Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 221445 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.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#68440 Dec 29, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah you are IT alright...and full of it...dipsh!t
Word, I do believe you have nailed him right on his beany little head.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68441 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
What "doctrine?"
Also, yes, ethics are subjective, to gain an objective perspective on what's good and bad one needs the scientific method. Without objectivity you have people sacrificing other people to make believe gods or claiming that "spirits" told them to kill or forcibly submit an entire culture.
Using the scientific method doesn't accurately help us assess what is objectively good or bad. What is good for one person can be bad for others. Unfortunately we can't avoid cultural bias. For example, some religions do not allow them to have blood transfusions even if it benefits them. They're willing to sacrifice their health to benefit their moral principles. And who's to say which is right or wrong, better or worse?

Objectivity has its own merits but impossible to apply without a universal system to allow it. And that what limits reality because each of us see reality differently. We are a diverse population. We are not clones of each other.

Even in the scientific community, for instance, there are competing theories for a given subject no matter each theory has attempted to use the scientific method.

So goodluck with that.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Level 7

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#68442 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
What "doctrine?"
Also, yes, ethics are subjective, to gain an objective perspective on what's good and bad one needs the scientific method. Without objectivity you have people sacrificing other people to make believe gods or claiming that "spirits" told them to kill or forcibly submit an entire culture.
Careful here.

The scientific method has no explicit provisions for ethics. It's a tool to discover how the world actually works instead of relying on "prophet" revelations.

However, there is a component built in discovered by religions - the Golden Rule.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68443 Dec 29, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I think you are putting the cart before the horse. They associated the animals they knew to the qualities they held in respect. They didn't notice the qualities in the animals and begin to respect them for it. I don't have a reference.
Actually, some animals do have the ability to learn and don't just operate on blind instinct.
Again, the animals didn't possess some symbolic meaning, the symbolic meaning was applied to them by man. I don't doubt that we are connected. But that connection is more biological than spiritual in my opinion.
No, I didn't say each animal had a symbolic meaning. Of course humans applied them to these animals. That's when we started to associate these meanings with animals especially in a time with limited knowledge. Which led me the conclusion that this made us develop the skills, became more intelligent, and more receptive to the environment. Everything in nature has a symbiotic relationship with one another. Eventually we co-evolved.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68444 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Using the scientific method doesn't accurately help us assess what is objectively good or bad. What is good for one person can be bad for others. Unfortunately we can't avoid cultural bias. For example, some religions do not allow them to have blood transfusions even if it benefits them. They're willing to sacrifice their health to benefit their moral principles. And who's to say which is right or wrong, better or worse?
Objectivity has its own merits but impossible to apply without a universal system to allow it. And that what limits reality because each of us see reality differently. We are a diverse population. We are not clones of each other.
Even in the scientific community, for instance, there are competing theories for a given subject no matter each theory has attempted to use the scientific method.
So goodluck with that.
Excuses, and a clear display of you lacking the comprehension of what the scientific method is. You are also making excuses for people to do bad things to others, simply because they "feel" it's "right." So according to your own logic, we shouldn't be angry with the Muslims who destroyed the twin towers, or every single psychopath in known history, just because it was their religious belief that they were right. Lame.

When you learn what objective means, then you may actually grow a conscious, but your assertion in the above post is vile, despicable, and just horrible.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#68445 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I didn't say each animal had a symbolic meaning. Of course humans applied them to these animals. That's when we started to associate these meanings with animals especially in a time with limited knowledge. Which led me the conclusion that this made us develop the skills, became more intelligent, and more receptive to the environment. Everything in nature has a symbiotic relationship with one another. Eventually we co-evolved.
That we have co-evolved with other species, I do not doubt. However, I think we had already developed the necessary intelligence to make some of these symbolic associations. Of course we are treading in the gold fields of human development. We may be hitting pay dirt or way off the mark. Another reference I will have to find, but it was on the research into the development of intelligence by man. As I recall, one line of thought was that we were more often carrion feeders or theives and the skills needed for those two roles lead to greater and greater intelligence. Not as romantic as associations with our local deer, but not without plausiblity.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68446 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuses, and a clear display of you lacking the comprehension of what the scientific method is. You are also making excuses for people to do bad things to others, simply because they "feel" it's "right." So according to your own logic, we shouldn't be angry with the Muslims who destroyed the twin towers, or every single psychopath in known history, just because it was their religious belief that they were right. Lame.
When you learn what objective means, then you may actually grow a conscious, but your assertion in the above post is vile, despicable, and just horrible.
Which part didn't get through to your thick skull? As usual you resort to ad hominems because there's nothing you could do to refute it.

You think the world revolves around you. It doesn't. Killing is wrong to the victims but may have personal satisfaction to the perpetrator whether it's driven by revenge, morality, or illness. That's why we establish a system where people can relate and accept. But if you fly to the other side of the planet, it's a different story.

So tell me why despite the attempts of scientists use the scientific methods, we have many competing theories? And you wonder why we have different religions.

Grow up, you self-centered prick. It helps to expand your consciousness. You will actually learn to accept good reality instead of the harsh reality you've accustomed to while your mama raised you.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68447 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Which part didn't get through to your thick skull? As usual you resort to ad hominems because there's nothing you could do to refute it.
You think the world revolves around you. It doesn't. Killing is wrong to the victims but may have personal satisfaction to the perpetrator whether it's driven by revenge, morality, or illness. That's why we establish a system where people can relate and accept. But if you fly to the other side of the planet, it's a different story.
So tell me why despite the attempts of scientists use the scientific methods, we have many competing theories? And you wonder why we have different religions.
Grow up, you self-centered prick. It helps to expand your consciousness. You will actually learn to accept good reality instead of the harsh reality you've accustomed to while your mama raised you.
Nothing but projection, and the same post is evidence of that. You are justifying genocide, mass murder, and homicidal action, you are a horrible person.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68448 Dec 29, 2012
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Careful here.
The scientific method has no explicit provisions for ethics. It's a tool to discover how the world actually works instead of relying on "prophet" revelations.
However, there is a component built in discovered by religions - the Golden Rule.
I didn't say that science had any specific ethics, but that the scientific method is the best option for determining more sane and valid ethical behavior. The "golden rule" is anything but, as it also endorses inequality and evades responsibility, and it wasn't brought to us by religion, it's an innate logical conclusion which was an evolutionary benefit at the time. It's outdated, and we know that now because of the scientific method.

The scientific method wasn't developed for what we even use it for. Originally it was developed to weed out the scam "miracles," which the Catholic church claimed authority over, of course they have failed to find any genuine miracles, but what did you expect? We found it was beneficial in other areas of life, so we started applying the method to other areas of life, and it has never let us down as it leads us answers in all situations. You can thank religious skeptics for the great tool we have now, but they were, and are, still skeptics not blind followers of any sort.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68449 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I didn't say each animal had a symbolic meaning. Of course humans applied them to these animals. That's when we started to associate these meanings with animals especially in a time with limited knowledge. Which led me the conclusion that this made us develop the skills, became more intelligent, and more receptive to the environment. Everything in nature has a symbiotic relationship with one another. Eventually we co-evolved.
What is this "symbolic" garbage?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68450 Dec 29, 2012
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>That we have co-evolved with other species, I do not doubt. However, I think we had already developed the necessary intelligence to make some of these symbolic associations. Of course we are treading in the gold fields of human development. We may be hitting pay dirt or way off the mark. Another reference I will have to find, but it was on the research into the development of intelligence by man. As I recall, one line of thought was that we were more often carrion feeders or theives and the skills needed for those two roles lead to greater and greater intelligence. Not as romantic as associations with our local deer, but not without plausiblity.
What's your source for your assertions? I speak from direct experience. Again, I'm not the normal gal next door. There's a whole lot going on in this head of mine. Must've been indirectly programmed by more knowledgeable people through a 56 inch extra-dimensional space we call the idiot box. It can be quite educational and entertaining.

But on that note, I did have special experience with animals. Have you had any connection with them?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68451 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing but projection, and the same post is evidence of that. You are justifying genocide, mass murder, and homicidal action, you are a horrible person.
You really need to learn more about psychology. We are all animals with the same instincts unless you're made of candle wax. You really need that flame to get enlightened.

Stop accusing me of justifying these heinous crimes. I just happen to 'understand' what drives humans to do certain things. comprende?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68452 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
What's your source for your assertions? I speak from direct experience. Again, I'm not the normal gal next door. There's a whole lot going on in this head of mine. Must've been indirectly programmed by more knowledgeable people through a 56 inch extra-dimensional space we call the idiot box. It can be quite educational and entertaining.
But on that note, I did have special experience with animals. Have you had any connection with them?
"I speak from direct experience" ... because personal testimony has always demonstrated to be reliable./sarcasm

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68453 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
You really need to learn more about psychology. We are all animals with the same instincts unless you're made of candle wax. You really need that flame to get enlightened.
Stop accusing me of justifying these heinous crimes. I just happen to 'understand' what drives humans to do certain things. comprende?
So now you are saying we shouldn't advance or even try to be better than the other animals at all, as well as still justifying horrible actions, including genocide, rape, murder, child abuse, and a slew of other things any sane person would find repulsive, no matter the reason.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68454 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
What is this "symbolic" garbage?
"intelligence is isomorphic with a physical system that manipulates symbols"

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68455 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
"I speak from direct experience" ... because personal testimony has always demonstrated to be reliable./sarcasm
It works for me in my world.

Having problem with your kitten?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68456 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So now you are saying we shouldn't advance or even try to be better than the other animals at all, as well as still justifying horrible actions, including genocide, rape, murder, child abuse, and a slew of other things any sane person would find repulsive, no matter the reason.
With your logic, cops should be locking up corrupt politicians. who did you vote for if you don't mind me asking?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#68457 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So now you are saying we shouldn't advance or even try to be better than the other animals at all
We co-evolved remember me saying that? Doesn't evolving include improvement and advancement even if it's not always the case? No species is an island. How will that species survive without the other? It's symbiosis. We are all part of a network. Why do you think we are saving endangered species? Why we are exporting bees?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68458 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
With your logic, cops should be locking up corrupt politicians. who did you vote for if you don't mind me asking?
Cops should be locking up corrupt politicians, and the people who voted for them as well.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Level 7

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#68459 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say that science had any specific ethics, but that the scientific method is the best option for determining more sane and valid ethical behavior. The "golden rule" is anything but, as it also endorses inequality and evades responsibility, and it wasn't brought to us by religion, it's an innate logical conclusion which was an evolutionary benefit at the time. It's outdated, and we know that now because of the scientific method.
The scientific method wasn't developed for what we even use it for. Originally it was developed to weed out the scam "miracles," which the Catholic church claimed authority over, of course they have failed to find any genuine miracles, but what did you expect? We found it was beneficial in other areas of life, so we started applying the method to other areas of life, and it has never let us down as it leads us answers in all situations. You can thank religious skeptics for the great tool we have now, but they were, and are, still skeptics not blind followers of any sort.
"I didn't say that science had any specific ethics, but that the scientific method is the best option for determining more sane and valid ethical behavior."

So ethics derives from scientific endeavor? Not sure if I could agree with that. Science gives us more information to make a better judgement in a course of action.

But science is very much neutral in how that information is obtained. What we consider basic ethics in testing with humans invokes the Golden Rule.

Don't get me wrong here: the scientific methodology is an extraordinary tool to filter out the wannabe prophets of miracles for their profits.

I just don't want to see science seen as a religion and researchers become unquestioning cardinals of knowledge.

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
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 8 min Princess Hey 150,034
News Rat cafe opens in San Francisco 15 min The Wheeze of Trump 3
News Pet blood donors help other dogs, cats 18 min The Wheeze of Trump 2
News Double Murder Investigation Takes Bizarre Turn 23 min The Wheeze of Trump 1
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 27 min The Finny 75,224
News Bizarre Elk Poaching Case In Nevada Nets 3 Conv... 30 min The Wheeze of Trump 2
True False Game (Jun '11) 1 hr Sublime1 14,792
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 hr T Bone 217,049
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 4 hr Boink face 4,053
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 5 hr Boink face 2,539
More from around the web