Evolution vs. Creation

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

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104437 Nov 3, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Are you trying to steal away my lying, dependent, stalker? He is working so hard to curry favor with people on this thread and you make him look like a ranting lunatic, so fixated on winning, he doesn't even know he is losing.
I know, he is creepy but entertaining.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#104438 Nov 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is an example of what this paper was saying.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2003/0...
Yipe!

Four whole KINGDOMS???

That is many kinds of awesome.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104439 Nov 3, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me put it real simple for you, the easiest way I can. Did the ones that wrote the bible have the knowledge 2300yrs ago to know the earth was round? It is a yes or no question and this will answer all your other stupid questions. Again it is a yes or no question. So don't give us some drawn out drama answer as usual.
Sorry creepy, you until you tell me if your wife has stopped abusing you anally yet you have no right to demand a yes/no answer.

It should have been obvious to even you by that earlier response that demanding a yes/no answer is unreasonable.

So, are you going to answer my question yes/no or not?

“The Grim Reaper Is Fictional ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

But We Will All Meet Him

#104440 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry creepy, you until you tell me if your wife has stopped abusing you anally yet you have no right to demand a yes/no answer.
It should have been obvious to even you by that earlier response that demanding a yes/no answer is unreasonable.
So, are you going to answer my question yes/no or not?
Just what I thought. Give a drama BS answer coupled with rundowns as usual. What a COWARD!!! You need to go to your wife and get your balls back, if you ever had any.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#104441 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, he is creepy but entertaining.
Yes, I always am amused by his antics.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#104442 Nov 3, 2013
replaytime wrote:
Let’s have people input on this one. I know ther will be some make stupid comments but I also know some will be honest. I actually don't expect much but one never knows.
1. How many of you believe they knew what a sphere was 2300yrs ago?
2. How many ways did they have, if any to tell that the earth was even round 2300yrs ago?
3. How many of you think back when the bible was written that they knew earth was even round?
4. How many of you think that if you look out at the horizon over land or water that the earth looks like it ends?
5. If you knew the word circle and you could spin around in a circle and see earth’s horizon out everywhere you looked in that circular spin, would they think 2300yrs ago earth was a circle as well?
Bollocks. The ancients weren'y any more stupid than we are.

Anyone with a handy east-facing cliff, or even a tallish tree, could see that the Earth wasn't flat.

Seafaring people have known this for at least millenia.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#104443 Nov 3, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Only an idiot or a "Sub" would use them thinking a flat earth as a bad thing. They did not know better. Sphere did not exist! Ball was a toy! Circle was a shape! Get it yet?
Do you think the Egyptians should have referred to the pyramids as a trigonal?
Probably not.

Pyramids have five sides.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#104444 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, he is creepy but entertaining.
I'm surprised his "sister" has come along to defend him against a "terrible person" like you. Think about it. LOL!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104445 Nov 3, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Just what I thought. Give a drama BS answer coupled with rundowns as usual. What a COWARD!!! You need to go to your wife and get your balls back, if you ever had any.
I am not the coward.

I have been answering your idiotic questions all day and you will not answer one simple one of mine.

You keep forgetting replaytime, you are the one who is demanding answers. You have to pay for them sometimes by answering questions yourself.

It seems by your attitude that your answer to my question may be "no". Or worse yet it may be "Yes" and the reason you are so butt hurt right now is that you are going through withdrawal symptoms (Ouch!! NO pun intended but it sure worked out well!).

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104446 Nov 3, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Bollocks. The ancients weren'y any more stupid than we are.
Anyone with a handy east-facing cliff, or even a tallish tree, could see that the Earth wasn't flat.
Seafaring people have known this for at least millenia.
Of course this is just replatytime trying to change the argument, since he lost the original point, or never even understood what the original point was.

Of course we all know the Bible is not perfect. Yet there are certain fundamentalists who do think so. There are verses in the Bible that clearly show they believed in a Flat Earth back then. That is no real dig at the writers, but it is a dig at the people who are willing to swallow any of the Bible's nonsense.

It is fun to watch replaytime froth at the mouth and spin rather than to admit he was wrong.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#104447 Nov 3, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Probably not.
Pyramids have five sides.
Hey Mac. How are ya doin'?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#104448 Nov 3, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also up to you to have faith in TOE regardless of all evidence against it.
It appears you need more faith to believe in TOE than I do to believe in creation.
No it appears you are another deluded funditard, who tries to hijack science, to say what you want it to. You also attempt to belittle and distort the truth to bend it ti fit your personal need for a creator. Science can't test for things not there , so your creation illusions are ..well illusions. You can wriggle and whine , holler scream and dance around till your head pops off, it wont fool the true science minded people in this forum.
After all you creationists are all the same..and use the same lies and tricks.

http://www.wimp.com/evolutionfacts/

“The Grim Reaper Is Fictional ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

But We Will All Meet Him

#104449 Nov 3, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Bollocks. The ancients weren'y any more stupid than we are.
Anyone with a handy east-facing cliff, or even a tallish tree, could see that the Earth wasn't flat.
Seafaring people have known this for at least millenia.
So up in a tree or on a cliff you can see out past the horizon? Interesting.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#104450 Nov 3, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also up to you to have faith in TOE regardless of all evidence against it. The assumption that all life on Earth today shares the same basic molecular architecture and biochemistry as being part of the paradigm of modern biology has not only been challenged, it is in the process of being falsified.
The research seeks ways to identify shadow biospheres from the past or still in existence today, if there are any.
However, this is the statement made as a hypothesis.....
" If the emergence of life is, like other natural phenomena, highly probable given the right chemical and physical conditions then it seems likely that the early Earth hosted multiple origins of life, some of which produced chemical variations on life as we know it."
If all life that arises on earth, has similar genomic structure and can share dna, then common ancestry between ape and chimp is an assumption you choose to believe.
The other assumption you coose to believe is that evolving systems would be selected, in a major sweep, that are transitioning.
Indeed chimp and human genomes are so different, that the differences are virtually unquantifiable.
It appears you need more faith to believe in TOE than I do to believe in creation.
Maz, I would be interested in seeing what the differences between the human and chimpanzee genomes are and how the differences can't be quantified.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#104451 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, he is creepy but entertaining.
Now he is trying to get my attention. Poor thing. You have driven completely over the edge.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#104452 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, he is creepy but entertaining.
He always reminds me of one of those stereotypical wife beaters. They attack viciously, then they blame the victim, then they are just the sweetest guy. Every time he gets into it with someone, it seems to be the exact same pattern.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104453 Nov 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
No it appears you are another deluded funditard, who tries to hijack science, to say what you want it to. You also attempt to belittle and distort the truth to bend it ti fit your personal need for a creator. Science can't test for things not there , so your creation illusions are ..well illusions. You can wriggle and whine , holler scream and dance around till your head pops off, it wont fool the true science minded people in this forum.
After all you creationists are all the same..and use the same lies and tricks.
http://www.wimp.com/evolutionfacts/
Very nice video, and following the link given leads to this very useful site:

http://www.cassiopeiaproject.com/index.php

Thanks Aura.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#104454 Nov 3, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Now he is trying to get my attention. Poor thing. You have driven completely over the edge.
Thank you. Glad to be of service!

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#104455 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually we would all like to see you try.
So far none of your posts based upon peer reviewed science support you.
Sent you a number of peer reviewed posts, all mentioning how little is understood about the motor and none dare portulate the evolutionary origin. Interesting that your group here already "know" these complex units evolved, without understanding how they work. Just try one part of the 20, the proton powered coil, how did it evolve and only operate on protons? How are the protons generated, regulated? See, your stuck before you start.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#104456 Nov 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, I had to stop your idiocy here. The last claim is a nonsequitur and needs some evidence to support it. Sharing of DNA at a single cell level, which can still be observed today, is totally different from how DNA is passed down in more complex life.
<quoted text>
That has nothing to do with the point I made. You lot can't have your eggs in different baskets. Either all life that evolves independently is hypothesisied to be genetically similar or it isn't. Are you too scared to go with one or the other????

Yes, Indeed you are evading and skirting, because if multiple variations of life that is meant to have evolved, is genetically similar, the argument for comparative genomics looses steam.
Wrong, the differences between humans and chimps has been quantified. Do you want links? I am more than happy to provide them. I am sure that you have seen some of them before. Where do you think that we get the "98% similarity between humans and chimps" from?
I can't see any research here above. Indeed any research you present will soon be shown to cherry pick similarity out of a plethora of differences thrown into an algorithmic magic blender, you call data. eg. The myth of 1%,

"Researchers are finding that on top of the 1% distinction, chunks of missing DNA, extra genes, altered connections in gene networks, and the very structure of chromosomes confound any quantification of “humanness” versus “chimpness.”“There isn’t one single way to express the genetic distance between two complicated living organisms,” Gagneux adds."

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/316/5833/18...
http://watchmenservices.info/New%20Folder/Hum...

Are you now suggesting this evolutionary researcher above does not know what he is talking about, but you 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
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? 6 min Sarah 144
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 8 min veteran of war god 25,540
A six word game (Dec '08) 11 min Trouser Cough 18,032
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 11 min _hellbilly_ 152,401
I Like..... (Mar '14) 20 min Sarah 468
HOW LONG can you hold YOUR SEMEN ? For men only. (Mar '12) 29 min Stir Crazy 25
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 31 min Mega Monster 7,508
Is it possible to....... 1 hr -CatCiao- 537
Merry Christmas Topix, Thanks For,...? 1 hr mr goodwrench 112
"OLD SAYINGS" - - - Feel free to post them here... 1 hr Hoosier Hillbilly 70
More from around the web