Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.
Comments
92,521 - 92,540 of 114,516 Comments Last updated 3 min ago

“I'm Your Huckleberry ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

That's Just My Game

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97926
Aug 18, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution does not claim that. That is a mischaracterization of what evolution says. In fact once you define a clade all of the offspring, no matter how many generations down the road, still belong to the same clade.
The problem is that I see creationists always refer to "kinds" without ever properly defining them.
I was a bit trickier earlier and exploited Tzar's ignorance. I asked if bacteria were a "kind". He said yes. Since there is more diversity in bacteria than all of plant, animals, fungi, and I forgot protozoa, that means all of the eukaryotes can be said to be one kind.
In fact from an intelligent bacteria's point of view all animals would look pretty much the same. A creationist one would have no problem with animals evolving since there would be no change of kind. They would still be animals.
I did not speak of kinds. I spoke of change. To put it bluntly evolution is merely change over time. Like I said no one can deny change with/over time. Everything changes, hell even time changes as we go on.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97927
Aug 18, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Something to do with the poverty in China. I am going to bed so I am not going back to look them up tonight. Be my guest and you can do it or I will next time I am on.
The problem with those is that they were very recent studies. Wiki is, as I said, not the best for very recent info. On settled science it is pretty accurate.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97929
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Darwin looked forward with eager anticipation “at no very distant date” when an “endless number of lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world”(emphasis added). It was not enough in his mind that the European powers through their colonial empires ruled over and dominated these inferior races, but it was his hope and anticipation that they would be actually eliminated—exterminated (can you say “genocide” or “holocaust”?) by the superior whites, and sooner rather than later. Darwinism is not merely in harmony with Arian supremacy, Nietzscheism, Nazism, eugenics, and genocide; it is their foundation and justification. Indeed, there are demonstrable philosophical and intellectual links between Darwin’s hypothesis of “natural selection” and “the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life”(to quote the subtitle of The Origin of Species) with all of these evils, and more.
In another revealing moment, Darwin wrote about one species of ant enslaving another species:“I have seen a migration from one nest to another of the slave-makers, carrying their slaves (who are house, and not field n_____s) in their mouths!”(Darwin, p. 191; emphasis in original). Such was his condescending contempt for non-whites.
Darwin was a malignant racist and Darwinism is inherently racist. I wonder if all those non-Caucasian individuals now residing in England consider these things—or are even aware of them—when they spend their ten-pound notes, which sport a portrait of Darwin. And what do the tourists who view his grave in an honored place in Westminster Abbey think about these things? Likely nothing at all.
http://sharperiron.org/charles-darwin-racist
I note you don't actually quote what Darwin actually said.

I wonder why?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97930
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny. Did you know evolutionist find the fossils and date them
And now I expect you to trot out the usual creationist fallacy about index fossils. Wrong again.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97931
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
CROSSROADS BIBLE COLLEGE, Ind.- Darwin's book on human evolution, The Descent of Man, revealed him as what John West calls "a virulent racist."
"He did write extensively about how evolution by natural selection creates unequal races, and that in the evolutionary scheme of things, blacks are the closest to apes," he explained. West is the author of Darwin Day in America.
"It's not just residual racism," he added. "He's using his scientific theory as a justification for racism and countless scientists after Darwin latched on to that."
Hosea Baxter directs reconciliation ministries at Crossroads Bible College. He says racism had always been around, but Darwin gave it an air of scientific legitimacy.
"Darwinism is one of the most dangerous ideas in the world today," Baxter claimed.
"Blacks and Native Americans would be portrayed as savages, ignorant or people who could not be civilized [and had] no hope of being civilized," he added.
Making Racism 'Popular'
Baxter works with Charles Ware. He and Ken Ham co-authored Darwin's Plantation: Evolution's Racist Roots. They contend Darwin did more than anyone else to popularize racism.
On the last page of his book, Darwin expressed the opinion that he would rather be descended from a monkey than from a "savage."
In describing those with darker skin, he often used words like "savage," "low" and "degraded" to describe Native Americans, pygmies and almost every ethnic group whose physical appearance and culture differed from his own. In his work, pygmies have been compared to "lower organisms."
One professor in the 1880s wrote, "I consider the negro to be a lower species of man and cannot make up my mind to look upon him as 'a man and a brother,' for the gorilla would then also have to be admitted into the family."
"Since blacks were somewhere in the evolutionary scale between apes and men, they did not have souls," Ware explained. "And since they didn't have souls, some argued,'We don't even have to preach the gospel to them.'"
http://m.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2009/February/Con...
Your ad hominem attacks on Darwin are merely bottom of the barrel nonsense.

Racism long preceded any evolutonary theory and you know it.

Furthermore anyone who understands evolution will know that every race of man is exactly equally removed from the common ancestor with chimps. That is how a nested hierarchy works.

If Darwin was a racist, he was like everone else in his day. However he was dead against slavery. Even Lincoln said things about other races that would make a bigot blush today. No doubt they were both sexist and classist too like everyone back then.

Furthermore the word race was used as a synonym for species by Darwin as in the human race.

Attacking Darwin is still not going to discredit the theory of evolution no matter how you try. Its feeble.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97932
Aug 18, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
Sorry, I tend to ignore copy and paste from sites that have been shown to lie in almost every article.
Tsar, why don't you see if you can find some real scientific articles that back up your claims.
My guess is that he thinks he's "winning" when he copies and pastes 15 sentences at a time that are (both singularly and in total) too inane or fictitious to merit a reply. It seems to be a common misconception among creatard "debaters" and testifies to their intrinsic dishonesty.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97934
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
You are clueless. And gullible.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97935
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolutionary beliefs are constantly being reinforced by racist stereotypes published in news reports, on television and in our kids textbooks.
Look at the subliminal imagery that appeared once again with news reports about Homo floresiensis.3 Nicknamed the Hobbit, its bones were discovered in Indonesia in 2003, and it has been claimed to be a sub-human species.
Graphic images of this so-called pre-human hominid have been widely published on the web (just Google images of ‘The Hobbit’ and you will find plenty). Notice that these images all portray the Hobbit as … naked, primitive and black. Of course it’s black—it’s a pre-human.
http://creation.mo bi/evolution-is-inherently-rac ist
Humanity began as black, dumbass.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97936
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Building a 'Better Breed'
Slavery and segregation kept the races apart, but maybe even more dangerous was how Darwin's theories led to active eugenics.
"[It's] the idea of trying to breed a better human being, often by trying to get the people considered defective not to be able to breed or have children," Baxter explained. "And this was a worldwide phenomenon but the U.S. really pressed it further than anyone else until Nazi Germany."
It led to the forced sterilization of 70,000 Americans, many of them blacks.
Then along came Margaret Sanger, founder of what would become Planned Parenthood.
"Margaret Sanger was very Darwinian and very much inspired by this overall idea," Ware said.
"Part of the impetus behind abortion was to annihilate the black race," Baxter added.
The 'Concern' of Interracial Marriage
There were also many laws to keep blacks from marrying whites. Baxter says lawmakers were made afraid by arguments in books like 1907's Race Mongrels.
"If we don't create this separation of the races, we're going to create this mongol race, this race of, say, retards," Baxter said of the book's content.
But Ware, the father of four interracial children, says that fear was ridiculous.
"People used to say interracial marriage is horrible.[That] it's going to destroy racial groups," he said. "It hasn't destroyed anything. We're still human beings."
http://m.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2009/February/Con...
700 Club, Huh? You really are gullible.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97937
Aug 18, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? You don't know?
Because that's where they were created. And there light was created all the way to us.
In the beginning God said let there be light. And there was light.
You are challenging God who spoke everything into existence. That's pretty powerful. I wouldn't want to be in your shoes come judgement day.
http://youtu.be/rkgunX_Sa_0
The "God faked everything to fool us" is one of my favorite stupid fundie arguments.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97938
Aug 18, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Humanity began as black, dumbass.
I don't remember any rational people labeling the Hobbit as "subhuman", they thought it was a separate species of hominid.

kind of points out the total whackjobs Tzar listens to...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97939
Aug 18, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
700 Club, Huh? You really are gullible.
the same people who said Katrina and the Haiti earthquake were punishments from a proven mythical god...

yeah, the Tzar has some real credibility....

Level 2

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97940
Aug 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Almighty Tzar wrote:
You are challenging God who spoke everything into existence. That's pretty powerful. I wouldn't want to be in your shoes come judgement day.
Personally I'd find it a blessing to be left behind on judgement day. An Earth without evangelicals sounds like heaven.

Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97941
Aug 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Good, then all animals, all plants, and all fungi are another kind.

The diversity of bacteria is greater than the diversity of all of these put together:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...
Nope.

bacteria is one kind.
Dogs, wolves, etc. is one kind
Cats is a kind
Trees are one kind
Grass is one kind

Makes no difference how diverse bacteria is they are one kind.

But here a new updated category for you.

Evolutionist are of the ape kind
The rest of humanity are of the man kind.

This has been changed to reflect your dying aspiration to be a monkey.
Gm man

Western Springs, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97942
Aug 18, 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.
Humans a direct product(learned behavior) of their surrounings and environment. Monkey see, monkey do....after all they evolved from apes....? Or, star dust or something? God or Gods created all this? Humans are eaisly brainwashed.....look around. They only focus on what directly in front of them while billions of "earthlike" planets orbit around them. The human mind can not comprehend nor wants to know what out there......to scary!

Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97943
Aug 18, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You're not even a useful tool.
http://youtu.be/rkgunX_Sa_0

Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97944
Aug 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>So once again you are admitting that you believe in a God that lies.

The light that was already "on its way" could not be light from any star since that light will take from 4 years for the closest of stars to billions of years for the oldest of stars to get here.

He also made the asteroids rotate as if the solar system was billions of years old. Now I have heard of attention to details when telling a whopper, but that is quite extreme.
You know your an idiot right?
You really believe God could not make a star and have its light shine out lightyears ahead of it?

He spoke everything into existence Including light. But deep down you know this.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97945
Aug 18, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the same people who said Katrina and the Haiti earthquake were punishments from a proven mythical god...
yeah, the Tzar has some real credibility....
The only credibility he has is from paying his utility bills on time.

Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97946
Aug 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>So once again you are admitting that you believe in a God that lies.

The light that was already "on its way" could not be light from any star since that light will take from 4 years for the closest of stars to billions of years for the oldest of stars to get here.

He also made the asteroids rotate as if the solar system was billions of years old. Now I have heard of attention to details when telling a whopper, but that is quite extreme.
Your science is real good in this department.

"We have found that this is the oldest known star with a well-determined age," said Howard Bond of Pennsylvania State University in University Park, Pa., and the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, Md.
The star could be as old as 14.5 billion years (plus or minus 0.8 billion years), which at first glance would make it older than the universe's calculated age of about 13.8 billion years, an obvious dilemma.

Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97947
Aug 18, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>It occurs to me and maybe somebody else has thought about this, but if the universe is only 6,000 years old, then we would only be seeing light from the earliest stars just now right. Starting 6000 years ago, we would have started seeing new stars come into existence as time progressed so that the night sky today would not look like it did back then. Stars would have been winking on regularly throughout that time wouldn't they? I wonder what the fundie answer to this is. Probably some sort of magic action by God, to fool humans or make them think the universe is older.
Boy are you slow.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••