Evolution vs. Creation

There are 163690 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

#117245 Jul 7, 2014
An example of a species that has evolved recently:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_wall_liz...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117246 Jul 7, 2014
This site goes over the story of Tiktaalik. A fossil found by using the predictive powers of the theory of evolution:

http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#117247 Jul 7, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
.
Observation is not enough to give certainty. We can observe the sun rising in the sky and we could theorize that it has circled the earth, but that in itself is not enough to correctly postulate a geocentric solar system.
Hence, testing.
messianic114 wrote:
In the last 150 years of which evolution has been a theory, have we observed any new species develop? No.
Actually, yes.

talkoriginsDOTorg/faqs/faq-spe ciationDOThtml

Plus you're also ignoring the fossil record. In which it is VERY clear that species have changed over time. The question is HOW. By an invisible wizard magically poofing new species intermittently every once in a while when it gets bored? Or by evolution? Or perhaps an unknown third alternative no-one's thought of yet?

So far, only the theory of evolution has had great success in terms of scientific predictions in this regard:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

As opposed to ALL other alternative theories which have had NO success at all whatsoever.

Oh wait - that's because no-one HAS come up with an alternative yet. My bad!
messianic114 wrote:
In that time it is possible that a bacterial culture would have produced over 236 million generations and billions of progeny but at the end of it all what do we have? I'll tell you, we have a bacterium.
And we have bacteria of different species. A quick look at the Lenski experiment would show you that.

Of course what you are NOT understanding is that bacteria doesn't represent "species", it represents an entire biological DOMAIN:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_class...
messianic114 wrote:
If evolution were actually happening we would observe it. It would be testable, we could make predictions as to when we would expect an evolutionary change. So far we got zippo.
Except for the fact you're wrong, because it passes all of your current demands. Quite easily in fact:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

Feel free to be the first person on the face of the entire planet to refute this, or, come up with another alternative which does a better job of explaining the evidence (of course it would have to pass the usual standards of empricism like evolution does).

Take your time.

We'll be waiting.

A LOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNGGGG time...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117248 Jul 7, 2014
Don't you love it how posters like messianic 114 abuse the judgeits function. They can't answer legitimate arguments so he downrates responses using at least two sock puppets.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#117249 Jul 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
Don't you love it how posters like messianic 114 abuse the judgeits function. They can't answer legitimate arguments so he downrates responses using at least two sock puppets.
;-)

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#117250 Jul 7, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Observation is not enough to give certainty. We can observe the sun rising in the sky and we could theorize that it has circled the earth, but that in itself is not enough to correctly postulate a geocentric solar system.
.
In the last 150 years of which evolution has been a theory, have we observed any new species develop? No. In that time it is possible that a bacterial culture would have produced over 236 million generations and billions of progeny but at the end of it all what do we have? I'll tell you, we have a bacterium.
.
If evolution were actually happening we would observe it. It would be testable, we could make predictions as to when we would expect an evolutionary change. So far we got zippo.
You are LYING.
Speciation has been observed.
YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT.
Because if you criticize an idea, you should have basic understanding of it.

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#117251 Jul 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
Don't you love it how posters like messianic 114 abuse the judgeits function. They can't answer legitimate arguments so he downrates responses using at least two sock puppets.
I think he even jerking off when judging it.

It is an demonstration of incompetence.
It is just behaviour like a child who did not have it his way and starts to yell and sticking their fingers in their ears determined no to listen.

As Dawkins once put it: when creationists suspect facts being 10 miles around, they shut their eyes and close their ears and start reciting "la, la, la".

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#117252 Jul 7, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
The Guardians Of The Galaxy?
:)

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#117253 Jul 7, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the oft used creationist argument. We must effectively account for every second that passes in the entire universe. And if we can't? Goddidit. They on the other hand don't have to do a thing except sit on their azz.
Just look at Hog.(shrug)
Exactly, and Just look at Hog, Stupendously the ignorant *)&^er!

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#117254 Jul 7, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
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.
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Sheesh!
Somebody needs to tell these jerks, you fooled your way for a millennia, but you will fool us no more, fool.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#117255 Jul 7, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Also false in the real world. The fact that they happen at different places and at the same time (for any observer), will show that they cannot be causally connected: neither is the cause of the other (they could have a common cause, though).
The singular event has different places and different times to different observers. I know it's confusing to them, but a consequence of general relativity.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#117256 Jul 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
This site goes over the story of Tiktaalik. A fossil found by using the predictive powers of the theory of evolution:
http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/
Tiktaalik, is more than a mere fossil of predictive power, it was a creature that connects
the sea creatures to those that began to breathe the air and walk the land.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117257 Jul 7, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Tiktaalik, is more than a mere fossil of predictive power, it was a creature that connects
the sea creatures to those that began to breathe the air and walk the land.
But it was fully formed <snicker>.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#117258 Jul 7, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Observation is not enough to give certainty. We can observe the sun rising in the sky and we could theorize that it has circled the earth, but that in itself is not enough to correctly postulate a geocentric solar system.
.
In the last 150 years of which evolution has been a theory, have we observed any new species develop? No. In that time it is possible that a bacterial culture would have produced over 236 million generations and billions of progeny but at the end of it all what do we have? I'll tell you, we have a bacterium.
.
If evolution were actually happening we would observe it. It would be testable, we could make predictions as to when we would expect an evolutionary change. So far we got zippo.
150 years is a mere instant of time in the big picture of things.

Level 8

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#117259 Jul 7, 2014
Oh platypus.
Interestingly, some scientists are studying how co-dependent species are harmed by forest fragmentation. Certain pants and animals are so dependent on each other, the loss or fragmentation of one or the other can cause extinction of the others. So, then I wonder which one developed first, or did lots of things develop or mutate simultaneously, and are so specialized and codependent that they would die out without the others? So many codependent relationships in nature, what is the mathematical chance of so many mutations happening in separate species at the same time, over and over again?
But then, unable to cope with changes, and blink out. Almost like their genetic potential was played out. No new genetic material added, only deletions? Like selective breeding, you can get a daschund by breeding for specific traits in wolves, but I am pretty sure you can't breed daschunds selectively until you get a wolf. Just sayin'

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#117260 Jul 7, 2014
EQUALITY:
". equivalency, parity, correspondence, SAMENESS; justice,***FAIRNESS***, impartiality. " [http://dictionary.reference.c om/browse/equality]

CONFORM:
" TO BE SIMILAR TO OR THE SAME AS something"
[http://www.merriam-webster.co m/dictionary/conform]
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't know what it means to 'conform' to equality. The word 'conform' doesn't relate in any way to the word 'equality' that I can see.
Let the world witness the implications of those words.
I will not judge you; but the word that you have spoken, it testifieth of you that you are... what it implies you are.
polymath257 wrote:
Equality is a relation: either two things are equal or they are not. Everything is equal to itself (by definition) and unequal to everything else (again, by definition).
Equality is a natural phenomena: if a plank is placed on a pivot and the weight on both sides of it are equal, it will become "balanced", entering a state of equlity.

Equality is a natural drive of all things: energy will continue to flow until it is equal at all points (law of thermodynamics)... a particle will continue to move at the SAME speed (equal speeds) in the SAME (equal direction) unless interrupted by another force.

Equality is the the rule of engagement for the Christian; "do unto others as you will have them do unto you."
polymath257 wrote:
So, if there are two things in the universe, does that mean that the universe doesn't 'conform to equality'?
It actually means that the two things conform to equality.

For in order for them to exist in the same space (in any frame of reference), they must have at least one thing in common even if that common attribute is the space itself.

It is counterproductive to reason with you, if I can call what you do "reasoning".

Because "it is by reasoning that we arrive at truth", and truth embodies equality; and you dont know what it is to conform to equality (not even in thought, as your remark is rather general) neither do you believe IN truth.

So how do you arrive at reason?

And what are you doing with it, i.e. reason?

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#117261 Jul 7, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
EQUALITY:
". equivalency, parity, correspondence, SAMENESS; justice,***FAIRNESS***, impartiality. " [http://dictionary.reference.c om/browse/equality]
CONFORM:
" TO BE SIMILAR TO OR THE SAME AS something"
[http://www.merriam-webster.co m/dictionary/conform]
<quoted text>
Let the world witness the implications of those words.
I will not judge you; but the word that you have spoken, it testifieth of you that you are... what it implies you are.
<quoted text>
Equality is a natural phenomena: if a plank is placed on a pivot and the weight on both sides of it are equal, it will become "balanced", entering a state of equlity.
Equality is a natural drive of all things: energy will continue to flow until it is equal at all points (law of thermodynamics)... a particle will continue to move at the SAME speed (equal speeds) in the SAME (equal direction) unless interrupted by another force.
Equality is the the rule of engagement for the Christian; "do unto others as you will have them do unto you."
<quoted text>
It actually means that the two things conform to equality.
For in order for them to exist in the same space (in any frame of reference), they must have at least one thing in common even if that common attribute is the space itself.
It is counterproductive to reason with you, if I can call what you do "reasoning".
Because "it is by reasoning that we arrive at truth", and truth embodies equality; and you dont know what it is to conform to equality (not even in thought, as your remark is rather general) neither do you believe IN truth.
So how do you arrive at reason?
And what are you doing with it, i.e. reason?
I know what you are equal too.

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#117262 Jul 7, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
EQUALITY:
Let the world witness the implications of those words.
How many people you think read this? This is hilarious. Grandiose much?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117263 Jul 7, 2014
Naughtyrobot wrote:
Oh platypus.
Interestingly, some scientists are studying how co-dependent species are harmed by forest fragmentation. Certain pants and animals are so dependent on each other, the loss or fragmentation of one or the other can cause extinction of the others. So, then I wonder which one developed first, or did lots of things develop or mutate simultaneously, and are so specialized and codependent that they would die out without the others? So many codependent relationships in nature, what is the mathematical chance of so many mutations happening in separate species at the same time, over and over again?
But then, unable to cope with changes, and blink out. Almost like their genetic potential was played out. No new genetic material added, only deletions? Like selective breeding, you can get a daschund by breeding for specific traits in wolves, but I am pretty sure you can't breed daschunds selectively until you get a wolf. Just sayin'
Actually you could not breed a dachshund from a wolf again, nor could you breed a wolf back from a dachshund. Evolution is a one way trip that can only be taken once. Since populations evolve and individuals it would be all but impossible for the same path to be followed twice. You might be able to create a breed that looks like a dachshund but a genetic examination would show that the two lines were different.

And "information" is added all of the time in evolution. That has been observed time after time and there really is no problem in adding info. Don't believe lying creationist sites.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#117264 Jul 7, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you only have the existence of power, not the existence of a common source for all power.
Even if all power has a source, you are making the illogical leap from the statement
'For each power, there is a source of that power'
to the statement
'there is a common source for all powers'
THAT is the logical leap that you have not established.
Look at how your statement about not knowing what it means to conform to equality proves true:

If all power has one source, then it is naturally the source of EACH ONE of those powers which it (the source) has created.

Therefore the remark:

"Even if all power has a source, you are making the illogical leap from the statement...";

Should never even have entered your mind as a reasonable individual ("reasonable" by any definition).

The assumption that there is a source of all powers MUST immediately, directly, naturally and every -ally-ly implies that:'For each power, there is a source of that power'.
polymath257 wrote:
So you have not proven that there is a God, even by your definition, and even granting that the term 'power' is sufficiently defined to lend itself to this argument (which I also deny).
<quoted text>
If that conclusion was based on your sentiments above; it is meaningless (both the conclusion and the sentiment).
polymath257 wrote:
The logical flaw is pointed out above. You assume a common source for all types of power. That has not been demonstrated and, in fact, is incredibly unlikely.
But logic demands that there be, and there must naturally be.

That which is powerful by any definition of power, must possess one unique attribute (or set of attributes) which allows it to be identified as being powerful or having potential. And it is this attribute/s which is causes or generates the power by itself or from itself.

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
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? 8 min CJ Rocker 967
Word Association (Jun '10) 8 min Mega Monster 27,626
last word/first word. (Apr '12) 8 min Broken Lance 5,816
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 11 min Broken Lance 11,358
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 16 min whatimeisit 8,616
News Duke professor: Blacks riot because they're laz... 17 min Big Knob 211
*Sad music/sad themes Thread* 20 min Jay R 108
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 24 min eleanorigby 40,632
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Dream Crystal 162,731
News Driver Clocked at 153MPH in Dodge Wagon 4 hr Parden Pard 6
motorcycle traveling stories 6 hr TALLYHO 8541 760
More from around the web