Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223358 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.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98412 Aug 22, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I see in your comment you used "kind". Explain what you mean by kind and define it.
Don't be a moron.

You have no excuse.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98413 Aug 22, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry bud but you are the one that is clueless this time.
Wrong, Like I said, such a shame. Or perhaps you are merely lying.

You have constantly shown that you are not the most honest of posters. Which would mean that Dan was right.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#98414 Aug 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Idiot, that is not "26 different definitions for the word 'species'". Those have 26 different prefixes. The word "species" is part of a phrase, it is not 26 different definitions.
They get dumber every day.
'Blissful Ignorance' is their ultimate goal, so getting dumber every day means they're on track

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#98415 Aug 22, 2013
Croco_Duck wrote:
<quoted text>
If the flood actually did happen, then wouldn't all the fresh water fish have died from exposure to salt water?
And how did all the marsupials know that after they got off the boat that they were suppose to go to Australia?
Everything would have died. A flood of such proportions would have wiped out the planet to an extent that it would have taken another few million years to recuperate.
spOko

Oakland, CA

#98416 Aug 22, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you are only telling halve truths. Yes while many Christians believe in evolution they hold strong that evolution is only possible because God, who created life made evolution possible.
Your age old argument is an ambiguity or, more specifically, an "appeal to ignorance"!
The burden of proof is on those who claim god(s) exist. Since there is no proof of the existence of god(s) which is NOT subjective, then it is up to those who claim god(s) exists to provide proof. We do know that thus far no test has proven the EXISTENCE of god. That's why the burden of proof is on those who wish to prove the existence of god(s).
Eventually one should come around to understanding that belief in god(s) is, simply, belief and beliefs aren’t facts! If it works for you, go with it. After all, if that's what you believe, there's no point in denying it.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#98417 Aug 22, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything would have died. A flood of such proportions would have wiped out the planet to an extent that it would have taken another few million years to recuperate.
Few billion, at least.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98418 Aug 22, 2013
Dr_Seuss wrote:
Monkey's our ancestors ? What is wrong with this picture ?
They think that makes them smart.

It's been proven that dogs are much smarter then monkeys.

Yet they want to be monkeys........

Go Figure!
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98419 Aug 22, 2013
Justy_unplugged wrote:
Sucks ya have to die to be 'sure'
Sucks that once your dead you will find out.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98420 Aug 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Come on, how do we know that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old?
You count the birthday candles on the cake.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98421 Aug 22, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Well, tell me how you or your compadres can prove the earth is less than 10,000 years ago.
The truth?

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#98422 Aug 22, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sucks that once your dead you will find out.
When you're dead you don't find out, the living however...do.
Then they discuss what to do with the remains.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#98423 Aug 22, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sucks that once your dead you will find out.
you don't find out anything when you die....'cuz you are dead. the end of your existence.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#98424 Aug 22, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth?
Verifiable evidence.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#98425 Aug 22, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything would have died. A flood of such proportions would have wiped out the planet to an extent that it would have taken another few million years to recuperate.
And that doesn't take into account the spectacular amount of greenhouse gasses created by EVERY mote of biomass decaying (with the exception of those on the ark - wink, wink).

from http://www.brynmawr.edu/geology/206/cleare2.h...

The source of the carbon dioxide and methane in reservoirs is rotting and decaying vegetation (St. Louis et. al., 2000). When land is flooded to create a reservoir (Figure 1), the vegetation dies and is no longer able to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere via photosynthesis (St. Louis et. al., 2000). Instead, those plants decay and the stored organic carbon is converted into methane and carbon dioxide (St. Louis et. al., 2000). Fearnside explains this process:

“…reservoirs become virtual methane factories, with the rise and fall of the water level in the reservoir alternately flooding and submerging large areas of land around the shore; soft green vegetation quickly grows on the exposed mud, only to decompose under aerobic conditions at the bottom of the reservoir when the water rises again. This converts atmospheric carbon dioxide into methane, with a much higher impact on global warming than the CO2 that was removed from the atmosphere when the plants grew”(Fearnside, 2004).

The above describes the creation of a hydroelectric dam reservoir, but the same would hold true for a global flood -- yet obviously on a planetary scale.

The resulting environmental impact of the release of that amount of greenhouse gasses, combined with the LOSS of carbon/methane sinks would sterilize the planet for hundreds of millions of years, I would suspect.

Much less had this happened a mere 4500 years ago.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#98426 Aug 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Really idiot?
Why do you say so?
Apologize for being a complete asshat and I will give you the evidence.
But if you don't want to see the evidence then keep on acting like a complete and total moron.
I see...., you are the guardian of the sacred knowledge, the secret of the goo! All cults do claim the sacred knowledge.
Godlust

Chicago, IL

#98427 Aug 22, 2013
Internet Beyotch Slapper wrote:
Endgame question:
Who created the ability for creatures to evolve?
Who? Not a Bible God, thats for sure. The human brain in its current configuration cannot comprehend the "Who" in that endgame question. Heres a hint......cosmos.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#98428 Aug 22, 2013
Godlust wrote:
<quoted text>Who? Not a Bible God, thats for sure. The human brain in its current configuration cannot comprehend the "Who" in that endgame question. Heres a hint......cosmos.
Is it for sure? Or are you completely wrong? We will find out. LMAO!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98429 Aug 22, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
I see...., you are the guardian of the sacred knowledge, the secret of the goo! All cults do claim the sacred knowledge.
Nope, you keep demanding evidence. You can demand things and be an asshat at the same time. So if you want the evidence you know what you have to do.

Of course if you were not a complete moron you could probably find some of it on your own.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98430 Aug 22, 2013
Oops, typing too fast and somehow I dropped the 't from can't.

So to restate it, you can't demand things and be an asshat at the same time.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#98431 Aug 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Poor bohart is an idiot at best.
He gets angry when his superstitions beliefs are challenged. I am always happy to supply evidence when requested. Since creationists have none a request for evidence tends to drive them a bit batty.
So your always happy to supply evidence when requested?

Proven Liar!

You can't give evidence of the life giving goo, none exists

Ha,Ha,Ha,

Once again you've proven your worthlessness. I knew you were a lying fool for the goo when you stated some time ago that ,..something that was alive ,then died couldn't come back to life, but something that was never alive could come to life.

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) 3 min blacklagoon 3 87,628
What's your religion? 13 hr 15th Dalai Lama 774
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 15 hr Samuel Patre 166,398
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 22 hr Wisdom of Ages 5,843
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) Feb 21 Anonymous 1,825
Scientific Method Feb 15 stinky 20
Evolving A Maze Solving Robot Feb 6 Untangler 2
More from around the web