Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 171931 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.

anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#107794 Dec 30, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>So do you consider evolutionists those scientists and thinkers that accept the theory and/or work in the field? Or do you consider that group more broadly to include all those that use or misuse the information taken from the field? It sounds like the latter. Being that inclusive, as the driver of a car, I can be considered an automotive manufacturer.
Obviously, the latter. But the term "Evolutionist" suggests a philosophy or ideology that is based on Evolution science.

From WordWeb: evolutionist: a person who believes in organic evolution.

I'm not sure what term that scientists use to describe themselves, but I'm sure it has SOME Greek or Latin in it to make is sound special! Either way, I'm interested in the facts. The conclusions are not absolute.
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#107795 Dec 30, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Likewise.
Ouch! What button should I press today to wind you up on one of your rants?
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#107796 Dec 30, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Now give us examples of evolutionists lying to support their case as creationists have lied to support theirs. Its funny to watch you wriggle as you splutter and babble trying to back out of your claim.
Well, I don't often see lies support "their" case as they don't have one agenda, but you certainly have historical examples of frauds like Piltdown Man. Scientists are human. They're looking for fame and money and other political agendas just like anyone else. According to scientific method, we have a system in place to prevent such agendas from taking hold, but personally, I think we live in dark times.

Since: Dec 13

Iasi, Romania

#107797 Dec 30, 2013
Make money staying home. Up to 100$ a day. This is not a joke.
Subscribe here:
http://www.probux.com/...
....and start making your money!!!!

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#107798 Dec 30, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I don't often see lies support "their" case as they don't have one agenda, but you certainly have historical examples of frauds like Piltdown Man. Scientists are human. They're looking for fame and money and other political agendas just like anyone else. According to scientific method, we have a system in place to prevent such agendas from taking hold, but personally, I think we live in dark times.
Validating the claim that any scientist has ever lied is NOT validating RT's actual claim:

Replaytime wrote:

"The saddest part about it all is it is not a search of the truth. It is about one side against the other side and both sides lie and make shyt up tying to convince people to come to their side. Neither side knows or will ever know the truth about it." #107745 "Evolution vs Creation"

Even the famous frauds from a century ago such as Piltdown were not lies to try and convince people of evolution. They were phony fossils presented to the scientific community to support one version of human evolution over another.

And of course, the lies were exposed by evolutionary scientists themselves, not by any opponent of evolution. He still does not have a single example to support his original, stupid claim of parity between the two sides, as above.

As shown by my list a few posts back of actual creationist lies and that was just off the top of my head from being here for a while....RT can offer no such list.
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#107799 Dec 30, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Validating the claim that any scientist has ever lied is NOT validating RT's actual claim:
Replaytime wrote:
"The saddest part about it all is it is not a search of the truth. It is about one side against the other side and both sides lie and make shyt up tying to convince people to come to their side. Neither side knows or will ever know the truth about it." #107745 "Evolution vs Creation"
Even the famous frauds from a century ago such as Piltdown were not lies to try and convince people of evolution. They were phony fossils presented to the scientific community to support one version of human evolution over another.
And of course, the lies were exposed by evolutionary scientists themselves, not by any opponent of evolution. He still does not have a single example to support his original, stupid claim of parity between the two sides, as above.
As shown by my list a few posts back of actual creationist lies and that was just off the top of my head from being here for a while....RT can offer no such list.
You don't have to tell me that anti-evolution people are almost exclusively Christian extremists. The best form of scientific method would be to hear his theories and then dismiss them logically. Just because the Creationists have a bad track record doesn't mean that they can't get lucky!

This forum isn't about scientific credibility. It's about the credibility of science, as seen by the outside observer. If you don't show the discipline of the scientist, you won't make a good case.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107800 Dec 30, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I said both sides lie. And both sides do. I id not claim that for this forum. I claim in general. Both sides have lied and made shyt up. We all know it.
Big whoop. Your side outnumbers us 10,000 to 1 in that regard.(shrug)

By the way, which of US, on HERE have lied about evolution?

I'll give you a hint - not us.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#107802 Dec 30, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have to tell me that anti-evolution people are almost exclusively Christian extremists. The best form of scientific method would be to hear his theories and then dismiss them logically. Just because the Creationists have a bad track record doesn't mean that they can't get lucky!
This forum isn't about scientific credibility. It's about the credibility of science, as seen by the outside observer. If you don't show the discipline of the scientist, you won't make a good case.
I don't think Replaytime is a religious extremist. I think he is a person who wants to cling to religious belief and is of the view that accepting the science would negate his religious views.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#107803 Dec 30, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I said both sides lie. And both sides do. I id not claim that for this forum. I claim in general. Both sides have lied and made shyt up. We all know it.
Hey Replay, instead of continuing to fight this losing battle after making a claim you cannot support, why not try backing up a bit.

Accepting evolution does not have to mean abandoning God. Not that I believe in God, but some very smart people do. Highlights, by a publisher of 20+ Young Earth Creation geology papers who eventually realised YEC - that HE wrote many papers supporting, was a pack of lies:

" I took a poll of my ICR (Institute of Creation Research)graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

"From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true?"

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either."

-Glen R Morton
http://www.answersincreation.org/whyileft.htm

You might find his whole article very interesting.

Morton made the transition from paid up paper writing Creation Geologist to realising that Creation geology was a pack of lies, gradually. He now accepts an old earth, the BBT, and evolution...but he is still a Christian too. Its not either / or, no matter what extremists at both ends of the spectrum say. But the evidence for the scientific position is overwhelming, and cannot be ignored but must be reconciled at least, as Morton has done.

Fundies, of course, hate his guts.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107804 Dec 31, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think Replaytime is a religious extremist. I think he is a person who wants to cling to religious belief and is of the view that accepting the science would negate his religious views.
That's *his* problem.(shrug)
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#107805 Dec 31, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think Replaytime is a religious extremist. I think he is a person who wants to cling to religious belief and is of the view that accepting the science would negate his religious views.
I don't think Replaytime has given me enough information to reach a conclusion.

See, I suspect that many of the people who visit this forum take the side of religion to pose questions that would cause people to open their eyes to many things. It all depends on how much their insights depend on a literal interpretation of holy books. Now, I don't see any secret messages coming from Replaytime either so I'm keeping out.

From a spiritual point of view though, Evolution takes a nasty aristocratic spin if you aren't watching closely. I don't need my Neanderthal ancestors being condemned by misanthropic money grubbers...And yes, I'm of Irish ancestry with some Basque genetics in the family tree so I probably share some of those Neanderthal traits. Heck! Anytime a person implies prestige through family genes, I take offense! It's uncivil!

My core response when someone is obsessed with "victory" of the Evolution issue is to find out what's behind it. Usually, it's some creature of bad habits that the stuffy, church-going crowd gossips about. Well, if that IS the case, why should I fight your battles? I have better things to do then to kill their God so you.can make them feel bad.

Perspective! Don't leave home without it!

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#107806 Dec 31, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> And by that, the people of Borneo would have been known as the English, but not, who is now the liar?
According to Chuckie logic, they speak Borneo in Borneo and natives spoke Americ in America - except that there are no such languages. The answer to the question is:
Charles Idemi.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107807 Dec 31, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Ouch! What button should I press today to wind you up on one of your rants?
Buddy, have you been ranting lately? Not again.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107808 Dec 31, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
According to Chuckie logic, they speak Borneo in Borneo and natives spoke Americ in America - except that there are no such languages. The answer to the question is:
Charles Idemi.
Reading from your premise, there is no logic in your statement. The people of England are known as the English singularly, no one can take that not even you.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107809 Dec 31, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
According to Chuckie logic, they speak Borneo in Borneo and natives spoke Americ in America - except that there are no such languages. The answer to the question is:
Charles Idemi.
The truth and history taught me that, all the nations today that takes English as first or native language, does so because of England. Some good examples are USA and Canada.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107810 Dec 31, 2013
So by that premise, English belongs to England.
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#107811 Jan 1, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
So by that premise, English belongs to England.
The immense point that all the advocates of Evolution keep annoying you with is that nobody is interested in arguments "by that premise". They've debated too many Creationists who use stupid tricks to hijack a debate and you're an example of one of them. We're all content to let you go round and round and round and round in your little bubble and be an example of pathetic, Creationist rationalization for the others who show up here.

Move on or keep on circling! It's all good!

Since: Jan 07

Location Shown

#107812 Jan 1, 2014
So the common standard of proof ain't enough,



Standards of Evidence needed to Change your Mind on the issue are ,...??








9779

Since: Jan 07

Location Shown

#107813 Jan 1, 2014
BTW

Happy new Year, Last year Evolved from The Day it was Created into This year, Hope i get more than a couple more with Mom in them,...


“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#107814 Jan 1, 2014
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, the latter. But the term "Evolutionist" suggests a philosophy or ideology that is based on Evolution science.
From WordWeb: evolutionist: a person who believes in organic evolution.
I'm not sure what term that scientists use to describe themselves, but I'm sure it has SOME Greek or Latin in it to make is sound special! Either way, I'm interested in the facts. The conclusions are not absolute.
Evolutionary biologist is a commonly used description or title.

One can maintain their personal ideologies and beliefs while accepting the facts of evolution. Much the same way that one can accept the fact that the Earth orbits the sun and not the other way around without destroying ones primary beliefs.

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) 9 min Sublime1 167,260
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 9 min whatimeisit 9,334
~`*`~ Create a sentence using the 'letters' of ... (Oct '12) 10 min Grace Nerissa 2,570
Whatcha' doing? (Apr '12) 14 min Sublime1 8,729
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 14 min Hoosier Hillbilly 5,769
2015: "Make a Story/ 6 Words Only: 27 min Hoosier Hillbilly 1,930
A six word game (Dec '08) 31 min Hoosier Hillbilly 18,522
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 1 hr Bevy of Words 12,724
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 2 hr Wolftracks 42,112
Dedicate a song (Jul '08) 7 hr SLY WEST 16,054
More from around the web