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 3,471)

Showing posts 69,401 - 69,420 of105,934
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73691
Feb 4, 2013
 
GatorBUILT wrote:
<quoted text>Except THIS reality check...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_...

Now what arrogant, fundiot douche-nozzle?!?
That he was human, tampon.

Level 2

Since: Mar 09

Statesville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73692
Feb 4, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, it's a laser image projected onto the table .... you tap the table over the keys. It's awesome. No board, just a small box you place in front of your hands. My fingers get sore when I type too much, so I wind up taking too many breaks with a conventional keyboard. Right now I have an Apple Aluminum, it's really light touch but still more pressure than I can handle sometimes. To be able to just tap ... and get a response .... golden.
That s technology applied from digitizers...if I told you I actualy tried to get some money for that infrared/laser technology would you believe me? I had mentioned this to my stepfather years ago while he watched me use a (GTCO)roll-up digitizer for my construction take-offs drawings, etc...the rigid digitizers utilized infrared-sensing spacial technology, not unlike a burglar alarm r garae door opener to triangulatethe position of the input device...he was fascinated by it, and I said t him....if only these fools could include a keyboard on the table, I wouldn'tave to stand up all day to input the info...grrrr...He said: Hmmm, interesting...you think that's possible?...I said: If it can sense a stylus to within .001" I think it can sense a fingers on a keyboard...h asked me to ivestigate...I looked up patents, and IBM hand patented the damn technology about 1 months prior...those BASTARDS...a couple of years ago he sent me a link to a laser projection of a keyboard sensing device...like this
http://www.brookstone.com/laser-projection-vi... BASTARDS...but I am considering the sme type of technology for small projection video to eplace monitors...wait...those BASTARDS are patenting that as well...damnitalltohell!!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73693
Feb 4, 2013
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
And despite that degree in goddidit he helped define a branch of science that has helped make clear so much and has allowed huge advances in genetics and medicine that would not have been possible without his initial insights
So did Newton with his Law of Gravity and his mysticism. So did Galileo who was a devout Catholic and known to be the Father of Science. So did Georges Lemaitre, a Catholic priest who proposed the Big Bang Theory, etc. The point is even Scientists believe in a God.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73694
Feb 4, 2013
 
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins considers scientific discoveries an "opportunity to worship". In his book Collins rejects Young Earth creationism and intelligent design. His own belief is theistic evolution or evolutionary creation which he prefers to term BioLogos."
I'm not advocating anything. If he believed in theistic evolution, good for him! ;-)

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73695
Feb 4, 2013
 
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Well there ya have it. At least he understood himself. Still a brilliantly passionate man. I have nothing but the utmost respect for his work.
I agree. The was a trainee to be a clergyman. I'm sure he wasn't an atheist.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73696
Feb 4, 2013
 
GatorBUILT wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh what a fundiot world we weave, when we only cut and paste to decieve...
the ENTRE speech is onlin, on youtube...etc..etc
http://www.truthdig.com/dig/item/200512_an_at...
Another epic failure to actually READ- completely! and comprehend...and you have actually college degrees?!?!? From where? Liberty U.? Bob Jones?...wow...burn them in shame.
Here's more:

"The entirety of atheism is contained in this response. Atheism is not a philosophy; it is not even a view of the world; it is simply a refusal to deny the obvious. Unfortunately, we live in a world in which the obvious is overlooked as a matter of principle. The obvious must be observed and re-observed and argued for. This is a thankless job. It carries with it an aura of petulance and insensitivity. It is, moreover, a job that the atheist does not want."

READ THE LAST LINE. Apparently, he is willing to admit that an atheist does not and would not want to have an explanation for God. By stating something like "deny the obvious" he's acknowledging that perhaps the concept of a God is what many thinks is the 'obvious' and that he evidently states that it should be 'observed' and 're-observed.'

I read his book The End of Faith. And most of his criticisms are against Islam religion. And people say he's a closet Buddhist. Go figure.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73697
Feb 4, 2013
 
GatorBUILT wrote:
<quoted text>
and you have actually college degrees?!?!? From where? Liberty U.? Bob Jones?...wow...burn them in shame.
You are a d*ckhead loser. Gator fans must be really stupid.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73698
Feb 4, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>I agree. The was a trainee to be a clergyman. I'm sure he wasn't an atheist.
I think he became agnostic later in life, but he didn't start out that way. Perhaps his work brought him to that very personal conviction. Our paths take us to many strange places.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73699
Feb 4, 2013
 
I'm officially adding his book to my reading list. Very interesting individual.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73700
Feb 4, 2013
 
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he became agnostic later in life, but he didn't start out that way. Perhaps his work brought him to that very personal conviction. Our paths take us to many strange places.
He might have not been religious but I think he wasn't atheist, agnostic maybe.

"Darwin, it was believed, had simply discovered a new law of nature designed by God. And it seems this was how Darwin himself viewed at least part of the religious implications of his evolutionary theory."

Dr. Darwin has been frequently called an atheist, whereas in every one of his works distinct expressions may be found showing that he fully believed in God as the Creator of the universe. For instance, in the ‘Temple of Nature,’ published posthumously, he writes:“Perhaps all the productions of nature are in their progress to greater perfection! an idea countenanced by modern discoveries and deductions concerning the progressive formation of the solid parts of the terraqueous globe, and consonant to the dignity of the creator of all things.” He concludes one chapter in ‘Zoonomia’ with the words of the Psalmist:“The heavens declare the Glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.”

http://publicdomainreview.org/2011/06/28/was-...

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73701
Feb 4, 2013
 
01Justsayin wrote:
I'm officially adding his book to my reading list. Very interesting individual.
The first occurrence is in his first book, Journal of Researches (first edition of 1839, based on his Beagle diary) now known universally as The Voyage of the Beagle referring to an excursion in Australia:

"A little time before this I had been lying on a sunny bank, and was reflecting on the strange character of the animals of this country as compared with the rest of the world. An unbeliever in every thing beyond his own reason might exclaim,“Two distinct Creators must have been at work; their object, however, has been the same, and certainly the end in each case is complete.”

Darwin next used the term in his following book on the pollination adaptations of orchids in 1862:

"This treatise affords me also an opportunity of attempting to show that the study of organic beings may be as interesting to an observer who is fully convinced that the structure of each is due to secondary laws, as to one who views every trifling detail of structure as the result of the direct interposition of the Creator."

more:

http://publicdomainreview.org/2011/06/28/was-...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73702
Feb 4, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>He might have not been religious but I think he wasn't atheist, agnostic maybe.

"Darwin, it was believed, had simply discovered a new law of nature designed by God. And it seems this was how Darwin himself viewed at least part of the religious implications of his evolutionary theory."

Dr. Darwin has been frequently called an atheist, whereas in every one of his works distinct expressions may be found showing that he fully believed in God as the Creator of the universe. For instance, in the ‘Temple of Nature,’ published posthumously, he writes:“Perhaps all the productions of nature are in their progress to greater perfection! an idea countenanced by modern discoveries and deductions concerning the progressive formation of the solid parts of the terraqueous globe, and consonant to the dignity of the creator of all things.” He concludes one chapter in ‘Zoonomia’ with the words of the Psalmist:“The heavens declare the Glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.”

http://publicdomainreview.org/2011/06/28/was-...
Totally awesome stuff. I fail to see, like many others, how some people feel the need to exclude God from the concepts of scientific thought when they are so obviously, at least for the vast majority of us, intertwined. There's a flawless connectedness to everything that I find to be breathtakingly beautiful. This knowledge only enhances the human experience. I am not alone. I did not come from nothing nor will I return to nothing. I am a part of something much greater than myself as we are intertwined. I cannot possibly fathom how anyone could bring it upon themselves to separate the two.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73703
Feb 4, 2013
 
Dr. Darwin was his grandfather BTW. lol

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73704
Feb 4, 2013
 
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Totally awesome stuff. I fail to see, like many others, how some people feel the need to exclude God from the concepts of scientific thought when they are so obviously, at least for the vast majority of us, intertwined. There's a flawless connectedness to everything that I find to be breathtakingly beautiful. This knowledge only enhances the human experience. I am not alone. I did not come from nothing nor will I return to nothing. I am a part of something much greater than myself as we are intertwined. I cannot possibly fathom how anyone could bring it upon themselves to separate the two.
I agree with you. It's really frustrating how some educated individuals do not have respect whatsoever. It really makes me sick. Apparently they don't see the beauty of everything, only the vile and evil.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73705
Feb 4, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
Dr. Darwin was his grandfather BTW. lol
I noticed. It is obvious from his writings that Charles Darwin wrestled with his faith. He understood just like we have. That science can neither prove or disprove the existence of God.

"Thus we are brought face to face with a difficulty as insoluble as is that of free will and predestination."

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73706
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with you. It's really frustrating how some educated individuals do not have respect whatsoever. It really makes me sick. Apparently they don't see the beauty of everything, only the vile and evil.
How do you come to the conclusion that someone who doesn't see things your way finds everything vile and evil?

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73707
Feb 4, 2013
 
I heard a new species was found wandering the streets of D.C.. They named it homo slackass erectus. I think it resembles the skunk more than an anthropoid but I'm going by the stink emanating from behind it.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73708
Feb 4, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>I agree with you. It's really frustrating how some educated individuals do not have respect whatsoever. It really makes me sick. Apparently they don't see the beauty of everything, only the vile and evil.
Or only what they can process with their overly logical, analytical minds.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73709
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with you. It's really frustrating how some educated individuals do not have respect whatsoever. It really makes me sick. Apparently they don't see the beauty of everything, only the vile and evil.
You are projecting. Those of us with scientific understanding see beauty in things you do not even know about or comprehend. The atomic structures, how things interact, is a very beautiful thing. Quantum mechanics is one of the most gorgeous theories on the planet, even if I don't understand it all. Evolutionary biology is poetic beyond even what Shakespeare could have imagined. Biochemistry is something that sings to you, when you understand it, and the song is something that even our greatest composers cannot hold candles to. You see science as "evil" and "vile" because it requires actual work.

As Dawkins said, there is more beauty in the world that can only been seen with the eyes of science. Paraphrased.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73710
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, true science is repeatable. Cretinist sites, like the ones you quote from, cannot generate repeatable experiments.

If you do not believe the claims of evolutionists you can go to the sites they list and find the fossils for yourself. You can run the DNA tests and get the same results for yourself. All of their experiments are repeatable. If they aren't it tells you something is wrong with their methodology and their conclusions are probably wrong too.

Scientists are very open about their work, once it is published. Other people testing it is the one way to verify their work. They like that. By the way, if you find that they are not right, your results better be repeatable too. The one way to debunk a debunker is to show that his experiment was faulty.
"true science is repeatable"

As in the Big Bang?
Spontaneous life?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 69,401 - 69,420 of105,934
|
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.

•••
•••
•••
•••