Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 218730 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: Dec 08

Location hidden

#119666 Aug 6, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet all of the scientific evidence supports us and not you.
How do you explain that?
Would one of you brainwashed morons please take up the task of explaining Poly's statement that the universe was most likely uncaused,

Please give your scientific evidence of how an effect,( the universe ) didn't have a cause.
KeepCalmNcarryON

Los Angeles, CA

#119667 Aug 6, 2014
Hybrid chops with potato au gatin and
French green beans with a daisy garnish.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119668 Aug 6, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
If the lake dried up wouldn't all the fish have died?
.
Are you saying they evolved from micro organisms left over from the dried lake?
.
If evolution can occur this fast why aren't we seeing this duplicated?
The lake dried up and then refilled. About 15000 years ago, the lake was a grassland with a creek in it. As the waters became impounded the founder species or a few species came from the creek. They radiated out into the new ecological niches. Over the past 15,000 years this radiation has resulted in more than 300 different species of cichlid that exist no where else.

We see varying speeds at which speciation can occur. It is dependent on a mixed lot of factors. The ancestral species, selection pressures, mutations, genetic variability, quantity and quality of the various niches available to fill and on and on.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119669 Aug 6, 2014
KeepCalmNcarryON wrote:
Hybrid chops with potato au gatin and
French green beans with a daisy garnish.
Sounds good. I like my hybrid rare if bovine.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119670 Aug 6, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Would one of you brainwashed morons please take up the task of explaining Poly's statement that the universe was most likely uncaused,
Please give your scientific evidence of how an effect,( the universe ) didn't have a cause.
You want to talk to a brainwashed moron, go into your bathroom. He will be staring back at you from the mirror.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119671 Aug 6, 2014
Hybrids are functionally the same as an organism with a new mutation. They would be subject to selection pressures the same as any other organism. Their perpetuation isn't dependent on the origin of their genome, but how the phenotype resulting from that genotype responds to selection pressure. In those rare instances, where speciation occurs due to hybridization, the theory of evolution is defied, bent or broken. This type of speciation fits the theory of evolution just fine. There is no set duration for the occurrence of speciation stated in the theory.
wondering

Morris, OK

#119672 Aug 6, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>
We see varying speeds at which speciation can occur. It is dependent on a mixed lot of factors. The ancestral species, selection pressures, mutations, genetic variability, quantity and quality of the various niches available to fill and on and on.
you left out hybrids. many of your cichlids are hybrids while others species have died off.

because of the introduced Nile perch and water hyacinth, deforestation that led to water siltation, and overfishing, many lake victoria species have been wiped out or drastically reduced. by around 1980, lake fisheries yielded only 1% cichlids, a drastic decline from 80% in earlier years.
about two-thirds of endemic cichlids (about 300 species), especially bottom feeders, became endangered or extinct. some survivors have adapted by becoming smaller or hybridizing with other species.

saying those species of cichlid exist no where else is over stating the fact. at best all we can say is those species of cichlid exist no where else that we know of yet. there is still much we do not know and we still find species that we think have gone extinct residing in a different location.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119673 Aug 7, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Would one of you brainwashed morons please take up the task of explaining Poly's statement that the universe was most likely uncaused,
Please give your scientific evidence of how an effect,( the universe ) didn't have a cause.
You're assuming the universe is an effect. Effects are caused. You demand it "must" have a cause because you can't see any way otherwise. Yet God is uncaused. Deal with your own hypocrisy first.

And try dealing with what we ACTUALLY say, instead of deliberately trying to steer the conversation in a flawed attempt to force us to say the universe has a cause. We've ALREADY SAID the universe having a cause is ONE of the possibilities, the other it being uncaused. But having a cause does NOT nessecitate invisible magic wizards. And even if it did, it could EASILY be Zeus or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. There is currently no evidence of it being caused OR uncaused at this present time.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#119674 Aug 7, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked him whether the universe was created or did it create itself, you can answer the same question
His answer was loud and clear.
This is an evolution forum and not about cosmology.
EXPLAIN how you manage to ask whether the universe is created or self generated, a cosmological question, in a forum about evolution, a biological item.
THAT was a very relevant answer by Dude and to the point.

In other threads he answered your question dozens of times to other persons.

Do you have a topic to discuss relevant to the subject of this thread, which is evolution theory?

I don't say your questions are irrelevant but if you want to discuss cosmology, without any doubt there should be some Topix threads on that subject. Otherwise open a thread yourself on the right spot.

Maybe you ask why I would insist rather formally on this. Well this has to do with the tendency among creationists to reason like "evolution is not true because the big bang didn't happen." They THINK that big bang somehow has no empirical evidence, so there are two major flaws here: debunk a biological theory by means of cosmological arguments and the false assertion that there is no empirical evidence for big bang.

Constantly we try to unravel this nonsensical clew.
After a while you just get the answer Dude provided you.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119675 Aug 7, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
If the lake dried up wouldn't all the fish have died?
Not according to you.(shrug)

Silly non-uniformitarianists.
THINK

Youngstown, OH

#119676 Aug 7, 2014
All effects have causes. It's a law.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119677 Aug 7, 2014
bohart wrote:
You are just a damn coward, who is too ashamed of your answer.
False. You're projecting.
bohart wrote:
Did the universe create itself and all life?
Uncaused is NOT the same as creating itself, just like you claim God did not create itself. Life on the other hand was produced by the universe, and is a cause and effect phenomenon either way.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119678 Aug 7, 2014
THINK wrote:
All effects have causes. It's a law.
So was Newton's Law of Gravity, until Einstein came along.

But what you haven't demonstrated yet is that the universe IS an effect.

I know uncaused phenomena is a funky concept to get your head around but it's funny how fundies have no problem with the idea when it comes to their God.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119679 Aug 7, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
You won't acknowledge the existence of something with no evidence!!!!!!!!!
Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha,
the puddle of goo springing to life! you have acknowledged that for years
your evidence.....none!
You're lying again, since I've personally presented to you LOTS of evidence for abiogenesis ever since you showed up.

Still waiting for you to stop dodging and deal with what I actually say though.(shrug)
bohart wrote:
The universe creating itself,..evidence ..none
That's fine, since that's not our claim.

Try addressing what we say instead of what you preferred we said.
bohart wrote:
The only thing I see about you that's uncaused is your stupidity.
Yet I can address your posts. You can't address ours. So I guess that makes you the stupid one.
bohart wrote:
Please explain how the universe came into existence,...uncaused!
only a fool would try
Please explain how the universe came into existence with a cause. You don't need to be a fool to try, but you would be a fool to try.

... at pretty much anything.(shrug)
FREE SERVANT

Fairfax, VA

#119680 Aug 7, 2014
KeepCalmNcarryON wrote:
This seems like a very good time to stay grounded in reality.
But it seems like a whole lot of people have a problem with such.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119681 Aug 7, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
The Dude wrote: Plus also, if Josephus REALLY believed that Jesus was a magical wizard, how come he did not instantly convert to Christianity?
.
Firstly if he believed he was a wizard as a Jew he would not follow him, but if he thought he was the Messiah, then he may have been a secret convert as many Jews are.
Good, then we agree you have no evidence because if you HAD evidence then that would mean he wouldn't have done a good job of keeping it a secret.

But the point I'm saying is that pointing to somebody who, as far as all evidence demonstrates, did NOT believe that Jews were magic is NOT good evidence that Jews were magic. ESPECIALLY when we DON'T have any CONTEMPORARY evidence of the stuff Josephus was talking about. Claiming that "HE might have had it at the time" is not very convincing. Especially when he didn't even think the evidence was very convincing either.
messianic114 wrote:
But then again you would say that because of this he wrote what he did. So either way you can make it so you don't believe.
The only reason I don't believe is because you can't present evidence. And I even think that there could well have been some preacher called Jeshua whose stories were roughly based on, or inspired by him.

But since we KNOW some parts of the Bible to be categorically factually inaccurate, that's a darn good reason to look at the rest with skepticism, even though SOME parts of it are based in historical fact (eg the existence of Herod). That means the factually inaccurate parts have to be rationalized away as either poetic non-literal allegory (which would make it an unreliable source of information due to subjectivity of interpretation), or Godmagic.

So all you need to do now is demonstrate how invisble Jew magic passes the scientific method.

Take your time.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119682 Aug 7, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>But it seems like a whole lot of people have a problem with such.
Indeed Mikey.

We call them fundies.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#119683 Aug 7, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Matthew is a source for the claim which directly refutes your claim there was no sources.
And his claims had no evidence.
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Produce one credible historian who argues for that.
<quoted text> Produce some credible historian who argues for the existence of Jupiter based on Josephus.
Oh, so Josephus, a dyed in the wool citizen of pre-Christian Rome, did NOT believe in the polytheistic Roman pantheon?

My mistake.

I wonder, what do you think his religious beliefs WERE then?
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text>Ok then keep pontificating from a position if ignorance.
There is no reason for me to presume I am ignorant of evidence you are unwilling or unable to provide.
lightbeamrider wrote:
You do not need contemporary accounts for historical investigation. The existing accounts depict events which predate the writings. When doing investigation you are not in court so you do not need conviction.
So you're saying the evidence is not good enough for even a courtroom, but it IS good enough for you. Well it's not good enough for me. It's not good enough for historical scholars either. For instance Bart Ehrman, thinks Jesus was a real guy. But he's not a fundie Christian Biblical literalist.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Investigation involves gathering evidence and coming to some basic conclusions based on available evidence.
And the available evidence is not enough to demonstrate that invisible Jews are magic. The available evidence also FALSIFIES certain Bibilcal claims, such as talking lizards and donkeys, and the global flood.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Other than that i am done with you. You are not only stupid but stubborn and stupid at the same time.
Yeah, funny how when you fundies CAN'T back yourselves up apparently it's everyone ELSE who's "stupid".
FREE SERVANT

Fairfax, VA

#119684 Aug 7, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed Mikey.
We call them fundies.
By fundies, do you mean people who believe in a creator who has all power in heaven and earth? This is our answer to the question of the day. God had the power to produce the outcome we know as the heavens and he achieved this as a result of his commands. The effect is all natural laws.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#119685 Aug 7, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
There it is! It is a simple question, I asked what you believe , the reason you insult whine and cry is that you are ashamed of the answer.
You have the unmitigated gall to say the universe created itself, there is no scientific evidence ever ! that anything created itself ! none ! yet you believe it! IT IS WHAT YOU BELIEVE ,NOTHING ELSE
The simple answer is that we do not know. There simply isn't enough evidence to determine the answer.

But, given that caveat, the most likely scenarios are
1. The universe is uncaused.
2. The universe is 'caused' by a previous, contracting universe.
3. The universe is 'caused' by a process in a multiverse.

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 Gay Activists Plan Inaugural 'Queer Dance Party... 7 min Its Freak Season 11
News Springsteen cover band changes tune, won't play... 15 min guck fays 36
News House prohibits $15-an-hour minimum wage 1 hr I used to be someone 564
News Maine governor to Rep. John Lewis: You need a h... 4 hr Trump your President 19
News Bruce Springsteen cover band changes tune, won'... 4 hr Mouth9233 2
News Governor calls for free tuition at New York pub... 6 hr Munkey4836 5
News California raises smoking age to 21, tightens v... (May '16) 14 hr Mugs mahone 9
More from around the web