Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223360 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.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#105435 Nov 8, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I have always said I believe God started life and since has let life evolve.
Then there is no problem between you and I.

My problem begins when those who insist upon a LITERAL interpretation of the Bible ALSO insist that this text be taught AS SCIENCE in public schools.

Private schools? Go for it.

But don't screw with public schools, or with the government as a whole.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#105436 Nov 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
I'd label you an idiot... but that would disparage idoits
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105437 Nov 8, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to aim low for this audience.
Yup. Because your system of (no) honour requires you to hit below the belt. In the meantime we always deliver you knock out blows, but then there's no reason they should affect you, being a non-intelligent roly-poly:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roly-poly_toy

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#105438 Nov 8, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>where, outside of the bible that proves this god of yours to be false did you learn about your god?
run, forest, run!
Keep dodging questions you little worm. You are still on the hook hanging there squirming. Changing the subject won't get you off the hook.

Swing and a miss but thanks for playing.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105439 Nov 8, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
"information is information, neither matter nor energy .No materialist that fails to take account of this can survive the present day...
Norbert Weiner ....MIT Mathematician and father of cybernetics
there is no natural process known to science that creates coded information...like DNA.
Think anyone has answers?
Actually DNA is ONLY known to arise via natural processes.

This is the problem when you appeal to authorities who attempt to speak out of their area of expertise. It's even worse than asking Fred Hoyle's opinion of the Big Bang.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105440 Nov 8, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Let just put it this way: Nothing can be certain. There is an uncertainty associated with every thing, even those we see as facts. Nothing can be exactly predicted, just predicted within a certain probability. So what we think we know is only known for the moment and could change at any moment and does change quite often.
Yes, but while you bozos present all these supposedly profound, and possibly valid, quotes, is that it ain't gonna change much around here because you fundies are just so frakking daft.(shrug)
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105441 Nov 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't know which Bible you are reading, mine says, "and the Lord provided a "helpmate". It never said the women needed help..
No shite, Sherlock. No doubt you are a strict and passionate follower of the Bible:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105442 Nov 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
Here is the very first article that I ran across on how the blood clotting cascade evolved. Please note, it is by Professor Ken Miller, one of the heroes of the Dover Trial. If you ever saw the videos about that trial you would know that Behe looked like a fool in it:
And it's also worth noting that evolutionary biologist Miller is a Christian. Of course fundies love to pretend otherwise, like our old pal Fake Prof who opened up this very thread by lying for Jesus and painting him as an anti-God atheist.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105443 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.
She was a pop star, right?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#105444 Nov 8, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Keep dodging questions you little worm. You are still on the hook hanging there squirming. Changing the subject won't get you off the hook.
Swing and a miss but thanks for playing.
nope, i even re-answered it for you.

so is this god of yours life or not? why can you not answer this easy question?
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105445 Nov 8, 2013
Joy Beasley wrote:
I hope no one minds if I ask a question here that I find a bit unsettling. I know God created everything, but where did He come from? Maybe I am asking the wrong question, but the answer to the question of origin of everything seems incomplete. Does that make sense? I asked our minister and he said that God is eternal, an answer that seems to me to gloss over the question rather than answer it.
You're right in at least one thing, the question is glossed over, just as ALL questions are glossed over by creationism. The actual answer is simple:

You do not know that God created everything, period. It's possible that (a) God created everything, but then it's also possible that such a being does not exist. Since the concept is not amenable to scientific investigation it is not verifiable in any way. Just like we don't know if we really are trapped in the Matrix or not.

One possible scenario, that fundies would never want to consider, is that God was made by another God. Which was in turn made by another God.

Or another very likely possibility - God was made in man's image.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105446 Nov 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
So if you have faith that these smart guys are correct
Faith is irrelevant when one has evidence. That's why science works.

And your 700 scientists have been outnumbered for years by Project Steve.

So obviously your appeal to popularity is fallacious.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105447 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.
Currently, no-one knows for sure what caused the Big Bang, or even that the Big Bang needed a cause at all. But in a sense it is entirely possible that God was created by the Big Bang.

About 13.7 billion years later.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105448 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.
Problem is you are looking for "ultimate truth". Simple fact is that no-one will ever achieve it. At least not in our lifetimes. Another thing is that you seem to be equating atheism with science, or at least just the Big Bang - many Christians also accept scientific concepts like evolution and the Big Bang. The concepts are not mutually inclusive.

In the end, you are free to believe in whatever you want to believe. But for anyone interested in science, science is only interested in facts and evidence. People's beliefs do not enter into it.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105449 Nov 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Gotta love the irony - a creationist laying down the foundations of evolution. After all it was him who pointed out that humans are apes.

The fundies don't like that. Reality is tough on the soft-minded.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105450 Nov 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
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.
Of course he was refuted. Both in the scientific literature AND in court.

That's why he tours the church circuit instead of writing peer-reviewed papers backing up his silly claims which he said in his own words - "would not be fruitful". And so far no budding young creationist geniuses have bothered to take his mantle, which he was unable to attain in the first place.

I notice you also still haven't been able to address the fact that his position still vastly contradicts your own. But then, internal consistency has not been a concern of creationists for thousands of years.(shrug)
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105452 Nov 8, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
The reason the credibility is lacking on their behalf, mostly is because fundies are referencing them. That makes your claims about their claims automatically suspect due to your extreme dishonesty and lack of edumacation. The other thing is that quite often you take the words of so-called "experts" who are usually talking OUTSIDE their field of expertise. And even of those who aren't, most of them do not support your position either even if they did feel they had valid criticisms of concepts you reject only for theological reasons. On top of THAT, they tend to be outnumbered by the scientific community as a whole, since we rarely, if ever, argue against scientific consensus. And since you're not capable of discussing subjects enough to make a rational argument in light of the fact the scientific consensus NOT supporting your position, it usually ends up being a big evil worldwide atheist Darwinist evolutionist Communist anti-God conspiracy.

No wonder no-one takes you seriously.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105453 Nov 8, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Fascinating, a penny on the ground is evidence of an intelligence responsible for it, yet the flagellum motor which is far, far more complex is not evidence of an intelligent agent at work?
Incredible illogic
Oh? How is "complexity" measured in an objective manner via the scientific method? What is the demarcation line of complexity between designed and non-designed and how was this line determined scientifically? And why does complexity alone indicate design in the first place? Plus what are the mechanisms of design which are indicated by the phenomena you claim are designed?

Don't worry if you can't answer. Even the creationists who made up your BS claims can't answer these questions, and some of them have PhD's. Since you don't even have a GED, you're pretty much screwed.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105454 Nov 8, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
The revealing part of this post is the honesty takes place in backrooms, not in public.
No one understands it, yet it's presented as truth
That means they are not being truthful, imagine that
Irony meter go boom, since you and SBT are both massive liars.

Remember, not ad-hom but observable fact.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#105455 Nov 8, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me evidence of a complex biological system being produced by anything other than an already existing biological system. That is the essence of it.
God.

Oops.

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
First Word That Comes To Mind ....... (Apr '10) 4 min Rider on the Storm 13,653
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 11 min CJ Rocker 228,445
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) (Dec '14) 15 min CJ Rocker 6,745
True False Game (Jun '11) 16 min CJ Rocker 16,475
BAFTA Winners ! 44 min Tally 2
only TWO words! (Nov '08) 58 min David0407 28,249
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 59 min David0407 84,825
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 5 hr Louise Darling 7,199
More from around the web