Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223194 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.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117561 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. does science currently have tests for god?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?
if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!
on the other hand
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?
if you answer yes to any of the above then produce it when asked or STFU! don't use cop outs to avoid it.
You are really wound up. Relax. Have a hot bath. Then come back on when you have cooled off. Your just making yourself sick.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117562 Jul 10, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You seem tense. Have you considered cutting back on caffeine?
it stands as written. put up or shut up.it is that simple!
i challenge any person here, evolutionists or creationists to provide JUST ONE example and evidence of a live species completely changing into a new species! just a simple little one is all that you need to provide that "we" have "observed" changing from one species to a another completely different species. changing similarities does not count. ability to use a new protein does not count. ability to use a new amino acid does not count. it has to be completely changing from one species to another new species. any takers??? put up or STFU jack wagons! creationist do lie but not near as much as the evolutionist idiots on here. you want evidence of their god, then get with science and come up with tests that can tests for god and look for god. last time i checked those test did not exist in science because science is not looking for god. so one has to think how can they show scientific evidence for god when science does not know how and currently does not test for god.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117563 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
it is you that is afraid to produce said evidence for you and i both know species to species evolution has never been observed in life. only similarities in the fossil record and in molecular biology.
show me wrong. species to species during living life as we have seen it.
What do you mean by similarities? I have not read the use of this term in the literature.

Since you are implying a familiarity with how relatedness is determined in fossils, perhaps you could share your knowledge with the rest of us. It would be very enlightening to hear from someone knowledgeable in the subject to review the major and important minor points.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117564 Jul 10, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>My you are testing and there are at least 26 definitions of a species in science that I know of. My point isn't a dodge, it is to show that you don't even really know what you are asking. It is that simple. You are now using simplistic word games and name calling to crawfish around the fact that you haven't got a clue how a species is defined. Not a very good job of it either.
what a word game tard. i think we are talking about specieation correct?
wondering

Morris, OK

#117565 Jul 10, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Is that Jack Wagon related to any of them Wagons over by Willow Springs or down Koshkonong way? You know there was a famous heteropterist (entomologist that studies true bugs) from Koshkonong. Harry Hazelton Knight detailed the North American genera and species of the family Miridae nearly single-handedly and described over 1300 species in the order.
wtf are you talking about. look up jack wagon, urban dictionary. and you wonder why you are a jack wagon.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117566 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. does science currently have tests for god?
No, but certain religious claims can be shown to be false. In other words the existence of God cannot be tested for by science, the God that fundamentalist Christians believe in can be tested. Do you understand the difference between those two statement?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?
2. See above.
3. See above.
4. See above.
5. See above.
6. See above.
if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!
on the other hand
Luckily I did not answer no to any of your foolish questions. I see that you are still an idiot.
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?
if you answer yes to any of the above then produce it when asked or STFU! don't use cop outs to avoid it.
Sorry moron you do not get to determine the conditions under which I will give you evidence. The answer is yes for all of your questions.
Why are you afraid to learn what evidence is? Why are you afraid to learn what scientific testing is?
I guess we know who is the cowardly lying "jack wagon" here.
It would take you less than an hour to learn, why are you so afraid?
wondering

Morris, OK

#117567 Jul 10, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>My you are testing and there are at least 26 definitions of a species in science that I know of. My point isn't a dodge, it is to show that you don't even really know what you are asking. It is that simple. You are now using simplistic word games and name calling to crawfish around the fact that you haven't got a clue how a species is defined. Not a very good job of it either.
1. does science currently have tests for god?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?

if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!

on the other hand
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?

if you answer yes to any of the above then produce it when asked or STFU! don't use cop outs and word games to avoid it.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117568 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
it stands as written. put up or shut up.it is that simple!
i challenge any person here, evolutionists or creationists to provide JUST ONE example and evidence of a live species completely changing into a new species! just a simple little one is all that you need to provide that "we" have "observed" changing from one species to a another completely different species. changing similarities does not count. ability to use a new protein does not count. ability to use a new amino acid does not count. it has to be completely changing from one species to another new species. any takers??? put up or STFU jack wagons! creationist do lie but not near as much as the evolutionist idiots on here. you want evidence of their god, then get with science and come up with tests that can tests for god and look for god. last time i checked those test did not exist in science because science is not looking for god. so one has to think how can they show scientific evidence for god when science does not know how and currently does not test for god.
Sorry idiot, the first put up or shut up went out to you long ago.

First you have to learn what evidence is and how scientific evidence is done.

The bad is in your court coward.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117569 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
since you want to play a word game,, let cut through the chase. you tell what science considers specitation to speciation. that will not only save much time it will also cut through your word games.
I wondered if you were really going to read my posts or just the first sentence or two. Looks like just the first sentence or two.

You keep saying I want to play word games. That is your word game. There is no such thing as speciation to speciation. I assume you mean simply speciation. I must interject that I am beginning to have doubts that you know anything about biology. Anyway, I have already stated in the parts of my posts you didn't read that there are at least 26 definitions of a species that I am aware of. They can be grouped into biological, ecological, morphological, and genetic/molecular definitions. The definition I think you probably want and maybe actual have heard before is that of a population that can only breed within itself and any interbreeding with other populations produces infertile hybrids.

I also wrote in my posts about how I don't know of any evidence where speciation has been observed in real time, but I gave examples of speciation that has been observed for cichlids, and grasshoppers.

Now you are playing a game because you are obviously not interested in what is posted. You are interested in trashing people that have a greater knowledge than you do and don't agree with you. Your whining, angry rants don't show any intellect on your part. You demand respect and give none. If you can't take it, don't play your games.

Oh, and read posts. I have answered your questions.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117570 Jul 10, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but certain religious claims can be shown to be false. In other words the existence of God cannot be tested for by science, the God that fundamentalist Christians believe in can be tested. Do you understand the difference between those two statement?
<quoted text>
2. See above.
3. See above.
4. See above.
5. See above.
6. See above.
<quoted text>
Luckily I did not answer no to any of your foolish questions. I see that you are still an idiot.
<quoted text>
Sorry moron you do not get to determine the conditions under which I will give you evidence. The answer is yes for all of your questions.
Why are you afraid to learn what evidence is? Why are you afraid to learn what scientific testing is?
I guess we know who is the cowardly lying "jack wagon" here.
It would take you less than an hour to learn, why are you so afraid?
i don't give a f**k about religious claims. the post stands as it is written. answer or shut up you idiot jack wagon.

1. does science currently have tests for god?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?

if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!

on the other hand
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?

if you answer yes to any of the above then produce it when asked or STFU! don't use cop outs and word games to avoid it.

"God cannot be tested for by science, the God that fundamentalist Christians believe in can be tested. Do you understand the difference between those two statement?"

do explain? oh and you can't use the bible as a negative or evidence because that is man written.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117571 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. does science currently have tests for god?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?
if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!
on the other hand
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?
if you answer yes to any of the above then produce it when asked or STFU! don't use cop outs and word games to avoid it.
Why don't you provide the answers. Come on tough guy. You can do it. I bet you can even spell your own name.

You know I think you should answer the latter questions. I don't care about the former. They aren't about science. What is your answer. Answer them or SHUT THE FUCKUP!!!

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117572 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
what a word game tard. i think we are talking about specieation correct?
You are the one going full on tard, not me. Bet you like cake too. You tell me, you are the one that spells it six different ways. Maybe you are talking about something completely different in your retarded word games.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117573 Jul 10, 2014
Hey look! I was right. Wondering was projecting all of the time. Sine he is the coward who is too stupid to learn here he clearly meets this definition of "jack wagon":

"3.

jackwagon
a crybaby loser pussy-type who needs to grow some cajones and start acting like a man."

And this one:

"1.

jack wagon
Loser. Someone who is totally worthless."

In fact all of the definitions of "jack wagon" apply to him from his own chosen source:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php...

Finally wondering posted something useful.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#117575 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
i challenge any person here, evolutionists or creationists to provide JUST ONE example and evidence of a live species completely changing into a new species! just a simple little one is all that you need to provide that "we" have "observed" changing from one species to a another completely different species. changing similarities does not count. ability to use a new protein does not count. ability to use a new amino acid does not count. it has to be completely changing from one species to another new species. any takers??? put up or STFU jack wagons! creationist do lie but not near as much as the evolutionist idiots on here. you want evidence of their god, then get with science and come up with tests that can tests for god and look for god. last time i checked those test did not exist in science because science is not looking for god. so one has to think how can they show scientific evidence for god when science does not know how and currently does not test for god..
Well we saw you go from a semi intelligent ape , to a complete banana eating poo slinging dumb ass in less than
500 worda.?

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117576 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
it stands as written. put up or shut up.it is that simple!
i challenge any person here, evolutionists or creationists to provide JUST ONE example and evidence of a live species completely changing into a new species! just a simple little one is all that you need to provide that "we" have "observed" changing from one species to a another completely different species. changing similarities does not count. ability to use a new protein does not count. ability to use a new amino acid does not count. it has to be completely changing from one species to another new species. any takers??? put up or STFU jack wagons! creationist do lie but not near as much as the evolutionist idiots on here. you want evidence of their god, then get with science and come up with tests that can tests for god and look for god. last time i checked those test did not exist in science because science is not looking for god. so one has to think how can they show scientific evidence for god when science does not know how and currently does not test for god.
Yes, you are definitely not having a good day. Is it meth? You are down there in Methsouri.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117577 Jul 10, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
i don't give a f**k about religious claims. the post stands as it is written. answer or shut up you idiot jack wagon.
1. does science currently have tests for god?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?
if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!
on the other hand
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?
if you answer yes to any of the above then produce it when asked or STFU! don't use cop outs and word games to avoid it.
"God cannot be tested for by science, the God that fundamentalist Christians believe in can be tested. Do you understand the difference between those two statement?"
do explain? oh and you can't use the bible as a negative or evidence because that is man written.
I answered you questions and you forgot, your own hint about looking up the meaning of "jack wagon" tells us that it is about you and only about you.

Poor fool, his dad probably called him this while growing up. Though true his father could have done better and taught him how to think. With knowledge you will lose your fear. With knowledge you would not be such an idiot.

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117578 Jul 10, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but certain religious claims can be shown to be false. In other words the existence of God cannot be tested for by science, the God that fundamentalist Christians believe in can be tested. Do you understand the difference between those two statement?
<quoted text>
2. See above.
3. See above.
4. See above.
5. See above.
6. See above.
<quoted text>
Luckily I did not answer no to any of your foolish questions. I see that you are still an idiot.
<quoted text>
Sorry moron you do not get to determine the conditions under which I will give you evidence. The answer is yes for all of your questions.
Why are you afraid to learn what evidence is? Why are you afraid to learn what scientific testing is?
I guess we know who is the cowardly lying "jack wagon" here.
It would take you less than an hour to learn, why are you so afraid?
It sounds like you have been dealing with this goomer for a while. Is he always this angry and childish? I more or less ignored him from shortly after he started posting, because he just seems like a troll looking to stir up trouble. With all the frantic posts and the games it seems like I was right in my initial assessment. What do you think?

“Merry Christmas”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Happy New Year

#117579 Jul 10, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
Hey look! I was right. Wondering was projecting all of the time. Sine he is the coward who is too stupid to learn here he clearly meets this definition of "jack wagon":
"3.
jackwagon
a crybaby loser pussy-type who needs to grow some cajones and start acting like a man."
And this one:
"1.
jack wagon
Loser. Someone who is totally worthless."
In fact all of the definitions of "jack wagon" apply to him from his own chosen source:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php...
Finally wondering posted something useful.
He does seem to spout a lot of nonsense. It seems that types like him come on here to take their anger out on these threads. Maybe jack wagon means something to him beyond what is found in the definitions on the web. You may be right about his hearing it so often, it has become part of his every sentence.
wondering

Morris, OK

#117580 Jul 10, 2014
ah i see i have three idiot jack wagons here. answer them or dispute them by showing a scientific test for gos. end of story.


Reply
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#117570
16 min ago


Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but certain religious claims can be shown to be false. In other words the existence of God cannot be tested for by science, the God that fundamentalist Christians believe in can be tested. Do you understand the difference between those two statement?
<quoted text>
2. See above.
3. See above.
4. See above.
5. See above.
6. See above.
<quoted text>
Luckily I did not answer no to any of your foolish questions. I see that you are still an idiot.
<quoted text>
Sorry moron you do not get to determine the conditions under which I will give you evidence. The answer is yes for all of your questions.
Why are you afraid to learn what evidence is? Why are you afraid to learn what scientific testing is?
I guess we know who is the cowardly lying "jack wagon" here.
It would take you less than an hour to learn, why are you so afraid?

i don't give a f**k about religious claims. the post stands as it is written. answer or shut up you idiot jack wagon.

1. does science currently have tests for god?
2. does science currently tests for god?
3. does science even know what to test for god?
4. does science even know where to test for god?
5. does science even know what a god may be?
6. does science have evidence for god?

if you answer "no" to any of the above questions then you are a coward idiot jack wagon to ask for such scientific evidence for god because you know science does none of the above and only scientific evidence is what mattes. it is that simple idiot jack wagon!

on the other hand
1. does science currently have test for evolution?
2. does science currently test for evolution?
3. does science even know what to test for test for evolution?
4. does science even know where to test for evolution?
5. does science even know what evolution is?
6. does science have evidence for evolution?

surely between three jack wagons you can come up with one answer.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117581 Jul 10, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>It sounds like you have been dealing with this goomer for a while. Is he always this angry and childish? I more or less ignored him from shortly after he started posting, because he just seems like a troll looking to stir up trouble. With all the frantic posts and the games it seems like I was right in my initial assessment. What do you think?
Yep, It was obvious from the start that he did not know what evidence was so I refused to give him any evidence until he learned what evidence was and why. Something that would take less than an hour out of his life has kept him ignorant since I am not willing to waste my time on a fool and it seems that no one else wants to waster their time on this waste of DNA either.

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
Name something that gets past around (Feb '14) 1 hr Brandiiiiiiii 1,065
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 1 hr Brandiiiiiiii 5,994
Word Association (Mar '10) 1 hr -Papa-Smurf- 22,776
Word Association (Jun '10) 1 hr -Papa-Smurf- 32,771
"3 Syllable" Word s - A-Z" 1 hr Brandiiiiiiii 64
One Word (Jan '09) 1 hr -Papa-Smurf- 18,406
**4 Syllable Word A-Z** (Jul '12) 1 hr Brandiiiiiiii 980
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr wichita-rick 226,122
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 1 hr F_R_E_D 32,515
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr Brandiiiiiiii 6,767
More from around the web