Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 209775 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.

The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83041 Mar 26, 2013
Mark wrote:
You may want to read Denton and AE Wilder-Smith to bring you up to speed on your question. High schooler's are shown blobs and lighting striking a pond of chemicals, that was supposedly to have kick started all of this mindless complexity.
Abio is hypothesis only and under research. The theory of evolutio does not rely on abio.
Mark wrote:
Backed by the media, Nat'l Geo, Sagan etc. and ID being mocked at every level they have no chance to think reasonably, they have been brainwashed.
Actually ID is anti-critical thinking, hence brainwashing. It offers nothing but anti-evolution arguments and sets itself up as the default option if evolution was wrong - which it merely assumes for theological reasons (but avoids explaining how the limits of the designer were ascertained). It offers nothing in the way of positive evidence.
Mark wrote:
In my view only a higher intelligence acting on chemicals offers a reasonable solution to the origin and complexity of life.
Your baseless opinion is irrelevant. You have zero evidence.
Mark wrote:
I have friends that have views different than mine, do I think of them as foolish?, no. They have as much to offer in society and their families as any of us on my side. Opposing viewpoints are healthy for us all, it makes us think, research and challenge our thinking. That's not wrong.
But lying is and that's what you do. If your opposing viewpoint had merit you'd submit it to scientific peer-review. As it is you've only got one out of two papers to support you. The first was retracted due to it violating peer-review and the second because the peers were sloppy that day.
Mark wrote:
I know a Russian that I saw every weekend all winter for years,
One of these days your anecdotes will be about meeting Elvis. But it still won't be relevant.
Mark wrote:
I would say to him "(name), look, you always want to talk about religion and politics with me, we have to see each other weekly, I like you and can deal with it, are you good with this?", he would say sure. He had a lot of jokes about sex, one day I said to him "(blank),do you realize that if women had the same intense sex drive functions as men there would be no such thing as marriage, couples would be running off anywhere @ anytime and marriage would be pointless??" This got him thinking, how did sex evolve into to that only in humans?
Because humans figured out that abstract concepts were handy for manipulating people. Hence creationism.
Mark wrote:
We are different than animals. He was eating an orange one day and I said, "look at that thing, the color and how each slice is a perfect bite".
That's a VERY good point. By any chance have you seen Ray Comfort's video on the banana?
Mark wrote:
Later he became a believer in God. His wife is Jewish, both are highly educated professors. They had two boys and always wanted a girl. After that they soon had a girl, the happiest couple I know.
Charming tale.(yawn) I know of plenty of others who also believe in God but don't necessarily have to deny all of science for the sake of their religious beliefs. Also highly educated scientists. But people's religious opinions have no bearing on the validity of scientific concepts. You let yours cloud your judgement. That's not our problem.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83042 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Bull woody. The old testament was a trial set up for the children of Abraham. God realized that the chosen people, the Hebrews couldn't follow the laws set forth. So He sent His only begotten Son so that Jews and Gentiles alike would have a chance to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. All the burnt offerings and ceremonies couldn't save the chosen ones. God realized that humanity is weak and unable to save themselves. Thank You Jesus for your sacrifice!!! YOU woody are the one who really doesn't understand the Word. You are so blinded by your hatred for all things of God that you miss the very Message It's trying to deliver. Pity.
Actually you don't understand the Word of God any more than anyone else does. You ain't met the guy. You are not the world's best Biblical scholar. You're not His favourite. You're not His personally appointed mouthpiece. He does not love you best. You don't have any more special access to special information that anybody else does. You know diddly more about God than anyone else. Period. You are simply just another fundie with a massive ego that thinks their ego "must" be relevant to everyone else in the world. Newsflash:

It ain't.

Due to the possible influence of Poe's law, it's quite difficult to tell with fundies whether they are intentionally misrepresenting non-believers based on their own projections, or simply cannot fathom someone having a different opinion on the matter of theism. Non-believers don't "hate" your god since they can't hate something which may not even exist. What they do hate is the fundie prevalence for ego-centrism combined with imposition.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83043 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
They are. Read Revelation about the governments crumbling from within.
Sorry, I thought it went too far when it started mentioning talking lizards. Then I realised for certain that it was a science fiction novel.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83044 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Hysterical as well as hypocritical. The queeeen is one of the richest people on the face of the earth. All courtesy of you folks.
Not me. She was rich before I was born. Can't blame me for that.(shrug)
CBOW wrote:
Right,......and your point queeeenie contributor?


Thought that was obvious - that your rich buddies were doing everything in their power to avoid paying their 40%. Often illegally.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83045 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
How does your statement NOT confirm Creation?
Quite simple actually.

Because if it happened in a completely different way you'd still say Goddidit.

Therefore confirmation is not possible either way no matter what.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83046 Mar 26, 2013
Mark wrote:
There are only DNA read receptors in the cell, there are no write heads. Even if there were, an argument could be made for "God directed" evolution but ID would still be required, it's too complex.
An argument COULD be made for "God-directed" sure, but it wouldn't be based on evidence.(shrug)

How is "complexity" measured in an objective manner via the scientific method?
Mark wrote:
The human DNA has a stop bit and a second read head, this allows a DNA code string to be shorter but hold much more command information than lower life forms like a mouse. This can be measured in GB
Total BS.
Mark wrote:
hardly believable as a slight of hand, authored by accident and chance
Keep beating up that straw-man, Marky. That's why the scientific community doesn't take fundies seriously.
Mark wrote:
and is similar to modern data compression techniques. The cell mocks the efforts of man in complexity and size because it's all done at the molecular level.
Yes, so it's LIKE a machine but nothing at all whatsoever like a machine therefore Goddidit with magic. Brilliant!
Mark wrote:
Crick understood this and postulated that it came in from spaceships, because it's all too complex and points to ID. "Panasperma" is the name of his book.
The idea of panspermia doesn't actually address the riddle of origins, merely relocates it. It also in general doesn't directly address the possibilities of whether life was designed or not. However if life WAS designed then you run straight into the infinite regression problem, as your designer would need a designer.
Mark wrote:
Even Darwin said "they have made a religion out of my theory". When you read "Species" at least he is honest about the challenges of complexity, he mentions the eye and other things.
That's because he was a good scientist. His ideas were tentative at the time and he posed himself challenges and potential solutions. While he didn't get everything right (and also had no idea about genetics at the time) for the most part time has since vindicated him, as I've already demonstrated.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83047 Mar 26, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Not me. She was rich before I was born. Can't blame me for that.(shrug)
<quoted text>
Thought that was obvious - that your rich buddies were doing everything in their power to avoid paying their 40%. Often illegally.
Actually, didn't the royal families garner all their wealth by ruling from divine right? so it would have been this mythical god putting them in power to garner all the wealth from the poor and meek that supposedly god was a big fan of...

and wasn't king James a flaming faggot that ruled by divine right even thought that god would have known he was gay (and god hates gays, even wants them stoned to death...)

i wonder how that works in the cult members minds?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83048 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Slavery was a fact of humanity.
... and condoned by God. Especially since that's what ultimately awaits all true believers.
CBOW wrote:
So was famine, pestilence, birth defects, baroness and infertility, death. Whatever the sin, it existed because Adam and Eve chose the tree of life, the fruit of knowledge; and with it all the corruption of the world.
And once again we see the fundie prevalence for worshipping ignorance: knowledge bad, ignorance good.
CBOW wrote:
Once again, you blame God for humanity's short comings.
Uhuh. That's because he IS responsible.
CBOW wrote:
To clarify, not everyone of God's people owned slaves. No rational person would condone homosexuality since it doesn't provide the outcome of the union of two humans, OFFSPRING. Yet it is treated as though it's an alternate lifestyle.


If it's between consenting adults it's their business, not yours. In the meantime fundamentalist Christianity requires condoning among other things rape, genocide, slavery and incest. No rational human being would condone that. Your god however is not rational, and is not really that much different than any of the other petty gods of other ancient religious myths of the same period.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83049 Mar 26, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
I can find no reference to any such book written by Francis Crick.
Details, details...

But he can tell you about this guy he knew one time. Wanna hear it?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83050 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>Many incorrectly assume that the slavery in the Old Testament was like the modern western slavery of the 1700's and 1800's. Western slavery primarily benefited the rich, but Israelite slavery primarily benefited the poor. You see, slavery was almost always voluntary...the basic types of "enslavement" are known as self-sale, family sale, and indentured servitude. These relationships were usually initiated by the slave as a remedy for poverty.
Poor families would sometimes sell their children as slaves. Were this situation like modern western slavery, we could justifiably condemn the practice...but the reality is that this was of great benefit to the child.
Slavery contracts often emphasized that the slave agreed to work in exchange for economic security and personal protection. While modern western slaves were forbidden to own property of any kind, Hebrew slaves could take part in business, borrow money, and buy their own freedom...in other words, they were free to "buy out" the contract they'd made. They were also able to own property, pay betrothal monies, and pay civic fines. Slaves could appear in court as witnesses, plaintiffs, and defendants.
Many ancient near-eastern slaves were able to buy time off as well, paying a fixed fee called a "quitrent" to their owner. This bought them a year where they didn't have to work. The amount paid was roughly equivalent to the average annual pay of a hired worker, regardless of whether he was free or a slave.
Remember that if you're going to rationalize abhorrent acts it's normally a good idea to at least provide the citation for any one of the many fundie sites you copy-pasted this from.
CBOW wrote:
God didn't condone homosexuality, beastiality, or divorce, yet the Bible speaks of them and God's knowledge of them. If God had physically punished all who did acts not condoned by Him, we would be EXTINCT.
Um, you read your Bible to the end yet? What the frak do you think is gonna happen to the human race?
CBOW wrote:
Once again, blame God for humanity's decisions and failures. NICE!
Let's see. God made two stupid humans who didn't know their azz from their elbow, didn't train them and told them NOT to gain knowledge by eating from the tree he left in VERY easy reach. Kinda like leaving candy on the floor in your living room and telling a toddler or puppy (neither of which understand English yet) not to eat it. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would know that plate's empty when you get back.

So anyway, not only that but God also made an evil talking lizard who then went and told the kiddies to eat from the tree, which of course they did, then God punished them by throwing them out of paradise and condemned not only them but ALL OF HUMANITY THEREAFTER, supposedly for their "mistake". And God being God already knew all this was gonna happen anyway because he is omniscient and omnipotent and all-powerful and all-knowing and sitting on a seat of ultimate observation where the passage of time is meaningless.

So can we blame God for any of this? Well YES.

.

The game was rigged. Fundies are just too dumb to see it.(shrug)
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83051 Mar 26, 2013
CBOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again woody, you are so short sighted you can't grasp that theory of safety in numbers. During the days of the Biblical age, they didn't have the safety nets set up for the under privileged, uneducated or physically impaired people. To sell oneself into slavery WAS INDEED the only way to acquire protection, shelter and regular meals. Bloody hell, you're ignorant. Parents were sending their daughters and sons to work in wealthier homes even into the 1800's. The parents gleaned the profits, not those that worked, uh duh, that would be a form of slavery.
I'm still trying to decide whether your unwillingness to self-examine your position means you're a sick f ck or just monumentally stupid.

Just so I feel better - you're not planning to run for President are you?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83052 Mar 26, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
Wasn't the whole Exodus thing about "let my people go", from slavery?
No, the whole exodus thing (which didn't actually happen) was about God is a bigger cheese than Ra.

Letting go of slavery has never, is not, and never will enter into it.(shrug)

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83053 Mar 26, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm still trying to decide whether your unwillingness to self-examine your position means you're a sick f ck or just monumentally stupid.
Just so I feel better - you're not planning to run for President are you?
Can't he be both?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83054 Mar 26, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
Heard the eye evolution story, started out as a sensitive spot on an amoeba, comforting stuff like that. A good story for a 3 year old at bed time it seems to me. Why and how would an amoeba decide it needed an eye?
Right, so you've had a grand total of zero biology education.

This is usually the part where fundies tell us about their biology PhD's.

Oh, by the way - "measuring in Gb," the amoeba has twice the amount of genetic information than any human.
Mark wrote:
As far as an accurate stmt about what Darwin said or didn't say, I give you that, he does honestly struggle with the issue, I give him that. Goodness, with all that effort to discover something on his trip, finches beaks are still the same 150 years later. Time became the creator. Like the story of the Princess that kisses the frog and gets her prince = a fairy tale, so your side starts with a frog and add's 500 mil years and ends with the same prince and that = scientific?
No, successful predictions made by the theory confirmed by testing via the scientific method equals scientific.(shrug)
Mark wrote:
Actually they now tell us we came from “nocturnal tree dwellers” now, an opossum. They have 2 penises, where the previous connecting species has one, as does the Lemur after the opossum,(that’s a leap!) did his sex drive wake up his DNA one day and say boy, I like that? I actually think that I didn’t come from such a line of creatures, bad heritage you know. How is that different from your amoeba eye story!
It's not, since both your stories are caricatures which require violations of nested hierarchy.

Why not just go the whole hog and say dog giving birth to a cat and why are there still monkeys? After all as a YEC it's not as if you can say anything MORE stupid.(shrug)

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#83055 Mar 26, 2013
“A California man who believes the literal interpretation of the Bible is real is offering $10,000 to anyone who can successfully debunk claims made in the book of Genesis in front of a judge.

And for a man wanting to debate the very nature of human existence, Joseph Mastropaolo is taking a decidedly happy-go-lucky approach, saying he hopes the contest will improve future discussions on both sides of the argument.

"The evolutionists thereafter could read that transcript and make their case a bit stronger on the next one they contend against and we can do the same," Mastropaolo told the Guardian. "We can read the transcript and not have to go through the same process over and over and over again without any let up, without any resolution."”

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/creation...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83056 Mar 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, didn't the royal families garner all their wealth by ruling from divine right? so it would have been this mythical god putting them in power to garner all the wealth from the poor and meek that supposedly god was a big fan of...
Yup, the good old Divine Right of Kings - can't forget about that one. A distinctly undemocratic concept invented by theists for the purpose of keeping themselves in power. And something they're trying to get back after the Founders threw it away.
woodtick57 wrote:
and wasn't king James a flaming faggot that ruled by divine right even thought that god would have known he was gay (and god hates gays, even wants them stoned to death...)
i wonder how that works in the cult members minds?
Ignore that which is inconvenient. Ya know, the usual.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83057 Mar 26, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
“A California man who believes the literal interpretation of the Bible is real is offering $10,000 to anyone who can successfully debunk claims made in the book of Genesis in front of a judge.
And for a man wanting to debate the very nature of human existence, Joseph Mastropaolo is taking a decidedly happy-go-lucky approach, saying he hopes the contest will improve future discussions on both sides of the argument.
"The evolutionists thereafter could read that transcript and make their case a bit stronger on the next one they contend against and we can do the same," Mastropaolo told the Guardian. "We can read the transcript and not have to go through the same process over and over and over again without any let up, without any resolution."”
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/creation...
he is safe in knowing that no judge in his right mind and sense of duty would ever rule on such a case.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83058 Mar 26, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup, the good old Divine Right of Kings - can't forget about that one. A distinctly undemocratic concept invented by theists for the purpose of keeping themselves in power. And something they're trying to get back after the Founders threw it away.
<quoted text>
Ignore that which is inconvenient. Ya know, the usual.
perhaps god was watching the match during king James rule...was Manchester a team back then?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83059 Mar 26, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>No, they're all based on myth, with a heavy dose of chicanery.
You must be a partial judge.
The biblical stories are not myths. Archaeology have verified many. Those that are yet to be verified does not makes the bible to be false. Think straight!
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83060 Mar 26, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
“A California man who believes the literal interpretation of the Bible is real is offering $10,000 to anyone who can successfully debunk claims made in the book of Genesis in front of a judge.
Lizards can't talk? Wait, Goddidit with magic and we can't falsify magic because it's not possible to falsify non-scientific concepts. Darn he's good!

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 7 min Eagle 12 20,251
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 9 min Joncy David 45,542
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr It aint necessari... 152,200
America evolving into lockdown on purpose Sep 25 Dogen 68
New law to further hatred towards police Sep 24 One way or another 4
Hillary, a taco stand on every corner Sep 24 One way or another 4
News A better theory of intelligent design Sep 23 Chazofsaints 21
More from around the web