Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 213093 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.

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#84467 Apr 3, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Wrong!
Did those language that influenced English similar to English, yes or no? No!
Latin, Greek, Norman French, etc, are never the same as English.
That is the reason why, English is unique to England. Think!
So the professionals are wrong and you are right? Don’t talk utter bollocks all your life, take a day off.

“are never the same”–“unique”? See below
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> And again, show me one trace English in Northern or Main land Europe? Waiting!
English despite its many influences, started in England.
There are over 4000 words of French that the English have taken and spell identically with exactly the same meaning. Here are some you know

absent, action, danger, fruit, nation, parking, police, sabotage, train.

There I bet you never realised you were intelligent enough to know some French

Also there are over 10,000 words in French that are spelled similar with the same meaning as English. Your idiotic shout to show you “one trace” is blown out of the water with about 12% of the most commonly used English words being taken directly from and spelled the same or similar to the French

To embarrass you a little but more, a similar situation applies for German, at least 300 words are identical, and a couple of thousand similar.

Addition, aluminium (European spelling), definition, detail, idiot, radius (see latin below), religion, testament and of course one of your favourite words “god” is of 6th century German origin.

Similar for Latin

Acerbic, caper, color, deus, femina, finis, homo, opus, pollen, radius, sinister, terminus, various.

All Latin words and I am sure there are some that you can instantly recognise although a few are spelled slightly differently.

And similar for Greek but the alphabet makes it a bit more difficult for you to comprehend, here’s a few using Latin script

amphoreus, neuron, pathos

Take a speaker of medieval English to Holland or Denmark and find speaker of the medieval dialect for that country, the conversation would be for the most part seamless. This has been done several times I have seen 3 TV programmes based in this fact.

It really is time you got of this English is English hobby horse of yours, every time you are disproved you go around back to the beginning hoping for a different answer.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12


#84468 Apr 3, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Likeness of you and GOD is you both have the ability to choose.
Didn’t Jesus say we are all gods in your bible?
Remember, if you hold the bible to be the truth then you must hold everything in that book to be true. You can't hold some things to be true and some things not to be true.
Remember the bible said hold on to only that is true.
Other apes show a clear reasoning capability and many species demonstrate the ability to choose.

So ... your bible was wrong again.

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#84469 Apr 3, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Other apes show a clear reasoning capability and many species demonstrate the ability to choose.
So ... your bible was wrong again.
Why don't apes ask questions?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84470 Apr 3, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
If all biological interbreeding species that reproduce fertile off-spring of both sexes are not opposites on the universal scale on earth, then you are claiming that all biological reproductive species are the same. Then why can’t you mate with an opposite biological reproductive species like a bear? You and bears are either the “same” biological reproductive species or “opposite” biological reproductive species.
Why aren't I opposite to a shark? Or to a dog? Or platypus? We cannot reproduce due to genetic divergence.
Infinite Force wrote:
I know a lie (non-absolute truth) when I see one. Schools do not teach you this. It is something you must learn on your own. Now, you want to swap terms with opposite and species to organisms and different. FINE! NOW I APPLY THE SCIENTIFIC METOD TO THE INFORMATION (OBSEVABLE AND TEATABLE) YOU GIVE ME TO MAKE YOUR ARGGUMENT ABOUT REALITY (ABSOLUTE TRUTH).
"Absolute truth" can never be determined. The best we can ever get is a close approximation. Your thinking is flawed.
Infinite Force wrote:
A little advice to you… Learn what information is first. Because physical evidence is the same as the information you are reading right now and they are both observable and testable by my scientific method that is founded on absolute truth and this dis-qualifies your scientific method because reality (absolute truth) is not falsifiable.
I don’t need to see physical evidence to know when you are lying (non-absolute truth) because the information you give to me is observable and testable just like your physical evidence though my scientific method which is founded on absolute truth (the reality you observe).
Evolution is testable. This is not a lie. In fact it's been demonstrated over and over even just during the ten pages previous. You have no method because your position is based upon an assumption regarding an abstract concept you are unable to demonstrate. That is why not only physical evidence is needed but must also be tested. You refuse. That is why I have not lied.
Infinite Force wrote:
No, reality is not self-evident. Someone suffering from hallucinations can say it's self-evident that there's someone standing behind you even though no-one else can see it. Therefore we can test their claims using testable evidence. You claim "absolute truth" not only exists (which it may do) but also that you know exactly what the "absolute truth" is.

If you did, then you would be God.

You ain't.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84471 Apr 3, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Very true “statement” proposed by the religion Buddha. Let’s define what a GOD or GODDESS is first before I comment in depth on your statements.
GOD or GODDESSES are supreme (absolute) being(s). To claim the title of supreme in the reality we live in you must be an individual that accepts, knows and speak in only absolute (supreme) truths. This is what gives you the supreme being(s) title because an absolute is what supreme is.
The absolute truth is the only SUPREME thing there is because it cannot be destroyed, dis-proven and it will always exist.
I /all humans have the birth right to claim their self a GOD or GODDESS because only they can choose to accept, speak and up-hold absolute truth. This is a vow I made because I love what I am and that is an absolute truth seeker.
You have the choice to be a GODDESS or not. Just remember what you have to do to claim the supreme title and it has nothing to do with controlling people.
Everyone wants to claim the supreme title (GOD or GODDESS) like you said. What little do they know supreme beings know that having this title is not about controlling/ruling people and I know this as a supreme being because the absolute truth I am, up-hold, speak and know will never take away an absolute quality you have as a birth-right called “The ability to choose”. IT’S ALL ABOUT THE CHOICE YOU MAKE to claim that supreme title and no-body can do that for you but your- self.
Remember a supreme being(s)/ GOD OR GODDESS control or rules “NO ONE”.
I know I am supreme and I know my understanding have no boundaries are limits (infinite) and I can prove this as an absolute truth. This is what people want and they fail to realize they all can have it and say the same things I say if they build their understanding on absolute truths and they will learn for themselves being a supreme being or calling yourself a GOD OR GODDESS have nothing to do with ruling over people and telling them what they can and can’t do by physical or coercive force!
Now that we clarified what a GOD or GODDESS is I encourage you not to let it be the last thing you want to call yourself.
People have the wrong idea on what a GOD or GODDESS!
Ah, that explains things.

You have a God complex. Just like the vast majority of other fundies.

Barberton, OH

#84472 Apr 3, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> That is not my business. We are in democracy.
You sure don't sound like you want to be democratic. You hit people over the head with your religious dogma every chance you get. You can't get over your obsession with declaring English a concept owned by England and you seem to have some twisted philosophy about England being a superior race "entitled" to rule over others by virtue of God's will.

As I have heard, that kind of slop is what created the modern American democracy to begin with.

Just simply give SOME kind of evidence worth considering, or go home already. I'm not here to help you test your faith. If you want to go after those liberals, do it on a political forum.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84473 Apr 3, 2013
josie23 wrote:
Learn how the racist history of Darwinism is marked by deception and genetic failure. HIV is an STD of apes, chimps and monkeys.
And we are apes.
josie23 wrote:
Evolutionists assumed that blacks were closer genetically to apes
In the early days of the 20th century, some did. Turns out that this is wrong. According to the modern evolutionary synthesis all human races share the same divergence from humanity's last common ancestor as each other.
josie23 wrote:
and attempted to secretly create conception between humans and primates.
Actually you will find that the Commies tried that during WWII. They rejected Darwinian evolution in favour of Lamarck, which was one of numerous factors that eventually led to the USSR's downfall. Whereas the rest of the Western world accepted evolution and benefitted from increased crop production as a result.
josie23 wrote:
Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov, a Russian atheist biologist during the days of Stalin, tried to prove the evolution of man from apes by conducting bizarre fiendish experiments on African women and men in an attempt to create human-ape hybrids.
And they failed BECAUSE they rejected evolution, otherwise they would have known that the other great apes have been separated from humans for too long. In fact there's no evidence they had any success in their experiments whatoever.
josie23 wrote:
As a result, this atheist psuedo-science called Darwinism
Unfortunately you're arguing against a caricature. Evolution, like all sciences, is not atheistic. It makes no theological claims. Also the ACTUAL theory of evolution, now known as the modern evolutionary synthesis does in fact work. You would have found this out if you had just gone back and read a few pages, or in fact looked it up yourself and got your information from any reputable scientific sources instead of anti-reality religious apologetics sites.
josie23 wrote:
may have led to the global epidemic of HIV and AIDS throughout Africa and around the world.
Unfortunately (for you) the source of the AIDS epidemic has NOT been traced back to Soviet Russia. This is merely another piece of fantasy concocted by fundies to justify their pseudo-scientific religious beliefs.

So while you're here, if you ain't down with evolution perhaps you could provide us with your "scientific alternative" which does a better job of explaining the evidence? Thanks in advance.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84474 Apr 3, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> A question. Why are you hard headed?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84475 Apr 3, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, ordered information (language) comes from an intelligent (ability to choose) originator. DNA is ordered information as well.
Then can you provide objectively verifiable testable scientific evidence of this 'creator' of yours along with the mechanisms it used?
Infinite Force wrote:
Each and every biological species has a fixed blue print.
Except it doesn't.

Otherwise we would all be clones.
Infinite Force wrote:
How do you study and learn about the laws of nature that GOD created without using your bible. Remember, GOD created nature for man to observe and learn first. So how do you observe nature and tell me what is right and wrong.
Can you please provide objectively verifiable scientific evidence that this "God" of yours even exists? So far no-one on the entire planet has been able to do that yet.

I mean it's not as if he sticks his arm down every now and then so we can perform a blood test, is it?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84476 Apr 3, 2013
CBOW wrote:
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Thank you Jesus for your sacrifice.
How does one sacrifice a God?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84477 Apr 3, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Again,
de pis en pis.
Stop pising all over the thread!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84478 Apr 3, 2013
michellepain wrote:
For instance, early in the voyage at Bahia in Brazil he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he had just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wished to be free, and all answered “No.” I then asked him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answers of slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything. This made him excessively angry, and he said that as I doubted his word, we could not live any longer together."
Yeah, it was Darwin who opposed slavery by using this quote, just as I pointed out on PAGE ONE of THIS THREAD. Of course his alleged racial views, whether they be good or bad, have absolutely positively no bearing at all whatsoever on the scientific veracity of evolution, or indeed any other scientific theory.

Welcome to page 4010. Now go back and read the whole thing so you can catch up.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#84479 Apr 3, 2013
Page. 1

To all scientists, research scientists and national science foundation:

TOPIC DISCUSSED: A discovered flawed logic concept has been found in the scientific method and must be corrected by replacing a flawed logical concept scientist and scientific researches uses. The modified new scientific method I am proposing will validate flawlessly the integrity of the information proposed by scientist and scientific researchers to ensure scientific hypothesis, theories and scientific laws can be tested, modified and added to with new discoveries found in the scientific community. If accepted the scientific method will be officially founded on a scientific law that is validated as an absolute truth I will prove with-out doubt.

Please don’t let your emotions, prejudice, pre-conceived ideas or bias ways of thinking reject this new scientific method with no logical flaw as the current one has. This is important because this proves scientific conclusions cannot be based on interpreting physical evidence alone and must include applying the scientific method to the information proposed by all scientist and scientific researchers when explaining the physical evidence as well. This is what the previous scientific method lacks and is flawed in.
Hence, if physical evidence have a scientific method to abide by so must the information interpreted to explain the discovered information, because humans are influenced by emotions, prejudice, pre-conceived ideas or bias ways which can make there scientific conclusions flawed.

EVIDENCE PRESENTED: A greeting to all, my name is Curtis Threats and I am an Independent scientific researcher who is very concerned about the well-being of our civilization as human beings. I am an under-grad in college and I put my studies to a halt because I had difficulties excepting the information that was put out by my biology science instructor in biology 2. In Biology 1 I did well because a lot of the information that was put out by my instructor was non-contradictory with nature. I didn’t realize that I naturally applied a specific type of logic to my understanding that I soon came to discover it was not flawed but instead I discovered the scientific method has a philosophical logical flaw that influenced the scientific method that a philosopher proposed by the name of Karl Popper.

I am very naturally analytical when it comes to investigating information that tries and dis-proves a scientific conclusion I come up with to solving a problem. I discovered my scientific method of reasoning followed another philosophical view in logic that was the complete opposite of Karl Popper logical view and this is why I couldn’t accept and comprehend all the information my instructor was teaching in biology II. I cannot hold contradictory thoughts in my head because I naturally use a logic that I discovered in nature.

I have learned and can validate my method of reasoning scientifically as valid because it is constant with the mechanisms that are found in nature that governs information called the “law of non-contradictory”. Nature does not contradict its self and so must not the information you propose when explaining how nature works with your discovered empirical physical data.

Finally, I discovered why I had such a hard time accepting Bio II and halted my studies. It’s important to know that I am not religious and my scientific method is not biased or prejudice because the logical mechanism I discovered is not a man-made idea but a mechanism found in nature and explained by a philosopher with an opposing view of Karl Harper.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84480 Apr 3, 2013
Mary Magdalena wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry mr. tick
"the bible that is full of proven lies?"
No lies.
"the one who's first message to humans is that knowledge is bad? "
Only the knowledge that the fruit of that tree would reveal.
"that bible? "
Yes the Bible of Moses.
"surely you jest, shirly."
I'm Mary
Of course it lies. The Earth ain't flat. Lizards don't talk. Neither do donkeys. And there was no global flood. Oh, and speaking of the talking lizard remember that it was the only one who didn't lie in that story.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#84481 Apr 3, 2013
HOG_Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is exactly why you should have kept it to yourself.
Not everything you think is worth saying, you know.
Agreed. You should take your own advice.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#84482 Apr 3, 2013
Page. 2 (Last Page)

This law found in how nature works is an absolute truth because nature is constant and never changes. Please here me out because this is very important for the scientific method because instead of scientist and research scientist using Karl Pepper philosophical view on logic it must be changed to Aristotle philosophical view on logic called the “the law of non-contradiction”.

Now the foundation to the scientific method is flawless when interpreting the information from any branch of science because the scientific method is universal, because now I can apply the scientific method to “INFORMATION”. This gives birth to a new science called the law of non-contradiction of information which is in fact a scientific law applied to information.

Information is observable and testable just like physical evidence found in nature so it must not be excluded as empirical evidence. With this new scientific method scientific evidence and concepts can always be tested as long as the information doesn’t violate the scientific law called the “law of non-contradiction” which is an un-deniable absolute truth discovered in nature, because reality its self is an absolute truth and this is un-deniable as well because you can’t disprove nature exist, thus making nature un-falsifiable.

Nature clearly demonstrates without doubt you can’t use to opposite definitions (information) to explain or promote the same idea because nature does not contradict itself, man does.

P.S. I will be sending this out to all scientist and scientific researchers in college universe as well.

Thank you and I hope integrity is up-held to the fullest for the sake of life as a whole and this is the oath I up-hold as an independent scientific researcher,

Curtis Threats
Independent Scientific Researcher in Environmental Science and Technology
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84483 Apr 3, 2013
Mary Magdalena wrote:
<quoted text>
Bring your own Bible?
No thanks I'll bring Gods Word.
That's what the Muslims say.

Thing is that their claims aren't any more valid than yours.

In the meantime we're not interested in your apologetics. Only what you can demonstrate.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84484 Apr 3, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>Why don't apes ask questions?
They do.

In fact I remember one asking where his kitteh was.

It passed away.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84485 Apr 3, 2013
Let us know how that goes, Curtis. I'm sure you will be more successful than Shoob!

“Proud Member”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#84486 Apr 3, 2013
IF = dingbat^2

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
Science News (Sep '13) 2 min _Susan_ 3,756
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 6 min Eagle 12 22,167
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr Chimney1 46,368
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 21 hr scientia potentia... 153,664
evolution is correct. prove me wrong (Jul '15) Sun Legend 39
Narcolepsy continued Oct 20 One way or another 1
Human DNA is 60% Similar to the Banana Plant Oct 15 scientia potentia... 3
More from around the web