Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 219597 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.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#96445 Aug 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree.
To make a anti-proton you need a very high energy collision. That should make a proton anti-proton pair. Once you make a proton to make hydrogen all you need to do is to expose it to the real world. It will strip an electron off of the first non-hydrogen atom that it sees. Of course hydrogen is plentiful, anti-hydrogen is not. So the antihydrogen gets all of the press.
Hydrogen cannot be created from nothing, what you are proposing is to rip something else apart twice at a expense of energy.
When it is much simpler to simply extract hydrogen, it's not like there's not enough of it around. Nuclear transmutation can create
one thing to another but when matter is not conserved, the mass and energy associated with matter are conserved.

http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/questions/j...
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#96446 Aug 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's your link: www.google.com
Do your own homework.
Yeah, just as I figured. Didn't think you had anything that you claimed or you would have blasted it all over the thread.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#96447 Aug 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Wonderful! Let's see the evidence.
Obviously, YOU are too hardhearted to 'see' anything of God.

I can't help you see it, you have to do it for yourself.

Told you that before, remember?

That's why it's called "personal relationship with God"....

not "group relationship with God".
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#96448 Aug 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Wonderful! Let's see the evidence.
Romans 1:20-22

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#96449 Aug 8, 2013
It took you two posts to say you really **DONT** have evidence for God?
Hulu

Chicago, IL

#96450 Aug 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you're being funny. Antihydrogen has a lifetime of 0.1 seconds. That's a 0.1 second of fame, but can be trapped for 16 minutes. lol
Now why aren't we producing hydrogen? do you know why antimatter and matter annihilate?
Were you born with this knowledge? Then it was learned and regurgitated. Yawn.........The Big Bang....Cosmic Dust....Apes........Really, thats it? Please, have the comprehension level to realize whats out there..........

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#96451 Aug 8, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Hydrogen cannot be created from nothing, what you are proposing is to rip something else apart twice at a expense of energy.
When it is much simpler to simply extract hydrogen, it's not like there's not enough of it around. Nuclear transmutation can create
one thing to another but when matter is not conserved, the mass and energy associated with matter are conserved.
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/questions/j...
And yet he says hydrogen is not being split in experiments at CERN. Your source does say that we can obtain a proton by stripping an electron from hydrogen. I don't know where he's coming up with proton anti-proton bonding with electron from non-hydrogen atom.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#96452 Aug 8, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, just as I figured. Didn't think you had anything that you claimed or you would have blasted it all over the thread.
Think whatever you like, jackass.

It isn't not my fault your too friggin lazy (or is it stupid?) to go to the university's web site and look for your buddy.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#96453 Aug 8, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, YOU are too hardhearted to 'see' anything of God.
I can't help you see it, you have to do it for yourself.
Told you that before, remember?
That's why it's called "personal relationship with God"....
not "group relationship with God".
Yeah, just as I figured. Didn't think you had anything that you claimed or you would have blasted it all over the thread.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#96454 Aug 8, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Romans 1:20-22
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
You think bible quotes constitute evidence??? No wonder you're so confused.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#96455 Aug 8, 2013
Hulu wrote:
<quoted text>Were you born with this knowledge? Then it was learned and regurgitated. Yawn.........The Big Bang....Cosmic Dust....Apes........Really, thats it? Please, have the comprehension level to realize whats out there..........
Why does it bore you when you haven't tried to comprehend them. If you think we're primitive, then how would we be able to comprehend what else is out there? Fail.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#96456 Aug 8, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, YOU are too hardhearted to 'see' anything of God.
I can't help you see it, you have to do it for yourself.
Told you that before, remember?
That's why it's called "personal relationship with God"....
not "group relationship with God".
Your main position is that you have a feeling. You want everyone else to have this feeling even when it goes against what is known. You are upset because others don't accept your feeling without question. You want to replace a fact-based educational system with a "your feeling-based" educational system that limits investigation into the evidence surrounding your feeling.

You don't even want to investigate or question yourself on what your feeling may mean or if it represents something real or just some feeling you have. When challenged with facts regarding the existence, understanding, validity, or position of your feeling you retreat behind your feeling and claim others are against you because of they refuse to know or understand your feeling.

Your feeling may explain your personal views, but it does not explain the personal views of everyone or the natural world as explained by evidence. This evidence doesn't refute your feeling though you are frightened that it does. The evidence would probably augment and enhance your understanding of your feeling and strengthen your personal position, but again fear and lack of understanding prevent this.
Hulu

Chicago, IL

#96457 Aug 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it bore you when you haven't tried to comprehend them. If you think we're primitive, then how would we be able to comprehend what else is out there? Fail.
Primitive indeed. Being able to comprehend whats in the cosmos......not even close!

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#96458 Aug 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet he says hydrogen is not being split in experiments at CERN. Your source does say that we can obtain a proton by stripping an electron from hydrogen. I don't know where he's coming up with proton anti-proton bonding with electron from non-hydrogen atom.
The violation of conservation of matter can be achieved but comes at a high price and we are very limited in what we can do.
Such as lead can be turned into gold by nuclear transmutation.
Hydrogen maybe created by tearing other elements apart, but the cost for theses things are ten magnitudes higher than what they are worth to extract by other means. But hydrogen cannot be created from nothing, that violate thermodynamics, and nothing we know of can violate the laws of thermodynamics.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#96459 Aug 8, 2013
Hulu wrote:
<quoted text>Primitive indeed. Being able to comprehend whats in the cosmos......not even close!
that's because we're trying to understand the universe by using the laws of physics in our world when there are other dimensions in the universe that probably has its own laws.

But we can get as much knowledge about our own world to further understand what other worlds exist.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#96460 Aug 8, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Hydrogen cannot be created from nothing, what you are proposing is to rip something else apart twice at a expense of energy.
When it is much simpler to simply extract hydrogen, it's not like there's not enough of it around. Nuclear transmutation can create
one thing to another but when matter is not conserved, the mass and energy associated with matter are conserved.
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/questions/j...
I think that pair production is still at the core of the collision process. They don't say it outright, but it is implied.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#96461 Aug 8, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet he says hydrogen is not being split in experiments at CERN. Your source does say that we can obtain a proton by stripping an electron from hydrogen. I don't know where he's coming up with proton anti-proton bonding with electron from non-hydrogen atom.
No, I was saying that anti-protons are made through collisions that make particle pairs.

To make anti-hydrogen you need a positron and an anti-proton.

Positrons are made in much lower energy collisions. The methodology is very similar. You have a target and a relatively high energy particle strike it. If the energy is at least, actually it has to be significantly higher, of the collision is the same as 2mc^2 where m is the mass of an electron you can make a electron positron pair.

Basic particles, when created out of energy from a collision, appear as the particle and its anti-particle. It is one of the parity laws of physics.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#96462 Aug 8, 2013
And in this Wiki article the basic collision is described:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiproton

A very high energy proton collides with a nucleus of an atom and creates a proton anti-proton pair:

p + A &#8594; p+-p +p+ A

The equation comes from the article, the anti-proton did not quite copy correctly so I put a minus sign in front of it, the bar on top of it did not come through.
Think about it

West Plains, MO

#96463 Aug 8, 2013
Entropy - the second law of thermodynamics - things decline over time.
Over time species have gone extent but we don’t have one recorded sample of a new species ever becoming but we have plenty examples of species going extinct. When I say species I mean a new kind of creature emerging to become.

Biogenesis – life only comes from other life, life does not arise from non-living material
The first cell of life came from nothing. We have never seen a cell come from anything but another cell. Now we see cells die but we have never seen a cell just become from nothing.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#96464 Aug 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I think that pair production is still at the core of the collision process. They don't say it outright, but it is implied.
We are not capable of producing energy levels needed to reproduce Big Bang nucleosynthesis, which is what is needed to produce hydrogen from virtual. That involves ZPE if we could produce that level of energy we could harness power on the scale of the universe.
We can barley harness the power of a star however infinitly briefly.
The next step is to harness the power of a galaxy. But not likely any time soon.

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
News Woman Busted After "Yelling Profanities And Thr... 2 min Laughing at Kelly 1
News Man's strange request for surgeon to remove tat... 3 min Tea Bag Residue C... 3
News Half-eaten shark washes ashore 5 min Tea Bag Residue C... 14
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 13 min -Sprocket- 13,171
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 14 min grace f a l l e n 211,527
Interesting Quotes (Jun '11) 15 min -Sprocket- 17,088
What is your weakness? (Jan '14) 17 min -Sprocket- 435
News Thousands of demonstrators protest Trump in Atl... 56 min A Voter 1,400
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 hr Bad Bex 71,291
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 2 hr Sue 3,260
What Turns You Off? 3 hr Suezanne 399
More from around the web