Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 171904 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.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#39362 Aug 20, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know that "chemistry is itself the information?". What does that mean? It's the arrangement and sequence of nucleotides that comprises the information.
Except your premise is based on the precept that if the information changes even slightly, the "information" is then lost, and like changing letters in a book, becomes unreadable.

Now here's reality. We're all born with 125 to 175 mutations which are NOT shared by our parents. And so is each successive generation. There is currently over 7 billion different ways to make a human. Despite this, and the positively ridiculous claims of your Young Earth Creationist buddy Sanford, people who are born with mutations that are a serious detriment to procreation are the exception not the rule. Add to that the population of the human race is increasing, not decreasing as your pathetic apologetics for "TEH FALL" claims.

Now, if we take you as the human "standard" and for the sake of argument say you've got "100% human" DNA profile. Chimps are at 98%, gorillas at 97% and orangutans are 96.

According to you we can have genetic codes which can be 99.9%, 99.8%, 98%, 97%, 96%, but DEFINITELY NOT (no way no how) 99%.

This is absurd.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#39363 Aug 20, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoops, my bad. Meant him, not Lamarck. But it was a variation of Lamarck.
No problem. The difference between evolutionists and creationists is that we will admit when we make a mistake. Whether it is in a post here or in a scientific paper. Creationists try to use the times that scientists admit that they made a mistake as "evidence" against evolution. What they always forget is that the correction made the theory even stronger. Creationists practically never admit to being wrong, even when they are shown to be wrong time after time. How often have any of our creatards owned up to their own mistakes? It is an incredibly rare event.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#39364 Aug 20, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
Oh, how are you coming with explaining Chromosome 2? Or are you afraid to tackle that one?(Let me guess, you're going to whine that it's "scientific jargon", which means only that you don't understand any of the science involved.)
<quoted text>
As I clearly said above, afraid of tackling the question "How do you explain Chromosome 2?". So how do you explain it?
<quoted text>
And I ask you yet again: Why not?
Now you've got *2* questions that you're trying to avoid answering.
<quoted text>
You're still avoiding answering the questions. What are afraid of?
<quoted text>
Mutation and natural selection.
<quoted text>
On the contrary, it has long had an answer. Here you go:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC050.h...
Both mutations and natural selection are all traits, plants or animals, inherited from their parents to their offsprings...

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#39365 Aug 20, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
Oh, how are you coming with explaining Chromosome 2? Or are you afraid to tackle that one?(Let me guess, you're going to whine that it's "scientific jargon", which means only that you don't understand any of the science involved.)
<quoted text>
As I clearly said above, afraid of tackling the question "How do you explain Chromosome 2?". So how do you explain it?
<quoted text>
And I ask you yet again: Why not?
Now you've got *2* questions that you're trying to avoid answering.
<quoted text>
You're still avoiding answering the questions. What are afraid of?
<quoted text>
Mutation and natural selection.
<quoted text>
On the contrary, it has long had an answer. Here you go:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC050.h...
Again, this mutation, which means change, never arises, until they was a contact between the parents, which is an embodiments of creation...
For natural selection, the tendency for survival, is inherited from the parents(maker)...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#39366 Aug 20, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
"co-adapted by evolution as time goes by"... That's a nice sounding phrase. How do sequences of genetic code gradually gain a function over time? Please be specific.
They mutate. You already agree that genetic code can function, so you have no problem.(shrug) You just dislike the idea that changes can result in function.
HTS wrote:
"They look like ERVs" ... I agree
Why do they look like ERV's? How do we tell the difference between real ERV's and "fake" ERV's? What mechanism was used in their "design"? What evidence do you have of this mechanism? What evidence do you have of this designer? Why do they act like ERV's when the proteins are put together artificially?
HTS wrote:
"They act like ERVs" ... No, they act like they were put there for a reason.
How so? What reason? How were they put there? Who put them there? Why do they look and act like ERV's? If they have specific function then why are they affected by genetic drift?
HTS wrote:
Please explain how they show the effects of genetic drift.
Okay, let's take one of the many ERV's shared by chimps and humans as an example. Let's make it a functional one. We'll call it "Bob". ERV Bob has been affected by mutations, in the same manner that we are all born with mutations as a natural matter of course. ERV Bob in humans show 98% similarity to ERV Bob in chimpanzees, despite them performing the same function. Explain.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#39367 Aug 20, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No problem. The difference between evolutionists and creationists is that we will admit when we make a mistake. Whether it is in a post here or in a scientific paper. Creationists try to use the times that scientists admit that they made a mistake as "evidence" against evolution. What they always forget is that the correction made the theory even stronger. Creationists practically never admit to being wrong, even when they are shown to be wrong time after time. How often have any of our creatards owned up to their own mistakes? It is an incredibly rare event.
Well HTS for example has made many, but admitted to none at all.

Probably his biggest was when he claimed to be a doctor.

That was after his claim of a couple of months ago of being a 2 year medical student.

He hasn't owned up yet.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#39368 Aug 20, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Both mutations and natural selection are all traits, plants or animals, inherited from their parents to their offsprings...
Wrong. You were born with over a hundred mutations which neither of your parents have. This is a natural byproduct of being born.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#39369 Aug 20, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
Oh, how are you coming with explaining Chromosome 2? Or are you afraid to tackle that one?(Let me guess, you're going to whine that it's "scientific jargon", which means only that you don't understand any of the science involved.)
<quoted text>
As I clearly said above, afraid of tackling the question "How do you explain Chromosome 2?". So how do you explain it?
<quoted text>
And I ask you yet again: Why not?
Now you've got *2* questions that you're trying to avoid answering.
<quoted text>
You're still avoiding answering the questions. What are afraid of?
<quoted text>
Mutation and natural selection.
<quoted text>
On the contrary, it has long had an answer. Here you go:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC050.h...
Try and understand the course, Biology. As i said, nothing can evolve without maker, mutation is just a change in the pigmentation of the gene, already created by the parents(maker)...

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#39370 Aug 20, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
There a lot of toughness in that girl! After seeing Jaws, I didn't want to go back in the water!
I had heard that she did not want a prosthetic arm, but if she could have her real arm back, I think she would take it!
<quoted text>
How did that work out for ya?
More importantly, how did that work out for you?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#39371 Aug 20, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
Both mutations and natural selection are all traits, plants or animals, inherited from their parents to their offsprings
Mutation is a natural process. We observe this process acting in nature without any intelligence behind it.

Natural selection is a natural process. We observe this process acting in nature without any intelligence behind it.

The results of these natural processes is the evolution of a living population. In some cases, it results in speciation.

And after many many hundreds of millions of years, it results in every living species you see in the world today.

Now, let's go back to the question you're afraid of: How do you explain human Chromosome 2?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#39372 Aug 20, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
As i said, nothing can evolve without maker
And as I said, why not?
Charles Idemi wrote:
mutation is just a change in the pigmentation of the gene
Mutation has nothing to do with "pigmentation". It has to do with changes during reproduction.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#39373 Aug 20, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
Oh, how are you coming with explaining Chromosome 2? Or are you afraid to tackle that one?(Let me guess, you're going to whine that it's "scientific jargon", which means only that you don't understand any of the science involved.)
<quoted text>
As I clearly said above, afraid of tackling the question "How do you explain Chromosome 2?". So how do you explain it?
<quoted text>
And I ask you yet again: Why not?
Now you've got *2* questions that you're trying to avoid answering.
<quoted text>
You're still avoiding answering the questions. What are afraid of?
<quoted text>
Mutation and natural selection.
<quoted text>
On the contrary, it has long had an answer. Here you go:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC050.h...
Lastly, the theory of natural selection, is just the character exhibited by both the plant and animal species, already created by their parents(maker)...
This is the struggle for survival...
Look elsewhere...

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#39374 Aug 20, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know that "chemistry is itself the information?". What does that mean? It's the arrangement and sequence of nucleotides that comprises the information.
DNA is a chemical road map, in chemistry we call it a formula. You cellular animals that make up your body are just reacting to chemical reactions, which produce more chemical reactions based on the genetic formula in that cell. This is the easy part of cell theory, sheesh.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#39375 Aug 20, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Try and understand the course, Biology. As i said, nothing can evolve without maker, mutation is just a change in the pigmentation of the gene, already created by the parents(maker)...
Individuals do not evolve.

“ROCK ON ROCKERS!!”

Level 8

Since: Mar 11

Rockin' USA ;)

#39376 Aug 20, 2012
GIVE ME A FREAKIN' BREAK..are ya all still hammering away at this subject?? GIVE IT UP. ya all know the REAL FREAKIN' answer....NOW, don't ya??
Maccoat

Franklin, PA

#39377 Aug 20, 2012
Hey guys, did you miss me.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#39378 Aug 20, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Mutation is a natural process. We observe this process acting in nature without any intelligence behind it.
Natural selection is a natural process. We observe this process acting in nature without any intelligence behind it.
The results of these natural processes is the evolution of a living population. In some cases, it results in speciation.
And after many many hundreds of millions of years, it results in every living species you see in the world today.
Now, let's go back to the question you're afraid of: How do you explain human Chromosome 2?
This hundred millions of years are just exaggerations or simply farce. You guys can never deny the handiwork of a creator...
The line is drawn, you guys have no evidence. Good day...

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#39379 Aug 20, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Mutation is a natural process. We observe this process acting in nature without any intelligence behind it.
Natural selection is a natural process. We observe this process acting in nature without any intelligence behind it.
The results of these natural processes is the evolution of a living population. In some cases, it results in speciation.
And after many many hundreds of millions of years, it results in every living species you see in the world today.
Now, let's go back to the question you're afraid of: How do you explain human Chromosome 2?
Your position are without any clear evidence. Chromosomes 2, is never the issue, the issue is that, you guys have no clear evidence confirming your positions...

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#39380 Aug 20, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>This hundred millions of years are just exaggerations or simply farce. You guys can never deny the handiwork of a creator...
The line is drawn, you guys have no evidence. Good day...
Yes, we know your puny brain is incapable of handling large numbers.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#39381 Aug 20, 2012
Colorado Chick wrote:
GIVE ME A FREAKIN' BREAK..are ya all still hammering away at this subject?? GIVE IT UP. ya all know the REAL FREAKIN' answer....NOW, don't ya??
Bye then.(shrug)

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Word Association (Mar '10) 3 min wichita-rick 17,672
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? (Nov '14) 7 min Scarbelly Bob 992
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 7 min SLY WEST 167,208
Word association (Jun '07) 9 min Trunketeer 3,363
Word Association (Jun '10) 9 min wichita-rick 28,462
Dedicate a song (Jul '08) 30 min SLY WEST 16,054
I Like..... (Mar '14) 37 min Crazy Jae 1,258
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 1 hr Trunketeer 12,723
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 1 hr andet1987 9,331
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 3 hr Thigh High Bex 42,109
More from around the web