Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 216910 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.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71670 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"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.
Hey Lango, perhaps you can explain something for me:

If "micro" evolution is possible and "macro" is not, then could you explain why your "global flood" scenario requires mutation rates that FAR exceed that of traditional "macro" evolution?

I expect a scientific response of course.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71671 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Where exactly do I claim that I have full knowledge of how God created everything? I know enough to not try explain Gods Creation as "GODDIDIT with magic"
Yup. Even the phrase "Goddidit with magic" is more explanatory than you are.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71672 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
There is much uncertainty about what exactly the Bible means when it talks of "kinds".
No sh t, Sherlock!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71673 Jan 22, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Have the Creationists on this forum been more respectful than the Evolutionists?
I think so.
Have the Creationists argued more intelligently than the Evolutionists?
I think so.
Interesting how you can justify this post considering most creationists on here are liars for Jesus. Especially in light of Maz's recent tirade of ignoring rebuttals and repeating debunked arguments and SEVERE internal inconsistency.

I admit I'm not polite to liars for Jesus. But then, neither is reality.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71674 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
Probability regarding abiogenesis and Evolution has been addressed.
The theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis. For the exact same reason the theory of gravity does not rely on explaining the origin of mass.

This has been explained to the fundies thousands of times, and as yet is left unaddressed by them.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#71675 Jan 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
WORK or the Whole Organizational Range of KInds theory is an orgainzational theory which is an explanation of how ecological systems work in relation to SCP concept.
Thats nice, Skippy.

Now run along and play. The adults are trying to have a serious conversation here.
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#71676 Jan 22, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
The theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis. For the exact same reason the theory of gravity does not rely on explaining the origin of mass.
This has been explained to the fundies thousands of times, and as yet is left unaddressed by them.
I agree, but if you make certain assumptions with evolution, abiogenesis is implied. There's always the possibility of contamination of the earth by life from elsewhere, but ultimately, you have to address its origin. Why beat around the bush?

Assumption one: In an environment where life exists and can thrive, natural selection will cause that life to change in response to competition.

Assumption two: Life will adapt to new environments and exploit them, providing the means for survival are within the species reach.
Assumption three: Life started out simple and gained complexity over time, as new mutations were selectively added to the gene pool.

No divine magic is required, and assuming that it does intervene only detracts from the verifiable evidence at hand. If someone can prove that divine intervention DOES exist, then we can base theories on the idea that it had in the past. For now, to include divinity is just one of many forms of political bias.
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#71677 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, but what's your point. Even the evolution of DNA would have to be based on an environment conducive to creating self-replicating molecules. Would you call it life? Not by modern standards. Only the combination of the self-replication in DNA when combined with the functionality of a membranous structure that can contain proteins manufactured by DNA, do we have what we call life.
The same conditions are at work. The environment had to first occur to create membranes and DNA. The two had to combine and start to exploit each others abilities. None of this happened overnight, but over a portion of Earth's 4 billion year history. The existence of life has only been documented over the last 600 million of those 4 billion years. That's 600 million years to get from bacteria to humanity, and about 5 times as long to get from a rocky planet in a new solar system to those bacteria.
Probability regarding abiogenesis and Evolution has been addressed. Irrefutable proof isn't going to happen. It's just a question of whether or not you would rather have an ordinary truth or a fantastic lie that puts you above the natural world that you depend on for life.
You can call it a faith or a simple preference of logic but I don't see any reason to give credibility to a deity that does not make its presence known. That only convinces me of the voyeuristic nature of its followers.
fout times as long to get to bacteria! Yeah! I can add!:)
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#71678 Jan 22, 2013
"Four" times! I really shouldn't post with the morning light coming in the window!

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#71679 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Fins came first, then legs.
Creatures came first, then eggs.
I didn't think you would EVER admit that.

Now.... did that hurt so bad?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71680 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, but if you make certain assumptions with evolution, abiogenesis is implied. There's always the possibility of contamination of the earth by life from elsewhere, but ultimately, you have to address its origin. Why beat around the bush?
They don't. In fact there are numerous scientific organisations across the world who are working on that very subject. But it's more of a subject for chemists than for biologists. It still has no bearing on evolution, which doesn't care if life was magically poofed into existence, just as long as life is here. Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71681 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Totally delusional.
I'm sure the people who wrote the bible smoked marijuana plant and mushrooms or other natural hallucinogens aka burning bush. Even tribes, Native Indians, or shamans did it. Religion is a result of delusional beliefs caused by altered consciousness.

But of course it's the chosen elites with their delusions who have the authority to subjugate people into following their religions. It's because they hold power and secret knowledge. But the fact is, the truth is out there.

What we need is Science to explain "religiosity"

"Neuroscientists are uncovering interesting correlations between religiosity, the tendency to feel anxiety and the function of serotonin in the brain."

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-brai...

And now we just have to deal with both Science and Religion with equal importance. They both play a critical role for survival.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71683 Jan 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you hate everything that is different than you. Not at all surprising.
Likewise.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71684 Jan 22, 2013
Lililth_Satans_Bore wrote:
<quoted text>you struggle with reading and comprehension don't you... try hooked on phonics
Likewise. Why do you lie with both eyes closed?
Don't close your damn eyes against the truth.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71685 Jan 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Heck, it is easy to define sexual perversion from a Christian point of view. Sexually perverted acts are those acts that are done by other people.
And since you are not doing Chuckles the Clown (AKA Charles) you are a big old nasty pervert.
No cause for alarm. You are the clown.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#71686 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure the people who wrote the bible smoked marijuana plant and mushrooms or other natural hallucinogens aka burning bush. Even tribes, Native Indians, or shamans did it. Religion is a result of delusional beliefs caused by altered consciousness.
But of course it's the chosen elites with their delusions who have the authority to subjugate people into following their religions. It's because they hold power and secret knowledge. But the fact is, the truth is out there.
What we need is Science to explain "religiosity"
"Neuroscientists are uncovering interesting correlations between religiosity, the tendency to feel anxiety and the function of serotonin in the brain."
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-brai...
And now we just have to deal with both Science and Religion with equal importance. They both play a critical role for survival.
Yes, there's more than one study showing the inverse correlation between "religiosity" and IQ.

One only needs to read these threads to confirm their findings.

...either here or at FSTDT.

http://www.fstdt.com/Top100.aspx...

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71687 Jan 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Shh, you will set him off again.
Chuckles will go on for days on end about how the English language belongs to the English. And no, Chuckles is not a native English speaker.
English language belongs to the English( Angles and Saxons). You have no case against that. The truth and nothing but the truth.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71688 Jan 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Shh, you will set him off again.
Chuckles will go on for days on end about how the English language belongs to the English. And no, Chuckles is not a native English speaker.
Ofcourse. English belongs to the English( the Angles and the Saxons).
You have no case against that.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#71689 Jan 22, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> English language belongs to the English( Angles and Saxons). You have no case against that. The truth and nothing but the truth.
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, there's more than one study showing the inverse correlation between "religiosity" and IQ.
One only needs to read these threads to confirm their findings.
...as Charles (above, right on que) so adeptly illustrates this point...

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71690 Jan 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I am currently debating at a Christian Forum too, it goes by the name of "Christian Forums". You are supposed to be very polite and not offend anyone there. I don't think I will last too long, the moderators don't seem to apply the rules equally to atheists and Christians.
At any rate I have to get my insults in somewhere.
You don't know how good it feels to tell someone what an a-hole that they are when you have been restricted from doing so.
Dull!
You are already in that hole of abys( bottomless pit).

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
News 'Homosexuals aren't gay - they are just possess... 9 min Ted Haggard s Mas... 26
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 11 min Denny CranesPlace 67,264
A to Z songs by title or group! 13 min Poppyann 25
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 18 min Krypteia 33,969
News Weird 28 mins ago 9:02 a.m.Naked man climbs on ... 20 min Ted Haggard s Mas... 2
News Trump's bizarre claim that the Clinton email co... 31 min INFIDEL 1,052
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 32 min -ZAMASU- 207,200
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 50 min -ZAMASU- 10,647
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 1 hr Lelouch0 1,525
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr CJ Rocker 2,472
More from around the web