Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 204936 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 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120190 Aug 15, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, your steadfast devotion to ignorance is showing. Neither the theory of evolution nor any of the hypotheses regarding abiogenesis are anti-God. They rely on evidence from the natural world. You can deny it as you like, your opinion isn't important to either.
That a yes/no response is not elicited is because the question is poorly worded and yes or no would not be a proper answer. The proper answer is "we don't know". You don't. I don't. No one does. You may believe in your hate-filled, angry version of religion including God and I may believe in my more civilized and intelligent version of religion including God, but neither of us can provide evidence to support that belief.
The question wasn't poorly worded, it was pitifully answered. I asked what you believe ,you said we don't know. Fine, but you refuse to answer what YOU actually believe ! because you are a coward, a cringing one at that since you then go on a tirade about a hate filled religion including God! Add sniveling to your cowardice, criticizing the beliefs of another while hiding your own.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120191 Aug 15, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Well it doesn't, I know it just burns up your last brain cell trying to cope with the fact.
Explain why? if life wasn't begun by abiogenesis, how did it begin so it could evolve.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120192 Aug 15, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
You DON'T even answer.
You are not only irrational but also a deceiver.
.........Two world views

1. God created the universe and all life

2.The universe created itself then created life

These are both beliefs

is it 1 ,...2..
or...

3. to much of a coward to answer. a protoplasmic glob , lacking the courage of his convictions

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120193 Aug 15, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is because there are more possibilities than just those two. In fact, the phrase 'created itself' is self-contradictory. So there are more possibilities than just the one you are looking for.
This not a word game like scrabble,..there are only two possibilities as I've stated, we can say created or it created itself, we can say caused or uncaused

1. requires a creator or a cause
2. requires nothing as a cause or creator
or....

3. duck the question, hide and play semantic word games

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120194 Aug 15, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
being you think it is certainly NOT an uncaused phenomenon what would you say the "cause" was that brought those chemicals together to produce the reaction we know as life?.
Can't wait for this answer

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120195 Aug 15, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
I, again, only need to copy my former post, which you *OF COURSE* completely ignored in order to continue your ignorant lies.
I shall repeat your own words:
- "We been here before"
- "you still bring up the same old lies"
- "makes you an idiotic lying S.O.B"
Let's have your claim again:
- "There is zero evidence life has ever self assembled itself!!!!" MIND the claim "zero"
Now, let's that claim "zero":
But to say that there is "zero evidence" is just PLAIN LYING.
Also a notorious trait of creationism. As demonstrated by you by bluntly repeating it.
Give me your evidence that life self assembled and came to life. Just one....

and please, please , don't embarrass yourself by saying building blocks are here or there.

Trees and rocks are not evidence of a house, they need a builder o
to assemble it.....or maybe it can assemble itself?

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#120196 Aug 15, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course you need the very next lesson in biology 101 (grammar school level):
1) the first life that lived on land were bacteria - as we know even today thousands of bacterium species live in the soil and don't need any organic substrata to grow and thrive on
2) the next life that conquered the land were plants - many plants also can grow and thrive on soil, like lichens - these also do not need an organic substrata to live on
3) the first animals that appear in the terrestrial fossil record were insects - these ate the plants and each other
4) about the same era the first worms are found on land
5) only THEN the first vertebrate animals made it to the land - fish that already had evolved both lungs and gills and a bony skeleton.
They found plants, bacterial mats and insects to eat galore. And after a while other amphibian species.
Your question about the plants evolving into animals is of and astonishing and embarrassing ignorance that would have me felt ashamed being a 12 year old boy. And I don't exaggerate - when I was 12 years old, I knew more than you do now.
Home-schooled, Bohy boy?
Whoa! hold up there Wylie Coyote

Bacteria first, then plants What did plants evolve from?

The same life giving goo?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#120197 Aug 15, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
being you think it is certainly NOT an uncaused phenomenon what would you say the "cause" was that brought those chemicals together to produce the reaction we know as life?.
Well, some were brought by comets hitting the earth. Some were just part of the material from which the earth was formed. Gravity had a big part of bringing the
latter together.

Past that, the natural affinities of the atom and molecules themselves were instrumental for producing the initial reactions leading to life. No single cause lead to all of them, but all were under the restrictions that ALL physical and chemical phenomena are subject to: the laws of physics and chemistry.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#120198 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
This not a word game like scrabble,..there are only two possibilities as I've stated, we can say created or it created itself, we can say caused or uncaused
1. requires a creator or a cause
2. requires nothing as a cause or creator
or....
3. duck the question, hide and play semantic word games
So *you* are mixing up the language. Being self-created is quite different than being uncaused. In the first, the thing is the cause of itself. In the second, there is no cause.

OK, in your new scenario, the answer is that the universe is uncaused. It requires no cause nor does it require a creator (different concept by the way).

“Wrath”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#120199 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain why? if life wasn't begun by abiogenesis, how did it begin so it could evolve.
Doesn't matter how it began, evolution is an observation of the result of animals living in the biosphere. Even if there was/is a creator, animals were created to evolve.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#120200 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain why? if life wasn't begun by abiogenesis, how did it begin so it could evolve.
Evolution is perfectly consistent with being designed. It is perfectly consistent with even a divine creation. The question of the origin of life is simply different than the question of how living populations change over time. But however it started, it has changed over time, and *that* is evolution.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#120201 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
.........Two world views
1. God created the universe and all life
2.The universe created itself then created life
These are both beliefs
is it 1 ,...2..
or...
3. to much of a coward to answer. a protoplasmic glob , lacking the courage of his convictions
The universe is uncaused and life came about through natural forces within the universe.

Is that a good enough answer for you?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#120202 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
This not a word game like scrabble,..there are only two possibilities as I've stated, we can say created or it created itself, we can say caused or uncaused
1. requires a creator or a cause
2. requires nothing as a cause or creator
or....
3. duck the question, hide and play semantic word games

If there was a previous, contractio ng universe before ours, there would have been a 'cause' but no 'creator'.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#120203 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are an arrogant condescending jerk, why do you persist in assuming no one could possibly be as smart as you,..hey you have links and youtube videos.What a genius
I am not assuming you aren't very smart. I am concluding you aren't very smart based on your complete lack of understanding of science and your steadfast devotion to that lack of understanding as if it were fact. I have never posted a link to a Youtube video on this forum and anything I have linked has been relevant and direct to the point. Again, you provide the evidence that shows your limited mental capacity, anger, fear and hate.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#120204 Aug 15, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
The question wasn't poorly worded, it was pitifully answered. I asked what you believe ,you said we don't know. Fine, but you refuse to answer what YOU actually believe ! because you are a coward, a cringing one at that since you then go on a tirade about a hate filled religion including God! Add sniveling to your cowardice, criticizing the beliefs of another while hiding your own.
Here is what you wrote in the post I responded to regarding your question.

"That is why you see very few who will answer the question of whether the universe had a creator or created itself, they respond with everything but a yes or no answer".

Now where in this question this do you see the word believe? You may have made that statement in another post. I don't know and didn't answer another post. I answered the one that contained the quoted statement.

Your intelligence isn't sophisticated enough to understand that your expectation of a yes/no response to this question, especially on a science forum, is wrong and the question isn't properly presented to get a proper answer. The proper answer and the one you fear the most is "We don't know". You don't know.

I believe I did answer the question, you just aren't smart enough to see it. Is there a child available for you to ask for help in finding that answer?

As to a tirade, hardly. Any post you make where you point your finger at another and claim they are on a tirade is an example of the purest form of hypocrisy and lies. Your response above is the perfect example of how right I am and of a tirade. Get someone to read it to you and see the anger, fear, hatred and fear in it. You are obviously, a loving, kind, merciful, benevolent and forgiving Christian. Your post shows your deep devotion to these Christian principles.
bc7355a

Harrisburg, IL

#120205 Aug 15, 2014
I am a Newborn Christian.I do believe.Praise the Trinity
wondering

Morris, OK

#120206 Aug 16, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, some were brought by comets hitting the earth. Some were just part of the material from which the earth was formed. Gravity had a big part of bringing the
latter together.
Past that, the natural affinities of the atom and molecules themselves were instrumental for producing the initial reactions leading to life. No single cause lead to all of them, but all were under the restrictions that ALL physical and chemical phenomena are subject to: the laws of physics and chemistry.
so then it is uncaused as I said. life had no cause. glad we agree.
wondering

Morris, OK

#120207 Aug 16, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't wait for this answer
it wasn't much and that is what I expected.
wondering

Morris, OK

#120208 Aug 16, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
No it is not, period.
And it factually even isn't taxonomically classified.
Nobody, including Lenski, even did an attempt to designate a new name. Because it served no purpose to do that. So your tattle about not changing the fact that it still is classified as E. coli isn't even a fact because nobody ever did.
Saying this 1000 times will not change the fact that changing the metabolism of a bacterial species is one of the most fundamental criteria of classification of bacterial species. An E. coli bacterium that previously wasn't able to grow on citrate changing into one that actually do, let alone the other observed changes, does sweep it out of the main characteristics of E. coli.
lets make this simple. new classification or new species named. yes or no? end of story like it or not.
wondering

Morris, OK

#120209 Aug 16, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, some were brought by comets hitting the earth. Some were just part of the material from which the earth was formed. Gravity had a big part of bringing the
latter together.
Past that, the natural affinities of the atom and molecules themselves were instrumental for producing the initial reactions leading to life. No single cause lead to all of them, but all were under the restrictions that ALL physical and chemical phenomena are subject to: the laws of physics and chemistry.
here is the deal hoss. life was uncaused, spontaneous/natural. the chemical reactions you speak of were just that , "only retractions, not a cause".

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
Change 1 letter game! (Nov '11) 4 min SweLL GirL 8,341
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 6 min Sharlene45 197,539
News Couple claims dog murdered over Clinton sign 34 min Spotted Girl 3
News This Weird Galaxy Is Actually 99.99 Percent Dar... 48 min Go Blue Forever 1
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 52 min Bezeer 19,802
Post any FOUR words (Feb '16) 56 min Go Blue Forever 1,191
News Police: Man run over after shooting at car duri... 1 hr Go Blue Forever 8
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 4 hr I KNOW WHY 33,219
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) (Jan '16) 10 hr Melt down 8,832
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 11 hr 8541 MARINE 59,796
More from around the web