Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 216788 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.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71752 Jan 22, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow.
It's just that easy, huh?
[/SARCASM]
You're so clueless I'm embarrassed for you.
Don't hate the word, " truth " .
A child will always follow the right morals if he or she is given the right training or upbringing.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71753 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>You keep referring to a definition that is not accurate.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Mac...

So you don't agree to the fact there was increase in brain size in mammals, which is an example of macro-evolution?

Although I have questions about major transitions (origin of higher-level phyla) in species.
"You keep referring to a definition that is not accurate."

I'm sorry for that. I'm just quoting Berkeley's evolution science team.

Berkeley the center of Atheism.
And you believe you're correct and Berkeley is wrong.

I'll quote an old TV show here.
"Very interesting but stupid"

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71754 Jan 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes we know, you're gay and in the closet. Next topic now, it's getting old.
Tell them your secret...

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71755 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not playing games, I want answers. Because if there was one, you would be posting them by now, wouldn't you?

The bible actually tells you that and Science proves that and yet you still don't know?

Hint: We are literally made of star dust.
So no game? Yet you list here your belief of what man is made from.
So why ask? You're just a typical lying atheist. I see through you like a a plate glass window. You atheist sure like your little games.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71756 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.
Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.
Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.
There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!
Shit!
You do have some good points but due to your ill-mannered attitude you tend to spoil it with insults.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#71757 Jan 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.
Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.
Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.
There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!
Shit!
This is a forum for all. What you have said had been said before.

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71758 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So no game? Yet you list here your belief of what man is made from.
So why ask? You're just a typical lying atheist. I see through you like a a plate glass window. You atheist sure like your little games.
What makes you think I'm an atheist?

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71759 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"You keep referring to a definition that is not accurate."
I'm sorry for that. I'm just quoting Berkeley's evolution science team.
Berkeley the center of Atheism.
And you believe you're correct and Berkeley is wrong.
I'll quote an old TV show here.
"Very interesting but stupid"
Are you trying to say that Berkley's team is right then? If so, how is the link I provided not more accurate than yours?

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71760 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
So why ask?
I wanted to see how you're going to explain how we were made from dust. And you haven't provided that. How did dust come to life?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71761 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>What makes you think I'm an atheist?
Your little games gives you away, all the atheist on these thread pull the same crap.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71762 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>Are you trying to say that Berkley's team is right then? If so, how is the link I provided not more accurate than yours?
It's not as renown as Berkeley. Sorry.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#71763 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>I wanted to see how you're going to explain how we were made from dust. And you haven't provided that. How did dust come to life?
I don't need to provide that. You can look that up very easy.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#71764 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>...
Animals don't have an awareness like humans do. Have you seen one get high? If they did who knows what could happen. lol....
I've seen a couple of wasted creatures....

http://www.livescience.com/26398-image-galler...

...and I've heard of some people getting pets high on herb.

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71765 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I wanted to see how you're going to explain how we were made from dust. And you haven't provided that. How did dust come to life?
We are descended from apes, which are in turn descended from the earliest mammals, which are in turn descended from reptiles which are in turn descended from amphibians which are in turn descended from fish which are in turn descended from the first chordates which are in turn descended from starfish believe it or not which are in turn descended from the earliest bacteria.

True story bro :D

“serious about music , love rap”

Since: Oct 12

Huntsville

#71766 Jan 22, 2013
Creation all the way, and hip hop.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#71767 Jan 23, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.
Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.
Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.
There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!
At first sight it does appear that a "gay gene" would be a contradiction in evolutionary terms. However, there are other examples of genes (really alleles) that are advantageous when one of the pair inherited from the parents has it, but deleterious when both do.

The gene conferring malarial resistance causes sickle cell anemia when inherited from both sides. This means it reaches an equilibrium in the population, conferring a net benefit so long as its not too prevalent. So it will never dominate, but never disappear either (unless a better solution evolves). There are other examples.

What if an allele that conferred some creative or other advantage in a single copy, causes homosexuality when inherited from both sides? This IS pure speculation, but its logically within the bounds of possibility.

On a completely different note. There is homosexuality. Those who are homosexual do not seem to have much choice in the matter. So WTF business is it to do with anyone else if they decide to do what they do? Its a victimless activity. Even gay marriage has NO impact on straight marriage. So who cares? Only those who fear its somehow contagious. Let it go.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#71768 Jan 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> I reject that in Jesus name, amen!
The bible says, train up a child in the ways he or she will grow(give him or her the right morals) and they will never depart or deviate from that.
Actually pretty much every culture on earth has always said raising a child properly will (usually) result in a more morally upright person.

It didn't take the Bible to point out the obvious.

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#71770 Jan 23, 2013
Cybele wrote:
what about Evolution + Creation?
Maybe Evolutionary theory can be reconciled with some other Creation story, but not with the Genesis account.
According to the Genesis account, God created the great whales before he created the beasts of the earth.
Mainstream scientists tell us that the great whales are evolved from the beasts of the earth.
According to the Genesis account, God created the fowls of the air before he created the beasts of the earth.
Mainstream scientists tell us that the fowls of the air are descended from the beasts of the earth.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#71771 Jan 23, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>I've seen a couple of wasted creatures....
http://www.livescience.com/26398-image-galler...
...and I've heard of some people getting pets high on herb.
I knew that.
FREE SERVANT
#71772 Jan 23, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you are right but I don't think religion is necessary for one to achieve a higher perception of reality. I'm not religious but I'm spiritual. There is a difference.
Animals don't have an awareness like humans do. Have you seen one get high? If they did who knows what could happen. lol
Although I consider animals to be somewhat spiritual. They do mourn for the dead and do burial rituals. Elephants are one good example of that. It's just in a different level than humans.
The point is delusions may have resulted from altered consciousness. The pharaohs of Egypt believed they were reincarnate of the Gods. And I believe they tried substances to achieve such altered states. Heard of presences of drugs in mummies?
The drugs were found to have South American origins as well. DId you know that the pyramids were alters?

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
Jimmy Swaggart Ministries Faces New Scandal (Aug '11) Tue Joy Kail 551
News Louisiana shouldn't be known for locking people... Nov 28 EL1SE G1NGER1CH 1
News NASA study shows link between Deepwater Horizon... Nov 28 satmaster 1
News Inside Report for September 7, 2011 (Sep '11) Nov 26 Family 4ever 5
I will be committing suicide i.m going to end m... Nov 25 footprintofachris... 2
Horror hills Nov 23 Someone 1
News Critics calle for Rep. David Wallace to quit Se... Nov 11 Guest 4
More from around the web