Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 171902 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.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#95865 Aug 1, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
As in this:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#sectio...
A 2010 survey published in Encyclopedia Britannica found that is atheists at about 2.0%.
Another study assessing religiosity among scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science found that "just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power.
Sociologist Philip Schwadel found that higher levels of education are associated with increased religious participation and religious practice in daily life.
According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, people describing themselves as "atheist" were 2% of the total population in the US.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_o...
According to the International Bulletin of Missionary Research, an academic journal, "about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new Muslims every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day."
Another survey attributed to Britannica shows the population of atheists at around 2.4% of the world's population
While there are more atheists than ever before as global population continually increases, the atheist percentage of the total population seem to be declining
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religi...
Sources outside of Wikipedia give differing estimates:
The CIA's World Factbook gives the world population as 7,021,836,029 (July 2012 est.) and the distribution of religions as Christian 33.39%(of which Roman Catholic 16.85%, Protestant 6.15%, Orthodox 3.96%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.74%, Hindu 13.8%, Buddhist 6.77%, Sikh 0.35%, Jewish 0.22%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 10.95%, atheists 2.01%
persecution. A 2006 study by researchers at the University of Minnesota involving a poll of 2,000 households in the United States found atheists to be the most distrusted of minorities,
In 2012, an article entitled Atheism in decline by Nigel Tomes declared:
In 1970 atheists (those avowing there is no God) numbered 166 million worldwide; that was almost one-in-twenty—4.5% of the globe’s population. By 2012 atheists’ number is estimated at 137 million. That’s a decline of almost 30 million. Since world population is growing, atheists’ share declined to less than one-in-fifty—under 2% in 2012. Put differently, every 24 hours there are 800 fewer atheists in the world! Atheism is in decline.
Well that of course is total rubbish.

The atheist population of one country alone, China with 42% of its population of 1.34 billion people being atheist, i.e. 5.2% of the world population. Then of course there are other countries.

30 to 40% of the European population of over 700 million people adds another 3 to 4% to this

Australia, Japan and Vietnam also have high atheist populations.

It seems that the CIA cannot add up.

93% members of the US NAS have a personal disbelief in god or have doubt/agnosticism
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm

In much of the world christianity is declining
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/1006...

Even in America
http://www.thankgodforevolution.com/node/2049

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#95866 Aug 1, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Not according to his own words both written and spoken.
<quoted text>An ambiguous reference to microbiology but no specifics from someone willing to claim a fictional call to an evolutionary biologist.
An outright lie about transitional forms which have been found for numerous fossils series.
Mayr and Gould huh? Wonder what Niles Eldredge would say about that as well as your dishonest and inaccurate portrayal of the theory.
<quoted text>Not really a point so much as a meaningless and misguided statement. I suppose technically any living animal is transitional in a sense unless it goes extinct. I have no reason to doubt Patterson's honesty. Boundaries in the DNA? You are so clueless on evolution and biology.

I have nothing to avoid that comes to mind. You have convinced me of your ignorance and dishonesty.
To be frank, your answers remind me of Atty Gen. Holder on the congressional witness stand when asked when he first learned of the 'Fast and Furious' operation. He responded; "I don't understand the question".

You are still avoiding the question concerning obvious failures of logic dealing with complexity and perfect molecular efficiency of the cell, showing convergent and common design from the very first bacteria on for supposedly 3.6 billion years. DNA for particular "kinds" have boundaries, the study I linked has finally locked your side out of its last and futile 'mutation' argument against ID in explaining life. A 3 dimensional code requires intelligence.

I wonder how many "possibly yes, possibly no" statements by Dr. Patterson were "edited" out of his last edition. It was his favorite comment on evolution.

http://www.garvan.org.au/news-events/news/the...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#95867 Aug 1, 2013
SBT wrote:
You are still avoiding the question concerning obvious failures of logic dealing with complexity and perfect molecular efficiency of the cell, showing convergent and common design from the very first bacteria on for supposedly 3.6 billion years. DNA for particular "kinds" have boundaries, the study I linked has finally locked your side out of its last and futile 'mutation' argument against ID in explaining life. A 3 dimensional code requires intelligence.
I wonder how many "possibly yes, possibly no" statements by Dr. Patterson were "edited" out of his last edition. It was his favorite comment on evolution.
http://www.garvan.org.au/news-events/news/the...
Five dimensions of pseudo-scientific bunkum, nothing more.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#95868 Aug 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So there was no explosion?
Definitely not a traditional explosion, chemical or nuclear. An explosive growth, yes, and explosion in the traditional way of ripping something apart, not so much.
So you also think stars don't explode when they die?
Some do, some don't. It depends upon how massive they are. Are sun is not massive enough to blow up.
What happens during a nuclear reaction in the stars?
They get hot. Most of the heat is radiated off in some sort of electromagnetic radiation. We have a technical name for that. We call it star-light.
What happened when hydrogen were fused to helium in the sun?
It got hot and started to emit that energy mostly as electromagnetic radiation. We have a technical term for that. It is called sunlight.
How did the sun form?
Here, they can do better than I can:

http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/su...

Long story short, the sun started as a huge cloud of gas and dust, possibly as a result of the shock wave of a supernova. The concentration of gas and dust was high enough that it started to collapse under the force of gravity. As it collapsed the unbalanced rotational inertial caused it, and its planets to rotate. As it collapsed its temperature went up too, I do believe that is Boyle's law, though you could use the ideal gas law to explain it. Eventually it got hot enough for fusion to take place inside our sun.

Can you explain how the "expansion" in the beginning of the universe happened?
Me, no. Perhaps a physicist could
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95869 Aug 1, 2013
youtubeNews wrote:
.

ISRAEL to give POPE "Custody" of Temple Mount --

http://youtu.be/Qt9kEQB4ti8

.
Pretty cool

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#95870 Aug 1, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Definitely not a traditional explosion, chemical or nuclear. An explosive growth, yes, and explosion in the traditional way of ripping something apart, not so much.
<quoted text>
Some do, some don't. It depends upon how massive they are. Are sun is not massive enough to blow up.
<quoted text>
They get hot. Most of the heat is radiated off in some sort of electromagnetic radiation. We have a technical name for that. We call it star-light.
<quoted text>
It got hot and started to emit that energy mostly as electromagnetic radiation. We have a technical term for that. It is called sunlight.
<quoted text>
Here, they can do better than I can:
http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/su...
Long story short, the sun started as a huge cloud of gas and dust, possibly as a result of the shock wave of a supernova. The concentration of gas and dust was high enough that it started to collapse under the force of gravity. As it collapsed the unbalanced rotational inertial caused it, and its planets to rotate. As it collapsed its temperature went up too, I do believe that is Boyle's law, though you could use the ideal gas law to explain it. Eventually it got hot enough for fusion to take place inside our sun.
<quoted text>
Me, no. Perhaps a physicist could
What is a traditional explosion? an atomic bomb? An explosion is an explosion whether we're talking about fission or fusion of atoms. It is clear that the theory of big bang implies some type of explosion.

Even the sun at this stage experience a type of explosion in its atmosphere. We call it solar storm or solar flare.

According to scientists, new elements are produced via nuclear reaction in the stars called nucleosynthesis. We have a technical term for that, we call it star dust. ;-)

“Rising”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#95871 Aug 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
What is a traditional explosion? an atomic bomb? An explosion is an explosion whether we're talking about fission or fusion of atoms. It is clear that the theory of big bang implies some type of explosion.
Even the sun at this stage experience a type of explosion in its atmosphere. We call it solar storm or solar flare.
According to scientists, new elements are produced via nuclear reaction in the stars called nucleosynthesis. We have a technical term for that, we call it star dust. ;-)
The difference my dear is simple imagine this.
Explosions are matter and energy, the release of the energy spreads matter out from a specific point of origin. This explosive effect can be traced to a specific location by following a trail of matter from ground zero out.

The expansion of the universe , is specifically free from matter and purely a real estate equation. The expansion of space/time itself free of a physical point and matter itself.
It is every point and no point specifically. It is free of matter and energy in the traditional way of sensing it.

The expansion of the universe is he creation of space.
Maybe this can help you understand.

http://vimeo.com/19602286
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95872 Aug 1, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no-one says there was an explosion, except people that don't understand the big bang theory...
Really?

About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm

Astronomers Detect Most Powerful Explosion Since Big Bang

18 May 1998

The energy released in a cosmic gamma-rayburst detected in December 1997 is the most energy ever detected from an explosion in theUniverse, perhaps making it the most powerful explosion since the creation of the Universe in the Big Bang.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/features/ne...

big bang

(bg)
The explosion of an extremely small, hot, and dense body of matter that, according to some cosmological theories, gave rise to the universe between 12 and 20 billion years ago.

Most astronomers now believe that the universe began around 12 billion years ago in a cataclysmic explosion we call the Big Bang

Most astronomers now believe that the universe began around 12 billion years ago in a cataclysmic explosion we call the Big Bang

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records-1...
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95873 Aug 1, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Both bad math and bad statistics! It's a two fer.

Your estimation of atheists in America is low by a factor of over 2. And no, 97.7% has not "left our congregation". Wherever did you come up with such a crazy number?

Lastly, atheism has nothing to do with evolution. Why do creatards think that you cannot accept the theory of evolution and Christianity at the same time?
Sub, these are not MY numbers these number are from the CIA (central intelligent agency) and by Encyclopedia Britannica and Pew Research Center.

There is nothing wrong with these numbers other then they deflate your ego.

2%. That's it, that's all the atheist can claim out of the whole worlds population 2%.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95874 Aug 1, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>So it's about money then?

Not that I'm surprised....
No but I'll take your money.:)
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95875 Aug 1, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Your numbers are terribly wrong and low.

Check out this more recent, more accurate, more thorough survey. Atheism is healthier than it ever has been:

http://www.wingia.com/web/files/news/14/file/...
Again they are not my numbers they are the numbers of 3 of the most respect agency.

Hard to take? 2%.

There it is 3 major agency.

The United States of America's Central Intelligent Agency.

the Pew Research Center

Encyclopedia Britannica
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#95876 Aug 1, 2013
Discord wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism has nothing to do with Evolution. Why would scientists support Evolution with no evidence?
I wonder if any of these religious zombies
have ever considered the possibility of
evolution being God's method of creation?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95877 Aug 1, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I imagine that that my actual religion of Christianity once represented only 2.3% of the population. I don't think it was a joke then just because of the number of people that followed it.

I wonder what went wrong in your life that you lost faith and decided to promote lies and attack people to feel better about yourself. Seems like that is an actual danger to Christianity and spreading much faster than atheism from what I see here.
Lies? Me? LOL

2% buddy that's fact.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#sectio...

A 2010 survey published in Encyclopedia Britannica found that is atheists at about 2.0%.

Another study assessing religiosity among scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science found that "just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power.

Sociologist Philip Schwadel found that higher levels of education are associated with increased religious participation and religious practice in daily life.

According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, people describing themselves as "atheist" were 2% of the total population in the US.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_o...

According to the International Bulletin of Missionary Research, an academic journal, "about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new Muslims every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day."

Another survey attributed to Britannica shows the population of atheists at around 2.4% of the world's population

While there are more atheists than ever before as global population continually increases, the atheist percentage of the total population seem to be declining

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religi...

Sources outside of Wikipedia give differing estimates:

The CIA's World Factbook gives the world population as 7,021,836,029 (July 2012 est.) and the distribution of religions as Christian 33.39%(of which Roman Catholic 16.85%, Protestant 6.15%, Orthodox 3.96%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.74%, Hindu 13.8%, Buddhist 6.77%, Sikh 0.35%, Jewish 0.22%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 10.95%, atheists 2.01%

persecution. A 2006 study by researchers at the University of Minnesota involving a poll of 2,000 households in the United States found atheists to be the most distrusted of minorities,

In 2012, an article entitled Atheism in decline by Nigel Tomes declared:

In 1970 atheists (those avowing there is no God) numbered 166 million worldwide; that was almost one-in-twenty—4.5% of the globe’s population. By 2012 atheists’ number is estimated at 137 million. That’s a decline of almost 30 million. Since world population is growing, atheists’ share declined to less than one-in-fifty—under 2% in 2012. Put differently, every 24 hours there are 800 fewer atheists in the world! Atheism is in decline.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#95880 Aug 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So there was no explosion? So you also think stars don't explode when they die? What happens during a nuclear reaction in the stars? What happened when hydrogen were fused to helium in the sun? How did the sun form?
Can you explain how the "expansion" in the beginning of the universe happened?
stars do explode, but they are not singularities. the workings of stars an fusion do not come into play as there were no atoms to fuse, there were no protons or electrons, there were not even any quarks.

all the cosmologists i have read say that is one of the greatest misconceptions about the big bang theory, that is was not an explosion like a supernova...
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#95881 Aug 1, 2013
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>I wonder if any of these religious zombies
have ever considered the possibility of
evolution being God's method of creation?
Does Evolution contradict the Bible?
Is it possible to believe in evolution and still be a Christian? If being a Christian means believing that the Bible is the authentic, trustworthy Word of God and that Christ is our Creator and Savior, the answer is “No.” One cannot believe these things and also believe in evolution as the explanation for the origin of life on our earth as we know it.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#95882 Aug 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> The difference my dear is simple imagine this.
Explosions are matter and energy, the release of the energy spreads matter out from a specific point of origin. This explosive effect can be traced to a specific location by following a trail of matter from ground zero out.
The expansion of the universe , is specifically free from matter and purely a real estate equation. The expansion of space/time itself free of a physical point and matter itself.
It is every point and no point specifically. It is free of matter and energy in the traditional way of sensing it.
The expansion of the universe is he creation of space.
Maybe this can help you understand.
http://vimeo.com/19602286
I don't get it. You call that simple? What do you mean by expansion of universe is free from matter, free of physical point?
What is the traditional way of sensing it?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#95883 Aug 1, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Does Evolution contradict the Bible?
Is it possible to believe in evolution and still be a Christian? If being a Christian means believing that the Bible is the authentic, trustworthy Word of God and that Christ is our Creator and Savior, the answer is “No.” One cannot believe these things and also believe in evolution as the explanation for the origin of life on our earth as we know it.
But the bible itself proves that your god is man-made myth...and jesus also.
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#95884 Aug 1, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
You make me laugh with your 'mind your 9th commandment' entries in just about all of your posts, lol!
What reason would creationists have to lie?
There is no monetary reward for believing in creationism.
On the other hand, Evo-scientists have a very lucrative, financial gain and motive for keeping their story spread.
(psssst...they get to keep their jobs)
No monetary reward?

Really? You mean that these fundamentalist preacher guys
and women like we see on the tube aren't getting monetary
rewards? Jeez, some of them have their own private jet
airplanes to fly around in. They live in mansions and
hang gold and diamonds of their blond bimbo wives. They're
shepherds with big flocks that they sheer every Sunday.

It's a damn good living.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#95885 Aug 1, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>stars do explode, but they are not singularities. the workings of stars an fusion do not come into play as there were no atoms to fuse, there were no protons or electrons, there were not even any quarks.
all the cosmologists i have read say that is one of the greatest misconceptions about the big bang theory, that is was not an explosion like a supernova...
I think I see what you're trying to say. There couldn't have been an explosion of any form in the beginning of time because matter was not formed yet. Is that right?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#95887 Aug 1, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I think I see what you're trying to say. There couldn't have been an explosion of any form in the beginning of time because matter was not formed yet. Is that right?
no,not at all, i was pointing out that your comparing it to stars exploding and nuclear fusion was ridiculous and showed you didn't even grasp the basic physics of the issue.

i thought i used simple language, obviously not simple enough...

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
Poll Topix threesomes (May '12) 7 min Crazy Jae 530
Dedicate a song (Jul '08) 9 min Wolftracks 16,052
*add A word / drop a word* (Nov '12) 9 min Alain Vain 10,179
Users:: (Jun '14) 10 min Crazy Jae 16
" Tell me a secret"...... (Oct '14) 15 min Crazy Jae 523
Has anyone on here told lies about you? (Dec '11) 17 min Princess Hey 228
What Could Be Sweet,...? (Sep '14) 17 min Crazy Jae 56
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 23 min Wolftracks 167,197
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 23 min Jennifer Renee 12,722
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 53 min andet1987 9,331
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 2 hr Thigh High Bex 42,109
More from around the web