Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 195510 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.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83655 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> Oh joy...and there is evidence of homo erectus having lived with neandertal in southeastern Europe over 500,000 yrs ago. Yes, we have bones dated to prove it. Your history changes like socks and underwear. Therefore can not be taken as conclusive or positive actuality.
yes, there is proof they lived together...

so sad..

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#83656 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> Read what better?
Where is your "living" proof of the evolution of man from any origin?
Scientific proof requires the step by step testing and confirmed connection of any previous fossils or remains from the first to the last product of that human evolution.
Anything less is purely conjecture and hypothesis by any scientific standard of proof or discovery.
The failure to discover or validate any connecting "pieces" in any number only serves to make any hypothesis even weaker and more questionable.
So I ask for that proof, and my request for evidence and explanation regarding your conjecture is deemed a [FAIL]?
That is indeed, poor science...
Or you are a poor representative.
No, you are one hundred percent wrong and obviously do not understand the scientific method.

Second, you again show you do not understand science by asking for "proof". Technically proof is a mathematical concept not a scientific one.

Thirdly, no your inability to understand the posts of others is considered a fail. Your rudeness while being wrong is a very large fail.

And right now I am tired of being a "good representative". Treat tards as tards since they will never be anything but tards is my motto today.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83657 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that NONE of it can positively prove the progressive evolution of humans from any given origin...and yet it is posited as proof positive...It is what it is...spoof
the clear fossil record of beings moving from more ape-like to more human-like proves that...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83658 Mar 29, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
What I mean is who manufactured a ufo to be this large (mile long) that flies real slow with no sound.
Any theories or ideas you may have, I would like to hear them.
if that is what it was...it is not known if it was one vehicle or many or what they were...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83659 Mar 29, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep. Though, again, those fossils were fairly recent.
yeah, I cannot remember how old Otsi was. but he was not fossilized, he was frozen/mummified. none of his bones had undergone fossilization.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83660 Mar 29, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
How did this ufo origins came to be?
What UFO origins?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#83661 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that NONE of it can positively prove the progressive evolution of humans from any given origin...and yet it is posited as proof positive...It is what it is...spoof
There is one thing that is sometimes considered as "proof" in science. That is concordance.

When several different disciplines all agree independently on a claim then it is pretty much deemed to be proven. We don't have evidence for evolution just in the fossil record. In biology there are countless phylogenical trees that all show evolution to be the answer. Evidence for evolution can be seen in the fossil record, in the laboratory, in the field, in your DNA. Every aspect of science agrees with evolution. None with creation.

This video explains it much better than I ever could:

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

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#83662 Mar 29, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
How did this ufo origins came to be?
Charles??
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83663 Mar 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
...a million years later? What about the caterpillar to butterfly transformation?
A caterpillar and a butterfly are two forms of the same species?

WTH are you even asking here? LOL
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83664 Mar 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So how would the information from the outside world, such as leaves on a tree in relation to a giraffe growing a longer neck to reach a food source come about to mutate the genes?
??? Answered well by others.

In my HYPOTHETICAL example (NOT meant to be a giraffe), from generation to generation as the drought continues, those animals with longer necks eat better, live longer, reproduce more compared to the stubby necks, and thus the gene for the longer neck spreads throughout the population.

Natural selection.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#83665 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that NONE of it can positively prove the progressive evolution of humans from any given origin...and yet it is posited as proof positive...It is what it is...spoof
It is not. No responsible person who knows anything about the subject claims it has been proven. As often said, proof is for whiskey. Evolution does happen. The Theory of Evolution attempts to explain it. But ToE is not *proven*. It is accepted by the scientific community at large and many laypersons to be the best explanation for evolution.

Whoever told you it has been proven, tell them I said they are wrong.
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83666 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>One would expect that if that hypothesis were correct, even 4 million years should have certainly produced a tangible proof in the human genetic evolution. If the scenario of birds you offer as example of geological separation, and producing(causing) the inability to procreate due to genetic deformation of evolution, then the very same scenario should have produced like results in humans as well, especially over even longer periods of time and history...and yet it (in fact) has not.
Why not?
Actually, it MAY have, but we still don;t have a totally clear picture of the early and middle eras of human evolution.

Plus, the reproductive isolation scenario I gave is not the only way that evolution can work.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#83667 Mar 29, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>What UFO origins?
X-Files

:-)
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83668 Mar 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So your claim is that all leaf eaters develop long necks.
Well, ANTS are leaf eaters. I doubt they would evolve longer necks in this case. Don't you think they would simply CLIMB the trees? LOL
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83669 Mar 29, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for this sound example. It helps me explain with simplicity what I speak of.
It actually refutes, soundly and simply, "what you speak of."
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83670 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>If not by the inference of genetic information being passed as mutative cellular action within spermiation or zygote, then how and why would one neck of a giraffe grow to different lengths than another in the same environment?
IOW- there had to have been a transfer of genetic information for the mutation to even have happened....
OR- it never happened.
THose who happened to be born with the genetic makeup for a longer neck would tend, as a group, to eat better, live longer, reproduce more and thus pass that setup of genes throughout the population eventually.

It has nothing to do with "mutative cellular action within spermiation or zygote." LOL
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83671 Mar 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So Giraffes with longer necks eat better because they can reach higher for their food source.
And this is by no way implies any kind of information that was transferred from the physical world to the Giraffe.
Right.lol
Nope. Just blind luck and good fortune for the long necks.

Imagine a rabbit in the Arctic snows who is born with a mutation for black fur. How long do you think that particular animal will live and escape all the various predators?

Ever notice that virtually ALL the species that live on or above the ice in the polar regions have WHITE fur or WHITE feathers, etc.?

Did that come about because Jesus just happens to like WHITE?
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83672 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>"
So, again, I must ask ---why are there no humanoid species difference that can no longer interbreed??
There do not have to be.

I gave a simple, easy-to understand (or so I thought) HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE last night to Cybele of how natural selection CAN and DOES work.

Speciation does not HAVE to work by means of a scenario of reproductive isolation. There are other mechanisms.

As someone pointed out, evolution does not REQUIRE that species change visibly or greatly over the millennia if there is no pressure from the environment to do so -- i.e. if they are well-adapted to their environments, my HYPOTHETICAL "long-neck" scenario" would never happened.

Sharks are probably a good example of this. Very well-adapted for millions of years.
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83673 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Where is your "living" proof of the evolution of man from any origin?
Orthologous Endogenous Retroviruses (ERFVs) are considered slam-the-door "proof" of homo sapiens' decent from a common ancestor in the ape family.

Note that "proof" is for mathematics and alcohol. Nothing is ever officially "proven" in science (although the word is sometimes thrown around casually, usually by lay people). Evidence is gathered for a particular detailed explanation or "theory" and that theory stands as "what science knows" unless and until it is DISproven.
Gillette

Packwood, IA

#83674 Mar 29, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> You have failed to answer the posit that the human species was indeed separated for many thousands of years geologically on a global scale, yet is "still" capable of interbreeding...unlike your "circle species" would suggest happening.
You are making excuses for errant prediction now.
Answered earlier.

I gave a HYPOTHETICAL example of how evolution works SOMETIMES, i.e. a species trapped by nature in some sort of a situation of reproductive isolation.

I certainly did not mean or imply that that is the ONLY way evolution can work.

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
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 12 min grace--fallen 189,323
One Word (Jan '09) 16 min Mega Monster 15,167
Play "end of the word" (Nov '08) 20 min KNIGHT DeVINE 25,388
*add A word / drop a word* (Nov '12) 23 min KNIGHT DeVINE 12,319
The letter F (Jun '13) 24 min KNIGHT DeVINE 1,277
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 24 min wichita-rick 17,147
Anything Biggest, Largest, Tallest, Best, you'd... 28 min grace--fallen 18
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 1 hr honeymylove 144,146
News Woman Suing Starbucks For Iced Drinks Having To... 2 hr Spotted Girl 29
Answer a question with a question (Apr '15) 4 hr Princess Hey 1,800
More from around the web