Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 201753 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.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45825 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
*, Dr. Jerry, Why Evolution Is True, pp. 67, 81
  Brown University biologist Kenneth R. Miller wrote, 
"The human genome is littered with pseudogenes, gene fragments, "orphaned" genes, "junk" DNA, and so many repeated copies of pointless DNA sequences that cannot be attributed to anything that resembles intelligent design.... In fact, the genome resembles nothing so much as a hodgepodge of borrowed, copied, mutated, and discarded sequences and commands that has been cobbled together by millions of years of trial and error against the relentless test of survival." 
*"Life's Grand Design," Technology Review, February/March 1994

Actually Dr. Coyne did a pretty good job for something written nearly 20 years ago. DNA is indeed a "hodgepodge". It is more like what is in a programmers trash can than what his final program looks like.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45826 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Viruses are not "life" because they lack the machinery for self replication. Your post is entirely pointless.

Where do you draw the boundary between life and not life?

Do they have to meet all 7 characteristics of life, or is 6 good enough?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45827 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Buckwheat, it is interesting to listen to you rant about brainwashing and child abuse. You are wallowing in base ignorance if you think the complexities of life proceeded from simple to complex by random forces. What scientific observation leads you to that conclusion? There is none. All you have is our religion of atheism. You have faith in e supernal power of mutations and natural selection. You have faith that millions of years can accomplish anything. What you pretend to be science is nothing but a stupid fairytale for grown ups.

You are very emotional and high strung. You would do better if you took a few cleansing breaths and tried to post from the rational half of your brain. We will take you more seriously if you can do that.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45828 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>The evidence that they're not viral based is that they impart vital functionality. That is inconsistent with a random insertion. Of genetic material.

This is a logical fallacy. Very few ERVs have been shown to have current functionality, about as many as one would expect from mutation and selection from the point of their insertion (which can be roughly timed from cross species comparisons). Therefore we are back to the fact of random insertion.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45829 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you demand a perfectly tight historical record, yet freely accept enormous gaps in th fossil record which refute evolution?

LOL. The fossil record, like the DNA record, fully supports evolution. As does all the other collected data from a wide variety of scientific disciplines.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45830 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Your recycled homology argument has been soundly debunked over and over again. Your incessant citing of the same tired argument only underscores the weakness of your religion.

False. Biological and anthropological homology is well supported.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homology_%28biol...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45831 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Although you are pretending to be objective, your unbridled arrogance is obvious. You are simply drinking atheist kool-aid because you want validation of your immoral worldview.

Although you are pretending to be objective, your unbridled arrogance is obvious. You are simply drinking theist kool-aid because you want validation of your immoral worldview.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45832 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>It is laughable to watch an atheist pretend to be morally outraged, when its entire philosophy is founded on an absebce of morality. If Darwinism is not a religion, why do its adherents become so emotionally charged when their cherished religion is attacked?

As you are the most emotional person here this seems to be an obvious case of psychological projection.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#45833 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You're out of your mind. No laboratory-produced viral insertion has resulted in added functionality of the genome.

You apparently misread my post. ERV insertions have been replicated. I have seen no study of laboratory ERV insertions adding functionality nor have I so claimed.
FREE SERVANT
#45834 Sep 14, 2012
The Bible tells us that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. We have never heard of any other beginning. We read that in the beginning was the Word and the Word was God. We read that Jesus is the Word of God, and that he had glory with his father from the beginning. From this, I assume that God knew the end from the beginning even before it started to unfold. I personally believe in free will, and that many choices are laid before everyone. I believe when Jesus prayed to his father for the cup that he was about to partake in with the cruel cross to be taken away, it was a petition to search all heaven and earth for another way if at all possible, and there was only one way made, and it had to be finished in that way. I believe Jesus will knock on every hearts door, because I heard his clear knock, and I answered it and welcomed him in. We have choices, and the lord may not always strive with us if we continue to reject him. Answer the knock, and ask him in, and he will come in and help you through your trials. Praise the name of the lord Jesus forever.
Monkey's Paw

United States

#45835 Sep 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
Monkey's Ass, I am calling you out. I doubt if you can find anywhere that I lied in this forum. I will give you a reasonable amount of time to back up this claim of lies with quotes and page numbers. If you can't I will be bookmarking this page and bring it up every time that you post as a lie on your part.
Ok here you go.

Page 2141
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>"This only fits the design of an inept creator. "

I guess so after all he created atheist.
I'll bring it up to him next time I see him.
Seeing that you won't have that possibility.
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>You are making another foolish mistake. The fact that someone believes the theory of evolution does not make the person an atheist.
Page 2142
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>"Subduction Zone" "You are making another foolish mistake. The fact that someone believes the theory of evolution does not make the person an atheist.

"Doctor Who Two "
I said nothing about evolutionist in that post, only Atheist. No mistake. You jumped to an assumption just like your science does.
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text> "Subduction Zone:"
"You are making another foolish mistake. The fact that someone believes the theory of evolution does not make the person an atheist.
I said nothing about evolutionist in that post, only Atheist. No mistake. You jumped to an assumption just like your science does.
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>What you meant was clear. You don't get a pass by lying by omission.
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF
I'm lying because I didn't lie?
Because I defined who I was talking about "atheist" and did not say evolutionist I'm lying?
I believe I now understand why you believe in your science so blindly.
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, you were lying because your meaning was clear.
Page 2143
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, you were lying because your meaning was clear.

Page 2144
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>
I clearly stated who I was talking about.
It's right there in the post "Atheist"
You can't man up on clear proof that you were wrong. You can't read minds stick to reading post. You cannot insert what I did not post.
This is clear evidence that you're one of those that cannot except the truth even when it bitch slaps you in the face!
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, you are still wrong. Keep trying though I am sure you will convince someone.
Page 2174
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>Incorrect!

But you have proven that even when your words are slapped in your face as proven lies you refuse to man up.
You have proven yourself to be dishonest, unwilling to admit your errors and are constantly spewing insults in an attempt deflect your own ignorance.
Subduction Zone wrote:
By the way, making a claim without backing it up is a form of lying too.
Page 2165
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>Just like you were clearly wrong about this post and would not admit it.

"Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>
I clearly stated who I was talking about.
It's right there in the post "Atheist"
You can't man up on clear proof that you were wrong. You can't read minds stick to reading post. You cannot insert what I did not post.
This is clear evidence that you're one of those that cannot except the truth even when it bitch slaps you in the face!"
Monkey's Paw

United States

#45836 Sep 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
[QUOTE who="Monkey's Paw"]<quoted text>
Charles
Subpar is a liar and can't be trusted.
Nothing he types can no longer (not that they could before) be trusted.
Use a lot of SALT when reading his junk. "

Monkey's Ass, I am calling you out. I doubt if you can find anywhere that I lied in this forum. I will give you a reasonable amount of time to back up this claim of lies with quotes and page numbers. If you can't I will be bookmarking this page and bring it up every time that you post as a lie on your part.
Page 2170

Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like you were clearly wrong about this post and would not admit it.
"Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>
I clearly stated who I was talking about.
It's right there in the post "Atheist"
You can't man up on clear proof that you were wrong. You can't read minds stick to reading post. You cannot insert what I did not post.
This is clear evidence that you're one of those that cannot except the truth even when it bitch slaps you in the face!"
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, I am sorry. DWT was clearly lying back then. His meaning was clear.
Page 2184

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, I am sorry. DWT was clearly lying back then. His meaning was clear.
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry your lies don't fly.
I specificity stated Atheist. When one goes to the length to specificity in this case "Athiest" you cannot change the wording and blame me for insulting "Evolutionist". That is lying.
If you can't admit your lie here when everyone can read it in black and white then why should anyone ever listen to you?
Page 2186

Subduction Zone;
DW2, too bad your quotes are not valid. No source, no links, they can be declared to be nonsense wit the wave of a hand. Did you see Kong's long quote? He posted a link to go with it.

Most of your post sounds like creationist bullshit that has no basis in reality.

Doctor who:
There's links
On the last 3 parts the first 2 parts I stated the link was on the last part.
Can't find any real crap to talk about so you make it up.

Subduction Zone:
You are right, I don't know how I missed that. I have glanced at the site and it looks like a massive quote mining project.

At least here you manned up!
Monkey's Paw

United States

#45837 Sep 14, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
[QUOTE who="Monkey's Paw"]<quoted text>
You a missing one Key point.
Evolutionist traced back to the first life form believe that fist life form started life on it own from non living matter. How could it know how to do it or if it really wanted to try.
Christians believe in a God outside of our universe that he created for us. Thus he is not bound by the laws of physics (that he created).
Your question points to the assumption that you can't grasp what that means.
No time where God is.
No gravity
No mass
So did God alway exist?
In time as we know it yes bit outside of our little universes who knows. "

Insane.......... Get help fast....LOL....There is no god...if there was people would see him...Funny how only for a short time did a group of insane desert dwellers see him...OUT IN SUN MUCH??? LOL
Can't comprehend it?
So you spew Babble.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#45838 Sep 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Seriously - you want respect? For what?
Don't you know, he's a medical doctor!
And not only that, but he has done extensive study of Creation and Evolution and has acquired vast knowledge of the subject!
We know, because that's what he keeps telling us.
Once Bitten

United States

#45839 Sep 14, 2012
[QUOTE who="Monkey's Paw"]<quoted text>Can't comprehend it?
So you spew Babble.[/QUOTE]

Mr. Monkey's Paws he's a nut case he in the same mental hospital as woodtick.

Just ignore them.

In fact let's clean house and only discuses with those that can carry on a civil conversation and debate the issues and enlighten others with stuff they had not heard about.
In other words let's get the kiddies out of here and make it an adult only board.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#45840 Sep 14, 2012
Let's see how well you fared Monkey Boy:

We were discussing evolution. DW2 definitely implied that I was going to hell for my beliefs. I had not claimed to be an atheist to him so he was assuming that I was a nonbeliever. Not only that he had the arrogance to think that his flawed ass would be in heaven while I would suffer punishment for following the clues that this supposed god left on Earth. I don't see a lie on anyone's part but that of DW2 there. By the way, quoting another cretinist, ie Langoliers, does not support your argument in any way.

That might be a matter of opinion, but that was not a lie. You failed. Let's see you're next one.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#45841 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
"I've noticed that atheist's in their consummate arrogance are fond of pretending to know far more than they do. They peruse atheist websites, and selectively copy and past whatever BS fits their worldview, and pretend to be validated. You have no knowledge of ancient history, and everything you've posted is 100% BS."

You misused the apostrophe.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#45842 Sep 14, 2012
In your second one you see where I admitted that I missed the link. There was no lie there. But DW2 and Langoliers (at least I think it was Langoliers) both lied by quote mining. Now it was an incredibly long quote but they tried to imply that the writers of those quotes thought that quantum physics and relativity were disproved theories because they failed under very restrictive circumstances. If you asked those scientists they would say that does not mean those theories fail. When you try to falsify the thoughts of the people you quote that is quote mining.

That is something that creationists do all of the time and it is a form of lying. So you have not found any lies by me. At best you found a difference of opinion.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#45843 Sep 14, 2012
Once Bitten wrote:
<quoted text>
Mr. Monkey's Paws he's a nut case he in the same mental hospital as woodtick.
Just ignore them.
In fact let's clean house and only discuses with those that can carry on a civil conversation and debate the issues and enlighten others with stuff they had not heard about.
In other words let's get the kiddies out of here and make it an adult only board.
Good point. Once more I am going to issue a challenge. This one is much easier to meet than one given by a biologist would be. Luckily for the creationists here I am not a biologist.

I would like to see a creationist model that explains the fossil record. One More Time, attempting to debunk the evolutionary model of the fossil record does NOT SUPPORT A CREATIONIST MODEL. Sorry to yell but some people just don't get it.

So what you need to do is to describe how the fossils were deposited and why we find them in the order that we find them.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#45844 Sep 14, 2012
HTS wrote:
There is scientific evidence of His existence, but it is not testable.
Scientific but not testable?
Please explain.

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
"Any 3 word combination" (Dec '12) 2 min Princess Hey 2,660
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 5 min Bill Clinton 32,699
Word Association (Mar '10) 5 min Princess Hey 20,683
Names, A to Z, ... (Aug '12) 6 min Princess Hey 2,639
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 7 min grace-fallen 7,894
Poll 3 "NEW" words from last 3 letters without using... (Sep '12) 9 min Princess Hey 1,892
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 13 min LOST IN MISSISSIPPI 58,216
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 36 min ceemee2 18,521
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Camilla 194,702
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) (Jan '16) 6 hr Lucy the Worst 8,538
More from around the web