Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 199275 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.

The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120907 Aug 27, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Either heads or tails, but nobody knows yet. Therefore be open to the possibility (of head) until the coin is tossed and lands...
<quoted text>
Tail is the most rational position to take?
Why?
How?
When did I say tails? I said the coin was still up in the air.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
If I provided it would you indeed accept it?
Would it pass the scientific method? If so, then yes.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
Tell me what you are looking for as evidence; for while you reject what I offer as evidence, you must have knowledge of the subject so that you can justify you rejection.
I have no knowledge of this "God concept" since it has not yet been discovered. But what I DO know is that what I'm looking for must pass the scientific method. If this cannot be provided then my rejection is justified.

Also I do not HAVE to do YOUR homework for you. So instead of being just a lazyazz fundie just like every other fundie then why not just share your "Divine knowledge" with the world and Ussher in (see wot I did there) a new era of amazing scientific discovery because apparently you know something that the rest of us are all missing.

You've had over 3,000 years.

Take your time.

And you will.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120908 Aug 27, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
That is irrelevant to the discussion; we are discussing the implications of the words of JESUS; or so attributed to him.
Actually I'd say the factual accuracy of the Bible would be VERY relevant.

Not all that surprised to see a fundie claim otherwise though.(shrug)
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
You do.
I dont.
Then there's no reason for us to consider the Bible to have any bearing on reality since you freely admit to cherry-picking whatever you like. So if the Bible goes then Jesus can go right along with it.

However if you have evidence that the existence of some preacher called Jesus somehow really does demonstrate the existence of this "God" thingumawotsit exists then feel free to present it.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
You are entitled to your opinion.
Indeed.
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
So if the idea of evidence that cannot be verified by scientific method has no meaning; can all evidence be verified by scientific method?
Yes. I look forward to you presenting more excuses as to why you can't present what you need to in order to be taken seriously.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120909 Aug 27, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no conceptions of any magical wizards of any race in my mind.
You do.
Then as I said you need to provide better definitions. Since the God of the Bible is an invisible magic Jew wizard, according to the Bible.

But I guess that doesn't matter since you said the Bible doesn't matter anyway.(shrug)
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120910 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>I did, of course. Didn't think I had the talent, huh?
I don't think of god as "him". I think of "god" as a primordial energy. Of course it is only supposition.
Then "God" need not necessarily be intelligent, and could easily be a poetic metaphor for whatever physics was responsible for the universe. Which is nice and all, but scientifically useless.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120911 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right. Calling abiogenesis "fools gold" is definitely my opinion. But when abiogenesis reveals molecules with a survival instinct, I'm willing to reconsider.
Since life does not require a survival instinct your opinion is irrelevant.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120912 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>It is just as "accurate" to say that the notion that something can emerge from absolute nothing is scientifically unsound.
If something always existed then the answer to what created it is absolutely nothing.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120913 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>If you want to cross verbal swords with me, prepare to "die".
Good job you put that one in speechmarks.

Die by way of laughter? Or the Black Knight approach? Which is kinda the same thing.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120914 Aug 27, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to educate yourself on information theory,..information is not matter nor energy , its information. I could give you the person who said that , but what would it matter? you've already made up your mind.
Without matter and energy you would have no information.

Please Bo, don't attempt to lecture others on what you think they should be educated on, it'll only make you look...

... well, like you usually do.

Maybe you can point out the occasional typo or something. That's always handy.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120915 Aug 27, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Like you have?.......or are you going to lie hypocrite
BONG!!! Yep, that was another irony meter alright.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120916 Aug 27, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
It was Norbert Weiner. He went on to say that information is always associated with matter and uses matter and energy for its formation and transfer.
So, for example, pressure is not matter or energy. But pressure is an effect of matter. Momentum is not matter or energy. But it is an effect of matter and energy. Entropy is not matter or energy, but it is an effect of matter and energy. Information is actually closely associated with entropy.
Is God matter? Is energy intelligent? Inquiring minds wanna know.

Oh well, that leaves the fundies out.(shrug)
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120917 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>Your link is to a book, which I don't have access to at present.
I've seen theories that involve quantum mechanics. But in my opinion quantum mechanics makes a better case for a "god" than it does for atheism.
Nothing in science makes any case for or against a "God" either way. The reason being is that "God" is a scientifically useless non-explanation.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120918 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>This is getting a bit tiresome, but if you think I support Creationism you haven't been reading my comments on the subject. I am not religious.
Further, the self-satisfied notion that an "intelligent" trigger has been debunked is not evidence of an open mind. Like so many others, you speak with a sense of smug certainty about issues where there is as yet no basis for certainty.
Positing an intelligent trigger does nothing except move the goalposts back another 12 inches without actually solving the problem.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120919 Aug 27, 2014
replaytime wrote:
Woolly mammoths still lived when the Great Pyramid of Giza was constructed. The pyramid was completed in 2540 BC.. The last known population of woolly mammoths remained on Wrangel Island in the Arctic Ocean until 4,000 years ago.
That's nice, Repro. Did they walk like an Egyptian?
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120920 Aug 27, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>I'll put it as plainly as I can. As I see it, It is reasonable to assume that primordial life had the instincts of fear, and the need to defend itself, thus an instinct for survival. Abiogenesis demonstrates none of those traits. Therefore it is not an adequate replication or explanation of the original life process.
How is that reasonable before brains developed? Especially in light of the fact that all life without nervous systems do not require such instincts?
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120921 Aug 27, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
tactic 44,....that's where you say there's no evidence of a creator of life ,..then you say there's evidence that life created itself,...uh none!
By the way,..do you believe the universe created itself , then created life?
Sure there's evidence of a creator of life. It's called chemistry.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120922 Aug 27, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
I highly recommend you not to engage in biology. Apparently it is not your trade.
Of course that will change when you would have read some books about it.
But as you didn't, you are just tattling plain nonsense and rubbish.
And now you are going to explain WHY metamorphosis in Turritopsis dohrnii and WHY sequential hermaphroditism among Clown fish (also among many others species to be found) were to be of any problem for evolution theory, because it escapes me completely.
(Hint though: Replaytime has not the faintest idea what he is tattling about).
You're not wrong.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#120923 Aug 27, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would God -- an omnipotent being -- need to "rest" at all?
Bad back?

“Happiness comes through giving”

Level 7

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#120924 Aug 27, 2014
inbred Genius wrote:
<quoted text>
that was the rumor I learned at vacation bible school, about 60 years ago....do the new history books change that too?
Not all new books. Some stick to the same old thing. Well there is one new book called, "Adam and Irving", with an entirely different version of the snake.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Level 7

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#120925 Aug 27, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Then "God" need not necessarily be intelligent, and could easily be a poetic metaphor for whatever physics was responsible for the universe. Which is nice and all, but scientifically useless.
One could reason that since people (well some people) are intelligent, an "intelligence" was required to generate them.But I agree that if there is a primordial "creative force", assuming that it is intelligent or caring requires a leap of faith.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Level 7

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#120926 Aug 27, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Since life does not require a survival instinct your opinion is irrelevant.
I disagree with your premise.

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
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 4 min andet1987 44,149
~`*`~ Create a sentence using the 'letters' of ... (Oct '12) 5 min Grace Nerissa 3,147
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) 17 min sounds average to me 7,198
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 23 min Grace Nerissa 56,806
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 37 min Grey Daze 192,795
Word Association. (Nov '10) 51 min Red_Forman 19,203
Whatever happened to the Topix sex forum?? 59 min JohnM 1
True False Game (Jun '11) 1 hr andet1987 12,397
News Man arrested after 'putting his PENIS on superm... 8 hr Spotted Girl 23
More from around the web