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
89,881 - 89,900 of 114,439 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94951
Jul 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I specifically made that comment about dinosaurs in the Bible because I fully expected this exact response. Thank you for following through. Your type just can't resist. It is like sugaring ants.
Behemoth is a large herbivore. You can try and call it a dinosaur, but that is pure speculation of the fantastical type.
A whale perhaps.
You know many people claim to have seen bigfoot, but so far nada.
Are you writing a screenplay for a science fiction movie?
Again, you are left with the dregs of very sketchy data to support your belief system. On your side, literal belief in a book that isn't supposed to be interpreted literally, unsubstantiated reports of unsubstantiated events, objects or animals, preliminary findings that show marginal differences if any and that which science doesn't understand. On the side of science we have hundreds of years of the development of methodologies, theories, tools, and an every growing body of evidence.
Funny how the science side seems to hold up so well considering you believe it to be falling apart, but then again, you believe a lot that isn't true or supported by facts.
The whale was an answer to the creature described in the second passage, Chapter 41. I was answering sequentially, but I can see already that some of the less intelligent trolls are having difficulty interpreting that. Fortunately, attacking me for this is just further confirmation of the limited intellects supporting the literalist/young earth side.

I suppose if some of them would stop setting there hitting the refresh button to see if I post and spend some time reading and learning they wouldn't continue to make themselves look like a horse's ass.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94952
Jul 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
After the Lord has a little introductory chat with Job He jumps right in and states;
Chap 40; "Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. 16 What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! 17 His tail sways like a cedar; A Brontosaur?
Chap 41; "Can you pull in the leviathan with a fishhook or tie down his tongue with a rope? Can you fill his hide with harpoons or his head with fishing spears? 8 If you lay a hand on him, you will remember the struggle and never do it again! 9 Any hope of subduing him is false; the mere sight of him is overpowering.
There is a U-boat log signed off by all present on the bridge where a Kronosaur like creature did a tail dance after they torpedoed a freighter. Not a good spot for a dip don't you think?
For centuries ship crews have documented creatures like these, as have a number of terrestrial sources.
http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/otherprehistori...
I am in no sad state at all. I have been blessed and encouraged to chase down this stuff all these years and watch the other side fall apart time and again. God has allow me to work in places where this evidence actually is Vs cutting and snipping from weblinks following someone else's lead to nowhere.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/common...

But you can really tell because it's tail.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3275/2963283287...
OldTimer

Alderson, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94953
Jul 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Hey, folks, what so many posters here seem to have forgotten is that the bible is entirely a work of fiction. Volume one, the "Old Testament" is a collection of folk tales, oral tradition set to paper.
Volume two, the "New Testament" is a collection of stories that we would now call an action adventure series, some of the stories about a superhero called Jesus, written by different people but all in the same vein.
Nothing in the bible was ever meant by its writers to be taken literally, no more real than tales about Oz or Wonderland, although many stories are set in real places that exist today, just like modern fictional depictions of happenings in Chicago or New York.
As someone previously so aptly put it, I just thought I'd put my two sense in!

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94954
Jul 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
JZ,
Think for a second, what all animals on the zoology side they would get to occupy the high ground and water with. Not a pretty picture.
We have whales mixed with turtles and shellfish fossilized here in Oregon, its a another jumbled example not in the textbooks but quite common. So we can view the fossils and geology from several perspectives but reason and evidence has never done my perspective wrong in the last 35 years since I got into this fray..
There are Dino tracks in the sandstone @ the 8K ft level in the rockies,(West Elk mine) And human sandal prints not that far away on the Utah side in formations that the Uniformists say are too old or to young.
Always had a great time working in your country for MRS and CVRD. Got some very cool jems on a great deal too!
Regards
I appreciate the response SBT, but in all honesty I cannot buy into this theory, other than to accept it as a metaphorical event, which hopefully serves a greater good. I respect your opinion, and respect the passion with which you go into great detail, but you can' t argue with science.

Forget the fact that the world was flooded, forget the fact that all life was wiped out (which, at least by my standards is not a very nice thing to do to), forget the fact that some dude fit so many animals into a boat, what we haven't even touched on yet is how did the world repopulate to almost 7 billion people in such a short amount of time? I mean, that' s a lot of getting'-it-on. Even if you considered every wife/daughter/sister/anything- with-a-vagina starting to bear children at 13 or 14, ignoring mass death by plagues/whatnot, and taking into consideration that the average lifespan of a human 1000 years ago was around 40, it would be impossible to have populated the world to current headcount.

And what about languages? Why would language need to be so diverse if we've been on Earth for less than 1000 years? My understanding is that the flood occurred around year 1050. Regardless of then-population of 250 million, they don't count in the equation because they were all wiped out by the flood. This means we started from zero again (sorry, 7) in 1050. Why then today are there more than 5000 languages? Why would we need so many languages? And how did the world become so diverse in such a short amount of time? I hate to break it to you, but 1000 years is not a whole lot of time for 7 billion people to speak 5000 languages. Unless the little ones were being born with languages pre-loaded into their little ROMs, well, let's just say there would be no need to have such a diverse population.

Glad you like Brazil. Next time you're here we can have a caiparinha!

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94955
Jul 5, 2013
 
I told a story about 5000 posts ago, sorry for being repetitive, but I'm going to tell it again.

I grew up in a Catholic family. We were not real religious, but growing up in New England meant you were probably Catholic. My cousin and I were very dedicated to studies, and were a bit competitive when it came to knowledge. He went on to become a mechanical engineer, and I an electrical engineer. Several years later, while working for a very large multi-national (he grew quickly in that company) he just decided that he would drop everything to become a Catholic Priest. It was quite a surprise to say the least. He dedicated years of study and dedication to do this, and today he is well-known in his community.

I know how he thinks. Science has always been his passion, and you can't just un-learn evolution. He will argue religion with a fiery passion all day, but he knows I know how he thinks - we're both wired the same. I usually stay away from these topics with him, but occasionally I challenge him to explain the whole Noah thing while keeping a straight face. And of course he does, flawlessly while I eventually give up and walk away, but I know inside he buys it about as much as I do. But he's doing what he loves, and I respect him for that. Afterall, how many priests do you know who can argue the law of thermal dynamics while reciting a sermon?

My point is that I do respect people's opinions about religion, and it's not my intention to go out of my way to try disprove anyone, that would only mean I am trying to feel better about myself, which I am not, but many of the points of our great Bible are pretty far-fetched, to say the least. Said the atheist: God Bless Creationists.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94957
Jul 5, 2013
 
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>I appreciate the response SBT, but in all honesty I cannot buy into this theory, other than to accept it as a metaphorical event, which hopefully serves a greater good. I respect your opinion, and respect the passion with which you go into great detail, but you can' t argue with science.

Forget the fact that the world was flooded, forget the fact that all life was wiped out (which, at least by my standards is not a very nice thing to do to), forget the fact that some dude fit so many animals into a boat, what we haven't even touched on yet is how did the world repopulate to almost 7 billion people in such a short amount of time? I mean, that' s a lot of getting'-it-on. Even if you considered every wife/daughter/sister/anything- with-a-vagina starting to bear children at 13 or 14, ignoring mass death by plagues/whatnot, and taking into consideration that the average lifespan of a human 1000 years ago was around 40, it would be impossible to have populated the world to current headcount.

And what about languages? Why would language need to be so diverse if we've been on Earth for less than 1000 years? My understanding is that the flood occurred around year 1050. Regardless of then-population of 250 million, they don't count in the equation because they were all wiped out by the flood. This means we started from zero again (sorry, 7) in 1050. Why then today are there more than 5000 languages? Why would we need so many languages? And how did the world become so diverse in such a short amount of time? I hate to break it to you, but 1000 years is not a whole lot of time for 7 billion people to speak 5000 languages. Unless the little ones were being born with languages pre-loaded into their little ROMs, well, let's just say there would be no need to have such a diverse population.

Glad you like Brazil. Next time you're here we can have a caiparinha!
I agree with pretty much everything said here but one:

Fundies claim "Da Flud" happened about 4500 years ago, not 1000 years ago.

But your points you raise are still valid.

“I'm Your Huckleberry ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

That's Just My Game

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94958
Jul 5, 2013
 
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
I appreciate the response SBT, but in all honesty I cannot buy into this theory, other than to accept it as a metaphorical event, which hopefully serves a greater good. I respect your opinion, and respect the passion with which you go into great detail, but you can' t argue with science.
Forget the fact that the world was flooded, forget the fact that all life was wiped out (which, at least by my standards is not a very nice thing to do to), forget the fact that some dude fit so many animals into a boat, what we haven't even touched on yet is how did the world repopulate to almost 7 billion people in such a short amount of time? I mean, that' s a lot of getting'-it-on. Even if you considered every wife/daughter/sister/anything- with-a-vagina starting to bear children at 13 or 14, ignoring mass death by plagues/whatnot, and taking into consideration that the average lifespan of a human 1000 years ago was around 40, it would be impossible to have populated the world to current headcount.
And what about languages? Why would language need to be so diverse if we've been on Earth for less than 1000 years? My understanding is that the flood occurred around year 1050. Regardless of then-population of 250 million, they don't count in the equation because they were all wiped out by the flood. This means we started from zero again (sorry, 7) in 1050. Why then today are there more than 5000 languages? Why would we need so many languages? And how did the world become so diverse in such a short amount of time? I hate to break it to you, but 1000 years is not a whole lot of time for 7 billion people to speak 5000 languages. Unless the little ones were being born with languages pre-loaded into their little ROMs, well, let's just say there would be no need to have such a diverse population.
Glad you like Brazil. Next time you're here we can have a caiparinha!
Just curious but why do you think the great flood was in 1050? It supposedly happened sometime around 2345BC.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2012...

http://www.deusdiapente.net/science/flood.php

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94959
Jul 5, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Just curious but why do you think the great flood was in 1050? It supposedly happened sometime around 2345BC.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2012...
http://www.deusdiapente.net/science/flood.php
Agreed, I used 1050 as a reference I thought for some reason was around the date. But Google claims Noah's date of birth to be 1056.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94960
Jul 5, 2013
 
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed, I used 1050 as a reference I thought for some reason was around the date. But Google claims Noah's date of birth to be 1056.
Probably said 1056 BC (BCE), but I didn't read the article you did.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94961
Jul 5, 2013
 
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed, I used 1050 as a reference I thought for some reason was around the date. But Google claims Noah's date of birth to be 1056.
It does say that which is curious and even if as Kong says, it supposed to be 1056 BCE, that doesn't make sense.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94962
Jul 5, 2013
 
OK. Upon reading a little further I found this.

"According to the Jewish timeline Noah was born in the 10th generation of the descendants of Adam. The year is believed to be 2704 BCE, or the Jewish year of 1056."

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94963
Jul 5, 2013
 
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed, I used 1050 as a reference I thought for some reason was around the date. But Google claims Noah's date of birth to be 1056.
As probably relating to the generations of Adam , but that age has nothing to do with reality.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94964
Jul 5, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
OK. Upon reading a little further I found this.
"According to the Jewish timeline Noah was born in the 10th generation of the descendants of Adam. The year is believed to be 2704 BCE, or the Jewish year of 1056."
Do the Jews really have their own calendar based on Adam? Or is it a fantasy calendar?

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94965
Jul 5, 2013
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Do the Jews really have their own calendar based on Adam? Or is it a fantasy calendar?
I don't know. That quote I found is about the extent of my knowledge on the subject of a potential Jewish calendar. I presume they had some sort of calendar. But I have no idea whether it was one they developed or co-opted from another culture or cultures.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94966
Jul 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I specifically made that comment about dinosaurs in the Bible because I fully expected this exact response. Thank you for following through. Your type just can't resist. It is like sugaring ants.
Behemoth is a large herbivore. You can try and call it a dinosaur, but that is pure speculation of the fantastical type.
A whale perhaps.
You know many people claim to have seen bigfoot, but so far nada.
Are you writing a screenplay for a science fiction movie?
Again, you are left with the dregs of very sketchy data to support your belief system. On your side, literal belief in a book that isn't supposed to be interpreted literally, unsubstantiated reports of unsubstantiated events, objects or animals, preliminary findings that show marginal differences if any and that which science doesn't understand. On the side of science we have hundreds of years of the development of methodologies, theories, tools, and an every growing body of evidence.
Funny how the science side seems to hold up so well considering you believe it to be falling apart, but then again, you believe a lot that isn't true or supported by facts.
Well DF,

I saw your little mind game, you're way too consistent. The Word of God will never change, let my words fall to nothing.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94967
Jul 5, 2013
 
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
I appreciate the response SBT, but in all honesty I cannot buy into this theory, other than to accept it as a metaphorical event, which hopefully serves a greater good. I respect your opinion, and respect the passion with which you go into great detail, but you can' t argue with science.
Forget the fact that the world was flooded, forget the fact that all life was wiped out (which, at least by my standards is not a very nice thing to do to), forget the fact that some dude fit so many animals into a boat, what we haven't even touched on yet is how did the world repopulate to almost 7 billion people in such a short amount of time? I mean, that' s a lot of getting'-it-on. Even if you considered every wife/daughter/sister/anything- with-a-vagina starting to bear children at 13 or 14, ignoring mass death by plagues/whatnot, and taking into consideration that the average lifespan of a human 1000 years ago was around 40, it would be impossible to have populated the world to current headcount.
And what about languages? Why would language need to be so diverse if we've been on Earth for less than 1000 years? My understanding is that the flood occurred around year 1050. Regardless of then-population of 250 million, they don't count in the equation because they were all wiped out by the flood. This means we started from zero again (sorry, 7) in 1050. Why then today are there more than 5000 languages? Why would we need so many languages? And how did the world become so diverse in such a short amount of time? I hate to break it to you, but 1000 years is not a whole lot of time for 7 billion people to speak 5000 languages. Unless the little ones were being born with languages pre-loaded into their little ROMs, well, let's just say there would be no need to have such a diverse population.
Glad you like Brazil. Next time you're here we can have a caiparinha!
All good here, on languages, you may note that on Papa New Guinea alone there hundreds of languages, fitting in a land locked area that's not that large. I would ck your population statistics numbers, I think their way too conservative. Same to you if you are ever in Oregon, Thanks
youtube

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94968
Jul 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

.

300 MIL Americans -- "Hostile Towards God"



.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94969
Jul 5, 2013
 
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Well DF,
I saw your little mind game, you're way too consistent. The Word of God will never change, let my words fall to nothing.
Sure you did.

And you still don't have a real answer to the questions proposed.

I will commend you though, this is the shortest most direct response you have given. At least that is something.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94970
Jul 5, 2013
 
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
All good here, on languages, you may note that on Papa New Guinea alone there hundreds of languages, fitting in a land locked area that's not that large. I would ck your population statistics numbers, I think their way too conservative. Same to you if you are ever in Oregon, Thanks
According to the information I found, there are about 850 languages known for Papua New Guinea. That sure is a lot for a fairly large island that isn't land locked. You may want to check a map or a globe to verify that it is an island. Still this doesn't put a time frame around the development of these languages, but if you consider that it was first settled by humans 30,000 years ago, maybe that number of languages isn't so difficult to accept.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94971
Jul 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Well DF,
I saw your little mind game, you're way too consistent. The Word of God will never change, let my words fall to nothing.
What "Word of God"?

Now if you mean the Bible it has changed. And to call the Bible the "word of God" is rather blasphemous. It is full of errors of all sorts including scientific error, geographic error, countless contradictions, bad morality, and failed prophesy.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••