Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71497 Jan 21, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>I don't give a sh!t about your macro evolution. Get it through your head...evolution is proven.

Nitpick all you want, you cannot bring down what is truth.

People better than you ever will be have tried for 150+ years now and they have all failed.

Fundamentalist creatards are the only ones disputing evolution.
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.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71498 Jan 21, 2013
jkjkhardcore wrote:
<quoted text>Well what can I say to that? Because it's written down in several different books on the same subject that it has to be true? The fact that the bible is based off of the Torah, and the Koran is printed/created much later doesn't this alone explain the similarities? But even if they all tell the same story what evidence suggests that this is the true story, this is how creation came to be? After all it is a story and it could have been a major belief way back in the day, but then why don't all humans like tribes in Africa or Asians, or Native Americans or the greeks, or the Vikings (thor loki believers) believe the same creation story? How can you say your story's legit and theirs is not?
I do not claim that Christianity is the one and only true faith.

So you find that the very first people to invent the written language put so much effort to carve in stone the story of Genesis no big deal?

I don't know why Atheist keep screaming for proof of our faith. Why it makes no sense at all. Look up the word faith this might help you out.

“This is the other side”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71499 Jan 21, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
It's incomprehensible to you because you refuse to look past the surface.
you know the subject is the "incomprehensible underlying intelligence" of the Universe....as implied by Edison and Einstein...(?)

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71500 Jan 21, 2013
I don't parse out of context. I provide sufficient context for each of the statements I'm responding to.(And if the reader is concerned that a statement has been taken out of context, they can always go back and re-read the original posting that I'm responding to.)
Of course, I notice that you never seem to explain how any of your statements has been taken out of context. You just claim that, without any evidence.
anonymous wrote:
You're parsing.
No, I'm responding to each of your claims.
anonymous wrote:
If you can't demonstrate that your censoring of context...
I'm not "censoring" any context, so your statement already begins with a false premise.

***

I think that the word "science" describes an existing body of knowledge (facts and theories) and a process to determine new facts and theories.
You have a problem with that? Then you probably don't want to be in an Evolution Debate Forum or a thread that discusses evolution.
Yet here you are.
anonymous wrote:
I didn't ask you to define science. I asked you what you think of the word.
And I told you what I think of the word "science", by explaining what I think it means.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71502 Jan 21, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
I don't know why Atheist keep screaming for proof of our faith.
I'm an atheist, but I'm not "screaming" for anything. I'm *asking* for theists to provide some *evidence* that supports their beliefs.

So far, they are coming up empty.

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71503 Jan 21, 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.
The definition of micro and macro-evolution from that link is incorrect or misused. lol
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71504 Jan 21, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not claim that Christianity is the one and only true faith.
So you find that the very first people to invent the written language put so much effort to carve in stone the story of Genesis no big deal?
I don't know why Atheist keep screaming for proof of our faith. Why it makes no sense at all. Look up the word faith this might help you out.
What argument are you trying to make?

What story of Genesis are you trying to defend? Personally, I don't scream for proof of your faith. I just want to know what value your story merits?
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71505 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
I don't parse out of context. I provide sufficient context for each of the statements I'm responding to.(And if the reader is concerned that a statement has been taken out of context, they can always go back and re-read the original posting that I'm responding to.)
Of course, I notice that you never seem to explain how any of your statements has been taken out of context. You just claim that, without any evidence.
<quoted text>
No, I'm responding to each of your claims.
<quoted text>
I'm not "censoring" any context, so your statement already begins with a false premise.
***
I think that the word "science" describes an existing body of knowledge (facts and theories) and a process to determine new facts and theories.
You have a problem with that? Then you probably don't want to be in an Evolution Debate Forum or a thread that discusses evolution.
Yet here you are.
<quoted text>
And I told you what I think of the word "science", by explaining what I think it means.
So post something when you have something to say. And don't worry about content when you put out of your mind everything that is said from one minute to the next.

When you apologize for your rudeness, we can start the game again.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71506 Jan 21, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You need to brush up on your entomology, because most insects breath through a trachael system that starts on the surface of the body as openings called spriracles. The surface of the body of an arthropod is composed of a chitonous exoskeleton, that doesn't lend well to absorbing oxygen for repiration. The blood of the insect does not act as vertebrate blood does in transporting oxygen to the cells of the body. These tracheae carry oxygen to the cells.

So you believe that the many millions of species of insects survived by burrowing in the mud. Do you mean insects like the 120,000 known species of Lepidoptera? Or perhaps they all clung to floating debri, whilst being pummelled by insesant rain, only to emerge from the deluge in perfect shape to immediately start breeding and hopefully do so near their host plants. Perhaps while burrowing through the mud, the Monarch butterfly for instance, was able to dig its way to mildweed plants that were no doubt buried with it. In any event, while there are numerous insect species that do live in soil, those that do not would find it difficult to survive under such conditions not even mentioning the low oxygen, high water content and pressure of being buried in this soil covered by several thousand feet of water. Yes, I can see the complete logic and certitude of your hpostheses. This must surely be how it happened.

Lake Victoria in Africa is a young lake by geological standards, yet it contains or has contained (we have managed to kill off some species) some 500 species of cichlid fish. Now recent geological evaluation of the lake bed using coring methods has revealed the unexpected discovery that 15,000 years ago there was no lake and the area was a grassland. Genetic and molecular evaluation of these fish species reveal that they all developed from a single ancestor species that entered the lake during its early formation. These species are indigenous to Lake Vicoria and are found nowhere else. This evidence reveals an episode of one of the fastest instances of macroevolution so far recorded. Or perhaps God put them there with magic. Maybe the flood miraculously deposited 500 species freshwater fish in Lake Victoria and nowhere else on earth and they were instantly able to survive and reproduce. Perhaps they were all buried in the mud of the former grassland or arrived at the lake clinging to bushes floating on the water.
"most insects breath through a trachael system that starts on the surface of the body as openings called spriracles"

And your point?

You are clearly stating that insects breath through their surface (skin) of their body's. they clearly do not have " nostrils with the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). "

So why is it that you claim that I need to brush up on my entomology?

Noah was commanded to take into the ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). There is no reason to believe that all the varieties of insects were on the ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark. The Bible does not teach that they had to be on board.

Now I will point out to you what you need to brush up on. These fish you talk about, here let me quote you "Genetic and molecular evaluation of these fish species reveal that they all developed from a single ancestor species"
And that my boy is the definition of a "Kind" macro evolution is one kind changing to another kind. No macroevolution happened here just microevolution.

“This is the other side”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71507 Jan 21, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Were they from Wyoming? lol
had to look it up...it's been awhile since I read about it...

..."ancient artifacts include the small zinc and silver vessel found in a Massachusetts rock layer supposed to be 600 million years old, and advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. Professor J.D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of these implements, including spear points, mortars and pestles, verifying that they were found deep in mine shafts underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava thought to be from 9 to 55 million years old."

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71508 Jan 21, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>I take it you just debunked the info I presented for you (again) yesterday then in a coherent rational manner using the scientific method then, yes? You know, that stuff that not one single fundie on this thread has been able to do for a year? And not one single fundie on the face of this planet has been able to do for 150?

What's that?

Oh, you completely ignored it and went on another "NO NO NO!" rant as usual?

Therefore Goddidit with magic?

Uhuh, thought so.
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.

“This is the other side”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71509 Jan 21, 2013
Benjamin Frankly wrote:
<quoted text>
That which is self evident sould be easy to prove so do it.
the whole of the Universe is proof...you included.

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71510 Jan 21, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
had to look it up...it's been awhile since I read about it...
..."ancient artifacts include the small zinc and silver vessel found in a Massachusetts rock layer supposed to be 600 million years old, and advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. Professor J.D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of these implements, including spear points, mortars and pestles, verifying that they were found deep in mine shafts underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava thought to be from 9 to 55 million years old."
I forgot what the argument was about. Or does it have any? lol

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#71511 Jan 21, 2013
anonymous wrote:
So post something when you have something to say.
I always have something to say when I post. This is true whether you like it or not.
anonymous wrote:
When you apologize for your rudeness, we can start the game again.
I'm not here to play a game. And as I have already pointed out to you earlier (which you appear to have already forgotten), I owe you no apology.

“This is the other side”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71512 Jan 21, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm an atheist, but I'm not "screaming" for anything. I'm *asking* for theists to provide some *evidence* that supports their beliefs.
So far, they are coming up empty.
like I asked before...if there was irrefutable evidence that supported the idea of an intelligence behind the Universe would you believe?

The answer was an honest no...

so in all honesty, asking for "evidence" is really kinda of mute...don't you think?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71513 Jan 21, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>Um, Lango. You just said that evolution definitely didn't happen. Now you just said that evolution, on a MACRO scale, definitely DID happen.

If the Ark story is true then "MACRO"-evolution definitely DID happen. If no such evolution took place then the Ark story definitely did NOT happen.

You DO understand all the science behind all these concepts being discussed, right?

Or uh, are you just another fundie liar for Jesus claiming reality ain't real cuz an invisible magic dude didit?
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.

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.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71514 Jan 21, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text> http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

Here it is for you again Langs. That's just a few billion facts that put together enequivocally demonstrate evolution. All you need is just ONE of any number of valid potential falsifications. Do let us know when you can come up with something better than "evilooshun iz rong cuz GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC!"

Take your time.

You will.
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.

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71515 Jan 21, 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.
You have "full knowledge" of how God created everything? Sorry but the Genesis story isn't complete either.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71516 Jan 21, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"most insects breath through a trachael system that starts on the surface of the body as openings called spriracles"
And your point?
You are clearly stating that insects breath through their surface (skin) of their body's. they clearly do not have " nostrils with the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). "
So why is it that you claim that I need to brush up on my entomology?
Noah was commanded to take into the ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). There is no reason to believe that all the varieties of insects were on the ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark. The Bible does not teach that they had to be on board.
Now I will point out to you what you need to brush up on. These fish you talk about, here let me quote you "Genetic and molecular evaluation of these fish species reveal that they all developed from a single ancestor species"
And that my boy is the definition of a "Kind" macro evolution is one kind changing to another kind. No macroevolution happened here just microevolution.
Sorry, I'm still not seeing this. Fish came from a common ancestor. Reptiles came from a common ancestor. Mammals came from a common ancestor. It just so happens that at some point in time, the common ancestor stopped being defined as one type of species and started being classified as another.

At one point in time, human ancestors were Australopithecenes, and over time, along with a few branches that didn't persist, a few other steps along the way produced modern man. We don't have to give the species the variety of names that we do, but it's all the same process at work.

The terms macro and micro don't mean much other than maybe to describe the creation of new species. We don't observe the creation of new species simply because nowhere near enough time has passed for us to actually witness such events. It's entirely possible for species such as bonobos and chimpanzees to interbreed, although not very successfully or that often. They have as much as 1.5 million years of separation in their blood lines, the geography discourages interbreeding and the behavior of the two species discourages the possibility as well.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/...

“This is the other side”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71517 Jan 21, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I forgot what the argument was about. Or does it have any? lol
not really an argument...just a more of an observation that main stream scientific ideologies, tend to ignore finds that don't directly support their theories.

If there was an argument implied, it would be one of bias.:D~

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.

Louisiana Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fight for U.S. Senate control may not end on El... 4 hr tha Professor 26
vote- vote - vote Wed VOTE 1
Jimmy Swaggart Ministries Faces New Scandal (Aug '11) Oct 25 hang them rats 352
HELP U.S. send MARY LANDRIEU back to her 2.5-MI... Oct 24 dragoon70056 6
Gay marriage ruling appealed to La. Supreme Court Oct 23 Fa-Foxy 8
Miss Julie Runs Now thru 11/8 at August Strindb... Oct 22 Bobby 1
Who's got your vote in the Louisiana Senate rac... Oct 22 Not Landrieu 1

Louisiana People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE