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

#105075 Nov 6, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no! perhaps you can help Subby find a dictionary that has word definitions he can agree with, or maybe you can help him write his own dictionary. You see, he's the one who's having trouble with distorting words.
What is your hypothesis of how life began? and what evidence do you have to support it?
You poor moron. If you had half of a brain you would want to know WHY the definitions had problems. Instead you are happy to play the idiot.

It is early in the morning and I feel generous to idiots for now. What was wrong with the first definition is that it called abiogenesis a "theory" where we know that it is a hypothesis.. If it was a "theory" that would mean the problem was fairly well solved so that we could predict how early life would react at different points in its development, just as the theory of gravity allows us to plot orbits, use GPS systems etc.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#105076 Nov 6, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
and you despite your dubious claims, have no evidence that life sprang forth from a puddle on it's on.
So here we are.
Actually we do have evidence. He even listed some of it for you. Unfortunately for you, you do not know what qualifies as scientific evidence. And yet idiots like you were why scientific evidence has the definition that it now has.

That is irony for you.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#105077 Nov 6, 2013
fossils wrote:
I love the fact there is no real fossil record of man from the apes to man. Well unless you take into account the ones made up of ape bones and a lot of plaster. Leakey proved that game true.
You have been running your mouth a lot without providing any evidence that supports your claim.

Let's see your evidence for your Leakey claim and I will gladly provide evidence for the various fossils.

By the way, you could not even get what the fossils represent correctly. Since men are apes the fossil record shows a transition from one ape species to another. Biologists knew that man was an ape long before Darwin came along. In fact it was a creationist who first recognized this fact.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105078 Nov 6, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Damn Tick! have you been infected by the evo lying bug too?
where did I say that?
so if a god or creator is just energy. and you say this creator made life from life, aren't you saying energy is life?

is there some way your god or creator could be not just energy?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105079 Nov 6, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, they did in my day too. It is still an old man's game.
excuse me? golf an old man's game? i've been playing since i was six. my grandson plays and he is three.(well, he prefers to just hit the heads off his mom's old barbie dolls in the back yard, but he has a hell of a natural swing..)

golf is anything but an old man's game.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#105080 Nov 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>excuse me? golf an old man's game? i've been playing since i was six. my grandson plays and he is three.(well, he prefers to just hit the heads off his mom's old barbie dolls in the back yard, but he has a hell of a natural swing..)
golf is anything but an old man's game.
Psychopath in the making?

I'd keep a close eye on that boy....

;-)

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105081 Nov 6, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Psychopath in the making?
I'd keep a close eye on that boy....
;-)
full disclosure...it was me that thought to put the old doll into the clothesline pipe in the ground, and knock the head off it. i think i laughed harder than he did when it flew so far...

Bwa ha ha ah haaaaw......

ya gotta make things fun for little kids to keep them interested.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105082 Nov 6, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Thesaurus: hypothesis (noun) Synonyms - theory ∑ premise ∑ suggestion ∑ supposition ∑ proposition ∑ guess
http://www.bing.com/search...
A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.
http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/...
For your EDUCATION!:

Scientific theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For a general treatment of theories, see theory.

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. As with all forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive and explanatory force.[3][4]

The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain, which is measured by its ability to make falsifiable predictions with respect to those phenomena. Theories are improved as more evidence is gathered, so that accuracy in prediction improves over time. Scientists use theories as a foundation to gain further scientific knowledge, as well as to accomplish goals such as inventing technology or curing disease.

Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.[3] This is significantly different from the word "theory" in common usage, which implies that something is unsubstantiated or speculative.[5]

Now STFU!

“A Idiot Thinks Im Savoir Faire”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Paranoid That I Am Everywhere

#105083 Nov 6, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>For your EDUCATION!:
Scientific theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For a general treatment of theories, see theory.
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. As with all forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive and explanatory force.[3][4]
The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain, which is measured by its ability to make falsifiable predictions with respect to those phenomena. Theories are improved as more evidence is gathered, so that accuracy in prediction improves over time. Scientists use theories as a foundation to gain further scientific knowledge, as well as to accomplish goals such as inventing technology or curing disease.
Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.[3] This is significantly different from the word "theory" in common usage, which implies that something is unsubstantiated or speculative.[5]
Now STFU!
To bad you are too stupid to even see that we were talking about hypothesis. Swing and a miss but thanks for playing. So STFU yourself.

Go do something you have never done before,,, make a difference in something.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105084 Nov 6, 2013
Damn... wrong place for that last post. Stupid windows

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105085 Nov 6, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
To bad you are too stupid to even see that we were talking about hypothesis. Swing and a miss but thanks for playing. So STFU yourself.
Go do something you have never done before,,, make a difference in something.
Yeah... I just noticed I posted it in the wrong place. My apologies.

“A Idiot Thinks Im Savoir Faire”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Paranoid That I Am Everywhere

#105086 Nov 6, 2013
TerryL wrote:
Damn... wrong place for that last post. Stupid windows
BAHAHAHAHA Trying to blame the computer. You had to click reply and type your comment. What an idiot. LMAO

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105087 Nov 6, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
BAHAHAHAHA Trying to blame the computer. You had to click reply and type your comment. What an idiot. LMAO
Nope... just got confused as to which reality denying idiot I was posting to. Since you guys are all pretty much the same it's an easy mistake to make.

And I did apologize for it... not that you're familiar with that type of behavior

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#105088 Nov 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Scientists have had lab experiments running for millions and millions of years?
can i visit this lab?
It won't do you any good. Perhaps you could get the first species from the 3 domains of life to send some DNA to your researchers through a time loop so they don't have to keep adding to the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past....

Review Article Darwin's bridge between microevolution and macroevolution

Top of pageAbstractEvolutionary biologists have long sought to understand the relationship between microevolution (adaptation), which can be observed both in nature and in the laboratory, and macroevolution (speciation and the origin of the divisions of the taxonomic hierarchy above the species level, and the development of complex organs), which cannot be witnessed because it occurs over intervals that far exceed the human lifespan. The connection between these processes is also a major source of conflict between science and religious belief.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n72...

I prefer to rest my opinion on data, as flawed and biased as it is, still supports a creationist paradigm. IOW man and ape do not have the same molecular machinery and therefore do not show continuity and are of different genesis/creative events.

"In PNAS, the team reports cloning the human and chimpanzee hydroxylase cDNAs, and identifying a mutation in the coding region of the human cDNA that regulates hydroxylase activity. The same gene in apes codes for a hydroxylase enzyme which adds this atom to the sialic acid molecule, but due to a mutation at some point in human evolution, the human gene lacks this coding section, accounting for the structural difference in the molecule."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/...

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#105090 Nov 6, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>For your EDUCATION!:
Scientific theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For a general treatment of theories, see theory.
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. As with all forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive and explanatory force.[3][4]
The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain, which is measured by its ability to make falsifiable predictions with respect to those phenomena. Theories are improved as more evidence is gathered, so that accuracy in prediction improves over time. Scientists use theories as a foundation to gain further scientific knowledge, as well as to accomplish goals such as inventing technology or curing disease.
Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.[3] This is significantly different from the word "theory" in common usage, which implies that something is unsubstantiated or speculative.[5]
Now STFU!
I suppose over a century of claimed empirical evidence for human knuckle walking ancestry falsified on the back of one single fossil, Ardi, is reflective of TOEs credibility. Using the same fossils to support 2 scenarios is truly an amazing work. Well done!

IOW, TOE has NO predictive ability and is virtually unfalsifiable. However, having a documented creative account gives a scenario to predict, validate or falsify that TOE is lacking.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105091 Nov 6, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
It won't do you any good. Perhaps you could get the first species from the 3 domains of life to send some DNA to your researchers through a time loop so they don't have to keep adding to the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past....
Review Article Darwin's bridge between microevolution and macroevolution
Top of pageAbstractEvolutionary biologists have long sought to understand the relationship between microevolution (adaptation), which can be observed both in nature and in the laboratory, and macroevolution (speciation and the origin of the divisions of the taxonomic hierarchy above the species level, and the development of complex organs), which cannot be witnessed because it occurs over intervals that far exceed the human lifespan. The connection between these processes is also a major source of conflict between science and religious belief.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n72...
I prefer to rest my opinion on data, as flawed and biased as it is, still supports a creationist paradigm. IOW man and ape do not have the same molecular machinery and therefore do not show continuity and are of different genesis/creative events.
"In PNAS, the team reports cloning the human and chimpanzee hydroxylase cDNAs, and identifying a mutation in the coding region of the human cDNA that regulates hydroxylase activity. The same gene in apes codes for a hydroxylase enzyme which adds this atom to the sialic acid molecule, but due to a mutation at some point in human evolution, the human gene lacks this coding section, accounting for the structural difference in the molecule."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/...
what does that have to do at all with me pointing out clearly that your claim had no rational basis?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#105092 Nov 6, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
It won't do you any good. Perhaps you could get the first species from the 3 domains of life to send some DNA to your researchers through a time loop so they don't have to keep adding to the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past....
Review Article Darwin's bridge between microevolution and macroevolution
Top of pageAbstractEvolutionary biologists have long sought to understand the relationship between microevolution (adaptation), which can be observed both in nature and in the laboratory, and macroevolution (speciation and the origin of the divisions of the taxonomic hierarchy above the species level, and the development of complex organs), which cannot be witnessed because it occurs over intervals that far exceed the human lifespan. The connection between these processes is also a major source of conflict between science and religious belief.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n72...
I prefer to rest my opinion on data, as flawed and biased as it is, still supports a creationist paradigm. IOW man and ape do not have the same molecular machinery and therefore do not show continuity and are of different genesis/creative events.
"In PNAS, the team reports cloning the human and chimpanzee hydroxylase cDNAs, and identifying a mutation in the coding region of the human cDNA that regulates hydroxylase activity. The same gene in apes codes for a hydroxylase enzyme which adds this atom to the sialic acid molecule, but due to a mutation at some point in human evolution, the human gene lacks this coding section, accounting for the structural difference in the molecule."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/...
From your Science Daily link:

The differences between humans and apes are physically and functionally apparent, but genetically humans are extraordinarily similar to apes, especially to the chimpanzee and the bonobo (pygmy chimpanzee).

"We are so close in our DNA that if you were a visitor from another planet analyzing DNA samples of earth species, you would assume that there were greater differences between chimpanzees and gorillas than between chimpanzees and humans," said Ajit Varki, M.D., Professor of Medicine with the UCSD Cancer Center and Divisions of Hematology-Oncology and Cellular and Molecular Medicine at the University of California, San Diego. Varki is senior author of two new papers describing a genetic mutation at the root of a structural difference between an important cell surface molecule common in humans and chimpanzees.

Seems your own link disagrees with you.

“A Idiot Thinks Im Savoir Faire”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Paranoid That I Am Everywhere

#105093 Nov 6, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Nope... just got confused as to which reality denying idiot I was posting to. Since you guys are all pretty much the same it's an easy mistake to make.
And I did apologize for it... not that you're familiar with that type of behavior
No biggie. We all are idiots sometimes. And we will all get crap for it. So it's cool. And thank you.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#105094 Nov 6, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose over a century of claimed empirical evidence for human knuckle walking
Where do you come up with this BS?

Hominids have been known to be bipedal going back several million years, for decades. What "claimed empirical evidence for human knuckle walking"?

However, human knuckle-headedness is clearly alive and well in your continual declarations that the evidence for evolution is really evidence against it. Time for your meds.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#105095 Nov 6, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
When it comes to science the evolutionist say the glass is half full whereas creationists say the glass is half empty. When it comes to God the creationist say the glass is half full whereas evolutionists say the glass is half empty, well pretty much empty.
There is plenty of evidence in just about everything science has studied either in a hypothesis form or a theory form. Does it mean it is correct? No it doesnít. It means it is correct in what we believe at this time but can change at any moment if something comes along different. There is so much we have no clue about, so much that we donít even know of, so much we will never know.
How we choose to classify the glass is only a choice. I see science as science, a glass with water in it. I see God as God, a glass with water in it. Now some can tell me God say it is half full and some can tell me science says it is half empty. Until someone can show me absolute reason and fact that the level of water means more than how I view it, it will remain just a glass with water in it.
The difference is that our water gave you your computer. Your water gave you a lot of nothing to talk about.(shrug)

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
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 4 min Mister_ E 20,684
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 5 min _Zoey_ 3,399
Funny!! Word association game. (Nov '13) 5 min NoSmoke-NoMirrors 1,683
keep a word drop a word (Sep '12) 7 min NoSmoke-NoMirrors 6,660
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 7 min _Zoey_ 29,319
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 9 min Mike Allen 6,001
Change "1" letter =ONLY= (Oct '12) 10 min _Zoey_ 3,650
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 12 min Mister_ E 147,081
Do you have a Topix crush? (Jun '11) 19 min Nattitude 5,702
What's your tip for the day? 42 min Old Sam 1,092
Food Truck Sold Tacos With Side of Meth: Author... 2 hr beatlesinthebog 3
•••

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••