Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 174077 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.

Dan

UK

#95519 Jul 24, 2013
haha, i love it when you are all arguing, so funny. 'im right' 'you couldnt be more wrong' 'your belief a joke'. you would think if there was one right answer, humans would have figured it out and come to an agreement, rather then argue because of their pride.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#95520 Jul 24, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Biological diversification from the same to opposite/incompatible biological reproductive species. Sorry, nature doesn't contradict its self, the theory of evolution does!
You can speak English if you try.

The biological diversification from a single species is explained by the theory of evolution. There is no contradiction.

So far you have totally failed to support your claim. A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You lose.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#95521 Jul 24, 2013
Dan wrote:
haha, i love it when you are all arguing, so funny.'im right''you couldnt be more wrong''your belief a joke'. you would think if there was one right answer, humans would have figured it out and come to an agreement, rather then argue because of their pride.
As far as science is concerned the answer has been found. There are always a few whackos that will deny the truth regardless of topic.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95522 Jul 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for the link SZ. I have been looking over this and some related articles and it appears to be methods papers comparing methodologies for construction of phylogenies using molecular techniques. I just wanted to see whether the BaTzar is just cutting and pasting spam without even a hint of understanding what he posted.

I am going to go over this when I get access to the full paper and other related work I found, but it appears to be more snatching at straws and misleading review of legitimate work.
Oh no dan has attempted to insult me with the old over used cut and past line.

dan can't you think for yourself at all?

I'll give you plenty of time to play catch up. Although I don't expect much from you.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95523 Jul 24, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>I don't care and I have nothing for religions. The theory of evolution is nothing but contradictions! It's not even an argument any more!
It never was.

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95526 Jul 24, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no dan has attempted to insult me with the old over used cut and past line.
dan can't you think for yourself at all?
I'll give you plenty of time to play catch up. Although I don't expect much from you.
In other words, you don't understand what you posted. Wouldn't have been simpler to post that then a dollop of rehashed juvenile insults.

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#95527 Jul 24, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
It never was.
Of course you have produced nothing to show that but lies and misinformation. Isn't it sad that that is the best you have. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#95528 Jul 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Of course you have produced nothing to show that but lies and misinformation. Isn't it sad that that is the best you have. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
And look who he has to use for an ally.

Infinite force is the third of our present batshit crazy posters on this forum.
Dak-Original

Slough, UK

#95529 Jul 25, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care and I have nothing for religions. The theory of evolution is nothing but contradictions! It's not even an argument any more!
Evolution of the specis is a fact beyond any doubt since the Human Genome Project circa 2003.Which "planet" are you living on?
Dak-Original

Slough, UK

#95530 Jul 25, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Biological diversification from the same to opposite/incompatible biological reproductive species. Sorry, nature doesn't contradict its self, the theory of evolution does!
Someone has misled you. Over a long period of time diversifications will and have occurred. It is all in the DNA! If you walk inot a DNA lab today....!LOL!

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#95531 Jul 25, 2013
Dak-Original wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone has misled you. Over a long period of time diversifications will and have occurred. It is all in the DNA! If you walk inot a DNA lab today....!LOL!
I wouldn't bother arguing with that poster.
He doesn't know how.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#95532 Jul 25, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Spam.
Didn't we just have a man with a ferret in?

He must have missed boarding up an entrance.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#95533 Jul 25, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
Biological diversification from the same to opposite/incompatible biological reproductive species. Sorry, nature doesn't contradict its self, the theory of evolution does!
The road goes both up AND down Infinite, I suggest you rethink your argument. And speaking of contadictions, love your avatar. Hypocrate much?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#95534 Jul 25, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
This argument has come to an end by implying the "Universal Law Of Non-Contradiction."
The theory of evolution is a contradictory philosophy and the scientific method is flawed!
By applying the universal law of non-contradiction (because nature does not contradict its self) you are either/or when it comes to a biological reproductive species.
Changing from one biological reproductive species to an opposite/incompatible biological reproductive species over time is a violation of the universal law of non-contradiction.
According to your reasoning, Latin changing into French would also be impossible. Just think. A modern French speaker cannot understand Latin. Yet there is an unbroken line of sons who could understand their fathers, with the tiniest changes accumulating incrementally over time.

That is how evolution works too. The analogy goes further.

A modern French speaker cannot understand an Italian or a Spaniard either. But they all came from the same root language (Latin), and gradually diverged as the relative isolation following the collapse of the Roman Empire allowed regional variations to compound over time.

Think isolated populations subject to different forces of natural selection and genetic drift over long periods.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95535 Jul 26, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>In other words, you don't understand what you posted. Wouldn't have been simpler to post that then a dollop of rehashed juvenile insults.
But not as fun.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95536 Jul 26, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Of course you have produced nothing to show that but lies and misinformation. Isn't it sad that that is the best you have. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
What would you like to know about dan?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95537 Jul 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>And look who he has to use for an ally.

Infinite force is the third of our present batshit crazy posters on this forum.
Contradictory Trees:
Evolution Goes 0 For 1,070

One of evolution’s trade secrets is its prefiltering of data to make it look good, but now evolutionists are resorting to postfiltering of the data as well. Evolutionists have always claimed that the different species fall into a common descent pattern forming an evolutionary tree. That is, the various traits—from the overall body plan down to the DNA molecular sequences—from the various species, consistently reveal the same evolutionary pattern. If one gene shows species A and B are closely related and species C is more distantly related, then the other genes will reveal the same pattern. Evolutionists call this consilience. In practice however, this consilience is superficial. There are profound contradictions between the different traits, and in a new attempt evolutionists just set a new record for failure: out of 1,070 genes, every single one contradicted the hoped for evolutionary tree, as well as each other. 1,070 different genes and 1,070 different evolutionary trees. Consequently evolutionists are now manipulating the data even more than before to obtain the desired results.

These days when evolutionists compare species they usually use molecular sequence data, such as genes. But what if a particular type of gene is found in species A but not in species B? Obviously this constitutes a big difference between these two species. It is not as though the gene merely is different to some extent. It is altogether missing from one of the species. Nonetheless, the typical strategy in such cases is simply to drop that particular gene from the data set. That big difference is, in a stroke, eliminated from the analysis. This is one type of prefiltering evolutionists use.

Prefiltering is often thought of merely as cleaning up the data. But prefiltering is more than that, for built-in to the prefiltering steps is the theory of evolution. Prefiltering massages the data to favor the theory. The data are, as philosophers explain, theory-laden.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95538 Jul 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>And look who he has to use for an ally.

Infinite force is the third of our present batshit crazy posters on this forum.
Part 2

But even prefiltering cannot always help the theory. For even cleansed data routinely lead to evolutionary trees that are incongruent (the opposite of consilience). As one study explained, the problem is so confusing that results “can lead to high confidence in incorrect hypotheses.” And although evolutionists thought that more data would solve their problems, the opposite has occurred. With the ever increasing volumes of data (particularly molecular data), incongruence between trees “has become pervasive.”

This problem became all the more obvious in a new study that examined 1,070 different genes found in a couple dozen yeast species (yes, the data were prefiltered). All those genes taken together produced one evolutionary tree, but each of the 1,070 different genes produced a different tree—1,070 plus 1 different trees. It was, as one evolutionistadmitted “a bit shocking.”

Or as another evolutionist put it,“We are trying to figure out the phylogenetic relationships of 1.8 million species and can’t even sort out 20 [types of] yeast.”

Clearly something is amiss and for evolutionists it cannot be the theory. That means it must be the data. The solution is postfiltering, to go along with the prefiltering. Whereas evolutionists once assured themselves that their problems would go away when more data became available, they now are headed in exactly the opposite direction.

What is needed now is less data. Specifically, less contradictory data. As one evolutionist explained,“if you take just the strongly supported genes, then you recover the correct tree.” And what are “strongly supported” genes? Those would be genes that cooperate with the theory. So now in addition to prefiltering we have postfiltering. We might say that the data now are theory-laden-laden. Evolutionists will be eliminating the uncooperative genes and retaining those genes with what evolutionists euphemistically refer to as “strong phylogenetic signals.”

Then they can tell us again that evolution is a fact because the evidence says so.

That’s just the stuff of good solid scientific investigation.

http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2013/06/contr...
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95539 Jul 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>And look who he has to use for an ally.

Infinite force is the third of our present batshit crazy posters on this forum.
http://www.rubak.com/article.cfm...

Exploding the Big Bang Theory

Originally, the Big Bang Theory was being used to explain the beginning of the universe. Now more and more people are seeing this huge event less as the actual beginning and more as a massive event unto itself. However, many still claim the Big Bang was the beginning of the universe and this article is evidence that this is probably a false claim.

This article will not involve any mathematical calculations or anything too difficult to understand. The purpose of this article is to explain in simple language why a "Big Bang" if they do exist, was not the creation of the universe.

First off we must explain the Big Bang Theory and then give the arguments that we will be dispelling.

The theory actually has multiple formations and differences in details depending on who you talk to.(Time frame, speed differences, etc.) However since we will be discussing the overall generalities and not the mathematical details, we won't bother with those differences.

The overall Big Bang theory states that the universe started from an incredibly dense singularity that exploded. All matter, light and energy came from that explosion. The size of the universe increases as everything expands from this explosion. The theory is that of an expanding universe, meaning that the universe as a whole is expanding, instead of a static universe meaning that matter is expanding into a statically sized space. The theory states that the size of the universe is equal to the speed of light (the item furthest away from the explosion as possible) times the age of the explosion. In simpler terms, the light created from the explosion is expanding in equal directions and they represent the edge of the universe.

That's it in a nutshell. Now let's look at the problems with this theory.

http://www.rubak.com/article.cfm...
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95540 Jul 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>And look who he has to use for an ally.

Infinite force is the third of our present batshit crazy posters on this forum.
Part 2

Issue #1: Problem of Size

First we must remember the definition of the term "universe". Basic definitions state: "Everything that exists anywhere", "The whole collection of existing things", "Everything stated or assumed in a given discussion", etc. That means all substance, energy and the space in between.

Regardless of the size of the universe, let's pretend that we are at the edge where the "universe defining light" is speeding its way out. Here's a simple question: Is the area 1/2 inch ahead of the light wave part of the universe? Of course it is. It's just as much a part of this universe as the space between the Sun and Earth is. Empty space is also a part of "everything that exists anywhere". No one would deny that.

OK, so if the area 1/2 inch ahead of the light wave is part of the universe, what about a foot ahead? What about a mile? What about a million miles? It's all empty space according to the theory.

Or is it? Remember, the current Big Bang theory is an expanding theory, not a static theory.

http://www.rubak.com/article.cfm...

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 2 (Sep '13) 4 min Jennifer Renee 13,443
last word/first word. (Apr '12) 4 min Mr_FX 6,363
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 5 min andet1987 29,556
Play "end of the name"... 7 min Mr_FX 410
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) (Dec '14) 7 min Judy 123 2,643
The Letter B (Jun '09) 9 min Mr_FX 5,392
Word Association (Jun '10) 10 min Mr_FX 28,942
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 50 min Sublime1 29,788
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 51 min streetglidehoney 44,088
2015: "Make a Story/ 6 Words Only: 57 min beatlesinthebog 2,609
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 hr Wolftracks 169,745
More from around the web