Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#63109 Dec 4, 2012
MazHere wrote:
Your link says nothing. And you posted a link that I addressed and then you disappeared.
Evos have found modern whale bones in strata dated to 290mya. Fact.
Your evo researchers came up with inconclusive dates that were blamed on contamination and therefore hold no validity at all. Fact.
Evo reseachers canot explain how the whale bones got there. Fact.
There are no dinosaur fossils in Michagan. Researchers suggest dino fossils were taken away during an ice age. Fact.
Logic. If dino fossils were taken away by ice sheets during an ice age, then the remaining fossils must be older that the dino fossils.
So not only can I present whale bones found in strata dated to 212 myo, I can also present a plausible explanation of why they are there and dino fossils aren't, on the back of inconclusive contaminated dating of the bones themselves.
For your whale ancestry you have a bunch of fossils that were cohabitating around 49mya, a basilosaurus that is older than Indohyus, morphology that contradicts DNA in whale/hippo/pig.
Again I maintain that the data supports a creationist paradigm. Evolutionists have contradictory hubris to present to explain the data and suggest why whales could not possibly have 'evolved' 212mya.
So you have not finalized anything at all. Do you think making a comment then scurrying off is a debate, do you?
My supports and interpretations of data could not posibly be worse than what you have to present. That is a fact that evos would rather hang themselves over than admit.
290 was the pretend whale evidence. 212 was the pretend bird evidence. Try to keep your bullshit straight.
Orripa Paquia

Lubbock, TX

#63110 Dec 4, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan, I think TOE should be excluded from science streams and put in with philosophies. TOE is a philosophy of faith that is suppported by misrepresentation and hubris.
MAzhere:
I have not seen any evolutionist here quote any scientific papers in this thread. For all their claims of being scientifically correct!!
Orripa Paquia

Lubbock, TX

#63111 Dec 4, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>What are your qualifications? What is your point with what you have posted above? The execution of your post is so muddied with your unwarranted arrogance, it is unintelligible. Why don't you stop and give it a think. When you have a reasonable, rational point come back and we can tell what it wrong with it.
Obviously, you need further schooling but we don't have time to pull you up into the basics.
Deep breath, relax, try again.
You cant understand the basic principles of evolution that you believe in? What do you understand then?

If you cant understand a basic statement of what evolution implies or believes in, how can we go any further? A rational conversation cannot be had.

I would like to educate you, but i usually charge for that.

You seriously cannot believe in evolution without a basic understanding of its principles. Both you and subduction zone have serious deficits in your understanding.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#63112 Dec 4, 2012
Orripa Paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
MAzhere:
I have not seen any evolutionist here quote any scientific papers in this thread. For all their claims of being scientifically correct!!
Then you haven't looked. I'll just bet you went beck and read through almost 60,000 posts.

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#63113 Dec 4, 2012
Orripa Paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
MAzhere:
I have not seen any evolutionist here quote any scientific papers in this thread. For all their claims of being scientifically correct!!
I have.

I suspect most don't quote them because they realize you can't take people who are used to reading books that only have pictures in them and start discussing articles published in scientific journals with big words in them. We have to dumb it down for you folks a lot of times.

Since: Sep 12

Fort Worth, TX

#63114 Dec 4, 2012
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>Glad to see you're not answering the question asked. I will repeat it - what about all the religions that do not subscribe to the christian God and the concept of satan? What happens in their case?

Good to see the light of chrisitanity shining through in the care you show for your fellow man.
I paid 3 families rent and once a month I give out food at the mission to families in need. At Christmas I hand out gifts to kids my kids only get one gift from my wife and I so we can help poor kids. I've done this the last 3 years. What do you do to help your fellow man? Point an laugh and thank the whatever you believe in its not you?

As for religions that don't believe in satan or the Christian God I have no idea. However missionaries do some great work. I also don't think God punishes those who don't know of him. The Bible says where there is no law their is no sin. For those how have the chance to know and ignore him they're in trouble.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#63115 Dec 4, 2012
Orripa Paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
MAzhere:
I have not seen any evolutionist here quote any scientific papers in this thread. For all their claims of being scientifically correct!!
That is the best you have? Not true either.

Maybe you should stop posting with your head up your butt.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63116 Dec 4, 2012
Orripa Paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
MAzhere:
I have not seen any evolutionist here quote any scientific papers in this thread. For all their claims of being scientifically correct!!
You haven't been around very long. Nor has anyone posted anything that requires scientific papers to bust.

And if you see us post something from Talk Origins, a pro-evolution debaters favorite site, all of those articles are based upon scientific papers and they include links to them in their footnotes.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63117 Dec 4, 2012
So ripa, have you considered my claim about scientific evidence?

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#63118 Dec 4, 2012
Orripa Paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
You cant understand the basic principles of evolution that you believe in? What do you understand then?
If you cant understand a basic statement of what evolution implies or believes in, how can we go any further? A rational conversation cannot be had.
I would like to educate you, but i usually charge for that.
You seriously cannot believe in evolution without a basic understanding of its principles. Both you and subduction zone have serious deficits in your understanding.
I sure that is not the only thing you charge for but I like girls. Thanks anyway.

You don't have the first clue about what you are ranting about. If you can't deal with being told you are a messed up, completely ingnorant and wrong-headed idiot, then stop posting here. It is for your own good.

Really? Deficits? And how awkwardly executed in your sentence. I bet it thought better than it reads.

You base this of course on the fact that we have torn up and thrown back stupid, illogical arguments that you tried to sneak by everyone as serious. Whatever you say.

Obviously, Subduction Zone and I have stirred you up and pissed you off. You don't even bother to answer questions regarding your claims.

What are your qualifications? What are you trying to say? What is your point? Why did your dog drop you on this thread?

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#63119 Dec 4, 2012
Orripa Paquia wrote:
<quoted text>
You cant understand the basic principles of evolution that you believe in? What do you understand then?
If you cant understand a basic statement of what evolution implies or believes in, how can we go any further? A rational conversation cannot be had.
I would like to educate you, but i usually charge for that.
You seriously cannot believe in evolution without a basic understanding of its principles. Both you and subduction zone have serious deficits in your understanding.
You won't bother to educate others, is the way you say, I don't understand anything, but I want to sound like I am an expert. If you are an expert, then enlighten us as to what that means. Go ahead and explain the basic principles of evolution to us poor unannointed masses that we may bask in the glory that is you.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Level 7

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#63120 Dec 4, 2012
http://www.weirdasianews.com/2007/06/29/real-...

Some fossils, named the “China dragon fossils”ť, were recently exhibited in the Xinwei Ancient Life Fossils Museum in Anshun, Guizhou.

When archeologists first stripped the clay off the fossil, they found the dragon had a pair of horns above its head and the shape of the dragon was very like the legendary animal often described in books and stories.

Dragons have often appeared in Chinese legends. The dragon with two horns on its head is regarded as a totem. The totem was first invented by Chinese ancestors and worshipped by the Chinese people. Therefore Chinese people are also called the “descendents of the dragon”ť.

For a long time, scientists thought that the dragon was a fictional animal existing only in stories.

The dragon fossil was found in Guanling County, Anshun City, in 1996, and has been kept in a good condition. It is measured 7.6 meters long. Its head is 76 centimeters long and the neck is 54 centimeters long. The body is 2.7 meters in length and 68 centimeters in width, and the tail is 3.7 meters long.

The dragon’s head is in a triangle shape. Its mouth is 43 centimeters long. The widest part of the head is 32 centimeters long. The horns project from the widest part of the head, and are symmetrical and 27 centimeters long. They are a little bit curved and tilted, which makes the fossil look very much like the legendary dragon.

The China dragon was a reptile animal living in the ocean in Triassic Period about 200 million years ago. It was an amphibian. It spent most of its time living in water, although sometimes it walked on land. It also laid eggs on land. The animal lived on fish and small reptile animals.

This is the first time that China found a dragon fossil with a pair of horns. Its discovery provides some evidence to prove that dragons might really have horns. The fossil provides important scientific information for people to trace the origin of the Chinese legendary dragon.

Since: Sep 12

Fort Worth, TX

#63121 Dec 4, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>Who cares what you said? I have said time without number that faith is not fact and I have offered the definitions to prove it, tell me what you have offered to disprove it –What was that? I can’t hear you, what?-“Nothing”, Ah ok, forget I asked

What game? Stamping your feet like a petulant child and ignoring fact does not mean you win, it simply means you have nothing to offer and are frustrated at the fact but are not willing to accept that fact. Just because you are too deliberately ignorant to actually understand what faith is is no ones fault but your own. DonÂ’t blame me or anyone else for your ignorance

Faith is not fact, faith is individual and in the imagination it has no bearing on reality

Let me re-quote

Faith
1 - Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2 -Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

Then we have

Fact
1 - A thing that is indisputably the case.
2 - something that actually exists; reality; truth.
3 - something known to exist or to have happened
4 - a truth known by actual experience or observation
5 - something known to be true

Notice the difference?

Just in case you are to stupid to understand IÂ’ll explain
The definition of faith highlight that faith is based on trust and belief, apprehension and not proof

The definition of fact is indisputable, actual, known, experienced, observed, true

Personally I think that offering indisputable facts and definitions beats your lying imagination every time but hey, thatÂ’s just me, IÂ’m not a godbot in love with a myth
By your definition faith is fact.

4 - a truth known by actual experience or observation

Faith
1 - Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2 -Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
I have actual experience with faith.
This is the part where you say something about how I'm dumb and how much better it is to be like you.

Since: Sep 12

Fort Worth, TX

#63122 Dec 4, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>What evidence would you like that evolution is ongoing?

What evidence do you have that it's not?
Science isn't really my thing and I know you're going to laugh but from a non science point of view maz has posted some pretty good stuff supporting id.

My back ground is faith mostly Jewish , Christian , and Islam.

Since: Sep 12

Fort Worth, TX

#63123 Dec 4, 2012
Makes sense wrote:
Viruses are STILL evolving or is God creating the new ones?
They could be adapting?

Since: Sep 12

Fort Worth, TX

#63124 Dec 4, 2012
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?
How many people would still be alive if the flu changed every 6 days as God rested on day 7

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#63125 Dec 4, 2012
Knightmare wrote:
http://www.weirdasianews.com/2 007/06/29/real-dragon-fossils- display-china/
Some fossils, named the “China dragon fossils”ť, were recently exhibited in the Xinwei Ancient Life Fossils Museum in Anshun, Guizhou.
When archeologists first stripped the clay off the fossil, they found the dragon had a pair of horns above its head and the shape of the dragon was very like the legendary animal often described in books and stories.
Dragons have often appeared in Chinese legends. The dragon with two horns on its head is regarded as a totem. The totem was first invented by Chinese ancestors and worshipped by the Chinese people. Therefore Chinese people are also called the “descendents of the dragon”ť.
For a long time, scientists thought that the dragon was a fictional animal existing only in stories.
The dragon fossil was found in Guanling County, Anshun City, in 1996, and has been kept in a good condition. It is measured 7.6 meters long. Its head is 76 centimeters long and the neck is 54 centimeters long. The body is 2.7 meters in length and 68 centimeters in width, and the tail is 3.7 meters long.
The dragon’s head is in a triangle shape. Its mouth is 43 centimeters long. The widest part of the head is 32 centimeters long. The horns project from the widest part of the head, and are symmetrical and 27 centimeters long. They are a little bit curved and tilted, which makes the fossil look very much like the legendary dragon.
The China dragon was a reptile animal living in the ocean in Triassic Period about 200 million years ago. It was an amphibian. It spent most of its time living in water, although sometimes it walked on land. It also laid eggs on land. The animal lived on fish and small reptile animals.
This is the first time that China found a dragon fossil with a pair of horns. Its discovery provides some evidence to prove that dragons might really have horns. The fossil provides important scientific information for people to trace the origin of the Chinese legendary dragon.
Amusing story about a movie prop.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#63126 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Science isn't really my thing and I know you're going to laugh but from a non science point of view maz has posted some pretty good stuff supporting id.
My back ground is faith mostly Jewish , Christian , and Islam.
Maz has posted a lot of previously refuted claims and links to actual scientific findings that she has overemphasized the signficance of or misrepresented entirely.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#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.

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 are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 1 min Bro 25,528
Man murders wife, shows parents her body on webcam (Apr '11) 18 min Rust 80
HOW LONG can you hold YOUR SEMEN ? For men only. (Mar '12) 24 min Sam 24
Is it possible to....... 31 min -CatCiao- 537
Merry Christmas Topix, Thanks For,...? 42 min mr goodwrench 112
Wicked Willie 43 min Hoosier Hillbilly 2
Make A Sentance out of a 5 letter word. (Nov '09) 44 min -CatCiao- 30,296
"OLD SAYINGS" - - - Feel free to post them here... 58 min Hoosier Hillbilly 70
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Rose of Tralee 152,399
More from around the web