Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 172004 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: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#70799 Jan 13, 2013
If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?
Cybele wrote:
With that kind of mentality you will not find the truth.
In other words, to "find the truth", one must open the skull, discard the brain, and automatically accept any new age woo that comes along, despite a complete lack of objective, unambiguous evidence to support its claims.

Good luck with your belief in a "god" that you can't even figure out how to describe to someone.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70800 Jan 13, 2013
sickofit wrote:
<quoted text>
Only in some states do same sex people have equal righst and freedom ...In most states the religous nazi fascist still hold freedom and equality out of reach.
Hmmm!
But come to think of it, how can people of the same sex be marriage partners?
That is ridiculous, how can they procreate or reproduce?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#70801 Jan 13, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?
<quoted text>
In other words, to "find the truth", one must open the skull, discard the brain, and automatically accept any new age woo that comes along, despite a complete lack of objective, unambiguous evidence to support its claims.
Good luck with your belief in a "god" that you can't even figure out how to describe to someone.
Good luck with your religion of Scientism and keep worshiping your ego and alter-egos. LOL!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70802 Jan 13, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as they have functioning genitalia, they can reproduce. I can't imagine why you would think they cannot.
Let me just jump ahead a bit...Yes, almost all primate species have demonstrated same sex sexual behavior, along with many, many other species.
So, you are saying that a man can impregnate a man and a woman can impregnate a woman?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70803 Jan 13, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not?
Do you think that procreation only happens within the boundaries of marriage?]
May I ask you a side question?
Do you know what a gene is?
I do know what a gene is. Lets face the fact, it is improper for a man to go after a man, it is sexual perversion.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#70804 Jan 13, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Hmmm!
But come to think of it, how can people of the same sex be marriage partners?
That is ridiculous, how can they procreate or reproduce?
I know you want to paint a picture that depicts heterosexual reproduction as something sacred. However, there are many people who can't take the responsibility of being a parent. So why can't gay couples take that responsibility instead by adopting a child they could nurture?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#70805 Jan 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
Good luck with your religion of Scientism
I don't have any religion, "scientism" or otherwise.

I guess you seem to think that people can't get through life successfully without a religion. Too bad you've never tried.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#70806 Jan 13, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
it is improper for a man to go after a man,
Who decides whether or not it is "improper"?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70807 Jan 13, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
...and you stay out of my discussions! I won't have you co-opting my logic or distracting weasels from putting their image where their mouth is.
Then you must be out of your mind, because this is a public forum for all.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#70808 Jan 13, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have any religion, "scientism" or otherwise.
I guess you seem to think that people can't get through life successfully without a religion. Too bad you've never tried.
I have tried. But it didn't make sense.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#70809 Jan 13, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Then you must be out of your mind, because this is a public forum for all.
My discussions never were within the grasp of your mind. Go find a corner to go practice parting the sea in.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#70810 Jan 13, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Who decides whether or not it is "improper"?
And yet you define what is anti-social in the forums. Who makes all these stupid rules?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70811 Jan 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I know you want to paint a picture that depicts heterosexual reproduction as something sacred. However, there are many people who can't take the responsibility of being a parent. So why can't gay couples take that responsibility instead by adopting a child they could nurture?
I see. But really it is not an ideal practice, it is sexual perversion.
A couple( man and woman) can decide not to give birth to children, instead they prefer adoption.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#70812 Jan 13, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Something doesn't have to be mentioned in the U.S. Constitution in order to be a right. And the U.S. Supreme Court has already declared marriage to be a right.
<quoted text>
Only if heterosexuality is also described as a medical condition.
<quoted text>
In other words, because of your homophobia, you automatically reject any scientific study that shows that children raised by same-sex parents turn out just as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents.
<quoted text>
And the unmarried are "unfairly taxed" in what way?
And while we're at it, what do you think about the *topic* of this thread? Or are you just here to spout off your homophobia?
You'd think that people would stay on topic, but no, they have to drone on and on with their same old rhetoric, even though they claim that they won't. I don't answer claims that I've dismissed before. You haven't introduced anything new. You're just dismissing everything that was stated already and re-reciting your name-calling big lie. Yep! Just like a Creationist!

So why do you hang out at an Evolution vs. Creationism thread? Interested in Science, looking to bond with science minded people or just projecting your own kind of "experimentation" onto others?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#70813 Jan 13, 2013
Who decides whether or not it is "improper"?
Cybele wrote:
And yet you define what is anti-social in the forums.
The dictionary defines what "anti-social" means, and I gave an example of such behavior from this thread.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70814 Jan 13, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Who decides whether or not it is "improper"?
Then what is the essence of men, women and children?
If men are going after men likewise women, how can there be continuity of human race?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#70815 Jan 13, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>My discussions never were within the grasp of your mind. Go find a corner to go practice parting the sea in.
You are again between the devil and the deep blue sea( dilemma).
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#70816 Jan 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
With that kind of mentality you will not find the truth. You just want to be an antagonist. That can be self-destructing. So if that's the route you want to take, by all means, be it. No one is stopping you. You still fill the void of life.
No, that's the opposite of scientific method. It kind of reminds me of the old "Planet of the Apes" TV show, where the ape insists that you must plow up the hill so you can give the horse a rest as you plow down the hill. First, the logic has no bearing on the second law of thermodynamics. Second, downhill furrows cause erosion.

Scientific method isn't about what feels good. It's one hundred percent absolutely about the provable. If the statistics favor something but it's not absolute, you can adjust your theory or refine your test, but you can't just ignore the exceptions and insist on something that may just be a manifestation of your own prejudices.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#70817 Jan 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I have tried. But it didn't make sense.
That's probably because we don't have all the answers.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#70818 Jan 13, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> You are again between the devil and the deep blue sea( dilemma).
You are between a dog biscuit and bituminous coal.(utter nonsense!)

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) 21 min karl44 20,672
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 57 min Paul Porter1 142,726
What Motives Created Social Darwinism? 2 hr Zog Has-fallen 1
Simulated Evolution in a Computer Program 2 hr Zog Has-fallen 2
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory 5 hr Chimney1 304
Cartier brand luxury bangle cartier watch on il... 8 hr Dopy 1
Dr. David Berlinski corrects himself on whale e... 8 hr Chimney1 54
More from around the web