Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 comments on the Jan 6, 2011, Best of New Orleans story 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.

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.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71497 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.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...

"Evolution at different scales: micro to macro
by the Understanding Evolution team

Evolution encompasses changes of vastly different scales — from something as insignificant as an increase in the frequency of the gene for dark wings in beetles from one generation to the next, to something as grand as the evolution and radiation of the dinosaur lineage. These two extremes represent classic examples of micro- and macroevolution.

Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:"

FYI No one is better the me.
I sure hope Berkeley does not upset you too much. Ah, not really I do hope it raises you blood pressure.

There is no proof of macro evolution.
Never happened never will.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71498 Jan 21, 2013
jkjkhardcore wrote:
<quoted text>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?
I do not claim that Christianity is the one and only true faith.

So you find that the very first people to invent the written language put so much effort to carve in stone the story of Genesis no big deal?

I don't know why Atheist keep screaming for proof of our faith. Why it makes no sense at all. Look up the word faith this might help you out.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71499 Jan 21, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
It's incomprehensible to you because you refuse to look past the surface.
you know the subject is the "incomprehensible underlying intelligence" of the Universe....as implied by Edison and Einstein...(?)

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71500 Jan 21, 2013
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:
You're parsing.
No, I'm responding to each of your claims.
anonymous wrote:
If you can't demonstrate that your censoring of context...
I'm not "censoring" any context, so your statement already begins with a false premise.

***

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 wrote:
I didn't ask you to define science. I asked you what you think of the word.
And I told you what I think of the word "science", by explaining what I think it means.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71502 Jan 21, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
I don't know why Atheist keep screaming for proof of our faith.
I'm an atheist, but I'm not "screaming" for anything. I'm *asking* for theists to provide some *evidence* that supports their beliefs.

So far, they are coming up empty.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71503 Jan 21, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
"Evolution at different scales: micro to macro
by the Understanding Evolution team
Evolution encompasses changes of vastly different scales — from something as insignificant as an increase in the frequency of the gene for dark wings in beetles from one generation to the next, to something as grand as the evolution and radiation of the dinosaur lineage. These two extremes represent classic examples of micro- and macroevolution.
Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:"
FYI No one is better the me.
I sure hope Berkeley does not upset you too much. Ah, not really I do hope it raises you blood pressure.
There is no proof of macro evolution.
Never happened never will.
The definition of micro and macro-evolution from that link is incorrect or misused. lol
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71504 Jan 21, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not claim that Christianity is the one and only true faith.
So you find that the very first people to invent the written language put so much effort to carve in stone the story of Genesis no big deal?
I don't know why Atheist keep screaming for proof of our faith. Why it makes no sense at all. Look up the word faith this might help you out.
What argument are you trying to make?

What story of Genesis are you trying to defend? Personally, I don't scream for proof of your faith. I just want to know what value your story merits?
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71505 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
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>
No, I'm responding to each of your claims.
<quoted text>
I'm not "censoring" any context, so your statement already begins with a false premise.
***
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.
<quoted text>
And I told you what I think of the word "science", by explaining what I think it means.
So post something when you have something to say. And don't worry about content when you put out of your mind everything that is said from one minute to the next.

When you apologize for your rudeness, we can start the game again.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71506 Jan 21, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>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.
"most insects breath through a trachael system that starts on the surface of the body as openings called spriracles"

And your point?

You are clearly stating that insects breath through their surface (skin) of their body's. they clearly do not have " nostrils with the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). "

So why is it that you claim that I need to brush up on my entomology?

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.

Now I will point out to you what you need to brush up on. These fish you talk about, here let me quote you "Genetic and molecular evaluation of these fish species reveal that they all developed from a single ancestor species"
And that my boy is the definition of a "Kind" macro evolution is one kind changing to another kind. No macroevolution happened here just microevolution.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71507 Jan 21, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Were they from Wyoming? lol
had to look it up...it's been awhile since I read about it...

..."ancient artifacts include the small zinc and silver vessel found in a Massachusetts rock layer supposed to be 600 million years old, and advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. Professor J.D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of these implements, including spear points, mortars and pestles, verifying that they were found deep in mine shafts underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava thought to be from 9 to 55 million years old."

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71508 Jan 21, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>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.
If you wish to say it in those term that's fine. God created all living things and sense you lack full knowledge of how God created, you can go ahead and try to describe it as a child might.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71509 Jan 21, 2013
Benjamin Frankly wrote:
<quoted text>
That which is self evident sould be easy to prove so do it.
the whole of the Universe is proof...you included.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71510 Jan 21, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
had to look it up...it's been awhile since I read about it...
..."ancient artifacts include the small zinc and silver vessel found in a Massachusetts rock layer supposed to be 600 million years old, and advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. Professor J.D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of these implements, including spear points, mortars and pestles, verifying that they were found deep in mine shafts underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava thought to be from 9 to 55 million years old."
I forgot what the argument was about. Or does it have any? lol

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71511 Jan 21, 2013
anonymous wrote:
So post something when you have something to say.
I always have something to say when I post. This is true whether you like it or not.
anonymous wrote:
When you apologize for your rudeness, we can start the game again.
I'm not here to play a game. And as I have already pointed out to you earlier (which you appear to have already forgotten), I owe you no apology.

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
Interesting Quotes (Jun '11) 2 min Mega Monster 14,103
News The trooper fired at the motorcycle, and then d... 3 min Terrible Liberal 64
A To Z Of Movies (Sep '12) 6 min Princess Hey 4,788
Word Association (Jun '10) 6 min Mega Monster 27,317
Word association (Jun '07) 7 min Mega Monster 2,833
4 Word Game (Use Same Letter) 9 min andet1987 618
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 9 min wichita-rick 161,281
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 2 hr Bill 18,178
motorcycle traveling stories 3 hr ittybitty1 614
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 5 hr lost in Mississippi 40,251
More from around the web