Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 216947 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.

The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84323 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said, perhaps the closer the DNA between two species, the more likely there will have similarities in ERV insertions.
Yes, due to common ancestry. There is only a 1 in 1.5 billion chance of an ERV sharing the same spot and not being due to common ancestry.
Cybele wrote:
You have not provided what specific virus were found in chimps, gorillas, and humans that shows proof of nested hierarchy.
We have now.
Cybele wrote:
If these alleles in ERVs have become fixed in populations, then how come some humans have ERVs that other humans don't?
Because if that didn't happen then that would be evidence that ERV's attack specific places and the common ancestry hypothesis would be falsified.

This should be obvious.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84324 Apr 1, 2013
Eristotle wrote:
If some animals today are classified as endangered because of numbers too low to constitute a breeding population, who did a single ape-to-human mutation procreate with?
All their contemporaries.

We are all related to mitochondrial Eve. But that doesn't mean she didn't have her pick of males to mate with.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84325 Apr 1, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
REALITY (PHYSICAL UNIVERSE) IS AN ABSOLUTE TRUTH WHEN IT COMES TO EXISTENCE! According to your flawed man-made scientific method stating reality is disqualified since all with-in it is an absolute truth (does not qualify for evidence by your scientific evidence) BY YOUR MAN-MADE FLAWED SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS DIS-QUALIFIED AND CANNOT SPEAK ON ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOUND IN THIS UNIVERSE BECAUSE ALL WITHIN REALITY (UNIVERSE) IS AN ABSOLUTE!
“THE DUDE” IRONY MEATER GOES DROP, DROP KABOOM!!!!!!!
LIKE I SAID MY METHOD OF REASONING IS FLAWLESS BECAUSE IT IS FOUNDED ON AN ABSOLUTE TRUTH FOUND IN THE LAWS OF NATURE CALLED “THE LAW OF NON-CONTRADICTION”!
You are violating the law of non-contradiction by claiming there are absolutes in science. This would make falsification impossible. This would make scientific predictions impossible. You have therefore refuted yourself. Game over.

So yes indeedy, irony meter go boom.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#84326 Apr 1, 2013
I don't have time for this nonsense. I made my point and leave it at that.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84327 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
If common ancestry is the answer to the mystery of ERVs then what is the common ancestor to chimps, gorillas, and humans?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homininae

[QUOTE who="Cybele"]Scienti sts are just assuming viral DNA have to be passed on in order for chimps and humans to have exactly the same ERV insertions. But then they are not sure how far back it goes, does it date back to dinosaur period or what?
Don't you think homology could be a factor in similar species to provide the same integration sites to these viruses? Like I said, being exactly in the same loci for these ERVs could just mean the virus is very specific as it targets the same areas. This is not like winning the jackpot with the same lotto numbers twice. We just have a lack of understanding of how viruses behave.
No, you do. All we need to do is to infect two cells with identical genomes with the same ERV. The result is that they attack different areas of the genome:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...

Building Phylogenetic Trees from ERV LTR Sequences

"Endogenous retrovirus loci provide no less than three sources of phylogenetic signal, which can be used in complementary fashion to obtain much more information than simple distance estimates of homologous sequences. First, the distribution of provirus-containing loci among taxa dates the insertion. Given the size of vertebrate genomes (>1 × 109 bp) and the random nature of retroviral integration (22, 23), multiple integrations (and subsequent fixation) of ERV loci at precisely the same location are highly unlikely (24). Therefore, an ERV locus shared by two or more species is descended from a single integration event and is proof that the species share a common ancestor into whose germ line the original integration took place (14). Furthermore, integrated proviruses are extremely stable: there is no mechanism for removing proviruses precisely from the genome, without leaving behind a solo LTR or deleting chromosomal DNA. The distribution of an ERV among related species also reflects the age of the provirus: older loci are found among widely divergent species, whereas younger proviruses are limited to more closely related species. In theory, the species distribution of a set of known integration sites can be used to construct phylogenetic trees in a manner similar to restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis."

That paper answers everything you've asked for.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84328 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
I don't have time for this nonsense. I made my point and leave it at that.
And you failed.

If you don't take that as a positive thing then not learning is your problem.(shrug)
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84329 Apr 1, 2013
Eristotle wrote:
<quoted text>
One fact is true..."That, historically speaking, most scientists have been proved wrong".
More precisely, most scientists haven't gotten it exactly right because they lacked all of the facts.
Science by consensus is bad science.
Most people once believed the Earth was flat,and that the sun, the moon and the stars revovled around the Earth.
Nobody believed in Ice Ages until a geologist studying "erratics" (rocks found far from their origin) speculated they had been moved there by glaciers, then proved it.
Continental Drift theory was lauhged at until proven correct (now called Plate Techtonics).
Gene Shoemaker had to prove comets and asteroids really did impact Earth.
Yes, the scientific method does work...eventually.
Don't worry, science doesn't go on consensus for no reason. It tends to go with concepts because they work. Kinda like how we went with Newton's "law" of gravity even though it was inaccurate. In general our theories tend to get a little better over time.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84330 Apr 1, 2013
Eristotle wrote:
<quoted text>
Life (even human life) was seeded on earth by extraterrestrials so that, if they were ever stranded in this part of the universe, they would have someting to eat.
That's nice. It doesn't matter even if aliens did seed this planet. Once it had life, evolution took over.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#84331 Apr 1, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Whatever!
English as a language originated from a country called, England, now in the UK.
No doubt about that.
Hey Chucky!

You might be interested in this:

http://www.themillions.com/2013/04/amazon-ann...

<<begin cut/paste>>

"Amazon Announces Purchase of English™

By Michael Bourne posted at 6:00 am on April 1, 2013 12

SEATTLE – Amazon announced today that it has acquired the English language and plans to fully privatize the world’s predominant mode of written communication. As of 6 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time April 1, anyone writing in Amazon’s proprietary language, now known as English™, will be obligated to pay a “licensing fee” to the Seattle-based online retailer.

The purchase of English™ for an undisclosed sum in cash and stock completes Amazon’s meteoric rise from an online bookseller to a global behemoth dominant in the spheres of online retailing, cloud computing, and digital publishing. It remains unclear who sold English™, though credible reports suggest that Apple and Google had earlier offered to buy the language, only to be outbid by Amazon at the eleventh hour.

“We are pleased to add English™ to our growing family of products,” said an exultant Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.“We just bought GoodReads last week, and we already own Audible.com along with numerous digital publishing platforms, so buying the language outright was an obvious next step. This way, we will be able to put the Amazon stamp on the creative process itself, rather than merely on the finished product.”

<<end cut/paste. truncated for brevity, more at link above>>
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84332 Apr 1, 2013
Bigfoot wrote:
<quoted text>
If something evolves, it has to evlove from something. You can only have something, if it was created. Without something, there would be no evolution.
But we have something. It's called LIFE. That's all evolution requires. Doesn't matter how it started. Life is here. Life evolves. Facts. In order to demonstrate otherwise you need to demonstrate that life is in fact NOT here.

The theory of evolution need not explain abiogenesis, for the very same reason the theory of gravity need not explain the origin of mass.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#84333 Apr 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And you failed.
If you don't take that as a positive thing then not learning is your problem.(shrug)
Do you know how harder it is to question Science than accept all the data given? Ever thought about that?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84334 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So if cell arose naturally, then how do you explain the existence of viruses when they are not cellular organisms? How did they evolve?
Dunno. I guess that means the germ theory of disease is wrong because we haven't explained the origin of germs.

Back to the four humours then I guess.

:-/
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84335 Apr 1, 2013
Eristotle wrote:
<quoted text>
No...just saying "don't bet the farm on unproven (probably unprovable) theories".
Theories do not get "proven". Proof is only for math and alcohol.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84336 Apr 1, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
You can scoff all you want you religious zealot who claims his/her self scientific!
It is now deemed AS A SELF-EVIDENT TRUTH THAT IS VALIDATED BY ALL EVIDENCE IN THIS UNIVERSE (THAT INCLUDES ALL THE INFORMATION YOU READ WHICH IS IMMATERIAL EVIDENCE) THAT REALITY IS AN ABSOLUTE TRUTH!
YOU AND ALL THE OTHERS WHO UP-HOLD THIS PSEUDO0-SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS DISQUALIFIED AS SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHERS AND SCIENTIST! YOU PEOPLE ARE FALSE TRUTH SEEKERS BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS AN ABSOLUTE!
ALL OF YOUR PSEUDO EVIDENCE FOR THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IN THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES IS DIS-QAULIFIED AND I NOW DEEM THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION A RELIGIOUS CONCEPT THAT IS FOUNDED ON ZERO/UN-TESTABLE EVIDENCE. YOUR ORIGIN OF SPECIES IS BASED ON UN-TESTABLE EVIDENCE BECAUSE REALITY IS AN ABOLUTE AND THIS VIOLATES YOUR PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF FALSIFIABILITY AND DIS-QUALIFIES YOU FROM TOUCHING EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOU CLAIMS!
SELF-EVIDENT TRUTH THAT THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES AS NON-FIXED IS A CIRCULAR RELIGION AND HAVE NO PLACE IN TRUE SCIENCE!
Of course it's testable. We've been talking about it for over 4,000 pages now.

I know you've been away off gallivanting around Alpha Centauri with your extra-terrestrial buddies, but now you're back I suggest you go back to page 1 and bring yourself back up to speed.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84337 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to break it to you but the theory of evolution is science fiction with the use of logic. That's all there is. No real evidence.
You should only use this theory as a logic enhancer for your brain.
Plenty of real evidence. You just ignore it every time and go looking for some little query you can muster up so you can pretend you've changed the entire face of biology. The BEST you could ever achieve is just find something that stumps a bunch of geeks on the internet.(shrug)

Hardly a scientific revelation.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84338 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
What you know is Endogenous Retroviruses as a slam dunk for evolution. No wonder you don't believe in creation, "endogenous" means "originating from...without or having no apparent external cause" but claims there is common ancestor. LOL.
It's unbelievable what evolutionists come up with to disprove God.
Evolution falsifies God? I was not aware of that!

http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/

In fact I was unaware that the God-concept had suddenly become a falsifiable concept. When the heck did that happen?!?

:-/
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84339 Apr 1, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
"Knowlede is power but knowledge of self-evident truths (absolutes) is infinite power!"
Source of quote: Me
Ah, no ego involved then.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84340 Apr 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't underestimate the knowledge and wisdom our ancestors had. Only evolutionists who think we evolved from animals would do that. Didn't neanderthals had larger brains? What happened? Did they have bigger penis? Are you still prancing about with your neanderthal genes? lol
Actually humans had the bigger penii. And bigger axes.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84341 Apr 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
"if it doesn't my idea or concept must be abandoned, NO EXCEPTIONS"
Well it doesn't... so...does that mean you will self destruct or something?
Something along these lines:



When he breaks out the all-caps you know it's happening!
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#84342 Apr 1, 2013
ooo wrote:
that's a good question... Cybele..
Aura, she's cornered you... duck or something..
Don't worry, it's only a rubber duck. Squeek squeek.

Hey Curtis, doesn't that also violate your law of non-contradiction?

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. (Nov '10) 1 min Bezeer 19,920
+=Keep 1 Drop 1=+ 3 STACK (Mar '13) 1 min Bezeer 11,169
The Letter "C" (Aug '09) 3 min Bezeer 5,639
The letter E (Jun '13) 3 min Bezeer 1,284
Add a word and drop a word (Jan '14) 4 min Bezeer 6,615
Change 1 letter game! (Nov '11) 5 min Bezeer 9,258
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 8 min Appreciate 207,258
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 18 min KNIGHT DeVINE 1,532
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 24 min KNIGHT DeVINE 22,245
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 48 min Poppyann 10,656
A to Z songs by title or group! 1 hr Poppyann 34
More from around the web