Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.
Comments
60,861 - 60,880 of 115,169 Comments Last updated 11 min ago
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#65024 Dec 13, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
Experience says we will probably need to tell you this at least fifty times or more before you sheepishly drop this idiotic idea.
Oh, a thousand times more at least. There's no scientific theory of creationism, but there IS a scientific theory of creationists that makes valid successful testable scientific predictions - they will constantly lie and ignore anything theologically inconvenient without addressing the posts that demonstrate them to be wrong.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#65025 Dec 13, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
Stuff like this however--IS actually "interesting"!!
The two genes SLC24A5 and SLC45A2 were recently identified as major determinants of pigmentation in humans and in other vertebrates. The allele p.A111T in the former gene and the allele p.L374F in the latter gene are both nearly fixed in light-skinned Europeans, and can therefore be considered ancestry informative marker (AIMs).
(oops-- forgot the site cite!!)
I don't normally dwell on the actual chemistry of genetics. It's sufficient for me to know that Melanin is important because it blocks UV radiation. It would seem that pigmentation has become a bit more about presentation than function among the Caucasian tribes but that's a whole new can of worms.

Curiously, I suspect that appearance and personality are linked in the European tribes. It would seem that there's a genetic advantage to visually announcing yourself before any further dialog when in Europe. One can only wonder!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#65026 Dec 13, 2012
A specific article that supports me still eludes me. I have found a reference to mouse human genome differences, but since it is a professional journal the bit I want seems to be buried deep inside the article and is not available at the levels I can read.

Perhaps it is still to new of a topic for it to be widespread in the popular press. I still stand by my prediction. ERV's that we share with mice would have many more differences between them than the same ERV's that we share with other apes.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#65027 Dec 13, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't normally dwell on the actual chemistry of genetics. It's sufficient for me to know that Melanin is important because it blocks UV radiation. It would seem that pigmentation has become a bit more about presentation than function among the Caucasian tribes but that's a whole new can of worms.
Curiously, I suspect that appearance and personality are linked in the European tribes. It would seem that there's a genetic advantage to visually announcing yourself before any further dialog when in Europe. One can only wonder!
Oh oui oui, et, est-ce que votre annonce un modèle français, que "vous savez t être tellement" parce que l'internet a dit?

AIMS perhaps Would be the more suitable acronymn in this instance, eh?
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#65028 Dec 13, 2012
Never seen a flying fish or heard a talking one, but I did see a walking catfish....:)
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#65029 Dec 13, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh oui oui, et, est-ce que votre annonce un modèle français, que "vous savez t être tellement" parce que l'internet a dit?
AIMS perhaps Would be the more suitable acronymn in this instance, eh?
I'm not familiar enough with France or the French to decode that right. I'll assume AIMS is some internet teaching consortium, although there's many references to the acronym. If you're trying to be subtle, it's too subtle!...and I like getting information in return, when I give it!:)

If you're implying that the dialog here is not sufficiently in layman's language, ask! I don't mind explaining and I rarely allude to Internet culture, or at least make sure it's understood that I'm doing so. I'm tragically aware that I may be posting to someone half my age and unaware of things that I find commonplace. It's downright annoying when I find out that a twenty year old has never heard of Laurel and Hardy!

There's a few gaps in my day from work and sleep so when I post, it's those brief recreational moments! It would be bad to do forum talk while at work. They use those waist-high cubicles!
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#65030 Dec 13, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Never seen a flying fish or heard a talking one, but I did see a walking catfish....:)
Those really exist too! Although they really just twist around on the ground to find new water. They were a big thing when they were announced in the 70's.

“Eleanor, Where is your heart?!”

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#65031 Dec 13, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
We've already had a taste of what the world would be like if religion rules....it was called the Dark Ages, and the place was really a sh!thole.
Religion was worse then dictators rule because the religion thought it was doing 'the right thing.' Many, many innocent people died.
Do you mean to say that during the dark ages God's will was being done on earth as it was being done in heaven?

“Eleanor, Where is your heart?!”

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#65032 Dec 13, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Never seen a flying fish or heard a talking one, but I did see a walking catfish....:)
Many are familiar with the Chalk-browed Mockingbird as well.

It has been classified as Least concern by the IUCN.(BLI 2004)

[edit] References Thank you Wikipedia. sigh. Everyone knows it's a sin to kill a mocking bird #%$$& it
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#65033 Dec 13, 2012
I fish wrote:
<quoted text>
Many are familiar with the Chalk-browed Mockingbird as well.
It has been classified as Least concern by the IUCN.(BLI 2004)
[edit] References Thank you Wikipedia. sigh. Everyone knows it's a sin to kill a mocking bird #%$$& it
Darwin was listening for the Mockingbird to sing and they appropriate the calls of others, now why is that?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#65034 Dec 13, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Darwin was listening for the Mockingbird to sing and they appropriate the calls of others, now why is that?
Without researching the scientific literature on the subject, I couldn't say. But I bet you'll be able to tie it into "Systems, Cycles and Patterns" somehow, right?
Jesus Diablo

Plymouth, MN

#65035 Dec 13, 2012
While science and religion are not incompatible, using religion as a substitute for science is. You only fool yourself, MazHere (and other creationists), by believing that you can punch holes in scientific theories with religious beliefs masquerading as science. Those of us who follow science entertain ourselves by engaging and provoking you and others who share your views. And yet, there is some value in kicking the wasp's nest: by drawing you out, we can more readily pinpoint your weaknesses and collectively shake our heads over your fallacious arguments. And with this information strengthen our positions and sharpen our arguments.

In short, MazHere, you are the worse possible spokesperson for your views.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#65036 Dec 13, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
The European word "man" means thinker or "men" means to think.
According to whom?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#65037 Dec 13, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
So, not anyone else's problem, till such becomes a problem. A lot of people don't like blond haired people either. Should they all be castrated and dehumanized because of it?
No, and neither should the ones that prefer it, unless of course any of them become willfull ignorance problems, willfully hating on others, for having their OWN likes and dislikes, and of course, thier OWN opinions and beliefs.
I never said anything derogatory but I did quote facts, you don’t like facts? That’s just tough

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#65038 Dec 13, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU seem to be one of those example species with a willfull ignorance problem.
I referenced what Einstien said DIRECTLY (as in from the source of, not from a chain of ignorant, grade school tin can he said she said garbage), based on DIRECT interviews and LETTERS, as spoken and written by the man himself.
Emphasis on "DIRECT", as in out of the mans mouth, and penned from his hands himself.
And it's not nice to ATTACK people, that aren't around to defend themselves especially! So in a right spirit, I shall uphold the original author and interviewer of the articles I quoted, and say, I enjoyed reading them immensely, and found them quite enlightening.
MUCH more so than from a rewritten, not even restated factually, often UNcredible source as wikistoopedia.
Back to the dunce chair for you, and tighten your tin foil caplet, it seems to be somewhat askew, and loosely hanging.
And I quoted directly from his letters, written by himself.

Not misinterpretations of his writing but actual, factual quotes, once again, if you don’t get on well with facts than tough

http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9583...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-04/eins...
http://uctaa.net/articles/meds2/med35/med684....

But hey if you want to make a mockery out of a clever mans life that entirely up to you to rationalise. If you want to lie for you belief and your god than I hope you sleep well on that dies of lies

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#65039 Dec 13, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
Footnote: and to say ANYthing else beyond whathas already been posted on the verbage of Eistien, would not only be "willfully ignorant" it would be utterly "abjectly" ignorant as well, because, the written words of the history of such stated, is all the evidence we have, and beyond that evidence, the truly honest with even HALF a non-dysfunctional brain, could ONLY say, "we DON'T know".
And we don't, because we Weren't there!!
End of PSA.
###
Footnote

To lie in the presence of you god and to make a mockery of a dead mans beliefs is a pathetic way to promote you belief

Einstein Wrote

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

Einstein Wrote

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions."

“Eleanor, Where is your heart?!”

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#65040 Dec 13, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Darwin was listening for the Mockingbird to sing and they appropriate the calls of others, now why is that?
My thought is that a camper is being annoyed by a genuine hoot owl...and God in his foreknowledge provides the mockingbird to pipe up and pretend to be a hoot owl or whatever annoying bird is out there...and the camper starts laughing and being cheered up somehow because the mockingbird is an example of a person saying 'ignore it...it's only noise...watch I can do that'. It's a message in nature of how to deal with evolutionists such aas yourself...but you can use the lesson on the annoying people in your life if you would like.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#65041 Dec 13, 2012
Does anyone know anything about Evolutionary Psychology (EP)?

Is it possible that maybe what I'm experiencing is an evolutionary thing?
newsReports

AOL

#65042 Dec 13, 2012
.

ISRAEL --- VATICAN meetings RE: MIDEAST

&fe ature=plcp

.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#65043 Dec 13, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh yeah sure, the correctly predicted fish-phibian fossil has been "discredited" by footprints found a mere 4-17MYA earlier tops. By footprints made by uh... another fish-phibian.
Duh.
Stop playing with yourself, Dude. Do you lot of boofheads really think your ignorance and gobble outweights the supported claims?
But it is their age that makes these tracks so special: 18 million years older than the earliest known tetrapod body fossils, and 10 million years older than the oldest elpistostegids — Tiktaalik , Panderichthys and their relatives, seen as transitional forms between fishes and tetrapods. The finds suggests that the elpistostegids that we know were late-surviving relics rather than direct transitional forms, and they highlight just how little we know of the earliest history of land vertebrates.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n72...
Already addressed Maz. Get around to it any time ya like. You answer those questions yet?
Here is another evo idiot that sporookes about past famous posts that can never repost them or ask these wonderful questions ever again.

Suck it up Dude. I have to repeat myself again for every looser that drops by. Repost questions Dude child. The answer this one.
How can you tell the difference between a recently inserted erv and not? The answer is you can't.
Retroviruses insert themselves randomly. All we need is just one showing orthology. As it happens we don't just have one.
You may try something called evidence one day. Don't be a dork. If evos can hand wave away anything that does not suit, effectively your erv evidence is a raught and unfalsifiable.
Remarkably, we have found many cases of parallel intron gains at essentially the same sites in independent genotypes. This strongly argues against the common assumption that when two species share introns at the same site, it is always due to inheritance from a common ancestor.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/...
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5957/12...

But although this concept of retrovirus selectivity is currently prevailing [37], practically all genomic regions were reported to be used as primary integration targets, however, with different preferences. There were identified `hot spots' containing integration sites used up to 280 times more frequently than predicted mathematically.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/...
You can't tell. We can. And we've tested it.
Quack quack. Evidence please. Make it peer reviewed seeing as you lot like to quack about it so much yet NEVER present any. Anything you provide, if you bothered, has a base of maybe and perhaps.
No they don't. It is in fact the very PREMISE of evolution, validated by genetic evidence and experiment.
Quack quack. Evidence please. Make it peer reviewed seeing as you lot like to quack about it so much yet NEVER present any. Anything you provide, if you bothered, has a base of maybe and perhaps.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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) 4 min Princess Hey 145,078
Shaun the shaggy Aussie sheep finally shorn smooth 6 min Naughtyrobot 3
TGIF .. EVERYDAY .. I want to ENJOY .. 7 min Alias 26
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 9 min eleanorigby 35,965
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 9 min CrunchyBacon 18,495
+=Keep 1 Drop 1=+ 3 STACK (Mar '13) 17 min Mike Allen 6,867
Fergson Police Dept. 18 min A TROLL NAMED SLACK 344
What's your tip for the day? 50 min Rose of Tralee 795
Texas Governor Rick Perry Indicted 1 hr ---Word Woman--- 227
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••