Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 218794 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

#118503 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
What a question.
Yet it seems that no amount of studying will ever bring you to know the obvious.
LOL
Nice try, but what I claimed was obviously true and has been observed by many. Do you have to tell someone that dropping a 50 pound lead weigh on a bare foot is a bad idea?

Some ideas are obvious, that is to all but those that believe in a book of magic.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#118504 Jul 18, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Since it's dishonest for creationists to ask for evidence at all, why do you desire to make your position look even MORE stupid than it already is?
Do you have evidence they aren't fabricated?
Is evidence capable of proving anything with absolute certainty?

Even when all the evidence suggests that a criminal is guilty of charges laid against him; is it not possible to argue that the evidence is actually suggesting something else?

Does evidence directly connecting a subject to any event or process make it impossible assume that the evidence points to something contrary?

NO AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE CAN CONVINCE ANYONE WHO CHOOSES NOT TO BELIEVE.

So stop pretending as if the failure to present evidence is the main reason for you so called skepticism (if it can be called that).

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#118505 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
...Furthermore, we know that "Muppet" monsters and "Big Birds" are not real; yet they are used to teach the young about reality.
So all you have just said translates to: "I dont know what it means so it must not mean anything".
So admittedly, by means of comparison you are stating that the Bible is nothing more than a book of stories and metaphors created for amusement and educational purposes? Good, looks like you do understand.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#118506 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it matter what name I use here?
And by the way; has evolution demonstrated that there is no God?
I cant see the meaning of that question you asked.
<quoted text>
I dont accept nor reject anything; I use whatever works as long as it works.
I dont waste my mental capacity hugging on to any particular concept, because at the end of the day, they are nothing but mere rationalizations.
<quoted text>
I'm touched.
<quoted text>
Most Christians that YOU know, to be accurate.
Leave it to your kind to make hasty generalizations.
Furthermore, we know that "Muppet" monsters and "Big Birds" are not real; yet they are used to teach the young about reality.
So all you have just said translates to: "I dont know what it means so it must not mean anything".
Thal'll do pig.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#118507 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it matter what name I use here?
And by the way; has evolution demonstrated that there is no God?
I cant see the meaning of that question you asked.
Please, that is the sort of name that only a creatard would use. And no, evolution does not demonstrate that there is no God. It only shows that the God of Genesis is not real. Too many Christians interpret that as saying there is no God.
I dont accept nor reject anything; I use whatever works as long as it works.
I dont waste my mental capacity hugging on to any particular concept, because at the end of the day, they are nothing but mere rationalizations.
Perhaps for the uneducated. Not for those that understand the subject at hand.
I'm touched.
<quoted text>
Most Christians that YOU know, to be accurate.
Leave it to your kind to make hasty generalizations.
Furthermore, we know that "Muppet" monsters and "Big Birds" are not real; yet they are used to teach the young about reality.
So all you have just said translates to: "I dont know what it means so it must not mean anything".
No, most Christians world wide accept the theory of evolution. They know that Adam and Eve and Noah's Ark are simply myths. Yes, the book of Genesis can still be used to teach morals. In fact that is really what it is, it is simply a morality story. Of course it has some terribly flawed morals in it, but then what do you expect out of a bronze to iron age culture?
wondering

Morris, OK

#118508 Jul 18, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You total idiot. You started this whole nonsense long before the splooge comments. You left yourself open and I gave you a shot.
You can dish it out but you cannot take it.
does it make you feel good to lie? does it give you some kind of superiority complex and as predicted right on time. it took 7 minutes for you to respond. you keep that refresh button hammered don't you. lmao

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#118509 Jul 18, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try, but what I claimed was obviously true and has been observed by many. Do you have to tell someone that dropping a 50 pound lead weigh on a bare foot is a bad idea?
Some ideas are obvious, that is to all but those that believe in a book of magic.
Oh?

So how come the idea that God exists is obvious to me and not to you?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#118510 Jul 18, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
does it make you feel good to lie? does it give you some kind of superiority complex and as predicted right on time. it took 7 minutes for you to respond. you keep that refresh button hammered don't you. lmao
You moron, I did not lie.

You started this whole thing long ago. The last bit was just an extension of it. And you moron I have not been to this site for hours. I had a couple of messages from HOG that were over an hour old. I do not have the fascination with you that you have for me. You are projecting again.
wondering

Morris, OK

#118511 Jul 18, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You total idiot. You started this whole nonsense long before the splooge comments. You left yourself open and I gave you a shot.
You can dish it out but you cannot take it.
lying ljackass wagon. i said i had to go see about a problem at one of the theaters and you posted back with the "porn" comments then the "splooge comments..

when i returned an hour or so later you and dan had the porn comments a rolling. when i answered to dans post of why i went down myself instead of calling some one you started in with the splooge comments.
here ya go;
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TC7...

you should post only when you are sober and you would remember the crap you say. but as it stands you are just a lying jackass wagon.

again does it make you feel good to lie? does it give you some kind of superiority complex?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#118512 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh?
So how come the idea that God exists is obvious to me and not to you?
I don't know. You have not listed any evidence for god or gods. There is no observed need for a god. Most people that believe in God are driven by a large part by their natural fear of death. I can't say why you have this particular delusion.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#118513 Jul 18, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Well the problem with your conclusions is that there is zero OBJECTIVE (look up that word) evidence of invisible magic Jews. You are free to correct me on this if you can...
I agree with that.

But it is more effective to search for a nail with a metal detector than with a stethoscope; therefore we know that the nature of the thing being examined determines how the thing must be investigated.

It is the subject which determines what is evidence of it (the subject).

So if I one wants to test that God exists; one MUST test for the attributes of God as suggested by the nature of (a) God.

If the test for the attributes gives data which suggests the claims are false; then the conclusion is that:

THE SUGGESTED ATTRIBUTES ARE NOT THOSE OF GOD, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE IS NO GOD.

Describe the nature of the God for which there is no evidence, or shut the f**k up.

And we all agree that there is no invisible jewish wizard outside of your fantasies.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#118514 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with that.
But it is more effective to search for a nail with a metal detector than with a stethoscope; therefore we know that the nature of the thing being examined determines how the thing must be investigated.
It is the subject which determines what is evidence of it (the subject).
So if I one wants to test that God exists; one MUST test for the attributes of God as suggested by the nature of (a) God.
If the test for the attributes gives data which suggests the claims are false; then the conclusion is that:
THE SUGGESTED ATTRIBUTES ARE NOT THOSE OF GOD, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE IS NO GOD.
Describe the nature of the God for which there is no evidence, or shut the f**k up.
And we all agree that there is no invisible jewish wizard outside of your fantasies.
And yet you claim the existence of God is obvious. If it was obvious it should be detectable.

Now I will not claim that there is no god. I will say that certain versions of god have been thoroughly debunked. For example I do not think that anyone would argue against my claim that Zeus, Thor, and Apollos and countless other nature gods, gods used to describe natural processes have been debunked. Very often since we have a scientific explanation of why they are wrong. For the same reason we know there was no Adam and Eve, a first man and first woman. We can show that not only with the observed fact that all life evolves but also measuring those rates and seeing if at any time in the recent past there were only two individuals. The answer is of course no. The science of population bottlenecks shows that the human race hit a low spot about 70,000 years ago and the worldwide population fell to roughly 3,000 to 10,000 people

A lack of a much worse human population bottleneck rules out Adam and Eve and Noah's flood:

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

“Don't try to goad me...”

Level 1

Since: Nov 07

... I'm a goadless heathen.

#118515 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with that.
But it is more effective to search for a nail with a metal detector than with a stethoscope; therefore we know that the nature of the thing being examined determines how the thing must be investigated.
It is the subject which determines what is evidence of it (the subject).
So if I one wants to test that God exists; one MUST test for the attributes of God as suggested by the nature of (a) God.
If the test for the attributes gives data which suggests the claims are false; then the conclusion is that:
THE SUGGESTED ATTRIBUTES ARE NOT THOSE OF GOD, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE IS NO GOD.
Describe the nature of the God for which there is no evidence, or shut the f**k up.
And we all agree that there is no invisible jewish wizard outside of your fantasies.
I like this reasoning.

I've said for years that god(s) can't be investigated unless their attributes are defined, and I've yet to see any broadly-agreed definition of attributes.

The few characteristics that all modern gods (i.e. those still being worshiped) seem to possess are:
- invisible
- inaudible (except as internal voice)
- requiring acknowledgment / worship
- able to temporarily suspect physical / chemical laws in response to entreaty

Of those (and feel free to add more), only the last could conceivably be put to any sort of structured investigation. As you likely know, studies of the efficacy of intercessory prayer have not led to a particularly optimistic conclusion that any god is interested in our pleadings.

So, if the universe looks and acts exactly as it would if there were no god, wherefore the sense in believing?

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#118516 Jul 18, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You have not listed any evidence for god or gods.
Even if tangible evidence was presented for the TRUE God, there will always be a shadow of doubt.

For that which is TRUE remains consistent in all its ways eternally (for that which is true never changes).

But since the human race is by no means eternal, we could never be certain of the truth of that we are observing/measuring is the TRUE God.

Furthermore, we know that just because we DONT have evidence that Mr. A killed Mr.B, doesnt mean he didnt do it nor was not involved.

And just because you arrive to see Mr. A pulling a knife from the dead body of Mr. B doesnt mean Mr. A killed him (if there was blood on the handle that hides the fingerprints of the real killer, Mr. A might as well have been the actual killer).
Subduction Zone wrote:
There is no observed need for a god.
Bullshit!

That remark suggests that you know that there is a God, and thus have the authority to say there is no need for it.

Do you know that there is a God?

If you dont know that there is no God, you cannot make that remark logically.
Subduction Zone wrote:
Most people that believe in God are driven by a large part by their natural fear of death.
LIAR!

You neither know most people nor their beliefs.

And Jesu/s encouraged mankind to look beyond the physical existence and find confidence in things that not even death can take away.

He encouraged us even by example that we must face death with courage, especially if it means that it will give others a chance to survive.
Subduction Zone wrote:
I can't say why you have this particular delusion.
You cant say anything at all.

Even if you could, what justification do you have for taking yourself seriously? Evidence?

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#118517 Jul 18, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet you claim the existence of God is obvious. If it was obvious it should be detectable.
Yes it is, for those who know what they are looking for, or know what they should find.

Two people will look at the same object, but they see different images.

Why? Because of perspectives and thought practices.
Subduction Zone wrote:
Now I will not claim that there is no god.
If I suspected you were dumb enough to do that; I would not have spoken to you at all.
Subduction Zone wrote:
I will say that certain versions of god have been thoroughly debunked.
They must be!

The TRUE God says that he/it is the only God; so any other concept of God outside/apart from him/it MUST prove false.
Subduction Zone wrote:
...For the same reason we know there was no Adam and Eve, a first man and first woman.
Really?

Well the terms of expression used in the Bible suggest that "Adam and Eve" were representative of the whole human race (Gen 1).

Elsewhere it suggests that the Garden of Eden case was an isolated event.

Nevertheless, the scenario of adam and eve could used to teach mankind about an aspect of reality that he (man) would not have understood in the literal terms if they were described to him in such.
Subduction Zone wrote:
We can show that not only with the observed fact that all life evolves but also measuring those rates and seeing if at any time in the recent past there were only two individuals. The answer is of course no. The science of population bottlenecks shows that the human race hit a low spot about 70,000 years ago and the worldwide population fell to roughly 3,000 to 10,000 people
A lack of a much worse human population bottleneck rules out Adam and Eve and Noah's flood:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottl...
None of that suggests nor proves that "creation" is less accurate than "evolution"; nor that evolution and "creation" are naturally conflicting.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#118518 Jul 18, 2014
Cvvl wrote:
<quoted text>
...So, if the universe looks and acts exactly as it would if there were no god, wherefore the sense in believing?
To answer your question:

Whereas the attributes associated with God are observable, there is no reason not to believe.

The universe only looks and acts like there is no God, when:

a) the idea of "God" is undefined and

b) when the attributes associated with God are false.

And judging from the attributes you listed, I wouldn't believe there was a God if thats all it/he/she was neither.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#118519 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with that.
But it is more effective to search for a nail with a metal detector than with a stethoscope; therefore we know that the nature of the thing being examined determines how the thing must be investigated.
It is the subject which determines what is evidence of it (the subject).
So if I one wants to test that God exists; one MUST test for the attributes of God as suggested by the nature of (a) God.
If the test for the attributes gives data which suggests the claims are false; then the conclusion is that:
THE SUGGESTED ATTRIBUTES ARE NOT THOSE OF GOD, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE IS NO GOD.
Describe the nature of the God for which there is no evidence, or shut the f**k up.
And we all agree that there is no invisible jewish wizard outside of your fantasies.
You're going in circles pig. In order to test for God, we must establish the nature of God. God must exist in order to establish the nature of God. But since we can't test for God, how do we know God exists.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#118520 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh?
So how come the idea that God exists is obvious to me and not to you?
The idea that God exists is one thing. That God exists is another.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#118521 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Even if tangible evidence was presented for the TRUE God, there will always be a shadow of doubt.
For that which is TRUE remains consistent in all its ways eternally (for that which is true never changes).
But since the human race is by no means eternal, we could never be certain of the truth of that we are observing/measuring is the TRUE God.
Furthermore, we know that just because we DONT have evidence that Mr. A killed Mr.B, doesnt mean he didnt do it nor was not involved.
And just because you arrive to see Mr. A pulling a knife from the dead body of Mr. B doesnt mean Mr. A killed him (if there was blood on the handle that hides the fingerprints of the real killer, Mr. A might as well have been the actual killer).
I did not ask for proof of god. That is a creatard mistake, I asked for evidence. Why haven't you posted any evidence for god?
<quoted text>
Bullshit!
That remark suggests that you know that there is a God, and thus have the authority to say there is no need for it.
Do you know that there is a God?
If you dont know that there is no God, you cannot make that remark logically
No it doesn't. That is a mere observation. Or perhaps a better observation would be I have not ever observed any objective evidence for the existence of god. I have never met anyone that could show any objective evidence for god. My conclusion: There is no evidence for the existence of god..
<quoted text>
LIAR!
You neither know most people nor their beliefs.
And Jesu/s encouraged mankind to look beyond the physical existence and find confidence in things that not even death can take away.
He encouraged us even by example that we must face death with courage, especially if it means that it will give others a chance to survive.
I don't give a shit of what Jesus said. I have said what I observed. Take a chill pill. It looks like I am too close to exposing your fear of death. An opinion is not a lie even if it is wrong.
<quoted text>
You cant say anything at all.
Even if you could, what justification do you have for taking yourself seriously? Evidence?
What? Now you have gone full creatard. Yes, that shows there was no Adam and Eve. Do you want the evidence for the lack of a population bottle neck? You can check out some of the references at the bottom of the article on bottlenecks. What sort of evidence do you want? Do you want it explained to you so that you can understand why we know Adam and Eve to be a myth?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#118522 Jul 18, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Even if tangible evidence was presented for the TRUE God, there will always be a shadow of doubt.
For that which is TRUE remains consistent in all its ways eternally (for that which is true never changes).
But since the human race is by no means eternal, we could never be certain of the truth of that we are observing/measuring is the TRUE God.
Furthermore, we know that just because we DONT have evidence that Mr. A killed Mr.B, doesnt mean he didnt do it nor was not involved.
And just because you arrive to see Mr. A pulling a knife from the dead body of Mr. B doesnt mean Mr. A killed him (if there was blood on the handle that hides the fingerprints of the real killer, Mr. A might as well have been the actual killer).
<quoted text>
Bullshit!
That remark suggests that you know that there is a God, and thus have the authority to say there is no need for it.
Do you know that there is a God?
If you dont know that there is no God, you cannot make that remark logically.
<quoted text>
LIAR!
You neither know most people nor their beliefs.
And Jesu/s encouraged mankind to look beyond the physical existence and find confidence in things that not even death can take away.
He encouraged us even by example that we must face death with courage, especially if it means that it will give others a chance to survive.
<quoted text>
You cant say anything at all.
Even if you could, what justification do you have for taking yourself seriously? Evidence?
With your rabid approach, it has become very confusing as to what you are arguing.

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
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 min Sublime1 68,129
4 Word Game (Use Same Letter) (Dec '14) 5 min Mr_FX 1,590
Post any FOUR words (Feb '16) 6 min Mr_FX 2,931
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 7 min Mr_FX 61,350
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 9 min Mr_FX 10,745
Last Word is First Word (no "breast" word please) (Jul '15) 11 min Mr_FX 1,917
I Believe __________________ ....... (Feb '11) 22 min F_R_E_D 742
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 54 min visitor 209,849
True False Game (Jun '11) 1 hr andet1987 13,534
What Turns You Off? 2 hr Ferrerman 136
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 3 hr liam cul8r 2,166
More from around the web