Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223384 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

#121955 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
again I ask you where have I ever said evolution is wrong or posted anything and said it is evidence against evolution? that is just your made up bs because I don't 100% agree with you.
a source. it is called "google" look it up yourself.
You are still stuck on stupid I see.

This is why I need to keep reminding you that you are being an idiot. You made a claim, it is up to you to defend it with a valid source. And don't pretend that you are not a creationist at heart. You have a creationist's approach in almost every post of yours here. Dishonesty is your only forte here.

Why not try to argue honestly for once? You will still lose but people will not treat you like an idiot.
wondering

Morris, OK

#121956 Sep 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
What name calling? Calling an idiot an idiot is not name calling.
When you are losing terribly you always try to play the politeness card. When you think you are winning you like to call people "jackwagons". Now obviously we are not jackwagons. You cannot make the same claim about you being an idiot.
I started out very politely to you, but you decided to get stuck on stupid early on in the debate so I treated you that way.
Go back and look at the history of this most recent of debates.
If you don't like being called an idiot, don't be an idiot. When someone answers your questions don't lie and say that they did not. Especially when you have asked such stupid questions.
then lets make this short. calling you an arrogant asss would be fitting to you and not name calling then right? lol
wondering

Morris, OK

#121957 Sep 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
What name calling? Calling an idiot an idiot is not name calling.
When you are losing terribly you always try to play the politeness card. When you think you are winning you like to call people "jackwagons". Now obviously we are not jackwagons. You cannot make the same claim about you being an idiot.
I started out very politely to you, but you decided to get stuck on stupid early on in the debate so I treated you that way.
Go back and look at the history of this most recent of debates.
If you don't like being called an idiot, don't be an idiot. When someone answers your questions don't lie and say that they did not. Especially when you have asked such stupid questions.
does science look for a god?
does science know how to test for a god?
does science know where to test for agod?
does science have tests for a god.

you only call them stupid because you are to much of a coward(it fits so it is not name calling) to answer them honestly because it will show your question of "show scientific evidence for a god" a moronic question.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#121958 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
does science look for a god?
does science know how to test for a god?
does science know where to test for agod?
does science have tests for a god.
you only call them stupid because you are to much of a coward(it fits so it is not name calling) to answer them honestly because it will show your question of "show scientific evidence for a god" a moronic question.
It's all in your head.

http://vimeo.com/22669312
wondering

Morris, OK

#121959 Sep 7, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are still stuck on stupid I see.
This is why I need to keep reminding you that you are being an idiot. You made a claim, it is up to you to defend it with a valid source. And don't pretend that you are not a creationist at heart. You have a creationist's approach in almost every post of yours here. Dishonesty is your only forte here.
Why not try to argue honestly for once? You will still lose but people will not treat you like an idiot.
what claim did I make? the only claim I made is that we do not know if there is a god or not. you are the one that claims there isn't and you only claim that by what you believe and the argument from silence fallacy because your conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence. you are a fallacy fool and don't even know it.
wondering

Morris, OK

#121960 Sep 7, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
It's all in your head.
http://vimeo.com/22669312
does science look for a god?
does science know how to test for a god?
does science know where to test for agod?
does science have tests for a god.

i find it hilarious that you all duck, dodge and avoid these questions on the mere fact if you answered them it would make you look like fools when asking the creationists for scientific evidence for god. lmao.

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#121961 Sep 7, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>It is? Heavens to Betsy!
Dear Diary. Today my good friend Adolph told me that German is the coolest language on earth, even though it sounds like vomiting and explosive diarrhea. He should know though. He is 100% Douche.
So this sounds like vomiting?


You also see beautiful German women in this video.
wondering

Morris, OK

#121962 Sep 7, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
So this sounds like vomiting?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =eRzbWPJHFqYXX
You also see beautiful German women in this video.
just teach your women to shave their legs and under arms. I hated that when I was over there. lol

“Peter hole is a pink twatt”

Since: Aug 14

Mumbai, India

#121963 Sep 7, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that science cannot disprove God. I also think that this is not the core of the arguments on topix or anywhere else.
The argument is whether one should take seriously a bronze age account of God versus the evidence and theories of modern science. "God" is a possibility. "God" as represented in the Bible or Koran is an absurdity.
When are we going to superhuman. when religion of athiesm will dominate the world

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#121964 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
does science look for a god?
does science know how to test for a god?
does science know where to test for agod?
does science have tests for a god.
i find it hilarious that you all duck, dodge and avoid these questions on the mere fact if you answered them it would make you look like fools when asking the creationists for scientific evidence for god. lmao.
Actually pretty much everyone here has openly answered your questions squarely as follows:

does science look for a god? NO
does science know how to test for a god? NO
does science know where to test for a god? NO
does science have tests for a god. NO

That does not alter the fact that humans in general HAVE looked for some evidence or proof or test of God for 4000 years and have nothing useful to offer for their efforts.

Science on the other hand has made enormous progress with the questions it is equipped to ask, and answer. Including the development and diversification of life.
wondering

Morris, OK

#121965 Sep 7, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually pretty much everyone here has openly answered your questions squarely as follows:
does science look for a god? NO
does science know how to test for a god? NO
does science know where to test for a god? NO
does science have tests for a god. NO
That does not alter the fact that humans in general HAVE looked for some evidence or proof or test of God for 4000 years and have nothing useful to offer for their efforts.
Science on the other hand has made enormous progress with the questions it is equipped to ask, and answer. Including the development and diversification of life.
actually you are the only one that has answered them and answered them honestly. if you can find a yes or no answer from anyone else, please post them because I never saw them.

humans could have looked for god for 100,000 years but without knowledge of how and what to look for it would be a waste of time. which is why evolution was not found out until roughly 250 years ago.
wondering

Morris, OK

#121966 Sep 7, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>
i think I have it figured out. you are still pissed because i actually am a rich educated guy from branson,(now staying at my small ranch in texas for a bit but will be back to missouri soon) and not a loser like you who's life evolves around topix. lmmfao.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#121967 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
actually you are the only one that has answered them and answered them honestly. if you can find a yes or no answer from anyone else, please post them because I never saw them.
humans could have looked for god for 100,000 years but without knowledge of how and what to look for it would be a waste of time. which is why evolution was not found out until roughly 250 years ago.
So, the conclusion for now must be:

1. So far we have no reliable way of knowing if God exists or not.
2. We have developed reliable ways of learning other things through the scientific method.

Where an evidence based theory based on (2) is in conflict with a mere conjecture such as "six day creation" based on (1), then choose (2).

Should be that easy.

In fact its worse for Biblical creationists because even if God does exist, "the Bible is True" is not a statement that would automatically follow from that.

And its even better for evolutionists, because the statement "God exists" would be perfectly compatible with evolution, too.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#121968 Sep 7, 2014
Manbrahmos wrote:
<quoted text>
When are we going to superhuman. when religion of athiesm will dominate the world
Lack of belief in something is not a religion.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#121970 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
what claim did I make? the only claim I made is that we do not know if there is a god or not. you are the one that claims there isn't and you only claim that by what you believe and the argument from silence fallacy because your conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence. you are a fallacy fool and don't even know it.
What is your definition of "a god?" In keeping the the thread title you have to go with the Biblical description - and you are ridiculed because that is ridiculous. You contend that the bronze age codex is merely exaggerated truths and generalize that people "believe in" biological evolution and astrophysics as a device of faith to deny creation stories. That is not reality. The evidence against the book of Genesis is not absent, it is cumulative. I suppose you perceive yourself as intelligent, honest and open-minded or even honorable and admirable to champion the house of cards. The record indicates otherwise.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#121971 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
i think I have it figured out. you are still pissed because i actually am a rich educated guy from branson,(now staying at my small ranch in texas for a bit but will be back to missouri soon) and not a loser like you who's life evolves around topix. lmmfao.
Looks like you've figured wrongly, habitual Topix poster.
No one cares about what or where you are or what you have, only in what you type and how it might entertain them.
BTW, educated guy - the words you intended to use were "revolve" and "whose".

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#121972 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
does science look for a god?
does science know how to test for a god?
does science know where to test for agod?
does science have tests for a god.
i find it hilarious that you all duck, dodge and avoid these questions on the mere fact if you answered them it would make you look like fools when asking the creationists for scientific evidence for god. lmao.
Science has tested all the paranormal attributes of gods or ....
spirits, prayer, precognition, miracles, divinity, divine providence ect..ect..ect.
None of these attributes work out better than chance or hint toward any supernatural power.
There is no divine bloodline like the kings and aristocracy used to hold.
There is no godly intervention in the world.
As far as testing god itself I never seen one , apparently you haven't either.
Sure we could test it , so the first test begin...

Test 1.
All the god has to do is.... appear .

How long should we wait, how bout till later this evening?

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#121973 Sep 7, 2014
reporterreport wrote:
<quoted text>
Due to the incorrect way you posted it, it sounds like silence. Which would be a good thing for you to do also...
Ich habe es richtig gepostet. Bei mir funktionierts. ich kann nichts dafür, wenn du für die moderne Technik zu blöd bist.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#121974 Sep 7, 2014
deutscher Nationalstolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Ich habe es richtig gepostet. Bei mir funktionierts. ich kann nichts dafür, wenn du für die moderne Technik zu blöd bist.
It isn't how you posted, it's what you posted. "The uploader has not made this video available in your country."
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#121975 Sep 7, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
does science look for a god?
does science know how to test for a god?
does science know where to test for agod?
does science have tests for a god.
i find it hilarious that you all duck, dodge and avoid these questions on the mere fact if you answered them it would make you look like fools when asking the creationists for scientific evidence for god. lmao.
Translation: I didn't like the answers, hence,'they were not provided'(addendum:'..... in order to avoid having to answer them')

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
I Like..... (Mar '14) 4 min North Mountain 2,065
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 4 min -Papa-Smurf- 25,400
Let's play "follow the word" (Jun '08) 5 min -Papa-Smurf- 50,468
Word Association (Jun '10) 6 min -Papa-Smurf- 33,098
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 8 min -Papa-Smurf- 38,108
what bothers you the most (Jun '13) 9 min greymouser 1,177
Replace one letter in word>>> (Oct '15) 11 min -Papa-Smurf- 878
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 14 min CJ Rocker 231,426