Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 216890 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.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79708 Mar 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>We are both from Minnesota and know that ice floats.

So, does ice float in your world? It does in mine.
As I said it floats until it goes out on a lake in those few hours it slips below the surface of the water. It still floats just not above all the water. If you are a Minnesotan you should know this. I live on a bigger lake for over ten years and have been on the lake when the ice goes out.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#79709 Mar 8, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Wouldn't this be more like devolution?
Not really, since evolution is not goal-directed. For instance cave-dwelling lizards losing their eyes is actually a benefit since they no longer have to expend energy on organs they no longer use. But if you wanna call it "devolution" then go ahead, doesn't make much difference. Because the same result is speciation. An organism with a certain genome has offspring whose genome continually changes over the generations until it is significantly different from its forbears.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79710 Mar 8, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>And I thought they gave up that cloaking device to Starfleet R&D.
Which on the got two one in Star Trek IV

Can you name the episode where they got the other one?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#79711 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
I would like to pose this question.
What is the origin of evolution?
Irrelevant to the validity of evolution.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#79712 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
so you have the earth covered in water...sometime in the past...and science concurring to this fact...with the only difference being the time frame of reference.
And in your case you proposed an error margin of 6,000 percent. I've heard of covering your bases, but geez...

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79713 Mar 8, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>I repeat; there is NO evidence for a flood...people have been looking for it since the 1600's. NONE found.
Are You going to make me start post it all here?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#79714 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Early Earth 'was covered in water'
http://www.earthdive.com/site/news/newsdetail...
"Just 2% to 3% of the Earth's surface would have been dry land, compared with 28% today."

So Koder was correct.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79715 Mar 8, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Irrelevant to the validity of evolution.
Then god would be Irrelevant to the validity of creation...

it's an asinine statement dude, even for a monkey.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79716 Mar 8, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>Which on the got two one in Star Trek IV

Can you name the episode where they got the other one?
Cross out the above ^^^^^^^^

Which one? They got two of them. They got one in Star Trek IV.

Can you name the episode where they got the other one?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79717 Mar 8, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>"Just 2% to 3% of the Earth's surface would have been dry land, compared with 28% today."

So Koder was correct.
Nope more like 2 or 3% were water before the flood.

And unlike today most of it was very inhabitable.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#79718 Mar 8, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>"Just 2% to 3% of the Earth's surface would have been dry land, compared with 28% today."

So Koder was correct.
Lmao!

Ya right that would be a first !!!!

"So Koder was correct."

LOL

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79719 Mar 8, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
"Just 2% to 3% of the Earth's surface would have been dry land, compared with 28% today."
So Koder was correct.

so you actually have that much faith that you would believe that science could tell that there was 2% land mass on the earth 2.5 billion years ago?...without margin of error greater that 1%?

talked about brained washed...lol

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#79720 Mar 8, 2013
pg 3767
Anonymous wrote:
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
You prove my original point only too well. Today, you claim that homosexuality is "normal". Tomorrow, as your politics suits you, all sexual expression is "normal".
The real ongoing political problem is that gays can't exist in a majority straight community without eventual confrontation. Terms like "pansy" or "drama queen" or "gay" are often terms invented in the homosexual community that eventually attain different meaning in the straight community. Sometimes, there is a bit of a slur to it because the stereotype is typically one where inappropriately effeminate behavior is linked with homosexuality. Other times, terms like "fabulous" or "swag" aren't even starting off as announcements of sexual preference but end up sticking to the stereotype like glue.
One thing here is absolute. You're in a political forum. You were warned that you may encounter opinions that you disagree with, but this is an open discussion. In this realm, YOU started to personally label ME with a slur. YOU are playing the victim while refusing to come out of the closet. YOU are TRAPPED.
As I label it, while trying to avoid sounding like I'm saying "burn the witch!", you serve your master. You just couldn't stop yourself. Now you've exposed your agenda in entirety.
The good little Christians are here to burn ants with a magnifying glass just as much as you are. They're just too cowardly to name their demon.
I give people their chance to back out. Some will always engage in their holy war to the end. You've failed to be a good advocate for science. In some ways I'm glad to make that point. In other ways, I still have some work to do to expose the elitism and prejudice in your political community. Either way, you've failed big time. But feel free to hide behind Woodtick's deliberate ignorance and try to turn it into a popular hate speech you came here to create anyway.
Tsk! Tsk!
end copypaste.

You came in this forum after some political issues were discussed.
One thing you fail to realise is that this board is accessible from various topix nomers.
So while i'm discussing on the evo-forum (i'll admit that i can only repeat so often without getting bored, so i'll entertain discussions with others exploring other venues)you come in from a political angle.
Only when you medicalise homo-sexuality, that can only be done form a bigotted point of view and by denying epigenetics, you can make some points.

You are wrong in your assertions, and frankly started imposing your points of view on all posters here -half are gay: gay is pedophile etc-. And obviously lost sight of it being an intellectual exercise with some premisses and not a contest in ad hominem attacks on all.
It's not entertaining to talk to real life bigots.
You somehow don't notice obvious incompatibility of enlightened anti-bondslavery with concepts as innate badness caused by the fall.
They can't be upheld at the same time.
Pre-determination will always have you trying to medicalise the normal.(Which you than can complain about, as you did i.e. the cost for the tax-payers for medication.)While at the same time excluding predetermination for groups you want to exclude. They suddenly have free-choice.
So i's subjective venting.

imo you're arguements are rambling and illogical.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#79721 Mar 8, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
The triangle has alway existed and will always exist.
;)
Can one have a triangle without apices?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#79722 Mar 8, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong! When the ice goes out on a lake it does it in a matter of a few hours and it sinks not to the bottom but down a good 5 to 10 feet. I have been on the lake when this takes place. So don't tell me it don't happen.
Nope, ice doesn't sink. Ice floats in water, what you are probably seeing is called an optical illusion, the same way deserts look wet when they are actually dry.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#79723 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Early Earth 'was covered in water'
http://www.earthdive.com/site/news/newsdetail...
"Just 2% to 3% of the Earth's surface would have been dry land, compared with 28% today."

It was never completely covered. Learn to read your own sources, and posting one that supports the opposing argument is never intelligent.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#79724 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
so you actually have that much faith that you would believe that science could tell that there was 2% land mass on the earth 2.5 billion years ago?...without margin of error greater that 1%?
talked about brained washed...lol
You posted it as a source, so you accept what it states as well, if you call him an idiot, then that makes you one as well. Moron.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#79725 Mar 8, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You posted it as a source, so you accept what it states as well, if you call him an idiot, then that makes you one as well. Moron.
well then, that would also make the writer a moron...since, after all the title of the article is...Early Earth 'was covered in water'

which by the way...would make you a bigger moron.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#79726 Mar 8, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
well if I have to explain your own scienctific concepts to you...
cosmology is theoretical scienctific ideas of origin.
and the whole debate is about origin...as in origin of species...is it not?
Two totally different topics.

What difference does it make if the universe is steady state or not?

You probably do not understand that subject either.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#79727 Mar 8, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
The steady state model is now largely discredited, as the observational evidence points to a Big Bang-type cosmology and a finite age of the universe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady_State_the...
I'll bet the BBC Hardtalk interview with Penrose is the background for xxx00xxx assertions.

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
keep a word drop a word (Sep '12) 4 min KNIGHT DeVINE 15,311
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 4 min Parden Pard 45,783
*add A word / drop a word* (Nov '12) 6 min KNIGHT DeVINE 15,264
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 7 min KNIGHT DeVINE 10,687
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 7 min Suezanne 10,638
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 8 min Parden Pard 61,085
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 8 min -ZAMASU- 207,129
What Topics knows about you 9 min Out In The Blogos... 76
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 58 min 8541 MARINE 67,249
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 1 hr honeymylove 1,511
More from around the web