Evolution vs. Creation

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

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71743 Jan 22, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
By the same token, the assertion of an intelligent process without evidence is also entirely ego based. For example: an invisible magical Jewish wizard that created the universe especially for us.
who knows...in the Parallel Universe Theory anything is possible...

see ya in hell...

or maybe we're in hell and don't know it....

or...

anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71744 Jan 22, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> We are not talking about politics or nationalism but on homosexuality.
No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.

In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.

Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.

Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.

There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71745 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
You'll get yourself stuck up a tree if you don't keep the context straight. None of us have the time to sit around and observe evolution in action. We just analyze what is around us and calculate probability. If you phrase Evolution science any other way, you'll just waste time on other people's stupid debate tactics.
I'd rather ignore the trolls by encouraging thoughtful comments. I'm not interested in taking a victory lap around the city walls for skewering a troll.
Since this thread is full of fundies thoughtful comments can be rare. However skewering trolls is not done merely for skewing trolls, it is also to counter the misinformation they spread. Which can at the very least provide potential lurkers to evaluate positions for themselves and hint at further lines of investigation.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71746 Jan 22, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
who knows...in the Parallel Universe Theory anything is possible...
see ya in hell...
or maybe we're in hell and don't know it....
or...
Anything is possible anyway. All things require are evidence.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71747 Jan 22, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Anything is possible anyway. All things require are evidence.
All things are evident unto themselves...only man requires evidence.
nemesis

Kansas City, MO

#71748 Jan 22, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Or you both imagined it.
Or you are lying.
Either explanation is far more plausible than what you expect others to believe happened.
I dont expect primitive human animals that believe a story that some guy walked on water to believe that a starship/probe was 10ft from us.....so no, that would be silly, DS!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71749 Jan 22, 2013
Combat-Wombat-88 wrote:
Evolution > Creation
End of story.
what about Evolution + Creation?

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#71750 Jan 22, 2013
nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>I dont expect primitive human animals that believe a story that some guy walked on water to believe that a starship/probe was 10ft from us.....so no, that would be silly, DS!
Emesis, was that Jefferson Starship and was that an anal proble or the regular kind?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71752 Jan 22, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow.
It's just that easy, huh?
[/SARCASM]
You're so clueless I'm embarrassed for you.
Don't hate the word, " truth " .
A child will always follow the right morals if he or she is given the right training or upbringing.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71753 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>You keep referring to a definition that is not accurate.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Mac...

So you don't agree to the fact there was increase in brain size in mammals, which is an example of macro-evolution?

Although I have questions about major transitions (origin of higher-level phyla) in species.
"You keep referring to a definition that is not accurate."

I'm sorry for that. I'm just quoting Berkeley's evolution science team.

Berkeley the center of Atheism.
And you believe you're correct and Berkeley is wrong.

I'll quote an old TV show here.
"Very interesting but stupid"

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71754 Jan 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes we know, you're gay and in the closet. Next topic now, it's getting old.
Tell them your secret...

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71755 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not playing games, I want answers. Because if there was one, you would be posting them by now, wouldn't you?

The bible actually tells you that and Science proves that and yet you still don't know?

Hint: We are literally made of star dust.
So no game? Yet you list here your belief of what man is made from.
So why ask? You're just a typical lying atheist. I see through you like a a plate glass window. You atheist sure like your little games.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71756 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.
Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.
Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.
There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!
Shit!
You do have some good points but due to your ill-mannered attitude you tend to spoil it with insults.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71757 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.
Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.
Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.
There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!
Shit!
This is a forum for all. What you have said had been said before.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71758 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So no game? Yet you list here your belief of what man is made from.
So why ask? You're just a typical lying atheist. I see through you like a a plate glass window. You atheist sure like your little games.
What makes you think I'm an atheist?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71759 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"You keep referring to a definition that is not accurate."
I'm sorry for that. I'm just quoting Berkeley's evolution science team.
Berkeley the center of Atheism.
And you believe you're correct and Berkeley is wrong.
I'll quote an old TV show here.
"Very interesting but stupid"
Are you trying to say that Berkley's team is right then? If so, how is the link I provided not more accurate than yours?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71760 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So why ask?
I wanted to see how you're going to explain how we were made from dust. And you haven't provided that. How did dust come to life?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71761 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>What makes you think I'm an atheist?
Your little games gives you away, all the atheist on these thread pull the same crap.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71762 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>Are you trying to say that Berkley's team is right then? If so, how is the link I provided not more accurate than yours?
It's not as renown as Berkeley. Sorry.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71763 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>I wanted to see how you're going to explain how we were made from dust. And you haven't provided that. How did dust come to life?
I don't need to provide that. You can look that up very easy.

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
Tell Us Who or What You Really Are,...? (Apr '13) 11 min wichita-rick 1,644
Federal Disability Insurance Program 24 min Roy 12
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 25 min wichita-rick 152,500
tellmealie (Dec '12) 29 min Independent1 335
The BIZARRE reasons why men rape in India 35 min Scholar 1,083
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? 40 min wichita-rick 318
Is it possible to....... 51 min CJ Rocker 578
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 1 hr Mega Monster 7,582
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 2 hr Sarah 25,711
More from around the web