Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 201450 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.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#105366 Nov 8, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't pointed out anything at all. What you have offered is your opinion.
Here is my opinion about TOE.
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
"Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research."
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/ ...
Indeed a documented Genesis account at least gives creos a scenario to support falsify and make predictions from. TOE is a theory in evolution itself and has no preditive ability and is based on flawed and biased research, and still upposts a creationists paradigm better than TOE. eg human knuckle walking ancestry falsified on the back of one single fossil, the deteriorating genome, punctuated equilibrium, the death of single celled LUCA.
Ahhh, the next chapter in your entirely predictable Creatard Playbook.

Having charged in and made a bunch of silly, specific claims that all foundered or were irrelevant, you move onto the tactic of trying to discredit the methods of science more generally.

So HOW is the falsehood of a particular research claim verified MAZ? Considered that?

Nope. You are just piling more silly on, as usual.
Joy Beasley

Cincinnati, OH

#105367 Nov 8, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Religion can't answer reality based questions because their worldview is based on faith in something that has no evidence of ever existing... hence the absolute requirement of "faith".
When you base your whole belief system on something that has no actual evidence to support it... what real value can an answer have that is based on it? Why are the majority of religious "truths" unable to be shown to actually be true?
Religion only makes sense if you don't actually bother to really think about it.
Thank you Terry and everyone else who has replied to me with help. You have helped me understand that I have faith, but want to make sense out of it which cannot be done. The answer to my question about where God came from is that there is no answer. Either you keep on believing in God and do not word about it or you become an atheist and believe in the big bang theory and do not word about what caused the big bang. I understand now that I should not expect everything to make sense. But how do you stop doing that? Another question with no answer.

Thanks again nice people.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#105368 Nov 8, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears your libraries full of myths does not beat an original documented account of what should appear in the fossil record.
Evolutionists copied their basic hierarchies from a biblical account that got it right first.
More to the point...Linnaeus got it right even without the assumption of evolution. Meaning the nested hierarchies of evolution are not something made up by evolutionists, but inherent in the observable arrangement of life even if you don't know what caused them, as Linnaeus did not.

Evolution explains what Linnaeus observed.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105369 Nov 8, 2013
HELPER wrote:
<quoted text>Joy; The only real answers we have to this question are in the Bible and according to the words of Jesus, God is a Spirit and the Bible says in the beginning his Spirit moved and then he said 'Let there be light and there was light'. The Bible also says that the Word of God created all things and we do not have any information that there was another beginning other than the one event mentioned. This mystery occured and unfolded because God said for it to happen and the Bible also says the Word of God is like a seed which was very small, then it branched out to become great. The Bible says that God is the beginning and the end and this heaven and earth will have an end at some point and there will be a New Heaven and Earth, but no where does the Bible say there was not a beginning of all things. It is what it is, because God said for it to be so and it will be accomplished according to his Word.
that same bible proves that the god they tried to create therein is false. no more real that the turtle that supposedly holds up the world.(...it is not turtles all the way down!)

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#105370 Nov 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't live in an abstract world, my working world is in concrete realities everyday or we go out of business. Behe didn't discover blood clotting, he merely used it as an example of a simple appearing but actually terrifically complex process of decade reactions and key feedback sequences that really make clotting work or we die, that if any one piece in the process is omitted all blood life dependent fauna on the planet is done for.
Behe claimed the blood clotting cascade was irreducibly complex. Waffle all you like, but he was wrong. As existing living examples demonstrate.
Your single (reptile)to three bone(mammal)analogy is a really poor example to use as proof of an operable evolutionary mechanism. Anyone find a 2 bone ear set yet? No.. Find an odd extinct animal with a 3bone mammal ear, maybe.
IN fact the evolution in the therapsid line shows the arrangement of the multi-boned reptilian jaw gradually changing with the boned moving backwards towards the pivot point etc and collecting towards the middle ear in a sequence around 230 mya. By the time we get to mammals, the jaw is composed of a single bone and the other bones have been included in the ear assembly.
“Bones have generally low degrees of heritability because they form parts of complex, integrated functional units that are subject not only to many genes with multiple effects (pleiotropism), but also to a large number of nongenetic influences. It is therefore difficult to divide bones into discrete, independent units of phylogenetic information. For these reasons, bones and other aspects of morphology can yield reasonably correct results for phylogenetic analyses of high-level taxonomic units, but become increasingly less reliable at lower taxonomic levels, such as species.
Lieberman, D.E., Homology and hominid phylogeny: problems and potential solutions, Evolutionary Anthropology 7:142–151, 1999.
A typical example of quote mining without comprehension.

We are talking major structural changes, not trying to just tell the difference between say a lion and a tiger skeleton. And bones are heritable enough that experts can tell the race of a human skeleton with some confidence...tiny differences compared to the jaw transition we are discussing.
Ear operation in transitional forms would have been very iffy in your mutation scheme as deaf intermediates would have been gobbled up by their predators, another miracle of survival of the fittest. Without them how could the mutation process have succeeded to completion? Never been observed in the real world nor explainable at the DNA level.
http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/a-questio...
Utter BS. No deaf intermediates required. Tell you what, YOU go and reconstruct a series of transitions that require a deaf intermediate, and we will let the scientists construct one that does not. Whoops, they already did. And the fossil transitions confirm to their picture, not yours. At least you know why.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#105371 Nov 8, 2013
Joy Beasley wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you Terry and everyone else who has replied to me with help. You have helped me understand that I have faith, but want to make sense out of it which cannot be done. The answer to my question about where God came from is that there is no answer. Either you keep on believing in God and do not word about it or you become an atheist and believe in the big bang theory and do not word about what caused the big bang. I understand now that I should not expect everything to make sense. But how do you stop doing that? Another question with no answer.
Thanks again nice people.
You have plenty more "eithers" available to you.

A god who started the universe with a big bang, and in such a way that evolution could proceed, for example. There are respected scientists who believe that.

Just because Genesis is a load of bollocks does not mean there is no God. Not the same thing at all.

Do not let fundies fool you into thinking its a simple "this way or that way" choice.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#105372 Nov 8, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>The earliest word for God, Elohim is a plural. God consists of a husband and a wife and they are one flesh. Genesis 2:24. The husband part is energy and the forces in nature. It is omnipotent, omnipresent and eternal. Daniel 11:38 "But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces..." Gravitation, electromagnetism, and the nuclear forces. Energy created the Lord. Isaiah 54:5 "For thy Maker is thine husband..." The Lord created everything else.
Gravitation, electromagnetism, and the nuclear forces. Daniel 11:38 "But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces..." Energy created the Lord. Isaiah 54:5 "For thy Maker is thine husband..."
Wow. I don't think we've had anyone this bizarre since the girasas abducted Brenda6
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#105374 Nov 8, 2013
Joy Beasley wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you Buckwheat. I really do not like to make waves so maybe he did me a favor and was just being nice. He is a nice man and we all love him. I have seen a program about the big bang theory. It was on the Science Channel I think and it was very interesting. It made me think maybe the big bang created God, but then what created the big bang? I guess that is what you are wondering too. Maybe I am really an atheist too, but I still think that if religion is true, it should make sense.
Well, at least you are trying to think for yourself. Most christians take the words of a minister as gospel and NEVER question or doubt their word.

I am not trying to persuade you either way. I only gave my thoughts on the subject. You have to decide where you stand on religion. I was raised by christian parents, but I decided that there is no god. I didn't come to that conclusion overnight, but I came to it. Good luck on your search.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105375 Nov 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. I don't think we've had anyone this bizarre since the girasas abducted Brenda6
Was that the SLA in California? one of their group was caught living here in MN a few years back.. ;)

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#105376 Nov 8, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Was that the SLA in California? one of their group was caught living here in MN a few years back.. ;)
I don't think so - who knows?- but she had some *very* unusual ideas.

http://www.topix.com/member/profile/brenda6

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105377 Nov 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think so - who knows?- but she had some *very* unusual ideas.
http://www.topix.com/member/profile/brenda6
no shit?!? seriously, Mike, i thought that was a reference to some sci-fi TV show.(i was attempting to express my total ignorance on such things these days..)

't look at the link...seems i do not need to. reality, or at least this person's reality, is definitely stranger than fiction!

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105378 Nov 8, 2013
Joy Beasley wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you Terry and everyone else who has replied to me with help. You have helped me understand that I have faith, but want to make sense out of it which cannot be done. The answer to my question about where God came from is that there is no answer. Either you keep on believing in God and do not word about it or you become an atheist and believe in the big bang theory and do not word about what caused the big bang. I understand now that I should not expect everything to make sense. But how do you stop doing that? Another question with no answer.
Thanks again nice people.
I follow the adage "if it sounds to good to be true, it's probably not".

If someone makes a fantastic claim (i.e.'god exists') yet can give you no evidence of that claim being factual except to tell you that "you have to have"faith".... ask yourself why that claim should be given any more weight than you would give to someone claiming "leprechauns are real" and showing you a four leaf clover as evidence.

If believing in an all seeing, all knowing 'god' gives you some sort of comfort from your fears of the unknown... cool.

To claim it's anything more than a security blanket belief is just silly.

Giving up your search for real evidence based understanding in favor of maintaining that belief? not so cool

Never stop asking questions... and if your given 'answers' that don't make logical or reasonable sense... ask someone else.

Things that are true can be shown to be true.

Things that are claimed as 'truth'(religion) requires you to die before you find out if it's true or not.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105379 Nov 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. I don't think we've had anyone this bizarre since the girasas abducted Brenda6
LOL! I had forgotten about Brenda and the girasas!
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

#105380 Nov 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. I don't think we've had anyone this bizarre since the girasas abducted Brenda6
Sorry for the double post on that. I had a problem with the computer. Please disregard the last paragraph.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#105381 Nov 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Behe claimed the blood clotting cascade was irreducibly complex. Waffle all you like, but he was wrong. As existing living examples demonstrate.
<quoted text>
IN fact the evolution in the therapsid line shows the arrangement of the multi-boned reptilian jaw gradually changing with the boned moving backwards towards the pivot point etc and collecting towards the middle ear in a sequence around 230 mya. By the time we get to mammals, the jaw is composed of a single bone and the other bones have been included in the ear assembly.
<quoted text>
A typical example of quote mining without comprehension.
We are talking major structural changes, not trying to just tell the difference between say a lion and a tiger skeleton. And bones are heritable enough that experts can tell the race of a human skeleton with some confidence...tiny differences compared to the jaw transition we are discussing.
<quoted text>
Utter BS. No deaf intermediates required. Tell you what, YOU go and reconstruct a series of transitions that require a deaf intermediate, and we will let the scientists construct one that does not. Whoops, they already did. And the fossil transitions confirm to their picture, not yours. At least you know why.
I saw that phoney little cartoon showing how a single bone reptile transforms. Like "Transformers". The sci-fi. A whole bunch of concordant DNA with a planned ending Must and I repeat Must be accounted for. Mindless nothingness has no end plan, no plan period. And where did the Corti show up?, the moment it does its operable and fully formed, all 15,ooo + parts, all by accident, chance and mutations. Pretty sharp Time-God that always throughs winning dice.

Behe has not been refuted. That's why his book is in its 10th + printing. He still teaches and all your side has to offer is rediculus rebuttals that cannot be replicated the he shoots down like clay pigions as they come out.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#105382 Nov 8, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text> Please disregard the last paragraph.
This sounds like a good catch-all conclusion for all of your paragraphs.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#105383 Nov 8, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And what explanation was that, precisely? I was NOT wandering around the question. I was addressing exactly how information is created in the real world: through interactions that change the state of something. That changed state *is* information. Weiner worked a LOT on cybernetics, but that is not the same subject as information theory. And Wiener's ideas are certainly not the last word on the subject. You might also look into the work of Shannon, for example.
As he stated , information is not matter, nor energy. Which rules out your explanation

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#105384 Nov 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>

Behe has not been refuted. That's why his book is in its 10th + printing.
No, ya blithering fool - his book is in its 10th printing for the same reason that PT Barnum was a success.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#105385 Nov 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I trust these guys because they have shown that due to his religion Behe is a fool.
And you are making the mistake again of assuming that because we do not know everything that we cannot know anything. Time to get your head out of your but.
Make no mistake about the fact that MO-1 has a 24 stage planetary gearbox. I used to think about those spinning gears everyday in our fleet. Crews die every year when just one of those planets come apart in a helicopter and we had only 12 not 24 /ship to worry over. I saw that unit in MO-1 and laughed. Your biochemists that argue with Behe are evoltionists that are really the priests of your faith, but can't make any of these clotting agents nor the blood that allows you and I to live. I believe in a Living God that makes these things just like I beleived the mfg of those helicopters, do so and so and you and your crews will live. Now we have a gearbox and 7 axial motors in the bacteria MO-1, God has aways come through for my side. Priase Him for his magnificent complex creation in big and small things and for giving us all we need to live.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#105386 Nov 8, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>why does he have more credibility?
you just are going with what you already believe, regardless of the facts given you. not much of a thinking mind, there. more of the cult mentality mind, really. but that has been proven over and over about you...
Why does the father of cybernetics have more credibility than polymath, you can't be serious.

Try reading ,..Information theory, evolution and the origin of life.

Hubert Yockey

or just call him a fundie and live up to your own description.

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
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 1 min Jennifer Renee 18,447
TRUMP, Donald (Jun '15) 13 min razz58 188
conversation using song lyrics (Aug '13) 14 min Northbound 2,343
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) (Jan '16) 20 min LBS 8,552
News 6 weird, wacky facts about hearing 38 min Spotted Girl 13
motorcycle traveling stories (Mar '15) 46 min beatlesinthebog 2,312
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 48 min CJ Rocker 194,380
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 hr streetglidehoney 58,082
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 1 hr Northbound 7,830
More from around the web