Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 221214 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.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112653 May 8, 2014
Tinka wrote:
<quoted text>
What does that have to do with life a game?
I think all things by now have been tried and nothing makes a dam of difference to some ...
No of course it does not...
But how many is playing against in one game? How many does it take to win?
He may be smart to cut his throat now and get it done do it in peace and private oh hey is that against policy to speak of death?
Later I have no patience for this place much at all anymore...
Nice put together's though the threads how they develop and people seem to know a lot of sheet...
America has a certain way doesn't it? well you would maybe not know you prolly were born here ...
If I start making baseless assertions such as, the flood really happened because God the E.T. melted the ice sheets, that Jonah had a stenographer with him in the fish or that languages are all owned by the Tower of Babel, I should expect to be corrected by all comers. It wouldn't be a gold star for the day mark of my character to cry about it and say in effect "I'm taking my marbles and running home!"

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#112654 May 8, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Nothing can elve without a cause. This is where you guys are getting it wrong.
Quantum physicists would disagree, and they have masses of evidence to prove it.

But that is not the point. Evolution is not causeless, in fact the whole theory is about the causes of species change over time.

PS: Evolution has nothing to do with how the universe got here, or how life started. That is where you guys are (ALWAYS) getting it wrong.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112655 May 8, 2014
Sad Enlightenment wrote:
Why does it have to be either or? Is it not possible that there is another way life came to be that has nothing to do with either theory? We don't know what we don't know. So why all this debate about two theories that could both be incorrect? What a colossal waste of time!
sigh. Once more, the ToE doesn't have anything to do with the "way life came to be" and Creationism/Intelligent Design isn't a theory, it doesn't even rate as a hypothesis.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#112656 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
You know how to spell ASSumptions.
This whole business of trying to analyze date that is 20 million years old is a crock. Science does not work that way. You are practicing geology which is a useless profession unless you are trying to find oil or natural gas.
Yes, ASSes are what you would still be getting around on if scientists had listened to the likes of you 200 years ago. Keep whining on your computer though, you still get the benefits of their work.

“I am an ALIEN!!!”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

KREUZBERG...

#112658 May 8, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
If I start making baseless assertions such as, the flood really happened because God the E.T. melted the ice sheets, that Jonah had a stenographer with him in the fish or that languages are all owned by the Tower of Babel, I should expect to be corrected by all comers. It wouldn't be a gold star for the day mark of my character to cry about it and say in effect "I'm taking my marbles and running home!"
Well some of us may love to talk to our marbles...lol and home for some these days has real meaning harsher than before...
Some of us actually endured the elements of living outside...
I am going to look up job in the scipts today there might be something hidden and have you heard they supposedly found a bible that tells that Jesus never was crucified...
Crazy sheet Religion if you ask me...

Oh and what is it now before Congress gets into session big prayer they just ok'd that The justice dep...

“I am an ALIEN!!!”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

KREUZBERG...

#112659 May 8, 2014
As sumption sounds to me like some tricky comp math creation where they can place data within all of the real things and linger while the wise people as sumingly think....LOL

“I am an ALIEN!!!”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

KREUZBERG...

#112660 May 8, 2014
Where has the lone worker been?
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#112662 May 8, 2014
Sad Enlightenment wrote:
Why does it have to be either or? Is it not possible that there is another way life came to be that has nothing to do with either theory? We don't know what we don't know. So why all this debate about two theories that could both be incorrect? What a colossal waste of time!
So stop complaining and present a viable alternative.(shrug)
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#112663 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
There is not one single benefit for mankind due to half baked "theory" of evolution.
Sure there is. Medicine, cancer treatments, crops - you've reaped the benefits of evolution and never even knew it.(shrug)
SevenTee wrote:
Unless of course your practice eugenics or are a practicing Nazi.
Whoa, ad-hom and Godwin's all in one. Boy, you keep vying for that dumbest fundie of all time slot and win every time, eh? By the way, you promised to refute me a couple of weeks back. We're still waiting. Lemme guess, that'll never happen? Same as every other fundie on the entire planet?

Thought so.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#112664 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
Piltdown Man
In 1912, a well-known doctor and amateur paleoanthropologist named Charles Dawson came out with the assertion that he had found a jawbone and a cranial fragment in a pit in Piltdown, England. Even though the jawbone was more ape-like, the teeth and the skull were like a man's. These specimens were labelled the "Piltdown man".
From the outset, some scientists expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find.

G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 that "deliberate malice could hardly have been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking the fossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the parts together."[10] In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientists increasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with the path of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere.[1] Skeptical scientists only increased in number as more fossils were found.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#112665 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
Piltdown Man
Piltdown? Oh, I love Piltdown! Fraudulent fossil which was found to be fraudulent by using all those evil evolutionary science concepts you reject. In other words, you have no reason to believe it's a fake in the first place.

Oh and by the way, next time don't forget to include the linky to the liars for Jesus website you copy-pasted your BS from, so you at least look slightly less like a dishonest lying idiot.(shrug)
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#112666 May 8, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
From the outset, some scientists expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find.
G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 that "deliberate malice could hardly have been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking the fossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the parts together."[10] In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientists increasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with the path of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere.[1] Skeptical scientists only increased in number as more fossils were found.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
To translate that into words he will understand, it was basically found to be fake because it never fitted in with evolution. Most creationists do not know this so they keep repeating their BS about Piltdown as if it's somehow a serious problem for evolution.

It ain't.

At all.

And hasn't been for over 60 years.

Ironically this is probably one of the creationist's more up to date arguments.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#112667 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
There is not one single benefit for mankind due to half baked "theory" of evolution.
Unless of course your practice eugenics or are a practicing Nazi.
Dimwits say things like that, not knowing modern medicine is all based on evolution.
Of course evolution works against medicine also, but knowing is half the battle.
As they say.. hind sight is 20/20.. and evolution is knowing about the past and understanding the future.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#112668 May 8, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
From the outset, some scientists expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find.
G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 that "deliberate malice could hardly have been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking the fossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the parts together."[10] In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientists increasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with the path of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere.[1] Skeptical scientists only increased in number as more fossils were found.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Yes, what do we get here:
1) a single fraud already severely suspicious from the very beginning among the expert scientists, decisively debunked in 1948 when more advanced methods allowed for that by scientists themselves;
2) out of 6,000 (count: SIX THOUSANDS) hominid fossil finds;
3) and of course we NEVER hear of the creationist's frauds, which have NEVER been corrected: http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/creation... .

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#112669 May 9, 2014
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the rube who says England owns the English language.
Okay, whatever.
You have no case to answer here, Rube, the evidence is clear, it began in England. CRY!

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#112670 May 9, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
It wasn't. The universe began 13.71 billion years ago. Evolution started about 3.5 billion years ago. Hence evolution doesn't violate cause and effect.
<quoted text>
I gave you the causes of evolution - the mechanisms I previously mentioned a few hours ago.
As for debate, there is no scientific debate over the validity of evolution. As far as science is concerned evolution is a fact.
GUESSING!
No one knows. But evolution can never occur without first passing through the creation process.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#112671 May 9, 2014
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
NOOOOOOO!
*covering face with hands*
You reminded him. Prepare for the next 17-page wave of Charles English babble.
And yet you are the one babbling. English do originate in England. That is a fact.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#112672 May 9, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the non-nutters with a modicum of understanding of the science.
Leave science out of this. We have scientist of international repute both in the past and present that are christians.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#112673 May 9, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Quantum physicists would disagree, and they have masses of evidence to prove it.
But that is not the point. Evolution is not causeless, in fact the whole theory is about the causes of species change over time.
PS: Evolution has nothing to do with how the universe got here, or how life started. That is where you guys are (ALWAYS) getting it wrong.
So tell me, did that species evolved without first passing through the creation process?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#112674 May 9, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> GUESSING!
No one knows. But evolution can never occur without first passing through the creation process.
No guessing, it's observed. Evolution doesn't care if the universe was magically poofed (created) by God. All evolution needs is for life to be here. Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts. If you want to prove otherwise then you need to prove that life is in fact NOT here.

Creationism. Now THAT'S a guess.

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 two letters into two new words... (Jun '15) 6 min unreals_dad 6,552
News Millions of Brits no longer using a pen 7 min Princess Finny Fe... 12
News Thousands of demonstrators protest Trump in Atl... 11 min Julia 2,056
News 'Large tortoise blocking the A24' 17 min Spotted Girl 4
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 19 min Princess Finny Fe... 74,298
Poll Funny people on here you miss and why (Jul '15) 44 min Bad Bex 99
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 56 min Ohio Sam 215,284
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 5 hr DMan 3,744
A to Z songs by title or group! 9 hr Rider on the Storm 1,562
More from around the web