Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 comments on the Jan 6, 2011, Best of New Orleans story 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.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#64018 Dec 8, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
Congratulations Mav, you misinterpreted another article. And what is that supposed to prove?
The writers of that paper clearly do not believe what you believe so why do you think that it supports you in any way?
All you have offered to date is a mixture of articles that you did not understand and misinterpreted. eaily debunkable sources, and the rare fringe article of dubious veracity.
And this last article is from a bit of a questionable source. Due to economics open access journals are less reliable than regular peer reviewed journals. The peer review of your article is a bit dubious to say the least.
I have not misinterpreted anything at all. The majority of the research articles I can present are peer reviewed research, including the one on the deteriorating human genome. You have flown from that and resorted again to hubris and opinion.

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/1...

My argument on arch still stands that it is a feathered dinosaur and nothing more with a reversed hallux predating it by 60my.

You bombed out on junk dna and cannot wipe that egg off your face nor can you refute that creos have had a prediction validated whilst you could not even make one.

Your choice to handwave the above away does not make it go away.

So again you are full of hubris and scratch around trying to score useless points and offer gibberish.

You evotards wanted peer reviewed research and you got it. Now you are still quacking, when you basically present nothing more than your twoddly opinion and stuff all peer reviewed research of your own. Hypocrites!. You ridicule peer reviewed research on the back of your uneducated opinion when it suits you.

Evos look better when they are chasing their tails in philosophy. That way no one can easily tell how ignorant some are.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#64020 Dec 8, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Recapping bullshit that does not make it any more true the tenth time around than the first time.
Pick a subject and see if you can prove your claim. Until then you are debunked by the Gish Gallop rule of debate.
I don't bow down to Gish any more than you bow down to Ruben who disagrees with the dino to bird deal.

The subject is non coding dna, and right back to the start just for you...

The claim is 1. Evolutionists are big mouthed geese quacking.
2. Creationists predictions have been validated
3. TOE could make no prediction on non coding dna.

Evidence: A decade of 'junk dna' has been falsified and validated creationist predictions and falsified evolutionists claims around 98% junk dna.

Your turn....Go...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#64021 Dec 8, 2012
Again, if you want to use a source that disagrees with you, you need to show how it is wrong and how your conclusion is correct.

Your last one disagrees with your conclusion. Therefore you have misinterpreted it. There conclusion is that their data supports a specific model of evolution, not the bullshit you preach:

"The importance of effective population size in influencing the organization and complexity of genomes has recently been highlighted [37]. Our findings support the idea that microevolutionary processes are also strongly influenced by population size, and are evidence for the nearly neutral model of molecular evolution [38] in mammalian genomes."

You keep making the mistake of thinking a constraint on rate is a constraint on how far a creature can evolve. A constraint on speed of 20 mph does not mean you cannot take a 1,000 mile trip. It will only take you 50 hours, where at 50 miles per hour it would take you 20 hours.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64022 Dec 8, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
I have seen evidence that ocean water was once over the hills of Kentucky. The man that showed it to me is a world renowned agate expert, but what he found wasn't an agate and it could only have came from the ocean.
Yup, from at least as far back as 300 million years ago.

Not in the time period when humans existed.

Since: Sep 12

Fort Worth, TX

#64023 Dec 8, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>Pfft. no. I am not saying god or jesus even exist, let alone have author anything! I am saying that man wrote the bible so that they could control other man with it.

There is no way that a god would worry about female virginity, so much so that it would have the female murdered for not being one. Only a man, who believes that women are property would worry about female virginity.

Only man would have slaves and think that it was OK.

Only man would think that killing a slave would be OK.
It is easy to look at some else's life or into some story and say what you would have done. However it is much more difficult to look at our own lives sometimes and not just see our problems but also to find the solution.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#64024 Dec 8, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't bow down to Gish any more than you bow down to Ruben who disagrees with the dino to bird deal.
The subject is non coding dna, and right back to the start just for you...
The claim is 1. Evolutionists are big mouthed geese quacking.
2. Creationists predictions have been validated
3. TOE could make no prediction on non coding dna.
Evidence: A decade of 'junk dna' has been falsified and validated creationist predictions and falsified evolutionists claims around 98% junk dna.
Your turn....Go...
No, that was never the case. The term "junk DNA" is a popular press description. It is not that of evolution. The finding that non-coding DNA may have some purpose does not debunk the theory of evolution in any way. In fact when "junk DNA" was first discovered it bothered certain evolutionists since they had no explanation for it with the theory.

And you still have not debunked the concept of ERV's. Most ERV's have no purpose, but since we knew their source they were never considered to be "junk DNA". You need to find something that specifically shows that ERV's do not support evolution and we are wrong about their source.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#64025 Dec 8, 2012
And Maz, since you seem to think you are an expert on genomes, can you explain why chickens have genes for teeth, scales, dinosaur type tails, and "hands"?

http://www.nature.com/scitable/content/the-di...

Since: Nov 12

Milk River, Canada

#64026 Dec 8, 2012
MazHere wrote:
Subby
Note above evos find the accumulation of deleterious mutations is called small effect when we can see all the diseases that affect mankind and no other,...
Not to contest any of your larger points, but this one observation, of how we see all the diseases that affect mankind and no other, does not seem incompatible with evolutionary theory to me. As to whether this is of small effect or not, I'd have to look more closely, but on the surface I don't see how your observation either supports or stands against it.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#64027 Dec 8, 2012
The people of the time of Nimrod could have been familar with earth cycles and alternating ocean flow patterns which are identifiable through the year. There is one current that flows from China to Mexico and completes a cycle in about 3 years to my knowledge. A plastic ship made of recycled bottles (The Plastiki) was made to follow ocean currents and the findings may prove how debri can continue to move around the ocean by being carried along with the currents.
Linda the lonely widow

Plainfield, IL

#64028 Dec 8, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
The people of the time of Nimrod could have been familar with earth cycles and alternating ocean flow patterns which are identifiable through the year. There is one current that flows from China to Mexico and completes a cycle in about 3 years to my knowledge. A plastic ship made of recycled bottles (The Plastiki) was made to follow ocean currents and the findings may prove how debri can continue to move around the ocean by being carried along with the currents.
Dumbass

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#64029 Dec 8, 2012
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because how God does something isn't understood does not make it magic.
300 years ago air conditioning would have seemed like magic.
100 years ago man on the moon would have been science fiction and magic
60 years ago cell phones would have been impossible.
Just because we don't understand how it is done doesn't mean we won't ever.
You say:
"Just because we don't understand how it is done doesn't mean we won't ever."

Exactly....Just because we don't yet know (for sure) how the universe began doesn't mean we never will.

Just because we don't yet know how life began 3.5 billion years ago doesn't mean we never will.

And all the things you mention could be explainable even 500 years ago to someone who wasn't subscribing to the Goddidit line and understood logic.

WE are just fairly recently beginning to understand that we ARE descended along the great ape line of hominids and were not purpose made 6,000 years ago by a floaty thing.

After finding the first bones it took us less than a hundred years to prove the lineage.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#64031 Dec 8, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
The people of the time of Nimrod could have been familar with earth cycles and alternating ocean flow patterns which are identifiable through the year. There is one current that flows from China to Mexico and completes a cycle in about 3 years to my knowledge. A plastic ship made of recycled bottles (The Plastiki) was made to follow ocean currents and the findings may prove how debri can continue to move around the ocean by being carried along with the currents.
Do you *really* think Nimrods contemporaries understood alternating ocean flow patterns?? Hell, they didn't even understand 'Germ Theory'

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#64032 Dec 8, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Arch has not gained any bird traits nor loose any dino traits, that appears to be what you refuse to suck up.
Arch has a wishbone just like a theropod, feathers like a theropod, three digits like a theropod, has a moveable thighbone like a dinosaur and a beak like a dino and a plethora of other species.
Arch does not have a reversed hallux like a bird, hollow bones like a bird, a moveable thighbone like a bird, a wishbone like a modern bird, nor a beak like a modern bird.
So I will ask again seeing as you evos have bombed out with every try,eg hollow bones what traits are intermedicate or a mix that suggests arch is anything more than a variety of dinosaur?
Evos are you still wiping egg off their faces around their hollow boned dinosaurs?
It has feathers like a bird, wings like a bird, it can fly (though not as good as a bird.
If it had all the features of a modern bird it would be a bird not a transitional species!

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#64033 Dec 8, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
I have seen evidence that ocean water was once over the hills of Kentucky. The man that showed it to me is a world renowned agate expert, but what he found wasn't an agate and it could only have came from the ocean.
You will find that ocean water at one time or another has covered many parts of the Earth. Over millions of years the continents have moved and stuck up and/or plowed deep. I now live in an area that was covered by water about 1.5 billion years ago and you can still find occasional artifacts bearing witness to this.

I used to live in the Cincinnati/Dayton Ohio area and the whole area was covered in fossils from the Ordovician period nearly 500 million years ago.

I hear there are ocean artifact on Mt. Everest. We do know that that mountain was once underwater...actually was part/neighbor of Africa at one point...millions and millions of years ago
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#64034 Dec 8, 2012
Linda the lonely widow wrote:
<quoted text>Dumbass
Smartaleck

Level 1

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#64035 Dec 8, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
"Prof. Beer was part of the team on board "Mediterranean Explorer" that recently headed to the Black Sea off the coast of Turkey, the site where historians believe the great biblical flood occurred. EcoOcean and an international team believe they have found evidence to substantiate what is written in the Bible.
Says Weil, "We found that indeed a flood happened around that time. From core samples, we see that a flood broke through the natural barrier separating the Mediterranean Sea and the freshwater Black Sea, bringing with it seashells that only grow in a marine environment. There was no doubt that it was a fast flood -- one that covered an expanse four times the size of Israel. It might not have been Noah, as it is written in the Bible, but we believe people in that region had to build boats in order to save their animals from drowning. We think that the ones who survived were fishermen -- they already had the boats."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/...
And this link to some info from a religious organization.
http://www.ucg.org/christian-living/evidence-...
Geology also has its problems and terms like 'reworking' to explain why fossils are where they should not be and visa versa.
I don't think any evidence against a global flood is any more robust than any evidence for one.
first, many ancient civilizations have stories of great floods. The Epic of Gilgamesh is from the first known writing in history and has a great flood in it. which only lends evidence that the bible plagiarized stories from older civilizations. Some people believe there was land between England and France and that a large Earthquake caused a tsunami, flooding the land...

fossils locations are easily explained when one considers plate tectonics...you realize that at one point there was one big super continent called Pangaea

BTW the flood you are talking about predates you biblical account

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outburst_flood
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#64036 Dec 8, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
You will find that ocean water at one time or another has covered many parts of the Earth. Over millions of years the continents have moved and stuck up and/or plowed deep. I now live in an area that was covered by water about 1.5 billion years ago and you can still find occasional artifacts bearing witness to this.
I used to live in the Cincinnati/Dayton Ohio area and the whole area was covered in fossils from the Ordovician period nearly 500 million years ago.
I hear there are ocean artifact on Mt. Everest. We do know that that mountain was once underwater...actually was part/neighbor of Africa at one point...millions and millions of years ago
Thank you, for the honest reply. I'm not here to contest currant understanding of timelines, YET.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#64037 Dec 8, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you *really* think Nimrods contemporaries understood alternating ocean flow patterns?? Hell, they didn't even understand 'Germ Theory'
Yes, I believe they were the first pyramid builders which were aligned with celestial cycles as well.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#64038 Dec 8, 2012
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
first, many ancient civilizations have stories of great floods. The Epic of Gilgamesh is from the first known writing in history and has a great flood in it. which only lends evidence that the bible plagiarized stories from older civilizations. Some people believe there was land between England and France and that a large Earthquake caused a tsunami, flooding the land...
fossils locations are easily explained when one considers plate tectonics...you realize that at one point there was one big super continent called Pangaea
BTW the flood you are talking about predates you biblical account
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outburst_flood
Maz is from the anything but evolution crowd. She often uses mutually disagreeing sources, and even disagrees with her own sources quite often. As long as it seems to disagree with evolution they are okay with her. She has no real points to make. Her points fall apart when they are examined.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#64039 Dec 8, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
So how does the genome know what is or is not a beneficial mutation?
?!!!
It doesn't.
If it helps the individual survive then it will be passed on to next generation. If not it dies with the individual.
MazHere wrote:
"When the bacteria were moved onto a more fit background the mutations were less needed and so selection slowed down (It didn't stop).
“These three alleles all reduced morphological defects caused by expression of the foreign pathway.”
Three of the mutations reduced defects so increasing fitness of the bacteria."
I did not say the research said that adaptation would stop. I said that the cost is more than the benefits.
That's a presumption on your part.
If the cost is greater than the benefit then those mutations wouldn't have survived.
MazHere wrote:
So a REDUCTION in defects is now what has happend for billions of years. A reduction is not sufficient because over 4 billion years the ever accumulating effects of deleterious mutations and compounded epigentic effects should have grinded the process of adaptation to at least a halt.
No because natural selection (what survives breeds) clears them out.
Species adapt to an environment. If the environment doesn't change then once fully adapted the species won't change.
MazHere wrote:
The process would have to clean out all 'the badies', not just reduce them, for the 4 billion year thing to work?
But there's always new ones. Evolution never stops.
MazHere wrote:
The other thing again is that evos could not accept their own initial data. They had to mess around with more biased algorithmic magic, another landscape, to make it fit in with TOE.
Like you understand the data?
MazHere wrote:
I still maintain the data supports a creationist paradigm and rhetoric supports TOE.
Your opinion is irrelevant.

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) 2 min Cyan in CA 78,886
+=Keep 1 Drop 1=+ 3 STACK (Mar '13) 10 min Camilla 8,013
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 13 min Doug77 31,520
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 18 min wichita-rick 161,366
Word Association (Jun '10) 20 min Mega Monster 27,300
Let's Play Songs Titled with Two Words ... 39 min I Am No One_ 766
Favorite Oldies Songs (Jun '10) 41 min I Am No One_ 18,801
motorcycle traveling stories 55 min Mega Monster 541
News The trooper fired at the motorcycle, and then d... 1 hr Thugs Wear Badges 93
Whatcha' doing? (Apr '12) 2 hr Ferretman 8,331
News Freak lawnmower accident shoots wire through ma... 5 hr Michael Satterfield 8
More from around the web