Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222920 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.

TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113951 Jun 11, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
You are so naive. Or brainwashed. Probably both.
<quoted text>
You forgot to add kicked the crap out of your little country. Twice.
You bore me now.
Yes you kicked the crap and puke out of them.
And most people in Europe ARE HAPPY WITH THAT.
It saved us from one of the most profound human disasters EVER.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113952 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you trying with these curly brackets? Are you trying to write a programme?
You can formulate an algorithm which simulate selection and Mutation but I am sure that the average American is not able to do this.
Wha ha ha ha ha ha ha.(a German tries to be funny).

Doch ganz kein Problem!
Ich werde es für dich übersetzen:
{Gähen}.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113953 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Now I have a question for the Americans about evolution.
Why is homosexuality realized even though homosexuals can't reproduce themselves?
I am sure that this easy question already overcharge the Americans and many Americans would say that homosexuality isn't natural.
Wow, all the Americans here are now COMPLETELY blown away.
They criss cross the room in utter despair.
They are baffled by this unexpected question.
Stunned by its razor-sharp import.

BACK to the topic of this forum INDEED.
THE LONE WORKER

Tucker, GA

#113954 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
I meant thousands instead of sounds
OK, CAN YOU TELL US how many people were in your family going back 35 doublings? Just give me a number of women going back that far.
HAGER

Newark, NJ

#113955 Jun 11, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Can you tell me an answer to a question? If I count back starting with my mother and father and their mother and father and their mother and father back just 35 doublings, how many people were involved in just my family from that point of view? Some of my ancestors came from Germany, where could all of these people be buried?
Just the women would be in the millions!
deutscher Stolz

Osnabrück, Germany

#113956 Jun 11, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
BACK to the topic of this forum INDEED.
Ich habe die ganze Zeit über das Thema geredet. Allerdings seid ihr zu blöd um das zu merken. Die Gleichung beschreibt ein populationsdynamisches Modell, welches ich übrigens mal in C++ simuliert habe. Ich hätte auch das DGL-System zum Räuber-Beute-Modell aufschreiben und ihr hättet es nicht einmal gemerkt. Die Frage zur Homosexualität ist durchaus berechtigt. Wieso gibt es Homosexualität in der Natur bzw. wie lässt sich dies mit der Evolutionstheorie vereinbaren?
Mit dieser Frage haben viele ihr Problem. Ich nicht, denn ich habe die Evolutionsbiologie verstanden. Meistens beruhen solche Missverständnisse darauf, dass die Evolution fälschlicherweise als zielorientiert und zweckgebunden betrachtet wird.

Aber wieso erzähle ich das überhaupt einem afrikanischen Jungen, dem das ohnehin zu hoch ist?
Wieso sprichst du überhaupt Deutsch? Bist du nach Deutschland Immigrant und hast dort von der Sozialhilfe gelebt. Machen heute ja leider viele aus Afrika und den arabischen Ländern inklusive der Türkei.
deutscher Stolz

Lengerich, Germany

#113957 Jun 11, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>OK, CAN YOU TELL US how many people were in your family going back 35 doublings? Just give me a number of women going back that far.
Do you mean something like 2^35.
You can't calculate it that easy because double counts are inevitable if you go back far enough.
deutscher Stolz

Lengerich, Germany

#113958 Jun 11, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wha ha ha ha ha ha ha.(a German tries to be funny).
Doch ganz kein Problem!
Ich werde es für dich übersetzen:
{Gähen}.
Ich kenne weder das Wort 'Gähen' noch habe ich versuch witzig zu sein.
THE LONE WORKER

Tucker, GA

#113959 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you mean something like 2^35.
You can't calculate it that easy because double counts are inevitable if you go back far enough.
Did you have a mother and did her mother have a mother? Just give us a total number for 35 double counts please.
deutscher Stolz

Osnabrück, Germany

#113960 Jun 11, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Did you have a mother and did her mother have a mother? Just give us a total number for 35 double counts please.
You don't understand the problem.
It is difficult for me to explain this in English but I try it.

Let us assume you have 2^2=4 grand-parents.
Does it mean that you have 2^3=8 grand-grand-parents?
No.
For example you can only have 6 grand-grand-parents in the following way.
I denote the grand-grand-parents with C1 to C6 (C1, C3, C5 are masculine) and the grandparents with B1 to B4 (B1 and B3 are masculine).
C1 and C2 get B1. C3 and C4 get B2. C5 and C6 get B3.
It is also possible that C1 and C2 get B4 as a second child.
ok B1 and B4 are brother and sister, so because of incest they shouldn't get childs.
Now B1 gets with B2 your father and B3 with B4 your mother.

Maybe this isn't the case on that level but it is definite the case if you go back for 20 or more generations.
Since I don't know the exact relations between the persons I can't calculate the number of family members.
If there wouldn't be any overlap it would be 2^35 but this is definite not the case.
deutscher Stolz

Osnabrück, Germany

#113961 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<If there wouldn't be any overlap it would be 2^35 but this is definite not the case.
sorry it's 2^36-1 in this case because you have to add over all generations.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113962 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Ich habe die ganze Zeit über das Thema geredet. Allerdings seid ihr zu blöd um das zu merken. Die Gleichung beschreibt ein populationsdynamisches Modell, welches ich übrigens mal in C++ simuliert habe. Ich hätte auch das DGL-System zum Räuber-Beute-Modell aufschreiben und ihr hättet es nicht einmal gemerkt. Die Frage zur Homosexualität ist durchaus berechtigt. Wieso gibt es Homosexualität in der Natur bzw. wie lässt sich dies mit der Evolutionstheorie vereinbaren?
Mit dieser Frage haben viele ihr Problem. Ich nicht, denn ich habe die Evolutionsbiologie verstanden. Meistens beruhen solche Missverständnisse darauf, dass die Evolution fälschlicherweise als zielorientiert und zweckgebunden betrachtet wird.
Aber wieso erzähle ich das überhaupt einem afrikanischen Jungen, dem das ohnehin zu hoch ist?
Wieso sprichst du überhaupt Deutsch? Bist du nach Deutschland Immigrant und hast dort von der Sozialhilfe gelebt. Machen heute ja leider viele aus Afrika und den arabischen Ländern inklusive der Türkei.
Ich spreche fünf Sprachen.
Deutsch ist nur einer davon.
Pass gut auf was du sagst.
Du hattest es allerdings schon falsch um alle Leute hier Amerikaner zu nennen.

Dem das ohnehin zu hoch ist?
Ich unterrichte Soziobiologie auf einer Universität.
Wieder mal komplett geschlittert.
Du sollst deine Minderwertigkeitskomplex ein Bisschen ablegen.
Es macht dich einen kompletten Vollidioten und abscheulich dazu.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#113963 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Disagreed
As we "stupid Americans" say: "Tough shit".
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>First it's not about a forum. It's just about a topic.
It is a thread entitled "Evolution vs Creation", in the "Evolution Forum". Is this too complicated for you?
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>Second it's not about evolution.
Pertaining my previous response: Apparently this *IS* too complicated for you.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>It's just an ideological American discussion about Evolution vs Creationism. Creationism is totally nonsense. Every intelligent human would go to a scientific library and read specific literature if he wants to know something about evolution and not inform in an arbitrary forum with laymen.
First off, if you have been paying attention, there are folks from all over the world here (duh..."GERMANY"?), not just America.

Second, I agree that Creationism *IS* nonsense, but it is a (nonsensical) argument that we, as rational people (us, not you) must contend with. Hence, the discussion.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>Now I have a question for the Americans about evolution.
Finally.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>Why is homosexuality realized even though homosexuals can't reproduce themselves?
Homosexuality is "realized" because it exists. Although homosexuals RARELY contribute to the population -- although they very infrequently DO reproduce -- they are nevertheless are participants in every other facet of humanity.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>I am sure that this easy question already overcharge the Americans and many Americans would say that homosexuality isn't natural.
"Overcharge the Americans"? WTF does THAT mean?

Assuming this was another of your attempts at an immature insult, I can assure you that a large -- and increasing -- percentage of Americans would say that homosexuality is normal.

"Overall support for same-sex marriage jumped 21 percentage points, from 32 percent in 2003 in a Pew Research survey to 53 percent in 2013 in PRRI’s survey. During this period, gay marriage became legal in 17 states and the District of Columbia and the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, that blocked federal recognition of legally wed gay couples.

Since 2003, the Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America opened their doors to gay bishops and clergy, even as most other major U.S. denominations kept their teachings against homosexual behavior intact. Yet over the decade, PRRI found, the number of people who say same-sex marriage is against their religious beliefs dropped, from 62 percent to 51 percent."

http://www.religionnews.com/2014/02/26/gay-ma...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#113964 Jun 11, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not. School and education is very important for us Germans in contrast to Americans.
Tell me. What are the solutions of this equation?
d f(x, y)/dx+d f(x, y)/dy =delta(x-a)*delta(x-b)
with delta(x-a) as the deltafunction.
Now you can prove how intelligent Americans are and that is still an easy task.
I assume you meant to have delta(y-b) instead of delta(x-b). And do you want a particular boundary condition?
The Hand of God

Kingston, Jamaica

#113966 Jun 11, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
First, you have to present that a supernatural being exists before you can aver that IT is capable of anything whatsoever.
I agree.

But since I have not mentioned anything about a "supernatural being", nor does my suggestion require the involvement of the "supernatural"; there is no need for me to be concerned...
ChromiuMan wrote:
Aside from the existence of a popular book - which remains nothing more than a popular book, regardless of any emotional protestations you might have - you have failed to do so.
I dont agree.

I have the behavior of the universe and all in it to show me what "Jehovah" is capable of.
ChromiuMan wrote:
You have failed to distinguish any difference between the existence of a/any god and a baseless personal disposition.
Actually, you are the one failing to distinguish and differentiate between what "God" is and is not (or may/may not be).

For example, there are two distinct concept of "God":

a) one conception is that (such as the one espoused by Greeks and Romans etc), "God" is a "supernatural being"; a somewhat Zeus-like character.

b) another conception (such as the one espoused by Muslim and Jews), is that "God" is the All Powerful (causing, determining all etc); and this is the attribute on which confidence or "faith" is structured.
ChromiuMan wrote:
You have failed to establish that intelligent design is anything other than a rather vapid (if not mindless, then at best machiavellian) device concocted to legitimize scripture (creationism) with disinformation and pseudoscience.
Dont be retarded.

Your ability to achieve success by intelligent structuring (whether of thoughts or physical things) proves that intelligent design exists and that it works.

The only question is whether or not intelligent behavior (or behavior that is equivalent to intelligent behavior) originated in the brain/mind.

This question leads us to another question which you may reject claiming that it is purely metaphysical and philosophical etc: though it is of great scientific value regardless of you disposition...

And that question is:

Why does intelligence work?
The Hand of God

Kingston, Jamaica

#113967 Jun 11, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no idea where to begin with this. Sound like gibberish.
Please define the "power of equality".
You decide:

Power:
a (1): ability to act or produce an effect (2): ability to get extra-base hits (3): capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect....
[http://www.merriam-webster.co m/dictionary/power]

Equality:
the quality or state of being equal
[http://www.merriam-webster.co m/dictionary/equality]

Equal:
a (1): of the same measure, quantity, amount, or number as another (2): identical in mathematical value or logical denotation : equivalent
b : like in quality, nature, or status
[http://www.merriam-webster.co m/dictionary/equal]

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#113968 Jun 11, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Krebs cycle.
<quoted text>
You're a liar for Jesus, a hater of irony meters, and a promoter of anti-kitten propaganda.
Was I talking to you? You just have to defend the other praetorian guard members don't you? Don't speak unless spoken to you childish brainwashed idiot
The Hand of God

Kingston, Jamaica

#113969 Jun 11, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
ChromiuMan wrote:
...and some people propose that "God" (aka "YHWH/Jehovah/the Alpha and Omega, the Almighty,...") blew kangaroos from Mt Ararat to Australia via volcano. Woefully short on credibility, fantastically long on allegation.
<quoted text>
In these discussions, only the Creationists dwell on the erroneously applying the term "random."
Mr. Chromium man, we cannot have a discussion if each word does not have the same meaning for all involved in the discussion.

Here is what I know "random" to mean generally, regardless of field of study or profession:

Random:
"a haphazard course
— at random
: without definite aim, direction, rule, or method <subjects chosen at random>"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ran...

If that is not what "random" means, then you should describe the phenomena that you call as such using other words or terms.
ChromiuMan wrote:
Do you not realize that defending the ridiculous with a display of ignorance and sarcasm is not rational?
Sorry if it sounded like I was defending that creationist claim, that was not my intent. I cant imagine how that that scenario they suggest could be.

And yet, the suggestions that the Scientific Community concoct are often times equally as ridiculous as the ones concocted by Creationists.
The Hand of God

Kingston, Jamaica

#113971 Jun 11, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, since we never claim all forces act randomly randomly. Remember intelligence is not the opposite of random.
What do you mean by "we never claim all forces act randomly randomly"?

You never claim all forces act randomly random as opposed to what; "orderly random" or "random order"?

All TRULY random acting things will act randomly randomly at all times: thats what makes us call them random.

Intelligence is not the opposite of random: but inequity is the seed of madness and falsehood.

Since: Mar 14

Narangba, Australia

#113972 Jun 12, 2014
PROFESSOR X wrote:
Atheistic Scientists were Humiliated As Their Junk DNA Evolution Paradigm recently Collapsed
Anti-theistic scientists, Ken Miller, Ayala, Dawkins, Collins, Falk and other junk DNA proponents made failed observations about DNA, such that their Darwinian evolution paradigm has collapsed. Not that long ago, junk DNA was being defended as an important element of the Darwinian evolution paradigm ... The question now seems to be whether Ayala, Dawkins, Collins, Falk and other junk DNA proponents will continue to defend junk DNA, whatever they call it?- Rob Crowther,PhD
Evolutionary Biologist Richard Sternberg discusses modern genomics and the collapse of evolutionists junk DNA theory.
http://www.cross.tv/66770
Doubt Atheism & Question Darwinism
http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
.
what are we choosing to talk about. 8 million years are the spirit? Stu

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.

US Governors Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump returns favor by campaigning for an early... 2 min Evilgelicalling 11
News Pence leaves NFL game after players kneel durin... 18 min Evilgelicalling 556
News Gov: Removing Confederate statues like losing 9... 21 min DonaldMcDumpfHeil... 370
News Mitch Needelman corruption trial: What we know 1 hr Mongrel Mick 1
News Ohio ethane cracker main topic for Wheeling, WV... 11 hr They cannot kill ... 1
News What the Black Lives Matter campaign gets wrong (Aug '15) 12 hr im fair are you 49
News Trump reportedly joked that Pence wants to see ... 12 hr Oscar 1
More from around the web