Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222984 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.

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#104000 Oct 31, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps. But this...
<quoted text>
...is your dogmatic bullshit.
To say life may be possible on other planets is reasonable based on what we know. To say it is impossible is uneducated crap from a known fool.
Few things are more hypocritical, illogical and ironic than a fundie who tells us he believes in Gawd, but doesn't believe there are any other inhabited planets "because nobody had proven that there are any."

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#104001 Oct 31, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The only "known" planet you ape-brained moron.
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Way to insult apes worldwide!
HEY!!!!

>:-(

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104002 Oct 31, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Same as it is moronic to claim God does not exist.
Tell me what kind of test would science run to see if God does exist? How do you test what you can't see, explain or understand?
It is even more moronic to claim that God does exist.

The God that is said not to exist by woodtick is the God of the Bible. The concept of an all knowing all powerful god is easily debunked.

Atheism is not necessarily the belief that god or gods do not exist. It is the nonbelief in God. The difference is subtle but very very important. There is no valid reason that anyone has been able to show for the belief in a god since there is no valid evidence that anyone can give for belief in a god.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104003 Oct 31, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for something of substance from you rather than mocking emotional responses. Attacking the person is always a sign of weakness, which is glaring here. Take a history of electrical science course, it may help you keep up. No time Gods allowed, just hard work and research. Faraday was also a committed Christian, understood humility and that he owed a lot to those who went before him when he sorted electric field physics out.
So what if Faraday was a Christian. Not enough of the universe's questions had been answered for him not to be one, at the his time in history. Do you seriously think he would be one today?

And I am still waiting for a reply of substance regarding your idiocy about the bacterial flagellum. Its evolution has been solved. You creatards have to find some other subject to ooh and aah and argue from ignorance about.

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#104005 Oct 31, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Therefore God is Sofia Vergara.
Note of course how your linky in no way helps you with Biblical apologetics in any way, and in reality only makes "God" a pretty meaningless concept.
Unless you're a politician.
You're disturbingly ignorant and assume wayyyyy to much. The link wasn't meant to help Biblical apologetics. So your post was pretty meaningless.
By the way, in reality the concept 'god' is by no ways or means a meaningless concept except to the ignorant as yourself. A meaningless concept doesn't rake in billions a year. A meaningless concept doesn't give birth and ruin to countries and civilizations polarized in their superstitions of a meaningless god.
Only a severely ignorant person would state 'god' is a meaningless concept.

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#104006 Oct 31, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Old Kurt could be absolutely brilliant at times but I am very skeptical of his proof of god. I'll have to dig into it further.
He was also a bit of a loony. He starved himself to death because of his paranoia. SO his state of mind at one point or another is questionable.
It was this tid-bit I found interesting...(parenthesis mine)

Its theorems and axioms --...-- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.

But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea(of the existence of God). Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#104007 Oct 31, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You're disturbingly ignorant and assume wayyyyy to much. The link wasn't meant to help Biblical apologetics. So your post was pretty meaningless.
By the way, in reality the concept 'god' is by no ways or means a meaningless concept except to the ignorant as yourself. A meaningless concept doesn't rake in billions a year. A meaningless concept doesn't give birth and ruin to countries and civilizations polarized in their superstitions of a meaningless god.
Only a severely ignorant person would state 'god' is a meaningless concept.
no, not a meaningless concept at all. religious cults have proven themselves to be incredibly effective means to control the masses and garner great wealth and power.

people have gotten their cult members to do the most vile or idiotic things in the name of that god concept, and they still do.

the concept if god is incredibly useful in controlling others.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#104008 Oct 31, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It was this tid-bit I found interesting...(parenthesis mine)
Its theorems and axioms --...-- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea(of the existence of God). Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
I'm sorry?!? are you saying Godel found a mathematical proof of god?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#104009 Oct 31, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It was this tid-bit I found interesting...(parenthesis mine)
Its theorems and axioms --...-- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea(of the existence of God). Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
Ummm... The math, maybe so. But the underlying assumption are another matter.

René Descartes attempted a proof Meditations on First Philosophy. Something I found contained very poor logic. Godel may be guilty of the same.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104010 Oct 31, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm... The math, maybe so. But the underlying assumption are another matter.
René Descartes attempted a proof Meditations on First Philosophy. Something I found contained very poor logic. Godel may be guilty of the same.
Godel proved there are some true statements in math that cannot be proved. It sounds a bit circular, but he managed it. Another mathematician proved that there were some false statements in math that cannot be shown to be false. I don't think either of them thought that they "proved" that god exists or does not exist.

Of course both of them do almost guarantee that you can always have a God of the gaps.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#104011 Oct 31, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm... The math, maybe so. But the underlying assumption are another matter.
René Descartes attempted a proof Meditations on First Philosophy. Something I found contained very poor logic. Godel may be guilty of the same.
i am curious as to your listing priorities? why did you put Decartes before the horseshit?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#104012 Oct 31, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for something of substance from you rather than mocking emotional responses. Attacking the person is always a sign of weakness, which is glaring here. Take a history of electrical science course, it may help you keep up. No time Gods allowed, just hard work and research. Faraday was also a committed Christian, understood humility and that he owed a lot to those who went before him when he sorted electric field physics out.
Faraday was a great scientist of his day and contributed a lot to science, but his personal beliefs have nothing to do with science. Then or now. His beliefs and humility are not in question and don't support your claims. I am still waiting for you to provide real science to defend you position. So far you have failed. Borrowing that, the only thing left is to mock you.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#104013 Oct 31, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
So what if Faraday was a Christian. Not enough of the universe's questions had been answered for him not to be one, at the his time in history. Do you seriously think he would be one today?
And I am still waiting for a reply of substance regarding your idiocy about the bacterial flagellum. Its evolution has been solved. You creatards have to find some other subject to ooh and aah and argue from ignorance about.
I have no intention of leaving reality to join the evolutionary dilution. You folks get to learn a lot about that little proton motor in coming posts. Your Time God looking a little tipsy? To think of it, the whole of evolutionary biology and long ages toppled by a tiny little proton engine, little Big engine we should say. Lots of words and pictures vs an ever increasing volume of evidence for design and complexity.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#104014 Oct 31, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Godel proved there are some true statements in math that cannot be proved. It sounds a bit circular, but he managed it. Another mathematician proved that there were some false statements in math that cannot be shown to be false. I don't think either of them thought that they "proved" that god exists or does not exist.
Of course both of them do almost guarantee that you can always have a God of the gaps.
Godel was a Platonist when it came to mathematics and Platonism is very amenable to theism. In fact, Godel's argument is one I have seen a few times based on modal logic. The essential confusion is between the concepts of 'necessary truth' and 'possible truth'. If you work through the definitions, you find that the modal logic argument is attempting to quantify over the same set twice and making it into one quantification. That fails.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#104015 Oct 31, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It was this tid-bit I found interesting...(parenthesis mine)
Its theorems and axioms --...-- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea(of the existence of God). Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
Not all mathematical truths can be proven. That is part of what Godel was able to demonstrate. Furthermore, the basic assumptions (axioms) for any system are unproved.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#104016 Oct 31, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no intention of leaving reality to join the evolutionary dilution. You folks get to learn a lot about that little proton motor in coming posts. Your Time God looking a little tipsy? To think of it, the whole of evolutionary biology and long ages toppled by a tiny little proton engine, little Big engine we should say. Lots of words and pictures vs an ever increasing volume of evidence for design and complexity.
Run away! Run away some more!

My stars and garters, what are we gonna do? Don't poke us with your wooden sword.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#104017 Oct 31, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for something of substance from you rather than mocking emotional responses.
Leave the irony meters alone, bub.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#104018 Oct 31, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You're disturbingly ignorant and assume wayyyyy to much. The link wasn't meant to help Biblical apologetics. So your post was pretty meaningless.
By the way, in reality the concept 'god' is by no ways or means a meaningless concept except to the ignorant as yourself. A meaningless concept doesn't rake in billions a year. A meaningless concept doesn't give birth and ruin to countries and civilizations polarized in their superstitions of a meaningless god.
Only a severely ignorant person would state 'god' is a meaningless concept.
Like I said, unless you're a politician - someone who's good at taking concepts that, even if they have no objectively demonstrable basis in reality, can still be used to manipulate the vulnerable or gullible masses.

I can't be ignorant when I already took your point into account.

Meanwhile back in the real world, "God" cannot be objectively scientifically verified or pass the scientific method. Unless you call her Sofia Vergara.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#104019 Oct 31, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Run away! Run away some more!
My stars and garters, what are we gonna do? Don't poke us with your wooden sword.
"Supper at such an hour!
My stars and garters! who would be,
To have such guests, a landlady"
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#104020 Oct 31, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It was this tid-bit I found interesting...(parenthesis mine)
Its theorems and axioms --...-- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea(of the existence of God). Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
Yes they can. But only mathematically.

For example, a mathematical model of a two-dimensional universe may contain many mathematical proofs. You can throw all the numbers you like at it and (so long as you don't suck at math) all your calculations will be correct, will work out, be logical and internally consistent.

But we don't live in a two-dimensional universe. Math CAN be useful when applied to reality, but it doesn't always have to (klein bottle being another perfect example). From this we learn two things:

1 - Math is a language, not a science.

2 - Science doesn't deal with "proofs", as proof is only for maths and alcohol. Science deals with facts and evidence. NOTHING in science is ever "proven", as science needs to have the potential for falsification in order to make scientific predictions about real-world phenomena. Something which the God-concept cannot do.

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
News Oh $!&@: Roadside defecation ends in disaster 10 min Rick Perry s Closet 11
News George Will: All eyes turn to Illinois for an i... 13 min Rick Perry s Closet 1
Why Do Losers Insist On Related Everything To T... 14 min Faith 1
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 27 min UStalker 150,581
Two rhyming words! (Jun '12) 42 min DumbDrumpft 370
Start a sentence in alphabetical order.. (Oct '16) 1 hr Hoosier Hillbilly 3,984
News Your Life Story In 6 Words (Feb '08) 1 hr Hoosier Hillbilly 10,309
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 1 hr Whatevs 30,835
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 8 hr -feelingSOblue- 225,301
More from around the web