Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 210039 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.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72701 Jan 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Many places in Harry Potter have been confirmed to be real too. England, London, even certain railroad depots. Just because a few places in the Bible can be shown to have existed does very little to give the book any credence.
Spiderman is real too according to the standards you have just given.
That does not say too much for your evidence.
So conclusively, that does not say too much for your evidence.
Most biblical characters according to archaeology existed in true life bearing that same name unlike Spider man and Harry Porter. Liar!
You lost again.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72702 Jan 27, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
You chose Christianity out of all the religions in the world.
That was a guess, wasn’t it?
Nope.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#72703 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No, if we found a computer on Mars that would be evidence that someone built it and put it there. Your design analogy fails as computers are not naturally occurring self-replicating organisms.
<quoted text>
"Design" is assumed. How exactly is "complexity" measured in your examples? I can quite easily provide you with examples of EXTREME complexity, made PURELY by natural forces. Of course you could demonstrate me wrong by providing evidence of the mechanisms used by your intelligent agent responsible for them.
Complexity alone does not necessarily indicate intelligence. And in fact may be the opposite of what you require. A designer wants things to be simple, easy to create, easy to repair. Complexity is a barrier to that.
Here's another reason why you're wrong. Someone has written "Hello there!" in the sand. The symbols involved are actually very simple. They were designed that way so they would be easy for people to remember when learning the language. Yet it's not likely that a combination of wind, rain and water would be able to make those shapes in the sand. But it's very easy for someone to just grab a stick and write it.
Nearby we can see some pretty repeating criss-cross shapes made in the sand. One might even describe them as more complex shapes than "Hello there!" Made by crabs, an unintended side-effect of the way they walk. But again easy for someone to imitate by just using a stick. However while we know that natural forces are incapable of creating one, we know that they are capable of creating the other.
It's not the alleged "complexity" of something that's important, but the mechanisms used to create those phenomena, and what they are capable of.
False analogy. If nothing is complex, then you would have an answer to how planets were exactly formed and be able to replicate them, let alone a universe, or can you? It's why you need an intelligent agent as a cause of how it created such complexity as the solar system, because then it would make your argument valid. Because only such intelligent agent would be able to 'easily' create or manipulate such complex system.

It may look like a crab or crabby in nature but then we already have the cancer constellation. lol

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72704 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
What "debate" is that? There is none. The scientific community seem to be blissfully unaware of it.
Poof poof!
It is in the Darwin's crowd thread under the evolution debate, are you denying that your bloody loser?
Too late!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72705 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
There may be a sect which does something along those lines, but it's not the usual for Buddhism.
So, what is their mode of worship?
Who do they pray to?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72706 Jan 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>So you are presuming that it could not possibly happen through natural causes, in spite of us watching stars forming through natural means all the time.
"So you are presuming that it could not possibly"

the big bang. Where nothing exploded and created everything. Or as some now are changing it up to sound less ridicules claim that when a singular (that contained all matter in the cosmos and was no bigger then this period .) exploded S L O W L Y creating everything.

Ya this second explanation sounds way more plausible. One other thing. What made it explode?
It had been sitting there for most of an entirety then just on a whim it thought
"Hey let's try something different"?

Yes sir, you folks real have something to hang your hat on with that one.

I can see why with such a solid foundation as that you feel superior enough to call creationist crazy.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72707 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And here I thought Bill Gates was an atheist.
Check it out. He may be in his dreams. Lol

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72708 Jan 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>You have not provided any evidence that your god is real, so it is you who is a liar, not Alan.
The Bible.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72709 Jan 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Saying "I don't know" is a lie to you? Your morality is very backwards.
It is if you do know.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72710 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not being dishonest. I have not claimed to disprove God, never have, never will. Reason? Because it's a non-falsifiable, and therefore non-scientific concept. I've also never claimed that Christians say that God does not exist.
There are only two possibilities here: either you have difficulty in understanding what I am saying, or you're just another typical fundie liar for Jesus.
Not that it makes any difference to me which one you are.(shrug)
Playing to the gallery or dancing around the tree, we never solve any thing. You have no clue, whom God is.
When it comes to God, science is zero. Period.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72711 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I have it for my position. And you can only dismiss it, not address it. Again, that ain't my problem.
Likewise.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72712 Jan 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Which was a philosophical colloquial ... nothing more. It proves nothing but it does assume that self awareness is attributed to intellect, which we know is a false equivocation.
No, it's widely accepted as the self awareness proof. You're simply wrong on this one too.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72713 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>Yup. Doesn't apply to creationists.

(evil grin)
How about YEC?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72714 Jan 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>With what we know about the Bible nowadays, you have no reliable evidence.
You don't know jack then do you?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#72715 Jan 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
But....god didn't do it.
And no man wouldn't be able to do it either.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72716 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no cause. The reason being there is no particular event that precedes it to cause the phenomena. This is normal in quantum physics, though it is counter-intuitive. But there's no violation of energy conservation laws as the positive particle is counter-balanced by the negative. So far all scientific research demonstrates quantum physics to be correct.
Dodge.
You have not addressed or answered the question.
Like i said, science have no answer in Godly matters.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72717 Jan 27, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
people in asia wopship buddha as a god every day. Along with other buddhist deities.
Thanks for those wonderful piece of information. God bless!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72718 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, abiogenesis. That doesn't necessarily mean that Goddidit.
How?
And who did it?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#72719 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
On the contrary, I've demonstrated it. You have not addressed it. It stands until you do.
Foul!
You are a liar.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#72720 Jan 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Simply a natural occurrence. However it may seem like magic to the incredulous.
What makes you think a natural occurrence does not need any outside or external factors to bring about the natural processes?

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
*add A word / drop a word* (Nov '12) 4 min xxxooxxx 14,060
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 4 min Notheast 201,189
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 7 min xxxooxxx 20,603
Make A Sentance out of a 5 letter word. (Nov '09) 7 min andet1987 36,282
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 11 min Luckys Mommmy 61,603
Change 1 letter game! (Nov '11) 13 min andet1987 8,637
True False Game (Jun '11) 16 min andet1987 12,766
Who won the Presidential debate 2016 ? 20 min andet1987 146
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) (Jan '16) 21 min TheJerseyDevil 8,996
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 1 hr streetglidehoney 9,163
More from around the web