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
67,181 - 67,200 of 112,802 Comments Last updated 2 min ago
jkjkhardcore

Westbury, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71438
Jan 20, 2013
 
nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>What would humans do if they knew that an energy or control could make their mind fall asleep....? Knowing it exist. Its real. its scary. What ramifications would that bring to human existence?
wtf are you talking about?
jkjkhardcore

Westbury, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71439
Jan 21, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
And all three plus the seven stone tablets from Sumerian all tell of the same creation.
The Quran further states that Allah created the sun, the moon, and the planets, each with their own individual courses or orbits. "It is He Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon; all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course" (21:33).
The Quran states that "Allah created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them, in six days" (7:54). This seem similar to the account related in the Bible.
Torah
1. In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens and the earth.
2. Now the earth was astonishingly empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the water.
3. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
4. And God saw the light that it was good, and God separated between the light and between the darkness.
5. And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night, and it was evening and it was morning, one day.
6. And God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the water, and let it be a separation between water and water."
The Bible
Genesis
1
The Creation
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: 2 Cor. 4.6 and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. 2 Pet. 3.5 And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry landappear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Seven stone Tablets of creation:
Sumerian cuneiform stone tablets and writings that are 6,000 years old.
The Sumerian culture, the first civilization to invent writing as a complete written language, recorded stories that have been preserved through the modern day biblical passages found in the Old and New testament. All of which speak of a time when man lived among their living gods here on earth. The Sumerians had 7 sacred tablets that explained our creation. These stories preserved in stone, are now told to us in the form of the english version, "7 days of creation".
Well what can I say to that? Because it's written down in several different books on the same subject that it has to be true? The fact that the bible is based off of the Torah, and the Koran is printed/created much later doesn't this alone explain the similarities? But even if they all tell the same story what evidence suggests that this is the true story, this is how creation came to be? After all it is a story and it could have been a major belief way back in the day, but then why don't all humans like tribes in Africa or Asians, or Native Americans or the greeks, or the Vikings (thor loki believers) believe the same creation story? How can you say your story's legit and theirs is not?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71440
Jan 21, 2013
 
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't give a sh!t about your macro evolution. Get it through your head...evolution is proven.
Nitpick all you want, you cannot bring down what is truth.
People better than you ever will be have tried for 150+ years now and they have all failed.
Fundamentalist creatards are the only ones disputing evolution.
Great thing about science.
It's rue whether you believe in it or not.(Paraphrase from Neil DeGrasse Tyson)

“ROCK ON ROCKERS!!”

Level 8

Since: Mar 11

Rockin' USA ;)

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71441
Jan 21, 2013
 
This thread WILL never expire.. theory after theory will be discussed and challenged until the end of time..

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71442
Jan 21, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You should really brush up on your bible passages if you expect anyone to take you seriously.
"Noah was commanded to take into the ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). There is no reason to believe that all the varieties of insects were on the ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark. The Bible does not teach that they had to be on board."
That goes for worms as well.
You need to brush up on your entomology, because most insects breath through a trachael system that starts on the surface of the body as openings called spriracles. The surface of the body of an arthropod is composed of a chitonous exoskeleton, that doesn't lend well to absorbing oxygen for repiration. The blood of the insect does not act as vertebrate blood does in transporting oxygen to the cells of the body. These tracheae carry oxygen to the cells.

So you believe that the many millions of species of insects survived by burrowing in the mud. Do you mean insects like the 120,000 known species of Lepidoptera? Or perhaps they all clung to floating debri, whilst being pummelled by insesant rain, only to emerge from the deluge in perfect shape to immediately start breeding and hopefully do so near their host plants. Perhaps while burrowing through the mud, the Monarch butterfly for instance, was able to dig its way to mildweed plants that were no doubt buried with it. In any event, while there are numerous insect species that do live in soil, those that do not would find it difficult to survive under such conditions not even mentioning the low oxygen, high water content and pressure of being buried in this soil covered by several thousand feet of water. Yes, I can see the complete logic and certitude of your hpostheses. This must surely be how it happened.

Lake Victoria in Africa is a young lake by geological standards, yet it contains or has contained (we have managed to kill off some species) some 500 species of cichlid fish. Now recent geological evaluation of the lake bed using coring methods has revealed the unexpected discovery that 15,000 years ago there was no lake and the area was a grassland. Genetic and molecular evaluation of these fish species reveal that they all developed from a single ancestor species that entered the lake during its early formation. These species are indigenous to Lake Vicoria and are found nowhere else. This evidence reveals an episode of one of the fastest instances of macroevolution so far recorded. Or perhaps God put them there with magic. Maybe the flood miraculously deposited 500 species freshwater fish in Lake Victoria and nowhere else on earth and they were instantly able to survive and reproduce. Perhaps they were all buried in the mud of the former grassland or arrived at the lake clinging to bushes floating on the water.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71443
Jan 21, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it matter what it's called? I know it's obvious you're skeptic about intelligent design. And that it goes against the theory of evolution because we supposedly evolved from simpler life forms. If the universe evolved from the simplest matter then what caused order and intelligence of the universe, nature, and in our species?
It really isn't so much a question of being skeptical of Intelligent Design, it isn't a tenable thesis. It is just religion in a lab coat. Every piece of evidence so far presented by ID in support of a designer has been shown to be flawed and wrong. The bottom line is that it isn't science.

I would argue that life developed on the edge of chaos. Beyond that I am not qualified to discuss intelligence as it pertains to the universe or nature. Unless you are expanding the definition of intelligence to mean more than it does, the universe and nature are not intelligent in the way that humans are. Ordered and following rules, but not intelligent in the sense of conceiving and carrying out complex thought and rending it to action. Having read extensively in science fiction, I have been introduced to a lot of ideas regarding the concept of what could be alive in a speculative sense. Such things as the ideas developed in the writings of Stanislaw Lem are interesting, but they describe living things that would still be less than pan-universal in their existence.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71444
Jan 21, 2013
 
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
very interesting read...there's a lot of ideas that I was not aware of presented....I read somewhere that there was deep mining operation in western US, that cut into solid rock and they found flint artifacts.
The rocks that house these artifacts were dated like a million years old or older...alot of things are swept under the rug if they don't support current mainstream scientific ideology.
NImrod developed formed morter techniques to build pyramid alters abroad and those blocks may have looked like stone.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71446
Jan 21, 2013
 
The theory that Noahs descendants built cities and towers throughout the world and the people of old were an advanced civilization explains a lot. Just sayin......

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71447
Jan 21, 2013
 
FREE SERVANT wrote:
The theory that Noahs descendants built cities and towers throughout the world and the people of old were an advanced civilization explains a lot. Just sayin......
Quite the opposite, because it would lead to one important question:

Why are we so much more advanced than they ever were?
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71448
Jan 21, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite the opposite, because it would lead to one important question:
Why are we so much more advanced than they ever were?
God stopped them. They may have had advanced knowledge that we do not yet know of and God caused it to be scattered and lost.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71449
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>God stopped them. They may have had advanced knowledge that we do not yet know of and God caused it to be scattered and lost.
Lame excuse for something you know nothing about. They were more primitive than some of the older civilizations as well, in reality. You just want to make up something that "feels" good so you can pretend to know more, but in reality, you fail at archeology so much it's pathetic.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71450
Jan 21, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
The thing is you have zero proof of Macro evolution. As far a micro evolution no big deal there, so some genes get turn on or off. Big deal.
Not one fossil proves Macro evolution
Not once has it been observed.
Never in the history of the planet has macro evolution left behind a bit of proof that it ever happened.
I take it you just debunked the info I presented for you (again) yesterday then in a coherent rational manner using the scientific method then, yes? You know, that stuff that not one single fundie on this thread has been able to do for a year? And not one single fundie on the face of this planet has been able to do for 150?

What's that?

Oh, you completely ignored it and went on another "NO NO NO!" rant as usual?

Therefore Goddidit with magic?

Uhuh, thought so.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71451
Jan 21, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You should really brush up on your bible passages if you expect anyone to take you seriously.
"Noah was commanded to take into the ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). There is no reason to believe that all the varieties of insects were on the ark
Um, Lango. You just said that evolution definitely didn't happen. Now you just said that evolution, on a MACRO scale, definitely DID happen.

If the Ark story is true then "MACRO"-evolution definitely DID happen. If no such evolution took place then the Ark story definitely did NOT happen.

You DO understand all the science behind all these concepts being discussed, right?

Or uh, are you just another fundie liar for Jesus claiming reality ain't real cuz an invisible magic dude didit?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71453
Jan 21, 2013
 
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
The thing is you have zero proof of Macro evolution. As far a micro evolution no big deal there, so some genes get turn on or off. Big deal.
Not one fossil proves Macro evolution
Not once has it been observed.
Never in the history of the planet has macro evolution left behind a bit of proof that it ever happened.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

Here it is for you again Langs. That's just a few billion facts that put together enequivocally demonstrate evolution. All you need is just ONE of any number of valid potential falsifications. Do let us know when you can come up with something better than "evilooshun iz rong cuz GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC!"

Take your time.

You will.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71454
Jan 21, 2013
 
[QUOTE who="On page 3369, I"]
Creationists hate both atheists and Evolutionists, so they pretend that those are the exact same people.[/QUOTE]
marksman11 wrote:
You guys say GOD didn't do it,
See what I mean?
anonymous

Franklin, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71456
Jan 21, 2013
 
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
You think you're some sort of policeman?
Seriously?
I consider myself an advocate for order, not a volunteer to enforce anyone's perception of what is fair. I consider you someone who is trying to kill every shadow that moves. If I can remove your element so that others go on to discuss on topic, I've maintained the order I seek.

Stop parsing. Pay attention to the real debate. If you don't think my analogy is close enough to the Evolution/Creationism debate, feel free to walk away. For the most part, you have not presented logical information, just statistical claims and your private view as to what is "natural". I suggest your claims are invalid and defend my arguments. You call people names.

I call it a complete win, but you WILL go back to statistical claims and calling people names. Nothing can be more absolutely certain.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71457
Jan 21, 2013
 
nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>We had many questions prior to our encounter. One question was answered....."We are NOT alone in the universe". Next question. Why do aliens insist on being like gray ghost and make humans fear them? The more we learn, the more we understand that with the universe having infinite earth-like planets the odds of an advanced civilization existing is fact, not fiction. Why they will not make direct and factual contact is a mystery. Science does not have a clue. All the number crunching in the universe will never answer that question. Again, we understand the "negative" response.......we know what happened was real.
Science has increased our understanding of probability. We know now that the likelihood of alien life is high, while the likelihood of space travel is not so high.

We can easily dismiss reports of alien visitors as improbable stories but as has always been the case, proving a negative is not logical or compulsory.

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71458
Jan 21, 2013
 
Too slow wrote:
Bored much?
much

slow is key I think...
anonymous

Franklin, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71459
Jan 21, 2013
 
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Great thing about science.
It's rue whether you believe in it or not.(Paraphrase from Neil DeGrasse Tyson)
A good scientist would see the difference between absolute proof, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and pure opinion though. Evolution is admittedly what you and I call reasonable doubt so we can easily say "prove that it didn't happen", which is proving a negative.

I prefer to suggest that the phrase "demonstrate natural examples that don't fit Evolutionary theory" is a better place to start. Scientists CAN make mistakes. We can find random mutations in the fossil record that represent random mutations without being the result of Evolution. It's best to avoid defending Evolution as absolute fact.

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71460
Jan 21, 2013
 
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
I consider myself an advocate for order, not a volunteer to enforce anyone's perception of what is fair. I consider you someone who is trying to kill every shadow that moves. If I can remove your element so that others go on to discuss on topic, I've maintained the order I seek.
Stop parsing. Pay attention to the real debate. If you don't think my analogy is close enough to the Evolution/Creationism debate, feel free to walk away. For the most part, you have not presented logical information, just statistical claims and your private view as to what is "natural". I suggest your claims are invalid and defend my arguments. You call people names.
I call it a complete win, but you WILL go back to statistical claims and calling people names. Nothing can be more absolutely certain.
Amongst people are persons of no great claim other than to be considered that a Person amongst people...

You have to admit that logical thought process comes much from personal means experience statistics are a lot of numbers to go by them you really would have to know the source they are coming from...

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••