Evolution vs. Creation

There are 163955 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.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101554 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh-huh.
So because DNA is invisible to your eyes, it's invisible?
This also still has zero bearing on the fact that air can be, and often is invisible.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#101555 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I have six definitions of serpent and you assume only one of them?
I didn't take you for being stupid...
and here i didn't think you could make a bigger ass of yourself and then you surprise me...good job!

so no talking serpents in the real world? your stupid cult bible still an absolutely proven work of fiction?

cult members are funny!

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#101556 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just the way science goes. It proves itself wrong in what seems a daily basis.
There are so many 'science used to know' examples, it's hilarious.
Like science used to 'know' insects are made from rotting meat. And they taught that as 'fact'.
Then throw away your computer, your cell phone, your TV and never go to a doctor again.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Nowadays, science tells us that humans are 200,000 years old. Then they find a 2 million year old human fossil.
What science 'knows' is unreliable.
Obviously, what you know is unreliable. What species are you referring to? Or do you even know?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#101557 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually a creationist should not even acknowledge the find. It is a 1.8 million year old skull and it doesn't fit into their time line of a young earth. So it should be viewed as another blow to their story.
who cares what creationists think? they still buy into a proven false myth...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101558 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Unknown. It's only called a serpent.
And ignorant people translate that to snake.
*shrugs*
Not something I did. I referred to it as a lizard. You say the species was unknown. In that case do you know what type of animal it was after God cursed him and told him to crawl on his belly and eat dust for the rest of his days?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101559 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just the way science goes. It proves itself wrong in what seems a daily basis.
There are so many 'science used to know' examples, it's hilarious.
Like science used to 'know' insects are made from rotting meat. And they taught that as 'fact'.
Nowadays, science tells us that humans are 200,000 years old. Then they find a 2 million year old human fossil.
What science 'knows' is unreliable.
And yet like a good fundie hypocrite, here you are using a computer.

That's the difference between science and dogma - science takes new evidence into account. Fundies just invent new apologetics and play word games to say they were right all along.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101560 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I have six definitions of serpent and you assume only one of them?
I didn't take you for being stupid...
No, I did not assume at all. I was hinting that you needed to clarify your definitions as appropriate. But it appears when being applied to the Bible, clarifications are left deliberately vague on purpose. Handy.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101561 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually a creationist should not even acknowledge the find. It is a 1.8 million year old skull and it doesn't fit into their time line of a young earth. So it should be viewed as another blow to their story.
Only for Young Earth creationists. Old Earth creationists don't have a (theological) problem with deep time phenomena. Of course they DO have a problem with pretty much any real world phenomena which contradicts their ideas about creationism, but...(shrug)

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#101562 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just the way science goes. It proves itself wrong in what seems a daily basis.
There are so many 'science used to know' examples, it's hilarious.
Like science used to 'know' insects are made from rotting meat. And they taught that as 'fact'.
Nowadays, science tells us that humans are 200,000 years old. Then they find a 2 million year old human fossil.
What science 'knows' is unreliable.
Like I said, the creatards are grasping at straws.

Science has not "proved itself wrong".

This article was not about modern humans, which are only 200,000 years ago. It was about Homo erectus and some of our other forerunners. You did not understand the article. You should not be getting so excited.

And what science does is to get more and more correct every day. Was Newton "wrong" about gravity? Technically you could claim that. But he was right enough to get us to the Moon and back. He was not right enough for GPS systems. All this find does is to possibly clear up our understanding of our ancestors a bit more.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#101563 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually a creationist should not even acknowledge the find. It is a 1.8 million year old skull and it doesn't fit into their time line of a young earth. So it should be viewed as another blow to their story.
Perhaps our understanding of the past should be as diverse as our understanding of today's world. We tend to write off how populations get mixed up today, thinking it was not so in ancient history.
We however could find things haven't changed so much in this respect after all. LQQK V

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#101564 Oct 19, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>

BTW, facts are facts. They don't change. Theories may be modified or discarded in the light of new facts but facts remain facts.
Is that a fact? lol

Here are some facts for you. I never have said evolution did/does not happen. I never said earth is young. I never said science is bad. What I have said is science can be and has been wrong.

I don't swallow ever pill science throws out there unlike you. There may be less species of man than they claimed, from evidence there were. If you want to call it modifying a theory instead of being wrong have at it.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#101565 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually a creationist should not even acknowledge the find. It is a 1.8 million year old skull and it doesn't fit into their time line of a young earth. So it should be viewed as another blow to their story.
That is true, but it still won't keep them from hoping against hope that some evidence will go their way some day.

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#101566 Oct 19, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>who cares what creationists think? they still buy into a proven false myth...
Evidently you and many others on here care what they think or you would just ignore them instead of arguing with them all the time. But you keep on telling yourself the myth of you don't care.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#101567 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidently you and many others on here care what they think or you would just ignore them instead of arguing with them all the time. But you keep on telling yourself the myth of you don't care.
I don't argue with them at all, i just point out the facts that show they are members of a proven false cult. they try to argue they are not, but they fail...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101568 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that a fact? lol
Here are some facts for you. I never have said evolution did/does not happen. I never said earth is young. I never said science is bad. What I have said is science can be and has been wrong.
I don't swallow ever pill science throws out there unlike you. There may be less species of man than they claimed, from evidence there were. If you want to call it modifying a theory instead of being wrong have at it.
Sure, it means something could have been wrong. Being wrong does not invalidate science. It's called the potential for falsification. It's what makes science scientific. Ideas are formed and are tested against evidence. If they pass those tests then they are TENTATIVELY accepted as correct. If not then we know they are incorrect, and our original ideas have to be modified, or in rarer cases, perhaps discarded completely. And this is how scientific knowledge progresses.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101569 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidently you and many others on here care what they think or you would just ignore them instead of arguing with them all the time. But you keep on telling yourself the myth of you don't care.
Of we care. But only because they push their ignorance in public schools. At least flat-Earthers are under no illusions that they may get their BS taught in public schools any time soon, so you may notice they don't often take as much flak here as your average creationists do.

“If It Is Possible”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

It Will Likely Happen

#101570 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Of we care. But only because they push their ignorance in public schools. At least flat-Earthers are under no illusions that they may get their BS taught in public schools any time soon, so you may notice they don't often take as much flak here as your average creationists do.
Dude you just won't admit you care what they say for the sake of mere argument. The last 17 threads that have recently been commented on, you are the last one to comment in 12 of them. You just run around to them all trying to pick at someone. LOL

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101571 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Not something I did. I referred to it as a lizard. You say the species was unknown. In that case do you know what type of animal it was after God cursed him and told him to crawl on his belly and eat dust for the rest of his days?
God cursed it to be a snake.

What sense would it make to curse a snake to be a snake?

Why do you assume the Serpent was a lizard?

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101572 Oct 19, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>and here i didn't think you could make a bigger ass of yourself and then you surprise me...good job!
so no talking serpents in the real world? your stupid cult bible still an absolutely proven work of fiction?
cult members are funny!
Sure there are talking serpents today. Nearly every politician is a serpent.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#101573 Oct 19, 2013
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's break that down a bit.
Man has not discovered signs of life on another planet. Check.
Does this mean that life on other planets do not exist. No.
Now let's consider the range which Man has the ability to observe in regard to the Universe.
Say Earth was a single grain of sand on a vast beach. Now let's say you dropped a dime on that beach, over the grain representing Earth. THAT is how much we can observe, and very limited observation at that. With this in mind, can you honestly believe that based solely on our observations, there is no other life forms in the Universe? Are you that simple minded?
No surprise makes more sense than you do...

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/01/...

...regarding the likelihood of there being life anywhere else in the universe; he/she just doesn't know "why".

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
Word Association. (Nov '10) 9 min Mega Monster 17,452
*Sad music/sad themes Thread* 12 min Wolftracks 188
Poll Obsessive Posters 17 min OCD 0
News 2 Dead, Several Hurt In Shooting At Wal-Mart In... 28 min Concerned Granpa 2
REAL motorcycle traveling stories. 29 min Ferretman 21
Poll cjt12/Crazy Jae 31 min Pollster 0
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 35 min Mechanic 4,523
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 49 min Denny CranesPlace 40,727
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 1 hr Denny CranesPlace 18,225
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Crazy Beautiful 162,886
More from around the web