Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 209782 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.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#120618 Aug 21, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
What a load of crap. What makes you think none of us have used logic to determine the existence (or non-existence) of a god?
Because truth embodies logic; so if you did, you would identify His influence through "The Spirit of Truth" (Book of St. John).
MikeF wrote:
What makes you think that none of us were raised as Christians?
Because if you were, you would know what God means, and you could not justify rejecting claims of his existence nor actions.
MikeF wrote:
We don't think fairly because we don't agree with you?
No.

You dont think fairly because you dont apply your concepts of investigation the same way for ALL subjects.

You fail to apply the same methods of thougth and investigation as soon as you approach God for no apparent reason than the fact that it is God who you are dealing with.
MikeF wrote:
Because we expect more evidence than ancient stories written by who knows who? Get a grip.
We're not the one making excuses.
Is that your excuse... for not being able to appreciate the influence of the attributes associated with God in nature?

“Happiness comes through giving”

Level 7

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#120619 Aug 21, 2014
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
Genesis1:24
Then God said: Let the earth bring forth every kind of living creature:
Did he have to include cockroaches?

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#120620 Aug 21, 2014
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
... Science works whether you believe in it or not...
Reality is what it is; regardless of what science describes it as...

We know that there is something beyond what science can measure and we know that that thing is the essence of all things that came after it.

Your Odin and Zeus are of no significance here.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#120621 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Because truth embodies logic; so if you did, you would identify His influence through "The Spirit of Truth" (Book of St. John).
A book is only evidence of the author's opinions. Nothing more.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Because if you were, you would know what God means, and you could not justify rejecting claims of his existence nor actions.
I know what it means, arrogant one. Nor have I rejected claims of his existence. I allow for the possibility. But feel free to jump to unwarranted conclusions.

What I do reject is that bi-polar nutcase of the Old Testament and anything based on it.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
No.
You dont think fairly because you dont apply your concepts of investigation the same way for ALL subjects.
I have and I do. You included.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
You fail to apply the same methods of thougth and investigation as soon as you approach God for no apparent reason than the fact that it is God who you are dealing with.
Total bullshit. Is that the best you can do?
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Is that your excuse... for not being able to appreciate the influence of the attributes associated with God in nature?
I make no excuses. Unlike you who have to resort to criticizing another s logic, thought process or conclusions. And THAT is your excuse because you can't support your beliefs with anything more than you beliefs and because you can't convince another to believe as you.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120622 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
So there is no record nor any historical data (even outside the Bible and apart from Christian sources) regarding Jesus?
Let me ask you: did Socrates exist?
Let me ask you: does the existence of Socrates demonstrate the existence of Jesus?

More importantly, is there any CONTEMPORARY evidence of Jesus?

And further (since I've already stated that for all I care Jesus could have been a real life historical preacher whom Christianity was based on) would contemporary evidence of the existence of this preacher demonstrate that he had magical powers?
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
What differentiates "scientific evidence" from any evidence at all?
Scientific evidence is that which can be verified by the scientific method.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Describe non-scientific evidence.
A contradiction in terms.(shrug)
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120623 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Is it ONLY Christian sources that claim there was a real and historical Jesus?
I'm not sure. Are there other non-Christian sources which present evidence of the historical existence of Jesus?

And if so, does any of this prove that he was a magical wizard?
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
And this is evidence that Jesus is not real and is a myth?
No, but it is evidence that humans aren't magical wizards. And Jesus was thought to be human.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Oh.
I see.
Indeed.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120624 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no business is this argument.
It is beyond you.
You have nothing of any relevance to contribute to it.
Go away.
I accept your concession once again.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120625 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with you on that.
But if you expect THEM to admit that fact, you delude yourself.
They have no will to think fairly, else they would have applied the same principle used in scientific investigations to the question of the existence of God.
And if they did that; they would be compelled by logic to acknowledge that He is.
They settle for whatever line of thinking is convenient for them, then they use scientific method as an excuse for their biases.
Then all you need to do is stop whining like a little crybaby and tell us how invisible magic Jew wizards pass the scientific method in an objective manner. Thanks again in advance for not bothering.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#120626 Aug 21, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
This is done all the time, they call it history.
It's a good thing very little science is based on history then, huh?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#120627 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
But because he fails to acknowledge that all history is hearsay.
And also because he fails to acknowledge that all human "knowledge" is a rationalization.
First part .... Yup.
Second part .... bull crap! If it can be independently verified, it is fact, not rationalization.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120628 Aug 21, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
Why are you then responding to my posts? You even respond to posts not directed to you.
Public forum. Get used to it.
messianic114 wrote:
I don't expect you to care your an atheist!
Which is irrelevant to the subject, since:

1 - I don't care about promoting atheism.

2 - I have not made any positive claims for atheism either way.

3 - Science does not make any positive claims for atheism either way.
messianic114 wrote:
When are we going to see a new "kind"? That would be a good prediction.
When we find Tiktaalik. Oh hang on, we already did.
messianic114 wrote:
When am I going to get data on how many mutations we are documenting each year in the human genome?
When you go back and address all of Turkana Boy's posts, which you keep ignoring. Along with lots of other things.
messianic114 wrote:
By the way evidence can be refuted but it is not necessary to convince others evolution is a "crock"
Good job, because you're doing a poor job.
messianic114 wrote:
It's your conclusions I have a problem with.
Your problems are frankly completely utterly and totally irrelevant. You are under the mistaken impression that your baseless opinions are worthy of note. They never were and never will be in the slightest. They are quite simply not that important.
messianic114 wrote:
This just came to me. If civilization were to suffer a catastrophe and 10,000 years from now someone dug up a pictures explaining the evolutionary path of hominids and another book of classic cars one could imagine one of them saying, look how this creature (cars) evolved over time.
That's fine as an analogy, but that's as far as it can be taken. In reality however cars are not self-replicating biological organisms with reproduction differential. Unfortunately instead of providing evidence you fundies rely on using poor analogies to REPLACE evidence.
messianic114 wrote:
Sounds silly, when we know this similarity is nothing but intelligent design.
In the case of cars, yes. And MAYBE it's even possible for life itself. In which case you need to present evidence of the designer and its mechanisms. So far that's not happened.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120629 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no idea what he/she thinks they demonstrates by doing so.
And his responses have been absurd to say the least.
The guy forms his conclusions on the falsehood of Jesus' existence, based on the fact that he shoved one of his relatives in a pool to see if they could walk on water.
He is psychotic.
They will let anyone into the academic circle these days.
First of all I never claimed to be an academic. Second of all the fact you dismiss a potential academic for merely disagreeing with you speaks volumes about your critical thinking skills. Thirdly, I never claimed Jesus did not exist. I am open to the possibilities that he was a real preacher, or a character invented for politico-religious purposes, just like many many other religions. Or even a combination of both. I do however dispute claims that he was a magical wizard. Fourth, my alleged psychosis doesn't change the fact that you resorted to ad-homs instead of presenting evidence for your position or refuting my posts. Fifth, you're attempting to find validation in the camaraderie of a dishonest fundie liar for Jesus who has a tenuous grip on reality (much less science) to say the least. Even Bohart's not stupid enough to make claims Young Earther's do, but it's funny how you fundies still give those who think The Flinstones was a documentary a free pass.

And you claim I'M psychotic.(shrug)
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120630 Aug 21, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
I would not generalize all history as hearsay, although much of it is. What I have a problem with is without evidence claiming the bible is hearsay. The best evidence we have is that the gospels are written from the perspective of the witnesses of Messiah. Even the internal evidence (as well as traditional evidence) is consistent with eyewitness testimony.
Unfortunately you have no idea what the term "evidence" means.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120631 Aug 21, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
Well, it seems impossible to ME that if genes do not change, there is no frequency change.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one and take the blame for poor communication.

If we have a variety of genes within a population (say eye colour) and a tyrant comes along and orders the execution of everyone who doesn't have blue eyes we will see a change in gene frequency, but not a change in the genes. An eye colour gene is still an eye colour gene.
And you would have a point if said genes were genetically identical.

So it's a good job you took the blame for poor communication on your part for this one, since you're saying that the frequency of genes change but the frequency of genes don't change.
messianic114 wrote:
Only the frequency of non-blue eyed genes has changed. No new information has been added to the genome there is only a loss.
True in this scenario. But evolution rarely invokes execution of individuals as one of the main mechanisms for evolution.
messianic114 wrote:
Now if we were to see purple eyed people start to be born, I would suspect that there has been a change in the genome, but would I call it evolution? Probably not, there is no new structure. For evolution to be true, we must be able to add new structures to the organism, like specialized cells, For that microbe to be the parent of all living things some new structures had to have been formed. Am I incorrect in this statement?
You started out life as a single cell. What did you gain as you got closer to adulthood? New structures. We've presented evidence of mutations adding bases to the genome (even new genes) for YEARS on this forum, and to you personally only a few months ago when you first showed up. Do we CARE if YOU call it evolution? Nope. And what we observe as we travel through time in the fossil record (and it doesn't even matter if you call the Earth young or old as it's irrelevant to this point) we see new fossils with new structures. And furthermore, we see it in a manner that's consistent only with what evolution expects. Which is why evolution is the only theory that's been developed so far that's capable of making successful predictions based on the fossil record. And as usual the evidence presented has been left unaddressed and dismissed.

Feel free to come up with a better alternative theory that does a better job of explaining the evidence.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120632 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
It may be that all of it is not hearsay; but it is subjective regardless.
For an individual's account is limited to what he/she can and/or did perceive at a point in time.
So regardless of what is, we'll just have to take them at their word and see if what is present is consistent with what the person reported.
Nevertheless, I have been looking into historical accounts of Jesus and the validity of the concepts embodied in the Bible.
And up to this date I have not seen anything that cannot be justified nor is truly conflicting in the Bible nor have I seen where the accounts of Jesus are less credible than those of Julius Cesar.
Alright then. Justify walking on water. Spontaneous fig tree degradation via human touch. Immaculate conception. Miraculous healing, ya know, as in something that's better than the claims of UFO nuts and Bigfoot spotters.

Otherwise if all you're gonna do is claim that Jesus was a really cool but still normal human being without magical powers I have no real beef there.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120633 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears to be so.
... I only answer his posts when I am bored and cant find anything better to do at the moment...
Then while you're bored perhaps you could go and do some scientific research on the invisible magic Jew hypothesis? Just a thought.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120634 Aug 21, 2014
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually eye color is determined by more than one gene and the presence or absence of specific genes determine eye color. A few years back a study supported that the pure strain of blue eyes first appeared in Northern Europe about 10,000 years ago and every person alive today with pure blue eyes shows that specific gene sequence. People of other eye colors, including blue with brown flecks, show a different set of genes.
Actually there is a relatively small group of people who eye color is more toward violet than blue. If they start reproducing amongst themselves, you might very well see the allele frequency within the human population showing more and more violet eyes. I'm not aware of any genetic studies done on those folks, it might be interesting to study their DNA.
Another change you might do a little homework on is the ability to digest milk. Again, Northern European area allele frequency change. Some folks cannot digest milk past a certain age, but think of a survival advantage milk digestion in a cold region of the world with a limited growing season might offer.
You inability to accept evolution being true has nothing to do with it being true. Science works whether you believe in it or not. Can't say the same for religion. If you disagree go ask Odin or Zues :-)
It's almost as if Messy doesn't view the differences between genomes as differences in biological structures, even though... they are categorically differences in biological structures. Strange, innit?

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#120635 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Reality is what it is; regardless of what science describes it as...
We know that there is something beyond what science can measure and we know that that thing is the essence of all things that came after it.
Your Odin and Zeus are of no significance here.
No, you want there to be something beyond what science can measure. You do not 'know' it, because you haven't provided any support other than your conjecture and wishful thinking.

And the reference to Zeus and Odin was to remind you that the difference between an ancient Greek praying to Zeus or a 15th century Norseman lifting a horn to Odin and you praying to which god you follow ... is pretty much nil. Your 'explanations' are the same as theirs. You give some deity credence for perfectly natural acts and do your best to deny when better explanations come your way. I bet if you were slive when the Wright Brothers were doing their thing, you would have been one of the first to cry "If God wanted man to fly, he would have given us wings." The only real difference is that you believe in yours and they believed in theirs. But other than that, you guys are pretty much the same. You might check out http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatr... . You won't get it, but it applies none-the-less.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120636 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Because truth embodies logic; so if you did, you would identify His influence through "The Spirit of Truth" (Book of St. John).
<quoted text>
Because if you were, you would know what God means, and you could not justify rejecting claims of his existence nor actions.
<quoted text>
No.
You dont think fairly because you dont apply your concepts of investigation the same way for ALL subjects.
You fail to apply the same methods of thougth and investigation as soon as you approach God for no apparent reason than the fact that it is God who you are dealing with.
<quoted text>
Is that your excuse... for not being able to appreciate the influence of the attributes associated with God in nature?
I've found the Spirit Of Truth!!!

http://www.greygoose.com/en/us/our-vodkas/ima...
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120637 Aug 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Reality is what it is; regardless of what science describes it as...
We know that there is something beyond what science can measure and we know that that thing is the essence of all things that came after it.
Your Odin and Zeus are of no significance here.
Of course they are significant. You have no idea if God IS Odin or Zeus, if such an entity exists at all. Who are you to say who God can and cannot be? Answer - NOBODY. You're just another fundie with an opinion, no different to any other fundie of any other theological conviction. You all think you speak with the authority of God Himself, but not one of you is capable of being any more convincing than any other fundie.

You are quite simply not that important.(shrug)

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
News Police Respond To St. Cloud Mall On Reports Of ... 2 min Mitts Gold Plated... 182
One Word (Jan '09) 3 min A_Visitor 17,283
Add a Word remove a Word (Oct '13) 4 min A_Visitor 4,128
A six word game (Dec '08) 4 min ImFree2Choose 20,151
Word Association (Mar '10) 5 min Wolverine33 21,299
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 5 min xxxooxxx 82,688
News Clinton's name spelled wrong on Hofstra Univers... 8 min Spotted Girl 46
Philly grey poster hangout 10 min A_Visitor 44
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 15 min xxxooxxx 200,899
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 52 min streetglidehoney 9,112
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 hr Lucy the First 61,532
More from around the web