Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223191 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.

“too hard to handle”

Level 4

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#80707 Mar 13, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it does. Without those reactions you would not be thinking or reasoning.
.
Wait a sec - have we just discovered a scientific hypothesis that explains creationists?
I asked you to DEFINE, not DESCRIBE sentience, there is a subtle difference. You descibed it simply. Defining it is almost impossible.

“too hard to handle”

Level 4

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#80708 Mar 13, 2013
superwilly wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked you to DEFINE, not DESCRIBE sentience, there is a subtle difference. You descibed it simply. Defining it is almost impossible.
I apologize, got my word definitions wrong.

From Miriam Webster online;

"describe", verb, to give details about what someone or something is like.

"define", verb, to describe clearly and exactly what something is.

I stand corrected

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#80709 Mar 13, 2013
superwilly wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked you to DEFINE, not DESCRIBE sentience, there is a subtle difference. You descibed it simply. Defining it is almost impossible.
how's this...if you know you are sentient, you are sentient.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#80710 Mar 13, 2013
Anyone want to explain why lizards switching birth from egg to live young as evolution?

I'm talking about the skinks species, a type of Australian lizard, those that live in higher, colder mountains giving birth to live young. And that nourishment in the mother's young play a role in this. Scientists claim that this is evolution in action.

Let's say this could be the holy grail for evolution. Alright. But what about other species of lizards such as the desert night lizards that also give birth to live young?

Lizards are special animals. Take for example the Komodo dragon that was dubbed to have virgin birth or immaculate conception. That is, no male needed to fertilize the egg.

You see, just because a certain type of animal has the flexibility to adapt in so many ways doesn't necessarily mean they are evolving into another species. Unless anyone have evidence that this is a process of speciation.

That lizard that can regenerate its tail for instance, that's not evolution. They just have that unique trait. And perhaps all lizards have their own unique and special traits.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#80711 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
Anyone want to explain why lizards switching birth from egg to live young as evolution?
I'm talking about the skinks species, a type of Australian lizard, those that live in higher, colder mountains giving birth to live young. And that nourishment in the mother's young play a role in this. Scientists claim that this is evolution in action.
Let's say this could be the holy grail for evolution. Alright. But what about other species of lizards such as the desert night lizards that also give birth to live young?
Lizards are special animals. Take for example the Komodo dragon that was dubbed to have virgin birth or immaculate conception. That is, no male needed to fertilize the egg.
You see, just because a certain type of animal has the flexibility to adapt in so many ways doesn't necessarily mean they are evolving into another species. Unless anyone have evidence that this is a process of speciation.
That lizard that can regenerate its tail for instance, that's not evolution. They just have that unique trait. And perhaps all lizards have their own unique and special traits.
if not evolution, then what is it?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#80712 Mar 13, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>if not evolution, then what is it?
DNA. That's all it is. Lizards have a unique DNA.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#80713 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA. That's all it is. Lizards have a unique DNA.
and how did htey get that uniquew DNA?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#80714 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele if anything has been the Holy Grail for evolution it has been ERV's.

Creatards very often try to argue against evolution with fatally flawed probability arguments. The reason they are fatally flawed is that they always make false assumptions as to how evolution works.

An example of a fatally flawed argument is that Boeing 747's cannot fly since they cannot flap their winds hard enough. Of course that is not how Boeing 747's fly in the first place. All creationist "probability" arguments against evolution are on this order. With ERV's we can prove evolution since the odds of two species sharing the number of ERV's that they do is all but impossible without common descent. There are on the order of one billion different places that an ERV can attach to the genome randomly. So the odds of sharing one ERV between two species at exactly the same spot would be one in a billion. To share two it would be one out of billion time one out of a billion.

Species will share hundreds of ERV's making the odds of it being anything but shared descent more than one out of a googol.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#80715 Mar 13, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>and how did htey get that uniquew DNA?
Only one type of lizard's genome was sequenced completely as what they claim, the green anole lizard. Funny how scientists claim our junk DNA have these transposons of our DNA that happen to be found in this particular lizard. So now we have common history with green lizards. LOL!

Evolution never ceases to amuse me. ;-)

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#80716 Mar 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
Cybele if anything has been the Holy Grail for evolution it has been ERV's.
Creatards very often try to argue against evolution with fatally flawed probability arguments. The reason they are fatally flawed is that they always make false assumptions as to how evolution works.
An example of a fatally flawed argument is that Boeing 747's cannot fly since they cannot flap their winds hard enough. Of course that is not how Boeing 747's fly in the first place. All creationist "probability" arguments against evolution are on this order. With ERV's we can prove evolution since the odds of two species sharing the number of ERV's that they do is all but impossible without common descent. There are on the order of one billion different places that an ERV can attach to the genome randomly. So the odds of sharing one ERV between two species at exactly the same spot would be one in a billion. To share two it would be one out of billion time one out of a billion.
Species will share hundreds of ERV's making the odds of it being anything but shared descent more than one out of a googol.
So you think you're the expert at ERV's? I haven't made research on it. I will let you know if I have any questions. Do you have a link to show me so we can discuss and use the same source?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#80717 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Only one type of lizard's genome was sequenced completely as what they claim, the green anole lizard. Funny how scientists claim our junk DNA have these transposons of our DNA that happen to be found in this particular lizard. So now we have common history with green lizards. LOL!
Evolution never ceases to amuse me. ;-)
ao, ummmm...how'd they get that DNA? seems you forgot that little bit in your pointless rant...

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#80718 Mar 13, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
"evidence","res ults", "tests"...these are scientific terms that apply to the physical world....not the metaphysical.
The "evidence" of the metaphysical world comes not by way of logical assessment, but by direct experience.
"Metaphysical" is nothing but assertions, and yes, even energy can be evidence. Energy is actually easier to measure than physical mass, much easier to detect too. That's, oddly, how they find planets out of our solar system, it's all to do with energy, not physical mass. The problem is that your "metaphysical" crap is not logical, it's all illogical and never works how anyone claims it does, if it did, you'd have evidence of it.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#80719 Mar 13, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>ao, ummmm...how'd they get that DNA? seems you forgot that little bit in your pointless rant...
Why do you think I know? I'm not a scientist. I only analyze scientific claims. lol

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#80720 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think you're the expert at ERV's? I haven't made research on it. I will let you know if I have any questions. Do you have a link to show me so we can discuss and use the same source?
No, I am not an expert on ERV's.

Biologist do consider it a slam dunk for evolution so if you have any questions perhaps you should ask them.

Start here:

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

You could find countless articles on ERV's. Remember there will be the regular creatard crap denying the obvious.

If you like videos I like the work of this YouTuber:

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Like me he is a fan of Beethoven too. He runs through the odds argument step by step. It is roughly ten minutes long. If you don't like the video you can at least enjoy the music.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#80721 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you think I know? I'm not a scientist. I only analyze scientific claims. lol
you seem to be attempting...(seem to be...) to debunk evolution with this... so if not evolution, where did htey get the DNA?

(yes, you have made it clear your understanding of science is very limited, at best.)

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#80723 Mar 13, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>you seem to be attempting...(seem to be...) to debunk evolution with this... so if not evolution, where did htey get the DNA?
(yes, you have made it clear your understanding of science is very limited, at best.)
I'm not debunking evolution. I'm asking for evidence or explanation. Because when you put two and two together, the theory falls apart. But then you know there's a truth in everything. Read between the lines.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#80724 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not debunking evolution. I'm asking for evidence or explanation. Because when you put two and two together, the theory falls apart. But then you know there's a truth in everything. Read between the lines.
You admit to having no scientific study, yet you think the "theory falls apart" when you apply your lack of study to it. Well, someone without any study in physics would also make that same claim of gravity. People who do not know computer theory think that programming is just entering data into the processor. Those with limited exposure to engineering thing that all buildings are cubes. Without some actual study, everything that entails study will always "fall apart" when you apply layman logic to it, that's why scientists have to be very well educated to excel in their fields.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#80725 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not debunking evolution. I'm asking for evidence or explanation. Because when you put two and two together, the theory falls apart. But then you know there's a truth in everything. Read between the lines.
What!!

Now that is one of the most stupid things I have ever seen you post.

Please tell us how the theory falls apart.

The fact that it may not be able to answer all of your foolish questions is not a case of the theory falling apart.

Since creationism answers no questions evolution clearly beats that nonsense.
see the light

United States

#80727 Mar 13, 2013
If you believe in God then you were created.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#80728 Mar 13, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not debunking evolution. I'm asking for evidence or explanation. Because when you put two and two together, the theory falls apart. But then you know there's a truth in everything. Read between the lines.
you're funny!

the funniest part is you don't even know you are vbeing funny...

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
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 8 min 8541 MARINE 32,421
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 23 min Sublime1 6,756
Play "end of the name"... (Jun '15) 41 min -Papa-Smurf- 3,375
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Dave 226,084
"3 words beginning with similar Letters!" (Dec '12) 3 hr -Papa-Smurf- 368
A Five Letter Word (Jan '12) 3 hr -Papa-Smurf- 3,214
Add a word and drop a word (Jan '14) 3 hr -Papa-Smurf- 7,450
Does anyone remember? (Apr '13) 5 hr Pardon Pard 1,978
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 6 hr Dave 76,615
More from around the web