Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 218797 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.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#71649 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Cybele:
"The definition of micro and macro-evolution from that link is incorrect or misused. lol"
That link was Berkeley's evolution teams web page.
Yes. And for some strange reason you are claiming that the entire science department at Berkeley is wrong about evolution. And not just that science department, but every single science department at every single top university in the entire world.

In fact, I cannot imagine that a university could be "creationist," and certainly not a biological science department. The closest any biologists come is the ID movement - and there's less than a handful of them who are a disgrace to their departments. Michael Behe, for example - his own department has a paragraph declaring his silly ideas about ID non-scientific. And he hasn't produced a real research based scientific article in quite a few years.

See? You are delusional.

You proclaim that others cannot argue with Berkeley and then you take a stance that no biological department at any university takes - in fact, you proclaim that they are all wrong, despite all their evidence, and that your religion's silly idea, based on an ancient mythological text, is somehow correct.

Totally delusional.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#71650 Jan 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>A niche is a work place in the chain of life....
I really didn't think you'd get it. No worries. Someone did.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#71651 Jan 22, 2013
Combat-Wombat-88 wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU FAIL
at being an uneducated creationist, yes. Yes I do!

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#71652 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Fins came first, then legs.
Creatures came first, then eggs.
That is just disgusting... I never understood how people could get into bestiality.

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71653 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
at being an uneducated creationist, yes. Yes I do!
NO you fail at life

The world was obviously created 200 years ago by pirate space aliens. Duh!
FREE SERVANT
#71654 Jan 22, 2013
WORK or the Whole Organizational Range of KInds theory is an orgainzational theory which is an explanation of how ecological systems work in relation to SCP concept.

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71655 Jan 22, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>That is just disgusting... I never understood how people could get into bestiality.
What the hell?????????? Why bring that up you sick [email protected]!

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#71656 Jan 22, 2013
The date of cheetah bottleneck is estimated to be 10,000 to 12,000 years ago.
Yet even today, cheetahs are virtual twins of each other.

If a bottleneck could create that much uniformity in a species for that long, then imagine the results of a world flood leaving 8 humans, 7 of every clean species, and 2 of every unclean species, and taking place only 4500 years ago.

Yet we have dark people, light people, tall people, and short people. We have Great Danes, chihuahuas, and cocker spaniels, which probably could not have been bred if the World Flood took place.

Either the scientists are wrong about the cheetah bottleneck or they are right about the Flood.

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71657 Jan 22, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
The date of cheetah bottleneck is estimated to be 10,000 to 12,000 years ago.
Yet even today, cheetahs are virtual twins of each other.
If a bottleneck could create that much uniformity in a species for that long, then imagine the results of a world flood leaving 8 humans, 7 of every clean species, and 2 of every unclean species, and taking place only 4500 years ago.
Yet we have dark people, light people, tall people, and short people. We have Great Danes, chihuahuas, and cocker spaniels, which probably could not have been bred if the World Flood took place.
Either the scientists are wrong about the cheetah bottleneck or they are right about the Flood.
Cheetahs aren't actual big cats, they don't belong to the Panthera genus. Do you know that cheetahs can run at 900 miles per hour????? Thats quick

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#71658 Jan 22, 2013
Combat-Wombat-88 wrote:
<quoted text>
What the hell?????????? Why bring that up you sick [email protected]!
I guess I used the wrong meaning for came in HFY's comment. My bad.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#71659 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
"Evolution at different scales: micro to macro
by the Understanding Evolution team
Evolution encompasses changes of vastly different scales — from something as insignificant as an increase in the frequency of the gene for dark wings in beetles from one generation to the next, to something as grand as the evolution and radiation of the dinosaur lineage. These two extremes represent classic examples of micro- and macroevolution.
Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:"
FYI No one is better the me.
I sure hope Berkeley does not upset you too much. Ah, not really I do hope it raises you blood pressure.
There is no proof of macro evolution.
Never happened never will.
Yes there is, there is considerable evidence for macroevolution, what is the real problem is that goddidit bots have nothing to hang onto so they lie

I’m sure we have argued this before and I have presented evidence that you appear to have ignored, why am I not surprised?

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71660 Jan 22, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>I guess I used the wrong meaning for came in HFY's comment. My bad.
LIKE A BOSS!

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#71661 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
If you wish to say it in those term that's fine. God created all living things and sense you lack full knowledge of how God created, you can go ahead and try to describe it as a child might.
So tell us, how did he do it?

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#71663 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
Can anyone guess where I came from? lol
Pandora?

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71664 Jan 22, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Pandora?
I used to live on Pandora, but i got sick of the fact that i was the only wombat there and left

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#71665 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty impressive you claiming to know more then the Evolution Team at Berkeley.
Did you not see the word misused?

Or did you deliberately ignore it?

The “evolution team” at Berkeley are fully aware of the definition of macro evolution and that page you linked to states

Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:

“happens”(not does not happen) I guess you forgot to read what you were linking too - right?

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#71666 Jan 22, 2013
Combat-Wombat-88 wrote:
<quoted text>
I used to live on Pandora, but i got sick of the fact that i was the only wombat there and left
I though that was eastern Australia

Anyway, welcome home
anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#71667 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution: when you think of it you would have start at the very beginning with the primordial soup. Let's go back to the making of the soup. Rain falling on rocks for millions and millions of years washing the correct minerals and elements into a puddle to combine with the correct gases over millions of years. Then to make the fairy tale really good something some how created the spark of life and a speck of life came forth. Now this very primitive ( the most primitive life form ever ) lived long enough to mutate and mutate billions of times creating all forms of life ever to exist. Plants and animals adding more and more DNA along the way. Perfecting host and symbiont relationships. Fish and mammals swimming in the oceans some with gills others with blow holes then the birds in the sky and of course the birds that can't fly. Insects and ticks and worms.
Grass and trees and flowers. All from the speck of life that sprang to life with who knows how long of a life span.
Creating some as in algae to create oxygen that would be needed for the life forms that were to follow as it just kept mutating and adding DNA until the arrival of the great ape who figured it all out with no room for error and stood on his soap box and proclaimed this is how it happened no other explanation is possible.
OK, but what's your point. Even the evolution of DNA would have to be based on an environment conducive to creating self-replicating molecules. Would you call it life? Not by modern standards. Only the combination of the self-replication in DNA when combined with the functionality of a membranous structure that can contain proteins manufactured by DNA, do we have what we call life.

The same conditions are at work. The environment had to first occur to create membranes and DNA. The two had to combine and start to exploit each others abilities. None of this happened overnight, but over a portion of Earth's 4 billion year history. The existence of life has only been documented over the last 600 million of those 4 billion years. That's 600 million years to get from bacteria to humanity, and about 5 times as long to get from a rocky planet in a new solar system to those bacteria.

Probability regarding abiogenesis and Evolution has been addressed. Irrefutable proof isn't going to happen. It's just a question of whether or not you would rather have an ordinary truth or a fantastic lie that puts you above the natural world that you depend on for life.

You can call it a faith or a simple preference of logic but I don't see any reason to give credibility to a deity that does not make its presence known. That only convinces me of the voyeuristic nature of its followers.

anonymous

Chagrin Falls, OH

#71668 Jan 22, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the guy who willingly participated in the aforementioned discussion.
<quoted text>
Great! But you're not doing it in this exchange, so you're not doing very well in living up to your own claimed intentions.
<quoted text>
You mean, my statistical-based (which is quite real, and not myth) argument for equal rights for gays.
<quoted text>
Homosexuality isn't part of evolution? Then you must be claiming that humans aren't part of evolution, since homosexuality has been part of humanity for all of recorded history.
But since humans *are* part of evolution, then all of their behaviors are, too. So you're obviously wrong.
Drive on, troll!

I was content to continue the forum discussion once I fully demonstrated your pathological disconnection from logic. YOU will continue to display that disconnection and all of your other pathological behavior because that is what you are. You are all the evidence I need to dismiss anything you've posted.

Feel free to do your duty to evolution and eliminate yourself from the gene pool. Trolling isn't a survival adaptation so order is restored.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#71669 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
If you wish to say it in those term that's fine. God created all living things and sense you lack full knowledge of how God created, you can go ahead and try to describe it as a child might.
So far you ain't described it any better.(shrug)
Langoliers wrote:
No sorry I have to burst your bubble.
Macro evolution is one "Kind of animal or plant completely changing to another Kind" there is no proof of this ever happening.
OH NOES! YOU BURST MY BUBBLEZ!!!

Oh wait. You actually haven't addressed the information I presented.

Again.
Langoliers wrote:
Some how you seem to have jumped to yet another childish conclusion. Just because you can't see God this does not make him invisible. Can you see the planets in the Andromeda Galaxy?
Does Andromeda have invisible planets? Andromeda is our closest neighbor what about the furthest Galaxy does it have invisible planets?
Now given that God is outside our universe why would you jump to the conclusion that he is invisible, sounds mighty childish. Grow up Dude.
Well since what is outside the universe (which may or may not even exist in the first place) is NOT visible, that uh... kinda fits the definition.(shrug)

You have difficulty with BASIC English language and you think you're capable of criticizing science?
Langoliers wrote:
Oh I'm quite aware that microevolution does happen.
No need to keep pushing that issue.
Turning on or off genes that God has created is not a miracle.
Micro, macro, it's all the same. What you consider "miraculous" is utterly irrelevant. But the facts are that God or no, they demonstrate evolution. I provided you with a few billion facts that not one fundie either on this thread, but, without exagerration, none on the entire planet have been able to debunk. And what did I get from you?

Yup, another "NO NO NO!" rant and more baseless holier-than-thou posturing again.

Grow up Lango.

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.

Science Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 6 min katrina 409,684
News Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 4 hr Joel 256,398
News Reevely: Ontario agriculture grant program subs... 20 hr Erin 1
News Cleaned Dried Processing debuts new 143,000-squ... (Aug '14) Thu Blessing 7
News Why American Researchers Want To Use Cuba's Can... (May '15) Thu Were just afraid 42
News Myriad Genetics Announces an Assay that Identif... Thu Purplemouse2 6
We offer you a quick loan here Thu william Gregg 1
More from around the web