Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

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

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#62105 Dec 1, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Nothing political there. After all, emperiors before him were doing the otherwise. They were killing the christians.
Of course not, if you only scan the surface.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62106 Dec 1, 2012
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>
This comment is almost as unimpressive as the claim made by that idoit running for office that when rape occurs a woman's body shuts down and she doesn't get pregnant. That, like your assertion, has absolutely no evidence to substantiate it.
Go through your gibberish. It makes me laugh.
Next?

“Ignore the trolls”

Level 6

Since: Oct 08

Southampton, UK

#62107 Dec 1, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Go through your gibberish. It makes me laugh.
Next?
No, I leave the gibberish to you - why should I try to compete with an expert?

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#62108 Dec 1, 2012
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear ,dear, aren't we getting hot under the collar? Still spelling waffle wrongly I see - but you have proved the levels of your reading skills with your links. Notice that you do not address why no prestigious university, including Melbourne, Sydney and New South Wales teach creationism.
Top tip - calling DNA junk does not make it so - or is that too hard for you to comprehend?
So the vast majority of researchers don't agree with your view? Now there's a surprise - not! You have been given more than adequate evidence over these pages to refute the rubbish you post: indeed, you yourself have unwittingly provided it with several of the links you give (trouble is, you don't really understand them, do you?). Want to shut your eyes to it? Dig out - but don't expect us to try to educate you, two adages about horses (one concerning water, one concerning flogging) would seem applicable.
Dweebette? And you comment on anyone's maturity? Keep the laughs coming - you're a guinea a minute for the jokes. Btw, a tip on an argument: refuting a statement involves more than a "it's not me, it's you" approach - might work in a playground , but not very convincing for adults.
Oh, who are you? Got something to say?

I am glad I entertain you. I likewise am here for entertainment. I love watching evos on this thread pretend they are debating. Scarcely a link to be seen from any of them, just words that say nothing.

What are you talking about in "hot tip".

Evolutionists shoved junk dna down creos throats for over a decade saying that is evidence of the functionless left overs of TOE. They said creationists are idiots for not accepting this evidence let alone predicting its functionality. Your evo researchers have found 80% of non coding dna to be functional and are expecting 100% of it to be. We have done this to death.

Functional non coding dna validates a creationist prediction that has been around since its discovery. That is it pal. You can wriggle and squirm and stamp your feet and ignore ridicule or run and even make nonsense posts.

Now, after all the prattle, you have nothing to say about non coding dna, which was spoken to in the intial post. Evos will reject they had a prediction around the functionality of non coding dna that could be falsified. The best I've got is, "so what"? How typical.

Hence an example of evos handing creationist support over on a silver platter!

Your post makes no sense.

BTW. the older followers of this thread are sick of junk dna talk. They are gobsmacked and basically speechless and are still wiping that egg off their face hoping it will go away. So thanks for bringing it up again.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#62109 Dec 1, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh you mean how the majority of well credentialled researchers woffled on about about their junk dna, single celled LUCA, human knuckle walking ancestry, brain size to bipedalism, functionless vestigial organs etc and there were proven to be idiots.
The hot and obvious news for you dweebette is that you have woffled on with BS with not a shred of science to even challenge let alone refute me.
La la la is more applicable to idiots with big attitudes that cannot articulate an appropriate response. OH! That would be you!
You evos can't even mount an appropriate reply. It is like debating with year 9 students.
Offer a better theory to explain the observations, or stop being an idiot. "Goddidit" doesn't count.

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#62110 Dec 1, 2012
MazHere wrote:
this post cleansed of incoherent bullshit.
Hello Matted Hair. I haven't read through your complete list yet, I try but then the laughter just gets in the way, but I did get to read part of point 3. Now having read Genesis, your statement is only supported by one of the two conflicting versions of the creation myth presented there. In one version man comes last and in the other man comes first. Now which is it? For that matter, how can God have created the Earth in seven days and one day at the same time? I gotta say, this little conundrum casts a pall upon the weight of your evidence. But then, I don't think you really care about validity, transparency, integrity, or honesty as long as you can propagandize your view, I suspect you are just fine with it.
By the way, I know there are fine, intelligent people in Australia, can you put some of them on.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62111 Dec 1, 2012
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to get into the history of this, you might find this short article useful:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/c...
I am fully aware of the history. I even have the book.
What i said was true.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#62112 Dec 1, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you admit that you have a big atitude and so far have contributed nothing to this discussion at all and that includes your stupid backbone you tried to shove at me and failed miserably
The point is TOE has nothing to do with medicine and is not responsible for any medical advancements at all.
Toe is not a science. If surgery was based on TOE with all its instability and falsifications no one would survive.
Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_med...

A small example - the TOE has helped us to understand why antibiotics are no longer as effective, and it is helping us to develop more effective drugs.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62113 Dec 1, 2012
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>
What utter balderdash. Most causes of death are disease, accident, old age and war. What a very strange person you are.
Ofcourse, but stress, bitterness, etc, are also included. It hastens deaths.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#62114 Dec 1, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I finally think you evos have realized that you cannot refute the above because it is irrefuteable. Now you are all in desperation mode.
The above post is based on factual data from your evolutionary reseachers and reflects the twoddle you have shoved at creos when in actual fact you were, and still are, peddling hubris.
How dare you delusionists suggest that we creos should accept any twoddle and flavour of the month these desperadoes come up with in blind faith, like you do?
You lot were simply parrotting your silly researchers and are still standing there with egg on your face with them. Congratulations!
Maz, there is a reason people ignore you. You spam the same things over and over, show a clear lack of understanding about *everything*, then people explain to you why you're wrong, you ignore them, and then claim "victory." It's funny how you post the same nonsense over and over again, then when people ignore you, you quote yourself and all but beg for a response. Remember, there's a reason why no one wastes their time with you. You're like a 10 year old jumping up and down in the classroom yelling at the professor that he's wrong about the sky being blue.

Rinse and repeat, as naseum.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62115 Dec 1, 2012
NikkiShae wrote:
<quoted text>
And dogs can never be compared to bacteria. Your point?
This is a human world!
Note that.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62116 Dec 1, 2012
NikkiShae wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Show me an autopsy report to confirm this.
Ask your clinical psychologist that question.
What causes, for example high blood pressure, hypertension?
Hope you know that they all causes death?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62117 Dec 1, 2012
NikkiShae wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup. Brain cells firing, transferring information through biological process. Not evidence of a soul.
Wrong. Why when one is sleeping or possibly dreaming, he or she is not aware of any thing in the physical world, but in the spiritual world?

“Ignore the trolls”

Level 6

Since: Oct 08

Southampton, UK

#62118 Dec 1, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, who are you? Got something to say?
I am glad I entertain you. I likewise am here for entertainment. I love watching evos on this thread pretend they are debating. Scarcely a link to be seen from any of them, just words that say nothing.
What are you talking about in "hot tip".
Evolutionists shoved junk dna down creos throats for over a decade saying that is evidence of the functionless left overs of TOE. They said creationists are idiots for not accepting this evidence let alone predicting its functionality. Your evo researchers have found 80% of non coding dna to be functional and are expecting 100% of it to be. We have done this to death.
Functional non coding dna validates a creationist prediction that has been around since its discovery. That is it pal. You can wriggle and squirm and stamp your feet and ignore ridicule or run and even make nonsense posts.
Now, after all the prattle, you have nothing to say about non coding dna, which was spoken to in the intial post. Evos will reject they had a prediction around the functionality of non coding dna that could be falsified. The best I've got is, "so what"? How typical.
Hence an example of evos handing creationist support over on a silver platter!
Your post makes no sense.
BTW. the older followers of this thread are sick of junk dna talk. They are gobsmacked and basically speechless and are still wiping that egg off their face hoping it will go away. So thanks for bringing it up again.
For a post that makes no sense, you spend time writing an answer? How strange. Reading skills really aren't your strongest point - "top tip", not "hot tip" was what I posted.

Think there's only one person on here stamping their feet - pop over to the mirror for a clue as to who that might be.

Still having difficulty explaining why none of the top universities in the world teach creationism? Would you like me to ask you an easier question (although strikes me that I would be hard pushed to find one much simpler than that).

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#62119 Dec 1, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Ask your clinical psychologist that question.
What causes, for example high blood pressure, hypertension?
Hope you know that they all causes death?
Actually, it's "bottled" or suppressed anger that causes it. Released anger appears to have no effect, many studies have shown that the exact opposite happens, people who release anger more often do appear to live longer if the anger is released in a constructive or neutral manner, destructive releases have their own causes for shortening lifespans though.

“Ignore the trolls”

Level 6

Since: Oct 08

Southampton, UK

#62120 Dec 1, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Ofcourse, but stress, bitterness, etc, are also included. It hastens deaths.
No proof of bitterness whatsoever - it is not a cause of death. It makes people's vives miserable, but if that's how they want to live, so be it. I will credit stress is a contributory factor, as any doctor will confirm. But that isn't what your original post said.

“Ignore the trolls”

Level 6

Since: Oct 08

Southampton, UK

#62121 Dec 1, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> I am fully aware of the history. I even have the book.
What i said was true.
Actually - you're not, or you fail to show it in your posts. As the link is an article for the BBC by a professor at King's College, London, I somehow suspect you do not have that particular "book".

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62122 Dec 1, 2012
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Faith is belief based, science is fact based. Inventions are based on experiment, trial and error, previous work. Faith is based on personal belief. If you cannot discriminate between the two, you have a problem.
WRONG. Faith cuts accross all areas of life.
It is applied, and its applications normally brings results, that result is reality.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#62123 Dec 1, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> WRONG. Faith cuts accross all areas of life.
It is applied, and its applications normally brings results, that result is reality.
So then why are people who receive "faith" healing needing the doctors or dying for lack of getting medical attention all the time?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#62124 Dec 1, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Technology was not advanced by faith, it was advanced by science. Science is a method of learning, not at all requiring faith. You'd know this if you knew a lick about what you're attempting to discredit.
And i am telling you that, the work of science is an evidence of faith and that faith finally led to reality. Inventions and technologies are some good examples.

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
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 hr Zog Has-fallen 18,847
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 5 hr Paul Porter1 1,665
No Place For ID? 8 hr Denisova 71
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 17 hr Paul Porter1 13,692
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 17 hr Kong_ 178,596
The Definition of a Creationist Scientist 18 hr Zog Has-fallen 3
proof of gods existence .....or lack there of Sat Chimney1 14
More from around the web