Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71477 Jan 21, 2013
anonymous wrote:
I consider myself an advocate for order
And who determines what is "order"? You? If there are people who are unhappy with the order, doesn't that mean that it wasn't order in the first place?
anonymous wrote:
If I can remove your element so that others go on to discuss on topic, I've maintained the order I seek.
The topic of this thread is evolution vs. creation. I don't see you spending much of your time trying to discuss that.
anonymous wrote:
For the most part, you have not presented logical information, just statistical claims and your private view as to what is "natural".
And which view of what is "natural" did you present?

How is the use of statistics not "logical"?
anonymous wrote:
I suggest your claims are invalid
Except that you can't seem to demonstrate how. You just rail against statistics as if evidence for claims wasn't important.
anonymous wrote:
You call people names.
Says the guy who referred to gays as "deviants".

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

#71478 Jan 21, 2013
Like the chicken and the egg which came first planet or walking creature...

To walk on you would have had to had something to be walking on...

Why use your legs in mid air having had to develop legs for a reason don't you think? Limbs

Bone scale hair...wonder which came first...Fiber in threads or minerals...

Fiber helps you move along har har...:)

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

#71479 Jan 21, 2013
Benjamin Frankly wrote:
<quoted text>
What Iím tiring to get him to do is rip him apart, but to retort you need an argument from the other side. That is the only way I can show that design is not self-evident, hell not even your example shows something that is self-evident because the black man probably showed his face to tell people he is black, thus giving evidence that he is black without even thinking. Your other example 1+1=2 fails to as this isnít self-evident to those who have never tried to add one object and an other object together, for 1+1 to become obvious they would have to get said objects and put them together.
That is so profound in no way, that took time considering actually none, I don't say it much to anyone especially posting comes out not right at times, as one might would have wanted things to sound but that is really taking it to the lamest so an orange and one apple make fruit and if you wanted (or want it) to take it further you can make fruit salad YAY, I like it add some whipped cream now you have a fruit salad having used three items but maybe you cut the fruit in half prior to preparing you would then have used 5...If you want to argue that go for it I am all ear but later I think I will return under my covers for a snooz...Meaning heading back to bed...

Did that made sense much?

Also people from the middle east come in different shades some in Russia are DARK OF COLOR TOO BUT THEY ARE WAY UP NORTHERn TO EUROPA...North east but North they are...

Now Regions that can be some (Topic) in the black and white Theory of well at least some things stand true that in the South generally it is hotter than it is North where there a lot of the time it gets very cold and it snows as well...

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

#71480 Jan 21, 2013
If I had to create one a Universe I wouldn't invite anyone...

Having had to create another?

For what a reason would that could that have been?

The world alone Earth let's say life existing had been split apart, why not just have taken and made tiny new balls...

For Humankind to sit up on and twirl their thumbs...

Now that would be something, people they have been getting together now for a while or HUMAN kind some really are not all were not that up-tied....

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

#71481 Jan 21, 2013
Night can't wait to read on later today...

Will try to stop back in, sometimes I skip it on my tracker I think the mood has to be right to be talking about life and matter...

“you must not give faith”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Nottingham, UK

#71482 Jan 21, 2013
Tinka wrote:
<quoted text>
That is so profound in no way, that took time considering actually none, I don't say it much to anyone especially posting comes out not right at times, as one might would have wanted things to sound but that is really taking it to the lamest so an orange and one apple make fruit and if you wanted (or want it) to take it further you can make fruit salad YAY, I like it add some whipped cream now you have a fruit salad having used three items but maybe you cut the fruit in half prior to preparing you would then have used 5...If you want to argue that go for it I am all ear but later I think I will return under my covers for a snooz...Meaning heading back to bed...
Did that made sense much?
Also people from the middle east come in different shades some in Russia are DARK OF COLOR TOO BUT THEY ARE WAY UP NORTHERn TO EUROPA...North east but North they are...
Now Regions that can be some (Topic) in the black and white Theory of well at least some things stand true that in the South generally it is hotter than it is North where there a lot of the time it gets very cold and it snows as well...
What point are you trying to make that I have made no sense or something else? I'm not sure.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71483 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
And who determines what is "order"? You? If there are people who are unhappy with the order, doesn't that mean that it wasn't order in the first place?
<quoted text>
The topic of this thread is evolution vs. creation. I don't see you spending much of your time trying to discuss that.
<quoted text>
And which view of what is "natural" did you present?
How is the use of statistics not "logical"?
<quoted text>
Except that you can't seem to demonstrate how. You just rail against statistics as if evidence for claims wasn't important.
<quoted text>
Says the guy who referred to gays as "deviants".
Parse! Ni!
Parse! Ni!
Parse! Ni!

Parse! Parse! Parse!

Talk when you have something to say.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71484 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
It matters for the purposes of communication between human beings.
<quoted text>
Why shouldn't I be skeptical, given that no evidence has yet been provided to support it?
<quoted text>
That's what the evidence demonstrates.
<quoted text>
First of all, you're now switching gears in the use of the word "evolution". The processes that result in the creation of matter, galaxies, stars, and planets are not the processes that result in the creation of the first living things, nor are they the processes that result in the creation of all modern species from earlier species.
Second, the initial settings of the Universe have resulted in what we observe. If they had been different, we wouldn't be here to observe whatever existed. For all we know, there are an infinite number of Universes, each with its own set of initial settings. If so, then some are going to like our own Universe.
In order for anything to be able to observe reality, it needs consciousness. So did matter evolve to create consciousness?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71485 Jan 21, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
You're playing with the facts. Scientific method, when applied to Evolution rejects deity. Evolution does imply abiogenesis at some level. Accept it and reject the theist arguments anyway.
What's wrong with rejecting the "immortal soul"? Evolution certainly wouldn't see value in it, and physics doesn't have anything to suggest one. If you're arguing for natural order, accept it as the way of things.
If you believe in order, then your existence would have to have a purpose. Do you know what your purpose is?
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71486 Jan 21, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
If you believe in order, then your existence would have to have a purpose. Do you know what your purpose is?
My purpose is what I choose to be my purpose. No waving my hand and defying physics, no control by one person over billions of others, but my choice anyway. What kind of person would give away their choice on one of the few things they do have control over?

...and no, I don't share my purpose with others. That would just invite parsing idiots who think everyone's purpose is to serve their own. Don't need some cliche Riddler in my life. I get enough annoyances from Catwoman and Two-Face! 8o)

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71487 Jan 21, 2013
And who determines what is "order"? You? If there are people who are unhappy with the order, doesn't that mean that it wasn't order in the first place?
<quoted text>
The topic of this thread is evolution vs. creation. I don't see you spending much of your time trying to discuss that.
<quoted text>
And which view of what is "natural" did you present?
How is the use of statistics not "logical"?
<quoted text>
Except that you can't seem to demonstrate how. You just rail against statistics as if evidence for claims wasn't important.
<quoted text>
Says the guy who referred to gays as "deviants".
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Parse! Ni!
Parse! Ni!
Parse! Ni!
Parse! Parse! Parse!
Talk when you have something to say.
I'm the one who had something to say.

You just had nonsense as your response.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71488 Jan 21, 2013
Cybele wrote:
In order for anything to be able to observe reality, it needs consciousness.
That depends on the definitions of "observe" and "consciousness", but for the sake of argument, let's take that as true.
Cybele wrote:
So did matter evolve to create consciousness?
Matter didn't "evolve" in the biological sense of the term, but certainly at least *some* of the matter in the Universe changed over time so that it would be considered by us to be alive (whatever definition of "life" you have) and so that it achieved consciousness (whatever definition of "consciousness" you have).
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71489 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
And who determines what is "order"? You? If there are people who are unhappy with the order, doesn't that mean that it wasn't order in the first place?
<quoted text>
The topic of this thread is evolution vs. creation. I don't see you spending much of your time trying to discuss that.
<quoted text>
And which view of what is "natural" did you present?
How is the use of statistics not "logical"?
<quoted text>
Except that you can't seem to demonstrate how. You just rail against statistics as if evidence for claims wasn't important.
<quoted text>
Says the guy who referred to gays as "deviants".
<quoted text>
I'm the one who had something to say.
You just had nonsense as your response.
You seem to have something to say to yourself, but I expect my comments to be addressed in context.

Now, apologize! You've offended me. That's the context. That's how you're going to eat it.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71490 Jan 21, 2013
I'm the one who had something to say. You just had nonsense as your response.
anonymous wrote:
You seem to have something to say to yourself, but I expect my comments to be addressed in context.
I've addressed your comments in context. You just didn't like what I said as I addressed them.
anonymous wrote:
Now, apologize! You've offended me.
If you were offended, that is your problem, not mine. No apology on my part is required.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71491 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
I'm the one who had something to say. You just had nonsense as your response.
<quoted text>
I've addressed your comments in context. You just didn't like what I said as I addressed them.
<quoted text>
If you were offended, that is your problem, not mine. No apology on my part is required.
See, now we're going to play a little game called "projecting". You're going to demonstrate how you parse out of context and how you always try to claim your bad behavior is actually the bad behavior of others.

This game starts with a word called "deviant". Now, we can say all sorts of things about that word to make it a negative thing, but we don't have to. But we WILL anyway, because some of us feel that our behavior is being inhibited because of that word, and that word alone.

Now, there's a second word in this game. We'll call it science. I'm going to let YOU start by telling us about science. Tell us what you think about the word, and listen to complete rebuttals, without parsing.

I'm sure you can restrain your obsessive-compulsive behavior just long enough for this game, can't you?

OK! Start your engines!!! Rooommmm! Roooommm!!!! GO!

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71492 Jan 21, 2013
anonymous wrote:
See, now we're going to play a little game called "projecting".
The only one here playing that game is you.
anonymous wrote:
You're going to demonstrate how you parse out of context
I don't parse out of context. I provide sufficient context for each of the statements I'm responding to.(And if the reader is concerned that a statement has been taken out of context, they can always go back and re-read the original posting that I'm responding to.)

Of course, I notice that you never seem to explain how any of your statements has been taken out of context. You just claim that, without any evidence.
anonymous wrote:
I'm going to let YOU start by telling us about science. Tell us what you think about the word
I think that the word "science" describes an existing body of knowledge (facts and theories) and a process to determine new facts and theories.

You have a problem with that? Then you probably don't want to be in an Evolution Debate Forum or a thread that discusses evolution.

Yet here you are.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71493 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
The only one here playing that game is you.
<quoted text>
I don't parse out of context. I provide sufficient context for each of the statements I'm responding to.(And if the reader is concerned that a statement has been taken out of context, they can always go back and re-read the original posting that I'm responding to.)
Of course, I notice that you never seem to explain how any of your statements has been taken out of context. You just claim that, without any evidence.
<quoted text>
I think that the word "science" describes an existing body of knowledge (facts and theories) and a process to determine new facts and theories.
You have a problem with that? Then you probably don't want to be in an Evolution Debate Forum or a thread that discusses evolution.
Yet here you are.
You're parsing. Just say "No!". If you can't demonstrate that your censoring of context does or doesn't matter to you, then you're not playing the game.

I didn't ask you to define science. I asked you what you think of the word. Try again. Pay attention to context.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71494 Jan 21, 2013
Oh, yes. Feel free to elaborate on the word "deviant" at any time. Try using the word "science" if you think it will help!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71495 Jan 21, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
My purpose is what I choose to be my purpose. No waving my hand and defying physics, no control by one person over billions of others, but my choice anyway. What kind of person would give away their choice on one of the few things they do have control over?
...and no, I don't share my purpose with others. That would just invite parsing idiots who think everyone's purpose is to serve their own. Don't need some cliche Riddler in my life. I get enough annoyances from Catwoman and Two-Face! 8o)
What defies physics? We are all made up of energy.

It sounds like you rule by way of a closed system or in total denial.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71496 Jan 21, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
What defies physics? We are all made up of energy.
It sounds like you rule by way of a closed system or in total denial.
What particular type of energy do you think is within our capacity to control and make part of our purpose? For my part, I stick with the mechanical energy of muscles created by synaptic triggers. Otherwise, we are able to sense energy and our bodies generate heat on a largely automatic level. Anything else is fringe theory that has no scientifically observable precedent and I don't include such things into my calculations as to how to follow my purpose.

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
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 8 min Hoosier Hillbilly 7,644
Republican Bob McDonnell on Trial 12 min Bill 15
Obama Barrage! 19 min Hoosier Hillbilly 4
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 22 min beatlesinafog 26,780
4 Word Game (Use Same Letter) 25 min Hoosier Hillbilly 301
Change "1" letter =ONLY= (Oct '12) 27 min beatlesinafog 4,307
~`*`~ Create a sentence using the 'letters' of ... (Oct '12) 27 min Hoosier Hillbilly 1,812
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 32 min eleanorigby 37,807
Is it possible to....... 38 min beatlesinafog 621
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr black shuck 152,933
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 4 hr -Lea- 26,057
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 8 hr dragoon70056 3,051
More from around the web