Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

“Lets all play DantheDipshyts”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

game.of annoyance. It's fun.

#94149 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
replaytime, I am sadly boringly straight. You on the other hand were probably badly bent by your past sexual assault against you.
There are victims groups where you can go for help.
Wait now. You are the one that starting calling me your bicth and you even bragged I was your bicth. Don't back out now sugar. Back your yap or shut your trap.

“Lets all play DantheDipshyts”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

game.of annoyance. It's fun.

#94150 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
<quoted text>
No. Adaptation is very different from evolution. The various colors of our skin may be an example. Skin Has a biological mechanism that adopts to protect us. This is not evolution. And this is what causes me problems with this debate. People do not understand the difference. And no one has even dared to try To explain away one of my earlier comments...
The human Y chromosome has twice as many genes as the Chimpanzee Y chromosome. Humans have at least 78 genes and Chimpanzees have only 37. The Y chromosomes of Chimpanzees and humans are radically different in the arrangement of their genes. What more need I say? Or should I continue? So for evolution to work the number of genes would have to about double and reorganize themselves. There is NO biological mechanism that allows for this to happen. Mutating genes is very different than creating genes. Plus reorganizing them! Someone previously suggested that conception would allow for this to happen- lol. You cannot evolve through conception. Genetic recombination will also not cause evolution in a species.
We all supposedly came from "one" something that somehow learned to self replicate. See that is the problem. "self replicate" means a copy of itself not a change of species or a copy of something different (how ever you want to see it).

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94151 Jun 27, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait now. You are the one that starting calling me your bicth and you even bragged I was your bicth. Don't back out now sugar. Back your yap or shut your trap.
Your being my bitch is much much more than a sexual thing.

You have been completely owned and that is why you are my bitch.

Can't sleep, so let's see if we can ask some of your idiot questions tonight.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94152 Jun 27, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
We all supposedly came from "one" something that somehow learned to self replicate. See that is the problem. "self replicate" means a copy of itself not a change of species or a copy of something different (how ever you want to see it).
Are you that dense that you think that is what we believe?

Come on, you aren't really that stupid, are you?

Since: Jun 13

United States

#94153 Jun 27, 2013
Since no one could challenge my precious point, allow me to make another. Since a cell is the simplest of life forms, it may have been the first life. So a cell would have had to create itself, learn to breath, learn to reproduce, learn to evolve. Obviously this is impossible. Even a single cell is way to complex for this to be possible. Watch this video of how a cell actually works. It probably won't make sense to most people but it clearly demonstrates the complexity of even the simplest life form.

http://youtu.be/RrS2uROUjK4

Since: Jun 13

United States

#94154 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Your being my bitch is much much more than a sexual thing.

You have been completely owned and that is why you are my bitch.

Can't sleep, so let's see if we can ask some of your idiot questions tonight.
Since no one could challenge my previous point, allow me to make another. Since a cell is the simplest of life forms, it may have been the first life. So a cell would have had to create itself, learn to breath, learn to reproduce, learn to evolve. Obviously this is impossible. Even a single cell is way to complex for this to be possible. Watch this video of how a cell actually works. It probably won't make sense to most people but it clearly demonstrates the complexity of even the simplest life form.

http://youtu.be/RrS2uROUjK4

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94155 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
Since no one could challenge my precious point, allow me to make another. Since a cell is the simplest of life forms, it may have been the first life. So a cell would have had to create itself, learn to breath, learn to reproduce, learn to evolve. Obviously this is impossible. Even a single cell is way to complex for this to be possible. Watch this video of how a cell actually works. It probably won't make sense to most people but it clearly demonstrates the complexity of even the simplest life form.
http://youtu.be/RrS2uROUjK4
First off we need to see the source of your claim. Very often the answer is there.

Please, no invalid creatard sources. I don't like creatard sources since they openly admit that they will lie if necessary.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94156 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
Since no one could challenge my precious point, allow me to make another. Since a cell is the simplest of life forms, it may have been the first life. So a cell would have had to create itself, learn to breath, learn to reproduce, learn to evolve. Obviously this is impossible. Even a single cell is way to complex for this to be possible. Watch this video of how a cell actually works. It probably won't make sense to most people but it clearly demonstrates the complexity of even the simplest life form.
http://youtu.be/RrS2uROUjK4
The simple answer to your question is going to be a bunch of "No"s.

The first cell did not "create itself".

Nor did it have to "learn to breathe". "learn to reproduce", or "learn to evolve". I do not like poorly worded questions since they show that your mind is already prejudiced against the answer.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94157 Jun 27, 2013
Now if you want to know where they are on studying abiogenesis this is a nice video that explains it rather well. Spoiler alert, it is only simple chemistry:

&li st=PL0696457CAFD6D7C9

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94158 Jun 27, 2013
What I find disgusting about so many of the creationists in these debates is that they seem afraid to lay out exactly what they believe. They will not say how they believe life got here. They will not say whether they believe the Noah's Ark myth or not. And then they get mad when called on these beliefs. And they also get irate when they are called creatards. Creatards are called that more for their behavior than for their beliefs.

Since: Jun 13

United States

#94159 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>First off we need to see the source of your claim. Very often the answer is there.

Please, no invalid creatard sources. I don't like creatard sources since they openly admit that they will lie if necessary.
I continue to use scientific journals to back up my opinions and other in this discussion use Wikipedia and magazines. I can't argue with you if you refuse to accept scientific evidence.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94160 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
<quoted text>
I continue to use scientific journals to back up my opinions and other in this discussion use Wikipedia and magazines. I can't argue with you if you refuse to accept scientific evidence.
I accept scientific evidence. Too many creatards have used bad sources. You don't like Wikipedia, I don't know why. Yes, it used to have a bad reputation, not so today. It is very often a good starting point.

If you read the scientific journal on your question you would have found suggestions to what the answer may be. Evolutionists, unlike creationists, are truthful. Sometimes the answer to part of a question is we don't know for sure yet.

The way you worded your claim made it sound like your "facts" came from a creationist site, and there is not an honest one out there, that was distorting the facts that were presented in the scientific journal.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#94161 Jun 27, 2013
BiggBBoss wrote:
Evolution has already need debunked. Wake up and get with the times people.
Say what?

When?

By who?

I seem to have missed that and I really do try and keep up with the latest scientific advances. Please be specific.
BiggBBoss wrote:
<quoted text>
Read a book on biological chemistry or Genetics.
I have read several and what I got out of them was education including it is that the theory of evolution explains the fact of evolution.

However you are welcome to put whatever interpretation makes you feel all warm and fluffy and goddidit by magic inside you want on those facts,

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#94162 Jun 27, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The first word is "a", the most used is "the". "French" lies somewhere between fraud and frog.
That is not what I said

I said the “premier” word

Note the definition of “premier”

First in status or importance; principal or chief:
First to occur or exist; earliest
First in importance, rank, etc.
First in occurrence; earliest

Note also that the earliest word which "evolved" into an English word is either "cinnamon." a spice used several thousand years ago. The word is of Hebrew origin (it is found in the 30th chapter of Exodus).

Or “water” which has counterparts in several languages that have influenced English, I believe the oldest use of the word water was in the Hittite language

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#94163 Jun 27, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you would not know logic if it sat on your face and farted
Looks pretty logical to me
That must have happened to you. What a wonderful experience.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#94164 Jun 27, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Shut up chaz, the premier word in the English language is French
Shut up, Chriz, the premier words in French are mostly in Latin. The same with all languages.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#94165 Jun 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
How many times do you have to be told Cuckles, the U.S. got it as part
of a package deal when we bought London Bridge. England was going
through a tough time then and was selling off some artifacts. The
English Language was on of those artifacts.
So now you need to practice saying American belongs to the
Americans!!
Wake up! why? because your nightmares are just too much.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#94166 Jun 27, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not what I said
I said the “premier” word
Note the definition of “premier”
First in status or importance; principal or chief:
First to occur or exist; earliest
First in importance, rank, etc.
First in occurrence; earliest
Note also that the earliest word which "evolved" into an English word is either "cinnamon." a spice used several thousand years ago. The word is of Hebrew origin (it is found in the 30th chapter of Exodus).
Or “water” which has counterparts in several languages that have influenced English, I believe the oldest use of the word water was in the Hittite language
No matter how you chop it, French is not the "premier" word in English. It isn't even the premier word in French. The earliest word is likely to be the simplest and most primal. Ma or mama.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#94167 Jun 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Shut up, Chriz, the premier words in French are mostly in Latin. The same with all languages.
The premier words in: Mandarin are Latin? Navajo are Latin? Swahili are Latin? Hindi are Latin?

Never ask a Christian anglophile for a correct answer, all you'll get is a "right and proper" one.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#94168 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Yet another cowardly dodge from Mike.
Cowardly dodge, huh? You cite a 40+ year old publication as if it were still germane today. If you knew what you were talking about and understood the modern definition of homology, you wouldn't make such a foolish mistake.

But continue to act like a jackass, Dr Phony.

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) 6 min Crazy Beautiful 152,921
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 8 min Mega Monster 7,855
keep a word drop a word (Sep '12) 10 min Old Sam 6,992
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) 11 min Crazy Jae 342
Change 1 letter game! (Nov '11) 13 min Old Sam 3,047
Why isn't Harly in Cuba like she said 14 min -Lea- 2
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 16 min Old Sam 6,923
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 25 min Enzo49 26,050
Is it possible to....... 52 min Old Sam 620
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 hr TALLYHO 8541 37,800
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 1 hr dragoon70056 3,051
More from around the web