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 3,845)

Showing posts 76,881 - 76,900 of105,982
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81386
Mar 17, 2013
 
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
So, 2.5 billion years ago the earth was covered in water...well that clearly does not back up the 'Flood' of 2300 BC
Details, details...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81387
Mar 17, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
A LIE N GOD
Of course it's alien. It's an invisible intelligent entity residing in some kind of multiverse that creates universes as a hobby. It could not possibly BE more alien.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81388
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Bingo. God sees us all and that's all you know. Unfortunately you don't even know if it exists. If you did you would be able to demonstrate it in an objective manner via the scientific method.
Of course all this is irrelevant since evolution makes no theological claims. It would be quite happy if God was the one responsible for abiogenesis. All it needs is for life to be here. Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts. In order to demonstrate otherwise you need to demonstrate that life is in fact NOT here.
Good luck.
<quoted text>
Except your problem is the analogy itself. DNA is not a language. It is not a code. It is also a naturally occurring self-replicating biological organism, unlike anything in your analogies. Your other problem is that the theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis. Since DNA *is* actually here, it can, and does evolve.
Is this going to be your attitude to get more evidence?

Your logic is getting weaker by the day each time you learn more of it. lol
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81389
Mar 17, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no, he was right...i openly mock the created god of abraham. they did such a poor job of creating him it is worth mocking. the people who believe in such a badly created myth deserve to be mocked also....openly.
perpetuating such cults through your belief and support is defintely mockable....should be a civic duty to mock such things.
Ah, but the god of the Abrahamic religions IS just opinion. That's the point. And creationists have this strange desire to portray their god stupidly. Their problem of course. Like I keep trying to tell them that if such a thing exists at all it's totally beyond human comprehension, and it's best staying that way. As any attempt to put such a being into human conventions falls afoul of plentiful logical contradictions.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81390
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it's alien. It's an invisible intelligent entity residing in some kind of multiverse that creates universes as a hobby. It could not possibly BE more alien.
That would explain all the 'probing' in the catholic church!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81391
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, but the god of the Abrahamic religions IS just opinion. That's the point. And creationists have this strange desire to portray their god stupidly. Their problem of course. Like I keep trying to tell them that if such a thing exists at all it's totally beyond human comprehension, and it's best staying that way. As any attempt to put such a being into human conventions falls afoul of plentiful logical contradictions.
He is ranting on about his white supremacist worldview. Don't you have that in Europe? Didn't you Darwinian cult prove that?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81392
Mar 17, 2013
 
ARGUING with IDIOTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You have a lot to learn. How would a sphere be represented in two dimensions? A circle.
That's nice.

We don't exist in two dimensions. If your god does then it's gonna have problems.
ARGUING with IDIOTS wrote:
Do you know the current number of dimensions the scientific mainstream community accepts?
Scientifically, four. Potentially? 5 or more, depending on which mathematical model is being used. So far they're all hypothetical.

None of which addresses the fact that the Bible is either literal or it's not.
d-pants7

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81393
Mar 17, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>No, people with real morals stick to them regardless...
have you ever been inches from starvation? I mean with no food anywhere? All your nice neighborhoods would turn into black Friday times ten thousand in a food or energy crisis. Instead of helping little old ladies acrossed the street many people with "morals" would be stealing her food from her pantry to feed their starving children, or worse. One moral out the window and another reinforced by instinct. Protecting and caring for our young.
ARGUING with IDIOTS

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81394
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>Gravity.

You back again? You're as clueless as you were last time.

Which was very.
LOL, gravity is a force, not a unit of measure.

Are you allowed outside without wearing a helmet?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81395
Mar 17, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
He is ranting on about his white supremacist worldview. Don't you have that in Europe? Didn't you Darwinian cult prove that?
Now you're calling me a racist? seriously?

have you been beat down so low by posting such ignorant posts and having them shot down one after another that now you have to resort to open libel?

you have really hit bottom, Cybele...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81396
Mar 17, 2013
 
d-pants7 wrote:
<quoted text> have you ever been inches from starvation? I mean with no food anywhere? All your nice neighborhoods would turn into black Friday times ten thousand in a food or energy crisis. Instead of helping little old ladies acrossed the street many people with "morals" would be stealing her food from her pantry to feed their starving children, or worse. One moral out the window and another reinforced by instinct. Protecting and caring for our young.
Again, people with real morals stick to thenm no matter what.

you seem to show your morals in your scenario.

we have countless examples where people in life and death situations have worked together and held to their morals.
d-pants7

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81398
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no real morals. It all comes from fear of eternal torment or desire for eternal paradise. And if God commands genocide you will do it happily for you think it righteous. You are incapable of genuine altruism.
double yawn. How does god command genocide? So If I think its wrong to hurt a child it because of fear of eternal torment? The torment in my head would last the rest of my life if I didn't try to protect them. But like I said its instinct really not moral. Point your finger up your ;-)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81399
Mar 17, 2013
 
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
I love those pics that show a petrified tree vertically transecting millions of years of evo strata. They tried that at Yellowstone and then had to change the signs. Not all fields of science are effected, where this has gone wrong is the integration of operational sceince and origin science into a 'cult science' that needs no creator and has it's own group of high preists controlling the data, claiming to have all the answers. The Bible calls it "science falsely so called". Why do you think they have spread the word not to debate anymore? Because of the stuff I write about. It works.
Sure it does. Except no-one's preventing you from scientific debate. In fact the scientific community has been waiting for you guys to do that for thousands of years. Creationists write apologetics instead, or the few times they try getting creationism through scientific peer-review it tends to get rejected as BS.
Mark wrote:
The Bible teaches that the world was made out of water with water. With H2O you can make the entire atomic chart, you just need to spin it fast enough.
With any element you could do that if it's put under enough pressure. That's why we see the creation of elements in stars. So why is water singled out? Because it's in the Bible of course. Not that you have any scientific mechanisms to support it though.
Mark wrote:
The word "light" in scripture actually means the entire spectrum of energy up to light, so there's your power to spin it and construct elements.
What power to spin it?
Mark wrote:
After that its intelligence - ID, "and God was hovering over the water's", He was there. It's a beautiful picture of a beautiful creation. Our world now is only an image of what was, hence the poles, deserts and wastelands that don't look to lovely, and the massive graveyards of dead things killed in a catastrophy that wasnt so pretty.
Oh, but ID doesn't have anything to do with religion, nope! Nosirree-bob! It's just them evil lying atheist Darwinists who say it is!

Right?

What exactly IS the "scientific theory" of ID?

I've been asking a fundie on another thread this for a whole week. In fact I've been asking fundies this for 8 years. The scientific community has been asking for 20. Or a few thousand, depending on how you look at it.

But even the guys who invented ID admitted they don't have a scientific theory.
Mark wrote:
It won't stay this way forever, God says he is going to show us His stuff again.
M
Can you please provide objective scientific evidence that this entity of yours even exists?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81400
Mar 17, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Now you're calling me a racist? seriously?
have you been beat down so low by posting such ignorant posts and having them shot down one after another that now you have to resort to open libel?
you have really hit bottom, Cybele...
No. You need a taste of your medicine. Do you prefer CODEine?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81401
Mar 17, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
And you're sure the formula is accurate in dating fossils? link please
I saw SD address this some pages back. The only people who use the wrong dating techniques on the wrong stuff is creationists.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81402
Mar 17, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA bank?
Well that too.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81403
Mar 17, 2013
 
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
What I suggested is that the universe is still unraveling from the creation event and there's no need for dark matter, the evo's need to hold it all together for long ages, we don't. I am not God, he says he created it, it looks pretty and works great!
M
Your preaching is (again) avoiding the point. But thanks again for demonstrating that creationism is light on explanations.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81404
Mar 17, 2013
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this going to be your attitude to get more evidence?
Your logic is getting weaker by the day each time you learn more of it. lol
Get more evidence from creationists? Isn't that kind of an oxymoron?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81405
Mar 17, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>yes, major joke. you are a joke.
you are a joke of a liar. not even a good one, just a joke of one...
every picture from HST is catalogued. which picture shows the center of the universe?
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
I saw a pic from Hubble of it, It has a cross in the center of the star, a rugged cross. no joke

where did you come up with that he said that a Hubble picture showed the center of the Universe????...you really must be smoking some good stuff there...lol

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81406
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I saw SD address this some pages back. The only people who use the wrong dating techniques on the wrong stuff is creationists.
Then why did you say that it was scientists that made the correction when they miscalculated the age of h. rhodesiensis fossil? You have repeated this in many instances when corrections were pointed out here.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 76,881 - 76,900 of105,982
|
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.

•••
•••
•••
•••