Evolution vs. Creation

There are 163927 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.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#100398 Oct 3, 2013
SCOUSE71UK wrote:
Some people on here keep linking Atheism on here with a belief in Darwinism or the big bang theory when atheism can exist without the need to believe in either theory.
I'm an atheist and I don't believe in creationism,Darwinism the big bang theory or any religion or religious book.
I believe we will never know if any of the above theories are true and all have been used to defend the bigotry of various people.
The bible as been used to promote child abuse and racism by various people. There have been scandals from just about every religion of the leaders of those faiths committing crimes against children and it being covered up. Religion as been used by some to defend wars such as the crusades.
So what does that say about religion?
If you have any sense you will realise it does not say anything about religion. It speaks only of the twisted mind of the individual who uses religion but would also use anything available to defend them perpetrating their twisted desires and forcing them on others.
In the same way it is wrong to believe that all atheists use these examples as a way of attacking religion or that all atheists have the need to attack religion or force their ideas of their being no god onto others. By the same token not all people of a faith have the desire to convert others to their faith.
I believe that we can debate things and put our opinions across and the problems arise when we personally attack others for their views or try to brain wash others to our way of thinking.
Bigotry is when we try to assign values to a group of people because no group of people no matter how small will ever have all the same values.
It is not religion or atheism at fault but the individual using them to promote their own prejudices.
You make some good points.

Just remember a good scientist does not "believe in" anything. He expresses a degree of confidence based on the evidence.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#100401 Oct 3, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Who's talking about plain old volcanism? I'm not. If you're looking for extremism I'm afraid that's only found in your position. That uh, IS why YOUR position is what's known as "fundamentalism", remember?
You are claiming that literally BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of tons of water is all moving simultaneously world-wide non-stop in the absolute total mother of storms to end all storms. This lasted (if you recall) for forty days and nights. And from there the waters did not recede for another minimum of 6 to 12 months. The height of the water has to reach a minimum of 5135 meters, or just over 17,000 feet - the height of Ararat. Now a fridge filled with water weighs roughly 1 ton. Your average fridge is just less than a meter square but over a meter tall so for simplicity let's go with a reasonable approximation of 1 meter cubed. And the water level needs to increase by over 128 meters per day. That's over 5 meters per hour. Nearly 9cm a minute. To put this in perspective it's around 15 times the largest recorded rainfall ever, and that was obviously only a local area. In your case you are claiming that 1 ton of mass is falling from the sky every 12 minutes for each square meter continuously non-stop for 40 days over the entire surface of the Earth (510 square kilometers). That's a LOT of mass. And bear in mind also that as we learned some days earlier outer circles are larger than inner circles so the surface area increases which will mean you will need to increase the rate of falling mass in order to still reach your target of Ararat's height, for which I'm being generous here since I'm not even taking Everest into account which of course would only heat things up even more. All of this water is somehow being pressurised inside underground caverns via world-wide volcanism beneath the upper layers of the crust. This is then shooting up into the sky and eventually falling back down. The pressure would have to be quite astounding and in fact this alone would create so much heat that the water would be turned to steam (gas expands) and boom. The upper crust of the Earth (everywhere) is blowing up. World War 3 doesn't cover it, but I suppose you've gotta get all that water in the air somehow. Apparently Noah's dinky wooden boat is floating above this and is only made of wood. I'm not sure if everyone remembers the recent xmas tsunami in the Indian Ocean which left massive ships made of metal with massive gashes in the sides of their hulls. And I haven't even taken Walt Brown's laughable claims into account whereby all the solar system's asteroids and comets also came from the same 'Fountains of the Deep', which would mean lots more pressure (and accompanying heat) in order for this mass to reach Earth's escape velocity.
510 MILLION square kilometers

you forgot a few zeros

:)
Huh

Owatonna, MN

#100402 Oct 3, 2013
If some god is real..HE IS AN IDIOT. What a messed up dump this god made.

Now we all know there is no god or supreme being..JUST A SIMPLE FACT.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#100403 Oct 3, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>510 MILLION square kilometers
you forgot a few zeros
:)
Yes. Any idea how much of that area is covered by massive volcanic formations like the Deccan and Siberian traps? Millions of square km.

If those outpourings had occured in a few short years, even the 6000 or so since the supposed creation, we would all be dead from the gases alone.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100405 Oct 3, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>510 MILLION square kilometers
you forgot a few zeros
:)
Whoops, I certainly did!

:-/

That is what I meant of course.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#100406 Oct 3, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Who's talking about plain old volcanism? I'm not. If you're looking for extremism I'm afraid that's only found in your position. That uh, IS why YOUR position is what's known as "fundamentalism", remember?
...(shortened for brevity)
All good points, but one additional;
Where did all this water come from? I could do the math to figure out exactly how much water we're talking about here, but I do not want exert my brain. I can safely conclude however that there would be far more water necessary to cover the globe to such mountain-top heights than the actual planet could hold, within it and around it combined. So a little question of where did this water come from arises. Also, where does it go afterwards? If they can reasonably answer just those 2 simple questions, I'll let all the other doubts go like repopulation scenarios, species regeneration and diversity explanations, Man's evolution in such a short amount of time, etc.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#100407 Oct 3, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
"I believe you identify yourself as a closet creationist or deliberately ignorant (same thing really) by specifying Darwinism"
Certainly a candidate for Comment of the Week Award!

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#100408 Oct 3, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoops, I certainly did!
:-/
That is what I meant of course.
Of that, I had no doubt

“Incorrupta fides, nudaque veri”

Level 9

Since: May 07

Vincit qui se vincit

#100409 Oct 3, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>510 MILLION square kilometers
you forgot a few zeros
:)
RUSH Rocks!

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#100410 Oct 3, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
All good points, but one additional;
Where did all this water come from? I could do the math to figure out exactly how much water we're talking about here, but I do not want exert my brain. I can safely conclude however that there would be far more water necessary to cover the globe to such mountain-top heights than the actual planet could hold, within it and around it combined. So a little question of where did this water come from arises. Also, where does it go afterwards? If they can reasonably answer just those 2 simple questions, I'll let all the other doubts go like repopulation scenarios, species regeneration and diversity explanations, Man's evolution in such a short amount of time, etc.
I did the approximate maths some years ago.

It went something like this.

Subtract the volume of a sphere the diameter of earth from the volume of a sphere the diameter of earth plus 18km. Twice the height of Everest (give or take).

1087803985034 cubic km minus 1083206916846 cubic km = 4597068188 cubic km

Subtract and arbitrary amount (say 1/3) of the result from the result to account for hills/mountains, land mass above sea level.

4597068188 Ė 1532356062 = 3064712126 cubic km of water

thatís

306471212600000000000000000000 0 litres which is a close approximation of the water needed to cover the surface of the earth to above the depth of the highest mountain.

Now consider that less than 25% of the world is covered with water to an average depth of 800 metres. With the rivers, lakes, aquifers etc thatís about

1482000000000000000000 litres

There are a lot of zeros unaccounted for in the babble

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#100411 Oct 3, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Certainly a candidate for Comment of the Week Award!
Cheers.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#100412 Oct 3, 2013
Ricky F wrote:
<quoted text>RUSH Rocks!
Agreed!!!

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#100413 Oct 3, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I did the approximate maths some years ago.
It went something like this.
Subtract the volume of a sphere the diameter of earth from the volume of a sphere the diameter of earth plus 18km. Twice the height of Everest (give or take).
1087803985034 cubic km minus 1083206916846 cubic km = 4597068188 cubic km
Subtract and arbitrary amount (say 1/3) of the result from the result to account for hills/mountains, land mass above sea level.
4597068188 Ė 1532356062 = 3064712126 cubic km of water
thatís
306471212600000000000000000000 0 litres which is a close approximation of the water needed to cover the surface of the earth to above the depth of the highest mountain.
Now consider that less than 25% of the world is covered with water to an average depth of 800 metres. With the rivers, lakes, aquifers etc thatís about
1482000000000000000000 litres
There are a lot of zeros unaccounted for in the babble
Put another way in perspective, water is 0.02% of Earths mass. It only seems to be alot because it's all on the surface, but it's really kinda rare, here even though there is massive amounts in the universe. Ours came from comets, those icy rocks in space.

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100414 Oct 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have dog ship for brains?
It's no personal opinion, it is a physical reality that the flood myth is impossible.
You may as well speak of the hollow Earth theory, because you traverse a mountain of stupid to arrive at the decision there was a global flood.
It's a mountain of stupid you stand upon when you use the word 'impossible' and determine what can't take place concerning this earth. You do have dog ship for brains and you stand with all those who in the past claimed it was impossible that the earth was anything but flat, that all life needed the sunlight etc. Nice job there :)

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100415 Oct 3, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
In the earth on every continent is a layer of iridium that was laid down by the Asteroid that created the Chicxulub crater off the coast of Yucatan. This crater is 65 million years old and is considered to be one of the chief reason the giant dinosaurs became extinct.
As I stated that you side stepped addressing. Iridium wasn't known to exist in a geological layer till someone found it and identified it. People can suppose they know what to look for concerning a global flood. That doesn't mean their correct. The scablands were flooded and evidence was there but no one saw it till someone understood what they were looking for. Science is based on possibilities, not impossibilities.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#100416 Oct 3, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a mountain of stupid you stand upon when you use the word 'impossible' and determine what can't take place concerning this earth. You do have dog ship for brains and you stand with all those who in the past claimed it was impossible that the earth was anything but flat, that all life needed the sunlight etc. Nice job there :)
No it is not, the flood happening covering all the mountains. Is a physical impossibility, to think it could have... takes an uneducated idiot who believes any religious hogwash they read.

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100417 Oct 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
We ahve extremely strong evidence that a flood never took place.
You clearly have no idea what is and what is not evidence.
For example the lack of worldwide genetic bottlenecks is extremely strong evidence against the flood.
I know what evidence is and I know what evidence isn't that isn't available to be used as proof against something that can't be proved to have happened.
The global flood is a myth. The time line for the myth has problems. So with those problems neither pro or con can accurately set forth a probable theory based on reasonable evidence to prove for or against it.
And bottlenecks have happened. Maybe you should Google the words you used. Since we have no precise data for when this myth actually took place, you can't use bottleneck data for or against the theory.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#100418 Oct 3, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
As I stated that you side stepped addressing. Iridium wasn't known to exist in a geological layer till someone found it and identified it. People can suppose they know what to look for concerning a global flood. That doesn't mean their correct. The scablands were flooded and evidence was there but no one saw it till someone understood what they were looking for. Science is based on possibilities, not impossibilities.

A flood layer is one of the easiest ones to spot, you have a jumbled up layer with broken pieces of everything entrenched in mud and silt.
With a global flood you would expect to find a mixture of land and sea creatures mixed in with broken pieces of everything. Also with something of this magnitude it would be a large layer.
There is no such layer that exists in the same place in the rock column. End of story.

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#100419 Oct 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> No it is not, the flood happening covering all the mountains. Is a physical impossibility, to think it could have... takes an uneducated idiot who believes any religious hogwash they read.
I know I am going to step on my own @ss here but hey, I don't care. For all we know these stories of a flood and such could have been around for 100's of thousands of years back when man/pre-man did not/could not write or kept track of days or years but yet passed on the stories down through the generations until they eventually learned to write and such. So when they learned to write and keep dates they may have been off by many years. None of us know or will ever know and if any one says the do for sure, they are liars, point blank period. Science is a good tool and has helped us in may ways but science itself is not free from fault. Back when Mt. St. Helens blew science dated a rock from that eruption at or over 150,000 years old. Nothing is perfect, not even science. So what I am saying is if we were not there we will never know and if you think science is perfect, you are a fool. Science is great for what is going on now and will be great for what we are facing but science is not a perfect past predictor as many think.

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100420 Oct 3, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah dude, but this lack of evidence has been going on for 300 years while thousands of scientists and plain fundamentalists have been looking for it. Never happened. There is absolutely NO evidence for a Noachian flood. The story has been falsified.
If somehow you can find some real evidence for a flood...come to us....until then it is a closed subject with science.
...and that's how science works. A few believe where many disbelieve and leave the few to prove their belief. In this case, the many established a 'deluge' theory for how the earth was shaped and a few were left to prove otherwise. Now the many are left to show evidence that somewhere lays evidence for this deluge by the many that doubt it.

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
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 21 min I Am No One_ 162,883
Word Association (Jun '10) 24 min whatimeisit 27,652
Play "end of the word" (Nov '08) 28 min whatimeisit 24,094
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 41 min whatimeisit 8,643
News Weird news: Thomas Sancomb, a 'dead' man comes ... 42 min wichita-rick 4
best flirting pick up lines... (Sep '08) 1 hr UnderstandPeople 1,121
News Woman uses obituary to say Brady innocent in 'D... 1 hr Goodells legacy 8
I Like..... (Mar '14) 2 hr UnderstandPeople 998
*Sad music/sad themes Thread* 2 hr SLY WEST 186
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 3 hr NinaRocks 18,224
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 6 hr TALLYHO 8541 40,712
More from around the web