Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 209824 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.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#94183 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think De Beer's research is irrelevant today, then state specifically what has been done to disprove it. Broadly stating that all research dating back to 1971 should be discounted is stupid. His research has withstood 40+ years of scrutiny, and he commands a great deal of respect as an embryologist.
All that has been done is re-defining terminology. Homologous structures produced by non-homologous genes are now designated "analogous". Inventing new words doesn't erase any obstacles to evolution.
This is yet another failed prediction of Darwinism. You can imagine that the flipper of a dolphin is homologous to the hand of a man. Genetic studies disprove your intuitions. Naive hunches must capitulate to science.
Listen up, you stupid shit. I didn't say DeBeer's research was irrelevant.(You just can't resist lying about what others say, can you? Some sort of personality defect. I imagine). I said that his opinion on homology was out of date. A lot has happened since 1971. We were barely scratching the surface in DNA understanding back then. Science has since refined the definition.

That's what pisses you off, isn't it? That science gets closer and closer to understand everything around us. Pushing your god of genesis further and further into a corner. Tough cookies that you have to live with such fear.

And where is this genetic study you referred to? Or was that just one more of your lies?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#94184 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone seems to be dodging my question and turning to adaptation or even conception to redirect away from my point. The "radical" differences cannot be explained by evolution.
No one is dodging your question, they are dodging your ignorance. YOU are dodging their answers.

You're comparable to a child who doesn't want to hear, with his fingers in his ears shouting "LALALALALALALALALALALALA LALALALA..."

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#94185 Jun 27, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
No you give a reach around that is why I said use your left hand for it is softer. I like it in the trunk but in your mouth you like it when I dunk. You should be glad with the gay win in court today. It means so much for you and I.
Dude, seriously - grow up. And please keep your personal preferences to yourself, no one want to hear this type of filth on this forum.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#94186 Jun 27, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The premier words in: Mandarin are Latin? Navajo are Latin? Swahili are Latin? Hindi are Latin?
Never ask a Christian anglophile for a correct answer, all you'll get is a "right and proper" one.
What are you driving at, Buddy?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#94187 Jun 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> What are you driving at, Buddy?
Not much really, just illustrating that when your thinking is imprecise your logic also becomes flawed.
English origin England = English belongs to England.
Christianity origin Judaism = Christianity belongs to Judaism.
Since I'm German/French/English/Irish/Sc ot/, I should "belong to" paganism, as my ORIGINal ancestors almost certainly practiced?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#94188 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
<quoted text>
Since no one could challenge my previous point, allow me to make another. Since a cell is the simplest of life forms, it may have been the first life. So a cell would have had to create itself, learn to breath, learn to reproduce, learn to evolve. Obviously this is impossible. Even a single cell is way to complex for this to be possible. Watch this video of how a cell actually works. It probably won't make sense to most people but it clearly demonstrates the complexity of even the simplest life form.
http://youtu.be/RrS2uROUjK4
Firstly, it's clear by your choice of avatar you think very highly of yourself and rank yourself above everyone around you. High Five, hope that works out for you.
No one is challenging your point because there’s nothing to challenge, you just keep repeating the same BS regardless of how anyone addresses your points. So it's not so much a case of challenging, it’s more like ignoring.

The cell did not create itself, it EVOLVED through chemical processes into a cell over time. It did not learn to breath or reproduce, it evolved into more complex organisms. No one on this forum suggested any of this, this was a creation on your part. And you're using this nonsense as the base of your irrational argument. No, I will not watch a video of how a cell works, but thanks so much for the condescending suggestion.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#94189 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
<quoted text>
I continue to use scientific journals to back up my opinions and other in this discussion use Wikipedia and magazines. I can't argue with you if you refuse to accept scientific evidence.
Fail. On so many levels.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94190 Jun 27, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Fail. On so many levels.
He would not even present a link to his chimpanzee article. It was obvious from his wording that he got his info from a creatard site. I had the original article. It was not that hard to find. As I said a possible explanation was included with the article. I am fairly sure that his source edited that out.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#94191 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
So you totally screwed up.
Thanks for admitting it.
Even How's That has admitted that he has nothing. I don't even have to try to dig up his DeBeers' link.
Quoting from Denton, "Evolution: A theory in Crisis" (1986, 10th printing) pg 151 -

De Beer is quoted;

"Homologous structures need not be controlled by identical genes and homology phenotypes does not imply similarity of genotype."

Denton continues;

"With the demise of any sort of straightforward explanation for homology one of the major pillars of evolution theory has become so weakened that its value for evidence for evolution is greatly diminished." He goes on to quote Alister Hardy who honestly admits;

"The concept of homology is absolutely fundamental to what we are talking about when we speak of evolution - yet in truth we cannot explain it at ALL in terms of modern day evolution theory".

Denton shuts the door with this comment;

The evolutionary interpretation of homology is clouded even FURTHER by the uncomfortable FACT that there are many cases of 'homologous like' resemblance which cannot by ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION be explained by decent from a common ancestor". In other words if God so chose to use a similar design salt and peppered across the natural world he did it so randomly it is explained better as "Common Creator" than common ancestor. Modern biochem supports the observation in the operational relationship of DNA and cell function.

Your evolutionary professors lied to you.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#94192 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
And thanks for mentioning Talk Origins, HST:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB811.h...
<quoted text>
Talk about a worthless special pleading argument...
This is why I denounced talkorigins...
It is nothing less than a propaganda machine.

All you can do is hope that some day in the future homologous structures arising from non-homologous genes will be explicable within the context of evolution.

Until then, you lose.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#94193 Jun 27, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Quoting from Denton, "Evolution: A theory in Crisis" (1986, 10th printing) pg 151 -
De Beer is quoted;
"Homologous structures need not be controlled by identical genes and homology phenotypes does not imply similarity of genotype."
Denton continues;
"With the demise of any sort of straightforward explanation for homology one of the major pillars of evolution theory has become so weakened that its value for evidence for evolution is greatly diminished." He goes on to quote Alister Hardy who honestly admits;
"The concept of homology is absolutely fundamental to what we are talking about when we speak of evolution - yet in truth we cannot explain it at ALL in terms of modern day evolution theory".
Denton shuts the door with this comment;
The evolutionary interpretation of homology is clouded even FURTHER by the uncomfortable FACT that there are many cases of 'homologous like' resemblance which cannot by ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION be explained by decent from a common ancestor". In other words if God so chose to use a similar design salt and peppered across the natural world he did it so randomly it is explained better as "Common Creator" than common ancestor. Modern biochem supports the observation in the operational relationship of DNA and cell function.
Your evolutionary professors lied to you.
It's no use, SBT...
SZ desperately wants to be the descendant of a worm.
He will go to unparalleled lengths to distort and pervert facts in the vain attempt to justify that worldview.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94195 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Talk about a worthless special pleading argument...
This is why I denounced talkorigins...
It is nothing less than a propaganda machine.
All you can do is hope that some day in the future homologous structures arising from non-homologous genes will be explicable within the context of evolution.
Until then, you lose.
How is that a pleading argument tard?

It shows the errors in the assumptions of De Beer.

Homology is in no trouble at all. If it was some creatards would have an article that sites much more recent research.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94196 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
It's no use, SBT...
SZ desperately wants to be the descendant of a worm.
He will go to unparalleled lengths to distort and pervert facts in the vain attempt to justify that worldview.
Ah, misrepresenting our beliefs again. A sure sign that you know that you are wrong.

Your lies only strengthen our case tard.
Patriot

Nashville, TN

#94197 Jun 27, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and opposition can never explain away Godly small, outnumbered military troops being triumphant over large, heavily armed ungodly troops. Many times, fog comes about mysterily or a large storm on the seas against the opposition with large, military ships being totally disabled.
This can't be explained away, but they sure try, don't they?
Science has proven that nature(i.e the strong east wind) could have parted the Red Sea, even if nature was used to bring it about, that does not take away the miraculous nature of the event.
Patriot

Nashville, TN

#94198 Jun 27, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, bub. It never happened.
Sounds like you are attempting to offer an eye witness account
Patriot

Nashville, TN

#94199 Jun 27, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. It takes a lot of faith to believe in the evolution science fiction. This is why I think that people who can't stand to be wrong, or can't admit they have been following a lie, a false teaching, who do not want to face their wrong doings, these people will viciously attack and call names, hurl insults, twist words and call everyone who opposes them a "liar".
In my life experience I have seen countless times witness those who do not have a valid argument just default to rhetoric and/or insults.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94200 Jun 27, 2013
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>In my life experience I have seen countless times witness those who do not have a valid argument just default to rhetoric and/or insults.
Do you mean like imagine just did?

I will insult people who have been given an answer countless times and have them ignore the given answer. That is another reason that people are insulted.
Patriot

Nashville, TN

#94201 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you mean like imagine just did?
I will insult people who have been given an answer countless times and have them ignore the given answer. That is another reason that people are insulted.
If Bill Gates were to state over and over that he is Chinese will not make it so.Some people deny the parting of the red sea but they ignore that chariot parts have been found BY EXPLORES/SCIENTISTS under water at the site of the event.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94202 Jun 27, 2013
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text> If Bill Gates were to state over and over that he is Chinese will not make it so.Some people deny the parting of the red sea but they ignore that chariot parts have been found BY EXPLORES/SCIENTISTS under water at the site of the event.
That is true.

But what if he said that and had Chinese parents, grandparents, great grandparents etc..

Chariot parts have not been discovered underwater. A round coral growth, that was not even measured for size was observed underwater.

Let's see your evidence. We have evidence that strongly supports our beliefs. You have very very weak evidence. None of those "chariot wheels have ever been recovered as far as I know.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#94203 Jun 27, 2013
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text> If Bill Gates were to state over and over that he is Chinese will not make it so.Some people deny the parting of the red sea but they ignore that chariot parts have been found BY EXPLORES/SCIENTISTS under water at the site of the event.
So some chariot parts underwater are more likely to be evidence of magical suspension of the laws of physics and probably not a boat carrying chariots that sank? You're dumber than I thought.

Well okay, you're not really dumber than I thought...

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) 31 min Brian_G 20,267
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 39 min It aint necessari... 45,556
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr Dogen 152,219
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