Evolution vs. Creation

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

Franklin, PA

#72985 Jan 29, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Hitler was, without question, an evil bastard that misappropriated many things for his twisted agenda. But Darwin wasn't one of them.
Once again:
http://speccoll.library.arizona.edu/exhibits/...
"6. Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism."
That not spin. That's fact.
Actually, Hitler sat on a fence concerning Evolution, being predisposed to what others call "social Darwinism" but allowing Darwin to be classified as subversive. It was the Party that actually banned his books.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hitler_and_evolu...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#72986 Jan 29, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, Hitler sat on a fence concerning Evolution, being predisposed to what others call "social Darwinism" but allowing Darwin to be classified as subversive. It was the Party that actually banned his books.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hitler_and_evolu...
Interesting reference.

It may have been the party that banned the book but I doubt they did much without his approval.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72987 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>And boy am I glad.
Yes I know.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72988 Jan 29, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>So everything is a giant conspiracy to you just to make you look like a fool?
What are you talking about?

I understand that you're the great debunker, but conspiracy?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#72989 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you talking about?
I understand that you're the great debunker, but conspiracy?
All the evidence that supports evolution and you having no evidence to support your god.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72990 Jan 29, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I thought it was amusing. About the only thing of interest that you may have ever written. It still doesn't change the fact that you are one of those dishonest naysayers that likes to redifine a term to a point where you can get out of bed with the KK so to speak. Anyone can do it. It isn't a triumphant achievement of intellecutal prowess. Very much the opposite.

So far, I have been as unimpressed with you as I have with KOB, MattedHair, FreeService, marksmonkey, Shoo Bee and that weirdo the underwear whisperer. And lest I forget "god himself-absorbed."

According to you all God did it. Science is bad or at least the parts you don't like. Every word of the Bible is true even the contradictory parts, the errors, and the completely abstract. Apparently when God dictated it, he made sure to leave out a whole bunch of stuff that you are now left to backfill with conjecture that you magically claim as fact. Why God probably air conditioned the Ark and automated the animal management system. All that energy released by 40 days of rain capable of inundating the whole planet was just magically whisped away by the breath of the Lord. The scribes just fell asleep during that part and it didn't get included along with dinosaurs, the real age of the earth, and the answers to all that nasty science you hate. I am glad they included the part with the talking snake trying to seduce the naked woman. It has my freudian side all atingle.

Now you and the rest of your ilk come on here with unsupported claims that require a back-breaking suspension of disbelief in order to accept it. It is all very amusing.
I never redefined a word. Those definition came straight out of Merriam-Webster. Not made up at all.

Dan I'm not trying to impress you or anyone on here. I on here for entertainment nothing more and that is exactly what Topix is for, entertainment.

Dan I would say that 90% of science is good. You know the kind. Testable theory's and laws. But telling people that the laws of physics did not apply for a split second after the Big Bang is really quite a joke. How is that testable?

Most of the water from the flood came from the fountains of the deep. And only when God ended the flood did he raise up the mountains and lower the ocean floors. Try and keep up.

"The scribes just fell asleep during that part and it didn't get included along with dinosaurs, "

Now try and understand that the word dinosaurs is a word that was invented recently. The Bible does describe them however under other names "Behemoth" and "Dragons". Rather funny the Bible describing your dinosaurs thousands of years before the first bones were found.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72991 Jan 29, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I was raised that Satan works through people like you.
Sorry to hear that.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72992 Jan 29, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Afterall the lord of liars would come dripping honey and promising much if you only you don't ask any questions and ignore the things that don't fit any facts.

I'd say that sounds about right.
Yes it does.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72993 Jan 29, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry Langoliers, but archaeology and archaeology in conjunction with some of the other ‘earth’ sciences have disproven a number of the Biblical myths.

For over a hundred years archaeology has been looking for evidence of a million+ Hebrews walking the Sinai desert for 40 years and have been unable to find ANY evidence at all for this event. So you could say that this is an event that lack of evidence disproves the story.

Geology primarily, but with much input from archaeology has never found any evidence for a world-wide flood. Archaeology's input in this is that it can prove that the WHOLE earth (minus Antarctica) was inhabited both before and after the supposed flood with no change in population or culture.

Archaeology, paleoanthropology, and DNA prove that we humans did evolve from the earlier ‘Homo’ species, and how long ago, pretty much destroying the Adam and Eve myth.

Archaeology along with other ‘earth’ sciences has proven that mankind has been around 200,000 +- years, as well as proving that other pre-humans were making tools and fire many hundreds of thousands of years ago…totally destroying the notion that the earth and humans are 6,000 +- years old.

Archaeology has disproven the Biblical story of Joshua and walls of Jericho. It has proven that Jericho’s walls and those of the other conquests (except for one) written about in the Bible, were already down, or were downed at a different date, or never down at all.

The Bible tells the story of Abraham and says he came from Ur of the Chaldea’s somewhere around 2,000 BC….However archaeology proves that the Chaldean's did not control Ur until about 500-600 BC thereby giving us the clue that ‘Moses’ did NOT write the Pentateuch. Archaeology also disproved the story of Abraham rescuing Lot from the city of Dan because its name wasn't ‘Dan’ until 300 years later. Further proof that the Abraham story was written later thereby excluding Moses as the author.

Don’t say that archaeology can’t disprove the Bible….it already HAS in the very foundational stories of the religion
Lack of evidence is not evidence.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72994 Jan 29, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Quite educative. God bless!
Thank you.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#72995 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
Most of the water from the flood came from the fountains of the deep. And only when God ended the flood did he raise up the mountains and lower the ocean floors. Try and keep up.
And the evidence for this is what exactly?
Langoliers wrote:
Now try and understand that the word dinosaurs is a word that was invented recently. The Bible does describe them however under other names "Behemoth" and "Dragons". Rather funny the Bible describing your dinosaurs thousands of years before the first bones were found.
A Fred Flintstone fan, I see.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#72996 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of the water from the flood came from the fountains of the deep. And only when God ended the flood did he raise up the mountains and lower the ocean floors. Try and keep up.
Please provide the Bible verse where this ("mountains up, ocean floors down") is specified.
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Lack of evidence is not evidence.
Repeat this 1,000 times.

To yourself, please.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#72997 Jan 29, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>You miss the point.

We would expect the chronicles of the Bible to increasingly conform to historical evidence, the more recent the records, especially in the era when events could be recorded as they happened. Myth blending into legend blending into history.

Before the era of writing and allegedly written down in the time of Moses, the myths of Creation, Adam and Eve, Noah, the Tower of Babel, Methuselah etc, all have absolutely no physical evidence and the pure flavour of creation myth.

Claiming that the real existence of say Babylon proves the earlier claims of the Bible is as silly as claiming that the real existence of Troy proves Homer's contention that Achilles was the son of the river goddess Thetis.
The proof of King David only proves that the Bible (the only documentation of King David previously) was validated in respect of its information on King David.

Since: Mar 09

Statesville, NC

#72998 Jan 29, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Quite educative. May God bless you...
Educative? WTF LMFAOOLOLOLOL...try EDUCATIONAL, dumbass

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#72999 Jan 29, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Please provide the Bible verse where this ("mountains up, ocean floors down") is specified.
<quoted text>
Repeat this 1,000 times.
To yourself, please.
Pardon me. I meant to specify the Bible verse ***POST FLOOD*** where said actions ("mountains up, ocean floors down") is specified.

You **DO** realize that if all those forces happened within a month or so after a cataclysmic flood as described in Genesis, that the entire surface of the earth would likely still be in a molten state, and the oceans of the earth would have long since evaporated, and there would be no life on earth.....right?

Since: Mar 09

Statesville, NC

#73000 Jan 29, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Go through your own shit you call a post.
Translation: Soy, Ga, it's just too EDUCATIVE for me...EPIC FAIL...and your posts keep getting shorter and more glib...losing ye faith, are we...LMFAOOLOLOLOL...stupid is as stupid doesn't read...unless it's a book of magic Jews and converted pagans, eh? You'll be gone soon enough, or just change your namne, as ALL you fundiots do...tell me is there a website where you trolls huddle up and try to- err- fail to ever prsent a cogent argument...seems you fools come out of every crevice, ever so often and then run whe the light of reality is shone upon your fables...and I bet you lie to your children about SAntaCLaus( real name: St NMicolas of Myra:http://en.wikipedia.org/w iki/Saint_Nicholas...bet you won't tell the THE TRUTH...you'll just lie for Yahweh...of course, as always SEE YOU IN HELL, oh beaerer of false witness, vainglory and prideful sinner...ye shall feel the wrath of Yahweh when you are judged and PROVEN a liar(as Yahweh has a GREAT net connection!)...don't worry, Hell has a great house band, awesome drink specials, and the chicks...whoa...the chicks are just plentiful, beautiful and EDUCATED...not those prude, sassed-up, Catholic girls I used to bang behind the rectory...or is that in the rectory?!? Either way...don't bring your buzzkill mentality, becuase we kick the crap out of downers like you, BIBLICAL STYLE!

Since: Mar 09

Statesville, NC

#73001 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
No it's official writings in stone that revealed the proof of King David and the house of David.
Atheist long used King David as proof that the Bible was not historically accurate. Then they find the proof that King David did in fact exist exactly as the Bible described. And atheist try and trash that proof. Here's to trying to have it both ways.
And thee are 1000s of Far East(Chinese) depictions of DRAGONS on lots of royal/civilain pieces...doesn't make them any more real...you idiots were first jerking off over the Shroud of Turin, then ooops, it's a 14th century relic...dang...next comes finding the Ark in Turkey...oops, just a satellite photo with a stange looking outcrop 'resembling' the prow of a ship...oops, daaaaang...then there was the JAmes Ossuary...oops, faked by relic salesfolk...do I really need to tell you about the TEMPLES built to Zeus, Athena, Helen, etc, etc, etc...finding archaelogical evidence merely provides CONTEXT...I'm sure 2,000 years from now, your kind will SWEAR that humans were giants back in the day...look at that statue of LAdy Liberty...she's AWESOME...

Tell me: Don't you ever get tired of shoehorning your tripe into a box to make your delusions palatable? Your denials are hilarious...stubborn...but hilarious...meanwhile back at the REALITY FARM, the sun will rise for many more eons...religion keeps growing smaller and smaller as knowledge becomes GREATER AND GREATER..it is after all why ' devoutly relgious' seems to be a synonym for proactively ignorant...but don't let the facts stand in the way of the truth...as YOU See it: BLINDLY, IGNORANTLY, and CONTEXTUALLY(Um, you forgot the Apocrypha and the Gospel of MAry in your cut-and-paste-what-you-want style), tsk tsk...lying for Yahweh, are we? SEE YOU IN HELL

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73002 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>And Troy existed just as the Illyad described. Therefore Zeus is real.

If you got a problem with atheists I suggest you take it up with them.
I don't have a problem with atheist in fact I think everyone should own one.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73003 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>Didn't care. Rhetorical dismissals don't address the evidence. It doesn't matter a bit if Darwin was Ghengis Khan. It has no bearing on the scientific validity of evolution. Tycho Brahe was an ahole but that doesn't falsify astronomy.(shrug)
If you say so.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73004 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>You don't seem to understand that we don't give a flying fig about your baseless religious opinions.

Langoliers wrote, "Makes no difference what you think you have against the Bible."

I know it makes no difference because evidence is irrelevant to you. If something supports the Bible, great. If it doesn't, make something up.(shrug)

Langoliers wrote, "See I also know how Satan works."

Of course you do. Which is because you have objectively demonstrated its existence in a scientific manner via the scientific method.

Oh, wait.

:-/

Langoliers wrote, "Gods word is like sowing seeds, some sprout and gets choked out by weeds some lands on rocks and never takes root while some lands in fertile land and produces a bumper crop."

You're preaching again.
Who's "We"?

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) 21 hr Aubie 367
Number of Louisiana towns have pit bull bans wh... Dec 22 countrylad 18
Gay marriage ruling appealed to La. Supreme Court Dec 19 KiMare 42
new orleans roads Dec 15 jimmifsu85 2
Jerry Lee Lewis sustained by brief glory Dec 13 squeezers 2
Louisiana voters decide fate of Mary Landrieu, ... Dec 12 serfs up 40
Republicans closing in on ninth Senate pickup i... Dec 7 tha Professor 100
More from around the web