothing more. If species was a real 'barrier' then hybrids couldn't possibly exist. Yet evolutionary theory explains hybrids quite well.

Of course the Biblical lack of definition of 'kinds' sorta makes it impossible for you to explain it without resorting to some fancy rationalization to try and force the evidence to fit your pet ideas. Luckily science doesn't work that way. Pet ideas tend to fall when faced with real evidence. Your rationaslizations are a poor substitute for evidence.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#35188 Jul 23, 2012
forreal wrote:
<quoted text>Ted you arose from the dead you are a mircale!LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Naw, you just wish I were dead. I, on the other hand, don't really care about you for anything. You can drop dead or continue to live your life of lies, I don't care.

Until, that is, you try and push your idea of a religion onto other people, especially school children. Then I care and will do what I can to ensure your religion stays out of the science classroom.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#35189 Jul 23, 2012
Coca-Cola Fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not offending by it, I was merely making an observation of how some people i here seem to get angry over this subject.
It can happen.

Emotions can also be falsely read.

For example, when I call a fundie a liar, it's not because I'm angry. I'm simply pointing it out the same way I would point out that the sky is blue or water is wet.

I don't expect fundies to go against their nature.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#35190 Jul 23, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I did have a sharp pain in my left big toe yesterday. Was that it?
That was it!:-) The spirit of your left big toe is in hell, paying for your disbelief!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#35191 Jul 23, 2012
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
And you have reached the last refuge of the Creationist poster. When you cannot substantiate anything you claim, when your critics refuse to let you off the hook for making those unsupported claims, and when your own arguments start sounding hollow in your own ears ... you start calling people names.
Since my address is not under a bridge and I do not grind up bones to make my bread, I will give your comment all the thought it requires and laugh at it.
Thank you Ladies and Gentleman, you have reaching the entertainment portion of this evening's show. I give you KJV's squirming and willingness to say anything to save his close-minded idea of a religious belief! Please hold your applause till the end or you might some less-then-gem-like comment for your laughter and enjoyment!
Although, be careful, like the camel that spits, KJV tries to spit some invective when he feels you aren't giving his 'genius' it's due! So don't stand too close, or he might drool on you!
His "genius" made him use a linky I provided demonstrating the early writers of the Bible were flat Earthers to support his claim the Earth was a sphere.

However his most impressive rebuttal so far has been: "Wrong and wrong."

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#35192 Jul 23, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
That was it!:-) The spirit of your left big toe is in hell, paying for your disbelief!
Crap! Next it'll be one foot in the grave.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How would creationists explain... 24 min The Dude 308
Science News (Sep '13) 2 hr positronium 2,943
Genetic entropy 17 hr Discord 159
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) 18 hr Wally West 3
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... Thu The Dude 466
What you should know about Tuesday's vote on ev... (Feb '08) Wed IAMIOOWAN 516
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) Wed Brian_G 13,614
More from around the web