Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 204729 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.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116312 Jun 29, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it happens way more then you would like to admit.
That assumes much about me that you can't know. I will say, that the occurrence could exceed the level shown by the evidence, but I don't have evidence to indicate that it occurs at the level you imply.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116313 Jun 29, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>A variety of sorts of things would be kinds. Living things follow instructions as how to best be fruitful and to multiply after their own sorts or kinds.
An ambiguous answer to support an ambiguous concept.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116314 Jun 29, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha,Ha,Ha,... you want details how nonliving dirt became alive?
and then you yak about abiogenesis! Ha,Ha,Ha
Giving you the entire benefit of the doubt, that proteins self assembled , nucleic acids, lipids etc, etc, and you put your organic goo compound on a rock and wait . What is more likely to occur, they self assemble into life? or begin to decay and rot!
Your concept of abiogenesis is every bit a belief in a miracle as Jesus rising from the dead.Yours is a religious belief, your denial just hides it from you.
So in other words you have no answer and we can't expect to see one anytime soon from you. You could save us all the time and say that up front.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116315 Jun 29, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>What do we have when a body decomposes? Carbon dust is the main element and when we take away the water, the body returns back to the dust just as the Bible claims also. This is one reason why we should consider creation as given to us in the Bible, plausible.
Carbon is the 2nd most abundant element in the human body following oxygen. What would result from decomposition are numerous carbon compounds and other compounds along with compounds from reactions with the surrounding substrate, coffin, casket, liner, etc. But yes, dead things return to the earth. It is not a plausible justification to believe Genesis but it doesn't deny the existence of God either.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#116316 Jun 29, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>The tropical rainforest. Volcanoes. The eruption of Mt Pinatubo in 1991 cause a global reduction in temperature for several subsequent years due to emissions in the upper atmosphere. The polar ice caps. El Nino. Earthworms. These contribute greatly to soil production and health driving the kinds of ecosystems present. Ants. Ants replace (functionally, not literally) earthworms in tropical ecosystems. To a more local extent, mass movement.
You leave out a lot of evidence of effort to change that. I also call mine an honest opinion.
Everything you mentioned is natural. Has been happening since the earth was formed.

“Wrath”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#116317 Jun 29, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>It is your concept of time that may be in error. The Creator did not need a great period of time to accomplish a miracle such as the first life on earth. The power that brought these things into being is all power in heaven and in earth and all things are possible with God. Jesus caused things to happen instantly through the power of God and his miracles would have taken great amounts of time and effort if it could have been done or even was as we know things to be in the natural. This is insight into the miracles of our Creator and I don't think the first man and his woman were created very far apart in actual time, but I can only give my opinion on this subject.
Actually you don't even have a clue it seems.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116318 Jun 29, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything you mentioned is natural. Has been happening since the earth was formed.
Humans are natural too, unless you know something I don't. Earthworms and ants are more recent. So is the tropical rainforest.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116319 Jun 29, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything you mentioned is natural. Has been happening since the earth was formed.
I think that our forgetting the concept that we are natural contributes to the problems you describe. We often think of ourselves as and act apart from the natural world that we can do as we please.

A misinterpretation of the Bible has often been used to say what we do (good or ill) is derived from our God-given dominion over the earth.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116320 Jun 29, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you don't even have a clue it seems.
It seems you are correct.

“Me Me Me!”

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#116321 Jun 29, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>That assumes much about me that you can't know. I will say, that the occurrence could exceed the level shown by the evidence, but I don't have evidence to indicate that it occurs at the level you imply.
I've had much assumed about me also.
This conversation started out with me saying that if I had an agenda I could make up facts to support my view.
Example:
Say I wanted to make a case that something was causing cancer.
I could come up with charts that show the cancer rate has grown since 1970s omitting all the other years because they don't support my argument.
I would not take into account that the population has increased at the same rate, also omit that many more people are better diagnosed or more able to receive cancer treatment. I would leave out that people are living longer which naturally increases the risk of getting cancer. I would also ignore any other environmental factors that may be the cause like additives in your water for instance.
With the right backing :) I could probably make you believe this.

“Me Me Me!”

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#116322 Jun 29, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you don't even have a clue it seems.
What they said made a lot of sense.
You don't have an argument. Lol.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#116323 Jun 29, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I think that our forgetting the concept that we are natural contributes to the problems you describe. We often think of ourselves as and act apart from the natural world that we can do as we please.
A misinterpretation of the Bible has often been used to say what we do (good or ill) is derived from our God-given dominion over the earth.
Mankind is the number one cause of all the destruction happening on Earth. The population of the Earth has trippled in the last fifty years, it is like we a re a bad virus spreading out causing more and more damage.

We're wiping out natural species -air, oceanic and land The land, seas and oceans are being poisoned by chemical products, oils, industrial and human waste. Population of man is overextended, damage is practically irreversible.

We are destroying rainforest(an estimated fourteen+ acres every minute), experts agree that we are losing upwards of 80,000 acres of tropical rainforest daily, and significantly degrading another 80,000 acres every day on top of that. Along with this loss and degradation, we are losing some 135 plant, animal and insect species every day—or some 50,000 species a year—as the forests fall. << being you are a entomologist one would think this should really make you think about that.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116324 Jun 29, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
I've had much assumed about me also.
This conversation started out with me saying that if I had an agenda I could make up facts to support my view.
Example:
Say I wanted to make a case that something was causing cancer.
I could come up with charts that show the cancer rate has grown since 1970s omitting all the other years because they don't support my argument.
I would not take into account that the population has increased at the same rate, also omit that many more people are better diagnosed or more able to receive cancer treatment. I would leave out that people are living longer which naturally increases the risk of getting cancer. I would also ignore any other environmental factors that may be the cause like additives in your water for instance.
With the right backing :) I could probably make you believe this.
You could. You have mentioned evidence that didn't pan out.

It doesn't necessarily follow that I would accept that the evidence supported by the conclusion in your scenario, especially in light of missing evidence or solid reasons for excluding that evidence. It could be that you have teased out some conclusion hidden in the facts and the exclusion of those facts in the analysis was a plausible methodology to carry that out.

One point you aren't focusing on is that it isn't always science that makes the claims that scientific evidence is used to support.

People demand on one hand that as intelligent, rational, adults they have the right to choose for themselves and on the other hand, fail to review the information that comes to them to make the best decision they can. It is easier to blame the information or an impersonal source. It is an interesting dichotomy don't you think.

Yes, money can manipulate things this way and that. But to state it always does is just as bad as stating that it never does. Questioning information you receive is an honest, reasonable paradigm to follow, but we have to be objective and remember we are filtering it through everything we know and believe on the way to taking action on that information.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116325 Jun 29, 2014
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Mankind is the number one cause of all the destruction happening on Earth. The population of the Earth has trippled in the last fifty years, it is like we a re a bad virus spreading out causing more and more damage.
We're wiping out natural species -air, oceanic and land The land, seas and oceans are being poisoned by chemical products, oils, industrial and human waste. Population of man is overextended, damage is practically irreversible.
We are destroying rainforest(an estimated fourteen+ acres every minute), experts agree that we are losing upwards of 80,000 acres of tropical rainforest daily, and significantly degrading another 80,000 acres every day on top of that. Along with this loss and degradation, we are losing some 135 plant, animal and insect species every day—or some 50,000 species a year—as the forests fall. << being you are a entomologist one would think this should really make you think about that.
I agree. We are a problem to our own environment. The biggest one. We are also the source of the only solutions to that problem. I don't think the earth would end following our demise, but the problem is maintaining our existence on earth while preserving the earth that allows us to exist.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116326 Jun 29, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
What they said made a lot of sense.
You don't have an argument. Lol.
You really thought what he said made sense?

“Me Me Me!”

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#116327 Jun 29, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You could. You have mentioned evidence that didn't pan out.
It doesn't necessarily follow that I would accept that the evidence supported by the conclusion in your scenario, especially in light of missing evidence or solid reasons for excluding that evidence. It could be that you have teased out some conclusion hidden in the facts and the exclusion of those facts in the analysis was a plausible methodology to carry that out.
One point you aren't focusing on is that it isn't always science that makes the claims that scientific evidence is used to support.
People demand on one hand that as intelligent, rational, adults they have the right to choose for themselves and on the other hand, fail to review the information that comes to them to make the best decision they can. It is easier to blame the information or an impersonal source. It is an interesting dichotomy don't you think.
Yes, money can manipulate things this way and that. But to state it always does is just as bad as stating that it never does. Questioning information you receive is an honest, reasonable paradigm to follow, but we have to be objective and remember we are filtering it through everything we know and believe on the way to taking action on that information.
I don't remember ever saying always. I believe I said sometimes. If I said always it was a mistake on my part.
I'm not implying that anyone would do this to be intentionally deceptive. All I'm saying is that people in general and by nature tend to ignore things that get in the way of their agendas.

“Me Me Me!”

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#116328 Jun 29, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You really thought what he said made sense?
He put forth a valid argument.

“Wrath”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#116329 Jun 29, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
What they said made a lot of sense.
You don't have an argument. Lol.
In effect he was saying, that he doesn't even understand the concepts, and believes the bible explains everything. Which is a sad place to be and I tend to view such people as ignorant.
But ignorance is bliss and those who choose to remain ignorant , will always be ignorant.
Simply because it was their choice.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116330 Jun 29, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't remember ever saying always. I believe I said sometimes. If I said always it was a mistake on my part.
I'm not implying that anyone would do this to be intentionally deceptive. All I'm saying is that people in general and by nature tend to ignore things that get in the way of their agendas.
You didn't. No mistake on your part. I saw that you said "probably" in your message, but made my post as I wrote it anyway.

I agree, it is easy to allow our agendas to interfere with the facts. We should all be careful of that and skeptical of things that are new information yet to be understood. While keeping in mind that something we don't like might be correct.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#116331 Jun 29, 2014
Cali-girl20 wrote:
<quoted text>
He put forth a valid argument.
Valid perhaps, but in no way supported by anything but belief.

For one, was the entire energy of God and heaven needed to make the universe, man, the earth and life on earth? It is just as plausible that it took no effort at 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
Word Association. (Nov '10) 1 min avon5735 19,655
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 5 min avon5735 19,662
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 6 min DMan 59,669
2words into 2new words (May '12) 7 min avon5735 3,765
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 7 min DMan 33,143
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 9 min wichita-rick 197,291
News Tastings at Gatlinburg distilleries will now co... 9 min ThomasA 11
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) (Jan '16) 18 min LaBeth 8,798
More from around the web