Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107987 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is the stupid puddlegooist in all his glory, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to support life springing to existence on it's own so how do the comic fools reply?....there is no evidence of god! Defame experiments! hell, they don't need me they all failed you azzhole!
Since there is absolutely zero evidence of God but plenty of evidence of life then that's at least tentative evidence that life developed on its own.

But the theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107988 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Of all the idiots on here you are the King, the SETI program which searches the universe for some kind of a coherent signal, something as simple as a SOS, or morse code would be recognized as requiring intelligence to produce and taken as a given for proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. Yet when you blind religious goobers are faced with the enormous complexity of the DNA code ,which recently was discovered to have a second layer of information imbedded
Yes, note SETI relies on SIMPLE radio patterns rather than complex ones. This is because simple patterns are far more easier to recognise than complex ones, and therefore are far more likely to be used if someone wanted to make other civilizations in space recognise that they were here. There is a REASON why even the guys at SETI came out and said ID was crap.

You on the other hand claim "complexity" is evidence of intelligence but you have no idea on how to measure it in the first place. This kinda undercuts your claims big time.
bohart wrote:
you call that the product of chance!
Except that you're lying.

So how many times do I have to explain to you that we have NEVER claimed it happened by "chance", and why? Too many to count. So why do you continue to lie about our claims?

An apple will always fall down. It will not fall up or sideways or diagonally "by chance" (unless other forces intervene), yet despite this gravity apparently works without any intelligent intervention being necessary.

Ergo it is NOT "chance".
bohart wrote:
no intelligence , mere undirected natural forces!
And undirected natural forces make life all the time.
bohart wrote:
You are like my grandfathers mule , equipped with blinders to avoid any and all distractions from your task. Protecting your world view
Look Bo, all you have to demonstrate your claims is tell us who or what your "intelligent designer" is, what it did, how it did it, where it did it, when it did it, and how this can be determined in an objective manner via the scientific method.
bohart wrote:
I have avoided quoted the bible here because it casts pearls before swine, but it does have a verse perfect for you and your deniers of intelligent reasoning
the fool has said there is no God
OH, so really all this is about God? Well no need to worry, since neither abiogenesis nor evolution, or indeed any other scientific concept claims that God definitely did not do it. Doesn't claim it did either, but doesn't say it didn't. Science is NOT atheism. So it's up to you if you prefer to place limits on an Almighty being capable of creating universes in its spare time.

But at least now you can't claim that your objections have any relevance to science. As in reality all your beefs are is that you reject science cuz you think an invisible magic Jew didit. I can see now you will never be able to compete with anybody here scientifically as your only interest is apologetics. This is why you lose every argument you attempt as you NEVER bother to address the content of people's posts. You may as well just start threatening us with eternal damnation for merely disagreeing with your religious opinions, ya know, kinda like the Phelps family.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107989 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Sad alright ,
Keep repeating your debate points allocated by your goober masters
Points which YOU can't understand, or ever refute.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107991 Jan 16, 2014
anonymous wrote:
It's not really true that you can't scientifically prove the existence of "God" but then again, you have to define your "god" first.
I would agree in principle, however since no one on the planet has been able to come up with a scientific definition for such a being ever, so far at least that statement remains correct. Anyone who's tried only ends up with a concept that violates physics, or internally contradictory, or non-falsifiable (therefore not scientific).
anonymous wrote:
Ultimately, all we can really establish is the idea of an entity that exists outside of space-time that engages in some sort of "manipulation" of events in a manner that clearly defies random chance at the sub-atomic level. There would be no proof of "creation", just evidence of intelligence.
And evidence of intelligence would be evidence of creation. For in human examples we don't tend to ascribe intelligence to phenomena unless we have at least some idea how that intelligence did whatever it is that it did. Fundies on the other hand claim things like "complexity", which might even be valid. In which case they would need to tell us how complexity is measured, what the demarcation line is between "product of intelligence" and "not necessarily product of intelligence", and how that line was determined in an objective manner via the scientific method.

Unfortunately they can't do that.
anonymous wrote:
And even that would presume that such an "intelligence" is not out to defy our efforts to scientifically demonstrate its existence.
Creationists often state that God does not reveal Himself then complain that we don't take their assertions seriously, which is an amusing contradiction. But I digress.
anonymous wrote:
For my part, I'd have to ask, why is it so important to find such an entity?
It's not.

There is no scientific debate over any of the scientific concepts that fundies don't like. They are disliked for theological reasons, and opposed for political ones. They don't like science period because they think education doesn't matter and is an impediment to religious indoctrination. Their goal is to overthrow the US Constitution and replace it with a theocracy. And they think when that happens Jesus will come back.
anonymous wrote:
I can live with the reality of my accidental existence. I'm not some smug eldest son who's trying to impress the king's court with my brand of magic.
No, show me events that defy physics, or majikal voices in my head, and I'll be very convinced that human scheming of the criminal sort is at work. I'm not looking for an ego prop. I'm only interested in the money!
As are they. That's why evangelism is a big business and they are VERY good when it comes to fundraising. Which is why the GOP likes to pander to the religious nuts (not the nice normal people who happen to be religious) so they can get all their money and get all their votes.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107992 Jan 16, 2014
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not really true that you can't scientifically prove the existence of "God" but then again, you have to define your "god" first. Ultimately, all we can really establish is the idea of an entity that exists outside of space-time that engages in some sort of "manipulation" of events in a manner that clearly defies random chance at the sub-atomic level. There would be no proof of "creation", just evidence of intelligence. And even that would presume that such an "intelligence" is not out to defy our efforts to scientifically demonstrate its existence.
For my part, I'd have to ask, why is it so important to find such an entity? I can live with the reality of my accidental existence. I'm not some smug eldest son who's trying to impress the king's court with my brand of magic.
No, show me events that defy physics, or majikal voices in my head, and I'll be very convinced that human scheming of the criminal sort is at work. I'm not looking for an ego prop. I'm only interested in the money!
Obviously the theology factory keeps going into scrambling and reinventing.
Given history obviously human scheming of the criminal sort is at work.

Basicly we are talking about a very concrete concept that did not create anything, but that has the name implying connection. Everything following is whatever else the term implies.
So after counting toes and inspecting the content of it's ears and nose it feels lonely.
You can order most filosophy into the question of how to deal with the concept of 'other'.

None would proof god(s) or intelligence being true or false because we are looking at an abstract concepts and various definitions thereof.
Those definitions are the only getting wider in scope in the vain attempt of proving what is essentially the enlarged definition.

That usually happens when dealing with abstractions.

So whether those are true or false is discussed.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107993 Jan 16, 2014
"creation", just evidence of intelligence.

The Dude wrote:
And evidence of intelligence would be evidence of creation. For in human examples we don't tend to ascribe intelligence to phenomena unless we have at least some idea how that intelligence did whatever it is that it did. Fundies on the other hand claim things like "complexity", which might even be valid. In which case they would need to tell us how complexity is measured, what the demarcation line is between "product of intelligence" and "not necessarily product of intelligence", and how that line was determined in an objective manner via the scientific method.

As i recall that is how did thread started and sofar not getting an answer/theory form a creationists point of view.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107994 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:

I have avoided quoted the bible here because it casts pearls before swine, but it does have a verse perfect for you and your deniers of intelligent reasoning
the fool has said there is no God

Funny, since that is all the defunct OT and NT are about.
i.e. obfuscating the Obvious and bring it down to anthromorphism and socio-political emperialism.

And if not for scrambling to get 'god' back, or revivalism since the money and power does not flow like it used to, we would not even have this discussion with a group calling themselves creationists.
cancer suxs

Owatonna, MN

#107995 Jan 16, 2014
Creation is based on a 2000 year old book written by uneducated goat herders..Evolution is based on fact and testes and what we can see with our eyes.

Yea evolution is the way to go.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#107996 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is the stupid puddlegooist in all his glory, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to support life springing to existence on it's own so how do the comic fools reply?....there is no evidence of god! Defame experiments! hell, they don't need me they all failed you azzhole!
It's been what - 4,500 years since the author(s) of Genesis adapted Sumerian stories as the Jews' own? What have you got besides those stories? Nada. What are you motivated to want or accept besides those stories? Nada.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#107997 Jan 16, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
...As are they. That's why evangelism is a big business and they are VERY good when it comes to fundraising. Which is why the GOP likes to pander to the religious nuts (not the nice normal people who happen to be religious) so they can get all their money and get all their votes.
This is what I refer to as Jesus Inc. It's real big business here in Brazil, with all the Latter-day Saints establishments, and the likes of the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God. These establishments are usually found in the poorer parts of cities, where they rent huge, cheap warehouses and pack the people in to standing-room only sessions. Here they miraculously 'cure' the disabled sick, and perform other 'miracles'. What is sickening is that the poor followers give real money to these establishments, out of faith. Money that many of these poor families cannot afford. On any given day these "churches" are filled to capacity, and you can see some preacher on a huge wall display in the front screaming out a sermon.

How much revenue do these establishments generate? It's unknown because they are registered churches and therefore pay no tax and declare no revenue, but it's speculated to be in the billions of dollars per year in Brazil alone. This absolutely sickens me.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107998 Jan 16, 2014
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what I refer to as Jesus Inc. It's real big business here in Brazil, with all the Latter-day Saints establishments, and the likes of the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God. These establishments are usually found in the poorer parts of cities, where they rent huge, cheap warehouses and pack the people in to standing-room only sessions. Here they miraculously 'cure' the disabled sick, and perform other 'miracles'. What is sickening is that the poor followers give real money to these establishments, out of faith. Money that many of these poor families cannot afford. On any given day these "churches" are filled to capacity, and you can see some preacher on a huge wall display in the front screaming out a sermon.
How much revenue do these establishments generate? It's unknown because they are registered churches and therefore pay no tax and declare no revenue, but it's speculated to be in the billions of dollars per year in Brazil alone. This absolutely sickens me.
Bohart would throw money at them too. Though in his case I don't feel quite as sympathetic.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107999 Jan 16, 2014
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what I refer to as Jesus Inc. It's real big business here in Brazil, with all the Latter-day Saints establishments, and the likes of the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God. These establishments are usually found in the poorer parts of cities, where they rent huge, cheap warehouses and pack the people in to standing-room only sessions. Here they miraculously 'cure' the disabled sick, and perform other 'miracles'. What is sickening is that the poor followers give real money to these establishments, out of faith. Money that many of these poor families cannot afford. On any given day these "churches" are filled to capacity, and you can see some preacher on a huge wall display in the front screaming out a sermon.
How much revenue do these establishments generate? It's unknown because they are registered churches and therefore pay no tax and declare no revenue, but it's speculated to be in the billions of dollars per year in Brazil alone. This absolutely sickens me.
I know people that avoid going to church because the main thing to take there to be welcome is money.
And i know people that for that reason only go occasionally.

Some trustworthy ones at least work to a goal (a community center, a kindergarten a.s.o.) and can be seen to be held accountable.
But with these evangelical offspring it just goes in the preachers pocket.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#108000 Jan 16, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn. Evolution does not claim there is no God.
Yawn. The point about evolution is that it shows a process by which things like DNA can develop complexity. Talk about casting a pearl before swine - you refuse to even understand the mechanism that you claim to know cannot happen. Then call anyone who has learned it and does understand it an idiot, and moreover understand how it explains the fossil record and the genome extremely well....yes, these are the idiots. Not an ignorant blow-off like you, resolute in your ignorance and proud of your stupidity, grabbing one debunked objection after another from your little sack of polished turds and flinging them about.
See? you already lied,...evolution is a process by which DNA can develop! that is utter lying bullshite!, or you simply don't know any better.

You might want to let the New York times in on your discovery about DNA development, you are the only one who knows about it

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#108001 Jan 16, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, note SETI relies on SIMPLE radio patterns rather than complex ones. This is because simple patterns are far more easier to recognise than complex ones, and therefore are far more likely to be used if someone wanted to make other civilizations in space recognise that they were here. There is a REASON why even the guys at SETI came out and said ID was crap.
You on the other hand claim "complexity" is evidence of intelligence but you have no idea on how to measure it in the first place. This kinda undercuts your claims big time.
<quoted text>
Except that you're lying.
So how many times do I have to explain to you that we have NEVER claimed it happened by "chance", and why? Too many to count. So why do you continue to lie about our claims?
An apple will always fall down. It will not fall up or sideways or diagonally "by chance" (unless other forces intervene), yet despite this gravity apparently works without any intelligent intervention being necessary.
Ergo it is NOT "chance".
<quoted text>
And undirected natural forces make life all the time.
<quoted text>
Look Bo, all you have to demonstrate your claims is tell us who or what your "intelligent designer" is, what it did, how it did it, where it did it, when it did it, and how this can be determined in an objective manner via the scientific method.
<quoted text>
OH, so really all this is about God? Well no need to worry, since neither abiogenesis nor evolution, or indeed any other scientific concept claims that God definitely did not do it. Doesn't claim it did either, but doesn't say it didn't. Science is NOT atheism. So it's up to you if you prefer to place limits on an Almighty being capable of creating universes in its spare time.
But at least now you can't claim that your objections have any relevance to science. As in reality all your beefs are is that you reject science cuz you think an invisible magic Jew didit. I can see now you will never be able to compete with anybody here scientifically as your only interest is apologetics. This is why you lose every argument you attempt as you NEVER bother to address the content of people's posts. You may as well just start threatening us with eternal damnation for merely disagreeing with your religious opinions, ya know, kinda like the Phelps family.(shrug)
You spend far,far more time attacking God than defending your own idiotic beliefs, I don't blame you though.

Lord!,....undirected natural forces make life all the time?

Please explain how undirected natural forces made the first life.
you can't, all you have is a belief that it happened.

All you ever do is say jew magic, jew magic, while you believe in puddle magic.

I believe that life and it's complexity and the universe is the result of a great intelligence that is obvious to anyone not embedded in total denial to it. Can't measure complexity! what a stupid evasion ,.I'll go slow for you what's more complex, a paper airplane , or the space shuttle?

"the harmony of natural law reveals an intelligence of such superiority , that compared with it , all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection"

Albert Einstein

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108002 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
See? you already lied,...evolution is a process by which DNA can develop! that is utter lying bullshite!, or you simply don't know any better.
You might want to let the New York times in on your discovery about DNA development, you are the only one who knows about it
Ergo if it is not read by a tiny faction of the internationally oriented Americans in New York it never existed.
Why?
Bohart never read it.
He never reads the NYT.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#108003 Jan 16, 2014
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Ergo if it is not read by a tiny faction of the internationally oriented Americans in New York it never existed.
Why?
Bohart never read it.
He never reads the NYT.
Wow! you really aren't to sharp are you? google sarcasm, whew!

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108004 Jan 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
You spend far,far more time attacking God than defending your own idiotic beliefs, I don't blame you though.
Lord!,....undirected natural forces make life all the time?
Please explain how undirected natural forces made the first life.
you can't, all you have is a belief that it happened.
All you ever do is say jew magic, jew magic, while you believe in puddle magic.
I believe that life and it's complexity and the universe is the result of a great intelligence that is obvious to anyone not embedded in total denial to it. Can't measure complexity! what a stupid evasion ,.I'll go slow for you what's more complex, a paper airplane , or the space shuttle?
"the harmony of natural law reveals an intelligence of such superiority , that compared with it , all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection"
Albert Einstein
In that case this elegance has an equal chance of being deemed god.

All the time life is made.

Laws are in action. But life in it's early state had different environments to cope with.

But there is no will or reason stating that.

It is chemistry and biochemistry (Lewis forces) and ultimately physics acting on random matter present from violent events in our past.

Find out where all the elements come from.

The idea is that we are old.

---
Can you recall the moment of your conception?

By your reasoning it is as if you are saying that evolution can only redeem itself when it can know that.

An intelligence ( with such modern notion as all-powerfull a.s.o.) could have decided to simply make some changes.

And make you aware of that.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#108005 Jan 16, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Bohart would throw money at them too. Though in his case I don't feel quite as sympathetic.


Why don't you and these other ubber goobers try reading a book and educate yourselves about the universe by MIT professor Max Tegmark .....Mathematical Universe

He states that the universe isn't just described by math , but that it is math!

Math requires intelligence

or....just stick with the astronomical luck theory

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#108006 Jan 17, 2014
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
In that case this elegance has an equal chance of being deemed god.
All the time life is made.
Laws are in action. But life in it's early state had different environments to cope with.
But there is no will or reason stating that.
It is chemistry and biochemistry (Lewis forces) and ultimately physics acting on random matter present from violent events in our past.
Find out where all the elements come from.
The idea is that we are old.
---
Can you recall the moment of your conception?
By your reasoning it is as if you are saying that evolution can only redeem itself when it can know that.
An intelligence ( with such modern notion as all-powerfull a.s.o.) could have decided to simply make some changes.
And make you aware of that.
Why do you people lie all the time about life?....all the time life is made! by already existing life! that's reproduction!

That life is mere chemistry was debunked decades ago, it's a 19th century idea blown apart by electron microscopes showing life wasn't simple globs waiting to be manufactured.

DNA is a complex code, there is no known natural mechanism that creates coded information, none!

It is impossible for Evolution to explain

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#108007 Jan 17, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you people lie all the time about life?....all the time life is made! by already existing life! that's reproduction!
That life is mere chemistry was debunked decades ago, it's a 19th century idea blown apart by electron microscopes showing life wasn't simple globs waiting to be manufactured.
DNA is a complex code, there is no known natural mechanism that creates coded information, none!
It is impossible for Evolution to explain
Please provide a link to this debunk? I think I may find it interesting

The fact that godbot guesswork has been superseded by multiple (MULTIPLE) and independent lines of scientific discovery and DNA evidence really seems to upset you for some reason. That same DNA that you are quite happy to see as evidence in a court case and back it 100% you quite blatantly deny when it comes to having to defend your goddidit by magic belief.

Of course it is known how DNA is formed, Its just 4 common chemicals that are built from 5 basic elements These elements were available throughout the universe after the first proto stars exploded over 12 billion years ago. Jeez even a school kid knows this. As usual for a goddidit by magic fan, you are forgetting the one important principal - TIME

Nope it is impossible for you to understand, there is a very obvious difference

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's your tip for the day? 4 min Breezy _Soul 1,850
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) 7 min skybobbie 333
Is it possible to....... 7 min Harrison Freebird 582
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 7 min Breezy _Soul 40,759
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 10 min Breezy _Soul 77,698
I Like..... (Mar '14) 10 min skybobbie 528
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 10 min Breezy _Soul 55,324
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 21 min American Werewolves 152,834
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 30 min Harrison Freebird 37,774
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 35 min -Lea- 25,975
Woman Switches Seats on Plane, Spends 3 Days in... 1 hr Newt G s Next Wife 22
More from around the web