Evolution vs. Creation

Jan 6, 2011 Read more: Best of New Orleans 159,803
High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Read more

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#61139 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I have been speaking to evidence and you totally ignore it. There is fossil evidence in birds and whales that is more supportive of creation then TOE.

False. Birds have been around more than 225 million years (that is about 225 million years longer than most creotards thing the earth has been in existence).

Whales have know evolutionary pathway
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_cet...

[creationist posturing and empty assertions deleted at this point]
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> Why don't you show us all how clever you are by refuting Sanford with new research in mind, seeing as you evos are too ignorant to realize that creos do actually have their own supports to present?

The new research you presented does not support creationism and does not undermine the ToE much less the proven fact of evolution. Demonstrated in previous posts.

Why can't creotards come up with any research to support their claims?
Why can't creotards develop a SCIENTIFIC theory of creationism?

The answer to the questions above is that it is much easier to go 'quack' than it is to have some substance to add to the discussion.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61140 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You are more of an idiot than I ever suspected. I have never stated that creation is the most popular theory at all.
So you create your own misinformation and then apply it.
Indeed if these stupid researchers had of listened to creos they would not have wasted over a decade just working out that non coding dna was functional. This may have allowed the advancement of genetic therapies to advance much quicker than they have by wasting time chasing ghosts and evolutionary assumptions.
It is not the theory of evolution that has provided a benefit to the population you silly one. The benefit has come from observed research in the here and now.
In fact some researchers that are also evos are suggesting that indeed some evolutionary assumptions around retrovirus have hindered medical advancement in the treatment of aides.
http://www.originofaids.com/
http://www.originofaids.com/articles/early.ht...
Oh, you're an AIDS denier too, just like that idiot Jonny Wells and his Moonie pals. So in other words you're in DIRECT support of pseudo-scientific claptrap that KILLS people. Way to go, Jenny McCarthy.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#61141 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Well you have made your choice. I gave you the truth and proof. If you deny it you deny God. that doesnt bode well for your eternal soul. Hell is a horrible place.

Send us a post card when you get there.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#61142 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
I never lied. Creation by God is real. Anyone whos heart is open to God knows this.

You did lie. You claimed the Bible as an a priori fact. You claimed the Bible is literally true. As you cannot know these things for a fact and you claim you do you have therefore LIED.

Who is the author of all lies? Say hello to your new master.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61143 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not a liar you dickweed.
Yes you are. You're a fundie.(shrug)

By the way, does Jesus approve of such venom?
MazHere wrote:
Just because a scientists still accept TOE when their assumptions and predictions are falsified does not mean I am a liar.
I thought you said evolution was non-falsifiable? Oh yeah, that was when you switched tables and claimed evolution was falsified - AFTER I gave you a bunch of potential falsifications - potential falsifications which you DID NOT meet by the way - and then claimed to have falsified evolution.

I expect to see your face on the cover of Time any day now...
MazHere wrote:
That fact that you have such a hard time accepting the obvious is a clear demonstration that you are the point leader here because you post the most woffle.
Yes, the obvious that you have proven everyone "wrong" with your amazing scientific JEWMAGIC. Well done Jenny.

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#61144 Nov 26, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but you are misrepresenting what KK said.
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You said one truth in there. Evolution is still not the most popular theory, it's just provided us with the most benefits, your creationist mythology is actually more popular, and it's not produced anything beneficial. You just defeated your own argument, thank you for conceding that the theory of evolution is beneficial.
<quoted text>
Why not? First of all creotards only started saying this recently and second this is necessary science.
<quoted text>

The evolutionary facts are in the DNA. We can trace human lineage back just using DNA. genetic and other evolutionary medical breakthroughs have continued all along.
<quoted text>
False. Evolutionary medicine is the area(s) of medicine that are making the most breakthroughs.
<quoted text>
Blah, blah, blah.... assertion, assertion assertion and not a fact to be found.
<quoted text>
You will swallow any crap available, won't you. Another loonie who follows loonies.
"Leonard Horowitz is a former dentist, anti-vaxxer, promoter of various "natural cures," and self-publisher of books and pamphlets expressing such unfounded beliefs as that the AIDS and Ebola epidemics were intentionally caused by the U.S. government. "
http://www.skepdic.com/horowitz.html
The guy is a con artist.
I had no respect for you to begin with and you just lost the rest.(note the irony)
If you were not an evotard you would be actually able to mount appropriate responses to challenges instead of running off down the garden path of evasion and philosophical twoddle.

You think going quack quack 'con artist' solves the concern. This researcher is actually concerned about saving lives.

You quack quack about dna. Where were you when I was disussing the myth of 1%, junk dna, and the chasing of erv ghosts? What evidence in DNA are you talking about? Do you even understand what assumptions underlie genetic distancing in relation to deep ancestries? I doubt it.

You see evolutionists like to go all over the place but when refuted by providing some support they start to crap somewhere else. I responded to the claim that creos have no evidence and look at the stuggling and squirming, tail chasing and change of subjects.

I suppose you think researchers head for creationism just to purposely destroy their careers for no reason. One does not have to be a creo to have faith in God.

If you wofflers want to try to maintain that creos have NO support for their pardigm then you should be able to demonstrate for yourself and articulate what new research into epitasis does not support Sanford. Sanford provides some algorithmic magic just like evos can.

You should also be able to demonstrate how the reseachers that suggest that non coding dna is functional are idiots and wrong, because validation of predictions is a creationist supoport that evos are either too stupid to understand or too proud and ignorant to accept.

Since: Sep 12

United States

#61145 Nov 26, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Ah, now you're trying the projection angle. Okay, at the risk of being redundant here's the typical, and factual, reply:

We do say we don't know all the time, it's you who refuses to say you don't know, you fill in the blanks with "god dun it" and then give up, we push on making things like computers, cellphones, mp3 players, etc. and you just sit back, lazily enjoying the fruits of our effort. We're just asking for the check.
Stay with me here I didn't say anything about technology I pay to play and the idea that smart people don't believe in God is a bit insulting for everyone. A lot of very smart people believe in God. Than you say the fruits of "our" efforts so how many of those things did you invent or think up or fund? Taking credit by roping yourself in with the technology in crowd doesn't make you an inventor. No more than believing in God and creation makes me the author of the bible. By the way I remodel houses in my spare time preach and work as a maintenance man I'm not lazy nor did I invent the house.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61146 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
SubductionZone, How does the overwhelmingly negative effects of epitasis support TOE better than John's theory of gentic entropy?
Because we're still alive.
MazHere wrote:
3. Selection can’t stave off deterioration—there are a number of reasons for this:
http://advindicate.com/...
Actually I am keen for some evo to evoke those long lost research skills and find the usual banter that evos offer to refute Sanford. All that woffle was before recent work actually supports Sanfords work again.
... except that Sanford is a reality-denying YEC. He refuses to take natural selection into account, genetics does not support his claims, does not support his timeframes, he can't account for the current diversification of the human population nor its continued increase in the face of what *should* be majority cancer cases across the globe, nor can he provide a date for genomic critical mass whereby the human genome is no longer viable. This may have something to do with the fact that critical mass had already been reached. Twice. Those fictions were called Genesis and Noah's Flood.

Interesting that anything you are unable to refute is only dismissed as "woffle".

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#61147 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
And how many times do I have to remind you that you are on a debating forum and are actually meant to be able to contruct an intelligent debate.
Even if you found the refute you would not understand it, nor be able to debate it because you have demonstrated you are an uneducated boofhead.

I call projection, luv.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text> [non debate like emotional rant deleted from this point]......
Now, do please tell us how the research into epitasis does not support Sanfords work, if you can? Which, of course, my bet is you can't..

In the same way research into weggies does not support Sanfords work. Because it doesn't. Remember who has the responsibility in science. It is not the onus of the established theory to prove itself wrong, it is the responsibility of the new idea to prove it is supported better by the data and is able to make better predictions than the old theory. In other words don't try to pass the buck. Yes Sanford has been refuted. Actually he never had a leg to stand on. But that is not the point. It is UP TO YOU to provide EVIDENCE for creationism.

We are waiting.......
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61148 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
Follow God or dont. You have free will. I wills erve God and spread his word.
If God exists there is no free will. If there is free will then God is not all knowing. If God is all knowing then there is no free will. Poor apologetics from creationists will now follow.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#61149 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
If you were not an evotard you would be actually able to mount appropriate responses to challenges instead of running off down the garden path of evasion and philosophical twoddle.
You think going quack quack 'con artist' solves the concern. This researcher is actually concerned about saving lives.
You quack quack about dna. Where were you when I was disussing the myth of 1%, junk dna, and the chasing of erv ghosts? What evidence in DNA are you talking about? Do you even understand what assumptions underlie genetic distancing in relation to deep ancestries? I doubt it.
You see evolutionists like to go all over the place but when refuted by providing some support they start to crap somewhere else. I responded to the claim that creos have no evidence and look at the stuggling and squirming, tail chasing and change of subjects.
I suppose you think researchers head for creationism just to purposely destroy their careers for no reason. One does not have to be a creo to have faith in God.
If you wofflers want to try to maintain that creos have NO support for their pardigm then you should be able to demonstrate for yourself and articulate what new research into epitasis does not support Sanford. Sanford provides some algorithmic magic just like evos can.
You should also be able to demonstrate how the reseachers that suggest that non coding dna is functional are idiots and wrong, because validation of predictions is a creationist supoport that evos are either too stupid to understand or too proud and ignorant to accept.

Sorry Luv, but you failed to address my points and just ran off with another litany of unsupported assertions and accusations. THEN you supported a known and debunked con artist.

You failed.

Remember it is YOUR responsibility to support creationism. WHO has the burden of proof in science? Evolution is the established science. You cannot wish it away or mumbo jumbo it.

Shit or get off the pot.

Let me know if you come up with anything supporting creationism. I won't hold my breathe.


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but you are misrepresenting what KK said.
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You said one truth in there. Evolution is still not the most popular theory, it's just provided us with the most benefits, your creationist mythology is actually more popular, and it's not produced anything beneficial. You just defeated your own argument, thank you for conceding that the theory of evolution is beneficial.
<quoted text>
Why not? First of all creotards only started saying this recently and second this is necessary science.
<quoted text>

The evolutionary facts are in the DNA. We can trace human lineage back just using DNA. genetic and other evolutionary medical breakthroughs have continued all along.
<quoted text>
False. Evolutionary medicine is the area(s) of medicine that are making the most breakthroughs.
<quoted text>
Blah, blah, blah.... assertion, assertion assertion and not a fact to be found.
<quoted text>
You will swallow any crap available, won't you. Another loonie who follows loonies.
"Leonard Horowitz is a former dentist, anti-vaxxer, promoter of various "natural cures," and self-publisher of books and pamphlets expressing such unfounded beliefs as that the AIDS and Ebola epidemics were intentionally caused by the U.S. government. "
http://www.skepdic.com/horowitz.html
The guy is a con artist.
I had no respect for you to begin with and you just lost the rest.(note the irony)

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61150 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
I would never lie. That is a sin. I have never been a jerk. I tell the truth and if that hurts you it is because that is your soul telling you to listen.
I am not hurt in any way. In fact it's also possible that (so far) you may not have lied, at least in your "heart". You HAVE been a jerk though and committed the grevious sin of hubris. However a number of your fellows HAVE lied, and in fact continue to do so. My guess is they have taken the advice of Martin Luther to heart.

This is because in our experience creationists who are faced with facts refuse to acknowledge them and force themselves to lie in order to preserve their religious outlook. After which they may pray that the Lord will forgive them for God is supposed to be a forgiving sort. Though while they assure themselves that the Almighty will SURELY forgive THEM, they still apparently have no problem in deciding that God will not forgive those who simply disagree with their baseless unprovable religious opinions.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61151 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Open your heart is just an expression. It means to let God fill you with the Holy Spirit and love.
Yes, believe it or not I understood the expression. But the problem is that because you are relying on such non-accurate expressions and appeals to emotion, you are unable to demonstrate your claims in an objectively verifiable manner. A Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or Jew could also tell us to "see with our hearts" to claim that THEIR particular religious beliefs are the most valid in the world rather than yours. You believe in your religion. They believe in theirs in equal measure. I choose not to believe any and demand they provide an objective demonstration instead.

So far no religious person on the planet is capable of doing that.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61152 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
Why don't you show us all how clever you are by refuting Sanford with new research in mind
Uh, Jenny, NEW research was not needed. He was centuries out of date when he came up with it the first time.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61153 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying is a sin. And all you just said is a lie.
Not at all. I didn't lie just because you disagree.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

So I see you're one of those NON-LITERAL "literalists" then.

It's funny, I am the only Biblical literalist I know. As most other creationists (save perhaps the Flat Earthers) reject the "Word of God".
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61154 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible is the only proof you need. God gave you all you need.
The Bible is inaccurate. There was no global flood, humanity did not start with two humans 6,000 years ago, the Earth is not a flat square circle, and lizards, donkeys and bushes do not talk. The Bible is accurate in some places, inaccurate in others. It is therefore the product of local ignorant goat-herders who knew little of the world outside their own country, and not the "Word of God".

Since: Sep 12

United States

#61155 Nov 26, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, scientists don't have faith in any one person. The neat thing about science is that it is repeatable. If it is not repeatable it is not science. Christine M can find evidence for evolution in her home country, write an article about it, and Kitten Koder and I can jump into a plane at SeaTac, fly over the pole and look at her evidence for ourselves.

You have some guy who supposedly talked to a burning pile of sagebrush and you want us to believe that? Where is the sagebrush? Where is the fire?
Were any audio recordings made?

Why should we believe your fictional book rather than some other fictional book? What EVIDENCE do you have that supports your book? Don't you think that the braindead of other religions claim the exact same thing about their books of magic?
You're right! Moses was a few thousand year before flash drives. However you are asking me to take your word for that we come from monkeys because you did from some person who told you and so on and so on. I choose to have faith that God made us the way we are. Idk what went on before God made everything we see today. Like I said before I'm not so stupid as to deny dinosaurs the proof is there. I don't deny that new and interesting things are found every day. The bible says nothing about dinosaurs but it also says nothing about cell phones and cars. I don't think that information is needed to live a Godly life thats why it isn't there. I said all of that to say this faith is all the proof I need I don't need to know how. When I stand before God after he looks at my life's history and welcomes me home I will ask him how he did it. I will continue to serve my God in faith and first hand answered prayer. The amour of my prayers that have been answered are so far beyond mathematical probability I just don't question it anymore.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61156 Nov 26, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
And how many times do I have to remind you that you are on a debating forum and are actually meant to be able to contruct an intelligent debate.
None. You aren't capable of intelligent debate.
MazHere wrote:
Even if you found the refute you would not understand it, nor be able to debate it because you have demonstrated you are an uneducated boofhead.
Case in point - you claim reality isn't real because Jewmagic made it differently and anyone who disagrees is a boofhead.
MazHere wrote:
Subs big scientific refute on a debating forum is. wait for it,........"Sanford was debunked long ago".
These simplistic replies of yours continue to prove you are simplistic and not fit to debate in proper forum style. Obviously a less moderated forum is going to attract all sort of simpletons that actually have no clue past arguing 'they said so'..
Not being informed is not the problem. The problem is when evod pretend they are informed and then can only present crap such as what you comeup with.
Now, do please tell us how the research into epitasis does not support Sanfords work, if you can? Which, of course, my bet is you can't..
Bub, Sanford's published work does not support his anti-reality YEC claims. You KNOW this. You call it the evil world-wide atheist Darwinist scientific conspiracy. Therefore his extra-curricular work (read: religious apologetics) is not considered valid scientific research, especially as, just like you, the claims of JEWMAGIC DIDIT are wildly scientifically inconsistent.

This has been demonstrated numerous times. But hey, don't let that stop you from posturing eh, Jen?

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#61157 Nov 26, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you're an AIDS denier too, just like that idiot Jonny Wells and his Moonie pals. So in other words you're in DIRECT support of pseudo-scientific claptrap that KILLS people. Way to go, Jenny McCarthy.
Do you now that on a properly moderated debating forum attacking one example that detracts from the point made would usually send you packing by forum members.

The allegation was that there was more merit to TOE than creationism becsause TOE has made medical advances.

I stated that the science of observation in the here and now has absolutely nothing to do with aides research. If there was no connection between chimp and man the current treatments would have still been invented.

The example of the aides deniers was and still an example of exactly what I claimed it to be, which is an example of some scientists, that are not creationists, suggesting that evolutionary assumptions around retrovirus are in error and confounding rtheir attempts to progress the treatment.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/15/us-...

The article speaks to the history of concerns into aides research and even now, the latest is only 31% effective, which to me is not much more significant than a placebo effect, but certainly better than having nothing, IF it actually works. There is still no vaccine for aides.

That example, does not detract from the substance of my post which challenges TOE being responsible for medical treatment.

What is it about evos that they are so desperate and lacking as to want to drag the discussion down any path of evasion they can clutch at?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#61158 Nov 26, 2012
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Following God is not wasting your life but extending it for eternity......I care very much for humanity. Why do you think I spread Gods word.
You like boring people to death with preaching.(shrug)
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>Oh and knowing your gonna go to heaven is HOPE for the future.What you have is only eternity in hell....That is not good.
Uh, sorry bub. But the fact of the matter is that you know jack more about God than anyone else does. YOU don't know any more than me, him, her, the next-door neighbour's cat or the guy who delivers the pizza. You DON'T have any special access to special God knowledge that anyone else on the planet doesn't have. You are NOT the world's greatest Biblical scholar. You're NOT His personally specially-appointed official spokesperson. God does NOT love you best. You're NOT God's favourite bestest person in the whole wide world. You are NONE of these things.

Nope, all you are is just another fundamentalist fruitloop whose monumentally massive ego causes the Earth's axial tilt who thinks his baseless religious opinions are better than everyone else's religious opinions. All cuz you think the Bible iz troo cuz the Bible sez so cuz my mommy told me. In the end you're no different from those ranting headcases that can be found in certain parts of the Middle-East. You know, those guys you sometimes see on TV, the ones with AK-47's.

Simple fact of the matter is you're NOT that important.(shrug)

(Oh, and that goes the same for every other holier-than-though fundie preacher we have around here)

Have a nice day.

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 News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Christie questions if Obama cares about US 3 min Responsibility 13
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min red and right 1,216,934
News What is Hillary Clinton thinking? 6 min Your Ex 49
News Vladimir Putin steals the show in TIME 100 read... 6 min tc Cls 63
News Poll: Hillary Clinton most admired woman 8 min Responsibility 549
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 10 min EasyEed 323,387
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 12 min Ari son of Anarchy 178,157
News Hillary Clinton has a new position on same-sex ... 50 min NorCal Native 222
News Which presidential hopefuls would attend a gay ... 1 hr Apoca Lips 89
More from around the web