Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 172119 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: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82053 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Then your claims about me have no value whatsoever, since you haven't bothered to compile the data I have set forth. Much like your other ramblings that have no evidence to back them up. Typical. Face it, you're just an angry old fart who hates everyone for shitting in your sandbox.
Waht claims are those? what data did you set forth? where do i not back up my claims?

you like to talk but you don't really put forth anything but the proven lies of your cult.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#82054 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
My mother was raised by a Pentacostal minister. When she came of age, she abandoned the church. My father was not raised in a church setting but his parents read and followed the scriptures. When I came of age, I became curious as to the word.
You confirm my point. You were raised by Christians in a distinctly Christian environment. What are the chances that you would someday espouse, say, ISLAM? NONE, right?

You know what those MEN (and women) around you have taught you was the Truth or pointed you toward as Truth.
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact is, it answered many questions about why humanity behaves the way it does. Answered the questions better than my psychology and sociology courses did.
It;s also chock full of brutality, sadism and quite sick violence on the behalf of, or directly BY your Holy God. Did you also read those parts?:)
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact is, the Bible doesn't discount evolution at all. It explains the previous worlds in the first few lines of Genesis. It also explains how the genes of Adam and Eve were diversified. The fact is, to be an atheist and completely disregard the Biblical texts for their historical value is shallow and defiant.
No, NOT shallow or defiant. but realistic and evidence-based.

Modern science tells us there NEVER were two distinct "first humans," nor could there have been. Mankind evolved as a group gradually out of earlier, proto-human species. Here's the lineage as science currently knows it:

Ardipithecus ramidus
Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus afarensis
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus garhi
Paranthropus aethiopicus
Paranthropus boisei
Paranthropus robustus
Homo habilis
Homo rudolfensis
Homo ergaster
Homo erectus
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo sapiens
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82055 Mar 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
In that post woodtick did not say that god did not exist.
He pointed out that your "word of god" has been shown to be in error many times over.
C'mon, don't dance around that statement. You and I both know woody denies the existence of God. Choose a more refined topic relating to God and I will discuss it with you.
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82056 Mar 21, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Waht claims are those? what data did you set forth? where do i not back up my claims?
you like to talk but you don't really put forth anything but the proven lies of your cult.
Once again, you went to the toilet didn't you. The discussion line just flew right outta yo lil head, didn't it?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82057 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again, you went to the toilet didn't you. The discussion line just flew right outta yo lil head, didn't it?
No, you made a bunch of poorly referenced claims. back them up and i will respond.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82058 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon, don't dance around that statement. You and I both know woody denies the existence of God. Choose a more refined topic relating to God and I will discuss it with you.
No, I was clear. the god of yoru bible is a proven lie. why do you continue in a cult that you know is a lie?

seems things are flying right over your head...
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82059 Mar 21, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
You confirm my point. You were raised by Christians in a distinctly Christian environment. What are the chances that you would someday espouse, say, ISLAM? NONE, right?
You know what those MEN (and women) around you have taught you was the Truth or pointed you toward as Truth.
<quoted text>
It;s also chock full of brutality, sadism and quite sick violence on the behalf of, or directly BY your Holy God. Did you also read those parts?:)
<quoted text>
No, NOT shallow or defiant. but realistic and evidence-based.
Modern science tells us there NEVER were two distinct "first humans," nor could there have been. Mankind evolved as a group gradually out of earlier, proto-human species. Here's the lineage as science currently knows it:
Ardipithecus ramidus
Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus afarensis
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus garhi
Paranthropus aethiopicus
Paranthropus boisei
Paranthropus robustus
Homo habilis
Homo rudolfensis
Homo ergaster
Homo erectus
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo sapiens
First of all, no I wouldn't seek an alternate point of view, since the Christian point of view works for me.
No where in the Bible does it state that those individuals other than Abraham were free from sin or perfect, so yes, the brutalities you listed were indeed part of the ancestral fiber of us all. "No, NOT shallow or defiant. but realistic and evidence-based.
Modern science tells us there NEVER were two distinct "first humans," nor could there have been. Mankind evolved as a group gradually out of earlier, proto-human species. Here's the lineage as science currently knows it:" Adam and Eve weren't the first two humans, MAN AND MAID were made before Adam was created. Since no timeline was established or mentioned, a million years could have passed between them and the creation of Adam. There is so much about this world we know nothing about, yet are confident that science will reveal it. There are pieces of information missing from the scriptures, which will also be revealed in due time. Of that I am confident.
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82060 Mar 21, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>No, I was clear. the god of yoru bible is a proven lie. why do you continue in a cult that you know is a lie?
seems things are flying right over your head...
Your statements, no matter how many times you write them ARE NOT PROOF, get it?
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82061 Mar 21, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>No, you made a bunch of poorly referenced claims. back them up and i will respond.
Poorly referenced claims? That I am a woman,(which I told you many times before as you referred to me as a dude.) The claim that I am self-employed so I am not stealing time from anyone but myself. Or the fact that my business in in robotics? Geeeeez!
Mark

Portland, OR

#82062 Mar 21, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Then he was not a very good scientist. The human species has many physical flaws, but we make them up with a few mental traits and behaviors that have secured our existence. The specific combination of social traits is unique to our species, and easily explained with the theory of evolution, though the individual traits are common in other animals so we aren't that unique. Our breeding capability, inherited by the chimp/ape lineage, is the reason we have benefited by the social traits so well. The one trait that is rare is our capability to alter our instinctual behaviors due to our intellectual advancement, it's why we have been capable of increasing our knowledge so much faster than any other species. This particular trait is so rare I cannot even recall the few other species that possess it.
Sagan said it best, "we can change ourselves." It's time we shed the childish things and embrace the beauty of reality. Pacifiers like religion are exactly the same as the tooth fairy.
So human evo is a very important piece to you I see. I agree that textbook evo is very powerful to look at and read about. It is also very easy to demolish at the fossil record level, and simple to prove that folk who believe in and teach evo have gone out and “discovered” the "evidence" they want to find. They get acclaim, grants, promotions and most of all notoriety. This is very popular stuff!

On my side of the fence, we get attacked and stereotyped as you have seen here and done yourself. How fair is that? An example is Johansson’s "Lucy". Without a dought, the most publicized evidence of a transitional human fossil since Piltdown,(over 500 Phds were conferred on the study of Piltdown, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man ) that later was proved a hoax.

Everyone on the evo side were anticipating this find, and Johansson found it. The most compelling anatomical part was the knee. It was a knee that could allow the animal to walk upright, other than that it was an Orangutan. Later, when he was questioned closely by his peers (some jealous, some skeptical), he got nervous. After over a year he admitted that the knee came from a location far away from the other remains. Game changer, would the media reverse on that, oh no, that popular ship had sailed. So how is your system of faith different than mine? With that thought why attack me so? Is not a challenge made in good faith healthy for all? For truth?

M

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#82063 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>\
Provide the said proof. The fact is, there IS NO PROOF that God doesn't exist, you only wish there were. Sorry to burst your little bubble.
Of late we seem to be getting a lot of circumstantial evidence that most of the stories from the Bible are just myth, i.e. not true.

I'm wondering how this is going to effect the myths about god. His stories from His book are mythical, just like all the other gods who have been discarded over time.
Mark

Portland, OR

#82064 Mar 21, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah. Found it.
http://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-tex...
The VOR thing seems to be a point of contention. The FAA discounts it, Alaska Air believes it. Of course, both would have their reasons for taking each position.
Having worked on VORs (and ILS, TACAN, etc) for a number of years, I'd have to work on understand how a radial shift of that magnitude is even possible.
There were techs out at the site working on it. The approach comes in at Cross Sound, so they turned to early when the needles started moving, There was a big SE storm so before they cross checked their yaw on the ADI's, bam. We were getting knocked around alot. I was a teen ager. As Jnu was the capitol, many legislatures from the interior put their kids on the flight, because it was the day before school started. FAA was covering it up.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#82065 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon, don't dance around that statement. You and I both know woody denies the existence of God. Choose a more refined topic relating to God and I will discuss it with you.
How can someone deny the existence of something that has no evidence of existing in the first place? BTW... warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing are not evidence of existence of anything other than warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82066 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Poorly referenced claims? That I am a woman,(which I told you many times before as you referred to me as a dude.) The claim that I am self-employed so I am not stealing time from anyone but myself. Or the fact that my business in in robotics? Geeeeez!
No the ones i asked you about...

I have to say that i am flattered that you came on this site apparantly just to talk about me, but if you really don't have anything to add but using your bible to prove that the bible is true, perhaps you should find some other endeavor? i mean, i'm glad to show you how yor cult lied to you over and over again, but it is kinda boring...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82067 Mar 21, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>How can someone deny the existence of something that has no evidence of existing in the first place? BTW... warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing are not evidence of existence of anything other than warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing
soevry religious text and belief is true? that seems impossible...in fact, it would be impossible.

you prove your own proof wrong! good job!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82068 Mar 21, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>How can someone deny the existence of something that has no evidence of existing in the first place? BTW... warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing are not evidence of existence of anything other than warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing
Ooops. sorry misread your post. my mistake.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82069 Mar 21, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Your statements, no matter how many times you write them ARE NOT PROOF, get it?
yes, i get that, the proof has been given countless times.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#82070 Mar 21, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Ooops. sorry misread your post. my mistake.
No worries... although, the only way you could misread that is if you are dyslexic. Not that there's enything wrong with that... LOL!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82071 Mar 21, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>No worries... although, the only way you could misread that is if you are dyslexic. Not that there's enything wrong with that... LOL!
hey, dislexia never hurt everyone!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#82072 Mar 21, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
So human evo is a very important piece to you I see. I agree that textbook evo is very powerful to look at and read about. It is also very easy to demolish at the fossil record level,
I doubt you can do that, and the only ones who CLAIM to be able to do this are usually fundamentalist Christians working a "creationist" agenda.
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
On my side of the fence, we get attacked and stereotyped as you have seen here and done yourself. How fair is that?
You are doubtless attacked because you are pushing your Christian religion in the guise of pseudo-science, by using sciencey-sounding language in attacking the uncontroversial (in SCIENCE, anyway) backbone of modern life science, evolution.
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
An example is Johansson’s "Lucy". Without a dought, the most publicized evidence of a transitional human fossil since Piltdown,(over 500 Phds were conferred on the study of Piltdown, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man ) that later was proved a hoax.
Who proved Piltdown a hoax? Evangelical Christian pastors and "scientists" working a creationist agenda? Or rather real scientists in the 1950s who finally had the tools (radiometric dating methods) to prove something fraudulent which had LONG been suspected of being so by science.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC001.h...
Creationist Claim CC001:

Piltdown Man was a hoax

In 1912, Charles Dawson and Arthur Smith Woodward announced the discovery of a mandible and part of a skull from a gravel pit near Piltdown, England. The mandible was apelike except for humanlike wear on the teeth; the skull was like a modern human. These bones became the basis for Eoanthropus dawsoni, commonly known as Piltdown Man, interpreted as a 500,000-year-old British ape-man. But in the early 1950s, it was found that the jawbone was stained and filed down to give its appearance and that the skull was a recent human fossil. In short, Piltdown Man was a fraud. British scientists believed it because they wanted to. The failure to expose it sooner shows that scientists tend to be guided by their preconceptions.

Response:

1. Piltdown man was exposed by scientists. The fact that it took forty years is certainly no shining example of science in action, but it does show that science corrects errors.
Preconceptions are an unavoidable problem in just about any investigation, but they are less so in science because first, different scientists often have different preconceptions, and second, the physical evidence must always be accounted for. Many scientists from America and Europe did not accept Piltdown Man uncritically, and the hoax unraveled when the fossils could not be reconciled with other hominid fossil finds.

2. One hoax cannot indicate the inferiority of conventional archeology, because creationists have several of their own, including Paluxy footprints, the Calaveras skull, Moab and Malachite Man, and others. More telling is how people deal with these hoaxes. When Piltdown was exposed, it stopped being used as evidence. The creationist hoaxes, however, can still be found cited as if they were real. Piltdown has been over and done with for decades, but the dishonesty of creationist hoaxes continues.

Links:
Harter, Richard, 1996. Piltdown Man: The bogus bones caper. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown.html

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 min Thinking 20,771
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 14 min Paul Porter1 142,915
Question to you about sex 2 hr Chimney1 2
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory 4 hr Paul Porter1 313
Evolutionists are monkeys 22 hr Zog Has-fallen 11
What Motives Created Social Darwinism? Mon Zog Has-fallen 1
Simulated Evolution in a Computer Program Mon Zog Has-fallen 2
More from around the web