Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

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

Comments (Page 206)

Showing posts 4,101 - 4,120 of111,597
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4213
Aug 25, 2011
 

Judged:

1

laserbreath wrote:
evolution puts forth monkey-men, dinosaurs that turn into birds, whales that walk, goo turning into humans.
still trying to find just one.
It's all in the fossil record; get some education...perhaps a basic college course in geology would help?

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4214
Aug 25, 2011
 
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a symbol from Hinduism and also used in Buddhism. Many Buddhist temples in Asia have them. Allegedly it is from the Sanskrit symbol for "all is well" or in the vernacular of the peasantry "it's all good".
Very interesting!

Love your avatar! Now who does that remind me of...?
laserbreath

Texarkana, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4215
Aug 25, 2011
 
Great Article to read:
Evolutionists have claimed that chimp and human DNA is up to 99% similar. These studies only looked at gene coding regions, which are a tiny fraction of the 3 billion base pairs in the human genome. When the chimp genome was sequenced, the number was reduced to 96%, twice as much difference as was previously thought. No matter what the difference, evolution would predict it, and evolutionists would claim it as proof. It is estimated that 40 million mutation events would be required to produce 125 million differences in the DNA sequences. There’s not enough time in the evolutionary explanation for this to happen.

The idea that skeletal features of australopithecines are intermediate to humans and chimpanzees is an interpretation that comes from the assumption that chimps and humans have a common ancestor. Starting from a different assumption, that humans and chimps have a common Designer, the evidence points to a Creator using similar structures to perform similar functions.
Neanderthals present a challenge to Christians who believe that soulless humans came before Adam. There is conclusive evidence that Neanderthals and humans lived at the same time. Recent discoveries of a humanlike hyoid bone, burial practices, musical instruments, weapons, and other signs of culture have started to shift the picture in even the evolutionists’ minds. Evidence of hybridization between humans and Neanderthals, DNA comparisons, and the indications that they lived together for 100,000 years of evolutionary time point to the fact that they were fully human. This evidence contradicts evolutionary assumptions and supports the biblical position that Neanderthals simply represent some of the variety that was programmed into the human genome by our Creator.

Questions

1. Since a species is commonly defined as a group that can interbreed, it seems that fossils could never be identified to the species level because we can’t observe how they interbreed. How do scientists determine what species a fossil is if it looks similar to another fossil but is a different size or slightly different shape? When scientists disagree with the classification of a fossil, who decides where it belongs?

2. Since bananas share about 50% of their DNA with humans, does that mean bananas are half human?

3. Does the suggestion that chimpanzee and human DNA are similar necessarily mean that they had a common ancestor? Could it also be considered evidence for a common designer?

4. Since the human-chimp DNA comparisons are only based on a comparison of part of the genomes, how can it be claimed that they are 96% similar?

5. Are there any alternative scientific explanations for humans evolving from apelike creatures?
6. How do paleontologists know that certain apelike creatures were evolutionary dead ends and others led to a new species? Are there multiple ways to interpret the evidence? How do we know which to trust?

7. If it is inaccurate to say that humans evolved from apes, but instead we should say all apes and humans have a common ancestor, what did the ancestor look like if not like an ape?

8. Scientists often deal with bioethical issues (cloning, genetically modified foods, drugs, etc.). If man has evolved from apes, what is the moral basis for deciding what is right and wrong? If cultures determine what is right, how can we claim that other cultures’ views are wrong? If terrorists act within their beliefs and Nazis believe they are superior, can we say that they are wrong? Would Nazi ideology be right if it was accepted by a majority of cultures?

9. Why has the picture of human evolution become less clear as more and more fossils have been found? It would seem that the picture would become clearer with more information.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4216
Aug 26, 2011
 
FossilBob wrote:
<quoted text>
Very interesting!
Love your avatar! Now who does that remind me of...?

You know in Tarot Cards if a card is upside down it has the opposite meaning as when face up. I thank that makes my avatar a good fit for me.

Clearly it is annoying UC since he has gone out of his way to not comment on it. I will change it once the insult has faded and he starts to rationalize it as a compliment.

“Just want to be”

Level 5

Since: May 10

your lovin teddy bear

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4217
Aug 26, 2011
 
laserbreath wrote:
Great Article to read:
Evolutionists have claimed that chimp and human DNA is up to 99% similar. These studies only looked at gene coding regions, which are a tiny fraction of the 3 billion base pairs in the human genome. When the chimp genome was sequenced, the number was reduced to 96%, twice as much difference as was previously thought. No matter what the difference, evolution would predict it, and evolutionists would claim it as proof. It is estimated that 40 million mutation events would be required to produce 125 million differences in the DNA sequences. There’s not enough time in the evolutionary explanation for this to happen.
The idea that skeletal features of australopithecines are intermediate to humans and chimpanzees is an interpretation that comes from the assumption that chimps and humans have a common ancestor. Starting from a different assumption, that humans and chimps have a common Designer, the evidence points to a Creator using similar structures to perform similar functions.
Neanderthals present a challenge to Christians who believe that soulless humans came before Adam. There is conclusive evidence that Neanderthals and humans lived at the same time. Recent discoveries of a humanlike hyoid bone, burial practices, musical instruments, weapons, and other signs of culture have started to shift the picture in even the evolutionists’ minds. Evidence of hybridization between humans and Neanderthals, DNA comparisons, and the indications that they lived together for 100,000 years of evolutionary time point to the fact that they were fully human. This evidence contradicts evolutionary assumptions and supports the biblical position that Neanderthals simply represent some of the variety that was programmed into the human genome by our Creator.
Questions
1. Since a species is commonly defined as a group that can interbreed, it seems that fossils could never be identified to the species level because we can’t observe how they interbreed. How do scientists determine what species a fossil is if it looks similar to another fossil but is a different size or slightly different shape? When scientists disagree with the classification of a fossil, who decides where it belongs?
2. Since bananas share about 50% of their DNA with humans, does that mean bananas are half human?
3. Does the suggestion that chimpanzee and human DNA are similar necessarily mean that they had a common ancestor? Could it also be considered evidence for a common designer?
4. Since the human-chimp DNA comparisons are only based on a comparison of part of the genomes, how can it be claimed that they are 96% similar?
5. Are there any alternative scientific explanations for humans evolving from apelike creatures?
6. How do paleontologists know that certain apelike creatures were evolutionary dead ends and others led to a new species? Are there multiple ways to interpret the evidence? How do we know which to trust?
7. If it is inaccurate to say that humans evolved from apes, but instead we should say all apes and humans have a common ancestor, what did the ancestor look like if not like an ape?
8. Scientists often deal with bioethical issues (cloning, genetically modified foods, drugs, etc.). If man has evolved from apes, what is the moral basis for deciding what is right and wrong? If cultures determine what is right, how can we claim that other cultures’ views are wrong? If terrorists act within their beliefs and Nazis believe they are superior, can we say that they are wrong? Would Nazi ideology be right if it was accepted by a majority of cultures?
9. Why has the picture of human evolution become less clear as more and more fossils have been found? It would seem that the picture would become clearer with more information.
Nice cut and paste job. Try and add the link next time , or are you attempting to say you actually wrote it?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4218
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Great Article to read:
..........
Questions
1. Since a species is commonly defined as a group that can interbreed, it seems that fossils could never be identified to the species level because we can’t observe how they interbreed. How do scientists determine what species a fossil is if it looks similar to another fossil but is a different size or slightly different shape? When scientists disagree with the classification of a fossil, who decides where it belongs?
2. Since bananas share about 50% of their DNA with humans, does that mean bananas are half human?
3. Does the suggestion that chimpanzee and human DNA are similar necessarily mean that they had a common ancestor? Could it also be considered evidence for a common designer?
4. Since the human-chimp DNA comparisons are only based on a comparison of part of the genomes, how can it be claimed that they are 96% similar?
5. Are there any alternative scientific explanations for humans evolving from apelike creatures?
6. How do paleontologists know that certain apelike creatures were evolutionary dead ends and others led to a new species? Are there multiple ways to interpret the evidence? How do we know which to trust?
7. If it is inaccurate to say that humans evolved from apes, but instead we should say all apes and humans have a common ancestor, what did the ancestor look like if not like an ape?
8. Scientists often deal with bioethical issues (cloning, genetically modified foods, drugs, etc.). If man has evolved from apes, what is the moral basis for deciding what is right and wrong? If cultures determine what is right, how can we claim that other cultures’ views are wrong? If terrorists act within their beliefs and Nazis believe they are superior, can we say that they are wrong? Would Nazi ideology be right if it was accepted by a majority of cultures?
9. Why has the picture of human evolution become less clear as more and more fossils have been found? It would seem that the picture would become clearer with more information.
..........

RESPONSE

This is a pseudoscience article. It contains many distortions of real science and attempts to twist things into being what they are not.
Please read some good factual information on the subject instead of propaganda.
Also, if you do not cite your source it is plagiarism.
For fun I have answered the questions so you can know what science actually teaches.
1. There is no formal and universal definition of a species. It is a category developed by humans to classify nature. Read a biology book
2. No. Read a genetics book.
3.(actually 2 questions)
a. By that information alone, no. But the NATURE of the similarities does to a very great degree.
b. No.
4. The coding for protein is considered the more active or important part of the genome.
5. No.
6.(again multiple questions)
a. the details of the fossils, the location, the time period, the artifacts.....
b. Not generally. In some specific cases yes, but overall no.
c. Generally no.
d. who does the best job of explaining (all) the evidence and making predictions as to what will be found in the future. This is a function of the scientific method and the best adherence to this would be expected to find the best results.
7. We act like an ape. We look like an ape. Genetically we are an ape.
8. There is no right or wrong but our thinking makes it so.- Buddha
9. Less clear? It has never been more clear. 50 years ago fundies were asking "where is the missing link". Since then we have found 23+ of them. Before we had a photo, and now we have a movie. Is particle physics less clear today than it was when all we had were protons, neutrons and electrons and a few odd others now that we have like a bizillion different particles? To non physicists maybe yes. To physicists no.
I hope this helps.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4219
Aug 26, 2011
 
jbird56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice cut and paste job. Try and add the link next time , or are you attempting to say you actually wrote it?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/o...

Like we didn't know that.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4220
Aug 26, 2011
 
laserbreath wrote:
Great Article to read:
Evolutionists have claimed that chimp and human DNA is up to 99% similar. These studies only looked at gene coding regions, which are a tiny fraction of the 3 billion base pairs in the human genome. When the chimp genome was sequenced, the number was reduced to 96%, twice as much difference as was previously thought. No matter what the difference, evolution would predict it, and evolutionists would claim it as proof. It is estimated that 40 million mutation events would be required to produce 125 million differences in the DNA sequences. There’s not enough time in the evolutionary explanation for this to happen.

(CUT FOR LENGTH)
Wow. A "great article to read" is complete horseshit. Since you didn't bother posting the URL to this "great article," why don't I do that for you? http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/o...

Here's something else "great" from their website:

AiG teaches that “facts” don’t speak for themselves, but must be interpreted. That is, there aren’t separate sets of “evidences” for evolution and creation—we all deal with the same evidence (we all live on the same earth, have the same fossils, observe the same animals, etc.). The difference lies in how we interpret what we study. The Bible—the “history book of the universe”—provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, and can be trusted to tell the truth in all areas it touches on. Therefore, we are able to use it to help us make sense of this present world. When properly understood, the “evidence” confirms the biblical account.( http://www.answersingenesis.org/about )

In other words, the Bible is correct, and anything that appears to contradict the Bible must be rationalized to fit with the Bible's claims, because the Bible is correct. There is absolutely nothing that can prove the Bible false, because the Bible is correct. Sounds fool-proof to me! If I replaced "the Bible" with "LowellGuy," would it be ridiculous? How about if we replaced "the Bible" with "the Koran?" What now? What if we change it to "Lord of the Rings?"

And, note that it says it "provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things." Really? REALLY? You do realize that if they're going to combat science, they need to DO SCIENCE, right? In other words, it's more than pointing at scientific findings and saying "NUH UH!" and "the Bible says!" They need to do actual research, do actual experiments, and report their actual results to actual scientific bodies. Otherwise, there is no reason to listen to them. Ken Ham loves to say "were you there?" Well, he wasn't there, so how does he know the Bible is true? There's your dear leader, hoist by his own petard.
Aunt JenJen

Pasadena, MD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4221
Aug 26, 2011
 
Miss Touri wrote:
<quoted text>
Chuck Smith repeats the words of God. Jesus promised He would return. It is natural to expect the words of Jesus to be fulfilled, as he never lied.
You cannot hope to defend abortion or homosexuality. If you are for either one...it is out of selfishness and lies and deceit. god loves sinners, but people who make decisions like that know what they are doing.
It's always the most perverted who is the least tolerant. I always wonder why these religious people always seem to conveniently forget the whole "thou shall not judge" commandment. Why is it your place to say what is right and what is wrong. Being judgmental is just as big of a sin as homosexuality, if you want to be technical about it. So I guess I'll see you in hell.
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4222
Aug 26, 2011
 
laserbreath wrote:
>>>>All it requires is exponential reproduction (observed)with imperfect heredity (observed) leading to competition for limited resources (observed) and and higher survival rates for more effective variants (observed).<<<<
what imperfect mutation produced you?
that may produce the survival of the fittest, but doesnt come close to making a monkey turn into a man, a bird into a dinosaur, or slime into a 75 trillion cell human being (albeit over hundreds of millions of years)
Really? And what is stopping it?
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4223
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

laserbreath wrote:
The idea that skeletal features of australopithecines are intermediate to humans and chimpanzees is an interpretation that comes from the assumption that chimps and humans have a common ancestor.
Nonsense. They are intermediate in the literal sense that many features lie part way between chimps and humans. Leg and arm proportions, for example. The curvature of the dental arch.

Some features are closer to human - such as the placement of the top of the spine in relation to the cranium. Other are closer to chimps, such as the shape of the rib cage.

These are measurable "intermediate" or "in between" features of the skeletons. That is not a question of interpretation, but of measurement.

The interpretation comes later - a sequence of measurably less apelike and ever more human like forms over a period of four million years is exactly what evolution predicted, and therefore their discovery is strong evidence of evolution.

What did creation or intelligent design predict? All they can ever do is try to "explain", after the event, whatever we happen to find.

Design could not predict anything like amniocetus, tiktaalik, or archaeopteryx, or Homo erectus. Only evolution could do that.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4225
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Aunt JenJen wrote:
<quoted text>
It's always the most perverted who is the least tolerant. I always wonder why these religious people always seem to conveniently forget the whole "thou shall not judge" commandment. Why is it your place to say what is right and what is wrong. Being judgmental is just as big of a sin as homosexuality, if you want to be technical about it. So I guess I'll see you in hell.
I'll bring the beer. The munchies are on you. ;-)
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4226
Aug 26, 2011
 
laserbreath wrote:
3. Does the suggestion that chimpanzee and human DNA are similar necessarily mean that they had a common ancestor? Could it also be considered evidence for a common designer?
At first glance, you might be forgiven for thinking that.

However, the nature of the similarities argues against it. Specifically, the nested hierarchy of ERV's, pseudogenes, and ubiquitous proteins can only be credibly explained by common ancestry, not by common design.

By the way, your question about the banana was fun. I doubt its 50% commonality but the point remains. Yes, we share a common ancestor with a banana, and with every other living thing on earth.

An alien with completely different cellular chemistry might conclude that we ARE half banana at the cellular level. They would certainly have no trouble identifying any life specimen from earth as being native to the planet, whether bacterial, fungal, plant, or animal, I am sure of that. While they would be likely to share a carbon based chemistry, the particular pattern of amino acids we employ, and the specifics of many processes, and the structures of particular organelles such as mitochondria, are no doubt unique to earth, being accidents of our own evolution that could have occurred in countless slightly different ways.
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4227
Aug 26, 2011
 
Ambulocetus, not amniocetus. whoops.
Chimney

UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4228
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Miss Touri wrote:
You cannot hope to defend abortion or homosexuality. If you are for either one...it is out of selfishness and lies and deceit. god loves sinners, but people who make decisions like that know what they are doing.
Rubbish. Homosexuals have little choice in the matter. They either do what comes natural to them or they remain celibate. That is how God made them. If you think its their choice to feel the way they do, you are an idiot.

YOU are the selfish one. No doubt your sexuality is normal - therefore its fine for YOU to preach to others who are not so fortunate.

“Die Hard For The Trivial”

Level 6

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4229
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, shutup you hypocritical bigot.
And what are you?

“Die Hard For The Trivial”

Level 6

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4230
Aug 26, 2011
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Help me understand this. So when Chuck Smith said: "...[I am] convinced that the Lord [will come] for His Church before the end of 1981."...he was repeating the words of God?
Was God just teasing Chuck then?
<quoted text>
I haven't made up my mind on abortion. But for the time being, abortion is legal in the US. It's a brutal, unfortunate practice, but it's legal and between a woman, her doctor and her conscience.
Homosexuals are human beings. Anything that two or more consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is of no concern to me, nor should it be to you, Chuck Smith, the government, or anyone else.
Also as you preach through the entire word of God you learn that "No man knows the hour and the day that the lord shall return" He comes back like a thief in the night and that indicates people will not expect His return, it will be a surprise, and it's true that right now most people don't expect him to return so it's quite logical that he could come soon. Chuck wasn't claiming to 'know' the hour and the day, he has sharing that which he was convinced of in his heart, he's still alive and could live to see the Lord come for the church.

Your rational for abortion and homosexuality is pathetic. When you fail to see evil as evil because you prefer to be seen as an open minded tolerant of everything in the whole wide world type of person...it is vain and empty...you'll reap the wind.

“Die Hard For The Trivial”

Level 6

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4231
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Chimney wrote:
<quoted text>
Rubbish. Homosexuals have little choice in the matter. They either do what comes natural to them or they remain celibate. That is how God made them. If you think its their choice to feel the way they do, you are an idiot.
YOU are the selfish one. No doubt your sexuality is normal - therefore its fine for YOU to preach to others who are not so fortunate.
How did God make Homosexuals? He made men and He made women. Where is your argument? An idiot must be a person who knows there are males and females.
Unfortunate? that's what homosexxuals are? if you think that's unfortunate why don't they simply stop?

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4232
Aug 26, 2011
 

Judged:

1

LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. A "great article to read" is complete horseshit. Since you didn't bother posting the URL to this "great article," why don't I do that for you? http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/o...
Here's something else "great" from their website:
AiG teaches that “facts” don’t speak for themselves, but must be interpreted. That is, there aren’t separate sets of “evidences” for evolution and creation—we all deal with the same evidence (we all live on the same earth, have the same fossils, observe the same animals, etc.). The difference lies in how we interpret what we study. The Bible—the “history book of the universe”—provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, and can be trusted to tell the truth in all areas it touches on. Therefore, we are able to use it to help us make sense of this present world. When properly understood, the “evidence” confirms the biblical account.( http://www.answersingenesis.org/about )
In other words, the Bible is correct, and anything that appears to contradict the Bible must be rationalized to fit with the Bible's claims, because the Bible is correct. There is absolutely nothing that can prove the Bible false, because the Bible is correct. Sounds fool-proof to me! If I replaced "the Bible" with "LowellGuy," would it be ridiculous? How about if we replaced "the Bible" with "the Koran?" What now? What if we change it to "Lord of the Rings?"
And, note that it says it "provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things." Really? REALLY? You do realize that if they're going to combat science, they need to DO SCIENCE, right? In other words, it's more than pointing at scientific findings and saying "NUH UH!" and "the Bible says!" They need to do actual research, do actual experiments, and report their actual results to actual scientific bodies. Otherwise, there is no reason to listen to them. Ken Ham loves to say "were you there?" Well, he wasn't there, so how does he know the Bible is true? There's your dear leader, hoist by his own petard.
It's even worse for kennie ham than that. He readily admits that what is in the Bible has to be interpreted in order to be accepted in a modern context ... so when he makes his pronouncements, he's claiming Biblical Literalism, but what he is really giving out is the Bible according to kennie ham.( http://sciencestandards.blogspot.com/2011/08/... )

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4233
Aug 26, 2011
 

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 4,101 - 4,120 of111,597
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••