Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 219578 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 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#60646 Nov 24, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that anything like your vacuum?
Does this topic have anything to do with the evolution/creation debate?

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#60647 Nov 24, 2012
Orangelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Transgender people aren't couragious, but only deluded and mentally challenged.
I suspect that evolutionists that have no ide what they are on about like to discuss philosophies in place of science because their evo science always lets them down.

So far they havce failed the Professors challenge and have absolutely nothing intelligent to say about non coding dna and how that informs TOE, they have changed the meaning of vestigial organs to align with the falsification of the initial definition of no function, they have fraudulently misrepresented the fusion site of human ch2, ervs are nothing more than mythical ghosts.

Now some want to have a shot at supporting the fossil record, which is the topic I like most.

It appears being wrapped up in transgenderr talk demonstrates that most evolutionists have got nothing intelligent to say on the evolution/creation debate. I am not surprised!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#60648 Nov 24, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't preach. I made a comment that wasn't about the bible, you narrow-minded and intolerant liar!
Comment?
Your qualities again, outlined.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#60649 Nov 24, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
The point being of course that I can supply links that you can ridicule without any more than your woffly opinion.
I understand perfectly well what I am talking about.
After our discussions in relation to junk dna I would say that absolutely none of you evos here know what you are talking about. That point has been well established.
You lot of idiots also whine when support is not supplied and then whine when research is supplied under the guise of quote mining.
The whole lot of you are nothing more than confused morons that have absolutely no idea what a considered debate should look like.
If you challenge what I say, then articulate an appropriate response with research that states otherwise, as opposed to the above vague woffle that means nothing other than in your opinion you disagree.
This is not hard in the evolutionary world because one can find conflicting and contradictory findings on the same thing, such is the beauty of evolutionary science. eg junk dna or no junk dna, Lucy is an obligate biped or no she isn't, bipedalism is solely a human trait or it isn't, Neanderthsal interbred with homo sapiens and no they didn't, erectus could talk or no they couldn't. You lot certianly know how to keep your eggs in more than one basket!
I have read what you post. You don't understand anything about science. Just because you say it, does not make it so and in this case that is a very fair and accurate statement. The fact that you post what you do with such assurety is testament to how little you understand.

Because rubbish has links that you can provide here does not change the condition of that rubbish.

I have looked at several of the links you have provided in the past and they no more support your claims than if you would have provided links to Disney Land. You misinterpret scientific findings and clearly for the purpose of supporting you own beliefs. If your beliefs are so strong, I can imagine how they need to be supported on pillars of lies and misinterpretation.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#60650 Nov 24, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Definitely NOT you though!
Check the list of students graduating from each universities, also do a research in their faiths, or practically engage in questionaires, and see their responses.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#60651 Nov 24, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Comment?
Your qualities again, outlined.
What is it about you that you absolutely refuse to discuss the topic and have wasted pages and pages going on about this woffle of yours.

Why don't you start a philosophy thread, because it apears you have no intention on speaking to the evolution/creation debate and have never gone anywhere near science.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#60652 Nov 24, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I suspect that evolutionists that have no ide what they are on about like to discuss philosophies in place of science because their evo science always lets them down.
So far they havce failed the Professors challenge and have absolutely nothing intelligent to say about non coding dna and how that informs TOE, they have changed the meaning of vestigial organs to align with the falsification of the initial definition of no function, they have fraudulently misrepresented the fusion site of human ch2, ervs are nothing more than mythical ghosts.
Now some want to have a shot at supporting the fossil record, which is the topic I like most.
It appears being wrapped up in transgenderr talk demonstrates that most evolutionists have got nothing intelligent to say on the evolution/creation debate. I am not surprised!
The theory of evolution and the ongoing research is the basis for the biological sciences. It only lets you down, because you really don't get it.

I have seen your shots at the fossil record. I can't understand how you like it the most, you seem so poorly informed on it.

To date, I have seen nothing you have posted that seriously challenges biological evolution. Again, this goes back to your complete and utter lack of understanding of science, the scientific method, experimentation and evolution.

If you wanted to surprise us you would read some actual works in the field and try to formulate reasonable questions rather than this blather you spout. I feel sorry for people this passionate about dishonesty and stupidity. If only you really understood, you wouldn't feel so threatened by the world around you and the people that devote themselves to understanding it.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#60653 Nov 24, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that anything like your vacuum?
The quest continues.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#60654 Nov 24, 2012
Orangelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Transgender people aren't couragious, but only deluded and mentally challenged.
True.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#60655 Nov 24, 2012
Organic or Darwinian evolution is the study of how life has evolved on this planet. Creationism is the belief in the creation of life by the deity of your choice.

Seems to me the real debate should be abiogeneis versus religious creationism. Those two topics are counter to each other, while evolution doesn't say anything about the creation of life. This would make the most sense, but knowing the opposing side in this argument, sense is not a prerequisite for them.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#60656 Nov 24, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I have read what you post. You don't understand anything about science. Just because you say it, does not make it so and in this case that is a very fair and accurate statement. The fact that you post what you do with such assurety is testament to how little you understand.
Because rubbish has links that you can provide here does not change the condition of that rubbish.
I have looked at several of the links you have provided in the past and they no more support your claims than if you would have provided links to Disney Land. You misinterpret scientific findings and clearly for the purpose of supporting you own beliefs. If your beliefs are so strong, I can imagine how they need to be supported on pillars of lies and misinterpretation.
Listen you fool, to say that you have read and bla bla bla means absolutely nothing to me or anyone else. That is opinion.

Opinion is suported by adding such things as research and considered responses.

So far none of you get this at all. Not one single evo here gets this in the slightest.

The entire freaken lot of you think that all you have to say is bla and that is that,\.

On what planet of morons did you learn to debate?

If you disagree with anything I have said or suggest misrepresentation then articulate an appropriate response to the area of concern and stop wasting both my time and thread space with your generalities, woffle and unsupported opinion.

For now anything that I have ever said stands. That is because I have supported it with more than my opinion at least, Get it????? You lot generally aren't even educated sufficiently to find your own material. I have to supply it for you.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#60657 Nov 24, 2012
Orangelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Transgender people aren't couragious, but only deluded and mentally challenged.
You described religious people, not transgendered people. They are themselves, they become who they should be in spite of all odds and morons like you who fear anything different than you. So no, they are not deluded, and certainly not mentally challenged, many of them work in the software industry, and some of them can code circles around the best straight person on a bad day.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#60658 Nov 24, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen you fool, to say that you have read and bla bla bla means absolutely nothing to me or anyone else. That is opinion.
Opinion is suported by adding such things as research and considered responses.
So far none of you get this at all. Not one single evo here gets this in the slightest.
The entire freaken lot of you think that all you have to say is bla and that is that,\.
On what planet of morons did you learn to debate?
If you disagree with anything I have said or suggest misrepresentation then articulate an appropriate response to the area of concern and stop wasting both my time and thread space with your generalities, woffle and unsupported opinion.
For now anything that I have ever said stands. That is because I have supported it with more than my opinion at least, Get it????? You lot generally aren't even educated sufficiently to find your own material. I have to supply it for you.
Everything you post contradicts what you state, end of story. Deny that all you want, it won't change that fact.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#60659 Nov 24, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
What is it about you that you absolutely refuse to discuss the topic and have wasted pages and pages going on about this woffle of yours.
Why don't you start a philosophy thread, because it apears you have no intention on speaking to the evolution/creation debate and have never gone anywhere near science.
Ofcourse, you are in a way right.
Question will bring about questions, and so, it goes on and on, some times on the topic, while some time, off-topic...
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#60660 Nov 24, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Does this topic have anything to do with the evolution/creation debate?
Well, that's kind of what I was asking, wasn't it?
Orangelion

Chester, UK

#60661 Nov 24, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You described religious people, not transgendered people. They are themselves, they become who they should be in spite of all odds and morons like you who fear anything different than you. So no, they are not deluded, and certainly not mentally challenged, many of them work in the software industry, and some of them can code circles around the best straight person on a bad day.
Whether or not many transgenders worked in the software industry does not mean they aren't challenged. What about David Cameron? He's the prime minister, it still doesn't change the fact that they are fools. And you have no proof to back up evolution and the big bang, while christians have proof to back themselves up.
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#60662 Nov 24, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> The quest continues.
It seems that you've decided that you've already got all the answers.

What are you questing for? The perfect lie?

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#60663 Nov 24, 2012
Would you evos like to go back to square one with the Proffessors initial post?

Let's do junk dna again, where evos will woffle on blindly about the 98% of junk non coding dna that surely proves evolution is true.

Oh wait!!!! Oh that's right, some evo researchers are now suggesting that is nore than likely that 100% of the genome is functional.

The same goes for vestigial organs, single celled LUCA the queen of evolutionary support killed by HGT, wrist bones that proved mankind had a knucklewalking ancestry and therefore must have evolved from some bent over ape, the same fossils demonstrating ancestry to a knucklewalker and now a biped, bipedalism being soley a human trait gone, accumulating beneficial mutations accruing without disasterous cost - gone, etc etc etc, all tossed aside generally on the back of one single new finding.

There really is no debate. It is quite obvious to me that evolutionary reseachers have no idea what they are talking about.

There are many well credentialed creationists some of which have left TOE behind on the back of what they have discerned from the data available.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/CMI_list_of_scie...

Regardless of what evos have to say about creos, evolutionary history suggests that one would have great difficulty in presenting worse and less credible assertions and hypothesis than what evolutionists have to present. This is my conclusion to the evolution/creation debate.

No one has proven anything beyond doubt and many scenarios are possible if one is talking about a power mankind knows nothing about.

You lot can chase your tails adnauseum forever, and still you will never recover from your history of evolutionary supports that now reside in the huge rubbish bin of evolutionary delusions past!
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#60664 Nov 24, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I suspect that evolutionists that have no ide what they are on about like to discuss philosophies in place of science because their evo science always lets them down.
So far they havce failed the Professors challenge and have absolutely nothing intelligent to say about non coding dna and how that informs TOE, they have changed the meaning of vestigial organs to align with the falsification of the initial definition of no function, they have fraudulently misrepresented the fusion site of human ch2, ervs are nothing more than mythical ghosts.
Now some want to have a shot at supporting the fossil record, which is the topic I like most.
It appears being wrapped up in transgenderr talk demonstrates that most evolutionists have got nothing intelligent to say on the evolution/creation debate. I am not surprised!
Well, despite some totally wrong words, very long run-on sentences, and a smattering of misunderstanding of the significance behind vestigial organs, Chromosome 2 and ERVs, I think everyone is doing very well at explaining things.

Now, I don't know where the transgender stuff started and I doubt it has meaning in the debate, but as I see it, that started with a comment from Orangelion. I'm fairly sure that person is defending Creationism.

Less trash-talk! Less bluster! More content.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#60665 Nov 24, 2012
Orangelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Whether or not many transgenders worked in the software industry does not mean they aren't challenged. What about David Cameron? He's the prime minister, it still doesn't change the fact that they are fools. And you have no proof to back up evolution and the big bang, while christians have proof to back themselves up.
You can't be mentally challenged and be successful in software development. Are you completely and totally clueless?

Also, where is your "proof?" Still have yet to see anything presented that was more convincing than the grainy photos of "bigfoot."

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
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 2 min LIM 71,268
News Ohio Woman's Final Jab at Trump 6 min Parden Pard 2
Poll Why should Lifelover be banned? (Jun '12) 11 min Sweetie-Pie 527
News Germany bans internet-connected 'spying' doll C... 11 min Parden Pard 1
News Thousands of demonstrators protest Trump in Atl... 14 min PayupSucka 1,186
News Your Life Story In 6 Words (Feb '08) 15 min Roxie Darling 10,251
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 18 min Sublime1 211,354
A to Z songs by title or group! 1 hr liam cul8r 957
Back In The Day ... for the third time! 11 hr Enzo49 240
More from around the web