Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 168760 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.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#97847 Aug 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, that Kanned Ham. I thought he meant Hormel.
Is that the same Ken Ham who is in prison for tax fraud?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Birmingham, AL

#97848 Aug 17, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
I would rather try and bring your puddle of goo to life, than to try and make you look intelligent,...now THAT would be a miracle.
Uh-huh. Keep telling yourself that, peckerhead.

“Just because it is possible”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Doesn't mean it will happen.

#97849 Aug 17, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that the same Ken Ham who is in prison for tax fraud?
I think that is another canned ham, but with the same substance and value (or lack of).

It seems that the evolution of a fundamentalist movement is driven by financial selection.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#97850 Aug 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>A typo is an error. You repeated the same error throughout you post. I agree it is an error, but not that it is a typographical one.
You are just another spammer with nothing substantive to report. If you were serious about any sort of debate on the facts, you wouldn't post it like you were the Fonz. For sure dude.
It doesn't change the fact that you make assertions that it shows recent existence and fail to post evidence to support that it is.
Where is your evidence that supports the soft tissue form "monasaur"? Saying it is so isn't science "Mr. Science".
I do mean accepted scientific evidence regarding your post and not a double posted link to the T-rex story, or AIG, or any creationist website.
I see you are drowning and I would throw you a rope, but you wouldn't accept it because it is made of fibers from a plant that evolved.
Your overreactions are glaring, changing the subject isn't working.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#97851 Aug 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I think that is another canned ham, but with the same substance and value (or lack of).

It seems that the evolution of a fundamentalist movement is driven by financial selection.
My mistake. You're correct.

I was thinking of Hammy's buddy, Kent Hovind.
Just wondering

Oakland, CA

#97852 Aug 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, that Kanned Ham. I thought he meant Hormel.
In either case - the Ham appears to be half cooked ...
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#97853 Aug 17, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Pssss...... Gillette
Science got the date [of the "Cambrian Explosion] wrong too.
And even more shockingly, the only people who know this are a handful of American Protestant fundamentalist Christians who know nothing about science! Praise Cheeses! It's a miracle!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#97854 Aug 17, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, looks like there is more to it than talkorigins is telling you.
http://www.ksl.com/...
http://www.ksl.com/...
Now look at this, we have a Monasaur with soft tissue and dinner in his mouth in the high basin of South Dakota,(buried in turbidites), Plesiosaurs found the high deserts(4000 ft+)level in Oregon and Montana,(buried in turbidites), all dated around 70-80 MY. But wait a minute, when we find Mastodons in the same condition,(buried in turbidites), excavated in the same manner, in the same condition, evolutionists date them recent. But why? Both have soft parts? But wait! we have the geologic column to help us here, lucky us, Mastodons can't be that old!, they were not even around waaaaayyy back then, or were they? And of course we have to stick to this line of Dogma for the Jurassic, or the Column would be dead wrong, and that would be a publicity nightmare. Fossils are doing evolution in.
Now tell us how to bury a Monasaur while he's alive having dinner, "here nice little monasaur, lay your little head down and go nighty while you hav din din, and we will through some nice mud on you to sleep under, just like what happened to all your little Plesiosaur playmates today." That are 50ft long, sure.
No, it was the same world-wide catastrophe that got them all. Its over 4000 ft up there and there are Plesiosaurs found world-wide buried the same way. This is telling a story.
The Talkorigins link is discussing the same find as the one you link to.

The tissue was only "soft" after it was chemically rehydrated.

It's interesting that neither Mary Schweitzer nor any other scientist or scientific organization thinks the so-called "soft tissue findings" in ANY WAY refute the long history of evolution.

As Talkorigins says so pointedly, if you Jesus Freaks are right, then virtually EVERY fossil find would have flesh and blood dangling on it, etc. yet it's been found once out of many millions of fossil finds.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#97855 Aug 17, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go sucking zone! notice how your fellow idiot says exactly what you denied, quadrillions of shit coming together at the same time ,ha,ha,ha,. You damn fools will believe in anything
You hillbilly MORON...

Your claim was that only one single cell gave birth to all life on earth.

My response is that, in all likelihood, when life came together chemically in the oceans of the early earth, it was in countless trillions of different molecules at the same time.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#97856 Aug 17, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
The evolutionist is failing to mention to his audience that vertebrates constitute less than .01% of the entire fossil record, and of these fossils, most species are represented by a bone or less!1 What about the other 99.99% of the fossil record? That’s the other key piece of information the evolutionist is withholding from you. Complex invertebrates make up the vast majority of this portion of the record, roughly 95%. We have cataloged literally millions of different species of these very complex creatures, and we have entire fossils, not just pieces here and there. In this rich and virtually complete portion of the fossil record, there is not a single sign of evolution, whatsoever!!!
The lies come thinck and fast form you Jesus Freaks, don't they?

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC211.h...

Creationsit Claim CC211:

No fossils have been found transitional between invertebrates and vertebrates.

Response:

1. There are Cambrian fossils transitional between vertebrate and invertebrate:
• Pikaia, an early invertebrate chordate. It was at first interpreted as a segmented worm until a reanalysis showed it had a notochord.
• Yunnanozoon, an early chordate.
• Haikouella, a chordate similar to Yunnanozoon, but with additional traits, such as a heart and a relatively larger brain (Chen et al. 1999).
• Conodont animals had bony teeth, but the rest of their body was soft. They also had a notochord (Briggs et al. 1983; Sansom et al. 1992).
• Cathaymyrus diadexus, the oldest known chordate (535 million years old; Shu et al. 1996).
• Myllokunmingia and Haikouichthys, two early vertebrates that still lack a clear head and bony skeletons and teeth. They differ from earlier invertebrate chordates in having a zigzag arrangement of segmented muscles, and their gill arrangement is more complex than a simple slit (Monastersky 1999).

2. There are living invertebrate chordates (Branchiostoma [Amphioxus], urochordates [tunicates]) and living basal near-vertebrates (hagfish, lampreys) that show plausible intermediate forms.

Links:

Monastersky, Richard, 1999. Waking up to the dawn of vertebrates. Science News 156: 292. http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc99/11_6_99/f...
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#97857 Aug 17, 2013
As a longtime Topix poster, a retired professional geologist named FossilBob used to say (about these Creationist "science websites"):

"They know that you don't know, and they know that you won't check."

And so the Christian lies, distortions, creative "omissions" etc., get passed on over and over again by sheeple like you guys.

“Just because it is possible”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Doesn't mean it will happen.

#97858 Aug 17, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Your overreactions are glaring, changing the subject isn't working.
In other words, you have nothing.

Why don't you just make some more shit up.

“Just because it is possible”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Doesn't mean it will happen.

#97859 Aug 17, 2013
Gillette wrote:
As a longtime Topix poster, a retired professional geologist named FossilBob used to say (about these Creationist "science websites"):
"They know that you don't know, and they know that you won't check."
And so the Christian lies, distortions, creative "omissions" etc., get passed on over and over again by sheeple like you guys.
FossilBob knows what he is talking about. Does he still post on here. I haven't seen him since last year.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U Will Never Know

#97860 Aug 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>In other words, you have nothing.
Why don't you just make some more shit up.
Hey Dan you need to lay off that devil in the bottle before you end up like this poor soul.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#97861 Aug 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>FossilBob knows what he is talking about. Does he still post on here. I haven't seen him since last year.
I talk to him on FB. I've not seen him on Topix lately, I think.

“Just because it is possible”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Doesn't mean it will happen.

#97862 Aug 17, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, looks like there is more to it than talkorigins is telling you.
http://www.ksl.com/...
http://www.ksl.com/...
Now look at this, we have a Monasaur with soft tissue and dinner in his mouth in the high basin of South Dakota,(buried in turbidites), Plesiosaurs found the high deserts(4000 ft+)level in Oregon and Montana,(buried in turbidites), all dated around 70-80 MY. But wait a minute, when we find Mastodons in the same condition,(buried in turbidites), excavated in the same manner, in the same condition, evolutionists date them recent. But why? Both have soft parts? But wait! we have the geologic column to help us here, lucky us, Mastodons can't be that old!, they were not even around waaaaayyy back then, or were they? And of course we have to stick to this line of Dogma for the Jurassic, or the Column would be dead wrong, and that would be a publicity nightmare. Fossils are doing evolution in.
Now tell us how to bury a Monasaur while he's alive having dinner, "here nice little monasaur, lay your little head down and go nighty while you hav din din, and we will through some nice mud on you to sleep under, just like what happened to all your little Plesiosaur playmates today." That are 50ft long, sure.
No, it was the same world-wide catastrophe that got them all. Its over 4000 ft up there and there are Plesiosaurs found world-wide buried the same way. This is telling a story.
Why is it so hard to believe that a MOSASAUR could die mid-meal? You act like that it is an impossibility or something. Does eating convey invulnerability to the eater? People have died mid-bite often enough. You like to pose ridiculous questions don't you. You just throw out several bales of straw and start typing. Just because the Matosaur was found with a meal doesn't mean that the initial steps on its way to becoming a fossil happened absolutely simultaneously. This madasaur could have killed its prey, died in turn and then subsequently sank and become buried. We don't really know the specific details of the death of animals whose remains become fossils including including this magosaur, but your hyperbolic chitter chatter doesn't alter the facts of evolution.

I have more on the mamosaur, matosaur, oh yeah, MOSASAUR. Don't fret I will get you straightened FOR SURE DUDE.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#97863 Aug 17, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>there's a big problem with that story, and the one about Adam & Eve, there's not enough genetic diversity to start a population. but hey, one of the basic precepts of fundamentalism is the suspension of scientific knowledge..
LOL

Think for one minute. Evolution believes that all life came from one cell. What about that genetic diversity?

Adam and Eve had perfect DNA intelligently designed to populate the world.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#97864 Aug 17, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Too late moron, I admitted that error about 12 hours ago.
Yes I say that after I posted this for the second time.

“Rising”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#97865 Aug 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I talk to him on FB. I've not seen him on Topix lately, I think.
He announced his quitting topix , seems like about 6 months ago but may have been a little longer.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#97866 Aug 17, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>What a complete tard.

The meaning of names changes over time. At that time "races" was almost identical to today's "species".

If you would bother to have read it, or at the very least not used a creatard website for your info you might have known this.
"William Crawley | 07:04 UK time, Friday, 13 February 2009

It will come as a surprise to historians of science if it's shown that he was, since the great naturalist has recently been lauded as an abolitionist whose detestation of slavery is an under-acknowledged motivation for his scientific work. According to Henry McDonald's piece in yesterday's Guardian, an MLA has suggested that Darwin was a "racist".

Mervyn Storey argues that Darwin's language in The Descent of Man would earn disapproval today. This is undoubtedly the case. Darwin certainly referred to Aboriginal people as "savages". There is also the language of "favoured race" in Origin of Species. But that language would not have raised an eyebrow in the nineteenth century; as always with historically placed language, we must be careful about extending our contemporary sensitivites to the past. Some of the language of the Bible would appear deeply objectionable by our contemporary lights."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/2009/02/was_cha...

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
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 10 min harley honey 41,354
Obama Touts 13 min Hoosier Hillbilly 1
keep a word drop a word (Sep '12) 17 min _FLATLINE-------- 8,830
A To Z Of Movies (Sep '12) 18 min Princess Hey 5,156
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 19 min _FLATLINE-------- 8,527
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 21 min Sublime1 165,296
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 27 min _FLATLINE-------- 79,441
Poll Should Hoosier Hillbilly leave Weird? 31 min Princess Hey 36
News Teen Leads Mob In Ransacking Of Georgia Walmart 52 min argylesock14 26
motorcycle traveling stories 1 hr harley honey 1,231
More from around the web