Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222738 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

#65387 Dec 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Never mind, I Google searched it myself. Two words: Thrust Fault.
And that is a geology question not an evolution question.
I did address them to you since you know about geology

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#65388 Dec 14, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
How simplistic ....and I am not a YEC. If they win the day, that is just a bonus.
Listen. Are you disputing the fact that 'ancient ervs' that link to common ancestry are based on extinct retrovirus that you cannot observe?
That is it. You don't have to gobble on about anything more.
Win the day? Is this a raffle?

If grandma made bread and left the recipe behind, I don't have to see a loaf of her original bread to make that bread from the recipe. If I am not some anti-science lunatic and instead am a trained baker, making that bread come out like grandma's is a cinch.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65389 Dec 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
TheDude, Phoenix is not from an old ERV, it is from a very recent one, as far as ERV's go.
As ERV's go, but as we know from flu viruses for example viruses can evolve quite quickly. "Recent" ERV's are ones such as those we share with chimps, which will generally only show genetic drift comparable to that of the difference between the human genomes and chimp genomes as a whole, which is why they are (mostly) identical, as well as being orthologous. Maz's point therefore is that the virus responsible for an orthologous ERV from the LUCA of chimps and humans (approximately 6-7MYA) is probably no longer around anymore. Which may be correct. But as you point out:
Subduction Zone wrote:
The fact that we were able to reconstruct an ERV as a working virus shows that we are correct in calling them ERV's where V stands for virus. Mav has no real answer for this and never will.
Exactamundo. Hence Maz is rehashing the "How do you know where you there" argument in the face of evidence. Because an invisible magical Jew just MIGHT have done it differently because we weren't born then.

It convinces Russ and Cybele anyway.
Subduction Zone wrote:
Old ancestral ERV's, say once that we share with mice. which have been separated from us for who knows how many millions of years, 50 millions at least. have evolved so much that we can only tell they are ERV's buy their shape. Of course evolution predicts a whole range of ERV's from very fresh recent ones like Phoenix which can be reactivated to ones that we have no idea of what they originally were.
This difference is a problem for creationism. Why would there be any difference in ERV's with that paradigm? But none for the TOE. It is what is expected.
I pointed this out to Mav a couple of days ago at least and she kept missing it. Now she tries to bring up this positive point for evolution as if it were a negative. Of course that is her mental disability rising to the surface.
No disagreements there.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65390 Dec 14, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you care that people (most likely the hippies) in Europe are climbing the upside down mountain (I believe it's the Bugarach)on doomsday?
No.
Cybele wrote:
Does your pal here Subduction Zone have an explanation to its mystery? Does the TOE have an explanation?
Yes.

Natural selection.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#65391 Dec 14, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for that. I know the guys will be real sad when I let them know.
Remind them to also read Darwin's own disclaimer in his book of Evolutionary Theory. There are very good reasons why we all contain "junk" DNA. Unfortunately, many people refuse to read The Holy Texts;perhaps, because they fear they might just learn the truth instead of the B.S.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65392 Dec 14, 2012
STEPHMAR wrote:
<quoted text>Evolutionary Theory is nonsense;and,those who support it, know this for a fact.
In that case you got 3077 pages of catching up to do.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65393 Dec 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Never mind, I Google searched it myself. Two words: Thrust Fault.
And that is a geology question not an evolution question.
Ah, I figured she was talking about the Jim Jones wannabees.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#65394 Dec 14, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
link to what? Someone from Europe told someone I know...LOL
I heard people there believe that aliens are coming out on doomsday and that they're climbing that upside down mountain because they think it's the safest place. talk about abduction zone. hehe.
BTW, why do upside down mountains exist?
And of course the upside down mountain is not really upside down. It has younger sedimentary rocks on the bottom and older ones on top.

There are actually two ways this could be accomplished. On a smaller scale there are recumbent folds. That occurs when layers of strata are squeezed so much from either side that some of the strata folds over the other layers:
http://www.google.com/imgres...

If you look at that image and erode off the top third you will see that all of the next remaining third will have reversed beds.

On a large scale this normally does not happen. Instead a fault occurs and one layer of rock is pushed up and over the one ext to it. At the contact point between the two faults you will have older rock over younger rock. When millions of tons of rock are thrust over other rock it does leave rather obvious traces. Up close the fact that something humongous was going on is very obvious.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65395 Dec 14, 2012
STEPHMAR wrote:
<quoted text>Remind them to also read Darwin's own disclaimer in his book of Evolutionary Theory.
You mean the bit where he said he MIGHT be wrong? Don't worry, he's since been vindicated for the most part:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...
STEPHMAR wrote:
There are very good reasons why we all contain "junk" DNA. Unfortunately, many people refuse to read The Holy Texts;perhaps, because they fear they might just learn the truth instead of the B.S.
Whoa! Don't tell that to Maz! ALL DNA is supposed to be "100% functional!"

Well, except for these little bits here and there which have gone through a radiation poisoning-like mutation rate. Me, I thought radiation poisoning could be pretty serious.(shrug)
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65396 Dec 14, 2012
STEPHMAR wrote:
<quoted text>Remind them to also read Darwin's own disclaimer in his book of Evolutionary Theory.
You mean the bit where he said he MIGHT be wrong? Don't worry, he's since been vindicated for the most part:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...
STEPHMAR wrote:
There are very good reasons why we all contain "junk" DNA. Unfortunately, many people refuse to read The Holy Texts;perhaps, because they fear they might just learn the truth instead of the B.S.
Whoa! Don't tell that to Maz! ALL DNA is supposed to be "100% functional!"

Well, except for these little bits here and there which have gone through a radiation poisoning-like mutation rate. Me, I thought radiation poisoning could be pretty serious.(shrug)

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#65397 Dec 14, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
<quoted text>
Yes.
Natural selection.
LOL! Very funny.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#65398 Dec 14, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, I figured she was talking about the Jim Jones wannabees.
No. It's the same people who made the crop circles

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#65399 Dec 14, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, I figured she was talking about the Jim Jones wannabees.
I haven't heard of them. I Google searched "Upside down mountain" and found a reference to a mountain where the strata on top are younger than strata on the bottom. Many many years ago when mapping for a summer undergraduate geology course we found a thrust fault in the section that the team that I was in with three others found thrust fault. It was pretty cool. The area had not been mapped yet and even our instructors were all over it after we found it.

“Eleanor, Where is your heart?!”

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#65400 Dec 14, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>How do you know genes were created by God, Rose Tyler?
Are you trying to say the fossil record was created by Satan? Care to pull up the evidence for that?
Are you trying to say it's impossible for God to send a flood and thereby create a few fossils to make a record that Satan wants to twist?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#65401 Dec 14, 2012
How do geologists explain this?

http://beyondthebrook.files.wordpress.com/201...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65402 Dec 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't heard of them. I Google searched "Upside down mountain" and found a reference to a mountain where the strata on top are younger than strata on the bottom. Many many years ago when mapping for a summer undergraduate geology course we found a thrust fault in the section that the team that I was in with three others found thrust fault. It was pretty cool. The area had not been mapped yet and even our instructors were all over it after we found it.
Cool. I looked up her mountain and apparently some Mayan nuts think it's groovy for different reasons:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugarach#Cult_se...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#65403 Dec 14, 2012
Cybele wrote:
How do geologists explain this?
http://beyondthebrook.files.wordpress.com/201...
What? That is not a geology question. Those rocks were set that way by man. Luckily for you I am almost all-knowing (wink):

http://www.theforgottentechnology.com/
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65404 Dec 14, 2012
I fish wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you trying to say it's impossible for God to send a flood and thereby create a few fossils to make a record that Satan wants to twist?
It's not impossible for God to do anything.

That's why it's not scientific.

Well, I'm not sure if it can create a rock it can't lift though. But that's the fundie's problem.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#65405 Dec 14, 2012
I fish wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you trying to say it's impossible for God to send a flood and thereby create a few fossils to make a record that Satan wants to twist?
The fossil record could not have been made by a global flood.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#65406 Dec 14, 2012
Cybele wrote:
How do geologists explain this?
http://beyondthebrook.files.wordpress.com/201...
People.

With too much time on their hands.

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
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 3 min Brandiiiiiiii 27,256
News Strange bedfellows: Jimmy Carter defends Trump 10 min INFIDEL 217
Phrases that you don't hear very often (Nov '11) 18 min Princess Hey 736
What's your tip for the day? (Jul '14) 19 min david04 2,321
Let's play "follow the word" (Jun '08) 19 min Princess Hey 49,894
* crazy passwords * 49 min Princess Hey 40
*add A word / drop a word* (Nov '12) 56 min Princess Hey 17,629
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 hr avon5735 223,300
True False Game (Jun '11) 2 hr avon5735 15,552
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 3 hr Brandiiiiiiii 6,022
More from around the web