Evolution vs. Creation

There are 162197 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

#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.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68460 Dec 29, 2012
greymouser 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."
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.
Please do not tell me you are conflating science with an actual "entity" and the scientific method with some "law." The scientific method is a standard, a procedure, for weeding out fallacious claims of any sort, as for you "I don't want it see as a religion" part, well, it comes from a religious group who were attempting to do just that, weed out the fallacious claims. People use the scientific method a lot more than they ever realize, the more intelligent the person, the more often they use the method. When you look at the labels on the food products, consider the prices and quality, and compare them to other brands ... that is the scientific method. Since ethics itself is entirely subjective, morals are a made up canard, ethical behavior determined by just "feelings" has proven less than adequate in almost all instances, but ethical behavior with the scientific method applied has always been consistent and always progresses for the better. Ethics is not a religious thing, it's an evolutionary trait and nothing more. There is no magic involved, it's not some "spiritual" garbage, it's simply how you regard other humans, very mundane and probably the least interesting aspect of human behavior as a whole.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Level 7

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#68461 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Please do not tell me you are conflating science with an actual "entity" and the scientific method with some "law." The scientific method is a standard, a procedure, for weeding out fallacious claims of any sort, as for you "I don't want it see as a religion" part, well, it comes from a religious group who were attempting to do just that, weed out the fallacious claims. People use the scientific method a lot more than they ever realize, the more intelligent the person, the more often they use the method. When you look at the labels on the food products, consider the prices and quality, and compare them to other brands ... that is the scientific method. Since ethics itself is entirely subjective, morals are a made up canard, ethical behavior determined by just "feelings" has proven less than adequate in almost all instances, but ethical behavior with the scientific method applied has always been consistent and always progresses for the better. Ethics is not a religious thing, it's an evolutionary trait and nothing more. There is no magic involved, it's not some "spiritual" garbage, it's simply how you regard other humans, very mundane and probably the least interesting aspect of human behavior as a whole.
So you have no problem with Dr. Mengele's research into twins or hypothermia on unwilling subjects?

Will you pull the "He's not a True Scotsman!" defense?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#68462 Dec 29, 2012
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
So you have no problem with Dr. Mengele's research into twins or hypothermia on unwilling subjects?
Will you pull the "He's not a True Scotsman!" defense?
He was following unethical behavior. His motives were entirely his own, and his methods betray that. Had he followed the informed consensus of ethical behavior, the way scientists follow the informed consensus on many aspects of their research, he would have known those were unacceptable behaviors because they harm other people.

Are you going to throw out anymore red herrings or strawmen?
Richard Robles

Horseheads, NY

#68463 Dec 29, 2012
The connecticut school shooter was an Atheist ... nuff said! The world would be a happier place without Islam and Atheism.

"Anders Behring Breivik was a practicing militant Darwinian Atheist racist. He believed secularism and science was the world's salvation, not Jesus Christ."

Anders Behring Breivik, Mass Murderer of Norway, was an Atheist Social Darwinist - NOT a Christian
http://cross.tv/69392

.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#68465 Dec 29, 2012
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting. What amazes me more is how the ancient people acquired knowledge of what symbolic meanings animals have. For example the deer - power animal symbolizes gentleness, unconditional love, and kindness. The Celtics and Native Americans prayed to the deer to give them good hunt. Perhaps because of this practice ingrained in early human hunters and gatherers, we developed an instinctive ability from our own associations with these game animals. Animals behave purely on instincts. And many animals possess traits that humans wish to have such as better hearing, night vision, agility, etc. Whatever made humans distinct from animals that possessed the ability to decipher symbolic meanings in animals, probably led to intelligence and heightened sensory perception. But that's just how I see it. We are all connected.
Perhaps we are to some degree, but humans don't have the senses of animals, even if they seek to emulate them. Deer are a particularly bad example of a metaphor of the human psyche, although if I were to speculate, I'd say the primary reason is because the human persona is based on binocular vision, while deer are animals who watch on all sides and flee from conflicts. Even though humans are not predators by their evolutionary nature, they share more in common with them, psychologically.

Being bipedal is another break away from most animals at a fundamental level. I'd have to say, even if one was hard-wired similar to an animal, the differences in anatomy would be significant enough to produce very different personalities.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#68466 Dec 29, 2012
Richard Robles wrote:
The connecticut school shooter was an Atheist ... nuff said! The world would be a happier place without Islam and Atheism.
"Anders Behring Breivik was a practicing militant Darwinian Atheist racist. He believed secularism and science was the world's salvation, not Jesus Christ."
Anders Behring Breivik, Mass Murderer of Norway, was an Atheist Social Darwinist - NOT a Christian
http://cross.tv/69392
.
The Spanish Inquisition were Christians. Nuff said!...and it seems that you're honest about your bigotry.

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
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 2 min Hoosier Hillbilly 41,560
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 7 min I Am No One_ 161,963
Write sentences with the first letter following... 7 min Hoosier Hillbilly 88
last word - first (Jun '12) 12 min Hoosier Hillbilly 7,733
+=Keep 1 Drop 1=+ 3 STACK (Mar '13) 15 min Hoosier Hillbilly 8,152
~`*`~ Create a sentence using the 'letters' of ... (Oct '12) 29 min Hoosier Hillbilly 2,231
News $700,000 worth of antique cars discovered in a ... 35 min Hoosier Hillbilly 3
Whatcha' doing? (Apr '12) 1 hr Observer 8,444
News Snorkeler makes bizarre underwater discovery 1 hr Observer 3
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 3 hr Roy 40,325
News Study: Beards are filled with poop and 'as dirt... 4 hr ZZTop 49
More from around the web