Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222738 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 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106818 Nov 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>More egg with your ma'am?
Spam, spam, spam, spamhere.
Maz. It's Australian for spam.
You evos think you can post spam and ridicule and a substantive point I or another creo makes just gets buried without resolve. I don't care if you call it spam. You lot aren't going to get away with offering your quacking as a substantive reply.

Just on limits to adaptation alone, you have blustered and quacked, offered brain dead examples like whale evolution as evidence, denied your own data and evos have misrepresented it themselves, defered to the philosophical, and bla de da de dah. That is spam.

This is not spam and it will not go away just because you can hit the keyboard and want to talk about the blustering majority of it, but none specifically.

How does negative epistasis, majority deleterious mutations and a degenerating genome support TOE?. This data does support the creo prediction of limits to adapatability. Fell free to demonstrate how it does not, instead of waffling.

How can a chimp have more percentage dna or morphology in common with man than a gorilla or orang in side by side comparisons? You lot are being ridiculous and desperate.

Why is a whale genetically or morphologically closer to a hippo than a bull shark, that is warm blooded, uses placental birth, displays hair proteins and is fully aquatic? Is it just because a bull shark doesn't fit well into your great cladistic mess.

Why does presenting biased reconstructions based on a few bones mean something like a deer or seal must be a whale ancestor, instead of a deer or seal?

If your data was credible and I was misrepresenting it, it would not be hard to address the above. Keep spamming because that says it all about you evos and your 'science'.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106819 Nov 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry Maz. I left the spam out of your eggs.
Seeing as you can't nail TOE with any of your rubbish data, would you like me to expose these cosmologists and their Copernican science for a change?

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

#106820 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Get lost, you philosophical spam freak!
You hoots for brains can't win on science and now you're going to blow off all over the bible you know less about.
As for spam,, to quote Inigo Montoya "you keep using this word but I do not think it means what you think it means." As far as the creationists handbook goes, you were the one who attempted to misquote it. I simply posted the entire paragraph directly from your handbook and pointed out your misinterpretation. As for my closing, that was just my twisted sense of humor.:) neyuk neyuk neyuk

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106821 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Seeing as you can't nail TOE with any of your rubbish data, would you like me to expose these cosmologists and their Copernican science for a change?
I see that your address of my points about whale and shark evolution were met with the usual repeat of your rambling post.

Maztake. Australian for mistake.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

#106822 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Seeing as you can't nail TOE with any of your rubbish data, would you like me to expose these cosmologists and their Copernican science for a change?
How many days did it take for the creation? 6? I hope it was during the summer because I would hate to thing God started man off bare ass in the snow. Are you still going with men are a hunk of mud but women are a hank of hair and a piece of bone. I'm just a hunk, a hunk, a hunk of burning mudd. Swampmudd ~~~~~~^^^^"< Tell about the creation why don't you.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106823 Nov 24, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>As for spam,, to quote Inigo Montoya "you keep using this word but I do not think it means what you think it means." As far as the creationists handbook goes, you were the one who attempted to misquote it. I simply posted the entire paragraph directly from your handbook and pointed out your misinterpretation. As for my closing, that was just my twisted sense of humor.:) neyuk neyuk neyuk
No research, only blather. Try again.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106824 Nov 24, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>I am not sure who she claims spams more,, you are me. But I must insist that when it comes to a twisted sense of humor I am numro uno even if she won't satisfy me by admitting it.
I think it really is anyone that points out her marginal understanding of what she is posting. I offer no challenge to your title. My twists only emerge when I am becoming bored with posters like Maz.

I like your take on things and you are numro uno in my book. Probably for Maz too. Deep down she is looking for somebody to drag her through the mud. You know those pent up frustration of living under repressive philosophy.

Her pants are blazing for you Newton Crosby.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106825 Nov 24, 2013
Here we go Dan, I'll start. Let's talk about the Copernican principle, seeing as you're no good at talking about science.

There is a credible model that requires 'special earth' and earth being at or near the centre of the universe. This model does not require dark energy and matter.

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/erasi...

Cosmologists are freaked out because they have to rely on a mystery while the other model does not require it.

Here is the latest refute to the geocentric model provided.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/...

Take a look at what scientific question is asked to refute the obvious...

"Essentially, we held a mirror up to the universe and asked if the reflection was special,"

Now look at this from NASA...

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/08/...

Here is another reference to emperical research that challenges the after glow being the result of big bang radiation...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/...

Clearly, the biased research offered to refute a much simpler model in laughable, don't you agree? Why not just accept what is observed, other galaxies moving away from the Milky Way, as if we are at the centre?

How can there not be a centre to a ball even if the location is a point in space? It is a nonsense.

These scientists appear quite ridiculous in an attempt to maintain the Copernican principle despite all observed evidence against it.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106826 Nov 24, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>How many days did it take for the creation? 6? I hope it was during the summer because I would hate to thing God started man off bare ass in the snow. Are you still going with men are a hunk of mud but women are a hank of hair and a piece of bone. I'm just a hunk, a hunk, a hunk of burning mudd. Swampmudd ~~~~~~^^^^"< Tell about the creation why don't you.
I do have to say that Maz and I had a thing a while back. She is on the rebound from me. I can't be sure she is over me yet. She is use to them Australian crocks and I bet she is ready to explore American alligator morphology. Get her to talk about your evolutionary mechanism.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#106827 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Pull your head in you stupid woman. You can't call on your science to respond to exposure of evolutionary stupidity so asking stupid questions must be next best thing to spam.
Now you're expecting science to not only explain how to boil a jug but that I simply put the jug on to make a cup of coffee as well. That being the metaphysical realm to which science is unqualified to explain at present.
Go back to bed Aura, and take you fake credentials with you.
Okay my little self licking ice cream cone head, I'm not a woman evolution is a school topic and has college level courses.
Boiling water is achieved by heating it to 212+ degrees or over 100C , these were explained by drum roll..........science.
Now if you want to know what boiling water does to the entropy of water of how the entropy falls as your coffee cools ask chimney , he is been practicing explaining micro-states to morons. I think you more than qualify, you may even qualify for the evolution for special ed needs children class. Other than that you're a swell creatard and are a shining example of goofyness. So over and out and 10-4 good buddy.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106828 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
Here we go Dan, I'll start. Let's talk about the Copernican principle, seeing as you're no good at talking about science.
There is a credible model that requires 'special earth' and earth being at or near the centre of the universe. This model does not require dark energy and matter.
http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/erasi...
Cosmologists are freaked out because they have to rely on a mystery while the other model does not require it.
Here is the latest refute to the geocentric model provided.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/...
Take a look at what scientific question is asked to refute the obvious...
"Essentially, we held a mirror up to the universe and asked if the reflection was special,"
Now look at this from NASA...
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/08/...
Here is another reference to emperical research that challenges the after glow being the result of big bang radiation...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/...
Clearly, the biased research offered to refute a much simpler model in laughable, don't you agree? Why not just accept what is observed, other galaxies moving away from the Milky Way, as if we are at the centre?
How can there not be a centre to a ball even if the location is a point in space? It is a nonsense.
These scientists appear quite ridiculous in an attempt to maintain the Copernican principle despite all observed evidence against it.
Yep. Here we go again. I post about whales and sharks and you start dumping some irrelevant claptrap in answer.

I told you it is over between us. You have to move on.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106829 Nov 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>The bull shark is a fish. The whale is a mammal. You think they whale and the shark are related in the same sense that the whale is related to a hippo? Aren't you the madcap. Show some more detail on this assertion. Evolution of mammalian whales from mammalian terrestrial ancestors is widely known. The only evolutionary connection between whales and bull sharks would be at the last common ancestor between fish and tetrapods.
The basic traits that separate mammals and fish exist between whales and bull sharks. Just because bull sharks have developed analagous reproduction to mammals doesn't throw evolution off kilter. It isn't surprising that fish having been around as long as they have, evolved numerous different strategies that help them survive. That these can be similar to mechanisms displayed by other organisms is not surprising. What would be surprising is that some whales evolved from sharks and some from land mammals. That would refute evolution.
You really need to pace yourself and work within your limitations. You have a tendency to pick outlandish and extraordinary examples that result in you face being covered in egg.
Now, I don't expect you to provide a civil, intelligent, or logical response to this.
The term 'Mammal' is arbitrarily assumptive of evolution, when you have a warm blooded bull shark that meets the same criteria, regardless of a shark not using its fake legs for penile erection.eg the excuse of convergent evolution.

Even when you try, you waffle. You need to start talking to Aura who also never has anything intelligent to say while sucking ice cream. That is why we are better off talking about something else, because I told you, you all have lost the first round.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

#106830 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing a creationist can present as their support could be worse than the flawed and non plausible rubbish evos have to present, even when they can be bothered to do so, unlike you.
What rubbish that a man is closer either genetically or morphologically to a chimp than any other fur laden, non obligate biped that are all incapable of sophisticated speech, is too each other. It is all genetic distancing rubbish and I defy to deny it.
You are all equal spammers that want to run off down any other road or defer to the bluster of the incompetent majority.
I defiantly deny it. Now are you happy? I double dog dare you to tell us how you think man happened. Did God really take a hunk of mudd, shaped it into a man and blow it. If that is true I sure hope that God is a women.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

#106831 Nov 24, 2013
Or is God a man and that why we are called homo,, sapiens

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106832 Nov 24, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your problem, sweetheart, is that the definition of "functional" that they used is not the same thing as you are assuming it to mean. As they have explained.
Now you can write your garbage in CAPSLOCK or in Chinese and it makes no difference. Most of the "function" identified is essentially useless.
Oh, and in case you missed it the first 20 times, junk DNA is neither a core nor a necessary prediction of evolution. Never was.
And unless you can show why junk DNA is essential to the evolutionary paradigm, it never will be.
But its there, and your problem is, evolution does not require it but at least can explain it, but ID cannot.
Now continue with your trash talk. Perhaps it makes you feel big, but 99% of biologists don't give a stuff about little idiots like you who misinterpret their work. You are not even in the conversation.
No the problem is around YOUR definition of 'functional'. You don't get to define a creationist prediction. The point being if God created, there will be no need for junk. I don't think you lot have any idea what you are saying about non coding dna. You make it up as you go along and then claim you predicted it. TOE is a theory in evolution itself and has the predictive ability of a crystal ball.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106833 Nov 24, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>I defiantly deny it. Now are you happy? I double dog dare you to tell us how you think man happened. Did God really take a hunk of mudd, shaped it into a man and blow it. If that is true I sure hope that God is a women.
Listen you hypocrite, you are to used to talking to the uneducated. Your stupid ploys will get you nowhere with me.

You freaken bag of excrement, if you can demonstrate abiogenesis I sure don't have to reproduce how God turned his energy into matter, greater than a molecule.

You're a pathetic weasel.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106834 Nov 24, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
Or is God a man and that why we are called homo,, sapiens
Go shove your head back in its bag...

We are special. It is only idiot atheists and sucked in theist evos that could possibly think otherwise. Where are your intelligent aliens or a bacteria for that matter? In the story books of Copernican science iis where you'll find them.

There is a credible model that requires 'special earth' and earth being at or near the centre of the universe. This model does not require dark energy and matter.

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/erasi...

Cosmologists are freaked out because they have to rely on a mystery while the other model does not require it.

Here is the latest refute to the geocentric model provided.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/...

Take a look at what scientific question is asked to refute the obvious...

"Essentially, we held a mirror up to the universe and asked if the reflection was special,"

Now look at this from NASA...

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/08/...

Here is another reference to emperical research that challenges the after glow being the result of big bang radiation...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/...

Clearly, the biased research offered to refute a much simpler model in laughable, don't you agree? Why not just accept what is observed, other galaxies moving away from the Milky Way, as if we are at the centre?

How can there not be a centre to a ball even if the location is a point in space? It is a nonsense.

These scientists appear quite ridiculous in an attempt to maintain the Copernican principle despite all observed evidence against it.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

#106835 Nov 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I do have to say that Maz and I had a thing a while back. She is on the rebound from me. I can't be sure she is over me yet. She is use to them Australian crocks and I bet she is ready to explore American alligator morphology. Get her to talk about your evolutionary mechanism.
Please don't remind her that us gators and cousin crocks are evolutionarily challenged. She will want to know why we didn't evolve. and claim that as proof it doesn't exist. All I got to say to all those high and mighty monkeys who arrogantly think they are Gods only inhabitant in this world is, take a swim in the swamp and I will show you why God put me here.~~~~~^^^^"<\O/ help that swamp thing is going to eat me like a can of spam. I never should have swung out of the trees.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106836 Nov 24, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
The term 'Mammal' is arbitrarily assumptive of evolution, when you have a warm blooded bull shark that meets the same criteria, regardless of a shark not using its fake legs for penile erection.eg the excuse of convergent evolution.
Even when you try, you waffle. You need to start talking to Aura who also never has anything intelligent to say while sucking ice cream. That is why we are better off talking about something else, because I told you, you all have lost the first round.
After having to drag a response out of you, I was hoping it would be coherent than this. You don't address what I posted. You just throw out another threadbare blanket.

So you are claiming that a fish is now a mammal. Gotcha. So no real explanation will be forthcoming.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#106837 Nov 24, 2013
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>Please don't remind her that us gators and cousin crocks are evolutionarily challenged. She will want to know why we didn't evolve. and claim that as proof it doesn't exist. All I got to say to all those high and mighty monkeys who arrogantly think they are Gods only inhabitant in this world is, take a swim in the swamp and I will show you why God put me here.~~~~~^^^^"<\O/ help that swamp thing is going to eat me like a can of spam. I never should have swung out of the trees.
Maz probably thinks that like bull sharks you gators are related to whales. Maybe that is because she heard whales have 10 foot long...

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
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 2 min andet1987 62,271
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 4 min a_visitor 223,315
weird association 4 min Crazy Jae 25
I gyrated 6 min andet1987 3
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 7 min September Daze 6,029
next word game (Apr '13) 7 min Crazy Jae 994
First Word That Comes To Mind ....... (Apr '10) 7 min a_visitor 13,166
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 9 min Geno 27,302
News Strange bedfellows: Jimmy Carter defends Trump 20 min Katrina 225
Phrases that you don't hear very often (Nov '11) 51 min Princess Hey 762
More from around the web