Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 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.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#82513 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Bible, Tons and Tons of evidence.
Pop goes the tick.
Again ... where is this evidence?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#82514 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Bible, Tons and Tons of evidence.
Pop goes the tick.
No.

In order to accept the bible as "evidence" of anything other than its own existence, you must prove it reliable.

It's not.

It's woefully self-contradictory, horribly internally inconsistent, miserably translated, and subject to (apparently) infinite and mutually exclusive interpretations.

Got anything a bit more, well, useful?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82515 Mar 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Hardly. Yes, we know now that the Earth is a sphere, or an oblate spheroid if you want to nitpick.

There was a time in the past when that was not the case. Please note that I did not have to use the "four corners of the Earth".

One more time, how much of the Earth could you see from a tree that was very very very high if the Earth was flat? You could see all of it theoretically. How much of the Earth could you see if tree was very very very tall and we had our spherical Earth? You could see at the very most half, and you are well out of the atmosphere and halfway to the Moon before you start to approach the one half limit.

According to Bible scholars if an idea is important it is in the Bible several times. There are more verses than the three groups I listed that describe the Earth as flat. I am just playing by your own rules here.

I am still waiting for verses that apply to a spherical Earth.
"Note, the Biblical Hebrew word for “circle”(חוגchuwg) can also mean “round” or “sphere.”

“The Earth a Sphere—Certain astronomical relations were recognized very early. The stars appear as if attached to a globe rotating round the earth once in 24 hours, and this appearance was clearly familiar to the author of the Book of Job, and indeed long before the time of Abraham, since the formation of the constellations could not have been effected without such recognition. But the spherical form of the heavens almost involves a similar form for the earth, and their apparent diurnal rotation certainly means that they are not rigidly connected with the earth, but surround it on all sides at some distance from it. The earth therefore must be freely suspended in space, and so the Book of Job describes it:‘He stretcheth out the north over empty space, and hangeth the earth upon nothing’(Job 26:7).”(International Standard Bible Encyclopedia)]

Proverbs 8:27 also suggests a round earth by use of the word circle (e.g., New King James Bible and New American Standard Bible). If you are overlooking the ocean, the horizon appears as a circle. This circle on the horizon is described in Job 26:10. The circle on the face of the waters is one of the proofs that the Greeks used for a spherical earth. Yet here it is recorded in Job, ages before the Greeks discovered it. Job 26:10 indicates that where light terminates, darkness begins. This suggests day and night on a spherical globe.[JSM]

The Hebrew record is the oldest, because Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. Historians generally [wrongly] credit the Greeks with being the first to suggest a spherical earth. In the sixth century B.C., Pythagoras suggested a spherical earth.[JSM]"

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c0...

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82516 Mar 24, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>If things don't evolve, then how do you look different than your parents?
Because I'm not a clone.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82517 Mar 24, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Oboy.

You think solidified magma is somehow "new"?

Here, just for exercise: ever wonder how old the friggin' magma was before it surfaced?
So then all lava flows cannot be dated.
Dust thrown up by eruption cannot be dated because it was lava from a volcano lave dome. In fact all rock on earth was molten as the earth formed so it can't be dated either. Dust from space can't be dated because it came from a molten star.

No rocks can then be dated.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82518 Mar 24, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>You're underthinking again.

If those results were accurate and repeatable, they'd be accepted as the norm.

They're not, so...

That's how it works, see? See?
Who's in charge of throwing out incorrect dating data?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#82519 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Because I'm not a clone.
But if you didn't have mutations in your DNA you would be a clone.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82521 Mar 24, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>But if you didn't have mutations in your DNA you would be a clone.
So everything is a mutation of it's mother source of DNA? LOL

Ok. Next.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#82522 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Bible, Tons and Tons of evidence.
Pop goes the tick.
Nope, all you have is the Bible, and you don't even follow that.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#82523 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"Note, the Biblical Hebrew word for “circle”(חוגchuwg) can also mean “round” or “sphere.”
“The Earth a Sphere—Certain astronomical relations were recognized very early. The stars appear as if attached to a globe rotating round the earth once in 24 hours, and this appearance was clearly familiar to the author of the Book of Job, and indeed long before the time of Abraham, since the formation of the constellations could not have been effected without such recognition. But the spherical form of the heavens almost involves a similar form for the earth, and their apparent diurnal rotation certainly means that they are not rigidly connected with the earth, but surround it on all sides at some distance from it. The earth therefore must be freely suspended in space, and so the Book of Job describes it:‘He stretcheth out the north over empty space, and hangeth the earth upon nothing’(Job 26:7).”(International Standard Bible Encyclopedia)]
Proverbs 8:27 also suggests a round earth by use of the word circle (e.g., New King James Bible and New American Standard Bible). If you are overlooking the ocean, the horizon appears as a circle. This circle on the horizon is described in Job 26:10. The circle on the face of the waters is one of the proofs that the Greeks used for a spherical earth. Yet here it is recorded in Job, ages before the Greeks discovered it. Job 26:10 indicates that where light terminates, darkness begins. This suggests day and night on a spherical globe.[JSM]
The Hebrew record is the oldest, because Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. Historians generally [wrongly] credit the Greeks with being the first to suggest a spherical earth. In the sixth century B.C., Pythagoras suggested a spherical earth.[JSM]"
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c0...
Nope, not good enough. If a word can have two meanings then you need to show that by context it means what you want it to.

By context all of the verses in the Bible are of a flat Earth.

Plus the Hebrews were not known as seafarers. They were local fisherman at best. Their is no evidence of the discovering that the world is round.

I asked for a verse that clearly describes a spherical Earth, not apologetics. Apologetics are used when the facts of the world don't match up with the Bible. In other words they are attempts to weasel out of a space Christians don't want to be in.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#82524 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So everything is a mutation of it's mother source of DNA? LOL
Ok. Next.
Reading fail. Try again.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#82525 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So everything is a mutation of it's mother source of DNA? LOL
Ok. Next.
How else do you explain the differences?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#82526 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So then all lava flows cannot be dated.
Dust thrown up by eruption cannot be dated because it was lava from a volcano lave dome. In fact all rock on earth was molten as the earth formed so it can't be dated either. Dust from space can't be dated because it came from a molten star.
No rocks can then be dated.
Wrong. Some rocks cannot be dated. They are the exception rather than the norm. Finding out why the dating failed allows us to not make the same mistake again.

Are you saying that if I find one error in the Bible the whole Bible is worthless? Hmm, you might have a point in that case.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82527 Mar 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Some rocks cannot be dated. They are the exception rather than the norm. Finding out why the dating failed allows us to not make the same mistake again.
Are you saying that if I find one error in the Bible the whole Bible is worthless? Hmm, you might have a point in that case.
Well, dating rocks has never claimed to be infallible. the bible on the other hand...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#82528 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So then all lava flows cannot be dated.
Dust thrown up by eruption cannot be dated because it was lava from a volcano lave dome. In fact all rock on earth was molten as the earth formed so it can't be dated either. Dust from space can't be dated because it came from a molten star.
No rocks can then be dated.
this is what happens when you try to talk about subjects you do not understand...

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#82529 Mar 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So then all lava flows cannot be dated.
Dust thrown up by eruption cannot be dated because it was lava from a volcano lave dome. In fact all rock on earth was molten as the earth formed so it can't be dated either. Dust from space can't be dated because it came from a molten star.
No rocks can then be dated.
*sigh*

No, ya halfwit.

Of course it can be dated.

And, of course, creationist nutters like your Steve Austin (is that REALLY his name?) can mismeasure and misinterpret and force-to-fit all they want.

The point remains - if they were doing it right, it'd be the accepted norm, and they'd be in the forefront of geological research.
Instead of out on the loonie fringe.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82530 Mar 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Nope, not good enough. If a word can have two meanings then you need to show that by context it means what you want it to.

By context all of the verses in the Bible are of a flat Earth.

Plus the Hebrews were not known as seafarers. They were local fisherman at best. Their is no evidence of the discovering that the world is round.

I asked for a verse that clearly describes a spherical Earth, not apologetics. Apologetics are used when the facts of the world don't match up with the Bible. In other words they are attempts to weasel out of a space Christians don't want to be in.
"I asked for a verse that clearly describes a spherical Earth"

Why? Would it really matter to you?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82531 Mar 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Reading fail. Try again.
Nope, sorry I won't go down your loony tune road.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82532 Mar 24, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>How else do you explain the differences?
You need to learn about genes and DNA.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#82533 Mar 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong. Some rocks cannot be dated. They are the exception rather than the norm. Finding out why the dating failed allows us to not make the same mistake again.

Are you saying that if I find one error in the Bible the whole Bible is worthless? Hmm, you might have a point in that case.
Just going off an atheist rules for rock dating.

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) 9 min Aura Mytha 18,822
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 31 min Chimney1 1,599
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 44 min SoE 178,591
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 1 hr lozzza 13,689
proof of gods existence .....or lack there of 17 hr Chimney1 14
No Place For ID? 17 hr Chimney1 65
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) Apr 27 MikeF 141,290
More from around the web