Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 221489 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.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#83909 Mar 30, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Another grammar!
The constellations, galaxies and other planetary bodies, can you please honestly explain how they came into form.
The use of grammar as a cover will not solve any thing.
A simple answer, you don't know.

Remember to tie the concrete blocks to your ankles, when you go deep thought exploring.

English is a West Germanic language that was first spoken in early medieval England.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83910 Mar 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't too bad that you cannot find any evidence that backs up your claims?
We can see evidence for evolution every where we look. You will not even tell us what these supposed laws of nature are or what real life evidence there is for them.
It’s called the “law of non- contradiction” and this is my evidence.

First question: Before I even start, do you know what this law means? Remember a law is universal in the scientific world because it explains nature.
Second question: Do you know what universal means?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83911 Mar 30, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Another grammar!
The constellations, galaxies and other planetary bodies, can you please honestly explain how they came into form.
The use of grammar as a cover will not solve any thing.
A simple answer, you don't know.
I have, so so many times, Chaz.

What part of it did you not comprehend?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83912 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
It’s called the “law of non- contradiction” and this is my evidence.
First question: Before I even start, do you know what this law means? Remember a law is universal in the scientific world because it explains nature.
Second question: Do you know what universal means?
isn't that the law bill Clinton got busted on?

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83913 Mar 30, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>isn't that the law bill Clinton got busted on?
The "law of non-contradiction" is a principle found in a scientfic law not a civil law.

The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#83915 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
The laws of gravity did not stop governing Mercury. To break it, it must have been outside the influence of the laws of gravity and this is not the case. The laws of gravity govern everything (including mercury) in this universe at all times with NO (ZER0) exceptions.
Yet we had a law of gravity. Worked out by some guy called Newton (you may have heard of him). Mercury violates that law.
Infinite Force wrote:
First of all I did not make this principle up that is found in the laws of nature. It’s sad the scientific method foundation does not rest on the “law of non-contradiction”. All of the scientific data and statements from any subject in the scientific field fail if it violates this law or principle. Here is the definition to my “principles found in the ‘laws’ of nature.
“contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e.g. the two propositions "A is B" and "A is not B" are mutually exclusive.”
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontra...
For example, The laws of nature either governs all in the universe or don’t. For your method of reasoning to say that mercury broke the law of nature you claimed that the laws of gravity found in nature is un-able to govern it when mercury breaks it.
It does.
Infinite Force wrote:
So now I apply “the law of non-contradiction” to your statement,“The orbit of Mercury breaks the law of gravity". Before even using the scientific method I know your statement violates the “law of non-contradiction” and dismiss your statement because either the law governs mercury or don’t and the laws of gravity is constant in the universe.
AGAIN, do the laws of gravity govern mercury or don’t? To break it mercury must make the laws of nature stop governing it. I think not!
Then since Mercury violates that law then the law must be wrong.

After all, "laws" are merely abstract concepts invented by humans as a guideline for expected actions either in culture or in practical/scientific principles.
Infinite Force wrote:
You got your scientific method when it comes to interpreting data
Vs
My scientific method which is founded on the “law of non-contradiction” checks the integrity of the information gathered by your scientific method. That’s right, the information that you spew from your lips is governed by the laws of nature also and this law shows me how to discredit information that violates its principle.
Yet evolution doesn't violate it. Mercury does. Ergo the "law" of gravity is simply wrong, which is why it got replaced by the THEORY of relativity. Which is in turn being replaced by the theory of quantum mechanics. Whereas evolution on the other hand MAY contradict YOUR so-called "law" re: species, however reality shows that it contradicts your "law". Ergo your claims about species are simply incorrect and life can and does change over time, which does NOT violate any laws of non-contradiction. It merely contradicts your assumption that evolution did not and cannot happen. However your baseless opinions aren't relevant.(shrug)

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83916 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
The "law of non-contradiction" is a principle found in a scientfic law not a civil law.
i should have cried "Duck!' in case you are taller than I imagine..
FREE SERVANT
#83917 Mar 30, 2013
Any person who truly searches impartially for the actualities of science or any official ivestigator will find the Bible to be truth. Precise application of facts or principles can be gathered and true knowledge of the physical or material world can be gained through observation and experimentation pertaining to the common idea of recurring events or phenomena which are a sequence of changing states that, upon completion, produce a final state like the original one. The Bible clearly teaches that common traits are in natures charcter. Nature produces examples of kinds and living things make propagation following patterns of form to bring the kind about again or anew in any manner to bear fruitful offspring. Natural markings are in kinds which are configurations with distinctive style, or form and a combination of qualities form a consistent characteristic arrangement. The laws and principles that guide the whole universe are a result of inborn or inherent qualities which are following a method of arranged order and material things are systematically comprised. SCPID theory contemplates and explains these truths.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83918 Mar 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't too bad that you cannot find any evidence that backs up your claims?
We can see evidence for evolution every where we look. You will not even tell us what these supposed laws of nature are or what real life evidence there is for them.
"Although the concepts of a law or principle in nature is borderline to philosophy, and presents the depth to which mathematics can describe nature, scientific laws are considered from a scientific perspective and follow the scientific method; they "serve their purpose" rather than "questioning reality" (philosophical) or "statements of logical absolution" (mathematical). For example, whether a law "refers to reality" is a philosophical issue, rather than scientific.

Fundamentally, all scientific laws follow from physics, laws which occur in other sciences ultimately follow from physical laws. Often, from mathematically fundamental viewpoints, universal constants emerge from scientific laws."

>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_science

The "law of non-contradiction" is a concept of a law or principle in nature.

Do you see the universal constant principle found in scientific laws. This means non-changing and if it changes with an opposing idea this would be a "contradictory" of the universal constant principle found in a scientific law that is backed with empirical evidence. It is this principle extracted from a scientific law that is backed with the empirical data that followed the scientific method I use to validate “The law of non-contradiction”, which is the foundation to my scientific reasoning I use to interpret all things found in the laws of nature.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#83919 Mar 30, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Any person who truly searches impartially for the actualities of science or any official ivestigator will find the Bible to be truth. Precise application of facts or principles can be gathered and true knowledge of the physical or material world can be gained through observation and experimentation pertaining to the common idea of recurring events or phenomena which are a sequence of changing states that, upon completion, produce a final state like the original one. The Bible clearly teaches that common traits are in natures charcter. Nature produces examples of kinds and living things make propagation following patterns of form to bring the kind about again or anew in any manner to bear fruitful offspring. Natural markings are in kinds which are configurations with distinctive style, or form and a combination of qualities form a consistent characteristic arrangement. The laws and principles that guide the whole universe are a result of inborn or inherent qualities which are following a method of arranged order and material things are systematically comprised. SCPID theory contemplates and explains these truths.
Nice word salad.
You may want to see a professional about it.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83920 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
"Although the concepts of a law or principle in nature is borderline to philosophy, and presents the depth to which mathematics can describe nature, scientific laws are considered from a scientific perspective and follow the scientific method; they "serve their purpose" rather than "questioning reality" (philosophical) or "statements of logical absolution" (mathematical). For example, whether a law "refers to reality" is a philosophical issue, rather than scientific.
Fundamentally, all scientific laws follow from physics, laws which occur in other sciences ultimately follow from physical laws. Often, from mathematically fundamental viewpoints, universal constants emerge from scientific laws."
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_science
The "law of non-contradiction" is a concept of a law or principle in nature.
Do you see the universal constant principle found in scientific laws. This means non-changing and if it changes with an opposing idea this would be a "contradictory" of the universal constant principle found in a scientific law that is backed with empirical evidence. It is this principle extracted from a scientific law that is backed with the empirical data that followed the scientific method I use to validate “The law of non-contradiction”, which is the foundation to my scientific reasoning I use to interpret all things found in the laws of nature.
wouldn[t the law of non-contradiction only work if we knew all there is to know in the universe?

(we do not, in case that is in question for you...)

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83921 Mar 30, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Any person who truly searches impartially for the actualities of science or any official ivestigator will find the Bible to be truth. Precise application of facts or principles can be gathered and true knowledge of the physical or material world can be gained through observation and experimentation pertaining to the common idea of recurring events or phenomena which are a sequence of changing states that, upon completion, produce a final state like the original one. The Bible clearly teaches that common traits are in natures charcter. Nature produces examples of kinds and living things make propagation following patterns of form to bring the kind about again or anew in any manner to bear fruitful offspring. Natural markings are in kinds which are configurations with distinctive style, or form and a combination of qualities form a consistent characteristic arrangement. The laws and principles that guide the whole universe are a result of inborn or inherent qualities which are following a method of arranged order and material things are systematically comprised. SCPID theory contemplates and explains these truths.
If you are a truth seeker as I am, why do you quantify your GOD when it is a contradictory to do so in the laws of nature?
We both know eternity exists and this term is known in mathematics as infinity. With this said, how can you quantify your GOD if he is infinite because you cannot quantify or put an absolute value on infinity.

This is my first question for you.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#83922 Mar 30, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> Several places in history are completely out of sync with the accepted view of the intellectual and societal disposition of the proposed "evolution" of humans. I don't think ALL the evidence is being objectively considered, and is causing considerable difficulty in the formation of discovery of a proper timeline of evolution and involved factors...mostly because of control of the "funding" for research, and the need to be accepted academically, even knowing that the information and methods are in error.
That's a whole lot of nothing other than your personal opinions. Got anything to back any of this up or are we just supposed to take your word for it?

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#83923 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
"Although the concepts of a law or principle in nature is borderline to philosophy, and presents the depth to which mathematics can describe nature, scientific laws are considered from a scientific perspective and follow the scientific method; they "serve their purpose" rather than "questioning reality" (philosophical) or "statements of logical absolution" (mathematical). For example, whether a law "refers to reality" is a philosophical issue, rather than scientific.
Fundamentally, all scientific laws follow from physics, laws which occur in other sciences ultimately follow from physical laws. Often, from mathematically fundamental viewpoints, universal constants emerge from scientific laws."
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_science
The "law of non-contradiction" is a concept of a law or principle in nature.
Do you see the universal constant principle found in scientific laws. This means non-changing and if it changes with an opposing idea this would be a "contradictory" of the universal constant principle found in a scientific law that is backed with empirical evidence. It is this principle extracted from a scientific law that is backed with the empirical data that followed the scientific method I use to validate “The law of non-contradiction”, which is the foundation to my scientific reasoning I use to interpret all things found in the laws of nature.
Science deals with conflict in empirical evidence, these states do exist. So contradiction itself is universal in a great many things we have learned, particle/wave manifestation, Quantum entanglement where the future decision can affect the past states of the particles, relativity itself . There is a host of paradoxical events, where any law of contradiction will break down and become meaningless. This does not void science, rather proves some things to be counter intuitive and conflictory to the human
psyche. Which is dependent on a perception of space/time not everything is bound to.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83924 Mar 30, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Any person who truly searches impartially for the actualities of science or any official ivestigator will find the Bible to be truth. Precise application of facts or principles can be gathered and true knowledge of the physical or material world can be gained through observation and experimentation pertaining to the common idea of recurring events or phenomena which are a sequence of changing states that, upon completion, produce a final state like the original one. The Bible clearly teaches that common traits are in natures charcter. Nature produces examples of kinds and living things make propagation following patterns of form to bring the kind about again or anew in any manner to bear fruitful offspring. Natural markings are in kinds which are configurations with distinctive style, or form and a combination of qualities form a consistent characteristic arrangement. The laws and principles that guide the whole universe are a result of inborn or inherent qualities which are following a method of arranged order and material things are systematically comprised. SCPID theory contemplates and explains these truths.
Dear...do you keep forgetting all the proven lies and falsehoods we have shown you in your bible?

no, the bible leads no-one to truth. It only leads you to a cult and cult like thinking.(like you are doing now, clearly denying real world facts in front of your face...) denying reality is not healthy, Free Servant. you really need to get out of this harmful cult...

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#83925 Mar 30, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a whole lot of nothing other than your personal opinions. Got anything to back any of this up or are we just supposed to take your word for it?
Just opinion. You guys may change them. I am enjoying your posts. They make one actually think.

“Curious? You should be!”

Level 8

Since: Nov 10

East of Eden

#83926 Mar 30, 2013
Hi,geeks!How is it going?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#83927 Mar 30, 2013
Milena N wrote:
Hi,geeks!How is it going?
hey! i resemble that remark...
HOG_Hand of God

Kingston, Jamaica

#83928 Mar 30, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I did but it loses something if I have to explain it...
Which is exactly why you should have kept it to yourself.

Not everything you think is worth saying, you know.
HOG_Hand of God

Kingston, Jamaica

#83929 Mar 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No precedence necessary. In fact it would be simultaneous. If I dig up a bone everyone else can see it. You quite simply have no clue as to what you're talking about.
Which is exactly why there is no need to refer to the scientific.

If objectivity is achieved so simply, why complicate stuff further systematic junk?
The Dude wrote:
On the contrary, science doesn't give a flying fig about philosophy.
You poor misguided fool.

Science is validated by philosophy:

Science:
"In modern use, "science" more often refers to a way of pursuing knowledge, not only the knowledge itself." [wikipedia.com]

Philosophy:

"Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.[1][2] Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument" [wikipedia.com]

It is philosophy that determines the efficiency and goalsof science you nut.
The Dude wrote:
It is, as they say, as useful to science as ornithology is to birds...
And I see you are like a dog returning to its vomit; because you have both tried to separates philosophy from science and used that corny analogy before... to no [email protected] avail.

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) 15 min grace f a l l e n 218,735
A to Z songs by title or group! (Dec '16) 24 min wichita-rick 1,951
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 1 hr andet1987 36,752
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr andet1987 4,287
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 hr SGHarleyhoney 76,019
Post "any three words" (Sep '12) 1 hr andet1987 4,255
5 Letter Word, Change 1 Letter (Oct '15) 2 hr andet1987 8,047
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 7 hr Parden Pard 22,886
What is your pets name? 8 hr Parden Pard 43
More from around the web