Evolution vs. Creation

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

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101533 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right I don't. What's a non-snake serpent?
At least I was correct about it not being a snake.
My ex-wife is a serpent.

One of the meanings of "serpent" is a sly or treacherous person.

Not all serpents are snakes, but all snakes are serpents.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#101534 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Numbers 2 & 3.....
1. A reptile of the order Serpentes; a snake.
2. often Serpent
a. In the Bible, the creature that tempted Eve.
b. Satan.
3. A subtle, sly, or treacherous person.
4. A firework that writhes while burning.
5. Music A deep-voiced wind instrument of serpentine shape, used principally from the 17th to 19th century, about 2.5 meters (8 feet) in length and made of brass or wood.
6. Serpent Serpens.
any talking serpents in the real world?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101535 Oct 19, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
What is wrong here?
You lack of education, and the fact you don't care.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101536 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
So? I can't see you, either. Is it fair to say that you can be invisible?
Derp
zero bearing on the fact that air can be, and often is invisible.

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101537 Oct 19, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
Both plants and minnows are ENORMOUSLY successful in reproduction, and maintaining species viability.
The very fact that plants and minnows HAVE been here for billions of years attests to that!
Kong_ wrote:
The very fact that plants and minnows HAVE been here for billions of years attests to that!
HA HA HA!!!!!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101538 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Really. "exactly and only what it means"?!?
Serpent has several meanings, only one of which is snake.
1. A reptile of the order Serpentes; a snake.
2. often Serpent
a. In the Bible, the creature that tempted Eve.
b. Satan.
3. A subtle, sly, or treacherous person.
4. A firework that writhes while burning.
5. Music A deep-voiced wind instrument of serpentine shape, used principally from the 17th to 19th century, about 2.5 meters (8 feet) in length and made of brass or wood.
6. Serpent Serpens.
You were saying?
And what species was the serpent that tempted Adam and Eve?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101539 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
My ex-wife is a serpent.
One of the meanings of "serpent" is a sly or treacherous person.
Not all serpents are snakes, but all snakes are serpents.
So all snakes are deep-voiced wind instruments?

“God of War”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#101540 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
tick we are talking about this new 1.8 million-year-old skull that has been found.
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/did-human-fami...
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/1...
Yeah but that exactly what evolution says is going to happen, but the trend is toward a change in the entire population. We still see this variety in humans of today, some look remarkably Cro-Magnon while others look almost apish, and others more modern looking. There is no clear defining lines drawn and every specimen is a transitional creature.

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101541 Oct 19, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course the problem with this is that creatards are misunderstanding what this finding tells us. It in no way threatens the theory of evolution. There may be fewer species of ancestors than we thought we had, but that is a big jump to take out of a few fossils found at one site.
Of course if you are a creationist grasping at straws is as close as they ever come to a victory.
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.

“God of War”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#101542 Oct 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
My ex-wife is a serpent.
One of the meanings of "serpent" is a sly or treacherous person.
Not all serpents are snakes, but all snakes are serpents.
Your ex was a three legged woman? Shame on you you naughty boy...lol

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#101543 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
zero bearing on the fact that air can be, and often is invisible.
I just got back from a week in Phoenix. the air there is very visible...but it's a dry smog...
Real BigT

Kingston, TN

#101544 Oct 19, 2013
my creations are always evolving

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101545 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:
zero bearing on the fact that air can be, and often is invisible.
Uh-huh.

So because DNA is invisible to your eyes, it's invisible?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101546 Oct 19, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course the problem with this is that creatards are misunderstanding what this finding tells us. It in no way threatens the theory of evolution. There may be fewer species of ancestors than we thought we had, but that is a big jump to take out of a few fossils found at one site.
Of course if you are a creationist grasping at straws is as close as they ever come to a victory.
It's a given that creationists are gonna jump all over this one and pretend it's something that it isn't. The specifics of 1.8 million years of evolution for one particular lineage is unclear while the other 3.4 billion years of evolution remains completely and utterly and totally unaffected by this discovery. Of course none of this helps Goddidit with magic in any way whatsoever, especially for Young-Earthers who predicted that none of this should even exist anyway since they think the universe wasn't even here then.

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101547 Oct 19, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>any talking serpents in the real world?
Obama

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101548 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:

And what species was the serpent that tempted Adam and Eve?
Unknown. It's only called a serpent.

And ignorant people translate that to snake.

*shrugs*
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101549 Oct 19, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>any talking serpents in the real world?
Considering he allows the definitions to be mutable no matter the context, clearly the answer is yes.

“Ditat Deus”

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#101550 Oct 19, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
So all snakes are deep-voiced wind instruments?
I have six definitions of serpent and you assume only one of them?

I didn't take you for being stupid...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#101551 Oct 19, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>I just got back from a week in Phoenix. the air there is very visible...but it's a dry smog...
Oh, I'm aware that air can be visible, just as it can also be invisible. All depends on the physical conditions involved.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#101552 Oct 19, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Re-writing their books, their papers, their studies that they wrote based on evidence,even their evidence would have to be re-classified if this one shows that there were not as many different species as they claimed.
This doesn't SHOW any such thing. It is the opinion of a small group of researchers. They *might* be right but they could, just as easily, be completely wrong.

I've already pointed out two reasons that cast doubt on their claim.
replaytime wrote:
So yea I think that would kind of suck.
You tend to think everything sucks, so this is no big shocker.
replaytime wrote:
It would help in the long run of providing more understanding.
As I had said.
replaytime wrote:
Like I said science is an awesome tool but if they turn out to be wrong from their evidence that they classified those species off of one has to wonder how much they actually do understand. Not knocking science but to label species based on studied evidence, tell the world this is what it is, then have to change it, shows it is not facts but at best a guess of what they think until something can show it wrong.
You think science is a awesome tool yet you dismiss scientific theories as guesses. But you're not knocking science. Yeah, right!

What would you have science do? Not modify our understand based on new evidence? That would be a totally dumbass position to take now, wouldn't it?

BTW, facts are facts. They don't change. Theories may be modified or discarded in the light of new facts but facts remain facts. One of these days you might grasp the distinction between the two.

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
Do you believe in Cod? 6 min TALLYHO 8541 11
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 6 min say it aint so 27,564
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 9 min Princess Hey 158,055
DEA Agent Warns Utah of Pot-Crazed Rabbits 10 min DILF 9
Buffalo Rams Car In Yellowstone National Park 11 min DILF 4
IS the worls ready for ufo diclosure? 15 min DILF 12
who do you want to sleep with? (Sep '07) 17 min DILF 191
Rest in Peace, Spock 22 min Grace nerissa 313
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 27 min Grace Nerissa 39,409
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 1 hr Selecia Jones- JA... 17,936
Name a smell you love to smell! (Jan '14) 8 hr livelivedrh 825
More from around the web