Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#98338 Aug 21, 2013
Croco_Duck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's great, but where did the original fish come from? God didn't put them there and neither did man. It's okay to say you don't know. Scientists do that all the time.
Actually, many fresh water species of today were results of being stranded as ocean dwellers as oceans shifted and receded.

“HATRED EATS THE SOUL OF”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

THE HATER -- NOT THE HATED

#98339 Aug 21, 2013
Croco_Duck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's great, but where did the original fish come from? God didn't put them there and neither did man. It's okay to say you don't know. Scientists do that all the time.
Nature uses nature to spread life. Take the Grey Herring (or the herring family) that thrive on fresh water fish and frogs ect. They carry a little of those eggs and maybe even very small minnows in their mouth as they fly from pond to pond or pond to lake. When they get there and shove their mouth in the water again some washes out in the water, result is very small minnows or eggs will be put in that water from the mouth of the herrings. I don't have a link for this but I have read about that and also of storms, tornadoes sucking fish and eggs, frogs and eggs out of lakes and ponds as they go over them and then carries them miles away sometimes before they fall back to earth and maybe they end up in a pond or lake that prior had no fish. Google raining frogs.
spOko

Oakland, CA

#98340 Aug 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Nature uses nature to spread life.
Duh! how profound :-)
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Take the Grey Herring (or the herring family) that thrive on fresh water fish and frogs ect. They carry a little of those eggs and maybe even very small minnows in their mouth as they fly from pond to pond or pond to lake. When they get there and shove their mouth in the water again some washes out in the water, result is very small minnows or eggs will be put in that water from the mouth of the herrings. I don't have a link for this but I have read about that and also of storms, tornadoes sucking fish and eggs, frogs and eggs out of lakes and ponds as they go over them and then carries them miles away sometimes before they fall back to earth and maybe they end up in a pond or lake that prior had no fish. Google raining frogs.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98341 Aug 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
And you say you can read context? lol. It is obvious ole paranoid thought bohart was me and then I comment on him being paranoid and he comments back to you "Is it paranoia, when it is true?"
I thought you were smarter. On that thought "I was wrong"
Still clueless. Such a shame.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98342 Aug 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>I can think of only one functional definition of "species". And having too many definitions is better than having none. There is no functional definition of "kind" as used by creatards.

What is a kind? Try to be consistent. If bacteria are a kind then eukaryotes are a kind. Which means that creatards are once again hoisted by their own petard.
I have found over 26 definitions for the word 'species'

http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2006...

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#98343 Aug 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Poor bohart is an idiot at best.
He gets angry when his superstitions beliefs are challenged. I am always happy to supply evidence when requested. Since creationists have none a request for evidence tends to drive them a bit batty.
Poor sucking my bone,...he gets angry when his superstitious belief of how life began is called out for the bullshit it is.

I hereby request evidence of how the first life came about using the scientific method.
Observable,
testable,
repeatable.

and please don't ask me to view a cartoon

You don't have it, then you've lied about your evidence

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98344 Aug 21, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Poor sucking my bone,...he gets angry when his superstitious belief of how life began is called out for the bullshit it is.
I hereby request evidence of how the first life came about using the scientific method.
Observable,
testable,
repeatable.
and please don't ask me to view a cartoon
You don't have it, then you've lied about your evidence
You complete tard!

Since abiogenesis is still in the hypothetical stage and there are competing hypotheses means we are not sure which is the path that life took.

Second abiogenesis is not evolution. They are related but different sciences. For evolution to be true we don't need abiogenesis to be natural. We do have a surfeit of evidence that evolution occurred.

Why do you focus on abiogenesis moron? Do you think that if you disprove it that will disprove evolution? You won't. Even your precious God could have made the first life. For the theory of evolution it makes no difference.

The evidence so far points to abiogenesis.

And since you could not even understand a "cartoon" I don't see the point in linking any other evidence for you.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98345 Aug 21, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
I have found over 26 definitions for the word 'species'
http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2006...
Idiot, that is not "26 different definitions for the word 'species'". Those have 26 different prefixes. The word "species" is part of a phrase, it is not 26 different definitions.

They get dumber every day.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#98346 Aug 21, 2013
Unfortunately I do have to work a bit and make a living.

I hope that blowfart is around when I get back. Odds are he will spew some unsupported idiocy and run away.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98347 Aug 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>I can think of only one functional definition of "species". And having too many definitions is better than having none. There is no functional definition of "kind" as used by creatards.

What is a kind? Try to be consistent. If bacteria are a kind then eukaryotes are a kind. Which means that creatards are once again hoisted by their own petard.
Darwin's claimed macro evolution which means one kind producing another kind.
Not bacteria evolving into bacteria, birds evolved in to birds and if the bird was a finch the NEW SPECIES is still a finch. insects evolving into insects and if it was an ant it's still an ant and if it was a fly its still a fly.
Turning on or off genes is nothing amazing. God put those genes there for animals or insect ect. To adapt to changing environments. It's a little like an electrician wiring the house so you can turn lights on when it gets dark. It's called planning ahead. Intelligent design. Every time a species has been isolated you claim a new species evolves. The fact is EVERY time the DNA has gotten shorter NEVER new DNA just different switches turn on an off and other genes lost for ever because adaptation is no longer needed. As a result these "NEW" species are on the short road to extinction.

Why do you observe these facts and still believe in macro evolution?
And you claim not to be religious.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98348 Aug 21, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Can I list a few myths that you guys seem to have permanently latched onto??

Of course I can.

The following are Biblical myths:

Creation 6,000+- years ago
Adam and Eve....this has repercussions for Jesus
Noah's flood
The Tower of Babel
Moses writing the Pentateuch
Moses
The Exodus, and all the attendant magik or 'miracles'
Abraham
Lot
Known Writers of the Gospel
They are not myths.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98349 Aug 21, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, I almost forgot the biggest myth....God
Well at least you capitalized God.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98350 Aug 21, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>Sucking zone is right about one thing, to believe in these myths is idiocy
Yes in deed.
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98351 Aug 21, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>Its probably correct. Since plants and animals share a eukaryote ancestor and that ancestor probably had chloroplasts and could photosynthesise then at least technically animals would have evolved from plants! But its not like a daffodil suddenly sprouted a mouth and legs.
How do you get from plants to animals?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98352 Aug 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>That analogy hold true as much as saying,
Bicycles have wheels with spokes, the space shuttle had wheels with spokes. The space shuttle evolved out of a bicycle.

The main flaw is that we don't know that plants evolved before animal life, and the evidence suggests that animal life came before plants. A type of seaweed may precede animal life , but seaweed isn't really a plant. It's better to say photosynthesis came before
cellular respiration. But for what we relate to as being plant and animal life most likely evolved somewhat together.
"but seaweed isn't really a plant"

Really? What is it?
Level 1

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#98353 Aug 21, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, many fresh water species of today were results of being stranded as ocean dwellers as oceans shifted and receded.
From the flood.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#98354 Aug 21, 2013
bohart wrote:
Poor sucking my bone,...he gets angry when his superstitious belief of how life began is called out for the bullshit it is.
I hereby request evidence of how the first life came about using the scientific method.
Observable,
testable,
repeatable.
and please don't ask me to view a cartoon
Go find some rock 3.5 billion years old. Observe if it has early life.

No go find some rock 4 billion years old. Try and find any signs of life.

Note how the validity of evolution still remains unaffected.
bohart wrote:
You don't have it, then you've lied about your evidence
Booboo, why are you, a known and confirmed liar accusing other people of lying?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#98355 Aug 21, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Darwin's claimed macro evolution which means one kind producing another kind.
Does it? WTF is a kind?
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
Not bacteria evolving into bacteria, birds evolved in to birds and if the bird was a finch the NEW SPECIES is still a finch. insects evolving into insects and if it was an ant it's still an ant and if it was a fly its still a fly.
And this is where your "kind" definition falls down, since if bacteria can evolve into different species of bacteria, remember that bacteria represent an entire biological ORDER.
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
Turning on or off genes is nothing amazing.
But amazingly, birds have teeth.

Oh wait...
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
God put those genes there for animals or insect ect.
What God? Evidence please.

Oh wait - evidence doesn't matter since no evidence contradicts Goddidit.
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
To adapt to changing environments. It's a little like an electrician wiring the house so you can turn lights on when it gets dark. It's called planning ahead. Intelligent design. Every time a species has been isolated you claim a new species evolves. The fact is EVERY time the DNA has gotten shorter NEVER new DNA just different switches turn on an off and other genes lost for ever because adaptation is no longer needed.
Plain incorrect. Sorry.
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
As a result these "NEW" species are on the short road to extinction.
Sure. Even when their populations increase. I suppose everything is headed to extinction when one considers the sun's gonna get everything eventually, yeah.
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
Why do you observe these facts and still believe in macro evolution?
And you claim not to be religious.
Due to the evidence you are unable to address in favour of your caricature version of evolution.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Tempe, AZ.

#98356 Aug 21, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Well at least you capitalized God.
Just trying to be nice....while ripping your dogma to shreds .:-)

Level 2

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#98357 Aug 21, 2013
The Dude wrote:
Land changes, gets flooded, and leaves aquatic animals stranded in lakes and ponds. Barring recent artificial introduction this is why you'll only get certain animals in certain places.
A new man made lake where fish suddenly appeared...

"There are fish appearing in these lakes as well. Fish eggs cling to the feet and legs of the herons. So as the birds shuttle between old and new lakes, the eggs fall off and hatch."

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/26/163723606/whats...

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
Change 1 letter game! (Nov '11) 2 min Hoosier Hillbilly 3,009
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 3 min Hoosier Hillbilly 26,747
Name a smell you love to smell! (Jan '14) 4 min andet1987 620
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 10 min andet1987 30,047
Change "1" letter =ONLY= (Oct '12) 14 min andet1987 4,280
Change-Six-Of-Six-Letters....Fun Game! 15 min Hoosier Hillbilly 424
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 15 min andet1987 4,020
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 26 min poised 152,741
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 4 hr UnderstandPeople 25,837
7 Teens Come Home Pregnant From School Trip 7 hr Joker 72
More from around the web