Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 216925 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.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#77404 Feb 25, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Mine neither.:))
Took me ages to find the proper form.
I keep confusing Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan and Italian.
Latin is less confusing. That's a good thing because some bloke with airs, figured it would be a good idea to use that as language of first choice to translate Luvian in.
ARHA uhhh?? had to look that up, but i first thought it was part of the language!?
For quite a few centuries, Latin was of course the international language of science.

I still kinda miss it...

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#77405 Feb 25, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>For quite a few centuries, Latin was of course the international language of science.
I still kinda miss it...
I miss when it was hieroglyphs.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#77406 Feb 25, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
But you said:
"Christopher Langan may be a very bright person, but that does not mean he is the "smartest person in the world."
And one thing he would agree with us on is that Langoliers is full of crap"
And my joke was Langan was me Langoliers.
Further down in the post you started talking about Alan.
Oh by the way Alan who?
You are clearly not Langan, despite the similarity in names. He is not an idiot. You are. He does not believe in a personal god, you do.

As I said, he would think you are full of crap. No one is falling for your delusion.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#77407 Feb 25, 2013
I hear all of these idiot creatards claiming that they live these fantastic lives. For some reason I don't believe them. Now it may be possible to have a nice house, car, and even a wife that is not make the dogs bark ugly, but it is extremely unlikely.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#77408 Feb 25, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I miss when it was hieroglyphs.
Laffin.

For some odd reason, I never learned those. Or cuneiform.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Level 1

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#77409 Feb 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the fact that all dogs came from one species would be another good example. ion only 15,000 years or so...
Hmmmm...what happened to that millions of years bullshit?
Not at all. Dogs ADAPTING to their environment is evidence of adaptation, not evolution or the model.

The fact that many breeds are, well, CREATED, specifically argues against evolution.

Adaptation is not evidence of positive mutations at all. Not even the evolutionists assert this, only the foolish layman that does not understand the model would make such a dumb error.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Level 1

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#77410 Feb 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no, it predicted they would evolve faster.and they have. more of that evidence you say doesn't exist.
No, it doesn't.

Using adaptation or natural changes that are not from mutations as evidence of evolution would be fraud.

And that is what you are attempting.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Level 1

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#77411 Feb 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>so dude, still waiting for those "more interesting' theories to replace evolution...
So am I.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Level 1

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#77412 Feb 25, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Please tell us about your mythology.
You don't seem to have sufficient gravitas to have discovered that modern day science is wrong and you know how and why that is. Do you have science degrees in ALL the relevant fields that somehow impact on evolutionary theory??
Perhaps you could take some time and write up a paper on how wrong today's scientific take on evolution is. All you're doing here is stating that, in your opinion, this science is ALL wrong. We need details.
Science has already stated it's opinion and provided proof, we need to see yours proof.
I have no mythology.

Modern day science does not support evolution, no more than science supported flat-earth.

I have no need to write a paper. The evolutionary model is not supported by science. They have been looking for a viable model for 150 years ... still not found.

Science does not have an opinion. Unless, perhaps, you have some mythology of some deity known as "Science" that you would like to ell us about?

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Level 1

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#77413 Feb 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>No. not even close, but nice try. a religious fanatic buys onto a cult with no evidence whatsoever.
i look at evidence and rationally decide whether to agree with it or not.
you can't even get those terms right, just parroting what you heared otheres say without checking the veradcity of the argument. you sir, seem to be the fanatic.
Indeed, nice try.

"a religious fanatic buys onto a cult with no evidence whatsoever."

You are deliberately, and with dishonesty, mixing "religion" and "cult" into the same sentence, as if they are interchangeable.

Nice try indeed. We can now safely count you out from all future rational and logical discussions.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Level 1

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#77414 Feb 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Don't give me that " i was dumbing it down for you" bullshit. You clearly tried to use the argument that something from nothing like the big bang was impossible.
you are not very good at logic...are you?
i know you are not very good at lying, or thrying to cover uyp your mistakes with lies.
seriously, dude, you are making a bigger fool of yourself the longer you try to back up shit you do not comprehend.
LOL! Projecting much?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#77415 Feb 26, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no mythology.
Modern day science does not support evolution, no more than science supported flat-earth.
I have no need to write a paper. The evolutionary model is not supported by science. They have been looking for a viable model for 150 years ... still not found.
Science does not have an opinion. Unless, perhaps, you have some mythology of some deity known as "Science" that you would like to ell us about?
Why do you have to lie so much?

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#77416 Feb 26, 2013
Yankee Yahoo, if there is so much difference between a religion and a cult,
will you kindly explain that difference to us?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#77417 Feb 26, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no mythology.
Modern day science does not support evolution, no more than science supported flat-earth.
I have no need to write a paper. The evolutionary model is not supported by science. They have been looking for a viable model for 150 years ... still not found.
Science does not have an opinion. Unless, perhaps, you have some mythology of some deity known as "Science" that you would like to ell us about?
Lie.

A SMALL sample of scientific organizations that support the teaching of Evolution in public schools:

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

The American Association for the Advancement of Science is the world's largest general scientific society. The AAAS serves some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals. A 2002 statement states: "[T]he lack of scientific warrant for so-called 'intelligent design theory' makes it improper to include as a part of science education."[1]
A 2006 statement on the teaching of evolution: "Some bills seek to discredit evolution by emphasizing so-called "flaws" in the theory of evolution or "disagreements" within the scientific community. Others insist that teachers have absolute freedom within their classrooms and cannot be disciplined for teaching non-scientific “alternatives” to evolution. A number of bills require that students be taught to "critically analyze" evolution or to understand "the controversy." But there is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution. The current controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution is not a scientific one."[2]

American Association of University Professors is an organization of professors and other academics in the United States. AAUP membership is about 47,000, with over 500 local campus chapters and 39 state organizations.[4] "deplores efforts in local communities and by some state legislators to require teachers in public schools to treat evolution as merely a hypothesis or speculation, untested and unsubstantiated by the methods of science, and to require them to make students aware of an "intelligent-design hypothesis" to account for the origins of life. These initiatives not only violate the academic freedom of public school teachers, but can deny students an understanding of the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding evolution."[5]

American Astronomical Society is an American society of professional astronomers and other interested individuals, with over 7,000 members and six divisions. "Intelligent Design" fails to meet the basic definition of a scientific idea: its proponents do not present testable hypotheses and do not provide evidence for their views that can be verified or duplicated by subsequent researchers. Since "Intelligent Design" is not science, it does not belong in the science curriculum of the nation’s primary and secondary schools."[9]

American Chemical Society is a scientific society that supports scientific inquiry in the field of chemistry, with more than 164,000 members at all degree-levels and in all fields of chemistry, chemical engineering, and related fields. It is the world's largest scientific society and one of the leading sources of authoritative scientific information.[10] "urges... State and local education authorities to support high-quality science standards and curricula that affirm evolution as the only scientifically accepted explanation for the origin and diversity of species."[11]

American Geophysical Union The AGU represents over 43,000 Earth and space scientists. "Advocates of intelligent design believe that life on Earth is too complex to have evolved on its own and must therefore be the work of a designer. That is an untestable belief and, therefore, cannot qualify as a scientific theory." [12]
<<cont'd>>

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#77418 Feb 26, 2013
<<cont'd>>American Institute of Physics has a Governing Board policy statement supporting evolution and opposing creationism.[13]

American Psychological Association The Science Directorate and the APA Council of Representatives issued a Resolution Rejecting Intelligent Design As Scientific And Reaffirming Support For Evolutionary Theory.[14]

American Society of Agronomy The ASA represents over 10,000 members. "Intelligent design is not a scientific discipline and should not be taught as part of the K-12 science curriculum.[16]

Botanical Society of America "The proponents of creationism/intelligent design promote scientific ignorance in the guise of learning. As professional scientists and educators, we strongly assert that such efforts are both misguided and flawed, presenting an incorrect view of science, its understandings, and its processes."[17]

Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology The Federation represents 22 professional societies and 84,000 scientists, and its statement FASEB Opposes Using Science Classes to Teach Intelligent Design, Creationism, and other Non-Scientific Beliefs was adopted by the FASEB Board of Directors.[18]

National Association of Biology Teachers "Scientists have firmly established evolution as an important natural process.... Explanations or ways of knowing that invoke metaphysical, non-naturalistic or supernatural mechanisms, whether called “creation science,”“scientific creationism,”“intelligent design theory,”“young earth theory,” or similar designations, are outside the scope of science and therefore are not part of a valid science curriculum."

The National Center for Science Education itself opposes the teaching of intelligent design, acting as a clearinghouse for information regarding efforts to force creationism (including intelligent design) into the classroom.

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#77419 Feb 26, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> I am telling it to your face, all that did the worse than you, are long dead and forgotten, good luck?
No, you are telling me anonymously on an anonymous thread and that great anonymous beast know as the internet, you posted 16 house ago and I have just got round to reading it, I presume that we are not only in different time zones but an a different continent. So please advise using basic logic without resorting to christian lies is that telling me to my face?

Yes, death comes to us all, including christians. The difference is I know without doubt what will happen to the my constant atoms for and billions billions of years after I die. You on the other hand, with absolutely no evidence live with the hope and delusion of a something else.

The universe is here and shows you delusion for what it is, delusion. Live with it

*** READ ***

The following is supposedly an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term exam paper.

The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.

As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different Religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:

(1). If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

(2). If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you, and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God."

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A
Learner

Macedonia, OH

#77420 Feb 26, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
So am I.
I read one on this thread. I think it was cycles and patterns or something or the other.:0)

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#77421 Feb 26, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, nice try.
"a religious fanatic buys onto a cult with no evidence whatsoever."
You are deliberately, and with dishonesty, mixing "religion" and "cult" into the same sentence, as if they are interchangeable.
Nice try indeed. We can now safely count you out from all future rational and logical discussions.
So you make the claim now please advise of evidence (any evidence) that confirms religious beliefs?

There are 38000+ different cults of christianity, my betting is you are a member of one of those cults.

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#77422 Feb 26, 2013
If any form of Christianity is to be followed , Snake handling is the way to go.
FREE SERVANT
#77423 Feb 26, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Lie.
A SMALL sample of scientific organizations that support the teaching of Evolution in public schools:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientif...
The American Association for the Advancement of Science is the world's largest general scientific society. The AAAS serves some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals. A 2002 statement states: "[T]he lack of scientific warrant for so-called 'intelligent design theory' makes it improper to include as a part of science education."[1]
A 2006 statement on the teaching of evolution: "Some bills seek to discredit evolution by emphasizing so-called "flaws" in the theory of evolution or "disagreements" within the scientific community. Others insist that teachers have absolute freedom within their classrooms and cannot be disciplined for teaching non-scientific &#8220;alternatives&#8 221; to evolution. A number of bills require that students be taught to "critically analyze" evolution or to understand "the controversy." But there is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution. The current controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution is not a scientific one."[2]
American Association of University Professors is an organization of professors and other academics in the United States. AAUP membership is about 47,000, with over 500 local campus chapters and 39 state organizations.[4] "deplores efforts in local communities and by some state legislators to require teachers in public schools to treat evolution as merely a hypothesis or speculation, untested and unsubstantiated by the methods of science, and to require them to make students aware of an "intelligent-design hypothesis" to account for the origins of life. These initiatives not only violate the academic freedom of public school teachers, but can deny students an understanding of the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding evolution."[5]
American Astronomical Society is an American society of professional astronomers and other interested individuals, with over 7,000 members and six divisions. "Intelligent Design" fails to meet the basic definition of a scientific idea: its proponents do not present testable hypotheses and do not provide evidence for their views that can be verified or duplicated by subsequent researchers. Since "Intelligent Design" is not science, it does not belong in the science curriculum of the nation&#8217;s primary and secondary schools."[9]
American Chemical Society is a scientific society that supports scientific inquiry in the field of chemistry, with more than 164,000 members at all degree-levels and in all fields of chemistry, chemical engineering, and related fields. It is the world's largest scientific society and one of the leading sources of authoritative scientific information.[10] "urges... State and local education authorities to support high-quality science standards and curricula that affirm evolution as the only scientifically accepted explanation for the origin and diversity of species."[11]
American Geophysical Union The AGU represents over 43,000 Earth and space scientists. "Advocates of intelligent design believe that life on Earth is too complex to have evolved on its own and must therefore be the work of a designer. That is an untestable belief and, therefore, cannot qualify as a scientific theory." [12]
<<cont'd>>
A fool says there is no God.

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
Last two letters into two new words... (Jun '15) 4 min Old Sam 5,876
Interesting Quotes (Jun '11) 6 min Old Sam 16,879
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 8 min Old Sam 32,279
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 9 min SUG here 35,668
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 9 min beatlesinthebog 22,237
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 10 min Old Sam 12,814
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 10 min Old Sam 83,179
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 32 min Gunthram 207,209
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 50 min 8541 MARINE 67,268
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr Majority should rule 2,480
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 1 hr beatlesinthebog 10,652
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 5 hr Lelouch0 1,525
More from around the web