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
75,781 - 75,800 of 113,170 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80331
Mar 10, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Different matter, your claims we do demonstrate are fallacious simply because you are claiming to know something, yet present no evidence. That is dishonest.
So your saying there's no evidence that atheists look for fault in the bible?

really...lol

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80332
Mar 10, 2013
 
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
read what I said...I did not say God.
"Because the average atheist has a agenda to disprove the bible.
So the atheist does an in depth search looking for fault...and finds it."
Well, it is still incorrect since "agenda" is not the coorect term.

The reason that atheists look for flaws in the Bible is because of claims of Christians of its perfection. If the Bible is perfect then their beliefs are correct. If the Bible is not perfect their beliefs may be wrong. It is a starting point in the search for the truth.

Remember most atheists in the U.S. started as Christians. The first thing they tend to do is to realize that their former belief has all sorts of flaws in it. They realize that those flaws don't mean that there is no god, it is a starting point that allows them to think logically about the existence of god.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80333
Mar 10, 2013
 
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
and again...
are you saying that atheists do not look for fault in the bible?
We don't have to. Most of 'em have already been found:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald...

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80334
Mar 10, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
They don't need to look for it, XXXOOXXX, it is pretty widely known stuff.
A better question would be why would people believe in a book full of proven lies and falsehoods?
This is fun: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald...

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80335
Mar 10, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it is still incorrect since "agenda" is not the coorect term.
The reason that atheists look for flaws in the Bible is because of claims of Christians of its perfection. If the Bible is perfect then their beliefs are correct. If the Bible is not perfect their beliefs may be wrong. It is a starting point in the search for the truth.
Remember most atheists in the U.S. started as Christians. The first thing they tend to do is to realize that their former belief has all sorts of flaws in it. They realize that those flaws don't mean that there is no god, it is a starting point that allows them to think logically about the existence of god.
a·gen·da (-jnd)
n. pl. a·gen·das
1. A list or program of things to be done or considered?
LEARNER

New Albany, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80336
Mar 10, 2013
 
Subdiction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Not all. Jesus was killed an a long weekend so to say. Many items point this out to be a Passover Sabbath.
(Wednesday not Friday death)
Thank you for pointing out that there were high day Sabbaths as mentioned in Leviticus 23. A high day Sabbath was not the regular weekly Sabbath day and it was one of seven that could fall on any day of the week. The day before the Sabbath was preperation day just like the Bible said.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80337
Mar 10, 2013
 
The Dud wrote:
<quoted text>
"The Bible calls it a flat square circle"
No it doesn't only a fool could believe this crap.
Yet we've already pointed out to Biblical quotes to support those claims. So like we said, either the Bible is NOT literal due to its common usage of parables and metaphors, OR it is incorrect and internally inconsistent.

“the end-times is now”

Level 2

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80338
Mar 10, 2013
 
somebody please come and help these folks http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T7F... .. they're not doing so good

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80339
Mar 10, 2013
 
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So your saying there's no evidence that atheists look for fault in the bible?
really...lol
So now your dishonesty has extended to making assertions for people.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80340
Mar 10, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did you come up with the magic number 33.3333%
Beneficial, neutral, detrimental. All three are possible.
Cybele wrote:
I was referring to programmed cell death. Just like we have beneficial mutations, apoptosis can also have an advantage. But that doesn't mean my question or my understanding of it is wrong. Please define how we are ALL mutants given the fact that taxonomy says organisms belongs in many different species.
We are all mutants because we are all unique. We are all unique because we all have a unique genome.
Cybele wrote:
Define species.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
Cybele wrote:
How can you say we can't demonstrate natural selection in an individual and then goes on to say that we are all mutants. Natural selection is a fact in nature that is 'within' a species. But this definition has been distorted to fit in with lie of Darwin's theory by claiming it can only be demonstrated in a population and not the individual.
Natural selection is not bound by an imaginary species barrier. And it cannot be measured within an individual, only populations.
Cybele wrote:
"Natural selection is the process by which biological organisms with favorable traits survive and reproduce more successfully than organisms that do not possess such traits, and, conversely, organisms with deleterious traits survive and reproduce less successfully than organisms lacking such deleterious traits."
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Nat...
Do you mean to say that by examining an individual, we can't prove if that individual has favorable or unfavorable traits and whether she can or cannot successfully reproduce even if she's ovulating? lol
Of course we can. But those traits can still be passed onto her offspring, if she has any. It is only THEN can we see natural selection in action, by how successfully those favourable or unfavourable traits pass on through the population.

Unless of course she dies first. Possibly due to the result of an unfavourable trait in which case that is natural selection in action. Observed.
Cybele wrote:
Okay let's go with your true definition. Can you demonstrate natural selection in this mutant population?
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80341
Mar 10, 2013
 
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
read what I said...I did not say God.
"Because the average atheist has a agenda to disprove the bible.
So the atheist does an in depth search looking for fault...and finds it."
And they found it because...?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80342
Mar 10, 2013
 
The Dud wrote:
<quoted text>
"The Bible calls it a flat square circle"
No it doesn't only a fool could believe this crap.
Thanks for showing us the level of your intelligence.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80343
Mar 10, 2013
 
His-truth wrote:
somebody please come and help these folks http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T7F... .. they're not doing so good
Actually you're not doing so good. Five pages in already and you still haven't been able to tell us what the "scientific theory" of ID is.

You have done a very convincing imitation of a fundie homeschooled teenager though.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80344
Mar 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Beneficial, neutral, detrimental. All three are possible.
<quoted text>
We are all mutants because we are all unique. We are all unique because we all have a unique genome.
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
<quoted text>
Natural selection is not bound by an imaginary species barrier. And it cannot be measured within an individual, only populations.
<quoted text>
Of course we can. But those traits can still be passed onto her offspring, if she has any. It is only THEN can we see natural selection in action, by how successfully those favourable or unfavourable traits pass on through the population.
Unless of course she dies first. Possibly due to the result of an unfavourable trait in which case that is natural selection in action. Observed.
<quoted text>
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
So being unique makes us mutant? Are we of the same species or not? If we are all unique, then there is no need for made up taxonomy in Biology. A bee orchid is not a bee, it's still a flower species. A bee has always been a bee, unless you want it to be like a butterfly. Metamorphosis is not evolution and yet evolution requires a species to morph into another but since it requires millions of years for it to happen, we have NO direct evidence. It is ridiculous because if we are still evolving, there should be plentiful of it in action. The commensalism and amensalism in nature is not random chance whether you want to admit it or not. It is obviously following a natural order and pattern.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80345
Mar 10, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So being unique makes us mutant?...
Yes.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80346
Mar 10, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
Does sexual orientation have anything to do with being a particular species? Unique, yes. But, mutant? Let's use that as an example. We haven't found evidence for the gay gene. I'm fine with that. Because it is detrimental in natural selection. So it's not that homosexuality is an abomination, it is devolution. I have no problem with bisexuality because well you get the point.

Now if you factor in health, intelligence, talent, and personality, how is that evidence for evolution? How does that change into another species? Does being biracial or multiracial make one a mutant?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80348
Mar 10, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Does sexual orientation have anything to do with being a particular species? Unique, yes. But, mutant? Let's use that as an example. We haven't found evidence for the gay gene. I'm fine with that. Because it is detrimental in natural selection. So it's not that homosexuality is an abomination, it is devolution. I have no problem with bisexuality because well you get the point.
Now if you factor in health, intelligence, talent, and personality, how is that evidence for evolution? How does that change into another species? Does being biracial or multiracial make one a mutant?
Genetics isn't just about finding genes.

Since evolution is directionless there is no such thing as devolution in reality.

Species are defined by a rather gray line determined by the amount of difference in the genetic identity of said species.

Look, if you're just going to dance around the same crap that's already been addressed, why not make yourself look at honest at least and just admit you know nothing scientific on the matter?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80349
Mar 10, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Genetics isn't just about finding genes.
Since evolution is directionless there is no such thing as devolution in reality.
Species are defined by a rather gray line determined by the amount of difference in the genetic identity of said species.
Look, if you're just going to dance around the same crap that's already been addressed, why not make yourself look at honest at least and just admit you know nothing scientific on the matter?
No I just want to know your personal insight on what makes you a mutant. But you have not provided scientific evidence for it. You're just angry as usual. More projections.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80350
Mar 10, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless you're standing on the moon.
Oh by the way, our galaxy will crash into Andromeda.
...don't you know your own science?...it will either merge, or pass through the milky way galaxy...not crash in any definition of the word.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80351
Mar 10, 2013
 
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
...don't you know your own science?...it will either merge, or pass through the milky way galaxy...not crash in any definition of the word.
Wow, so you really don't know anything about science.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••
•••