Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 221910 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 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117159 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
that is as weak as you saying clade is synonym for kind. idiot jack wagon
Good, you admit that I am right.

A person with a PhD in any school of engineering and a masters in any discipline of chemistry would know when peer review is required. It is not used for settled science, which caldes are. There is nothing particularly new or even controversial about that tool of classification. If you were not such a lying moron you would know when to ask for peer review.

Also if you were not a lying moron you would not keep forgetting that using clade as a synonym for clade was MY definition and no one else's. You challenged me to come up with a working definition of "kind".

You really are not all that bright.

Seriously try to follow along. You only make yourself look like a fool.
Hemet123

Honolulu, HI

#117160 Jul 6, 2014
Goodnight all.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117161 Jul 6, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Stop wondering, I believe there is God and from your post you don't , what side are you?
science is not about whether there is a god or not. that is a misunderstanding people have of science. science is about what we have to study trying to explain the past and in some cases the future. we accomplish that by finding things, seeing them, touching them, testing them, interacting with them on different levels. we do all that to try to tell and learn more about our past than we know or have been told by your religion. the bible is clearly false in several places.
i support evolution for science supports and backs its evidence through thorough tested theories, rigorous study, testing its own theories repeatedly, never stopping the move forward which means more testing of new evidence, old evidence and its theories again and through molecular biology coupled with the fossil record which supports what evolution partially, but mostly predicts. The similarities are there to be seen. now do i think there may be a god, that is simply we don't know. but again science is not about looking for god or trying to disprove god.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117162 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
furthermore any science claim that is published to the public/for the public to see, be it video or article should be peer reviewed, otherwise it is just one persons opinion. end of story lying jack wagon. good day
No, peer review is only used for new ideas. You should still be able to provide a link if necessary, but I do not have to provide a peer reviewed article to show that f = GmM/r^, when I am talking about the gravitational force between two masses. A Wiki article or other well accepted source is good enough, just remember that there can be mistakes in simple articles like Wiki. You have to be read for those too. I doubt if you are going to find a peer reviewed article to support that equation.

So you can demand a source. It need not be peer reviewed.

What a Maroon!
wondering

Morris, OK

#117163 Jul 6, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Good, you admit that I am right.
A person with a PhD in any school of engineering and a masters in any discipline of chemistry would know when peer review is required. It is not used for settled science, which caldes are. There is nothing particularly new or even controversial about that tool of classification. If you were not such a lying moron you would know when to ask for peer review.
Also if you were not a lying moron you would not keep forgetting that using clade as a synonym for clade was MY definition and no one else's. You challenged me to come up with a working definition of "kind".
You really are not all that bright.
Seriously try to follow along. You only make yourself look like a fool.
again you show your idiocy. i never asked for peer reviewed science on clade. i asked you for peer reviewed science that backs your claim of clade being synonymous with kind. they would have to agree on that. good day lying jack wagon.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#117164 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
again you show your idiocy. i never asked for peer reviewed science on clade. i asked you for peer reviewed science that backs your claim of clade being synonymous with kind. they would have to agree on that. good day lying jack wagon.

All you need is a damn dictionary, wonderful...

Clade
A clade or monophylum is a group consisting of an ancestor and all its descendants, a single "branch" on the "tree of life". The ancestor may be an individual, a population or even a species.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#117165 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
science is not about whether there is a god or not. that is a misunderstanding people have of science. science is about what we have to study trying to explain the past and in some cases the future. we accomplish that by finding things, seeing them, touching them, testing them, interacting with them on different levels. we do all that to try to tell and learn more about our past than we know or have been told by your religion. the bible is clearly false in several places.
i support evolution for science supports and backs its evidence through thorough tested theories, rigorous study, testing its own theories repeatedly, never stopping the move forward which means more testing of new evidence, old evidence and its theories again and through molecular biology coupled with the fossil record which supports what evolution partially, but mostly predicts. The similarities are there to be seen. now do i think there may be a god, that is simply we don't know. but again science is not about looking for god or trying to disprove god.
You do have a point, but even though there are some thing in the bible that have not yet come to reality, does it mean that others have not?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117166 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
again you show your idiocy. i never asked for peer reviewed science on clade. i asked you for peer reviewed science that backs your claim of clade being synonymous with kind. they would have to agree on that. good day lying jack wagon.
Then you area an even bigger idiot than I first thought.

You challenged me to come up with a working definition of "kind" when I said that I could. To all but the biggest of tards the use of kind being discussed was the sort of "kind" used in the Bible where life forms "after its kind" as in these verse:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

This was MY definition. It is not a public definition. It was a working definition for the undefined word "kind". I never claimed anyone else used it. I never implied that anyone else used it. That was all YOU. Of course you are a monumental tard and I am fairly sure that you will still not understand how you screwed up from the very beginning here.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#117167 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
science is not about whether there is a god or not. that is a misunderstanding people have of science. science is about what we have to study trying to explain the past and in some cases the future. we accomplish that by finding things, seeing them, touching them, testing them, interacting with them on different levels. we do all that to try to tell and learn more about our past than we know or have been told by your religion. the bible is clearly false in several places.
i support evolution for science supports and backs its evidence through thorough tested theories, rigorous study, testing its own theories repeatedly, never stopping the move forward which means more testing of new evidence, old evidence and its theories again and through molecular biology coupled with the fossil record which supports what evolution partially, but mostly predicts. The similarities are there to be seen. now do i think there may be a god, that is simply we don't know. but again science is not about looking for god or trying to disprove god.
And again, science did not give us the brain to date, it is just a God given gift to us. Without the brain, we can not think creatively and scientifically.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117168 Jul 6, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
All you need is a damn dictionary, wonderful...
Clade
A clade or monophylum is a group consisting of an ancestor and all its descendants, a single "branch" on the "tree of life". The ancestor may be an individual, a population or even a species.
i see why you don't speak up much now. you can't even comprehend what is in one post.

pay attention. we all know what clade is. the question at hand was and is "i asked you for peer reviewed science that backs your claim of "clade" being -synonymous- with "kind". they would have to agree on that.

go back to doing your nails

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117169 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
i see why you don't speak up much now. you can't even comprehend what is in one post.
pay attention. we all know what clade is. the question at hand was and is "i asked you for peer reviewed science that backs your claim of "clade" being -synonymous- with "kind". they would have to agree on that.
go back to doing your nails
No, you changed the question. The original demand by you was for a working definition of "kind". Obviously we were talking about "kind" as used in the Bible. Making that sort of "kind" synonymous to the already defined word "clade" produced a working definition of kind.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#117170 Jul 6, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
i see why you don't speak up much now. you can't even comprehend what is in one post.
pay attention. we all know what clade is. the question at hand was and is "i asked you for peer reviewed science that backs your claim of "clade" being -synonymous- with "kind". they would have to agree on that.
go back to doing your nails
Why would there be any peer review study papers to link a definition to another definition?
But since you insist on playing word games, I'll give you another definition.

clade -- A monophyletic taxon; a group of organisms which includes the most recent common ancestor of all of its members and all of the descendants of that most recent common ancestor. From the Greek word "klados", meaning branch or twig.

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/glossary/gloss1p...

That surely sounds like "kind" or more specifically "all animals of the same kind"

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#117171 Jul 7, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The "heavens" were "created" several billion years before the Earth. What is the Hebrew word for "billion" again?
Thats the type of stuff that makes people like me wonder.

Not about the answer to questions like that; but about what people like you are really expecting.

If God created our time; he/it would necessarily exist outside of our time.

Therefore, GODS PERCEPTION AND CONCEPT OF TIME WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF A HUMAN'S.

If you actually know anything about the bible, you would have read where it said that "a day with God is like 1000 years with man".

FURTHERMORE, the number 1000 represent INFINITY in the Hebrew culture.

Therefore what it could be suggesting is that each aspect of creation is a continually developing process; not different from what is suggested by evolution.

The Bible is significantly influenced by culture (even science is), therefore an understanding of the culture from which it originated is key to understanding it.

How much exactly do you know about Jewish thought and culture??????????
wondering

Morris, OK

#117172 Jul 7, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> And again, science did not give us the brain to date, it is just a God given gift to us. Without the brain, we can not think creatively and scientifically.
I never saw where anyone said science gave us the brain. Our brain along with our knowledge has evolved and given us science.

Now to humor you on god gave us the brain. Lets look at that; According to your bible god did not want man to be have knowledge that is why he forbid man to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Once man did, god punished him by giving him death as his fate for eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Which comes back full circle to the brain and knowledge,, manís brain and knowledge has evolved not because of your god but because of manís own actions. Knowledge and all that has came with that knowledge is all done by man.

And to humor you again manís brain and knowledge have evolved for both good and evil.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#117173 Jul 7, 2014
if x, y and z are in the same exact place ant the same exact time; x=y=z.
Aura Mytha wrote:
...Since time does not exist for a particle, it exists as several things at the same time.
Exactly: the x exists ALSO as y and z.

So you have agreed with me.

I am glad to see that you are able to appreciate the fact.

You have been one of the most reasonable ones so far.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117174 Jul 7, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would there be any peer review study papers to link a definition to another definition?
But since you insist on playing word games, I'll give you another definition.
clade -- A monophyletic taxon; a group of organisms which includes the most recent common ancestor of all of its members and all of the descendants of that most recent common ancestor. From the Greek word "klados", meaning branch or twig.
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/glossary/gloss1p...
That surely sounds like "kind" or more specifically "all animals of the same kind"
well if you want to be ignorant about it,,, let look at "kind" in the bible. the bible speaks of two "kinds of animals". 1) clean, 2) unclean. so technically there is a working definition for "kind" in the bible. they did not have clade. They did not have domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus or species. What they spoke of, being they were not as knowledgeable as we are today, were two --"kinds"-- of animals as follows; animals of the same kind---"clean" and animals of the same kind---"unclean".

now i can help you support evolution or i can hinder your bs petty arguments you throw at the creationists. They are people just like you and i. if you talk to them as people, show them a little respect which they do deserve, you will get further in talking to them and trying to explain things to them that they don't understand. look at Charles Idemi on my first post to him when he asked me what i believe. i explained to him what, why and what it was about. his reply was "you have some good points but not everything in the bible is false". he is correct that not everything in the bible is false and now maybe he will think about those good points i presented to him and when he is ready he might even want to discuss them more. we don't know. but it is better than treating them as idiots and bashing them down.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#117175 Jul 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you don't You are being a moron again. At best that is called "begging the question".
Try again.
<quoted text>
LOL!

Since language and meaning differs from culture, you cannot tell me what I know to be "God"; that it is not different from what another culture identifies as God.

So immediately, I know that you are mad at an image of "God" that you have in your head; not at the fact of God.
Subduction Zone wrote:
Again being a moron by "begging the question".
Try again...
NO! THAT IS NOT BEGGIN THE QUESTION!

" If the relation of B to C is such that they are identical, or that they are clearly convertible, or that one applies to the other, then he is begging the point at issue." [wikipedia.com]

I am describing an idea using terms which are associated with REAL AND NATURAL phenomena (isources, power etc) and you are telling me what?

LOL

Furthermore, the Bible state "And God said, Let us make MAN in our image, after our likeness..." [Gen 1]

If you payed nay attention in English language class, you would know that the subject "MAN" is plural and suggests the general, whereas "A MAN" would suggest the singular.

The Garden of Eden account was an isolated event as suggested by the narrative.

AND IF THE BIBLE CAN BE INTERPRETED TO MATCH ANY KNOWN FACTS; THEN IT IS INDISPENSABLE, FOR WE CAN USE IT TO LEARN THE NATURE OF ALL FACTS.
FREE SERVANT

Tucker, GA

#117176 Jul 7, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
How complex is a fertilized egg cell?
I meant that life itself as it unfolds into its kinds, will become what it is instructed to be from the first of these kinds which were brought forth. It is not going from simple to more complex as a kind. It is unfolding to become what it needs to be to be fruitful and to multiply after its own kind. The process of development and making changes or adjustments is what we are seeing in living things, and when they are fully grown they go about passing complex information as how to best do this down to their offspring.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#117177 Jul 7, 2014
By the definition of God that I know, God exists.
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you don't You are being a moron again. At best that is called "begging the question".
Try again..
NO!

Thats not beggin the question either.

To my knowledge, "God" means "Power"; "God" is defined to be "power"; not the powerful, but the power/potential itself is "God".

Now, I know that God exists, because God is power (the god I identify as "God"); and I know that power exists.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117178 Jul 7, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!
Since language and meaning differs from culture, you cannot tell me what I know to be "God"; that it is not different from what another culture identifies as God.
So immediately, I know that you are mad at an image of "God" that you have in your head; not at the fact of God.
<quoted text>
NO! THAT IS NOT BEGGIN THE QUESTION!
" If the relation of B to C is such that they are identical, or that they are clearly convertible, or that one applies to the other, then he is begging the point at issue." [wikipedia.com]
I am describing an idea using terms which are associated with REAL AND NATURAL phenomena (isources, power etc) and you are telling me what?
LOL
Furthermore, the Bible state "And God said, Let us make MAN in our image, after our likeness..." [Gen 1]
If you payed nay attention in English language class, you would know that the subject "MAN" is plural and suggests the general, whereas "A MAN" would suggest the singular.
The Garden of Eden account was an isolated event as suggested by the narrative.
AND IF THE BIBLE CAN BE INTERPRETED TO MATCH ANY KNOWN FACTS; THEN IT IS INDISPENSABLE, FOR WE CAN USE IT TO LEARN THE NATURE OF ALL FACTS.
You forgot to link the original claim.

Until you do it was begging the question and you missed the point. If the Bible can be reinterpreted to fit the truth no matter what the truth is it is absolutely useless.

Try again, but so far you have only shown that your Bible is worthless.

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
Veritas Certification VCS-322 exam latest dumps 10 min Gunslinger45 2
Which Poster Are You Thinking About Right Now? 14 min Gunslinger45 10
Add a Word remove a Word (Oct '13) 45 min cjt12 5,341
First Word That Comes To Mind ....... (Apr '10) 47 min cjt12 13,107
Only Three Word (Nov '09) 51 min cjt12 13,960
Let's play "follow the word" (Jun '08) 53 min cjt12 49,522
Post "any three words" (Sep '12) 55 min cjt12 4,458
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr cjt12 4,616
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr wichita-rick 220,782
A to Z songs by title or group! (Dec '16) 1 hr T Bone 2,128
More from around the web