Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 219597 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.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63175 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
The mutations that matter are those in the reproductive system
is that why you have ED?

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63176 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Hey jerk, I was trying to help you and answer your questions.

It seems like you would rather try to enter the contest for thread idiot. All you have contributed to this thread so far is a bucketful of stupid along with about 200 pounds of attitude. Not a very wise mixture.
So I see you don't like answering those questions either. If all you're going to do is call people stupid because you don't know the answer or just can't answer maybe you should move on. Just know if you really just want to trash talk I can too.

“Live Each Day and Have Fun !”

Level 4

Since: Nov 12

Where I am at .

#63177 Dec 4, 2012
But we look alot better, still like banana's and scratch thought it was the deodarant. Still learning about those vines , trees.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63178 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
So I see you don't like answering those questions either. If all you're going to do is call people stupid because you don't know the answer or just can't answer maybe you should move on. Just know if you really just want to trash talk I can too.
Why must you lie? You know it is against the Bible you supposedly believe in? Lying makes the Baby Jebus Cwy.

I call people stupid when they claim to want to learn and then do everything they can to avoid learning. It looks like you are just another dishonest Christian. And no, the Bible does not say it is okay to lie when you attack evolution.

So do you want to learn or do you want to be an idiot?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63179 Dec 4, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
is that why you have ED?
Projection by a frigid bitch.

Why don't you want serious answers to your questions? I know, it must suck to get all of those lies you have learned from lying creationist sites dashed to pieces. We live in the real world here. If you want to "feel good about yourself" go to a Christian site.

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63180 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Why must you lie? You know it is against the Bible you supposedly believe in? Lying makes the Baby Jebus Cwy.

I call people stupid when they claim to want to learn and then do everything they can to avoid learning. It looks like you are just another dishonest Christian. And no, the Bible does not say it is okay to lie when you attack evolution.

So do you want to learn or do you want to be an idiot?
How can you understand anything you don't even understand what a lie is. This is why I never argue with an idiot they drag me down to their level and beat me with experience.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#63181 Dec 4, 2012
Knightmare wrote:
http://theofficialillphil.com/ blog/evolution_exposed/
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!
None of that crap makes the slightest bit of difference. Of course mistakes are made...everyone makes them. But think of the differences there are from those scientists who lived in another era.

We have grown tremendously in our abilities to collect,analyze, understand, interpret and handle data, and we have now a system of peer review that is pretty darn good (although like everything else can fail at times).

The problem with you creationists is you are trying to put out a forest fire with a napkin. The real evidence of what the sciences are saying is simply overwhelming and you guys don't have enough smarts to understand that you are trumped by honest-logical- reality...and that you are the losers in the evolution vs. creationism wars...we won because we have actual truth on our side.
You do understand that don't you?? We have the TRUTH on our side.

Every argument I've ever read from creotards is wrong and is nothing but apologetics in disguise.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63182 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
How can you understand anything you don't even understand what a lie is. This is why I never argue with an idiot they drag me down to their level and beat me with experience.
I pointed out how you lied. Now you are pretending that it never happened.

You would really have to dig to find an idiot Bat Foy, you better go to an all Christian forum.

I would be more than happy to help you, but you have failed the honesty test too many times.

If you really want to learn about evolution I am more than happy to help. To deny evolution you have to be either a religious zealot who will rather lie than face the truth or a very rare person who is ignorant of almost all branches of science. When it comes to religions there are countless people who are more than willing to delude themselves. You can even convince most theist of this by using believers of other religions than they believe in as an example.

So before I go to far off on a tangent are you hear to learn or are you hear to try to cause trouble? It is clear you have no clue on how to debunk evolution.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63183 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Projection by a frigid bitch.
Why don't you want serious answers to your questions? I know, it must suck to get all of those lies you have learned from lying creationist sites dashed to pieces. We live in the real world here. If you want to "feel good about yourself" go to a Christian site.
I can't help it. It sounds funny.

Well if you could explain why mutations that matter are in reproductive systm, then we can continue to discuss.
60s chic

Allentown, PA

#63184 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
We are apes.
You're probably right. I've seen quite a few "missing links" roaming this planet; in every size, race and gender. I always thought the actor Ron Perlman looks similar to a Neanderthal or
caveman. He was awesome in Quest For Fire. Didn't seem to need a lot of make-up for the part, lol.

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63185 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>I pointed out how you lied. Now you are pretending that it never happened.

You would really have to dig to find an idiot Bat Foy, you better go to an all Christian forum.

I would be more than happy to help you, but you have failed the honesty test too many times.

If you really want to learn about evolution I am more than happy to help. To deny evolution you have to be either a religious zealot who will rather lie than face the truth or a very rare person who is ignorant of almost all branches of science. When it comes to religions there are countless people who are more than willing to delude themselves. You can even convince most theist of this by using believers of other religions than they believe in as an example.

So before I go to far off on a tangent are you hear to learn or are you hear to try to cause trouble? It is clear you have no clue on how to debunk evolution.
Alright to put an end to this I had no intention of trying to lie. As this was not my intent please accept my apology for not only not being clear on what I wanted to know and for the unkind remarks I made about your parentage. I got angry as once again rather than getting an answer I got called stupid. I now understand that seems to be the only answer anyone who doesn't see things the evo way will get.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63186 Dec 4, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't help it. It sounds funny.
Well if you could explain why mutations that matter are in reproductive systm, then we can continue to discuss.
Please don't quote out of context, it is too easy to change the meaning of the quote.

Remember when I corrected you on your claim that mutations are harmful? I said that we had on the average 150 mutations each. If mutations are harmful 150 harmful mutations would surely be deadly.

And hear you go, a peer reviewed article on the subject:

http://www.genetics.org/content/156/1/297.lon...
60s chic

Allentown, PA

#63187 Dec 4, 2012
Nature has her secrets. Not everything can be created or analyzed in a test tube or a petri dish. But someday, who knows.

Just for fun, an old Twilight Zone episode (part 5)- "The Sixth Finger!". Far-fetched, but than I remember when I thought that traveling to the moon was a science fiction tale. I wonder what man will really look like a million years from now, that is if the human race survives that long.
60s chic

Allentown, PA

#63188 Dec 4, 2012
Oops, forgot to post the link:

The Twilight Zone - "The Sixth Finger",(part 5).
You can see the other parts, except for 2, which seems to be missing. Quite amusing, weird and thought provoking. Hey, it was the 60s, lol.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63189 Dec 4, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Alright to put an end to this I had no intention of trying to lie. As this was not my intent please accept my apology for not only not being clear on what I wanted to know and for the unkind remarks I made about your parentage. I got angry as once again rather than getting an answer I got called stupid. I now understand that seems to be the only answer anyone who doesn't see things the evo way will get.
Alright, then I apologize for calling you stupid.

I am perhaps overly sensitive to various tricks that creationists try to pull. When you were honestly answered that random mutations is where new information came from I got angry at how you tried to change the question.

And to show I mean it I will give the complete answer. New information does come from random mutations. It gets filtered out by natural selection. It is a common creationist lie to mention only half of the evolutionary process. It is random mutation and natural selection working together that drive evolution. Neither one alone is enough to do it. So if someone says either "Mutations alone will not account for evolution" or "Natural selection does not explain evolution" they are correct, but they are also being dishonest since anyone who understands evolution knows it is both that drive evolution.
60s chic

Allentown, PA

#63190 Dec 4, 2012
60s chic wrote:
Nature has her secrets. Not everything can be created or analyzed in a test tube or a petri dish. But someday, who knows.
Just for fun, an old Twilight Zone episode (part 5)- "The Sixth Finger!". Far-fetched, but than I remember when I thought that traveling to the moon was a science fiction tale. I wonder what man will really look like a million years from now, that is if the human race survives that long.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63191 Dec 4, 2012
A little bit better wording on my last post:

New information comes from random mutations. That information gets filtered by natural selection. Not only are bad genes filtered out, if a mutation is beneficial for some and not others the people who do not react positively to that mutation eventually get filtered out. For example take the gene that causes sickle cell anemia. It is a "recessive" gene (but not really). Just having one copy of that gene increases your resistance to malaria. Having two of them may, and may is a very important word, give you sickle cell anemia. The people who are susceptible to sickle cell anemia have been largely filtered out. There are still a few who get the disease though the gene, and therefore the number of people who have a double shot of it, are widespread.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63192 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Please don't quote out of context, it is too easy to change the meaning of the quote.
Remember when I corrected you on your claim that mutations are harmful? I said that we had on the average 150 mutations each. If mutations are harmful 150 harmful mutations would surely be deadly.
And hear you go, a peer reviewed article on the subject:
http://www.genetics.org/content/156/1/297.lon...
So where in that article says 150 mutations in humans?

Since: Sep 12

Arlington, TX

#63193 Dec 4, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Alright, then I apologize for calling you stupid.

I am perhaps overly sensitive to various tricks that creationists try to pull. When you were honestly answered that random mutations is where new information came from I got angry at how you tried to change the question.

And to show I mean it I will give the complete answer. New information does come from random mutations. It gets filtered out by natural selection. It is a common creationist lie to mention only half of the evolutionary process. It is random mutation and natural selection working together that drive evolution. Neither one alone is enough to do it. So if someone says either "Mutations alone will not account for evolution" or "Natural selection does not explain evolution" they are correct, but they are also being dishonest since anyone who understands evolution knows it is both that drive evolution.
It all started somewhere meaning following the rules of evolution a single called organism copied its self. Did this happen because of design, nature, or choice? Than it gives birth to billions of random sexually reproductive species? Than is there some transition from single cell to 2 than 3 cells and up to more complex stuff?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63194 Dec 4, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So where in that article says 150 mutations in humans?
This article claims a slightly higher rate, 175 per generation:

" The average mutation rate was estimated to be ~2.5 × 10&#8722;8 mutations per nucleotide site or 175 mutations per diploid genome per generation."

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
One Word (Jan '09) 5 min -Papa-Smurf- 18,277
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) (Dec '14) 5 min all my fault 5,017
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 6 min Hippy Rick 2,310
Word Association. (Nov '10) 6 min -Papa-Smurf- 20,096
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 8 min all my fault 34,191
Word Association (Mar '10) 8 min -Papa-Smurf- 21,849
News Thousands of demonstrators protest Trump in Atl... 9 min Battle Tested 1,323
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 44 min LIM 71,175
Back In The Day ... for the third time! 2 hr Parden Pard 249
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 3 hr all my fault 211,404
A to Z songs by title or group! 5 hr liam cul8r 981
More from around the web