Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 comments on the Jan 6, 2011, Best of New Orleans story 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.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#111944 Apr 23, 2014
thulium wrote:
<quoted text>
What I meant by transformed is that the electron is ejected at the same time positron is created through gamma ray. There is still something missing here since radioactive material or propagation of gamma rays exceeding the production rate of free electrons doesn't create new matter, just electrons and antiparticles. That's why the lightning scenario produces antimatter not matter.
Electrons *are* matter. The gamma rays don't produce protons, but that is because they are too low energy to do so.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#111945 Apr 23, 2014
thulium wrote:
Gamma-ray photons, like their X-ray counterparts, are a form of ionizing radiation; when they pass through matter, they usually deposit their energy by liberating electrons from atoms and molecules.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/225...
This type of radiation (Brehmstalung) is one way energy from x-rays and gamma rays can be released, but it is not the only way. This tends to be limited to relatively low energy gamma rays. Those with energy above 1.022 MeV *will* produce both electrons and positrons. To produce protons and anti-protons requires gamma rays of energy more than 1877 MeV. In the type of radiation you are considering, there is a conservation of matter: no new matter is produced. For the higher energy gamma rays, new matter (electrons, muons, pions, etc) can be produced.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#111946 Apr 23, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Apparently some here do not understand the basic creation story.
Of course we do. We just don't accept it due to the complete and utter total lack of evidence.
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
You call creation a myth when the evidence is clear that disorder is occurring and things are not being made new as we see throughout, but entropy or death is in all of the universe.
Telling us your deity made a big pile of shite that's on a constant breakdown is not a fantastic way to convince others of his engineering prowess when it comes to making universes.
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
We are here and the Bible clearly tells us the whys and wherefores of our existence.
Yes - slavery. Worship or burn.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#111947 Apr 23, 2014
Sorry, Bremsstrahlung.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#111948 Apr 23, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Apparently some here do not understand the basic creation story. You call creation a myth when the evidence is clear that disorder is occurring and things are not being made new as we see throughout, but entropy or death is in all of the universe. We are here and the Bible clearly tells us the whys and wherefores of our existence.
Of course we *understand* the basic creation story. It is a child's story. Simple minded to the extreme.

We don't see any evidence that it is a correct description of what actually happened. your understanding of how the universe works is, at best, poor. We do see the 'creation' of new stars and planets *today*. We see that the universe is a dynamic system with feedback that can produce greater complexity in some situations. The bible is, on the other hand, a book of myths and propaganda.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#111949 Apr 23, 2014
thulium wrote:
Gamma-ray photons, like their X-ray counterparts, are a form of ionizing radiation; when they pass through matter, they usually deposit their energy by liberating electrons from atoms and molecules.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/225...
From the paragraph right after your quote:

"Gamma rays can also interact with atomic nuclei. In the process of pair production, a gamma-ray photon with an energy exceeding twice the rest mass energy of the electron (greater than 1.02 MeV), when passing close to a nucleus, is directly converted into an electron-positron pair (see Electrons and positrons produced simultaneously from individual gamma rays curl in opposite [Credit: Courtesy of the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, the University of California, Berkeley]photograph). "
thulium

Perris, CA

#111950 Apr 23, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
This type of radiation (Brehmstalung) is one way energy from x-rays and gamma rays can be released, but it is not the only way. This tends to be limited to relatively low energy gamma rays. Those with energy above 1.022 MeV *will* produce both electrons and positrons. To produce protons and anti-protons requires gamma rays of energy more than 1877 MeV. In the type of radiation you are considering, there is a conservation of matter: no new matter is produced. For the higher energy gamma rays, new matter (electrons, muons, pions, etc) can be produced.
Well even in pair annihilation requires gamma rays to interact with matter and gamma rays are produced. Your statement works in theory but what has been detected by a space craft is what I'm talking referring to since you brought up gamma rays. So how is proton produced to bind with an electron to produce hydrogen before the Sun was created, considering protons were already present since the Sun burns protons to produce ordinary helium.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#111951 Apr 23, 2014
thulium wrote:
<quoted text>
Well even in pair annihilation requires gamma rays to interact with matter and gamma rays are produced. Your statement works in theory but what has been detected by a space craft is what I'm talking referring to since you brought up gamma rays. So how is proton produced to bind with an electron to produce hydrogen before the Sun was created, considering protons were already present since the Sun burns protons to produce ordinary helium.
The initial protons formed from decaying neutrons just a minute or two into the expansion phase of the Big Bang. This was the period of nucleosynthesis, where the lighter primordial elements nuclei like hydrogen, deuterium, helium-3, helium-4, and lithium-7 were formed. We can tell from the early abundances how fast the universe was expanding at that stage because a slower expansion would allow more conversion of deuterium into helium and a faster would allow less.

The neutrons formed even earlier from the quark soup that formed from earlier, very high energy gamma rays.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#111952 Apr 23, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course we *understand* the basic creation story. It is a child's story. Simple minded to the extreme.
We don't see any evidence that it is a correct description of what actually happened. your understanding of how the universe works is, at best, poor. We do see the 'creation' of new stars and planets *today*. We see that the universe is a dynamic system with feedback that can produce greater complexity in some situations. The bible is, on the other hand, a book of myths and propaganda.
I'll tell you what's "myth and propaganda"... the Big bang and the notion that every complexity of the universe arose from an explosion. Not only is that propaganda...what you believe flies in the face of known laws of physics. What do you mean by "...greater complexity in some situations...?" Are you going to take that and extrapolate to every complexity in the universe? The fact remains...you have no explanation for the existence of DNA by naturalistic means. You simply have faith that it happened WITHOUT God. Who is clinging to archaic religion and who is objectively looking at facts? There is no observation in the universe that contradicts the Bible...only your childish interpretation of the Bible.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#111953 Apr 23, 2014
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll tell you what's "myth and propaganda"... the Big bang and the notion that every complexity of the universe arose from an explosion. Not only is that propaganda...what you believe flies in the face of known laws of physics. What do you mean by "...greater complexity in some situations...?" Are you going to take that and extrapolate to every complexity in the universe? The fact remains...you have no explanation for the existence of DNA by naturalistic means. You simply have faith that it happened WITHOUT God. Who is clinging to archaic religion and who is objectively looking at facts? There is no observation in the universe that contradicts the Bible...only your childish interpretation of the Bible.
You should stick to postin about transfusions. You come across much better when you know what you're talking about.
thulium

Perris, CA

#111954 Apr 23, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The initial protons formed from decaying neutrons just a minute or two into the expansion phase of the Big Bang. This was the period of nucleosynthesis, where the lighter primordial elements nuclei like hydrogen, deuterium, helium-3, helium-4, and lithium-7 were formed. We can tell from the early abundances how fast the universe was expanding at that stage because a slower expansion would allow more conversion of deuterium into helium and a faster would allow less.
The neutrons formed even earlier from the quark soup that formed from earlier, very high energy gamma rays.
You keep mentioning gamma rays when what has been observed are gamma rays interacting with matter and ejecting an electron and transforming an atom into a pair of electron and its antiparticle positron. Gamma rays are also produced when matter and antimatter annihilate each other.

I'm wondering why you didn't mention plasma at all when it's the most abundant form of matter in the universe where free protons exist.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#111955 Apr 23, 2014
thulium wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep mentioning gamma rays when what has been observed are gamma rays interacting with matter and ejecting an electron and transforming an atom into a pair of electron and its antiparticle positron. Gamma rays are also produced when matter and antimatter annihilate each other.
I'm wondering why you didn't mention plasma at all when it's the most abundant form of matter in the universe where free protons exist.
Realy? How can you tell mademoiselle?

Here is an extra l...
thulium

Perris, CA

#111957 Apr 23, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Realy? How can you tell mademoiselle?
Here is an extra l...
how can I tell what exactly?

wouldn't you agree that since proton is highly or exceptionally stable and has long life that matter cannot just start from gamma rays. I'm not disagreeing with Poly's statements, just pointing out what's missing, in this case, he didn't mention plasma. Relativistic electrons are created through plasma processes.

Does L stand for Lorentz? Do you know what Lorentz factor is? lol
MrBob jones

Red Deer, Canada

#111958 Apr 23, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Defensive? Not at all. No need to be defensive in the face of stupid. Arrogant? Perhaps. But only in the sense that we're arrogant for calling the sky blue and water wet, while fundies attempt to tell us otherwise.
And I'm rarely offended on these boards so none taken.
I get the point but i think the other guys have more than just those two points to tell
MrBob jones

Red Deer, Canada

#111959 Apr 23, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
There's no such thing as a Christian scientist. There IS such a thing as scientists who are Christian, but none of them have made creationism pass the scientific method.
<quoted text>
Evolution doesn't have the holes you think it has. There is the opinion of the science community, who accept that there is no scientific controversy over evolution. And then there's the opinions of liars for Jesus who were refuted decades ago, but even today keep repeating their lies to a gullible public audience who want to hear that they're going to heaven and don't give a crud about science.
Remember, we don't need to believe because we have evidence.
But isn't the purpose of science to change as we discover new things or disprove old things so wouldnt it only be right that there was a few minor holes
MrBob jones

Red Deer, Canada

#111960 Apr 23, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you can't even spell it something tells me you're actually our young homeschooled pal from a few weeks back. As we well know creationists have a bad habit of lying for Jesus (STILL waiting for an apology of SevenTee from when he got caught quotemining) but some also try pretending to be doctors or scientists or some other well-to-do authority so they can pretend to know more about something they don't even know.
Of course it doesn't matter even if they ARE real scientists. All that matters is what they know and what they can demonstrate. That's why very few genuine scientists have ever come here to make a fool of themselves on some random public website to argue against biology. Any who would would likely already be known as a crank.(shrug)
In short, Dr Bob, psychology doesn't make you an expert in biology.
Im not that kid i swear and you were saying what you did to help the world besides sitting on your ass i simply stated my profession as you did yours
MrBob jones

Red Deer, Canada

#111961 Apr 23, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
My current position and my consulting business requires me to be on a computer most of the day. Topix just breaks up the boredom.
<quoted text>
Odd then that you can't even spell the word.
Psychologist didnt i spell it this why oops sorry i have big fingers must have missed the correct key

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#111962 Apr 23, 2014
MrBob jones wrote:
<quoted text>
Im not that kid i swear and you were saying what you did to help the world besides sitting on your ass i simply stated my profession as you did yours
Sure you aren't (wink).

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#111963 Apr 23, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Ah, another moron heard from.
Is your sow mother still on a corn diet?

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#111964 Apr 23, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No problem. If cosmology was as much of a problem for biology as you said it would you could never have been born.
There, that was easy wasn't it?(shrug)
I mean, the SLoT, Bo? Srsly? Even other YEC's know not to use that one.
I knew it!... one of the mysteries of the universe as stated in the article and what is Dude's answer?...,.no problem!

What a cosmological dumbass you are masquerading as a know it all. Perhaps you need to call the people at ,..livescience .com. they don't seem to have the answers you do!!!!

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha.

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
Word Association (Mar '10) 1 min wichita-rick 17,008
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 min CJ Rocker 161,308
Word Association (Jun '10) 2 min wichita-rick 27,318
motorcycle traveling stories 3 min NinaRocks 621
News The trooper fired at the motorcycle, and then d... 5 min Christsharians on... 68
The Next Person Game (Mar '11) 25 min Sharlene45 9,821
News Manure trade show's slogan contest produces pil... 30 min wichita-rick 5
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 4 hr Bill 18,178
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 7 hr lost in Mississippi 40,251
More from around the web