Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 205264 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.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83376 Mar 28, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
My facts are based on reproducible and well attested science. I don't give a crap whether you believe or accept it.
The fact that we all (mostly) carry a small percentage of Neanderthal genes/blood is observable in the lab makes your argument superfluous.
Also there is this thing in the laws of most countries called circumstantial evidence. Its been used to put many people in prisons.
You are using a very old and useless creationist meme.'How do you know, were you there'??
We weren't there, but we know Adam and Eve as written in the Bible never existed.
Biological reproductive species is an observed phenomena in nature on how a species is created at birth. Your other man made species terms does not show how a species is created at birth in nature. Its just a concept made up by a man.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83377 Mar 28, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
What!?
No.
You, sir or madam, are an idiot.
I asked for evidence, not nonsense.
You don't have to accept the evidence but it is there.
Krypteia

Brighton, UK

#83378 Mar 28, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Krypteria, as MikeF suggested above,**IF** you are truely interested in being educated (hopefully in scientific fact), stick around.
It can be educational and informative.
Thanks for your post,but no thanks think I've read enough on here to understand zealots are everywhere..

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#83379 Mar 28, 2013
Krypteia wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for your post,but no thanks think I've read enough on here to understand zealots are everywhere..
The "zeal" that compells me to participate here is my fervent desire that science in public schools remain free of religious mythology.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83380 Mar 28, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
That is true but they are still the same biological reproductive species and they still remain the same biological species. The laws of nature are fixed and never changes and it is this law that governs biological reproductive species which are fixed.
So you are saying there is some magical barrier that prevents these very small changes from accumulating ... that's magic, not science.
Aphelion

Satellite Beach, FL

#83381 Mar 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying there is some magical barrier that prevents these very small changes from accumulating ... that's magic, not science.
Are you still claiming that all humans at one time spoke the same language? That's not critical thinking ... that's just stupid

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83382 Mar 28, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still claiming that all humans at one time spoke the same language? That's not critical thinking ... that's just stupid
I did not mention language in the post you are responding to, did you even read it?

But yes, even in most mythology there was once a single world wide language ... because humans didn't always cover the globe. Like organisms and DNA, language evolves in much the same way.
Mark

United States

#83383 Mar 28, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah! The RATE bullshit. I knew that was going to come up sooner or later. It's deja vu all over again.
A very sharp team was on that committee. Look into it. Evo's will never publish multiple dating systems in their lit., it gets too complicated for them to also explain the lack of concordant dating results, in addition to their theme. We are supposed to blindly accept the data which is often +/- mils/Y because we are suppose to trust peer review. The fox watching the hen-house issue. I am not saying they purposely lie, its dogma.
Aphelion

Satellite Beach, FL

#83384 Mar 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not mention language in the post you are responding to, did you even read it?
But yes, even in most mythology there was once a single world wide language ... because humans didn't always cover the globe. Like organisms and DNA, language evolves in much the same way.
So again your premise is that primal man in Africa spoke the same language as primal man in China.

Funny that you use mythology as a support for your position but reject the bible. Can you say hypocrite!
Aphelion

Satellite Beach, FL

#83385 Mar 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not mention language in the post you are responding to, did you even read it?
But yes, even in most mythology there was once a single world wide language ... because humans didn't always cover the globe. Like organisms and DNA, language evolves in much the same way.
Just in case you forgot your own words:

Kitchen Klutter #82944
Tuesday

If I we you I would attempt to forget the blather that you spew as well.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83386 Mar 28, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
So again your premise is that primal man in Africa spoke the same language as primal man in China.
Funny that you use mythology as a support for your position but reject the bible. Can you say hypocrite!
Actually, I just pointed out that sometimes mythology can be a hazy mirror to ancient history. If getting some small things correct made the myths true, then Spiderman would be real as well.

What do you mean "primal in Africa" and "primal in China?" Humans started in Africa, all humans did, the first language was likely some primitive vocalizations and gestures with very few "words" and almost no structure at all, but it was still a language. Other apes also have languages, very primitive that never mature without being introduced to human languages, but they do have languages. Even cats have languages, birds, reptiles, they all have very primitive languages.

Sheesh, it's like trying to teach a first year student the entire works of Shakespear before they can even read.
Mark

United States

#83387 Mar 28, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>No, none of that demands a designer.
if you had really gone to university, you would know that kind of reasoning and research would get you and automatic "F".
try something above third grade level thinking...
Hey, I got A's and my 2 geo profs converted to catastrophism, one wanted to offered me time as a guest speaker. Don't you wish!

On another subject, do you know where Hungry Jack lake is?? Had a great walleye trip there, boy do I remember that feed! Never had a better fresh water fish meal.
Aphelion

Satellite Beach, FL

#83388 Mar 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I just pointed out that sometimes mythology can be a hazy mirror to ancient history. If getting some small things correct made the myths true, then Spiderman would be real as well.
What do you mean "primal in Africa" and "primal in China?" Humans started in Africa, all humans did, the first language was likely some primitive vocalizations and gestures with very few "words" and almost no structure at all, but it was still a language. Other apes also have languages, very primitive that never mature without being introduced to human languages, but they do have languages. Even cats have languages, birds, reptiles, they all have very primitive languages.
Sheesh, it's like trying to teach a first year student the entire works of Shakespear before they can even read.
Keep making it up as you go Klutter

However, the existing state of human language nevertheless suggests that the variety of dialects and sub-languages has developed from a relatively few (perhaps even less than twenty) languages. These original ‘proto-languages’—from which all others allegedly have developed—were distinct within themselves, with no previous ancestral language.

http://www.trueorigin.org/language01.asp

Try facts once in a while rather than you abysmal opinions, conjecture and your belief that you are actually educated.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83389 Mar 28, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, I got A's and my 2 geo profs converted to catastrophism, one wanted to offered me time as a guest speaker. Don't you wish!
On another subject, do you know where Hungry Jack lake is?? Had a great walleye trip there, boy do I remember that feed! Never had a better fresh water fish meal.
You can barely make more than one post a day without a bunch of typos and displaying linguistic ignorance, I an not convinced that your assertion here is at all close to reality.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#83390 Mar 28, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Reading the piece I couldn't help but think; that still works to the advantage of us atheists.
It HAS been thought for quite awhile now that we Homo-sapiens and Homo-neanderthalensis came from the same ancestor. It is thought, but not proven yet, that Homo-heidelbergensis was that common ancestor. Go to Wikipedia and look for drawings of that ancestor.
Go to MIT site for more info:
Sankararaman and co say that by this measure, humans and Neanderthals must have shared their genes between 47,000 and 65,000 years ago, well after the exodus from Africa.
So, again we are tied into prior Homo species and we ARE in the line of great apes.
That’s good evidence for the first theory that humans and Neanderthals enjoyed one almighty love-in about 50,000 years ago in Europe, although the real story is probably one of rape and pillage rather than of peace and love.
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/428880/g...
Don't you just love science??
The only point I was making was the uncertainty of accepted science mis-conceptions.
If such wide spread false beliefs in science are held without question, then all you have is scientific supported propagated dogma,not truth.
Although many are happy excepting such dogma as "real" because it make for good "political" science, there are some who do actually seek out the true facts, and are not afraid to go against the grain to get them.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83391 Mar 28, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Keep making it up as you go Klutter
However, the existing state of human language nevertheless suggests that the variety of dialects and sub-languages has developed from a relatively few (perhaps even less than twenty) languages. These original ‘proto-languages’—from which all others allegedly have developed—were distinct within themselves, with no previous ancestral language.
http://www.trueorigin.org/language01.asp
Try facts once in a while rather than you abysmal opinions, conjecture and your belief that you are actually educated.
Do you have something other than your own blogs? Like, actual facts?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83392 Mar 28, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
The only point I was making was the uncertainty of accepted science mis-conceptions.
If such wide spread false beliefs in science are held without question, then all you have is scientific supported propagated dogma,not truth.
Although many are happy excepting such dogma as "real" because it make for good "political" science, there are some who do actually seek out the true facts, and are not afraid to go against the grain to get them.
Well, since you haven't actually learned any of it, your entire assertion here is discarded like your mythology.
Aphelion

Satellite Beach, FL

#83393 Mar 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have something other than your own blogs? Like, actual facts?
So where did the first language come from? There are no clear clues. We do know that language is quite old. The earliest record of language is 6000 years old (about 3500 B.C. Sumerian, an area now known as southern Iraq.)

http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/hurley/Ling1...

do you have something other than your opinions? I thought not
Aphelion

Satellite Beach, FL

#83394 Mar 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have something other than your own blogs? Like, actual facts?
BTW since you probably failed geography like most other subjects that you attempt to enter into, Iraq is not quite Africa.
Mark

United States

#83395 Mar 28, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
Oh, and the North and South American tribes of 4350 years ago (or any years ago) never saw a flood either.
I read the recorded testimony of the leading Alaskan Athabaskan chief at the time, as taken by the district Judge Wickersham in about 1900 of their flood story, the "big canoe story" etc.. Its all in Wickershams autobiography

Same for the Shoshone, I can check with some other tribes here and Canada, but that whittles down North America some on your comment.

How come there are Redwood stumps 10ft in dia. in Antarctica and when we drill on the North slope (for oil) we hit a biomass layer down deep with huge warm climate ferns and other fauna/flora? What covered them 500ft+ down, a local flood? We have fossil mega fauna there also, shells 3ft in dia etc.? For sure we must agree that the world at some earlier date had a uniform pole to pole temp that was warm. They omitted that stuff in my college geo/ classes, doesn't fit well. Quite an ommission however!

I will take a shot and postulate from the Bible a moment - how about a "very good" earth? Does that evidence make me a crackpot, I think not, actually, It woke me up.

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) 14 min THE LONE WORKER 43,357
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 14 min Into The Night 18,664
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 1 hr Reno HOOCK 921
Questions about first life Sun Upright Scientist 18
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) Sun Dogen 151,492
Carbon and isotopic dating are a lie Aug 27 One way or another 16
evolution is correct. prove me wrong (Jul '15) Aug 27 FallenGeologist 35
More from around the web