Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222920 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.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#103469 Oct 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
HA!
Ahahahahahaaaaa!!!!!
"You have to read those in context."
No shit, Sherlock.
You also have to read the OT slavery laws in context.
Why don't you?
Context???
Show me the ring passage...
And you and sub will have a long night in front of you with you having to admit being wrong.

I look back in a bit.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#103470 Oct 26, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe God wrote it. That would be the evolutionists that always say "God said", "God wrote", "the Word of God", etc etc.
Its fundamentalists - like Charles Idemi, Urban Cowboy, and KAB, who always insist that the Bible is the "inerrant Word of God" - written by man but perfect because God was whispering the words in their ears or equivalent.

Evolutionists by definition, including Christian ones, cannot hold that view of the Bible for obvious reasons.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#103471 Oct 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh. Huh... A string moral compass you say? Who gets to define what that is? You? Me? Obama? The Taliban? The Aztecs? Who?
Then lemme ask you, would a 'moral' guy take a dick up the ass?
Would a 'moral' guy shoot and kill someone?
Would a 'moral' guy eat another human?
Would a 'moral' guy piss on his girlfriend and call it kinky?
Would a 'moral' guy kill a chicken for food?
What is moral and what is a good moral compass differs. There's no constant for it.
There are local variations in what is considered moral, and there are universals or near universals. Some rules are arbitrary, some are universal for a reason. They clearly affect the survival potential of the society and its members. Nobody needs to believe in God to understand that France is a more pleasant place to live than Somalia circa 2013. Morals have a practical and universal purpose - they make life tolerable.

All societies have restrictions on issues like theft and sexual mores. All humans except for a few unfortunate individuals have a gag reflex, a disgust mechanism, which is obviously related to survival instincts but can be manipulated to some extent.

To me a rational morality would be one that explicitly recognises the purpose of morality as the optimising of human happiness in conformity with survival of the society. To do that we need to understand what really makes humans happy. For example, cradle to the grave welfare may not do that. Unrestricted sexual behavior and allowance of instant gratification may not do that, so I am not talking about hippy-heaven.

In fact many traditional moral codes contain a wise mix of freedoms and restrictions, and we ignore these at our peril, even if we no longer accept their divine basis. They have by default won a battle of cultural natural selection already, so they must be doing something right. We need to change, but change with caution and the fullest regard for unintended consequences.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#103472 Oct 26, 2013
That serious this early in the morning, on my side of the planet.
Did you just finish your tax-declaration!
-----
For river neck...all about your neck of the Woods:
http://www.amazon.com/Water-Rock-Black-Resist...

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#103473 Oct 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>ewww...
(or is that ewe...?)
Oh man, that is baaaaaad.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#103474 Oct 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a good place to start, but I wouldn't consider it reliable.
"Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration."
http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do...
Yes, for research it is not good enough. For debates it is more than accurate enough. And if you doubt it you can always check out the sources that are listed at the bottom of the article. You on the other hand have linked to sites KNOWN for lying. They never use peer reviewed science.

Wikipedia defeats AiG, creatard.com and various other creationist sites 24/7.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#103475 Oct 26, 2013
hmmm...I asked for a moss-green frame but it stays this horrible shade of orange.
The blues are most evocative in a moss-green frame.

And the pages could be less white, a soft shade of blue or yellow would improve reading as in more gentler on the eye.

Yep and judging could have names added.
And as siad the props were usefull to point to a good or lead post.

And being at it why not make it optional to correct ones own post.

cheap can't be a factor.
What are the results of the games goal of attracting more ppl. i.o. to get more advertising.
Ultimately that is what it was about.
I've seen more adverts!
Hurray and praise and all that...

can i now have have my moss-green frame?
plzzz

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#103476 Oct 26, 2013
MAAT wrote:
That serious this early in the morning, on my side of the planet.
Did you just finish your tax-declaration!
-----
For river neck...all about your neck of the Woods:
http://www.amazon.com/Water-Rock-Black-Resist...
No tax declarations here! But yes I had something to do very early...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#103477 Oct 26, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Oh man, that is baaaaaad.
i was going to use the sheep sound joke but you bleat me to it....

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#103478 Oct 26, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
I don't really understand how eating dogs and horses is immoral or how it relates to the former subjects.
But it does show how RRneck fails to distinguish between actual morality and his own personal sense of disgust, which is (or should be) something different.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#103479 Oct 26, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
But it does show how RRneck fails to distinguish between actual morality and his own personal sense of disgust, which is (or should be) something different.
I agree. I don't eat dog out of a sense of disgust with the idea myself and not because of some moral point. Equating the eating of favored companion animals with what he considers to be immoral sex acts seems more than a bit over the top or maybe just more self-disgust. In my understanding of morality, I find an act like rape to be immoral while consensual sex between adults is not. As you stated previously though, not the free for all espoused by some subcultures.
davy

Albuquerque, NM

#103480 Oct 26, 2013
So your omnipotent being is a caught up in context, time, religion and local/regional laws. Shouldn't an omnipotent being realize that slavery is inherently wrong? He sounds just as ignorant as most Christians are today. Religion kills brains dead
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It matters because of context, time, religion, local/regional laws, etc.
But you don't wanna hear any of it, I think. You just wanna hate God. Yes/no?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#103481 Oct 26, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I agree. I don't eat dog out of a sense of disgust with the idea myself and not because of some moral point. Equating the eating of favored companion animals with what he considers to be immoral sex than a bit over the top or maybe just more self-disgust. In my understanding of morality, I find an act like rape to be immoral while consensual sex between adults is not. As you stated previously though, not the free for all espoused by some subcultures.
Seems to me that the hippies tried out "free love" on the idealistic premise that possessiveness and jealousy were just hangups invented by a controlling and oppressive society.

Evolutionary psychology can tell us something very different....the possessive and jealous will succeed at the expense of the easy going...these impulses are inside us at a deeper level than mere rules of a society.

We need to build our moralities in recognition of human nature as it is, not as we wished it was. And that is a somewhat conservative argument...again a recognition that the traditional has one great advantageover the radical and that is that it has got us this far, no matter how imperfectly. It worked.

"Man is a wild beast" said Zorba. The human condition is not perfectable, just manageable, we hope!
davy

Albuquerque, NM

#103482 Oct 26, 2013
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2012/03/world/...

So you don't think that your imaginary friend feels that this woman should obey her master? When did your all knowing god have a change of heart? Why didn't god know slavery was wrong all along? I did. So much for gods morality and omnipotence.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell us where this came from:
"If any slave resists his master...correcting such a slave, and shall happen to be killed in such correction...the master shall be free of all punishment...as if such accident never happened."
It IS written.
Then tell us that it still applies today.
I dare you.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#103483 Oct 26, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Seems to me that the hippies tried out "free love" on the idealistic premise that possessiveness and jealousy were just hangups invented by a controlling and oppressive society.
Evolutionary psychology can tell us something very different....the possessive and jealous will succeed at the expense of the easy going...these impulses are inside us at a deeper level than mere rules of a society.
We need to build our moralities in recognition of human nature as it is, not as we wished it was. And that is a somewhat conservative argument...again a recognition that the traditional has one great advantageover the radical and that is that it has got us this far, no matter how imperfectly. It worked.
"Man is a wild beast" said Zorba. The human condition is not perfectable, just manageable, we hope!
I need to get to sleep, but after reading your post, I have to say that I completely agree with you on this. I could probably get into a lengthy discussion of the hippie movement and some of the good and bad that resulted if this were the place for it. I will just say, I support the ideas of individuality and freedom of expression that was part of the ideological basis of that movement. I think free love was rolled in for exactly the reasons you state. They had no understanding of the biological basis for behavior, not necessarily saying that we do, but it is much better.

I think management is a concept more aptly applied to a lot of human activities rather than the concept of control. Speaking of course from the point of view of an entomologist. We certainly don't control insects, but we can manage them.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#103484 Oct 26, 2013
davy wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/interactive /2012/03/world/mauritania.slav erys.last.stronghold/index.htm l
So you don't think that your imaginary friend feels that this woman should obey her master? When did your all knowing god have a change of heart? Why didn't god know slavery was wrong all along? I did. So much for gods morality and omnipotence.
<quoted text>
Damn, that is a sad story and illustrates the true evil of slavery.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#103485 Oct 27, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Because my dear little numbskull, the positioning of these imaginary lines is calculated on known mathematical precepts and on time at a given point on the earth and agreed internationally so that maps and atlases and navigation aids should contain an indication to aid navigation to make it easier for humans, more particularly for ocean going trade.
That does not mean they actually exist and I have never said they are irrelevant, I have said that much of what you say is irrelevant.
You all always go for what are in support of your cause. I ask again, why then are we using those lines that don't exist, to determine the distances and local time of real places?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#103486 Oct 27, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Because my dear little numbskull, the positioning of these imaginary lines is calculated on known mathematical precepts and on time at a given point on the earth and agreed internationally so that maps and atlases and navigation aids should contain an indication to aid navigation to make it easier for humans, more particularly for ocean going trade.
That does not mean they actually exist and I have never said they are irrelevant, I have said that much of what you say is irrelevant.
And again, Numbskull, they are imaginary and at the same time invisible. Why then do we use them( it), to determine real places? If they don' t exist, why are we then using them for real places?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#103488 Oct 27, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> You all always go for what are in support of your cause. I ask again, why then are we using those lines that don't exist, to determine the distances and local time of real places?
You do realise that the International Dateline could have been placed at any longitude point we chose, right? The reason its where it is, the middle of the Pacific, was to minimise the disruption of switching from one day to another on land. Fish dont mich care whether its Monday or Tuesday.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#103489 Oct 27, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Because my dear little numbskull, the positioning of these imaginary lines is calculated on known mathematical precepts and on time at a given point on the earth and agreed internationally so that maps and atlases and navigation aids should contain an indication to aid navigation to make it easier for humans, more particularly for ocean going trade.
That does not mean they actually exist and I have never said they are irrelevant, I have said that much of what you say is irrelevant.
To your last statement, get it clear, Numb, those lines to science are imaginary, but to reality they are invisible, if not, why do we use them?

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
Let's Play Songs With Four Words,... (Jul '15) 7 min Bovenzi13 154
Let's Play Song Titles With Only Three Words,... (Dec '13) 20 min Bovenzi13 715
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? (Nov '14) 25 min Bovenzi13 1,260
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 26 min Sharlene45 2,950
Why Do White People Start Stuff They Cant Fini... 31 min Chilli J 23
News FAA looking after pilot drops turkeys on Arkans... 35 min Parden Pard 3
News Children receive minor injuries after bounce ho... 47 min Parden Pard 2
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 1 hr LIM 28,799
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Just Sayin 224,335
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 2 hr whatimeisit 6,403
More from around the web