Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222984 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.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#115462 Jun 24, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>How do you see the number 42 as the answer? The Bible seems to indicate that the number 7 or 70 is the answer to that question.
When they guess or project, they it facts or evidence, but not knowing that they are all a piece of shit.
Nice hearing from you. Welcome.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115463 Jun 24, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
I did provide a exact reference. You seem to have found it alright. All thought that is buffered and sugar coated. Before they found the discrepancy they stated for a fact that they knew exactly how old the universe was. Carbon dating was used as an exact science and was used to date everything. It was big news when the universe was found to be much older then they had previously stated. I'm a sciance buff myself and remember it clearly.
This argument will never be solved. The farther we get away from the beginning the harder it will be to prove either side. The bible has been misinterpreted, abused and parts are missing. Sciance is open to the same problems. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Carbon dating may not be exact, in fact our planet may not be exactly 4.5 billion years old, I will give you that. But somewhere in the middle? The middle of what, the claim by creationists that Earth is around 6000 years old? Yeah, I don't think so. No matter how inaccurate carbon dating may be, the common sense of a six-year-old is sufficient to prove that the world is a wee-bit older than 6000 years.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#115464 Jun 24, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
To love and fear God is the beginning of wisdom.
Halleluyah!

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115465 Jun 24, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Suppose I brought the carcass of a dog and say "here is evidence of God"; how would you know whether the evidence proves the existence of God or not?
Since you dont know God, on what basis will you determine if my assumption are correct?
<quoted text>
Look for the effect of power, for one of the primary assertions is that God is Almighty.
CAn you see or observe power?
If you can, is that evidence of the Almighty?
DO you know what God is such that you can say that God is not almighty nor is the effect of power a sign of his/its existence?
Why would it have to be a carcass? Why couldn't it be a live dog? You're turning out to be a rather twisted individual for someone claiming to represent God.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#115466 Jun 24, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
...says the KING of blind assertion.
Says the King of blind assertion.
Ok?
Likewise.
FREE SERVANT

Tucker, GA

#115467 Jun 24, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> When they guess or project, they it facts or evidence, but not knowing that they are all a piece of shit.
Nice hearing from you. Welcome.
Thank you, likewise I am happy to see you are still standing for our great and awesome maker. May he continue to bless you.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#115468 Jun 24, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>How do you see the number 42 as the answer? The Bible seems to indicate that the number 7 or 70 is the answer to that question.
When they guess or project, they call it facts or evidence. But forgetting that they are all piece of shit.
Nice hearing from you. Welcome.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115469 Jun 24, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
...Look for the effect of power, for one of the primary assertions is that God is Almighty.
Is that your criteria?
I can twist the lid off of a jar of pickles.(Most of the time anyway...) This is an "effect of power". Does this classify me as 'Almighty'?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#115470 Jun 24, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you, likewise I am happy to see you are still standing for our great and awesome maker. May he continue to bless you.
Amen.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115471 Jun 24, 2014
wondering wrote:
all plant life, all land life, all aquatic life, all life period all came from one simple single-celled organism that accidentally began to reproduce, accidentally became multi-cellular and accidentally became a shape shifter. i say accidentally because if those abilities did not already exist or weren't planned, then it had to come to those abilities by accident.
did life start with a rather large population? it would have to had started with a rather large population for natural selection to act for we all know that in smaller populations genetic drift causes reduced genetic variation so the evolution of all we see today, with decreased genetic variation would not be possible.
It didn't start from one organism, it most likely started from billions of organisms, and over time began to evolve and branch off, forming life as we know it today. Contrary to the Biblical myth that *POOF* 2 humans appeared 6000 years ago, got busy, and lead to life as we know it today.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115472 Jun 24, 2014
Ozzie wrote:
envelopes. i was thinking about envelopes today..
just Oz.
*head-pat, head-pat*

Good for you Ozzie...

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115473 Jun 24, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
i think you mean aristotle, for it was he who accepted the spherical shape of the earth before archimedes was even born and knowledge of the earth being a sphere began to spread about and began to be acknowledged.
I think you mean Pythagoras, well before Aristotle.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115474 Jun 24, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
thanks for making my little experiment a successful one.
earlier i posted about (science) european-americans having more deleterious genetic variation than african populations. even gave links---- no one respomds.
i then post (just to get a bite)---so much for you people being interested in evolution and science. seems you would rather waste time arguing about egoís and meaningless things. donít let someone interested in science discussion interfere with talking about your egoís, pigeon crap, the bible or your other meaningless things. time to go back to a forum where there is better and more interesting conversation on things than here on the kindergarten level. well played, continue on.--- which got one little bite, a sarcastic response.
i then post this argumentative/negative post--all plant life, all land life, all aquatic life, all life period all came from one simple single-celled organism that accidentally began to reproduce, accidentally became multi-cellular and accidentally became a shape shifter. i say accidentally because if those abilities did not already exist or weren't planned, then it had to come to those abilities by accident.
did life start with a rather large population? it would have to had started with a rather large population for natural selection to act for we all know that in smaller populations genetic drift causes reduced genetic variation so the evolution of all we see today, with decreased genetic variation would not be possible.---- and I get a big bite and get an insulted right fast.
result; very few, if any of you are here to discuss science. you are here to argue and see who has the bigger ego.
sadly you fail to see these hold some truth;
all plant life, all land life, all aquatic life, all life period all came from a simple single-celled organism that accidentally began to reproduce, accidentally became multi-cellular and accidentally became a shape shifter. i say accidentally because if those abilities did not already exist or weren't planned, then it had to come to those abilities by accident.
did life start with a rather large population? it would have to had started with a rather large population for natural selection to act for we all know that in smaller populations genetic drift causes reduced genetic variation so the evolution of all we see today, with decreased genetic variation would not be possible
So, admittedly, you're nothing more than a mere troll baiting people into argument? Please stop wasting our time.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115475 Jun 24, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
how did one simple single-celled organism began to reproduce, become multi-cellular and began to change shape if it was not by accident?? how would you say it happened?
Oh, right. That's why there's no life on Earth today. How could we have missed that?
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>keep in mind unless you are claiming that life started with a large population, there would not be a sufficient population to change the population over time.


So which is it? You're contradicting yourself.
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>remember evolution is on a population level, not an individual level.
OK, Not evolution then...
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>small populations don't fair well for they lose genetic variation due to genetic drift and founder effect when a new population is established by a very small number of individuals from a larger population.
Adam and Eve was a rather small population.

So please elaborate YOUR view on how we're here today.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115476 Jun 24, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
science has existed for many thousands of years. are understanding and knowledge of science has just grown leaps and bounds in the last 200 years. why do you find that hard to accept? there were forms of science back in 200bc. it was very primitive but it existed.
No, before scientists there were philosophers and mystics. And barbers.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115477 Jun 24, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Why the hell did you give up a decent life with prosperity in Austria for a life in a third world country?
Stolz, I'm assuming by your posts that you didn't get the memo - there's no more wall. Get out there and see the world before you reach you own conclusions please.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115478 Jun 24, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
how many drunken sailors would you think there were 3000-4000 years ago?
In comparison to what, the number of scientists?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115479 Jun 24, 2014
Alex Trebek wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did scientists come from?
Their mothers. Next question...

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#115480 Jun 24, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>How do you see the number 42 as the answer? The Bible seems to indicate that the number 7 or 70 is the answer to that question.
Well the number 42 has considerable mathematic, scientific and technological significance. For example the hubble constant when expressed in Imperial gives 42 as a significant number in defining both the age and expansion of the universe.(there is much more)

And the babble has none, so without evidence of any sort you can take the babble with as much salt as you need.

Having said that, 42 mentioned several times in the babble.

There are 42 generations (names) in the Gospel of Matthew's version of the Genealogy of Jesus.
it is prophesied that for 42 months the Beast will hold dominion over the Earth (Revelation 13:5).
42 men of Beth-azmaveth were counted in the census of men of Israel upon return from exile (Ezra 2:24).
God sent bears to maul 42 of the teenage boys who mocked Elisha for his baldness (2 Kings 2:23)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42_%28number%29

However the world of Douglas Adams override all that.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#115481 Jun 24, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Eventually as kids we catch our parents or someone playing Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy. I have never caught anyone playing/trying to be God.
As I said look around you at all this world is. I find that hard to believe that it all happened by chance.
We also catch them playing wheelbarrow racing, but that's irrelevant to the topic at hand I 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
got any jokes (Sep '08) 3 min forwhatitsworth 196
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 5 min Brandiiiiiiii 31,013
News Naked man claims to be Jesus outside of Lowe's 10 min Brandiiiiiiii 27
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 11 min Brandiiiiiiii 3,001
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) (Dec '14) 16 min Brandiiiiiiii 6,346
Word Association (Jun '10) 17 min Brandiiiiiiii 32,733
one word only (Jun '08) 18 min Brandiiiiiiii 56,057
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr harrypaul1 6,541
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 hr Naturally Wired 225,643
More from around the web