Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 216710 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.

HTS

Sidney, MT

#89300 May 17, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the bible certainly proves that the god tha cult created does not exist...
their own myths disprove their cult.
it is not bigotry when you can show factual reasons to be wary of a group of people. if one's religion tells them that people of another race are inferior, they are still racists. bigotry thinly veiled behind the guise of religious freedom is still bigotry...
You are a consummate bigot, Woodtick.
YOu have assumed that I am a cultist, without even knowing what my religion is.
Just because I don't worship at the feet of Charles Darwin doesn't make me a "fundie".

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#89301 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>I have never argued from religion. You are always bringing it up. You don't know what my views are on Adam and Eve, the worldwide flood, or the Bible.
You don't have to say what you believe. That is clear by how you answer posts. Your arguments are never based upon science, they are based upon the misunderstanding of science that all creatards seem to have.

If you believe otherwise why not clear up the issue?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#89302 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>I have never argued from religion. You are always bringing it up. You don't know what my views are on Adam and Eve, the worldwide flood, or the Bible.
So then ID is myth. That leaves you with only naturalistic causes and effects, in other words, evolution to explain speciation.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#89303 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>How do you know my religion has been "proven to be a myth" when you don't know what it is?
I thought you DarwinBots acknowledged that God cannot be falsified. Why, then, are you claiming that a religion has been "proven" to be a myth?
I will not debate my religion with blaspheming religious bigots.
Certain beliefs can be falsified. The concept of god as a whole cannot.

Of course it is possible to show that god cannot be omnipotent nor omniscient using basic logic. Of course even the Bible implies that. Why would Satan oppose God if he were omnipotent?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#89304 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>How do you know my religion has been "proven to be a myth" when you don't know what it is?
I thought you DarwinBots acknowledged that God cannot be falsified. Why, then, are you claiming that a religion has been "proven" to be a myth?
I will not debate my religion with blaspheming religious bigots.
you do have serious comprehensions issues. I did not say that. i asked if that is why you can't debate your religious cult...

I am not claiming it. it is a fact. the known religious cults of today have been proven to be myths. their gods have been proven to be myths. this does not mean there couldn't be some god out there somewhere, but that discussion can only start when the first teensy weensy shred of evidence that might even possibly suggest that maybe there is a god surfaces...when you get that first teensy shred, give us a call...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#89305 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a consummate bigot, Woodtick.
YOu have assumed that I am a cultist, without even knowing what my religion is.
Just because I don't worship at the feet of Charles Darwin doesn't make me a "fundie".
no...again, i clearly asked what your religion is. why can you not understand plain English?
HTS

Sidney, MT

#89306 May 17, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no...again, i clearly asked what your religion is. why can you not understand plain English?
My religion is (or at least should be)irrelevant to this discussion.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#89307 May 17, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
HEAD/DESK
HEAD/DESK
HEAD/DESK
Lol. And Lol again.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#89308 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>My religion is (or at least should be)irrelevant to this discussion.
Shit, it should be irrelevant to any sane discussion. they are all proven myths.

we are not in the stone age anymore...

so your ignorance and misinformation on science comes from where?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#89309 May 17, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Kong, I see you having some difficulty with this. Let me summarize the available information...
There are systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns and systems and cycles and patterns.
I hope this helps.
LOL!

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#89310 May 17, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Wait a minute now, I stand out in my field all the time!
So you're a farmer?
HTS

Sidney, MT

#89311 May 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So then ID is myth. That leaves you with only naturalistic causes and effects, in other words, evolution to explain speciation.
You have not falsified God.
HTS

Sidney, MT

#89312 May 17, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Certain beliefs can be falsified. The concept of god as a whole cannot.
Of course it is possible to show that god cannot be omnipotent nor omniscient using basic logic. Of course even the Bible implies that. Why would Satan oppose God if he were omnipotent?
I agree.
HTS

Sidney, MT

#89313 May 17, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Shit, it should be irrelevant to any sane discussion. they are all proven myths.
we are not in the stone age anymore...
so your ignorance and misinformation on science comes from where?
Disagreement with popular dogma does not make someone "anti-science".

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#89314 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I see that you're scraping the bottom of the barrel, Kong.
I logically refute the article you posted, and you then go off on a tangent and attempt to insult my credentials. You apparently think that anyone who disagrees with you has an "abysmal" knowldged of science.
Why can't you defend the premises of what you claim to be science without getting so emotional? Are you that insecure? Your conduct tells me that you see evolution as more of a religion than science. Someone who is committed to scientific discovery WELCOMES debate, and when he is called out, he doesn't resort to childish insults.
You're right in one regard, I WAS mistaken about Dr. Wiens having DOCUMENTATION on his site regarding the accuracy of C14 dating techniques. He goes into detail in DESCRIBING the technique, and the different methods of calibrating C14 dating (pages 13' & '14' of the article). http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/wiens.html

He DOES reference some graphs that further illustrate C14 dating accuracy -- and those graphs ARE documented ("Tree-ring data are from Stuiver et al.,
Radiocarbon 40, 1041-1083, 1998; stalactite data are from Beck et al., Science 292, 2453-2458, 2001."). There are other links at the bottom of the article where you could have gone to get additional information on C14 dating, but hey...

But I was mistaken in that I thought I remembered from earlier readings of the Wiens paper that he DID have ALL the required documentation for his explanation(s),-- he did not (but he DID have some). But let's say that this is moot, and there was NO further refererence from THAT ONE SITE to back up the accuracy of C14 dating data.

Many reputable science sites can clarify any questions you might have regarding the range, calibration and accuracy of C14 dating methods. It's not difficult to locate on your own and acutally LEARN something about that which you're attempting to argue against.(note: AIG and Discovery.org are the NOT "reputable science sites").

Oh, and btw, were I really "scraping the bottom of the barrel", you would still have me to look up to, "Doctor".

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#89315 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You have not falsified God.
I thought you said you did not want to bring religion into this? You have no evidence supporting any god.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#89316 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You have not falsified God.
no, the religious cults falsified their own man made gods. no other god , gods or goddesses have yet to show any shred of evidence to even suggest the possibility that may possibly exist, so that discussion cannot even start yet.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#89317 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Disagreement with popular dogma does not make someone "anti-science".
It does if all he has to oppose this so called "dogma" is idiocy.

So far you are anti-science. You won't even bother to learn how science works. You can't be much more anti-science than that.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#89318 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Disagreement with popular dogma does not make someone "anti-science".
disagreement with proven scientific facts does...

Now if you have some actual facts to counter the verifiable facts of the science you claim to debunk, it would be nice ot hear them...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#89319 May 17, 2013
HTS wrote:
I see that you're scraping the bottom of the barrel, Kong.
You're a habitual liar for Jesus.

Can't get much lower than that.(shrug)
HTS wrote:
I logically refute the article you posted
You have never done that to anyone.

Ever.

All you have is to claim our position is based on assumptions which you in turn counter with your assumptions that reality MIGHT have been different in the past...

... just because.
HTS wrote:
and you then go off on a tangent and attempt to insult my credentials.
You have zero credentials to insult. But you do have a wonderfully massive fundie ego which is incredibly sensitive to bruising.

>:-)
HTS wrote:
You apparently think that anyone who disagrees with you has an "abysmal" knowldged of science.
In your case he is 100% correct, period.

This is not an exaggeration. This is merely a we established fact.
HTS wrote:
Why can't you defend the premises of what you claim to be science without getting so emotional? Are you that insecure?
Irony meter go boom.
HTS wrote:
Your conduct tells me that you see evolution as more of a religion than science.
No, your ignorance told you that before you started posting.
HTS wrote:
Someone who is committed to scientific discovery WELCOMES debate, and when he is called out, he doesn't resort to childish insults.
Sure we welcome debate.

We've been WAITING for you to come up with a viable scientific alternative for YEARS. We've been WAITING for you to actually address the content of our posts instead of constantly dodging, whining and spewing baseless and dishonest rhetoric.

So when are you gonna start?(shrug)

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
News Officials: Passenger hit train's emergency stop... 1 min Knock off purse s... 2
I Haven't Had____? In ages (Sep '12) 2 min GLEN CARTER 1,394
News House party takes bizarre turn as woman strips ... 3 min Knock off purse s... 6
News Scientists say nuts to heart disease 9 min Knock off purse s... 7
The letter E (Jun '13) 10 min GLEN CARTER 1,272
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 11 min Princess Hey 206,980
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 12 min GLEN CARTER 10,601
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 38 min Enzo49 67,188
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 40 min Enzo49 20,485
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 58 min Enzo49 1,472
More from around the web