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 (Page 2,946)

Showing posts 58,901 - 58,920 of106,039
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62928
Dec 3, 2012
 
"...type that out verbatim without getting it.."

what I meant to say
60s chic

Allentown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62929
Dec 3, 2012
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Is that correct? 100,000 years doesn't seem like that long a time. I can't keep up with my extinctions without a score card.
I know what you mean. I was raised in a Baptist church, but I have always been very skeptical. I have found that the Bible is rife with inconsistencies and contradictions that make the consideration of a literal interpretation laughable to me. I do consider it to be a book full of much wisdom though and historical information.
I suppose, but that's what was stated in the video. You should watch it. Very interesting.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Marrickville, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62930
Dec 3, 2012
 
Professor wrote:
Even if evolution is true (and there is plenty of evidence to support it), scientists cannot explain how the very first cell came into existence.
After the Big Bang, the universe was sterile. SOMETHING happened to cause life to appear out of nothing.
Perhaps you have been away but I believe I have more than demonstrated that TOE is actually based on hubris.

The data supports creation. The hubris about the data supports evolution.

If you think TOE has any legs to stand on then you have been deluded as I have repeatedly demonstrated.

In actual fact, your first post on junk dna has been done to death.

Clearly, evolutionists do not know what they are talking about and will peddle misrepresentation as support for TOE.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62931
Dec 3, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
And you're not being arrogant? Not only can you adapt but you can also outlive anyone in here. Wow.
I mention "adapt" and you think that's all there is to it in evolution.
So are you trying to argue that species that does not adapt to changing circumstances survive?

Okay.
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
You are stretching this a bit too far. I think because you still don't get it.
Aggh please. I know more about Paleontology in the Mesozoic Era, save for scholars and paleontologists in that very field.

Epic Fail. Care to try again?

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62932
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Who knows really?
Paleontogists, for one?

The earliest birds show up in the mid-Jurassic. The earliest eggs date back to the Devonian.

That is a three hundred million year gap from egg to bird.

Get a clue, will you?
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's just bury the hatchet. I mean hatch the eggs.
Lame.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62933
Dec 3, 2012
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
We *DO* really know....with an extraordinary high degree of confidence. Dinosaurs laid eggs long before the first bird appeared on the scene.
As did the archosaurs, long before the dinosaurs, as did the amphibians, long before the reptillian archosaurs, as did the fish, long before the amphibians

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62934
Dec 3, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Abduction Zone, you are right. I bet The Star Wars Explosion is as entertaining as the Cambrian Explosion.
You are about as funny as the Yellow Pages

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Marrickville, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62935
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>WTF are you talking about? Yes, you did miss something. The whole point is that it grew on citrate in an aerobic environment; the fact that you can type that out verbatim shows that you did not investigate the issue and have no idea what you're talking about. Prior to this experiment, ecoli could not digest citric acid. The link you posted claimed that bacteria never changes into anything else. What constitutes "something else" to you? Do you want a dog to pop out of it? In a (relatively)*extremely* short time span, Ecoli was able to evolve the ability to digest citric acid. That is evolution.
Actually you have no idea what you are talking about.

One thing that does not constitute 'something else' is somatic change.

You mean the ecoli were able to adapt in the same way that Darwins finches adapted with different beak sizes, which were somatic changes.

http://testifyingtotruth.wordpress.com/2012/0...

I see evos cannot get with the hard stuff and as suspected are going to start chasing their tails again.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62936
Dec 3, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you have been away but I believe I have more than demonstrated that TOE is actually based on hubris.
The data supports creation. The hubris about the data supports evolution.
If you think TOE has any legs to stand on then you have been deluded as I have repeatedly demonstrated.
In actual fact, your first post on junk dna has been done to death.
Clearly, evolutionists do not know what they are talking about and will peddle misrepresentation as support for TOE.
Poe.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62937
Dec 3, 2012
 
AustinHook wrote:
<quoted text>
That's an interesting distinction. Whether that fine a perspective matters for a given context should be examined carefully.
It's a fun distinction however. Lessee now, facts are generally discussed in terms of A is a B, or A has attribute B, or even just that "A is". So facts are almost indistinguishable from "truth values" in the logical/mathematical sense. Truth as an almost ultimate abstraction would seem to derive from the axioms of logic that are being assumed. I hope we all try to use the same rules of logic during a single discussion. I presume we allow derivative conclusions to be included in the realm of "facts". A fact might be the logical conclusion of a rigorous and complex chain of logic... or maybe not? What do you think? How do you see the distinction between "truths" and "facts"? How are facts different from what we might call "truth values"?
You're confusing poor charles. Stop it.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62938
Dec 3, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Subduction Zone. Have I missed your reply. Are you unable to futher justify your homolgy here?
I'd like to now throw the icing on the cake, which I generally like to save for latter.
Wiki has pictures of several Furcula (Wishbone) from theropods and of birds.
So here, something more the shape of a boomerang is 'the same' thing as a bone that is U shaped. None of them, including Arch, looks like a bird wishbone at all, except for Columba perhaps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Furcula_evo...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furcula
At least a couple of you have a bit of a go, finally. So thanks.
My 6 points in support of creation are robust. Data on the deteriorating genome, negative epistasis, can be accepted without the need for complicating scenarios. Predictions made well in advance are being substantiated.
Nothing I present could be worse and more complicated than what you have to offer and I actually think creationism has the upper hand overall.
Sorry. Wrong. Your so called 6 points have been debunked many times. Why do you still bother to post them here?

And another wall of nonsense.

I tell you what. If you have an actual point why don't you post that?

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62939
Dec 3, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
And you know exactly the first bird that appeared on the scene?
Once again, a question like that shows that you have no idea how to interpret fossil evidence.

That, in itself, is not a crime. My mother, bless her heart, she is a fine restaurateur, cannot interpret fossil evidence. Neither can my janitor interpret fossil evidence. Neither can the owner of the local supermarket, the beggar on the corner, nor the policeman who pulled me over yesterday.

No fault of theirs. Ignorance is not a crime.

You have demonstrated that you are clueless about the subject, but you choose to comment on it. Why? Do you enjoy looking stupid?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62940
Dec 4, 2012
 
By the way Maz, a transitional species is supposed to be between two different sorts of species. It seems to me that you are complaining that Archaeopteryx is in between that of birds and that of land based dinosaurs. In other words you are saying that it is a transitional species.

Am I the only one that sees this?

Archaeopteryx has bird features, dinosaur features, and features that are in between the two. Does this or doesn't this make it an almost perfect transitional fossil. It may actually be on an off branch, it still is very close to the transitional species that may or may not have been preserved in the fossil record.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62941
Dec 4, 2012
 
Orriapa paquia wrote:
Subduction zone:
How can someone believe in evolution if you cannot say/explain how it all started?
If you cannot explain or prove the first step then what good is the rest?
That is a stupid line of argument. My car is in the garage. Do you need to SEE my car entering the garage, to conclude that I had parked it?
Orriapa paquia wrote:
In regards to the bible can you tell me where it says about evolution? id like to check it out
The Bible is an abvious myth.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62942
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you have no idea what you are talking about.
One thing that does not constitute 'something else' is somatic change.
You mean the ecoli were able to adapt in the same way that Darwins finches adapted with different beak sizes, which were somatic changes.
http://testifyingtotruth.wordpress.com/2012/0...
I see evos cannot get with the hard stuff and as suspected are going to start chasing their tails again.
Good lord you are a Poe. Define somatic change.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62943
Dec 4, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
what do you mean by "evolved" and not "innate?" The idea of evolution sounds like a natural phenomena or occurrence. How do you know that about extinct animals when you don't completely understand their DNA?
I didn't say animals choose a meteor to end their existence. If you buy a house do you choose to live in it if you know you'd die from a fallen tree? what exactly is your point.
As much garbage you tend to spew, I found this sentence particularly revealing:

"How do you know that about extinct animals when you don't completely understand their DNA?"

I cannot even begin to tell you what absurdly stupid line of reasoning this is.

Let me ask you a couple of questions:

1) Do you know what a fossil is?
2) Do you know how we determine its age?

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62944
Dec 4, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
sorry I messed up on the quotes
Don't worry. We don't really you to very high standards

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62945
Dec 4, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't think I did my own research? I have. It's no different than politics. You have the media telling you all kinds of stuff.
Nope. Your research, I am willing to bet my month's salary, is what "facts" you could get off Kent Hovind, Ken Ham or Answers In Genesis.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62946
Dec 4, 2012
 
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I didn't say otherwise. Why did you feel you had to write this?
What part about my first two sentences is not reproduced in your paragraph?
I love it when you say things like 'reproduce'.

Say it again, will you? Indulge me.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Marrickville, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62947
Dec 4, 2012
 
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
As did the archosaurs, long before the dinosaurs, as did the amphibians, long before the reptillian archosaurs, as did the fish, long before the amphibians
Kong stopped replying to me when I showed him how silly his research link was. That of course in no way detracted from the fact that there are perfectly clear modern bird footprints dated to 212mya that evos have to go into confusion to realign with their flawed paradigm.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 58,901 - 58,920 of106,039
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••