Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 199401 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.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#114965 Jun 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
So you can always interpret evidence according to YOUR PERSONAL INTERESTS.
IN AN ANALOGICAL FORM:
A man walks into a town wearing a hat with half red and half black.
After he passed through the town and left, the people in the town were asked what color hat the man was wearing.
Some people said "a black hat"; some people said "a red hat".
Let's have the man with the hat standing right in front of us. There is a dispute about the color of the hat. The resolution is to look at the hat (observation) and realize that both sides are wrong and that the hat is half black and half red. it really isn't that difficult to understand.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#114966 Jun 21, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
Is 'Bubi' an English word as well?
What if it is?
deutscher Stolz wrote:
I haven't spent any time in America...
So you're just talking out your ass. I spent three and a half years living in your country and know the German people pretty well. You've spent zero time in mine yet you think yourself an authority on the subject. Are you familiar with the word "Putz"?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#114968 Jun 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
Test this empirically:
IF:
a=a;
b=b;
a=b;
THEN:
b=a
*sigh*

Tha's called an axiom, defined as a statement that's so obvious that it neither requires, nor is capable of, proof.

"Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other".
deutscher Stolz

Lohne, Germany

#114969 Jun 21, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
What if it is?
<quoted text>
So you're just talking out your ass. I spent three and a half years living in your country and know the German people pretty well. You've spent zero time in mine yet you think yourself an authority on the subject. Are you familiar with the word "Putz"?
'Putz' is a German word but it doesn't make sense in this context. According to my dictionary 'Putz' means 'plastering' in English and the English 'putz' means 'Dödel' in German.

Why have you been in Germany? Hopefully you didn't infect my people with American sillyness. It doesn't seem that you know Germans very well. It also depends on the region. The smartest Germans are living in the small cities in the West of Northern Germany. Namely in Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia
The dumbest Germans are living in the big cities (Berlin, Munich, Hamburg, Cologne,...).

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114971 Jun 21, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>All you are saying is that if you claim something, you don't have to have evidence for it to be true...
If you understand "true", you would understand why.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
...Based on their view of the evidence both sides would be right and because they were not able to see all the evidence, both sides are wrong.
SO they are both right and wrong at the same time?
DanFromSmithville wrote:
The towns people can only rule on what they have been given, but it is evidence nonetheless and not a claim that has no evidence...
But the integrity of the ruling was compromised by a hasty conclusion.

The fact is that we live in a world where things exist between two opposites (all things have a left and a right, top and bottom etc); so what you dont see on one side is likely to be on the other.

The town's people willingly concluded that the hat was red KNOWING THAT THERE IS MORE THAN ONE SIDE TO A HAT.

It is logic and reason that justify; NOT EVIDENCE.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#114972 Jun 21, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>'Putz' is a German word but it doesn't make sense in this context. According to my dictionary 'Putz' means 'plastering' in English and the English 'putz' means 'Dödel' in German.

Why have you been in Germany? Hopefully you didn't infect my people with American sillyness. It doesn't seem that you know Germans very well. It also depends on the region. The smartest Germans are living in the small cities in the West of Northern Germany. Namely in Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia
The dumbest Germans are living in the big cities (Berlin, Munich, Hamburg, Cologne,...).
Other than pointing out that you just claimed that most of your fellow countymen are NOT very smart (smartest living in small cites, confined in one corner of your country), I am 3 generations removed from Emden, Germany ("Emden is a town and seaport in Lower Saxony in the northwest of Germany, on the river Ems. " -- wiki).

Thank you.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#114973 Jun 21, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
'Putz' is a German word but it doesn't make sense in this context. According to my dictionary 'Putz' means 'plastering' in English and the English 'putz' means 'Dödel' in German.
Why have you been in Germany? Hopefully you didn't infect my people with American sillyness. It doesn't seem that you know Germans very well. It also depends on the region. The smartest Germans are living in the small cities in the West of Northern Germany. Namely in Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia
The dumbest Germans are living in the big cities (Berlin, Munich, Hamburg, Cologne,...).
Putz is slang in English.
So the dumbest Germans live in the Capitol huh?
Like your Chancellor and such..ha ha hah, you arrogant putz.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114974 Jun 21, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is your flaw.
"Some people said "a black hat"; some people said "a red hat"."
With the red and black hat..there is a hat.
What would you accept as evidence proving God existed?
Produce something tangible.
What would you accept as tangible evidence, proving God existed?
Aura Mytha wrote:
Memory of a red and black hat is subjective and memory is flawed.

The existence of the hat explains itself. Hat can be used to repeat test.

Empirical science using a visual item for evidence has to be repeatable for peer review to observe the same phenomena.

So that it isn't just two or three who observe it, but all you want to.
Relevance?
Aura Mytha wrote:
Only what you want to recall as evidence is presented.
And you have done differently?

Have you ever recalled anything that you did not want to recall as evidence?
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#114975 Jun 21, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
The poster asks for proof that evolution is a belief system. The proof is in the examination of who the evolutionists are.......they are a group that believes in atheism, paganism and heathenism.
Now what is your point?
Do you have proof of this?
Do you know the religious affiliation of biologists?
Where to be found?

Add this to the list of unanswered questions you dodge and duck.

Now back to reality: a substantial part of biologists are believers.
And they ALL affirm evolution.
STILL they go to the church.

TATTLING again.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#114976 Jun 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
If you understand "true", you would understand why.
<quoted text>
SO they are both right and wrong at the same time?
<quoted text>
But the integrity of the ruling was compromised by a hasty conclusion.
The fact is that we live in a world where things exist between two opposites (all things have a left and a right, top and bottom etc); so what you dont see on one side is likely to be on the other.
The town's people willingly concluded that the hat was red KNOWING THAT THERE IS MORE THAN ONE SIDE TO A HAT.
It is logic and reason that justify; NOT EVIDENCE.
I suspected this was where you were going with the hat scheme, and you didn't disappoint me by showing.....
Another example of the "dizzying" logic of believers.
The memory of a hat is not evidence...the hat itself is.
This is why an eyewitness is less credible than forensic evidence.
Even if a eyewitness points you out as the killer, dna can prove you are not.
But as a side note you discredited all personal accounts of there being a god for the same reason all personal accounts fail as real evidence, as you can be mistaken or your memory incomplete..

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114977 Jun 21, 2014
Discord wrote:
<quoted text>
So we're cool with Evolution?
Excellent. I feel like we accomplished something today.
Tomorrow, peace in the Middle East. I'm feeling saucy.
Did I ever specifically state or suggest in any way that I myself was "not cool" with evolution?

Here is what I have a problem with:

When I ask:

If X contains all potentials, will Y be in within the potentials of X?

I receive a YES, Y will be in the potentials of X.

HOWEVER, when I make a simple substitution of a variable:

Substituting "X" with "the Almighty" (whether there is such a thing or not) and "Y" with "creation of the universe":

If the Almighty contains all potentials, will the creation of the universe be within the potentials of the Almighty?

I receive the answer: "The question is too vague" or "the terms are too vague".

Is "X" any less vague than "Almighty"?

From where I stand, there are people here who reject the idea of God, not because it is false etc; but because they simply dont feel like it.

They are only trying to use science to justify their bias.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#114978 Jun 21, 2014
HOG_ the Hand of God wrote:
<quoted text>
What would you accept as tangible evidence, proving God existed?
<quoted text>
Relevance?
<quoted text>
And you have done differently?
Have you ever recalled anything that you did not want to recall as evidence?
What would you accept as tangible evidence, proving God existed?

Everything that could be tested has been tested many times.
It all falls short of evidence of there being one. But to further compound the weight against
the premise you can't even show any supernatural powers exist and then we have blatant obvious errors in the bible. But among the things that can and have been tested that fail.

Divinity
Prayer
Faith healing
Miracles
Supernatural power
Spirits
Demons
Possession

G/L finding something that will ring true, I know that you as his agent will have a hard time getting it to make any personal appearances, or even reveal it's power.
Try parting the sea in front of an audience , that would work.
deutscher Stolz

Lohne, Germany

#114979 Jun 21, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Other than pointing out that you just claimed that most of your fellow countymen are NOT very smart (smartest living in small cites, confined in one corner of your country), I am 3 generations removed from Emden, Germany ("Emden is a town and seaport in Lower Saxony in the northwest of Germany, on the river Ems. " -- wiki).
Thank you.
No I didn't claim it. The dumb Germans are still smart compared to non Germans and it is a fact that the dumbest Germans are living in Berlin. That doesn't mean that they are dumb compared to non Germans just compared to the other Germans in rural areas.
I am not one of the smartest Germans. I am an average smart German but I would be a genius in America.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114980 Jun 21, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And you have not done so.
<quoted text>
I have never presented a definition of "potential" for the sake of discussion?

Ok. Choose any definition you wish and use it.
polymath257 wrote:
So you actually have no definition. Instead, you simply pick and choose whatever you like?
<quoted text>
Does it matter?

It is the the point where there is an agreement upon a particular meaning that allows discussion.

So far you have not demonstrated a will to agree with what was presented nor have you suggested anything to agree upon.
polymath257 wrote:
I prefer to actually have definitions that work.
Describe the definition that "works".

I am the only one here who uses vague terminology, remember?
polymath257 wrote:
You are starting with the assumption that something exists and choosing the properties of it as you go along. Sorry, but rational discussion doesn't work like that.
Seriously?

There is NO NEED to "choose the properties as you go along"; THE PROPERTIES APPEAR AUTOMATICALLY AS NATURAL IMPLICATIONS AFTER YOU ASSUME THE POSITIVE (THAT SOMETHING IS).

LOGIC WORKS LIKE THAT.

Have you ever done graphing and linear programming in high school math?

When you are going to test a function "f(x)"; is it not possible to observe the behavior of the function AFTER ASSUMING the domain (a range for values of x)?

How is what I'm doing much different from that?
deutscher Stolz

Lohne, Germany

#114981 Jun 21, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not a waste of time my German friend. In fact Biblical study has challenged the most brilliant minds that every lived throughout history.
It is human nature to search for absolute truth and absolute truths are found in the Bible. You need to be more open minded and do some serious study before you make emotional statements.
You should face the reality. The bible is a book of fairy tales.
Your body will be eaten by maggots when you are dead and your awareness will be gone.
Accept it.

A scientist would never talk about ''absolute truth" and science is much closer to the reality than any silly religion belief.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#114983 Jun 21, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
No I didn't claim it. The dumb Germans are still smart compared to non Germans and it is a fact that the dumbest Germans are living in Berlin. That doesn't mean that they are dumb compared to non Germans just compared to the other Germans in rural areas.
I am not one of the smartest Germans. I am an average smart German but I would be a genius in America.
Actually you will prolly be dead in America, with your attitude you will be shot or stabbed within a week Adolph.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114986 Jun 21, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you fail to make distinctions that are relevant to the discussion.
You make distinctions that are irrelevant to the discussion.
polymath257 wrote:
Not all capacities are the same.
No but "capacity" is the same thing everywhere no matter how you describe it:

"capacity
k&#601;&#712;pas&# 618;ti/
noun
noun: capacity; plural noun: capacities

1.
the maximum AMOUNT that something can contain

2.
the AMOUNT that something can produce."
[https://www.google.com.jm/sea rch?q=capacity&ie=utf-8 &oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozi lla:en-US:official&client= firefox-beta&channel=sb &gws_rd=cr&ei=prilU-_u PPHlsASO1IDIDg]

CAPACITY DESCRIBES AN AMOUNT, IN WHICH EVER CONTEXT YOU PUT IT.
polymath257 wrote:

The item produced (an idea versus an individual) makes a difference in the argument.
However, it is the standard by which the production is defined or described that is being discussed.

I am suggesting that at the point where 2 or more things demonstrate an equal behavior; they can be described using equal terms.

Since: Nov 07

St. James, NY

#114987 Jun 21, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
Take a look at the posters on this thread.
They are Pagans, Heathens and Anti-Christian bigots.
Therein lies the proof
So you're sampling is the maybe 6-10 regular posters in this thread, not all of whom have stated their personal religious beliefs (note, someone challenging a literal interpretation of the Bible is not necessarily Anti-Christian, or even a non-Christian).

Earlier in this thread I posted the Clergy Letter, which is a letter signed by over 12,000 Christian clergy who support Evolution and say there is no conflict between Evolution and Christianity. Are they also Pagans, Heathens and Anti-Christian bigots? Scientists the world over comprise a wide range of all political, social, philosophical and religious beliefs. Other than supporting science and accepting Evolution there is no overriding philosophy that covers all of them.

And even your sampling is off because I know that doesn't account for everyone that posts here supporting Evolution. Some simply don't participate in the religious discussions. And I, personally, have come down defending religion from particularly ardent critics (like that twit, Skeptic, man what a tool). Yes, there are posters here who take a greater zeal in criticizing religion then I am comfortable with, but perhaps if Evolution critics didn't constantly USE their religion as part of their critique, it wouldn't be in play so often. Hell, look at the German kid who was saying stuff like all religious people are stupid and only Atheists are decent, etc. Both sides jumped on him for that. If we were, as you claim, all Anti-Christian bigots, we should have been loving him.

Since: Jun 14

Location hidden

#114988 Jun 21, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have absolutely no idea because I have never seen a testable definition of God that wasn't essentially identifying God with the universe. Attempting to show the existence of something that isn't well defined is a waste of time and energy.
So, if *you* have a testable definition, please give it It is *your* burden because I am not attempting to show the existence of the creature in your mythology.
Observe these questions closely and attempt to answer as honestly as you can:

1. If you were looking for signs that a particular component in an electronic device controls all other components in that device and their functions; what evidence would you look for?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#114989 Jun 21, 2014
deutscher Stolz wrote:
<quoted text>
'Putz' is a German word but it doesn't make sense in this context. According to my dictionary 'Putz' means 'plastering' in English and the English 'putz' means 'Dödel' in German.
Yiddish. Also see "Schmuck" Both are fitting.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
Why have you been in Germany?
Helping to defend your country and mine, jackass.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
Hopefully you didn't infect my people with American sillyness.
As many as I could.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
It doesn't seem that you know Germans very well.
Far, far better than you know Americans, Bubi.
deutscher Stolz wrote:
It also depends on the region. The smartest Germans are living in the small cities in the West of Northern Germany. Namely in Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia
The dumbest Germans are living in the big cities (Berlin, Munich, Hamburg, Cologne,...).
Whatever you say. Funny how you characterize people by region. Ever notice the Albert Einstein was born in southern Germany with the stupid Germans?

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 Iraq hero to be honored with bridge name (Aug '14) 9 min jibhead roofer 14
News RNC delegates launch 'Anybody but Trump' drive 13 min Responsibility 69
News Clinton campaign hits Trump for seeing Brexit a... 45 min Mite Be 58
News Being transgender isn't a mental illness. What'... 1 hr TerriB1 1
News News Supreme Court set to close out current ter... 2 hr WeTheSheeple 43
News Clinton scores prized endorsement from Gov. Jer... 2 hr spud 33
News S.C. Gov. Haley signs bill outlawing most abort... 10 hr davy 155
More from around the web