Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.
Comments
57,101 - 57,120 of 114,458 Comments Last updated 17 min ago

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61101
Nov 26, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you are a liar. You know it, I know it, the only fools you might put this over on are your fellow creatards.
That was not creationist work you linked. It does not support creationism in any way. The scientists working on it don't believe your nonsense.
It is a pretty sad state for your side when you have to steal and misrepresent the work of others.
By the way, how is that Blue Waffle of yours doing?
If you actually had any idea what you are talking about you would articulate an appropriate response to highlight the misrepresentation I have made to all.

If you actually had any idea what you were talking about you would lodge a considered response to my shallenge on Sanfords work.

Like I said before, you are the point leader because you post the most uneducated woffle.

The fact that you only ever offer vagueary and ridicule with nothing behind you is clear evidence that you wish you had something intelligent to refute me with but indeed the fact is that you don't.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61102
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Think as you wish. It is your soul that will fry if you dont except God. I hope you did not raise any children. Sad if you did to know they will fry also.
Really? Because creationists have a bad habit of lying their azz off for Jesus. Yet for some reason they think they can be complete aholes and get a free pass. Why do you think that is? Knowledge or hubris?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61103
Nov 26, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
SubductionZone, How does the overwhelmingly negative effects of epitasis support TOE better than John's theory of gentic entropy?
3. Selection can’t stave off deterioration—there are a number of reasons for this:
http://advindicate.com/...
Actually I am keen for some evo to evoke those long lost research skills and find the usual banter that evos offer to refute Sanford. All that woffle was before recent work actually supports Sanfords work again.
The fact is there are not overwhelming negative effects of eptiasis. None has ever been shown to exist. Your linked article was debunked long ago, try to find something new.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61104
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes God is creator of all and his holy word the Bible tells us so. The Bible is all the proof anyone needs.
So your god is real because the Bible is true because the Bible sez so.
Constitution-lover wrote:
And your heart should tell you this if you open it up to Gods love.
Anyone who opens their heart will likely die from serious injuries. With the organ damaged in such a way your body will have great difficulty pumping blood and hence oxygen to the brain. Is this what you mean by getting to know God? Open your heart so you will die and get to meet the guy? Does God really require everyone commit suicide?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61105
Nov 26, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct. I have been Touched by His Noodly Appendage! ALL HAIL THE FSM!
rAmen!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61107
Nov 26, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
If you actually had any idea what you are talking about you would articulate an appropriate response to highlight the misrepresentation I have made to all.
If you actually had any idea what you were talking about you would lodge a considered response to my shallenge on Sanfords work.
Like I said before, you are the point leader because you post the most uneducated woffle.
The fact that you only ever offer vagueary and ridicule with nothing behind you is clear evidence that you wish you had something intelligent to refute me with but indeed the fact is that you don't.
And how many times do you have to be told that Sanford was debunked long ago. Only cretinists refer to him today.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61108
Nov 26, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
I'm not going to tell you that gays, liars, thrives, and just sinners are going to hell. I even understand the frustration people have with Christianity so many denominations telling people what to believe. This is why I say read the bible and do so with an open mind.
Then you are wise. Many creationists on here do not realise they are at least as guilty of sin as gays are.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61111
Nov 26, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
So because I like my iPhone, tv, and electricity I can't be a "real" Christian? You called Christians judgmental. I would dare say if you see an angry judgmental "Christian" they're fake. Jesus taught faith, hope , love. Rather than take my word for it read the bible start in John. If you only read one book that one is great.

Read it. Not as good as the Tao Te Ching, but it has its moments.

I am not real hip on the "real" Christian, thing. It just sounds like a way for Christians to be angry and judge other Christians.

We Christian's aren't perfect, you know.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61113
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
It is called the Bible. That is the proof. Open your heart to God and live a good life. Or keep living in sin and burn in hell when you die. Simple choice.
The Bible says the Earth is a flat square circle that rests fixed on foundations fixed and unmoving hanging upon nothing at the center of a geocentric universe. Oh, and that lizards, donkeys and bushes can talk. It is therefore scientifically inaccurate.
Constitution-lover wrote:
What if your wrong....Eternity in burning hell....or....etternity in wonderful joy of heaven.....WHICH SOUNDS BETTER.
The FSM's Holy Beer Volcano sounds better. But which of these has more objective scientific evidence backing them up?

Answer - NONE of them.

Once you understand this you will understand why some people don't give a fig about your baseless religious opinions. You will of course disagree with them, but in order to have a case you then have to provide objective scientific evidence of this heaven and hell of yours, places which no-one currently on Earth has ever been, and cannot actually gain access until their biological systems are no longer maintaining any kind of Kreb cycle.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61114
Nov 26, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the bible is a bunch of assertions. I ask for proof and you just keep circling around with your assertions. Where is your evidence?
I have been speaking to evidence and you totally ignore it. There is fossil evidence in birds and whales that is more supportive of creation then TOE.

What do you evos expect to find? Are you expecting libraries of outdated woffle and speculation as proof that creos can supply support.

Are non thinking evos expecting creos to support creationism by refering to evolutionary assumptions and interpretations that change like the wind? That sounds like a great idea..NOT!

Why don't you show us all how clever you are by refuting Sanford with new research in mind, seeing as you evos are too ignorant to realize that creos do actually have their own supports to present?

Instead of trying to validate your existence with woffle why don't you come up with a great TOE prediction evos made that has actually eventuated?

The answer to the questions above is that it is much easier to go 'quack' than it is to have some substance to add to the discussion.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61115
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Your lies dont change the fact and truth of the Bible. You are wrong....Turn from sin.
Can you back up your claims with objectively verifiable scientific evidence?

No, I thought not.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61117
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
What would it hurt you to believe and follow God. All God asks us to do in the Bible is good ffor us. I ask what would it hurt you?
Well for one, a wasted life of not learning anything. Two, a lack of hope for the future.

What would it hurt for you to care about humanity instead of your mythology?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61119
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
I would never lie. That is a sin. I have never been a jerk. I tell the truth and if that hurts you it is because that is your soul telling you to listen.
I highly doubt that, you lied when you said you have evidence.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61123
Nov 26, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You are more of an idiot than I ever suspected. I have never stated that creation is the most popular theory at all.
So you create your own misinformation and then apply it.

Sorry, but you are misrepresenting what KK said.


KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You said one truth in there. Evolution is still not the most popular theory, it's just provided us with the most benefits, your creationist mythology is actually more popular, and it's not produced anything beneficial. You just defeated your own argument, thank you for conceding that the theory of evolution is beneficial.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> Indeed if these stupid researchers had of listened to creos they would not have wasted over a decade just working out that non coding dna was functional.

Why not? First of all creotards only started saying this recently and second this is necessary science.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> This may have allowed the advancement of genetic therapies to advance much quicker than they have by wasting time chasing ghosts and evolutionary assumptions.

The evolutionary facts are in the DNA. We can trace human lineage back just using DNA. genetic and other evolutionary medical breakthroughs have continued all along.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> It is not the theory of evolution that has provided a benefit to the population you silly one.

False. Evolutionary medicine is the area(s) of medicine that are making the most breakthroughs.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> The benefit has come from observed research in the here and now.

Blah, blah, blah.... assertion, assertion assertion and not a fact to be found.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> In fact some researchers that are also evos are suggesting that indeed some evolutionary assumptions around retrovirus have hindered medical advancement in the treatment of aides.
http://www.originofaids.com/
http://www.originofaids.com/articles/early.ht...

You will swallow any crap available, won't you. Another loonie who follows loonies.

"Leonard Horowitz is a former dentist, anti-vaxxer, promoter of various "natural cures," and self-publisher of books and pamphlets expressing such unfounded beliefs as that the AIDS and Ebola epidemics were intentionally caused by the U.S. government. "
http://www.skepdic.com/horowitz.html

The guy is a con artist.

I had no respect for you to begin with and you just lost the rest.(note the irony)

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61124
Nov 26, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
And how many times do you have to be told that Sanford was debunked long ago. Only cretinists refer to him today.
And how many times do I have to remind you that you are on a debating forum and are actually meant to be able to contruct an intelligent debate.

Even if you found the refute you would not understand it, nor be able to debate it because you have demonstrated you are an uneducated boofhead.

Subs big scientific refute on a debating forum is. wait for it,........"Sanford was debunked long ago".

These simplistic replies of yours continue to prove you are simplistic and not fit to debate in proper forum style. Obviously a less moderated forum is going to attract all sort of simpletons that actually have no clue past arguing 'they said so'..

Not being informed is not the problem. The problem is when evod pretend they are informed and then can only present crap such as what you comeup with.

Now, do please tell us how the research into epitasis does not support Sanfords work, if you can? Which, of course, my bet is you can't..
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61126
Nov 26, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
My theory of creation is already set out in Genesis. Genesis continues to be validated. At least Genesis provides an account to support of falsify. Where as TOE continues to change the scenarios that support it and any old story will do.
Translation - Genesis is ancient dogma that you can interpret to your convenience while science adapts to new evidence. Remember you DID claim that Genesis "predicted" the correct order of events as science allegedly discovered "later", despite the fact that science does NOT support the sun coming AFTER plants.
MazHere wrote:
My creationist theory is that there is a God and that God can use his ENERGY to create matter
What energy and how? First can you demonstrate this god of yours exists via the scientific method?
MazHere wrote:
Hence the 'mechanism' for creation is supported.
What mechanism? You just said energy can create matter therefore Goddidit with magic. Where's the science?
MazHere wrote:
Eg fossils found in line with Genesis as opposed to TOE
and modern leatherback turtles at the bottom?
MazHere wrote:
moon created after the earth as opposed to initial scientific thinking
And sun after plants. Oops. PLEASE demonstrate the scientific evidence that demonstrate that plants arose BEFORE the sun.
MazHere wrote:
Being created by a creator predicts no requirment for left over ‘junk’ dna nor left over functionless organs from ‘evolution‘, quite the opposite to TOE.
Until you start addressing rebuttals every time you repeat this, you are lying.
MazHere wrote:
This is the lack of scientific integrity that creationists come against and have to battle against continually.
Yes, young Earth, old Earth - doesn't matter. Hypocrites like you can use both.
MazHere wrote:
I claimed victory in demonstrating over a week or so that indeed what evolutionists call empirical evidence isn’t any better than what creos have to offer.
And your victory is at least as equal to that of the Black Knight. WELL DONE FINE WARRIOR SIR!
MazHere wrote:
What predictions does TOE offer that were not made in hindsight and actually are predictions? That should not be difficult for evos to research and find. If you need help I can post a dandy!
Transitional fossils, as predicted by Darwin. In fact I already presented this to you numerous times over. Yet for some strange reason here you are asking for it again. And later on you will ask it again. Not that you haven't been given the answers required, but you have only been given that answer that reality is theologically inconvenient to creationists.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61129
Nov 26, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I have been speaking to evidence and you totally ignore it. There is fossil evidence in birds and whales that is more supportive of creation then TOE.
What do you evos expect to find? Are you expecting libraries of outdated woffle and speculation as proof that creos can supply support.
Are non thinking evos expecting creos to support creationism by refering to evolutionary assumptions and interpretations that change like the wind? That sounds like a great idea..NOT!
Why don't you show us all how clever you are by refuting Sanford with new research in mind, seeing as you evos are too ignorant to realize that creos do actually have their own supports to present?
Instead of trying to validate your existence with woffle why don't you come up with a great TOE prediction evos made that has actually eventuated?
The answer to the questions above is that it is much easier to go 'quack' than it is to have some substance to add to the discussion.
No, you are just making assertions and attempting to discredit everything using the same evidence that supports it or issues that have been addressed, then when others point out how wrong you are, you ignore it and just start posting more junk science.

Good example "why don't you come up with a great TOE prediction evos made that has actually eventuated?" .... answered, answered so many times the only way to have missed that answer is if you purposefully, as a method of lying, ignored those answers.

You need to learn how to learn, and I can't help you with that.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61130
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
What I dont get is that being a Christian is easy and it is all about leading a good life. Nothing about being a Christian will harm you or hurt you in any way. Following Gods word is good for you and will bring you joy and happiness. Being a Christian is easy and means freedom for eternity. WHY DONT PEOPLE DO IT....
Tell me how does being a Christian hurt anyone?
Creationists lie. Constantly. That's not leading a good life. They seem to think otherwise.

(Note I did not place Christians in general into that category)

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61131
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Following God is not wasting your life but extending it for eternity......I care very much for humanity. Why do you think I spread Gods word. Oh and knowing your gonna go to heaven is HOPE for the future.What you have is only eternity in hell....That is not good.
So you hate life, you hate life so much you want another one. Greedy, aren't you?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61132
Nov 26, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
No I did not. The Bible is my proof.....I gave the proof.
Again, the bible is a bunch of assertions, that is not evidence. I asked for evidence, present it or stop bothering us with this failed assertion.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••