Evolution vs. Creation

There are 163598 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.

Proof of Evidence

United States

#78771 Mar 5, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>which god? do you have 'proof of evidence' of this supposed god?
Which god?

What do you mean?

Do you have proof of other gods?
Proof of Evidence

United States

#78772 Mar 5, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe.

Do you have 'proof of evidence' that this god-character of yours even exists?

If so you would be the only one on the planet.
I do have proof of evidence. I would not be the first or only one with proof of evidence.
Proof of Evidence

United States

#78773 Mar 5, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>And you know that how?

After all Zeus is gonna be mighty pished at you for not believing in Him and you're gonna end up getting lightning bolts shoved up your jaxi for eternity.
(And you know that how?)
The same way you know 2+2=4
Proof of Evidence

United States

#78774 Mar 5, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>Wow.

Now I KNOW you're a christian.

Even though you've never had the guts to state it.

You ought to switch from tampons to kotex.
(You ought to switch from tampons to kotex)

This is your forte?

Oh and stop using them for bad hemorrhoids.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#78775 Mar 5, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not quite accurate. Oxygen is formed inside of large stars where the 'carbon cycle' is used for fusion instead of the 'hydrogen cycle' found in the sun. The oxygen forms fairly late in the life of the star, but supernova are only required to get elements larger than iron (because of binding energy constraints).
Thanks, Poly. I appreciate the correction.
Proof of Evidence

United States

#78776 Mar 5, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>what is your IQ level?
With or with out Ritalin?

:)
Proof of Evidence

United States

#78777 Mar 5, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Iced tea, what are you on?
I was hoping it was something good.
You sure sounded like it was something good.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#78778 Mar 5, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
The scientific method can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God.
But, it can and has disproven much of the Bible. The Bible is nothing but mans made up stories

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#78779 Mar 5, 2013
Proof of Evidence wrote:
<quoted text>
I was hoping it was something good.
You sure sounded like it was something good.
Nope....just ridin' the wave of truth..:-)

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#78780 Mar 5, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>But, it can and has disproven much of the Bible. The Bible is nothing but mans made up stories
So we are to ignore the archeological discoveries which can be linked to Biblical accounts? Or the modern day lineage of Isaac and Ishmael? By all means, let's just ignore anything other than what is painfully clear to us. Let's not observe things objectively or anything. That's just too logical. In the spirit of logic and of calling a spade a spade, the scientific method cannot be used to prove or disprove the existence of a living God. Greater minds than ours (many of whom i profoundly respect) have sought to do so and failed miserably. By all means, formulate your own opinions. Fight the power and stuff. Yet you have no authority to judge or condemn another human being simply because their opinions differ from your own. Especially when you cannot use the scientific method to prove said opinions.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#78781 Mar 5, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
So we are to ignore the archeological discoveries which can be linked to Biblical accounts? Or the modern day lineage of Isaac and Ishmael? By all means, let's just ignore anything other than what is painfully clear to us. Let's not observe things objectively or anything. That's just too logical. In the spirit of logic and of calling a spade a spade, the scientific method cannot be used to prove or disprove the existence of a living God. Greater minds than ours (many of whom i profoundly respect) have sought to do so and failed miserably. By all means, formulate your own opinions. Fight the power and stuff. Yet you have no authority to judge or condemn another human being simply because their opinions differ from your own. Especially when you cannot use the scientific method to prove said opinions.
but none of those archology discoveries show in any way anything about any god, gods or goddesses. nothing. that myth is still without even a shred of evidence.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#78782 Mar 5, 2013
Babylon wrote:
<quoted text>
"International Standard Version (©2012)
God fashioned two great lights—the larger light to shine during the day and the smaller light to shine during the night—as well as stars."
Really.
the moon is not a light....it creates no light of its own.

again, the divinely inspired book of god's creation ALMOST gets it right...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#78783 Mar 5, 2013
Proof of Evidence wrote:
<quoted text>
(You ought to switch from tampons to kotex)
This is your forte?
Oh and stop using them for bad hemorrhoids.
Please tell me you didn't pronounce that for-tay...major pet peeve.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#78784 Mar 5, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but none of those archology discoveries show in any way anything about any god, gods or goddesses. nothing. that myth is still without even a shred of evidence.
Nor can "that myth" be disproven using the scientific method.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#78785 Mar 5, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>There was light before there were stars.
Fk off, pillow biter.
Roughly 380,000 years after the Big Bang, matter cooled enough for atoms to form during the era of recombination, resulting in a transparent, electrically neutral gas. This set loose the *initial flash of light* created during the Big Bang, which is detectable today as cosmic microwave background radiation. However, after this point, the universe was plunged into darkness, since no stars or any other bright objects had formed yet.

http://www.space.com/52-the-expanding-univers...

amazing...light first...and then the stars.

Who would have thought that light was preceded by the formation of stars?

But yet that is exactly how it unfolds in genesis.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#78786 Mar 5, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
So we are to ignore the archeological discoveries which can be linked to Biblical accounts? Or the modern day lineage of Isaac and Ishmael? By all means, let's just ignore anything other than what is painfully clear to us. Let's not observe things objectively or anything. That's just too logical. In the spirit of logic and of calling a spade a spade, the scientific method cannot be used to prove or disprove the existence of a living God. Greater minds than ours (many of whom i profoundly respect) have sought to do so and failed miserably. By all means, formulate your own opinions. Fight the power and stuff. Yet you have no authority to judge or condemn another human being simply because their opinions differ from your own. Especially when you cannot use the scientific method to prove said opinions.
Just what were my 'opinions' that you are replying to??

"The Bible is just mans made up stories."

Science can and has disproven much of the Bible.

I say that the Bible is just made up stories because science HAS disproven much of it.

Yes, we know the Bible speaks of real people and places of the era. So does Harry Potter's 7 books

However, just like Harry Potter,it has made-up up stories that we now KNOW for a fact are not true, and we have real scientific evidence to back that up.

The one disproven story that will do the most damage to today's Christian dogma is that the story of Adam and Eve, as written in the Bible, is a total fabrication.

A very large portion of the population of the USA and its religions believes that Adam and Eve lived about 6,000 years ago when God finished creating the universe and earth.

Well we know that the earth is Much Much older than 6,000 years, it is in fact over 4 billion years old. We have determined when life started on our planet, and we have determined when man-kind made his/her first appearance.

The life first starting on earth was 3.5 billion years ago (give or take few million years) and we have 2 lines of evidence for humans first appearance on earth....DNA and archaeology/paleoanthropology.

They coincide.....

We have the proof and it is irrefutable.

So, there is 2 of your holy books myths blown the hell up...and we do have more.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#78787 Mar 5, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor can "that myth" be disproven using the scientific method.
See my long post above...a lot of the myth can be disproven 'scientifically.'

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#78788 Mar 5, 2013
Proof of Evidence wrote:
<quoted text>
You know this is a fact why?
The evidence comes from a variety of sources, from seeing remnants of the first and second generation stars (the longer lived individuals from those generations). Their composition shows the conditions of when they were formed. Also, we know a lot about the processes of the early universe, from the expansion, to nucleosynthesis, to early star formation. We also know the age of the sun and can compare it to the age of the universe in general.

So, yes, there were *at least* two previous generations of stars before the sun and earth formed. Because they overlapped to some extent, it is possible that a third generation was involved.

Now, to gather and understand this evidence, you have to know and understand some of the basic science that has been done over the last century and a half. In particular, the specifics of stellar dynamics and how those are tested against real stars. The differences of composition between Population I, II and III stars. and how those differences were caused is also quite relevant. Understanding a bit of how galaxies form and change is another good point of departure.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#78789 Mar 5, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Just what were my 'opinions' that you are replying to??

"The Bible is just mans made up stories."

Science can and has disproven much of the Bible.

I say that the Bible is just made up stories because science HAS disproven much of it.

Yes, we know the Bible speaks of real people and places of the era. So does Harry Potter's 7 books

However, just like Harry Potter,it has made-up up stories that we now KNOW for a fact are not true, and we have real scientific evidence to back that up.

The one disproven story that will do the most damage to today's Christian dogma is that the story of Adam and Eve, as written in the Bible, is a total fabrication.

A very large portion of the population of the USA and its religions believes that Adam and Eve lived about 6,000 years ago when God finished creating the universe and earth.

Well we know that the earth is Much Much older than 6,000 years, it is in fact over 4 billion years old. We have determined when life started on our planet, and we have determined when man-kind made his/her first appearance.

The life first starting on earth was 3.5 billion years ago (give or take few million years) and we have 2 lines of evidence for humans first appearance on earth....DNA and archaeology/paleoanthropology.

They coincide.....

We have the proof and it is irrefutable.

So, there is 2 of your holy books myths blown the hell up...and we do have more.
Lol Proof? I fail to see how you have disproven the existence of God using the scientific method. Did I miss something? Either the Bible is valid or it is not. You don't get to pick and choose. Furthermore, your opinion of the Bible or Harry Potter or the Quran does in no way disprove the existence of God using the scientific method. Do that and shut us theists up forever.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#78790 Mar 5, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor can "that myth" be disproven using the scientific method.
it can't be disproven in any way, just like you can't disprove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created all and is the ruler of the universe nad your soul.

go ahead, prove he isn't yur god...

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 can we prove God exists, or does not? 2 hr Paul Porter1 71
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 13 hr Chimney1 141,315
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Tue Kathleen 19,031
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) May 18 SoE 178,597
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) May 18 MADRONE 1,870
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) May 15 emrenil 1,243
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) May 15 MikeF 13,700
More from around the web