Evolution vs. Creation

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

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#63616 Dec 6, 2012
Makesure100 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am pleased to see that you incorporate evolution as a theory. It will always be a theory because we don't have the fossil evidence to prove otherwise. Creation is the only adaption as to why we are even here. However, it takes humility to accept a creator.
... and now we see this canard for the billionth time. Can't you morons ever learn? Anything? Anything at all that's actually ... oh I don't know, real?

Since: Sep 12

United States

#63617 Dec 6, 2012
I'm not sure how to word this question but ill give it a shot.
How does nature select 2 species to breed? Just guessing here but if say species A can evolve into an infinite amount of other species would there ever be a point they could all have produced a alphabet soup?

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#63618 Dec 6, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
no, the watchmaker story has been debunked hundreds of times over. Our conscious evolved along with us. Other animals also have a conscious, why do you think we are unique in having one?
We can get a mortgage TOOL. Marry, buy a car, etc..........

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#63619 Dec 6, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
no, the watchmaker story has been debunked hundreds of times over. Our conscious evolved along with us. Other animals also have a conscious, why do you think we are unique in having one?
Commit ingenious crimes......

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63620 Dec 6, 2012
Makesure100 wrote:
<quoted text>
We can get a mortgage TOOL. Marry, buy a car, etc..........
Do you have a point here or are you just making absolutely sure that we know you are an idiot?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63621 Dec 6, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
I'm not sure how to word this question but ill give it a shot.
How does nature select 2 species to breed? Just guessing here but if say species A can evolve into an infinite amount of other species would there ever be a point they could all have produced a alphabet soup?
It may seem a bit self proving, but a creature is "selected" when it breeds successfully. A variation that is well adapted to a specific niche will replace the variations that are not well adapted by out breeding them.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63622 Dec 6, 2012
Makesure100 wrote:
<quoted text>
Commit ingenious crimes......
Aah, idiot it is then.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#63623 Dec 6, 2012
straa wrote:
On behalf of Britain I would like to appologise for UK sending all our crazy evangelists and wasps to USA centuries ago, now they're your problem, sorry, but I am happy that we don't have many left in britain now, the ones that werent burnt at the stake were expelled to America, that's where your problems with creos arise from, again sorry, but britain haa advanced muxh further after they went, its not a xoinxidence that the industrial revolution and enlightenment was born in britain right after we deported all our fundies to your god old USA, again sorry
What do you mean?
Are you indirectly or directly saying that Christianity are not in the majority in the UK ?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#63624 Dec 6, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
I'm not sure how to word this question but ill give it a shot.
How does nature select 2 species to breed? Just guessing here but if say species A can evolve into an infinite amount of other species would there ever be a point they could all have produced a alphabet soup?
Nature doesn't select, the term natural selection is a coined one, not like the face of a mountain or the raw end. The concept of selection is not at all directed, it's not intelligent, it's whatever survives better ... and most species do not have binary breeding systems. Binary breeding is a new, and highly unreliable, system of reproduction as it is more prone to errors, if we didn't have a specific set of mental traits we would probably have been utterly annihilated after a few hundred years. We give such concepts human like traits so others can better relate to them, it's suppose to make it easier for you to learn, it seems to have had the opposite effect on creatards, but that's not surprising.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#63625 Dec 6, 2012
Makesure100 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am pleased to see that you incorporate evolution as a theory. It will always be a theory because we don't have the fossil evidence to prove otherwise. Creation is the only adaption as to why we are even here. However, it takes humility to accept a creator.
True.

Since: Sep 12

United States

#63626 Dec 6, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>It may seem a bit self proving, but a creature is "selected" when it breeds successfully. A variation that is well adapted to a specific niche will replace the variations that are not well adapted by out breeding them.
Alright but how does it come to be that 2 of a compatible species would have come to be at the same time?(What are the odds really?)

Since: Sep 12

United States

#63627 Dec 6, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Nature doesn't select, the term natural selection is a coined one, not like the face of a mountain or the raw end. The concept of selection is not at all directed, it's not intelligent, it's whatever survives better ... and most species do not have binary breeding systems. Binary breeding is a new, and highly unreliable, system of reproduction as it is more prone to errors, if we didn't have a specific set of mental traits we would probably have been utterly annihilated after a few hundred years. We give such concepts human like traits so others can better relate to them, it's suppose to make it easier for you to learn, it seems to have had the opposite effect on creatards, but that's not surprising.
Didn't you just say that when a mutation took place it would only remain in the genes if it was a good mutation?

"Binary breeding is a new, and highly unreliable, system of reproduction as it is more prone to errors"
Wouldn't that mean that asexual would have worked better and therefore nature would go back to being that?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#63629 Dec 6, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Alright but how does it come to be that 2 of a compatible species would have come to be at the same time?(What are the odds really?)
Odds do not describe what happens at all. You are still thinking like a creatard, stop that and you will actually have time to learn instead of asking random stupid questions on a forum full of random people.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63630 Dec 6, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Alright but how does it come to be that 2 of a compatible species would have come to be at the same time?(What are the odds really?)
No, quit thinking of individuals. Populations evolve, not individuals.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#63631 Dec 6, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You may have taken those classes but it is sad to see that you did not learn what evidence is.
Similarities in DNA is evidence for evolution. It is an undeniable fact by anyone who understands evidence.
And one more point on giraffes. If the environment changed again so that grass was constantly available the extra energy required to grow a long neck would be detrimental and short giraffes would evolve again.
I didn't see the evidence, that's right. I was hoping for something like evidence in mutagenesis in nature or in a lab. I am really more interested in genetics than fossil records as some evidence turned out to be a hoax.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#63632 Dec 6, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see the evidence, that's right. I was hoping for something like evidence in mutagenesis in nature or in a lab. I am really more interested in genetics than fossil records as some evidence turned out to be a hoax.
Laboratory evidence can be hoaxed too. That is another reason there is peer review. Also science must be repeatable. One fossil can be hoaxed, many fossils cannot be hoaxed.

I am surprised that you have no interest in finding out what is scientific evidence.

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#63633 Dec 6, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Aah, idiot it is then.
NO fossil evidence, just a large gap in between. The easy way out is to say there is no creator..........freaky and isolated, solitude. No proof.........no proof.

Since: Sep 12

United States

#63634 Dec 6, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Odds do not describe what happens at all. You are still thinking like a creatard, stop that and you will actually have time to learn instead of asking random stupid questions on a forum full of random people.
I always thought of thinking in odds and statistics was more a mathematical thing.

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#63635 Dec 6, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Laboratory evidence can be hoaxed too. That is another reason there is peer review. Also science must be repeatable. One fossil can be hoaxed, many fossils cannot be hoaxed.
I am surprised that you have no interest in finding out what is scientific evidence.
Science doesn't exsist Freakshow. Lets have a party.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#63636 Dec 6, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see the evidence, that's right. I was hoping for something like evidence in mutagenesis in nature or in a lab. I am really more interested in genetics than fossil records as some evidence turned out to be a hoax.
"Mutagenesis?" These things don't just happen over night, and individuals don't change much at all, you are an evolutionary transition from your parents to any offspring you have, or may have. Look in the mirror, it's happening right before you eyes right this minute ... oh wait, you won't see it that way, because ... I repeat, it's not noticeable changes on individuals, the changes are so slow, if you watched a dinosaur evolve into a bird in real time, you'd still say you were watching dinosaurs the whole time ... and even today you'd be calling the birds dinosaurs ... because you wouldn't see the changes. That's why we didn't realize it was happening until we saw the fossil record, and even then, scientists doubted it was what some thought it was until genetics filled in the blanks with some undeniable information, evidence that could only point toward evolution.

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
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 6 min Princess Hey 77,647
Add a word and drop a word (Jan '14) 8 min Princess Hey 1,948
Merry Christmas Topix, Thanks For,...? 9 min mr goodwrench 122
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 12 min dragoon70056 2,870
Add of the DAY 13 min Ad2it 2
4 Word Game (Use Same Letter) 40 min Princess Hey 201
"OLD SAYINGS" - - - Feel free to post them here... 40 min NinaRocks 80
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 1 hr -Lea- 25,564
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? 1 hr Princess Hey 173
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 3 hr _hellbilly_ 152,433
More from around the web