Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 221949 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.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83154 Mar 27, 2013
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>He did not and does not condone adultery and idolatry, he gave rules concerning that. Paul addressed the church at Corinth of the sins they engaged in and also commended the ones who did do those things and turned from them when they became christians.
Saying "don't do it" is a very different rule than saying "when you do this, do it this way." One denounces, the other condones. Your bible says that your god condones slavery and even commands it.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83155 Mar 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Charles, I'm sorry, but you ARE wrong. We know for a fact that Adam and Eve did NOT exist as written in the Bible. Your denial with no backup leaves you in a silly position.
All you do is assert, and never with any backup data. Genesis HAS been mostly proven to be parables and allegory. There is real repeatable science behind what I am telling you.
Of course you can deny it all you want, but that does NOT make it untrue. I have never lied to you.
I am not disputing your facts, but what i am saying is that, you can not rule out the possibility of a first man and woman. A good example is our family tree.
This makes the bible not to be totally wrong. Understand?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83156 Mar 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> I am not disputing your facts, but what i am saying is that, you can not rule out the possibility of a first man and woman. A good example is our family tree.
This makes the bible not to be totally wrong. Understand?
Actually, no, there was no first man and woman, that would defy evolution, and our population would be much smaller if there was a first man and woman any sooner than a million years ago.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83157 Mar 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Even as we 'speak' there are Christian Apologists working on what they are going to have to do to adjust understanding of Adam and Eve for their congregants.
You can not rule out the possibility of a first man and woman.
If not why family tree?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83158 Mar 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I feel like I'm in a battle, but not with God....He doesn't exist.
I'm in a battle with people who will not explore something that is really important to them, and our world in general.
This is democracy where people are free to express themselves.
May God save your soul, amen.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#83159 Mar 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> You can not rule out the possibility of a first man and woman.
If not why family tree?
Charles, how old is the Universe?

How old is the Earth?

Do you believe that there was a world-wide flood approximately 4500 years ago?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83160 Mar 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I feel like I'm in a battle, but not with God....He doesn't exist.
I'm in a battle with people who will not explore something that is really important to them, and our world in general.
Ofcourse, we are in democracy.
You have no evidence against the existence of God.
More of your assertions.
Libertarian

London, UK

#83161 Mar 27, 2013
Oh please. It didn't appear from nothing.

atoms formed molecules, molecules formed protein chains, simple basic chemistry.

Life is not a divine spark that is started like a car, it is an ongoing chemical process that just joined up with others. Once we joined with mitochondria which infected our single celled ancestor we could then become multicellular.

Piece of proverbial evolutionary cake. Certainly makes a lot more sense then some magical being waving his hand and then nearly 14 billion years later starting to care what people eat or who they sleep with. Get a grip people and join us in the modern era.
Libertarian

London, UK

#83162 Mar 27, 2013
You state a God exists. You prove it.

You cannot prove a negative.

Debating 101. Doh!
Krypteia

Brighton, UK

#83163 Mar 27, 2013
Libertarian wrote:
Oh please. It didn't appear from nothing.
atoms formed molecules, molecules formed protein chains, simple basic chemistry.
Life is not a divine spark that is started like a car, it is an ongoing chemical process that just joined up with others. Once we joined with mitochondria which infected our single celled ancestor we could then become multicellular.
Piece of proverbial evolutionary cake. Certainly makes a lot more sense then some magical being waving his hand and then nearly 14 billion years later starting to care what people eat or who they sleep with. Get a grip people and join us in the modern era.
But doe's it matter if someone wants to believe in god or not,doe's it interfere in your life if someone goe's to church..
On your post who's to say that a god didn't make all these things in the first place and his/ hers plan was for this to happen in the long run..

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#83164 Mar 27, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Palin publicly stated that she expected to (paraphrased)'see Jesus in my(her) lifetime'.
It is mind-bogglingly frightening to have someone of that mind-set that close to 'The Button'. Especially when she was running as VP to John McCain, who has had a history of health/heart problems.
I didn't like any of the candidates on either side and would prefer there had been more to choose from. Picking between "dingy" and "lying scumbag" isn't exactly an ideal situation to be in. Even dingy Reagan, in the initial stages of Alzhiemer's,(and his looking to fortuneteller's for advice) did far less harm than Obama has. Dingy is looking more appealing with every day that passes.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83165 Mar 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I feel like I'm in a battle, but not with God....He doesn't exist.
I'm in a battle with people who will not explore something that is really important to them, and our world in general.
More of your assertions.
Let them keep coming!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83166 Mar 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you think we can't disprove parts of the Bible??
Your so called evidence against the bible will never invalidate the bible.
Mark

United States

#83167 Mar 27, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, how are you doing on that reasonable question I asked you yesterday?
Have you found the name of just ONE qualified, PhD'ed biologist or geologist who is NOT a Christian and NOT religious, but yet who has concluded that the earth is only about 6000 years old and that humanity spring from two first individuals 6000 years ago BASED SOLELY AND COMPLETELY ON THE EVIDENCE?
Do you agree that this is a reasonable question to ask and that you should not have any trouble finding such a person -- millions of them, actually -- if reality actually conformed to your religious beliefs?
And assuming you CANNOT find such a person -- do you find it telling and very odd that the ONLY PEOPLE who advocate your 6000 year-old scenario are Bible-beleiving American Protestant fundamentalist Christians of one stripe or another?
I mean, shouldn't it be OBVIOUS what is going on here?
I never stated that 6000 YO figure, thatís yours. For those who believe in Biblical truth, if you extrapolate the births and ages given in Genesis that figure comes up. If you don't believe what the Bible teaches, why believe in that specific age unless you believe that the Bible is true? It begs the question! As far as your reaction to Christ's warning about what little children should be taught, now you know, those are His words, not mine.

Other short age chronometers based on uniform conditions are supported in science, more so than long age dating methods I feel, such as those using isotopes of lead. A question on those; if leads origin is radioactive then deteriorates to pure lead, why isn't the earth completely radioactive?- most of Missouri and nearby states should be hot, as well as other huge portions of the earth, and no life could exist. You can't have it both ways, you hang on long age 1/2 life based on measured rates, but refuse to reverse the same number to look into the past of this old earth you embrace! Another accident needed to allow life to be self-created? or all the elements of lead that just happen to be in safe proportions when the earth was formed, more questions for your side and fewer accident-related answers.

I am not a trickster, and where is your science in cell operation to get new life forms? Where did the cell and brain come from, another sensitive spot? But Oh, we must get this all in order in the mindless self-directed world of evolution!

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83168 Mar 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Ofcourse, we are in democracy.
You have no evidence against the existence of God.
More of your assertions.
There is no evidence against the existence of Superman either.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#83169 Mar 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Your so called evidence against the bible will never invalidate the bible.
So you don't care about reality at all.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#83170 Mar 27, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
I never stated that 6000 YO figure, thatís yours.
Do you agree that the following is a reasonable question to ask?

Can you give us the name of just ONE qualified, PhD'ed biologist or geologist who is NOT a Christian and NOT religious, but yet who has concluded that the earth is only about 6000 years old and that humanity spring from two first individuals 6000 years ago BASED SOLELY AND COMPLETELY ON THE EVIDENCE?

And assuming you CANNOT find such a person -- do you find it telling and very odd that the ONLY PEOPLE who advocate your 6000 year-old scenario are Bible-beleiving Protestant fundamentalist Christians of one stripe or another?
FREE SERVANT
#83171 Mar 27, 2013
Libertarian wrote:
Oh please. It didn't appear from nothing.
atoms formed molecules, molecules formed protein chains, simple basic chemistry.
Life is not a divine spark that is started like a car, it is an ongoing chemical process that just joined up with others. Once we joined with mitochondria which infected our single celled ancestor we could then become multicellular.
Piece of proverbial evolutionary cake. Certainly makes a lot more sense then some magical being waving his hand and then nearly 14 billion years later starting to care what people eat or who they sleep with. Get a grip people and join us in the modern era.
The universe is guided and it follows patterns which propagate in cycles. Who or what caused this?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#83172 Mar 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Your so called evidence against the bible will never invalidate the bible.
Our evidence against the Bible is only against the LITERAL, INERRANT INTERPRETATION of the book, NOT against the allegorical, or symbolic reading of it.

If you insist on a LITERAL Bible, science can and does refute a great portion of the text, thereby rendering the whole of the book invalidated.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#83173 Mar 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
... and that is another of your really lame assertions. There are many dialects of English, and several of them are in America, mostly the USA. In England there are at least two distinct dialects that I have encountered, there is likely more. Do yourself a favor and look up dialect.
Why do you keep worrying your self over nothing. Like i said, the place where a language started supposed to be treated with respect.
All the dialects of English had roots from England.
Next?

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
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 3 min cjt12 24,089
Post "ANY WORD" that comes to mind! (Jul '12) 8 min cjt12 3,456
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 11 min Princess Hey 220,809
2words into 2new words (May '12) 17 min wichita-rick 8,384
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 23 min Sublime1 4,625
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? (Nov '14) 27 min Judy 123 1,135
Let's Play Songs Titled with Two Words ... (Nov '14) 31 min Judy 123 2,353
A to Z songs by title or group! (Dec '16) 42 min CJ Rocker 2,136
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 1 hr F_R_E_D 24,014
Which Poster Are You Thinking About Right Now? 2 hr 5th Row Centre 22
More from around the web