Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#96264 Aug 7, 2013
JBH wrote:
Obama is wrong all the time with a lot of stands of radicalism. This is a total embarrassment of ALL TIME as Obama is the light weight, by making lots of deception.
He HAS USED the Snowden story in the mixed-up of calling G-20 Summit with no one single fact proven, nor with demonstrating any substance to the degree of what Snowden really has done, as he even whispered opinion on the case by by saying of going back to cold war.
Obama always thinks he is progressive by calling forward, yet everything he does is indeed beyond being backward, ridiculous and silly, which shows by doing the backwardness policy of his saying of cold war, and that contradicts and confronts what he says he is a forward progressive.
He would also use the very small tiny matter of feeling upset by making gay stand as being extremely confused and agitated about Russia's Scohi Olympic, which is totally impertinent and improper in the relevant business.
When he had high anxiety in the chemical weapons subject about Syria by calling red line, yet he could not demonstrate with one substantial single fact of clues, and why and what-unsuitable-that he is not, by being so pushy into shuffling into Syria, with no valid findings,like former Bush to Iraq.
Everything Obama says is lack of ground and that is why he is always discredited from what he says, by the world
IN respect to global business and agenda as the vast and big agenda related to G-20 Summit and International OLympics in modern forward direction of especially in these new times, not that everything Obama thinks and says is wrong , the advocacy of wrongs in the damages so caused to US people, the great weight of global importance of G-20 and International Sochi Olympics, would make the silly stocks of embarrassment and laughters of Obama.
Just who defies who--as it indicates that Obama defies global democracy, of which huge majority of world public deny everything of what Obama says, about Snowden, G-20, International Sochi Olympics policy ? When one asks any country around the world will do that reaction like Obama , that is highly impossible, because worldwide people are much better than Obama, as Obama is merely a lone soul in his opinion among huge global populations.
How can US be a Superpower, with no basic grasp and weight measure of big events as to facts realized, adjusted and knowing when Obama demonstrates such, which makes no sense in every case?
As Obama seems to be very immature in his conducts and shows inapt attitude, there is no question why US is going downhill and increasingly lacking weight stand on the world stage, simply he demonstrates the lack of capability, being totally irrational and unreasonable beyond the over limit in the nature of being so odd as the extremism of unfit position undertaken by him.
He's using Snowden, G20 summit and Russia heavily in the news to divert attention away from his illegal actions with the IRS and his spying on the news channel and all other countries.

I agree, he took on a job that was way over his head, his very large, conceited, egotistical head.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#96265 Aug 7, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://pdf.amazingdiscoveries.org/Veith_Curri...
Why when you disagree with another person's views, you ALWAYS call them a "LYING IDIOT" or worse.
very childish
Yes, and the more you show them their error, the madder they get, accusing, stereotyping and attacking you personally, offering nothing to refute the evidence but taking sidestreets and offering paper arguments. But they did the same to Christ.

Dr. Maynard Miller, Americas most experienced glaciologist in his day, told me that there is not a single ice cap in the world with more than 5000 yrs of cyclic ice accumulation, as after those depths the ice homogenizes and then they estimate age by compression and length; as far as varves, they have found fossilized fish in multiple varves, covered and killed catastrophically. Hence ice core dating and varves prove nothing for evolution but support a creation model.

I have spent over 30 years working underground world-wide and in every case, I have never once seen strata that shows nothing less than the picture the Bible paints - That this world was made out of water with water and was subsequently destroyed by water.(See Great Unconformity link) I approach this with fear. Uniformity in general has been operating with the exception of local catastrophic events like St. Helens, which only more prove a flood model.

The comment venue of blogs and bantering sounds nice if your education is evolutionary and field experience is google and talk-origins. Evolution is a belief system based on faith easily refuted. You just have to ask the right questions -



http://youngearth.com/grand-canyon-nautiloids

http://www.icr.org/article/2032/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Unconformi...

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#96266 Aug 7, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and the more you show them their error, the madder they get, accusing, stereotyping and attacking you personally, offering nothing to refute the evidence but taking sidestreets and offering paper arguments. But they did the same to Christ.
Dr. Maynard Miller, Americas most experienced glaciologist in his day, told me that there is not a single ice cap in the world with more than 5000 yrs of cyclic ice accumulation, as after those depths the ice homogenizes and then they estimate age by compression and length; as far as varves, they have found fossilized fish in multiple varves, covered and killed catastrophically. Hence ice core dating and varves prove nothing for evolution but support a creation model.
I have spent over 30 years working underground world-wide and in every case, I have never once seen strata that shows nothing less than the picture the Bible paints - That this world was made out of water with water and was subsequently destroyed by water.(See Great Unconformity link) I approach this with fear. Uniformity in general has been operating with the exception of local catastrophic events like St. Helens, which only more prove a flood model.
The comment venue of blogs and bantering sounds nice if your education is evolutionary and field experience is google and talk-origins. Evolution is a belief system based on faith easily refuted. You just have to ask the right questions -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =zaKryi3605gXX
http://youngearth.com/grand-canyon-nautiloids
http://www.icr.org/article/2032/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Unconformi...
You idiot!

Antarctica is thought to have been covered by ice for over 30 million years. So far, scientists have drilled ice cores stretching back 800,000 years, and they are now working to extend their records back to 1.4 million years ago.

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/environmen...
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96267 Aug 7, 2013
Very good on Evolution vs God.

http://m.youtube.com/watch... #
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96268 Aug 7, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>We have no idea of if there was time "before" the big bang or not. The question of where time came from is a genuine mystery. But papering over a genuine mystery with "therefore Goddidit" is senseless. You cannot know that. Nor can non-believers know its not true.

There is only one honest answer, and that is that we don't know why there is time or why there is anything at all. That would include "why is there God" if indeed there is one.

As for your claim that black holes cannot stop time, you seem to imagine that they would stop time everywhere, but that is not what relativity claims. Time will stop only at the event horizon - the "boundary surface" of the black hole itself. Time will continue to move forward above that horizon, the faster the further away until it reaches its "ground rate" when gravity approaches zero.

Therefore there can be many black holes in the universe without time as a whole stopping. And don't fret just because its hard to make sense of it. Physicists spend years getting their heads around it but A/ it makes sense when you understand how it works and B/ every experimental measure to date confirms it whether you like it or not.
But where did Time come from?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96269 Aug 7, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I am a Christian and believe in God. I am a Methodist if that helps. Now was that so hard to actually ask a meaningful question?

Of course now you will perhaps feel justified in calling me a false Christian or a liar. Feel free if that is what you choose to do. Keep in mind that I don't consider religious views directly relevant to science and that this is a science forum.
"I am a Christian"

Hitler said the same thing. I didn't believe him either.

"and believe in God."

This I have no doubt.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96270 Aug 7, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, and now you can stop complaining that the question was dodged. I think I covered that too.
Where did time come from?

I must have missed it in your post. I went back and re read it but still I don't see where you explained where time came from?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96271 Aug 7, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>You seem to be considering time as a physical property, which is most certainly not - time is a reference, a dimension. Time can be slowed in reference to C, and may also be absent.
Where is time absent?

Nothing can exist without time.
Nothing can happen without time.
Nothing can change without time.

So where is time absent?
And where is the proof of this claim?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96272 Aug 7, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Clearly that isn't the truth.
The evidence says if time stops the clock simply quits ticking.
If time stopped on a universal scale, we wouldn't even have ever known it. But we can alter the ticks of clocks within the original
clock that started 13.7 bya.

Your question should be is the original clock, within another clock, or are there other clocks ? We simply cannot answer that.
But there most likely is. But more importantly ask the question
of whether we can detect the presence of a previous clock.
It maybe possible, and we maybe able to do this soon, with the Webb telescope after it gets in position and looks back toward the beginning.
Time is not a constant. This I am very aware of. Time is not a solid of this I'm aware. Science claims time started 13.7 billion years ago of this I'm aware. If time stopped we would not know it, I am aware of this.

Where did time come from?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96273 Aug 7, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Then why aren't you asking where length or height or depth came from?
Time came from the same place they did.
We got them at the dimension store.
They came together in a package deal.
I picked just one. Is there a rule that I can't question about just one?

Where did time come from?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96274 Aug 7, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Aah, you are a denying idiot.
Time still running! and according to science it's been running non stop for 13.7 billion years.

Now, where did time come from?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96275 Aug 7, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, for you it is impossible to stop time. You will never find yourself falling into a black hole. Nor will you ever approach the speed of light.

For a photon or something that falls into a black hole that is not the case. A photon experiences no time. To a photon it is everywhere along its path instantaneously.

I gave you a reference that supported my beliefs, what do you have that supports yours??
Prove that time would stop if I fell into a black hole.

Millions and millions of items have been sucked into black hole all over the universes. Time is still ticking non stop.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96276 Aug 7, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>Time is a vector quantity.

Now imagine 2 time vectors, one at right angles to the other. An infinity of time can elapse on one before a moment passes on the other. In that sense you would say time has stopped for whatever reference frame is at right angles to your own.

And thats about the size of it. Time slowing or stopping is merely one vector out of parallel with another.
I hear ya, and know exactly what your quoting. There truly is a lot of fascinating things about time. Time did not stop however.

Where did time come from?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96277 Aug 7, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>*sigh*

Evolution is not a faith.

It's a conclusion.
Scientific theory have testable obvious able facts.

Just give us one proof of macro evolution. Not one species changing into another species. There are over 14 definitions of species. Macro evolution where one kind changes into another kind.

Evolutionist claim millions of time this has happened. Please just give one example.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96278 Aug 7, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>No, it means you believe anything that is told to people if it has the title of being a 'scientific research paper'. You have made scientists your 'god'.

Do you not know that men will lie to you for money, career, power, prestige?

Science has became another political party, in a way.

There is plenty of proof of a global flood but just as Bible scripture states, the unbelievers will do anything to hide the truth of God, and that's exactly what the majority of scientist are doing.

Remember, everyone is born without faith in God.

Everyone is born as an enemy of God.

Everyone who is first born does not know God

and does not believe in God

and mocks God...

even every Christian on this thread.

When we tell you what we now know about God, its not to show pride in ourselves, it is ONLY to help you.
"There is plenty of proof of a global flood but just as Bible scripture states"

Check out the thread
"Noah's Flood Real"
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96279 Aug 7, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>And an example of one of those 'fatal flaws', please?
Wikipedia:
If anyone finds a case where all or part of a scientific theory is false, then that theory is either changed or thrown out.

A scientific theory in one branch of science must hold true in all of the other branches of science.

From Nova:

"For decades, every attempt to describe the force of gravity in the same language as the other forces—the language of quantum mechanics—has met with disaster

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: You try to put those two pieces of mathematics together, they do not coexist peacefully.
The laws of nature are supposed to apply everywhere. So if Einstein's laws are supposed to apply everywhere, and the laws of quantum mechanics are supposed to apply everywhere, well you can't have two separate everywheres.

BRIAN GREENE: In the years since, physics split into two separate camps: one that uses general relativity to study big and heavy objects, things like stars, galaxies and the universe as a whole...

...and another that uses quantum mechanics to study the tiniest of objects, like atoms and particles. This has been kind of like having two families that just cannot get along and never talk to each other...
There just seemed to be no way to combine quantum mechanics...

and general relativity in a single theory that could describe the universe on all scales.

So here's the question: if you're trying to figure out what happens in the depths of a black hole, where an entire star is crushed to a tiny speck, do you use general relativity because the star is incredibly heavy or quantum mechanics because it's incredibly tiny?

Well, that's the problem. Since the center of a black hole is both tiny and heavy, you can't avoid using both theories at the same time. And when we try to put the two theories together in the realm of black holes, they conflict. It breaks down. They give nonsensical predictions. And the universe is not nonsensical; it's got to make sense.

BRIAN GREENE: It's a little known secret but for more than half a century a dark cloud has been looming over modern science. Here's the problem: our understanding of the universe is based on two separate theories. One is Einstein's general theory of relativity—that's a way of understanding the biggest things in the universe, things like stars and galaxies. But the littlest things in the universe, atoms and subatomic particles, play by an entirely different set of rules called, "quantum Mechanics"

These two sets of rules are each incredibly accurate in their own domain but whenever we try to combine them, to solve some of the deepest mysteries in the universe, disaster strikes.

Take the beginning of the universe, the "big bang." At that instant a tiny nugget erupted violently. Over the next 14 billion years the universe expanded and cooled into the stars, galaxies and planets we see today. But if we run the cosmic film in reverse, everything that's now rushing apart comes back together, so the universe gets smaller, hotter and denser as we head back to the beginning of time.

As we reach the big bang, when the universe was both enormously heavy and incredibly tiny, our projector jams. Our two laws of physics, when combined, break down.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96281 Aug 7, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, if you are saying God had to exist to make the universe then you are only moving the goalposts. Who had to make god then? If you say God has always been that is exactly the same as saying the universe has always been in existence.

And no, there is no evidence of a flood.

Only people who are ignorant of geology would say anything so foolish.
God was not made.

Time is the Paradox for the Big Bang.

There is evidence all over world of The world wide flood.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#96282 Aug 7, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
I picked just one. Is there a rule that I can't question about just one?
Where did time come from?
I'd tell you , but then I'd have to kill you.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#96283 Aug 7, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and the more you show them their error, the madder they get, accusing, stereotyping and attacking you personally, offering nothing to refute the evidence but taking sidestreets and offering paper arguments. But they did the same to Christ.
Dr. Maynard Miller, Americas most experienced glaciologist in his day, told me that there is not a single ice cap in the world with more than 5000 yrs of cyclic ice accumulation, as after those depths the ice homogenizes and then they estimate age by compression and length; as far as varves, they have found fossilized fish in multiple varves, covered and killed catastrophically. Hence ice core dating and varves prove nothing for evolution but support a creation model.
I have spent over 30 years working underground world-wide and in every case, I have never once seen strata that shows nothing less than the picture the Bible paints - That this world was made out of water with water and was subsequently destroyed by water.(See Great Unconformity link) I approach this with fear. Uniformity in general has been operating with the exception of local catastrophic events like St. Helens, which only more prove a flood model.
The comment venue of blogs and bantering sounds nice if your education is evolutionary and field experience is google and talk-origins. Evolution is a belief system based on faith easily refuted. You just have to ask the right questions -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =zaKryi3605gXX
http://youngearth.com/grand-canyon-nautiloids
http://www.icr.org/article/2032/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Unconformi...
Oh no. Here we go again with all the name dropping and unsubstantiated dogma and pseudoscience.

Evolution is not a belief system. You don't even have the right lies, let alone the right questions. You avoid my questions everytime I ask one and twist like a fish on the line hoping to get loose.

I will have to look up this glaciologist you mention. Is he dead too and unable to refute what you say?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#96284 Aug 7, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I do? Really?

Cite one.
String theory.

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
How would creationists explain... 1 hr Chimney1 350
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 8 hr Ooogah Boogah 13,623
Science News (Sep '13) 9 hr Hatti_Hollerand 2,937
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 16 hr MikeF 546
Creationism coming to Ohio classrooms? Not with... Sat nobody 7
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) Dec 19 Zach 4
Genetic entropy Dec 18 Discord 159
More from around the web