Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 205211 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.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#63127 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
How many people would still be alive if the flu changed every 6 days as God rested on day 7
Not sure I understand what you are getting at.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63128 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
They could be adapting?
No, the changes seen in viruses in the laboratory have involved evolving whole new body parts. Definitely beyond adapting.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Level 7

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#63129 Dec 4, 2012
http://theofficialillphil.com/blog/dinosaurs_...

Beginning at a very early age we are taught that we as humans evolved from apes. We are also taught that dinosaurs roamed the earth before us millions of years ago. While I have already addressed the many issues concerning the theory of evolution in my previous article "Evolution Exposed...," there is much to be revealed about dinosaurs as well. You probably imagine dinosaurs as being huge intelligent creatures that prey on every living thing that crosses their path. Movies such as Jurassic Park help to portray this image of dinosaurs very cunningly. What you might not know is that many of these depictions you see, including the ones in our text books, are very deceiving. There is much that scientists have learned about dinosaurs through their fossil record, but there is also much that they still do not know. Instead of emphasizing actual facts and informing us of what they believe might have happened, they present information to us in a biased misleading manner reporting their assumptions to be facts. Fortunately, there are enough scholars in the field practicing and writing books that we can learn what the majority of scientists do not openly tell us. Contrary to what you may have been told, some of the most low profile discoveries report that there actually exists archaeological evidence that dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time. You don't think so? Hopefully by the time you finish reading this article you'll be pleased to have learned information that you were never told existed.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Level 7

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#63130 Dec 4, 2012
http://theofficialillphil.com/blog/evolution_...

If you were told to identify a scientific theory that dispels belief in the existence of God, the theory of evolution would probably be your first choice. Not only is this theory supported by some of the most educated and well known scientists in the world, but with the collaboration of so many great minds upholding it, how could they all possibly be wrong? Suprisingly, they are wrong! Do you doubt the possibility of this happening? If so, here are some examples of past scientific theories proven to be wrong. Did you know that until the late sixteenth century scientists thought that the earth was in the center of the universe and that the planets and the sun revolved around it (Geocentrism)? Did you know that not long ago scientist thought that heat was produced by a fluid called caloric (Caloric Theory)? Did you know that until as late as the nineteenth century scientists thought that children could inherit the characteristics of their mother's previous lover (Telegony Theory)? As you can see, although science has made fascinating discoveries and produced extraordinary technology, even with its many brilliant minds, they can still can be dead wrong!
Orriapa paquia

Lubbock, TX

#63131 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
So ripa, have you considered my claim about scientific evidence?
What claim?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63132 Dec 4, 2012
Orriapa paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
What claim?
The claim that the theory of evolution is supported by a mountain of scientific evidence and that there is no scientific evidence that supports creationism.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63133 Dec 4, 2012
Orriapa paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
What claim?
And I can prove my claim, but once again, I have to run now.

Perhaps some of the others may be able to make the same point. Otherwise you have to wait.

Of course a modicum of honesty is necessary to discuss this. Are you ready to admit that you were mistaken yesterday?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63134 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
The claim that the theory of evolution is supported by a mountain of scientific evidence and that there is no scientific evidence that supports creationism.
You keep saying that over and over but there aren't sufficient evidence to support TOE from the sources being posted here

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63135 Dec 4, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep saying that over and over but there aren't sufficient evidence to support TOE from the sources being posted here
You only say that because you don't understand scientific evidence. I will be back in about three and a half hours.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63136 Dec 4, 2012
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.
I'm asking you what species did E. Coli evolved into because that's what you're claiming. Organisms adapt to their environment that's why many animals use camouflage to protect themselves from prey. It's a defense mechanism.

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63137 Dec 4, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Not sure I understand what you are getting at.
This post
Makes sense wrote:
Oh, and if God is creating new viruses, why couldn't He complete the jobs in 7 days, like all the other stuff He created?

If this were the case and a new type of say flu virus were created every 6 days how many people would be left?

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63138 Dec 4, 2012
Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#63139 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
This post
Makes sense wrote:
Oh, and if God is creating new viruses, why couldn't He complete the jobs in 7 days, like all the other stuff He created?
If this were the case and a new type of say flu virus were created every 6 days how many people would be left?
Ok. Thanks. I see what you are getting at. Of course if would depend on whether all those new flu viruses were virulent.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63140 Dec 4, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm asking you what species did E. Coli evolved into because that's what you're claiming. Organisms adapt to their environment that's why many animals use camouflage to protect themselves from prey. It's a defense mechanism.
I meant predators, sorry

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#63141 Dec 4, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
In the history of football or soccer, all parts of the history are taken seriously.
<quoted text>
If we are discussing the origin of "English", then we must discuss the origin of *Old English*, because *Old English* is the earliest form of English.
You suddenly realized that *Old English* was already spoken by the Angles and Saxons on their boats on the way to England.
No wonder you want to move the goalposts.
I have earlier told you that, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes left mainland europe in their mass to England.
According to law, when a person leaves a particular place to another, he automatically becomes the citizen of that place, the same with the Angles, Jutes and Saxons, they later became the English.
And also, every knows that English was first spoken as a language in England. Challenge that!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#63142 Dec 4, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for admitting that Old English, which is a form of English, is not native to England.
You are wasting your time. Despite that, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, were/ are no German or Danish, they became English. Do your research on international laws or immigration laws.
English is a language that was first spoken in England. It is native to England, no one including you, can deny that.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#63143 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?
Random mutations.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#63144 Dec 4, 2012
How can this be an issue in the 21st Century!? The tale of creation is a Bronze Age myth. It has day and night time, and growing plants existing before the sun is created.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63145 Dec 4, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
How can this be an issue in the 21st Century!? The tale of creation is a Bronze Age myth. It has day and night time, and growing plants existing before the sun is created.
Never underestimate the ignorance of your fellow human beings.

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63146 Dec 4, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>Random mutations.
Sorry peanut but random mutations? That means the outcome is unpredictable making impossible to project the outcome. How would it come out with male and female of the same species?

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
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 min KNIGHT DeVINE 197,715
Word Association. (Nov '10) 3 min KNIGHT DeVINE 19,727
One Word (Jan '09) 6 min KNIGHT DeVINE 17,125
Any Word ! (Mar '11) 7 min KNIGHT DeVINE 5,194
Word Association (Mar '10) 9 min KNIGHT DeVINE 21,125
Word association (Jun '07) 10 min KNIGHT DeVINE 5,263
News Owner: Missing potbellied therapy pig is found,... 31 min wichita-rick 4
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 33 min Calisportsgirl 19,848
Make up your wildest Headline. (Aug '08) 1 hr Sparky 665
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 1 hr Statistics 33,278
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 2 hr Sociology for Beg... 59,894
More from around the web