Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223290 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.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#114268 Jun 15, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
The vast majority of Nazis were Germans but the vast majority of Germans were not Nazis.
OK, let's apply that same logic to your example below;
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe I should tell you something about the secret American plans during the cold war. Would they execute these plans Germany would be a nuclear dessert today just for holding the Russians back. For example the Americans planned to blow up some of the German nuclear power plants. Then the wind should blow the nuclear waste to the Russian soldiers. Million innocent German civilians would die as well...
The vast majority of US military officials are American, but the vast majority of Americans are not US Military officials.

Weeding through the conspiracies and the rhetoric, there may be some outlandish evil plans that some Gvt. organization concocted and perhaps presented as an idea, but did these happen? No, because fortunately those in power are not fools and understand the consequences. I could easily suggest sending over squirrels with contaminated nuts to Germany to "rid the world of evil", but would it happen? Of course not. There are checks and balances. You've really got to get your head out of the textbooks and get out in the real world.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#114269 Jun 15, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
The vast majority of Nazis were Germans but the vast majority of Germans were not Nazis.
Besides the Nazis were traitors. Every real German patriot hates Nazis because they were the worst for our country.
It seems that you (I mean the plural form of 'you'. One of the worst thing in English is that you don't differ between 'you singular' and 'you plural')
don't get why I hate America so much.
Maybe I should tell you something about the secret American plans during the cold war. Would they execute these plans Germany would be a nuclear dessert today just for holding the Russians back. For example the Americans planned to blow up some of the German nuclear power plants. Then the wind should blow the nuclear waste to the Russian soldiers. Million innocent German civilians would die as well.
My father saw these awful plans as he was in the 'Bundeswehr'(it was in the late 70th). Actually he wasn't allowed to see them. It was mere chance.
The very fact that these plans existed tells what kind of people you are.
There are many other crimes. For example Guantanamo. An innocent German was prisoned and tortured there for years.
I realize that during WW2 that only about 10% of Germans were members of the Nazi party. BUT virtually EVERY Nazi was a German citizen.

You do this so you can absolve personal responsibility for the actions of Germans during WWII.

I understand. BUT THEN...

THEN you go on a rant about "secret American plans" to blow up German nuclear plants, etc as a reason why "hate Americans". Even though far FEWER number of Americans had any input as to those "secret plans" in the first place, and the fact that THIS PLAN WAS NEVER PUT INTO ACTION....as opposed to the "Final Solution".

Same with Guantanamo.

Who was this German citizen? Name? Reason for his being brought to Guantanamo?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#114270 Jun 15, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
It seems that I know more about your job than you.
Ok. But I don't think you do.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
The most criminal people on earth are hedge fond manager.
I hate our economy system. It doesn't work. First one shouldn't allow the money market business. It is totally dumb.
I have nothing to do with the financial sector. I'm purely technology. Ironically, German technology.
Again, get your head out of the textbook, and (as my father would say) get out there and blow the stink off ya.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114271 Jun 15, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
The vast majority of Nazis were Germans but the vast majority of Germans were not Nazis.
That makes complete sense .ie: say there where 500,000 Nazis and 80% of them were German but the German population was 2,500,000. I see your point but everyone ties Nazis to Germans.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114272 Jun 15, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if the density of matter/energy were higher, the expansion could be reversed. So there is a sense in which you could say that there isn't enough to stop the expansion.
More to the point, though, is that when Einstein's equations are applied to a situation where space itself (a vacuum) has an energy density, it turns out that the expansion rate will increase. Essentially, such a situation provides a pressure that tends to accelerate the expansion. This is called either dark energy or the cosmological constant depending on your interpretation of the equations and whether you think there is something going on at the particle level or not.
Thanks Poly. I follow most of what you say and I agree it is good for now with what we know but I still think we have a long ways to go and many things will change as we go, including our thoughts on gravity
.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114273 Jun 15, 2014
OK another question: to my knowledge every person born has 150 or more mutations. Now mutations happen to everyone and that is a fact. Should it not be said the "random effects” of mutations (everyone experiences mutations) are what are responsible for the new traits instead of just saying "random mutations" are what is responsible? We really don’t even know what mutations causes what trait/effect or how it even really works. In my opinion! After all it is the random effect of the mutation not the mutation itself. <<<(if that makes sense to anyone)

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114274 Jun 15, 2014
Let mead to my past post a little.

The mutations that are helpful (less hair, more hair, walking, standing, flying, going from land to water and going to water to land) all for survival benefits that were environmentally caused,, one could say that they almost had to be planned.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114275 Jun 15, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
That makes complete sense .ie: say there where 500,000 Nazis and 80% of them were German but the German population was 2,500,000. I see your point but everyone ties Nazis to Germans.
Does it matter?

Since they didnt straight resist the Nazis and remove them from the country in a demonstration of intolerance; they all might as well have been Nazis.

Those who are not against X are arguable with X.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#114276 Jun 15, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
The vast majority of Nazis were Germans but the vast majority of Germans were not Nazis.
Besides the Nazis were traitors. Every real German patriot hates Nazis because they were the worst for our country.
It seems that you (I mean the plural form of 'you'. One of the worst thing in English is that you don't differ between 'you singular' and 'you plural')
don't get why I hate America so much.
Maybe I should tell you something about the secret American plans during the cold war. Would they execute these plans Germany would be a nuclear dessert today just for holding the Russians back. For example the Americans planned to blow up some of the German nuclear power plants. Then the wind should blow the nuclear waste to the Russian soldiers. Million innocent German civilians would die as well.
My father saw these awful plans as he was in the 'Bundeswehr'(it was in the late 70th). Actually he wasn't allowed to see them. It was mere chance.
The very fact that these plans existed tells what kind of people you are.
There are many other crimes. For example Guantanamo. An innocent German was prisoned and tortured there for years.
You are wrong, your countrymen and women were not traitors.
They were simply led to disaster by probably the worst leader in modern history.
They some of them were bad people, but the fault is in the few and not the many.
I know some who were participants , but many were victims as much as Jews were.
The guilty are those who held SS , Gestapo titles and were actively in command.
We do not lay blame on people who only followed orders in fear of their lives.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#114277 Jun 15, 2014
replaytime wrote:
OK another question: to my knowledge every person born has 150 or more mutations. Now mutations happen to everyone and that is a fact. Should it not be said the "random effects” of mutations (everyone experiences mutations) are what are responsible for the new traits instead of just saying "random mutations" are what is responsible? We really don’t even know what mutations causes what trait/effect or how it even really works. In my opinion! After all it is the random effect of the mutation not the mutation itself. <<<(if that makes sense to anyone)
Read a book about evolution.
Tip of the century: "natural selection".
You know that thing Darwin came up with 150 years ago.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#114278 Jun 15, 2014
replaytime wrote:
Let mead to my past post a little.
The mutations that are helpful (less hair, more hair, walking, standing, flying, going from land to water and going to water to land) all for survival benefits that were environmentally caused,, one could say that they almost had to be planned.
Mutations are at random and thus by very nature impossible to plan.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#114279 Jun 15, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
There no explanation on where reproduction came from. At best all that can be said is it came with first life, existed within the first life when it became to life.. It cannot be a product of mutations and evolution because something has to reproduce, either asexually or sexually to have those mutations happen and pass them on.
In 2008 Joyce and Lincoln published an article of their experiments on RNA strands.
They demonstrated that RNA strands can self-replicate themselves without the help of proteins. It not only did self-replicate, it also produced spontaneously ever longer and more complex strands, who gradually overtook the population - natural selection in its most elementary fashion already seems to be a BIOCHEMICAL - hence prebiotic - property of RNA.

RNA is both a catalyst AND self replicating AND a carrier of heredity.

Reproduction in bacteria is asexually by cloning (cell fission). It is basically self replication of its DNA. It is not difficult to imagine how this derived from self replicating RNA. the only difference between RNA and DNA is that RNA only has one helix and DNA has a double one.

Bacteria introduced a new feature: they exchange DNA. It is called bacterial conjugation: one bacterium ejects some DNA parts, which are inserted into another bacterium. This enhances genetic variation and is an example of horizontal gene flow.

It is not very difficult to imagine that here lies the origin of sexual reproduction.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114280 Jun 15, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Read a book about evolution.
Tip of the century: "natural selection".
You know that thing Darwin came up with 150 years ago.
You are putting the cart before the horse. Random mutations or the random effect of mutations has to happen before natural selection.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114281 Jun 15, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Mutations are at random and thus by very nature impossible to plan.
Everyone is born with mutations, so in a sense they are not random things. It is the effect of the mutation that is random.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114282 Jun 15, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
In 2008 Joyce and Lincoln published an article of their experiments on RNA strands.
They demonstrated that RNA strands can self-replicate themselves without the help of proteins. It not only did self-replicate, it also produced spontaneously ever longer and more complex strands, who gradually overtook the population - natural selection in its most elementary fashion already seems to be a BIOCHEMICAL - hence prebiotic - property of RNA.
RNA is both a catalyst AND self replicating AND a carrier of heredity.
Reproduction in bacteria is asexually by cloning (cell fission). It is basically self replication of its DNA. It is not difficult to imagine how this derived from self replicating RNA. the only difference between RNA and DNA is that RNA only has one helix and DNA has a double one.
Bacteria introduced a new feature: they exchange DNA. It is called bacterial conjugation: one bacterium ejects some DNA parts, which are inserted into another bacterium. This enhances genetic variation and is an example of horizontal gene flow.
It is not very difficult to imagine that here lies the origin of sexual reproduction.
You skipped the point. of the question; Asexual, sexual or cloning itself,,, What mechanism is the cause when life just arose out of chemicals. Even cloning itself had to happen before any mutations.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#114283 Jun 15, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone is born with mutations, so in a sense they are not random things. It is the effect of the mutation that is random.
No, the mutations are random. Some mutations don't even alter the phenotype. At the molecular level, the same members of the population can have different mutations and still express the same phenotype. The selection of the variation brought in by the mutation is the non-random feature of evolution. It is not completely non-random and chance is still at play, but it is not the primary driver. For instance a member of a population may have a mutation that allows it to survive better and a tree could randomly fall on that individual and keep that mutation out of the population.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#114284 Jun 15, 2014
That should read "At the molecular level, some members of the population can have different mutations and still express the same phenotype".
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#114285 Jun 15, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it matter?
Since they didnt straight resist the Nazis and remove them from the country in a demonstration of intolerance; they all might as well have been Nazis.
Those who are not against X are arguable with X.
Although I agree that the German people can't get away with "Ich habe es nicht gewusst" (an infamous and very well known saying in postwar Germany, meaning "I didn't know it" (pertaining the Holocaust), the world is not as simple as black or white reasoning.

Between those who were against and those who were with X there are:
- people who really were ignorant
- people who knew what went on and disagreed but who were afraid of acting
- people in denial because they emotionally just can't cope with it ("our Hans doesn't do such things")
- people who were compromised, e.g. who have a husband or son who was a camp bully but would YOU stand up against your own blood?

Let's have another example:
- the USA is founded on conquest of land that for 14,000 years was inhabited by Native Americans. The Indians were eventually locked away in reservations as if they were a endangered species. Actually they were. In some instances they even were hunted, just as pastime. Basically, the USA is founded by ethnic cleansing.
- in the same time, an estimated 300,000 of black Africans were torn away from their families like pack animals, leaving their loved ones and communities behind in complete derangement and with tremendous human misery, to be sent to the USA (in total the number of all Africans captivated in slavery numbers 12.5 MILLION).

Of course many Americans did bother their faith and opposed slavery.
YET it took a century and a civil war to pt an end to this disgusting practice.

I repeat your remark:
"Does it matter?
Since they didnt straight resist slavery and removed them from the country in a demonstration of intolerance; they all might as well have been slave-drivers.
Those who are not against X are arguable with X."

Think a little bit about that.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114286 Jun 15, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>No, the mutations are random. Some mutations don't even alter the phenotype. At the molecular level, the same members of the population can have different mutations and still express the same phenotype. The selection of the variation brought in by the mutation is the non-random feature of evolution. It is not completely non-random and chance is still at play, but it is not the primary driver. For instance a member of a population may have a mutation that allows it to survive better and a tree could randomly fall on that individual and keep that mutation out of the population.
I understand what evolution says but if the mutations are because of environmental effects then in a sense they are not random since they are producing what is needed other wise producing a trait for survival reasons caused by the environment factors..

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#114287 Jun 15, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>No, the mutations are random. Some mutations don't even alter the phenotype. At the molecular level, the same members of the population can have different mutations and still express the same phenotype. The selection of the variation brought in by the mutation is the non-random feature of evolution. It is not completely non-random and chance is still at play, but it is not the primary driver. For instance a member of a population may have a mutation that allows it to survive better and a tree could randomly fall on that individual and keep that mutation out of the population.
I want to add more than one can have the mutation but does that mean the effects from that mutation will produce the same trait/variation on them all?

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
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 4 min Faith 34,806
News Bizarre excuses for not filling in tax returns ... 19 min Pardon Pard 1
News Bravest dog in the world takes on 11ft CROCODIL... 20 min Hoosier Hillbilly 2
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 26 min HashTagME2 227,180
True False Game (Jun '11) 36 min Hoosier Hillbilly 16,227
What is your favorite sandwich? 44 min Crystal Clear 0722 13
Obama In Cross-hairs After Raid 46 min Hoosier Hillbilly 2
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr Hoosier Hillbilly 6,954
More from around the web