Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

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

Comments (Page 3,458)

Showing posts 69,141 - 69,160 of111,841
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73467
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Do you believe something can be suspended in time like sleep while other things are moving in time?
Of course. That's why we have creationists. One day they'll wake up and realise they're in the 21st century and be like "OMFG!!!"
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73468
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course. That's why we have creationists. One day they'll wake up and realise they're in the 21st century and be like "OMFG!!!"
When the Darwinist capitulate then science may catch up.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73469
Feb 1, 2013
 
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>When the Darwinist capitulate then science may catch up.
So in other words, when we deny the facts, you'll accept the science.

You have no idea how to use science.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73470
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So in other words, when we deny the facts, you'll accept the science.
You have no idea how to use science.
Not trying to do anything but speak the truth. Science should always reveal truth.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73471
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

The structure of nature does not work the way Darwin thought. A systematic study of systems in nature will give us the facts of how they are patterned and systematically arranged to cycle and reproduce following given pathways that are not linear as Darwin was misunderstanding and ignorant about.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73472
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Not trying to do anything but speak the truth. Science should always reveal truth.
Then you WILL find truth unfortunate.

God didn't do it the way you think it did.

Or it's a liar.

There are no other options.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73473
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Not trying to do anything but speak the truth. Science should always reveal truth.
No, science is a tool for figuring out how reality works. You would know that if you were educated, or paid any attention to what the more intelligent and learned people have said on here.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73474
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

FREE SERVANT wrote:
The structure of nature does not work the way Darwin thought. A systematic study of systems in nature will give us the facts of how they are patterned and systematically arranged to cycle and reproduce following given pathways that are not linear as Darwin was misunderstanding and ignorant about.
Thank you for providing evidence that you know nothing about evolution, nothing at all.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73475
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

FREE SERVANT wrote:
The structure of nature does not work the way Darwin thought. A systematic study of systems in nature will give us the facts of how they are patterned and systematically arranged to cycle and reproduce following given pathways that are not linear as Darwin was misunderstanding and ignorant about.
Sorry, but your claim was falsified years ago. And that's just this thread.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73476
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you WILL find truth unfortunate.
God didn't do it the way you think it did.
Or it's a liar.
There are no other options.
NO, the Creator can not lie or we would not be here and miracles are beyond your understanding!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73477
Feb 1, 2013
 
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>NO, the Creator can not lie
Stop telling God what to do. It is not limited by your petty limited imagination.
FREE SERVANT wrote:
or we would not be here and miracles are beyond your understanding!
And yours too. Therefore rather than appealing to evidence we do not have, I simply refer to the evidence provided by God itself. Assuming it even exists.

“Somewhere in time...”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73478
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you WILL find truth unfortunate.
God didn't do it the way you think it did.
Or it's a liar.
There are no other options.
No it created itself... is your claim. Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science... you imply An effect without a cause.

But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.

In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73479
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
No it created itself... is your claim. Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science... you imply An effect without a cause.
But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.
In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.

You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.

“Somewhere in time...”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73480
Feb 1, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.
You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
So if nothing was created as you claim, you imply that it(Universe) has always been here...is that your claim?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73481
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.

You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
"No one says any life was created"

I do! I claim God created all life.

"The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes"

This is a lie. You expect spontaneous life coming from rain falling on rocks creating a speck of life and that very first self creating speck of life mutated (against all we know about mutations) for the better billions of times (not once but billions of times) to be the mother of all life on the planet. And then put of the other side of your face you claim bottle neck with Adam and Eve.

“Somewhere in time...”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73482
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.
You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
and again...if life is just the result of chemical processes, why can you not show proof, by making the very simplest of simple life forms...such as a single cell organism? It would be apparent that the chemicals are readily available...but yet you can't why not?
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73483
Feb 1, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but your claim was falsified years ago. And that's just this thread.
No it was not correctly addressed and spoken to!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73484
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
No it created itself... is your claim.
Not definitively, no. But it's possible.
xxxooxxx wrote:
Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science
Ever heard of Newton's Law of Gravity? Planet Mercury breaks it all the time.

So now what? Put out an APB on Mercury?
xxxooxxx wrote:
you imply An effect without a cause.
This is not a problem in quantum physics. However some of the other hypotheses I mentioned in days past are still cause and effect phenomena, therefore should not offend your incredulous ideas about cause and effect.
xxxooxxx wrote:
But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.
Actually yes it does. The rule is that EVERYTHING must have a cause. If God doesn't, then neither must the universe.
xxxooxxx wrote:
In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.
Not really. Particle/anti-particle pairs have been scientifically observed to spontaneously appear in a vacuum. There is no cause. But this is fine under quantum physics. No magic involved. Although it may seem that way to anyone who doesn't know anything about quantum physics.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73485
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So if nothing was created as you claim, you imply that it(Universe) has always been here...is that your claim?
That is one possibility.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73486
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
and again...if life is just the result of chemical processes, why can you not show proof, by making the very simplest of simple life forms...such as a single cell organism? It would be apparent that the chemicals are readily available...but yet you can't why not?
Give us time dude...we've only been working on it about 60 years or so. Nature had millions and millions of years.

You expect miracles or something..:-)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 69,141 - 69,160 of111,841
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••