Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 171736 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.

Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#95243 Jul 12, 2013
A little heads up for the crude Jesus Freaks arguing against evolution here, like SBT, etc.:

The following is from the evangelical Christians at Baylor University, the "largest Baptist University in the world," where the students go on mission trips, etc.

This is from the Biology Department at Baylor:
http://www.baylor.edu/biology/index.php...

Statement on Evolution
"Evolution, a foundational principle of modern biology, is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence and is accepted by the vast majority of scientists. Because it is fundamental to the understanding of modern biology, the faculty in the Biology Department at Baylor University, Waco, TX, teach evolution throughout the biology curriculum. We are in accordance with the American Association for Advancement of Science's statement on evolution. We are a science department, so we do not teach alternative hypotheses or philosophically deduced theories that cannot be tested rigorously."

Also, here from the Baylor Geology Department:
http://www.baylor.edu/geology/index.php...

Quote:

"Question: Does the fossil record support the idea of biological change over time (biological evolution)?

Yes. The fossil record clearly indicates...

• a progression in complexity of organisms from very simple fossil forms in the oldest rocks (>3.5 billion years old) to a broad spectrum from simple to complex forms in younger rocks,

• that some organisms that were once common are now extinct, and

• that the living organisms inhabiting our world today are similar (but generally not the same) as organisms represented as fossils in young sedimentary deposits, which in turn have evolutionary ancestors represented as fossils in yet older rocks.

Mammals, for example, are prevalent today and can be traced back in the fossil record for approximately 200 million years, but are not present as mammals in the fossil record before that; however, fossil forms that have reasonably been interpreted to be associated with the evolutionary precursors to mammals are found in older rocks.

Whether biological evolution occurs has not been a matter of scientific debate for more than a century. It is considered a proven fact."

End quote
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#95244 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Teens have other escapes, all of them bad, sex, drugs or worse. Be honest, they are missing THE answer and its not Bil/yrs Godless materialism framed in evolution and pushed in the schools and media.
You're a crude, cynical LIAR. A major (and thoroughly dishonest) proselytizing tactic for you hillbilly pastor types is to claim everything is awful and things have never been worse and the youth are going to hell in a hand basket, etc., when in fact war, violence and crime are at all time lows, church attendance near all time highs, volunteerism and other good factors among youth has never been higher, etc.

You engage in what's called the Arsonist/Firemen Syndrome, namely, you set the fire, then run in and proclaim you have the tools the put out the fire, thus making yourself look like a hero.

No one here is fooled.
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
The Framers of our country would be sick to see where this country is right now and where it's going.
Speculative, self-serving BS. You could just as easily claim the Founding Fathers would be amazed and impressed with what we have done with their country in 240 years.

In any case, WHO CARES what the sainted FF would think? We live TODAY and OUR world, not THEIRS. They thought black people were worth 2/3 of a human being and woman didn't even count in their minds as voters.
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why they inserted "Creator" in the Constitution, we have abandoned it and are paying the terrible price.
How us exactly where the word "Creator" appears in our American Constitution.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#95245 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree Evolution is certainly the science philosophy of this age,.
No, LIAR, evolution is NOT a philosophy. It is a demonstrated scientific theory. You lying Jesus Freaks NEED evolution to seem like a philosophy so that you can compare it to your threadbare, pathetic fundamentalist Christian theology and claim you are the winner and everyone should believe thee shallow nonsense YOU believe.
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
your side published warnings not to debate in this country a dozen years ago. They used lots of excuses, the attendees don't understand, the other side uses trickery, and on and on.
And they are right. You liars schedule these debates so you can pack them with ignorant fundamentalist comrades and then you run the Gish Gallop on the scientist who has agreed to spend time with you.

You DO know what the Gish Gallop is, don't you?

A major reason why scientists won't debate or even give you Christian creeps the time of day is because to do so would bring them down to YOUR level and give you a standing that is completely undeserved in this discussion.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#95246 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry to be the one to enlighten you, but to say that Darwin's views of microbiology and genetics are 'proven' show that it's not me that's behind. Darwin was into the 'Pangenesis' theory, where he thought the environment could add genetic information within that living generation, and pass it on. He was wrong, that has to happen for evolution to work, right?
Trust me, you spread nothing but darkness whenever you speak.

And Darwin's basic understanding of evolution was eminently correct and is used to this day, although we have come far beyond it because of DNA knowledge, etc.

Darwin knew nothing about genetics, since it had not yet been invented. And yet the basics of his theory stand today as PROVEN FACT!
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
It didn't work because there's no mechanism to get it to work, so just write words, draw pictures, tell stories and attack the other view.
The mechanisms of evolution are simple: descent with modification by means of genetic mutation, drift and sexual recombination, filtered by natural selection.
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so man is without excuse."
Will and still holds true.
Yeah, yeah, Paul the A__hole claims that "because sunsets are pretty, our religion is true and anyone who disagrees is a fool and without excuse." Pathetic, self-serving apologetical BS.
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
The definition of 'science' is - it must be testable, repeatable, verifiable and observable. That's illogical from 1-4 above, and from experience.
Evolution is eminently "testable, repeatable, verifiable and observable." Your not one of those MORONS who think that you actually have to BE THERE and see something in real time in order for it too be scientifically verifiable, are you?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#95249 Jul 12, 2013
_Susan_ wrote:
Hello Dude, everyone
Howdy

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95250 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry to be the one to enlighten you, but to say that Darwin's views of microbiology and genetics are 'proven' show that it's not me that's behind. Darwin was into the 'Pangenesis' theory, where he thought the environment could add genetic information within that living generation, and pass it on. He was wrong, that has to happen for evolution to work, right?

Removed for space or what I am now calling taking out the trash.
I am overjoyed to be the among those that continually enlighten you. I will address the first part of your post for now.

We were talking about evolution and now you throw in his views on microbiology and genetics and combine it with another OUTRIGHT LIE. Gosh and golly gee whiz guy this is more of that trickery and deceit you have come to rely on in lieu of the facts. Genetics as a field didn't even exist when Darwin published his work and microbiology was in its infancy at best. Now I think Darwin is a genius in his own right, but you give him the paranormal ability to form views on subjects that didn't exist. That is some weird but awesome tribute to the man, but I think a bit much. In any event, I never said proven anywhere in my post. I certainly wouldn't have said proven in regard to your fabrication. What were his views on molecular biology and particle physics?

You are not only behind, but I think you resemble your position in a very real way.

You are confusing Lamarkism with evolution. A common error but not unexpected from your stellar performance so far. Whatever Darwin's views were leading up to formulating the basis for the theory of evolution, he was clear when he published. The theory of evolution does not include nor is it reliant on inheritance of acquired characteristics. Since you don't even know that much, it isn't surprising how confused you have everything else. How can you not even know or understand that which you are trying to trash? What are they teaching you kids at that home school?

Just a note. The posts on topix remain accessible after posting. You know that right. Anyone can go back and compare what we were talking about with your fabrication here. You get that right? Just wanted to check. It seems like you think this is all in a vacuum and you can post any crap you want and it will have to be accepted. Sort of like how your religious education was presented to you.

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95251 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>

Man has only lately the technology to OBSERVE what's going on,
Not according to the start of your post. You said Darwin could formulate views about fields that didn't even exist during his lifetime.

Again, if I had to lie as much as you do, I would begin to question my own beliefs and be ashamed in any regard. Are you sure your lord isn't a dark prince?

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#95252 Jul 12, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Not according to the start of your post. You said Darwin could formulate views about fields that didn't even exist during his lifetime.
Again, if I had to lie as much as you do, I would begin to question my own beliefs and be ashamed in any regard. Are you sure your lord isn't a dark prince?
As SBT said "Man has only lately the technology to OBSERVE what's going on" Key word observe.

Now you come back with formulate,,,, Hate to tell you but Observe and Formulate are very very different. A person of the intelligence that you claim to have should know that. LOL

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95253 Jul 12, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Since Christians accept evolution I know not of what you're referring with this "Godless materialist evolution". If you mean that evolution doesn't mention God then I point out that neither does the Godless materialist gravity. Note how gravity, also a scientific concept is just as materialistic.
I fell for gravity on the very first encounter, but I couldn't stand her obsession with material things. She really brought me down.

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95254 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Since Crick, we now know Darwin was mistaken,(he even had bears jumping into water and becoming whales - good imagination for sure!), but once you push the ship of macro-evolution away from the dock (mistaking it for mirco-evolution, as Darwin did), with a 90 year start,(Crick, and interrupted by Medel,)-
http://anthro.palomar.edu/mendel/mendel_1.htm
As pointed out by others, the discovery of the structure of DNA and Mendelian genetics are some of those recent advances that have aided in our understanding and refinement of the theory of evolution. Not the sharpest kid in general science were you.
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
even good science couldn't stop it. Crick (co-discoverer of DNA), postulated that the structures are so complex and the data so extensive that evolution has no chance to cause major CHANGES to life at all. Hence he wrote the book "Panasperma", being not attached to evolutionary Dogma, that the information may have come here on space ships, why;

1. You have tremendous data storage @ the chemical level for compaction.(they think about 3 GB of code for humans),smaller than any drive that man can build. By accidents -

2. You have a language convention between the data and the machines,(a triple code-interesting, but language convention requires intelligence, you can't run apps in the wrong basic), by accidents -

3. You have no write-heads in a cell, only READING heads.(a functional apparatus of high complexity and perfect efficiency)- by accidents

4. You have a replicating system in the cell and an archive (mDNA & RNA). What an accident!
If only poor old Johann Friedrich Miescher had read your post first. It would have saved him a lot of time. And Erwin Chargaff, well he would have been pissed off just the same, but maybe not if he had known that the one to one relationship of the DNA nucleotides he discovered was meaningless because DNA hadn’t been discovered yet. SBT, you are a fountain, neigh, a fountain of the deep of scientific information that no one knows.
Here is another piece of information that I didn’t know. I was not aware the Francis Crick had written a book called “Panaspermia.” In fact, I don’t think he wrote a book called “Panspermia” either. Now you are right, he did turn an interest to the origins of life and write a book called “Life Itself.” Maybe that was a mistake in the particular piece of propaganda you read before writing this poorly supported post.
In any event, you continue to make classical fundamentalist mistakes about evolution. Are you sure you aren’t in some sort of competition to see who can make the most mistakes? Evolution is not about the origin of life, but about how life had evolved from seemingly simple forms to more highly adapted forms.
I do find it amusing that you are willing to hitch your wagon to a meteor or a starship in an effort to refute the theory of evolution in support of your fundamentalist belief in the inerrancy of the Bible. I knew reading your post would be funny and you didn’t fail to deliver.

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95255 Jul 12, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
And yes, they issued warnings not to face to face public debate our side,(I saw copies of their mass mailings), it got too embarrassing for them, so they choose to stand off and mock instead.
Considering all the disinformation and completely misinterpreted information that make up the bulk of your posts, I am going call this bullshit for what it is. If you actually saw something it was probably more of the fabricated propaganda that seems to form the basis of your posts.

Stand off and mock instead? Funny how you recognize your own actions and then try to apply them to others. They should recognize that as a psychological phenomenon and give it a name like transference.

If anyone should be embarrassed, it is you. A high school kid could call you most of your so called facts. In fact, as long as you guys keep showing your ass, we will be able to produce high school kids that can do it.

I was thinking of putting all your posts together and then comparing the number of inconsistencies, errors and fictional information in it with the Bible and see which one wins. I am betting you will win hands down because at least the Bible is an attempt to understand.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#95256 Jul 12, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I fell for gravity on the very first encounter, but I couldn't stand her obsession with material things. She really brought me down.
Gravity sucks....

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95257 Jul 12, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Gravity sucks....
If only I had known that then.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#95259 Jul 13, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, you are aware that DNA is what cemented evolution in the scientific community, right?
<quoted text>
Ah, so evolution occurs it's just that a young Earth prevents change from accumulating. Well done. You have at least openly admitted you're a reality denier.
<quoted text>
Yes. By creationists. Chemistry is not accidental. If you combine hydrogen and oxygen you won't "accidentally" get platinum or gold.
<quoted text>
Actually if you accept "micro" evolution then you accept that the mechanisms have been replicated in the lab. At which point due to humans lasting only about 100 years as opposed to the 4.5 billion years of the Earth's existence, your ONLY argument then is "How do YOU know? Where you THERE?!?" Which means admitting to an arbitrary barrier to accumulative change.
<quoted text>
Which is why we can give examples of positive mutations, which will subsequently be ignored, because:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that invisible things are NOT clearly seen and your position rests upon Jewish magic. This means evidence is not relevant to your position no matter how much we provide since there is no problem that cannot be solved by throwing invisible Jewmagic at it. Of course even IF evolution was wrong we could also claim magic and it would be just as valid.
<quoted text>
Do a DNA test on you and your parents. Are all your genomes consistent with genetic drift? Then evolution has successfully passed that test. Observable, testable, verifiable, repeatable.
Now compare this with invisible Jewish magic. Is the DNA consistent with genetic drift? Then Goddidit. Is it not consistent with genetic drift? Then Goddidit. Doesn't matter. Now you see your problem.
You will not acknowledge it however since you've already demonstrated yourself to be yet another liar for Jesus.
<quoted text>
Invisible Jewmagic? It's not competing in the scientific arena. Only the public opinion arena. But as we already agreed, popular opinion has no bearing on a concept's reality.
<quoted text>
That's because fundies are dishonest in public debates. However in scientific debates those are the ones fundies shy away from. They're happy to write books on apologetics but not publish a science paper on invisible Jewmagic. They're supposed to be without excuse, right?
Actually, Homology, drawings of human evo like 'Piltdown man' and the now upsidedown horse series in nice diagrams did more to convince people than DNA ever did. DNA evidence wreaked them. SO now they scramble to title paper's on micro-bio something evo but when you read the content it's the opposite. There are letters and emails flying mentioning "don't let the other side see this".

The verse does mention 'invisible', like the complexity and design in the cell that allows life.

Variation in micro-evo just shows the creativity of God's designs, the ability to adapt throughout a range of environments, not changing 'kind'. If He would have not designed this way animal life would but pretty sparse in types and boring. Fact is evo can't be replicated nor observed nor working @ the cell level. So its not science. God says He added thorns and a more difficult childbirth at one point. Garden for a week sometime. He can add the genetic load of deterioration and did once so that's what we see in the genes. we don't have pure DNA now.
I am heading out of State now so later.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#95261 Jul 13, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, Homology, drawings of human evo like 'Piltdown man' and the now upsidedown horse series in nice diagrams did more to convince people than DNA ever did. DNA evidence wreaked them. SO now they scramble to title paper's on micro-bio something evo but when you read the content it's the opposite. There are letters and emails flying mentioning "don't let the other side see this".
The verse does mention 'invisible', like the complexity and design in the cell that allows life.
Variation in micro-evo just shows the creativity of God's designs, the ability to adapt throughout a range of environments, not changing 'kind'. If He would have not designed this way animal life would but pretty sparse in types and boring. Fact is evo can't be replicated nor observed nor working @ the cell level. So its not science. God says He added thorns and a more difficult childbirth at one point. Garden for a week sometime. He can add the genetic load of deterioration and did once so that's what we see in the genes. we don't have pure DNA now.
I am heading out of State now so later.
The baby Jebus cwies when you lie. Piltdown man had nothing to do with convincing people about evolution. Since he made no sense he was never incorporated in the theory. But, yes fossils that appear the way that the theory of evolution, like that of horse descent did convince people. Most thinking people had already accepted the theory of evolution be the time DNA was discovered.

What DNA has done since is to slam home the theory of evolution. The fossil record is enough to confirm the theory of evolution. DNA does that 1,000 times over.

There is a reason that science is done the way it is done. The main reason is that it works. Creationists can't even get started with a hypothesis that describes what we see in the world of biology and paleontology from a creationist point of view. Anything that they try to come up with is quickly debunked by observable facts. These same facts do not debunk evolution. They support it.

Do you realize what a problem your side has because of this?

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95262 Jul 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
The baby Jebus cwies when you lie. Piltdown man had nothing to do with convincing people about evolution. Since he made no sense he was never incorporated in the theory. But, yes fossils that appear the way that the theory of evolution, like that of horse descent did convince people. Most thinking people had already accepted the theory of evolution be the time DNA was discovered.
What DNA has done since is to slam home the theory of evolution. The fossil record is enough to confirm the theory of evolution. DNA does that 1,000 times over.
There is a reason that science is done the way it is done. The main reason is that it works. Creationists can't even get started with a hypothesis that describes what we see in the world of biology and paleontology from a creationist point of view. Anything that they try to come up with is quickly debunked by observable facts. These same facts do not debunk evolution. They support it.
Do you realize what a problem your side has because of this?
Watching SBT there has been an interesting progression of arguments with some basis in science to these later posts that are largely propaganda and lies.

Now I don't know him, but if I look at the "fossil" evidence preserved in this forum, I can get some idea of this person. Now, it isn't a complete picture of a whole group, but there is other "fossils" on this forum. If I get enough of the different "fossil" evidence here and maybe in other forums, I can formulate a theory or what I observe.

No, according to SBT, you can't do that. You have to feel and know the unobservable to be able to know anything. If he can't see it, feel it, know it, understand it or observe it in any objective way it must be so and it must be real.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#95263 Jul 13, 2013


Sam Harris Demolishes Christianity -- 11:23 and well worth every second.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#95264 Jul 13, 2013
Gillette wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =9X9iL2kKj2cXX
Sam Harris Demolishes Christianity -- 11:23 and well worth every second.
christianity pretty much demolishes christianity on its own...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#95265 Jul 13, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>christianity pretty much demolishes christianity on its own...
Hah!

Only if you think logically.

Debunk that point!

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#95267 Jul 14, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, Homology, drawings of human evo like 'Piltdown man' and the now upsidedown horse series in nice diagrams did more to convince people than DNA ever did. DNA evidence wreaked them. SO now they scramble to title paper's on micro-bio something evo but when you read the content it's the opposite. There are letters and emails flying mentioning "don't let the other side see this".
The verse does mention 'invisible', like the complexity and design in the cell that allows life.
Variation in micro-evo just shows the creativity of God's designs, the ability to adapt throughout a range of environments, not changing 'kind'. If He would have not designed this way animal life would but pretty sparse in types and boring. Fact is evo can't be replicated nor observed nor working @ the cell level. So its not science. God says He added thorns and a more difficult childbirth at one point. Garden for a week sometime. He can add the genetic load of deterioration and did once so that's what we see in the genes. we don't have pure DNA now.
I am heading out of State now so later.
"Upside down horse series"? This should be good.

Please do tell us all about the latest distortion / quote mine / deliberate obfuscation effort by the creationists, this time regarding the evolution of the horse. This should be good, I can't wait.

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) 2 min Princess Hey 167,107
2015: "Make a Story/ 6 Words Only: 5 min Grace Nerissa 1,906
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 15 min Jennifer Renee 12,680
News Teenage Clerks Brilliantly Foil Would-Be Robber 17 min Parden Pard 3
Make A Sentance out of a 5 letter word. (Nov '09) 22 min Cyan in CA 32,693
News Wandering turkey causes stir at University of M... 24 min Go Blue Forever 4
Fake book titles game (Feb '10) 45 min Spotted Girl 4,346
News J.C. Penney Employee Sent Home For Wearing 'Rev... 56 min Spotted Girl 16
Dedicate a song (Jul '08) 1 hr Princess Hey 16,015
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 2 hr june 42,100
More from around the web