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 3,961)

Showing posts 79,201 - 79,220 of112,792
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83818
Mar 29, 2013
 
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> No Mikie, there was flood that is the major goal, and the bible said so. Period.
Yes, the Bible is true cuz teh Bible sez so! Just ignore the bit where it got the flood totally wrong.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83819
Mar 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually if changes provide an advantage that's a darn good reason why those characteristics spread through populations.
LOL!
So, you are saying there is a "goal" to improve the species?
By who?
God?
Or do the people just pick a mutation and run with it because they like it?
Hahahahah!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83820
Mar 29, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Accreted solar disk particles...
Solar?
How did the solar or sun came into form?

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83821
Mar 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, gotcha. It's the evil world-wide atheist Darwinist evolutionist elitist scientist liberal socialist Communist Nazi anti-Christian God-hating Satan-worshipping baby-eating Jewish Illumanati conspiracy at work then.
If that's what you want to believe, have at it.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83822
Mar 29, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no chippy, there was no global flood in humans' time. period
your cult lied to you...again...
The issue was that, there was flood and the bible said so. Period.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83823
Mar 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, so you accept evolution then. Jolly good!
I've tried ta tell ya that several times, but I guess you are desperate ta have an enemy or whatever.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83824
Mar 29, 2013
 
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> Geesus krist you are thick.
I don't deny evolution. I question the people who are "using" it poorly and/or wrongly for personal gain.
That's nice. But your claim is rather generic and smacks of just a little bit of paranoia to say the least. And keeping in mind that the hypothesis of common ancestry (kinda the whole point of the modern evolutionary synthesis if you didn't know) is accepted by the vast majority of the biological community, and that further, that is where most of your strenuous objections lie, that is why the amount of your "acceptance" of evolution is questioned.
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
And yes, there have been many arguments and controversies regarding the research and discoveries.
Not by the biological community as a whole. Remember we discount creationists and quacks because they have no scientific basis. So no, the DI, AIG, ICR doth not constitute a "controversy". Neither does an idiot like Senapathy or von Daniken. An example of a genuine scientific controversy WITHIN evolution would be Alan Feduccia's position over dino-bird ancestry, or Gould's punctuated equilibria. Again, it's HOW evolution occurred is where the "controversies" are, not whether or not it DID occur.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83825
Mar 29, 2013
 
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> LOL!
So, you are saying there is a "goal" to improve the species?
By who?
God?
Or do the people just pick a mutation and run with it because they like it?
Hahahahah!
No, I'm not claiming there's a goal. And nor do the animals "choose" it. Again you are misunderstanding the concept, making the exact same mistake as the fundies do. Mutations occur, and they can be good, bad or indifferent. If neutral they will have a negligible effect on reproduction. If detrimental they will cause problems for reproduction. Maybe even to the point of extinction. If successful, successful mutations will spread through the population quicker than detrimental ones, hence further on down the line the resulting population will be "improved". This is natural selection.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83826
Mar 29, 2013
 
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> If that's what you want to believe, have at it.
Not MY beliefs.(shrug)

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83827
Mar 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny, I thought it was just made by humans and this, being only 12,000 years old tops was more of archaeological significance rather than evolutionary significance.(shrug)
Just checking, you're not a von Däniken fan are you?
Nope. But it surely doesn't fit the accepted timeline and developed society posited for the time. Some day it will have to be recognized for what it is or the world will laugh at the scientific community as fools and stop supporting their efforts.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83828
Mar 29, 2013
 
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> The issue was that, there was flood and the bible said so. Period.
Big deal. There was a rainstorm and the Koran said so.

See the problem?

No, of course you don't.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83829
Mar 29, 2013
 
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> I've tried ta tell ya that several times, but I guess you are desperate ta have an enemy or whatever.
Not really. Already have plenty on here!

>;-)

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83830
Mar 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Depends on how long they were gone and how much genetic divergence had taken place. We know that neanderthals were able to interbreed with us although they were different enough to be noted as a distinct subspecies of humans. Until we hunted them or shagged them into oblivion that is.
It could have been a viral infection introduced to them like was the case in the Americas.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83831
Mar 29, 2013
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Yes my ancestors died, so that I might live, they just had no fuggin clue about me :).
My parents were creationists, the screwed and created me.
But it wasn't regression, they created the perfect animal...he he heh
Hahahah! Hey Aura!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83832
Mar 29, 2013
 
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> It could have been a viral infection introduced to them like was the case in the Americas.
very well could have been. from the history of humans, the killing off by homo sapiens would have the highest probability, along with any infections...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83833
Mar 29, 2013
 
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> Nope. But it surely doesn't fit the accepted timeline and developed society posited for the time. Some day it will have to be recognized for what it is or the world will laugh at the scientific community as fools and stop supporting their efforts.
is that like when you said they built things with more precision than we can today?*snicker*

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83834
Mar 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
What you personally buy is irrelevant. "Disorders" is subjective. Mutations can be beneficial, detrimental or neutral. All humans are born with around on average 125 to 175 mutations as normal. Most are neutral.
<quoted text>
But anything passed on through the germ line IS passed on to new generations. That's how you end up with half your DNA from your mother and half from your father. This is how reproduction works. You will not gain any mutations your parents got from sunburn.
<quoted text>
If your father is born with a mutation and it's passed on to you, technically speaking it is not a mutation when describing the same DNA base(s) in your genome. It IS described as a mutation in HIS genome because neither of his parents had it. A mutation is simply a change of DNA. And DNA does change with each generation.
Right. And that "germ" line is passed from your parents. You do not "develop" them afterwards.
bohart

Morristown, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83835
Mar 29, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not only that you are using words you do not understand correctly.
And I don't name call. I use appropriate descriptive words.
Creatards are called creatards because of their actions, not because of their beliefs.
I am more than willing to help people out, but if they come on as rude ignorant bumpkins who have no idea how science is done or why it works then they get rudeness back tenfold.
So would you like to learn the scientific method, how it works, why it works, what is and is not evidence etc.?
It is clear right now that you are in no position to judge truth from lie. I will be running off soon, but this is not a task that can be accomplished in a few minutes anyway.
My offer to help is always genuine. When people play nice, I play nice, but lately I have had an overdose of creatards so my patience is a bit on the low side.
Good job subduct, you used all your defense mechanisms

1. lie
2. called him a creatard.
3. accused him of ignorance
4. spoke of your superiority.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83836
Mar 29, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>so? was there a point there? was there a point to the whole post about an archeological site and what that has to do with evolution?
do try to have a point when you post, dear...
Yes. There was. The point was that the people who constructed this 30 acre site were far more sophisticated than the scientific community will recognize for that time period. Either the anthropologists and scientists are wrong, or the site could not exist as it does...
It appears that is because the normal progression of evolution can not account for an abrupt change in that status of human development, therefore, it just couldn't happen.
So---Gobekli Tepe is just a figment of our imagination...as are all the other examples worldwide which do not fit neatly into the confines of the paradigm.
This is "before" the civilization of Sumer.
But you see nothing wrong at all with this picture? LOL!

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83837
Mar 29, 2013
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually ,
the monkeys just sorta watched the apes build them :).
Same thing --different actors.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 79,201 - 79,220 of112,792
|
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.

•••
•••