Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 186864 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.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106583 Nov 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> But an inventor do have the right of ownership, do you agree with that?
If English had been invented, yes. But it was *not* invented. You are making yet another pointless, totally stupid argument.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106584 Nov 23, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
To repeat my point, "if its ancient its not primitive", you are confirming my point. In these ruins like Puma Punka, Baalbeck and others we see construction methods using stone that we the "advanced", cant duplicate. Our buildings are very young in relative age, watch what happens to our skyscrapers when there is an earthquake or a fire.
When you research the origin of such places they cant be explained with our science so the sources are what they are, they doc what they see and report. That's not wrong. The one I used fell into that category. If an author wants to take a guess thats his business and doesn't change the basis of my point concerning the facts. Such places are better explained with a Biblical worldview that is, man was advanced from the beginning, has been interrupted by self-destruction or judgements, and then rebounded in cycles.
Completely wrong. Starting with 'we the "advanced", cant duplicate'. Your whole argument is based on that but it's total crap.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106585 Nov 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey!!!
What's wrong with Conservapedia? They have come up with some very innovative explanations of life. For example take this article with a unique idea that explains how life may have returned to Australia after the flood. Ooh, and a video that helps:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =4mjmGbfyPPUXX&list=PLAC34 81305829426D
http://www.conservapedia.com/Post-Diluvian_Di...
Holy crap! That's hilarious! Volcanoes blew the critters all over the earth??? Astounding that anyone could actually think this possible.

LMAO!

“Seventh son”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#106586 Nov 23, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy crap! That's hilarious! Volcanoes blew the critters all over the earth??? Astounding that anyone could actually think this possible.
LMAO!
I don't know whether to laugh hysterically , or to cry uncontrollably.

“Seventh son”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#106587 Nov 23, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy crap! That's hilarious! Volcanoes blew the critters all over the earth??? Astounding that anyone could actually think this possible.
LMAO!
It maybe evidence we are indeed descendants of arboreal monkeys.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106588 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> I don't know whether to laugh hysterically , or to cry uncontrollably.
Me neither.

I can just imagine all the bunnies, kolas and such calmly sitting in a pyroclastic flow waiting to get blown back home.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106589 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> You seem to think this refutes common ancestry, it doesn't. It merely points to an evolutionary difference.
Here we go again with another bizarre reply from you. I did not say differing ape/human molecular machinery, missing oxygen molecule, refutes common ancestry. We all know evos would be happy to offer great leaps of faith about the first homonid to loose expression of an oxygen molecule and survive the mutation. The data does give you evos something else to guesswork over and bring into the evo fold like a plethora of others eg Y chromosome.

A monkey/gorilla/orang is less like a chimp than a human only if you are content to appear non plausibly ridiculous and suggest genetic distance refers to genetic closeness and ancestry. It cannot possibly be the case, genetically or morphologically, that a monkey/gorilla is comparatively LESS gentically similar to a chimp than a human. Something is very amiss with evos ability to reflect 'similarity'!

By circular reasoning what ever organism is closest to mankind after hammering genes together bootstrapped to the prevailing bias, algorithmic magic will provide data suggesting genetic distances that actually mean nothing. Evos have done well to maintain that status by manipulating data and its reporting to support the prevailing bias in comparative genomics.

When researchers started coming up with reporting genomic data that suggested a chimp is genetically closer to mankind than a monkey or gorilla, and actually accepted it as having substantive scientific meaning, was the day 'science' lost its mind.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106590 Nov 23, 2013
Heads up! It's going to start raining Sicilians!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-251...

And fish! LOTS of fish!

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/world/asia/japa...

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106591 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
It maybe evidence we are indeed descendants of arboreal monkeys.
You'd have to look more like a monkey than me to suggest a chimp is genetically more similar to mankind than a monkey or gorilla.

Are you a Monkey head? Do you express the missing the missing oxygen molecule as well? Tick for both, you pass for a great example of the missing link. Keep talking and you'll get a tick for evidence for intermediate intelligence between Ardis relos and you. 3 out of 3. Well done!

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106592 Nov 23, 2013
I see the ego strokers are out hoping with enough spam, unfounded accusations and ridicule they will sweep the obvious away.

Current research data runs counter to what was expected by evos. The data is more supportive of a creationist paradigm than an evolutionary, limitless ability to adapt, scenario.

Evos simply have no more than evolutionary assumptions to suggest that the genome can adapt from microbe to man against all odds. eg negative epistasis, majority deleterious mutations, deteriorating genome, breeders never being able to breed dino sized dogs etc etc.

The nonsense around chimps being genomically more similar to man than a chimp is to a gorilla or monkey, is just the icing on the cake in showing how ridiculous evos algorithmic magic has become.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106593 Nov 23, 2013
MazHere wrote:
I see the ego strokers are out hoping with enough spam, unfounded accusations and ridicule they will sweep the obvious away.
Current research data runs counter to what was expected by evos. The data is more supportive of a creationist paradigm than an evolutionary, limitless ability to adapt, scenario.
Evos simply have no more than evolutionary assumptions to suggest that the genome can adapt from microbe to man against all odds. eg negative epistasis, majority deleterious mutations, deteriorating genome, breeders never being able to breed dino sized dogs etc etc.
The nonsense around chimps being genomically more similar to man than a chimp is to a gorilla or monkey, is just the icing on the cake in showing how ridiculous evos algorithmic magic has become.
BS.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106594 Nov 23, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
BS.
BS, is not an appropriate reply. Every time you look deeper into the genome you find restrictions to an orgaisms ability to adapt. Your wish list was to find beneficial mutations helping others along and more beneficial mutations than deleterious ones, you did not want to find a deteriorating genome. Where is your good news?

Despite all your biased and flawed research your data does nothing to bolster your claims but does bolster mine. Boo Hoo for you, like it or not. Your spamming won't change anything.

If humans and gorillas are 98% similar by some comparison, how can a credible chimp and gorilla comparison score less than this?

Comparative genomics is rubbish and based on false algorithmic magic that is only evidence of a prevailing bias, not reality.

“Seventh son”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#106595 Nov 23, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You'd have to look more like a monkey than me to suggest a chimp is genetically more similar to mankind than a monkey or gorilla.
Are you a Monkey head? Do you express the missing the missing oxygen molecule as well? Tick for both, you pass for a great example of the missing link. Keep talking and you'll get a tick for evidence for intermediate intelligence between Ardis relos and you. 3 out of 3. Well done!
Only self licking ice cream cone heads can think the way you do, so my advice to you is simple.

A clue...you might want to look into it.

If you are trying to make some point , you're terribly unsuccessful.
Your reading comprehension is shot to hell, and your knowledge sorely lacking. I can only guess you are a poe , all other explanations lead to moron, I refrain fro thinking that you're truly a moron. Though I could be wrong.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

#106596 Nov 23, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that explains it, especially as any hurry up done in the lab results in legs hanging off drosophila heads or a drop in fitness!
What you should say is your algorithmic magic that is always falsified over time can still be manipulated to support the prevailing bias, and has some guesswork to offer everyone.
"Comparisons of the map of each cluster’s network in each species plainly showed that certain connections exist in humans but not chimps. In the cortex, for example, 17.4% of the connections were specific to humans, Geschwind and co-workers reported in the 21 November 2006 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."
http://natzraya.com/New%20Folder/HumanApeDNA....
No doubt your researchers are able to continue the prevailing bias, given they have so many brains from our unknown and yet to be discovered chimp common ancestors.
The point is Aura, non human apes have different molecular machinery to mankind. Just because scientists can stain a hand full of enzymes and hammer a load of fragments into a biased alignment does not mean 'sameness'.
Difference Between Humans And Apes Linked To A Missing Oxygen Atom
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/...
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/steen/cogweb/...
DaaaAAaaamn!!!! And you accuse others of spamming

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#106597 Nov 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> The Angles, Saxons, and Jutes are also known as the English. Name one place in mainland Europe, where English is taken as first language?
Gibraltar. Laffin.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#106598 Nov 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> An inventor must compulsorily have the right of ownership, true or false?
False. Ask Tesla.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#106599 Nov 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey!!!
What's wrong with Conservapedia? They have come up with some very innovative explanations of life. For example take this article with a unique idea that explains how life may have returned to Australia after the flood. Ooh, and a video that helps:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =4mjmGbfyPPUXX&list=PLAC34 81305829426D
http://www.conservapedia.com/Post-Diluvian_Di...
*headdesk*

Ow.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106600 Nov 23, 2013
MikeF wrote:
BTW, whoever put spam, clueless and nuts on RP's post can just STFU.
I may not get on too well with RP, but I agree. And I see yours was judged the same.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106601 Nov 23, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>DaaaAAaaamn!!!! And you accuse others of spamming
Actually that article is written by evolutionists as is the one relating to different molecular machinery. If you want to call evolutionary researchers work and claims spam, you are more than welcome to do so, oh bright one! LOL!

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106602 Nov 23, 2013
Another page about to be spammed by evos that want to keep as far away from science as they can until they can when their rhetoric is exposed.

Every time evos look deeper into the genome they find restrictions to an orgaisms ability to adapt. Your wish list was to find beneficial mutations helping others along and more beneficial mutations than deleterious ones. Evos did not want to find a deteriorating genome. Evos did want to find evolutionary refuse. Where is your good news?

Despite all your biased and flawed research your data does nothing to bolster your claims but does bolster mine. Boo Hoo for you, like it or not. Your spamming won't change anything.

If humans and gorillas are 98% similar by some comparison, how can a credible chimp and gorilla comparison score less than this?

Comparative genomics is rubbish and based on false algorithmic magic that is only evidence of a prevailing bias, not reality.

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 song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 13 min SweLL GirL 181,261
conversation using song lyrics (Aug '13) 16 min SweLL GirL 2,024
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 21 min Red_Forman 143,082
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 22 min Red_Forman 81,014
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) 59 min F_R_E_D 1,887
News Everyone is talking about the weird constipatio... 1 hr Emerald 2
Change 1 letter game! (Nov '11) 1 hr whatimeisit 6,208
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 6 hr Denny CranesPlace 54,077
More from around the web