Evolution vs. Creation

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

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#79759 Mar 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
oh sorry, cats I suppose. ;-)
Not that either, I think.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#79760 Mar 8, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh so your beef is with Charles!
Well he can use some more flack...dh
But not that anyone else noticed, given the way you implicate everybody.
Implicate everyone else in WHAT? Yer losin' it, mate!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#79761 Mar 8, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Not that either, I think.
well I do know I evolved from a blue fish.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79762 Mar 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, neither one has anything to do with evolution. In both there is more than enough time for evolution to occur.
It is known now how the universe could create itself without breaking any laws of physics.
whatever...if you tell me to think rationally and logically...and then tell me that the universe created itself virtually out of nothing...then your presenting a oxymoron.

I find that it's more than likely, on a psychological level that scientists have developed a hypothesis that supports the only view in which they can exclude any type of intelligence behind the process of the creation of the universe.

and why do I think this?...because scientists copy processes from the universe to advance their own knowledge, the same as if they had found an advanced alien space ship and incorporated into their own design....and then readily deny that any kind of intelligent exist behind these processes.So basically you have no problem acknowledging the space ship as an advanced concept...but at the same time you deny the obvious alien intelligence that is implied.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#79763 Mar 8, 2013
MAAT wrote:
pg 3767
Anonymous wrote:
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
You prove my original point only too well. Today, you claim that homosexuality is "normal". Tomorrow, as your politics suits you, all sexual expression is "normal".
The real ongoing political problem is that gays can't exist in a majority straight community without eventual confrontation. Terms like "pansy" or "drama queen" or "gay" are often terms invented in the homosexual community that eventually attain different meaning in the straight community. Sometimes, there is a bit of a slur to it because the stereotype is typically one where inappropriately effeminate behavior is linked with homosexuality. Other times, terms like "fabulous" or "swag" aren't even starting off as announcements of sexual preference but end up sticking to the stereotype like glue.
One thing here is absolute. You're in a political forum. You were warned that you may encounter opinions that you disagree with, but this is an open discussion. In this realm, YOU started to personally label ME with a slur. YOU are playing the victim while refusing to come out of the closet. YOU are TRAPPED.
As I label it, while trying to avoid sounding like I'm saying "burn the witch!", you serve your master. You just couldn't stop yourself. Now you've exposed your agenda in entirety.
The good little Christians are here to burn ants with a magnifying glass just as much as you are. They're just too cowardly to name their demon.
I give people their chance to back out. Some will always engage in their holy war to the end. You've failed to be a good advocate for science. In some ways I'm glad to make that point. In other ways, I still have some work to do to expose the elitism and prejudice in your political community. Either way, you've failed big time. But feel free to hide behind Woodtick's deliberate ignorance and try to turn it into a popular hate speech you came here to create anyway.
Tsk! Tsk!
end copypaste.
You came in this forum after some political issues were discussed.
One thing you fail to realise is that this board is accessible from various topix nomers.
So while i'm discussing on the evo-forum (i'll admit that i can only repeat so often without getting bored, so i'll entertain discussions with others exploring other venues)you come in from a political angle.
Only when you medicalise homo-sexuality, that can only be done form a bigotted point of view and by denying epigenetics, you can make some points.
You are wrong in your assertions, and frankly started imposing your points of view on all posters here -half are gay: gay is pedophile etc-. And obviously lost sight of it being an intellectual exercise with some premisses and not a contest in ad hominem attacks on all.
It's not entertaining to talk to real life bigots.
You somehow don't notice obvious incompatibility of enlightened anti-bondslavery with concepts as innate badness caused by the fall.
They can't be upheld at the same time.
Pre-determination will always have you trying to medicalise the normal.(Which you than can complain about, as you did i.e. the cost for the tax-payers for medication.)While at the same time excluding predetermination for groups you want to exclude. They suddenly have free-choice.
So i's subjective venting.
imo you're arguements are rambling and illogical.
1. What's a "nomer"?
2. Something about ad-hominem but the rest isn't a structured argument in the English language.
3. There is a string of fancy terms you use that don't seem to make any sense in the English vernacular. Epigenetics, anti-bondslavery, pre-determination and probably several others that you have not posted as yet.
4. I'm doing my best to come up with empirical arguments for you to apply your logic to. It's not my fault that you decide to jump the tracks, take my rhetorical logic and attack me as if I personally advocate it. Are you familiar with the term "common sense"? If not, be so. You ARE on a mostly American forum.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#79764 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
whatever...if you tell me to think rationally and logically...and then tell me that the universe created itself virtually out of nothing...then your presenting a oxymoron.
I find that it's more than likely, on a psychological level that scientists have developed a hypothesis that supports the only view in which they can exclude any type of intelligence behind the process of the creation of the universe.
and why do I think this?...because scientists copy processes from the universe to advance their own knowledge, the same as if they had found an advanced alien space ship and incorporated into their own design....and then readily deny that any kind of intelligent exist behind these processes.So basically you have no problem acknowledging the space ship as an advanced concept...but at the same time you deny the obvious alien intelligence that is implied.
Watch and learn:

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#79765 Mar 8, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Implicate everyone else in WHAT? Yer losin' it, mate!
Do recall your own post! Paraphrased:Half the people on these evo board are hidden homo-sexuals...blabla...not owning up etc.
Otherwise it's going entirely stupid.

As far as i'm concerned address your posts to Charles Idemi since that seemed to be the goal in the first place.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79766 Mar 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
well I do know I evolved from a blue fish.
what? like a marlin?lol

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#79767 Mar 8, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
1. What's a "nomer"?
2. Something about ad-hominem but the rest isn't a structured argument in the English language.
3. There is a string of fancy terms you use that don't seem to make any sense in the English vernacular. Epigenetics, anti-bondslavery, pre-determination and probably several others that you have not posted as yet.
4. I'm doing my best to come up with empirical arguments for you to apply your logic to. It's not my fault that you decide to jump the tracks, take my rhetorical logic and attack me as if I personally advocate it. Are you familiar with the term "common sense"? If not, be so. You ARE on a mostly American forum.
Charles can answer that...talk to the hand.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79768 Mar 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Watch and learn:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =0ZiXC8Yh4T0XX
nothing to learn...the universe creating itself from nothing is a very old buddhist/taoist concept.

tao te ching

{04} The Nature of the Way ...
The Way is a void,
Used but never filled:
An abyss it is,
From which all things come.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#79769 Mar 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. If I'm mistaken, then correct me. If we evolved from apes, then there was a real chewbacca sometime in the past, or do you prefer elite ape? lol
a dose of humor. everyone needs it.
Yep we are still apes.
In 'human origin' i tried to amass any and all relevant studies.(not done yet)Since the question keeps returning.
None ever said it's easy material, you do need to study.
But you're up to it.

Like your fish joke though.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#79770 Mar 8, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup. He was punished for fighting God, and even matching his magic with his own. So either God is playing both sides like an evil sob, or God is not God.
I prefer to think of "God" as a passive acceptance of fate, but an iron will to challenge its minutia until you can redirect it. I don't really agree with it. It's a bit kamikaze in its abstraction, but that is the nature of religion. Make the dumb bunnies your willing martyrs. Claim all all good fortune as destiny.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#79771 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
what? like a marlin?lol
no I'm an Angels fan remember?

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79772 Mar 8, 2013
(6th century BC - Laozi )
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#79773 Mar 8, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Charles can answer that...talk to the hand.
Charles didn't write those words. If you're playing a "you're either with us or against us" angle, that's still not very popular on this side of the pond.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#79774 Mar 8, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Do recall your own post! Paraphrased:Half the people on these evo board are hidden homo-sexuals...blabla...not owning up etc.
Otherwise it's going entirely stupid.
As far as i'm concerned address your posts to Charles Idemi since that seemed to be the goal in the first place.
Yes, the operative word being "or". You can't reduce the factual evidence to match your world view. Facts are what they are. I would think an advocate of science would certainly KNOW better!

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79775 Mar 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
no I'm an Angels fan remember?
I was kinda of wondering if you would get the the drift.lol

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#79776 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
nothing to learn...the universe creating itself from nothing is a very old buddhist/taoist concept.
tao te ching
{04} The Nature of the Way ...
The Way is a void,
Used but never filled:
An abyss it is,
From which all things come.
You didn't watch it and did not see why it is not a superstitious belief but a scientific one. The how is the big difference.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79777 Mar 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>So are you claiming that you came from "da range"?
Iron ridge!! "Bush"

I only work in Sudan I live by Grand Marais by woodtick place.
I also have a lake home on the range.

Do you know much about the iron range?

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79778 Mar 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Watch and learn:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =0ZiXC8Yh4T0XX
besides, I watched the videos on the subject before.

I'm not buying.

I know "political" science when I see it.

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
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 1 hr MikeF 546
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 4 hr Brian_G 13,622
How would creationists explain... 5 hr Chimney1 343
Creationism coming to Ohio classrooms? Not with... 21 hr nobody 7
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) Fri Zach 4
Science News (Sep '13) Fri Ricky F 2,936
Genetic entropy Thu Discord 159
More from around the web