Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 204795 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.

anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#64677 Dec 11, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> More or less like Tom, in the MGM cartoon series of Tom and Jerry. Lol
Tom ain't got no majikal ayes! He's a cat!

Besides, the only good Tom and Jerry cartoons are the old ones, before they chopped them all up to censor out the racial stereotype gags and violence. The new ones all were written by humorless psychologists.
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#64678 Dec 11, 2012
AustinHook wrote:
Hey,goodbye fellow debaters. Loved meeting you. Back to my real job now: http://www.openbsd.org
How does this relate to FreeBSD?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#64679 Dec 11, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I see. Okay then, we'll do it the way the Biblical "literalists" do it and say it's almost the same, like a circle is almost like a ball.
<quoted text>
Have you even bothered to try looking up for yourself? Or have you even considered the fact that since evolution occurs anyway (we're all born different remember) that simple change over time would also be another factor? If I can't answer each and every one of your mindless questions do you REALLY think that the theory of evolution is in any danger just because someone who believes (with no evidence at all whatsoever) that aliens made life didn't get their questions answered on some random internet forum full of geeks? Srsly? And if so are you therefore suggesting that all human races were also created separately and did NOT come from a common ancestor? Even many reality-denying dumb-as-a-post YEC's would raise their eyebrows at that one.
So you don't think there are evidence of extraterrestrial life out there?

Here ya go:

http://www.popsci.com/category/tags/extraterr...

If you are right, then we wouldn't be wasting our time sending Curiosity rover to explore Mars and see if it can find any signs of life there. We wouldn't be using complex technology to search for alien life on other planets and other galaxies. Unfortunately, not all scientists will agree with you and not all are skeptics like you. You see, evidence of organic compounds found on asteroids or meteorites are difficult to fake. Unlike fossils that can easily be manufactured in China.
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#64680 Dec 11, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>As an aside, did you know that the word "slue" in that context (also spelled "slew") is straight Irish Gaelic?
"SlĂșa" - a crowd or large group...
Now back to our scheduled program.
Speak much Gaelic, or just the provocative kind?*

*Says the long time Pogues fan!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#64681 Dec 11, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
AND no one in the history of mankind and the universe has been able to PROVE the existence of God...or any god.
However facts of science may be used in dissembling the lies about religion. We CAN and HAVE disproven much of the Bible...what does that say about the credibility of the religion itself???
If religion are lies, they would have been in the minority or in extinction, but the reverse were the case. Just sit upon your first degree lies.
Next lies from you, Bill.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#64682 Dec 11, 2012
AustinHook wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait a sec. I thought you were claiming to be one of the immortals -- confidentially expecting resurrection due to your faith in Jesus, where as the rest of us faithless ephemerals were doomed, and you were lording it over us.
Hey, I am getting close to checking out of this forum. Maybe a couple more posts to go. Gotta get my life back. It has been fun, but folks don't take things so hard, and be nice. Merry Christmas all!
Before running away. GIVE your life to Jesus christ. Accept him as your lord and saviour. All humans are mortals, except God and the spirits. Compliments of the season.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#64683 Dec 11, 2012
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps not. Then again, scientists haven't tried to disprove God (many scientists are quite religious, mind you).
But.
Science CAN provide evidence that the "Creation" account given in Genesis is incorrect, that the universe, earth, and life itself did not form under in the method(s) and time scales described in the Bible.
Here you go. And yet those Christian scientist are still upholding what is false. Just keep quiet and face reality. God is real and no one can deny that, except liars under the guise of science.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64684 Dec 11, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I was always kinda partial to Matthew 4:8 myself.
Corinthians fan here!!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#64685 Dec 11, 2012
Jesus Diablo wrote:
<quoted text>
Science doesn't set out nor is interested in proving or disproving the existence of God. It's purpose if far more limited, it is limited to facts. It attempts to prove/disprove them through repeatable experiments that support/don't support the previous result. It's rational. Here's a simple science experiment to illustrate: 1+1=2. Now you try it. See? Same result. There's no opinion or beliefs involved.
On the other hand, religion is not fact based. It is, by it's own admission, a belief system (it's silly to say "I believe" 1+1 is 2 because it's a proven fact that it is 2). Beliefs are not, by definition, either right or wrong (that would make them a fact). Beliefs are either held or not (it's equally silly to say that God in fact exists because a belief of such an existence is not subject to independent verification). You can only legitimately question whether or not the individual actually believes (if one does, fine; as a belief it's neither right nor wrong)or not (if one does not, fine; as a belief it's neither right nor wrong). Or the strength of his/her belief. As such, it is, by definition, irrational.
The problem is using rationality to explain the irrational and vice-versa (like trying to squeeze a square peg in a round hole). Otherwise called a "categorical mistake."
So does God exist? Well of course not.
Blah blah blah!
Can you use scientific experiments to verify spirits, love, hatred or imagination? no.
Because science can only verify physical things or objects.
So, that does not mean that God does not exist.
GOD is real.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64686 Dec 11, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you're still arguing against a straw-man.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...
<quoted text>
I see. So you are claiming to share NO ERV markers at all with either of your parents? Really? Are you claiming that NO OTHER organism shares them with any others either? Really?
<quoted text>
It's called orthology.
What's the "scientific theory" of creationism again?
I'll wait. I might look like ZZ-Top by the time we get it but I'll wait.
Hey Dude-

ZZ Top LIKES shopping at the Dolluh Store. I SAW them doing it lol.

ALL about the savings!!:-)
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64687 Dec 11, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Big deal, no-one can disprove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn.
So why do people even WASTE time on SUCH stupidity.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64688 Dec 11, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
AND no one in the history of mankind and the universe has been able to PROVE the existence of God...or any god.
However facts of science may be used in dissembling the lies about religion. We CAN and HAVE disproven much of the Bible...what does that say about the credibility of the religion itself???
And we have also been able to PROVE, much of what took place in the Bible as TRUTHS, because of SCIENCE.

Two way street there kiddo-sorry.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64689 Dec 11, 2012
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps not. Then again, scientists haven't tried to disprove God (many scientists are quite religious, mind you).
But.
Science CAN provide evidence that the "Creation" account given in Genesis is incorrect, that the universe, earth, and life itself did not form under in the method(s) and time scales described in the Bible.
If read absolutely verbatim and "literally" maybe.

But who in their right mind does that kind of junk anyway.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64690 Dec 11, 2012
Jesus Diablo wrote:
<quoted text>
Science doesn't set out nor is interested in proving or disproving the existence of God. It's purpose if far more limited, it is limited to facts. It attempts to prove/disprove them through repeatable experiments that support/don't support the previous result. It's rational. Here's a simple science experiment to illustrate: 1+1=2. Now you try it. See? Same result. There's no opinion or beliefs involved.
On the other hand, religion is not fact based. It is, by it's own admission, a belief system (it's silly to say "I believe" 1+1 is 2 because it's a proven fact that it is 2). Beliefs are not, by definition, either right or wrong (that would make them a fact). Beliefs are either held or not (it's equally silly to say that God in fact exists because a belief of such an existence is not subject to independent verification). You can only legitimately question whether or not the individual actually believes (if one does, fine; as a belief it's neither right nor wrong)or not (if one does not, fine; as a belief it's neither right nor wrong). Or the strength of his/her belief. As such, it is, by definition, irrational.
The problem is using rationality to explain the irrational and vice-versa (like trying to squeeze a square peg in a round hole). Otherwise called a "categorical mistake."
So does God exist? Well of course not.
Does wisdom exist?

Of course it does--FAR more in others, than in some.

WTH are nominating lemming herd pack bootlicking, fame seeking bobbleheads, complaining thirty years behind the times about the cost of (LONG TIME Available to those who only have had to seek such out) for ANYTHING of the year, when we have actual INTELLIGENT, caring, hard working women contributing in SOOO much more worthwhile ways to society?

Anyone, Bueller, Fenris..Buckwheat...

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#64691 Dec 11, 2012
reality wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? What?
You obviously didn't bother to try out for your high school debate team and/or you very conveniently slept with your college LOG101 professor.
This is spiritual matters. Even my professor of psychology, etc, would never understand, except he is Godly.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64692 Dec 11, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you saying that a patriarchy is your ideal "heaven"? Mmmmm, not my cup of tea.
No, I am saying it's GOOD when parents take care of their FAMILIES, one hundred percently, first and foremost!!!

My "ideal" however, is a flipping ...mmm...NONE of your business!!
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64693 Dec 11, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> This is spiritual matters. Even my professor of psychology, etc, would never understand, except he is Godly.
Did you like my picture/bio, for MY vote of someone of the year?
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64694 Dec 11, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a genderized kind of abstraction!
I can say why you might interpret it that way (even if I didn't mean to type it that way lol)

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#64695 Dec 11, 2012
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Now who can argue with logic like THAT?
[/SARCASM]
But we all know that life will always move on, it always goes on with time. Since that applies, it shows that a creator is at work. You will never understand that.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#64696 Dec 11, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
L. Ron Hubbard's favorite cynical con? I can't tell if you're trolling so I'll step away!
THE most BORING blahblahblah book I've ever forced myself to read, was written by L Ron Hubbard.

I didn't like it, it lacked humane, goodly SUBSTANCE.

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) 2 min Thinking 43,175
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 54 min Kenedy njoroge 151,471
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Patrick 18,501
Sun could not have formed as thought 2 hr U think Im wrong 17
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 14 hr It aint necessari... 912
Current Education And Its Huge Flaws Mon Bren 1
Transfer Old iPhone Data to Samsung Galaxy S7 w... Mon CarLayshia 1
More from around the web