Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222919 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.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#121463 Aug 31, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a fact.
Brits were always anti-German. They envy us because of our success. Therefore they started two wars.
Do you wear one of those helmets with the spike on top? lol

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#121464 Aug 31, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Do you wear one of those helmets with the spike on top? lol
I think he sits on it.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#121465 Aug 31, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
Replay, why do you keep up this charade that you are other posters? It seems so pointless. You haven't posted as yourself lately, but the last few times you were rational and put forth reasonable questions and arguments. Why you persist on this behavior of pretending to be so many other posters, when you have the ability to argue your own position reasonably and rationally is beyond me.
I know, I know you and wondering are not the same people. Fine, do whatever you want.
How often has replaytime or his various socks chided us for wasting so much time on topix? Having socks allows him to post more often without it being apparent to himself.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#121466 Aug 31, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
How often has replaytime or his various socks chided us for wasting so much time on topix? Having socks allows him to post more often without it being apparent to himself.
It must be. I can't think of another reason. The guy isn't stupid. He has obviously been inspired to learn a good deal of information on the subjects of these threads. He just doesn't like to be told when he is wrong, but that isn't a deal breaker. He just needs to recognize his own fallibility and not be so mad at people for knowing something. When he isn't wasting time beating a point to death, he can be civil and interesting. I don't think he sees how easily he is found out and how much these games hurt his credibility. Maybe this will help. Who knows. It will probably make him work harder to convince everyone I am wrong and he really isn't who he obviously is.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#121468 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
You shouldn't say this. The Arab people are suffering under the Americans. Without the Islam your countries wouldn't be that bad. Btw. I have already been in Dubai. The Islam and the Americans are the reasons why you are so backwards today.
Like 87% of the people who live in the UAE, I am not from here. I am from New Zealand, and of Dutch, Austrian, and Hungarian descent.

The Arab people around these parts are not suffering at all, and are living the high life for as long as the money lasts. In other parts, yes, the USA destabilised parts of the region but it wasn't exactly a picnic before that either.

In any case, like it or not, English remains the international language for the time being and you should count your blessings that at least starting with Dutch and German made the basics of the language comparatively easy for you to learn.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#121469 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
It's 88 not 86 for Germany. Besides you are comparing three countries (England, Scotland and Welsh). If you do this you also have to include Austrian laureates into the German ones.
Then there are 106 German laureates. Then there are some Deutsch-Schweizer and many laureates who are listed as American laureates but they are actually of German origin.
If you consider this. Germany has the most laureates per capita by far.
Though not a nation, that accolade really goes to the Jews, by a country mile.

Remember? Those were the guys that your grandfathers systematically tried to slaughter to the last woman and child.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#121470 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a fact.
Brits were always anti-German. They envy us because of our success. Therefore they started two wars.
Frustrated twerp.

World war I:
Within a week after the assassination of Ferdinand by Princip, on 28 July 1914, the Austro-Hungarians fired the first shots in preparation for the invasion of Serbia. As Russia mobilised, Germany invaded neutral Belgium and Luxembourg before moving towards France, leading Britain to declare war on Germany.

Hence, the war wasn't started by the Brits.

World war II is generally said to have begun on 1 September 1939 with the invasion of Poland by Germany and subsequent declarations of war on Germany by France and the United Kingdom.

Again the was wasn't started by England at all.

Geschichtsverfälschung.

Happy the rest of the world is that we managed to defeat the most appalling and disgusting exhibition ever seen on this planet before.

Shame yourself because you haven't learned a bit of it.
Heil Hitler.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#121471 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
first I hate nazis. They destroyed Germany and got their orders from Churchill the war monger.
second
I am sure that you misunderstood the meaning of "Deutschland Deutschland über alles".
WOW!!!!

Did you read that, people, "the Nazis got their orders from Churchill"!

You must be kidding.
Heil Hitler!

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#121472 Sep 1, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Frustrated twerp.
World war I:
Within a week after the assassination of Ferdinand by Princip, on 28 July 1914, the Austro-Hungarians fired the first shots in preparation for the invasion of Serbia. As Russia mobilised, Germany invaded neutral Belgium and Luxembourg before moving towards France, leading Britain to declare war on Germany.
Hence, the war wasn't started by the Brits.
World war II is generally said to have begun on 1 September 1939 with the invasion of Poland by Germany and subsequent declarations of war on Germany by France and the United Kingdom.
Again the was wasn't started by England at all.
Geschichtsverfälschung.
Happy the rest of the world is that we managed to defeat the most appalling and disgusting exhibition ever seen on this planet before.
Shame yourself because you haven't learned a bit of it.
Heil Hitler.
You are proving again that you have no clue.
Brits wanted the war with Germany because of their minority complex. Ever heard of intrigues. They made intrigues so that it looks like we are starting the war.

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#121473 Sep 1, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Though not a nation, that accolade really goes to the Jews, by a country mile.
Remember? Those were the guys that your grandfathers systematically tried to slaughter to the last woman and child.
My grandfather slaughtered no one. He was still a child during the war

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#121474 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
You are proving again that you have no clue.
Brits wanted the war with Germany because of their minority complex. Ever heard of intrigues. They made intrigues so that it looks like we are starting the war.
Yeah Yeah Yeah, the English twisted around Germany's arm and made look like they invaded France. But they was really at home asleep on the couch huh?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#121475 Sep 1, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
It is funny how he perceives it.
But there are several mistakes in his observations, for instance "der Hund" (the dog) is masculine indeed. And horse ("das Pferd") of neuter gender indeed. But we also have the feminine forms "die Hündin" or "die Fähe" (both meaning "the bitch"). Also we have the form Rüde (male dog), which is lacking in English. Hence, "der Hund" is merely a class-name.
The horse comes with the forms "der Hengst" (the stallion) and "die Stute" (the mare). Again "das Pferd" is merely a class-name.
Interesting enough, old English had the almost same grammatical system with 3 genders, 4 (earlier even 5) cases: "Whan that Aprille with his shoures soote; The droghte of Marche hath perced to the roote" (William Chaucer,~1400, opening sentence of the Canterbury Tales).
Here we read: "that Aprile with HIS shoures soote" (That April with its showers sweet): Aprille is masculin, hence "his". The adjective "soote" and the noun "roote" come with -e endings due to the dative case - which Mark Twain was mocking about too.
("When April with its sweet showers has pierced the drought of March to the root [=thoroughly]").
The only remnants of the case system in modern English are the pronouns ("I" = nominative, "my" = genetive, "mine" = dative) and the -s ending in "father's book" (genitive). In Dutch the situation is about the same as in English, it dropped its case system entirely. In that respect, grammatically, Dutch is much closer to English than to German.
Fortunately Twain never travelled to Czechia. Czech has 4 genders, 7 cases and within each gender several declinations. For instance: "student" (student):
Case: Singular: Plural: English:
nominative student studentí student
genitive studenta studentú student's, students'
dative studentovi studentúm to, on behalf of the student(s)
accusative studenta studenty student
vocative studente! studente! student(s)!
locative studentovi studentech towards the student(s)
instrumental studentem studenty by means of the student(s)
NOT mentioning the feminine forms (both in singular and plural).
The use of a case system makes a language extremely concise:
"Jdu do mesta autem otce" (5 words) for: "I drive to the city with father's car" (9 words).
And you can pretty much freely change word order:
"Do mesta jdu autem otce" (I drive to the city with father's car, not his bike).
"Autem otce jdu do mesta" (I drive to the city with father's car and not somewhere else).
But, promise, I shall not further bother you with my obsession with language ;-)
Please, continue to bother - language facts are fun!
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#121477 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
You are proving again that you have no clue.
Brits wanted the war with Germany because of their minority complex. Ever heard of intrigues. They made intrigues so that it looks like we are starting the war.
Try to deceive someone else.

Yes we ALL KNOW that Churchill was ordering the Nazis. LOL!
Of course he commanded the Nazis to attack Poland first, in order to have an excuse to cross the Channel to fight the errr,......... uhhhhh ....... uhhhh Nazis (something like that).... uhhhh ...... AGAIN: Churchil was ordering the Nazis to fight against the .... uhhhh .... uhhhhh .... uhhh .... Nazis. No, wrong ..... again .... uhhhh...... uhhhhh.....

Question: is something not working quite well upstairs?

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#121478 Sep 1, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Jawohl!
LOL!
My friend used to have a German Shepperd, the poor animal has already passed to the eternal happy hunting-grounds after a traffic accident. He nicknamed the dog "Jawohl", which is German for "aye sir" or just a common affirmative after questions, like "indeed" (literal translation would be "yeah-well!"). It was a very mellow animal whose tail wagging never stopped. He said to me it was hilarious when he once visited a German camping hearing "jawohl" several times a day and beholding how the dog responded to it. But also the German speaking visitors of the camping responding to his calling the dog to come. And of course "Heisst Ihrer Hund denn Jawohl?" (Is your dog really be called 'Jawohl'?), answer: "Jawohl, Jawohl"!
I'm always very impressed at how Germans train their dogs so very well. You see them on trains sitting next to their owners (especially Sheppards), quiet and well-behaved, while their owner needs to pay no direct attention whatsoever. I have a big, bumbling happy lab, and although very smart and "semi"-well trained, I could never even imagine him on a train. He'd be everywhere, licking and smacking everyone with his tail.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#121479 Sep 1, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
My grandfather slaughtered no one. He was still a child during the war
Typical tactic: not answer the point made but some insignificant detail.

For your convenience I shall restate the point made by Chimney: Remember? Those were the guys that you great Germans, das HERRENVOLK systematically tried to slaughter to the last woman and child.

But gee, must be because they were ordered to do so by Churchill.
The Dude

UK

#121480 Sep 1, 2014
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
300 years ago the Europeans knew almost nothing about the
interior of Africa. That's why it was called the "dark continent."
It took 200 years of exploration by many explorers to understand
Africa.
Genetics is the same way. There is a whole nother world there that
has to be explored. The so called "junk DNA" is turning out
to be not as useless as first thought. The more exploration there is,
the more that will be understood about things like junk DNA and how
it all fits in.
Genetics is vast. Give it time.
Really now? So that means that since we're all born with over 100 mutations, each and every one of them will perform a necessary function?
The Dude

UK

#121481 Sep 1, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Can non material things be created (such as intelligence, emotions).
.
But getting to the heart of the question is who/what created G-d. Since G-d is not material, he need not be created or sustained. Since there is no loss of energy (in being sustained) he can be eternal whereas material things have a lifespan and cannot exist forever or from eternity past. Another dimension to this is time itself. Are there circumstances where time does not exist or is irrelevant?
Intelligence and emotions are material.

If God is not material and has no sustenance then it doesn't exist.
The Dude

UK

#121482 Sep 1, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
1 - If an empty tomb is all that's needed then that validates pretty much all the Egyptian Pharaohs.

No one to my knowlegde has claimed to see a dead Pharoah riased from the dead, and not one of these Pharoah's to my knowledge has had any effect on human civilization.
.
<quoted text>
2 - Since we know there's no contemporary evidence of Jesus even existing we all know you're BSing here. That's why EVERY time we ask for CONTEMPORARY evidence you can only give us Josephus and the usual suspects (all of whom existed AFTER Jesus allegedly died).
.
We have the NT record of his existance, we also have an ossuary of his brother which mentions Jesus. Also history is replete with accounts not written at the time of the occurance. We don't discount these. Also I doubt any reputable historian doubts the existance of Jesus. Lastly I seem to notice that what you want to do is narrow the field of evidence into something which you think makes it impossible to accommodate. But in this instance the ossuary is hard evidence.
.
<quoted text>
3 - Again, people who commit suicide for religious beliefs aren't necessarily right, but most likely incredibly stupid. Hence 9/11
.
I can agree on this point except for the stupid. Even 911 has had a significant impact on the world. They achieved what they wanted and the agreed upon price was death. The chose to pay this price.
.
<quoted text>
4 - Next time don't forget to post your sources instead of plagiarising them:
.
Since when is this required on Topix?
.
<quoted text>
5 - There's a BIG difference between evidence and apologetics.
.
Apologetics is better. It requires a logical explanation of evidence to support a conclusion. Evidence by itself can be manipulated to form different conclusions.
1 In which case you never heard of them. And bigfoot and ufos are real because they've been seen.

2 Not evidence that he was magic.

3 Yet it still validates their beliefs as much as yours.

4 It's not, but it's good debate form. But again that doesn't matter to your position.

5 No. Apologetics is more susceptible to manipulation than empirical evidence. In fact in the case of creationism, that is its purpose.
The Dude

UK

#121483 Sep 1, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
I don't think we can say that emotions and intelligence can arise naturally by themselves. It seems to me that they are an intangible part of the brain. It wasn't me who brought this up. I just responded to a post.
.
<quoted text>
Brain damage in an individual can lower intelligence and change emotional patterns.
.
I can't see how this supports intelligence arising naturally.
.
<quoted text>
The larger brains that a species have the more complex their mental interactions tend to be.
.
I can't agree with this either. Animals with larger brains than humans are not more complex.
.
If something is immaterial it need not be created (as we just discussed above) but it doesn't logically follow that immaterial things have no effect on the material. Light for instance is immaterial yet it can heat and even move things (solar sail). It can cause plants to function.
.
Also your postulation that G-d needs a creator will end in a logical dead end as there would have to be an endless creations of gods.
Light is material. And there's nothing wrong with an infinite series of creators. We don't let logical possibilities be ignored just because you find them to be theologically inconvenient.
BEYONDtheCMB

Los Angeles, CA

#121484 Sep 1, 2014
CHEERS!

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 song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 min wichita-rick 224,576
Post "any three words" (Sep '12) 8 min andet1987 4,776
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 37 min WhatDoesTheFoxSay 29,158
A-Z of "ANY WORD" that comes to mind! (Sep '12) 54 min andet1987 1,108
Last two letters into two new words... (Jun '15) 58 min andet1987 7,074
What's your tip for the day? (Jul '14) 1 hr andet1987 2,552
Caught on video 3 1 hr Suezanne 182
News Thong jeans are just the latest weird fashion t... 7 hr andet1987 12
More from around the web