Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Read more

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100060 Sep 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
"And he said a conservative (albeit blind) guess would be..."
Blind guess. Not very impressive.
What's not impressive is your ignorance of past discoveries that were once theories based on weak evidence and blind guesses of things not than yet proven.
"The ignorant prove what a open mind shall never become" Anonymous.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100061 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm pointing out the discrepancy in the Genesis. It was written before the calendar was invented, so obviously there is some inaccuracies in the interpretation of the Word.
Are you referring to this?
Cybele wrote:
Evolution and creation proponents do not agree with 7 day creation because both sides take the literal interpretation of the bible, which is really ridiculous.
One day did not equal 24 hours during that era of creation because when the sun was created, it did not form "instantly" to give its full function of producing daylight in a 24 hour day cycle. In other words, during its inception it did not fully give a 24 hour cycle to complete one full day that we observe now. Not until later, when planets, moons, asteroids and meteors were formed to be our solar system. So if this Creator did say, "I completed one full day!" get a clue.
What does the invention of the calendar have to do with anything? It is quite obvious that the concept of a 24 hour day and a 7 day week was not an unknown concept. That's what is referenced in Genesis. Not months or years. Nor calendars.
Cybele wrote:
Who ever said it was a valid "scientific" text?
Any number of fundamentalists have claimed that Genesis is scientifically accurate. Your minor discrepancies aside, you seem to be on board with this as well.

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#100062 Sep 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
And what is that exactly?
I follow Phys.org , Science Channel, Greenpeace, NASA Social, CERN, Curiosity Rover, Medical Xpress, on Twitter.

Also Yahoo.com , they post a lot of science news.

Periodically, I visit Scientific American and Science Daily websites.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100063 Sep 25, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it's an OPINION based on clichés and bullshit. What does it actually MEAN, in specific scientific terms, to " use our full potential in creative thought"? I'll bet you can't define it.
<quoted text>
Complete crap. Scientific inventions come along bit by bit, in nested hierarchies, as technology advances.
You seem to be saying that, if we :sued our full creative potential," the ancient Egyptians ought to have mastered space travel, etc. That's nonsense.
<quoted text>
I "get" that you're a shallow bullshitter who doesn't really know what he's talking about.
A fine example of a poster with a restrictive mentality of what can't be done and or accomplished with the human mind. You'd make a great fricking scientist who tells other what can't be done because you said it's impossible...lolol....to fricking funny dude.
I have a link for you. Maybe you should read his work concerning what I spoke of. He summed up idiots of suppressed thinking like you in the following..."..our natural creativity is limited by the prejudices of logic and the structure of accepted categories and concepts." Man was he ever describing individuals like you dude!
http://creativethinking.net/WP01_Home.htm

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100064 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I follow Phys.org , Science Channel, Greenpeace, NASA Social, CERN, Curiosity Rover, Medical Xpress, on Twitter.
Also Yahoo.com , they post a lot of science news.
Periodically, I visit Scientific American and Science Daily websites.
Oh, OK. It sounded like some sort of accusation.

“what we think we become”

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#100065 Sep 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you referring to this?
<quoted text>
What does the invention of the calendar have to do with anything? It is quite obvious that the concept of a 24 hour day and a 7 day week was not an unknown concept. That's what is referenced in Genesis. Not months or years. Nor calendars.
<quoted text>
Any number of fundamentalists have claimed that Genesis is scientifically accurate. Your minor discrepancies aside, you seem to be on board with this as well.
the Genesis in the bible has been misinterpreted, or should I say, written inaccurately. But that doesn't mean "nothing" created "everything."

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100066 Sep 25, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place.
If a huge number of people had wandered around the Sinai for 40 years, we would have buildings, campfires, burial sites, granaries, and all kinds of archeaological evidence of it. They would not have been walking every day, but would have stopped in places for years at a time.
"It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place."
Your above statement is a fine example of a shut mind. You need to say nothing more of your concept that if it doesn't exist it never did unless otherwise proved. People that think like you never do anything because it would mean you'd have to look for evidence of something you claim can't exist because you don't see it.

By the way, since you claim if such a huge number wandering around the Sinai would have HAD to of left OBVIOUS evidence right where we should find it by sight alone, explain the following for me I took from the web.
Each of these dictators and the numbers historians and researchers have declared are 'estimates' for how many people they killed, why don't you give me links to the 'supposed historical researched evidence' that states where these 'supposed' 82 million to 182 million dead decaying bodies are okay? This is modern research 'estimating' of killings that happened in the last century, not 2400 years ago. Their figures can't be to0 far off can they?

1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million
2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million
3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million
4. Pol Pot – around 1 million

Here, let's do one easier for you. It's estimated up to 700,000 soldiers died in the civil war. Why don't you show me where these 700,000 graves are huh? They have to be somewhere to prove upwards of 700,000 soldiers died in that war right?

Here, try this one instead. Prior to 1492 it's an estimate that there were 15 to 20 million native Americans on this continent. Why don't you show the evidence for these 15 to 20 million natives existence? Some evidence for their existence exists is a fact. But evidence for 15 to 20 million? Where is that much evidence?

Waiting..........

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100067 Sep 25, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
If it was describing evolution then why did it ACTUALLY describe magical poofing, so strongly in fact that fundie believers also agree that it was not describing evolution which they think is wrong because they think that God used magical poofing instead?
The Bible is not a science or history book.
I never stated the writer was describing evolution. Your bad for not reading what I wrote. Stop assuming. You know how it makes you look :)
I never said the Bible was "a history book" so your bad again. Stop assuming what I said that I never stated, really. The Bible does contain history. If you don't know that you're more of a self deluded idiot then I took you for.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100068 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
the Genesis in the bible has been misinterpreted, or should I say, written inaccurately.
Bummer that this god couldn't be more clear.
Cybele wrote:
But that doesn't mean "nothing" created "everything."
Agreed. Nor has anyone claimed as much.
whut

Tulsa, OK

#100069 Sep 25, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
That may be so, but since I have no idea who this "Hawkings" guy is it doesn't matter. As for Stephen Hawking, it's not possible for him to disagree with me if I agree with him. Otherwise if you're referring to the quotemine Kong caught you out on and which I have also addressed since then, that's just you lying again.(shrug)
what's a "quotemine?"
And it's "called you out on." If you're going to resort to nit-picking typos, at least clean your own yard, first.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100070 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
"It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place."
Your above statement is a fine example of a shut mind. You need to say nothing more of your concept that if it doesn't exist it never did unless otherwise proved. People that think like you never do anything because it would mean you'd have to look for evidence of something you claim can't exist because you don't see it.
By the way, since you claim if such a huge number wandering around the Sinai would have HAD to of left OBVIOUS evidence right where we should find it by sight alone, explain the following for me I took from the web.
Each of these dictators and the numbers historians and researchers have declared are 'estimates' for how many people they killed, why don't you give me links to the 'supposed historical researched evidence' that states where these 'supposed' 82 million to 182 million dead decaying bodies are okay? This is modern research 'estimating' of killings that happened in the last century, not 2400 years ago. Their figures can't be to0 far off can they?
1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million
2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million
3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million
4. Pol Pot – around 1 million
Here, let's do one easier for you. It's estimated up to 700,000 soldiers died in the civil war. Why don't you show me where these 700,000 graves are huh? They have to be somewhere to prove upwards of 700,000 soldiers died in that war right?
Here, try this one instead. Prior to 1492 it's an estimate that there were 15 to 20 million native Americans on this continent. Why don't you show the evidence for these 15 to 20 million natives existence? Some evidence for their existence exists is a fact. But evidence for 15 to 20 million? Where is that much evidence?
Waiting..........
This is absurd. There is evidence for each of the example you cited. Can we account for every single body? No. So what? That isn't necessary. Do I need to post pictures of the mass graves?

Same rules: Can you provide any evidence at all for the Exodus?

"People that think like you never do anything because it would mean you'd have to look for evidence of something you claim can't exist because you don't see it."

OK, let's see it.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100071 Sep 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
No glitch, archaeological facts are involved here
How you interpret the authors writing is you own affair, It remains fact that geological action took place then as is does now. The experience of a tsunami or a volcano or other eruption in no way suggest that the writer had inside knowledge of the deep.
And of course 3,000,000,000 times more water than is known to exist using modern science and technology to estimate is a considerable amount more than the average geyser could eject.
Noo, there is a glitch. A big glitch from both pro and con sides of the flood story.
First, here's a fact about mythical floods/global floods and many predate the Bible flood story in age. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.h...
The curious and un-explainable part is how all these separate different cultures for thousands of years spoke of flood stories instead of global fire stories or global earthquake stories or global ice age stories etc. Their preoccupation with flood/global stories makes no rational sense in light of all the other natural catastrophes they could have turned into a myth and didn't as they did with flood/global flood myths.
Next as to the 'glitch', theists behind the global flood myth assume it took place according to the Bible time line and assume the earth's geography looked then as it does now. Those against the myth are making their same calculations upon the same material theists use. Neither side will win for losing doing this.
The writer stated a global flood happened. Other cultures on this earth state in myth a global flood happened. Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#100072 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
A fine example of a poster with a restrictive mentality of what can't be done and or accomplished with the human mind. You'd make a great fricking scientist who tells other what can't be done because you said it's impossible...lolol....to fricking funny dude.
I have a link for you. Maybe you should read his work concerning what I spoke of. He summed up idiots of suppressed thinking like you in the following..."..our natural creativity is limited by the prejudices of logic and the structure of accepted categories and concepts." Man was he ever describing individuals like you dude!
http://creativethinking.net/WP01_Home.htm
I'm asking you to explain, in scientific terms, EXACTLY how you conclude that we "only use 10% of our creative potential." That is bullshit that has been debunked as myth long ago. I even gave you the links.

Instead of responding with a factual explanation of your tired cliché, you attack me for pointing out that you are, in fact, talking nonsense.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100073 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Noo, there is a glitch. A big glitch from both pro and con sides of the flood story.
First, here's a fact about mythical floods/global floods and many predate the Bible flood story in age. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.h...
The curious and un-explainable part is how all these separate different cultures for thousands of years spoke of flood stories instead of global fire stories or global earthquake stories or global ice age stories etc. Their preoccupation with flood/global stories makes no rational sense in light of all the other natural catastrophes they could have turned into a myth and didn't as they did with flood/global flood myths.
Next as to the 'glitch', theists behind the global flood myth assume it took place according to the Bible time line and assume the earth's geography looked then as it does now. Those against the myth are making their same calculations upon the same material theists use. Neither side will win for losing doing this.
The writer stated a global flood happened. Other cultures on this earth state in myth a global flood happened. Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle.
Where are you getting this nonsense? The geography of the earth has not significantly changed since man has walked the earth. The evidence has already shown that a global flood never happened.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#100074 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
"It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place."
Your above statement is a fine example of a shut mind.
No, it's actually an attempt to get you to understand how SCIENCE works. If there is evidence for a phenomenon, then it is researched further and eventually codified as a scientific theory, which stands until something else that is better at explaining the phenomenon comes along.
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, since you claim if such a huge number wandering around the Sinai would have HAD to of left OBVIOUS evidence right where we should find it by sight alone, explain the following for me I took from the web.
I didn't say that, you moron.

I DID say that top Israeli archeologists have concluded that there is no archeological evidence of such a massive movement of people over 40 years. And there presumably WOULD be -- graves, granaries, cooking pits, pottery, walls, settlement boundaries, etc.

These are professional, working Israeli archeologists who say there is no evidence of the presence of a large # of people in the Sinai in that period.
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Here, let's do one easier for you. It's estimated up to 700,000 soldiers died in the civil war. Why don't you show me where these 700,000 graves are huh? They have to be somewhere to prove upwards of 700,000 soldiers died in that war right?
Who cares where all the graves are. But we have MUCH evidence of the various BATTLEFIELDS, don't we?

So, in the case of the Civil War, those historical mass movements and activities left behind obvious traces.

In the case of the supposed Exodus? Nothing. And this from highly trained professionals who KNOW what to look for and would find the evidence if it were there.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100075 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
It's your arrogance that deludes you to believe that one branch of science is superior to others.
Yes, some branches of science are superior to others. Newtonian mechanics is inferior to relativity is inferior to quantum physics.
Cybele wrote:
Stop dreaming. You don't hold the key to the real truth about life. You will come and go without knowing it.
You want to tell me that my claims has nothing to do with science, who the f-- are you kidding? really? I know things that science cannot explain.
Your baseless philosophical opinions are irrelevant.
Cybele wrote:
So I'm doing you all a damn favor.
Yes, by providing a fine example of ignorance, and a lot of mirth.
Cybele wrote:
You obviously base your arguments based on your own BIAS, calling God a Jew magic for instance, and you don't care because you're just here with an agenda so you could care less what others have to offer to the table.
How is an accurate description biased? Of course the invisible magic wizard might not really be Jewish, it's just that all the Abrahamic religions assume so.
Cybele wrote:
Your mind is set with what you have learned and don't want to learn anything new. You don't want to question anything because it wasn't covered in the textbook or maybe because you're just an ass.
Look, I have been following science for some time now and I know what they are up to.
Indeed, it's the evil worldwide atheist materialist Darwinist evolutionist conspiracy!
Cybele wrote:
And you, you're stuck on the evolution propaganda. Science will not make progress if it ceases to tap the unknown.
Actually evolution, same as other sciences, DO tap the unknown. That's how science works. And in so doing make the unknown become known. Tiktaalik being a fine example.

You are implying that there are alternate ideas to be explored which are not being considered. However so far no-one has presented any.

What this means is that you have nothing to complain about. But you complain anyway.
Cybele wrote:
And what is this claim of yours that when something occurs "naturally" there is no need for a creator? Does that even make sense? So the first particles came to existence naturally, nothing created them. DUH. When you get a life, you will learn something.
Which particular particles are you referring to? Life? I already explained (duh) that they HAD a creator. If it were a purely natural non-divine non-magical event then that creator was chemistry, using the abundance of chemicals which had been on this planet for well over half a billion years.

Or were you referring to the universe itself? In which case if you reject Big Bang cosmology your "scientific alternative" is Godmagic. NOTHING created God. Apparently this is NOT a problem for Godmagic, but IS a problem for anything that ISN'T Godmagic.

Astoundingly massive hypocrisy noted.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100076 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm pointing out the discrepancy in the Genesis.
"The"?
Cybele wrote:
It was written before the calendar was invented
No it wasn't. It was written before OUR calendar was invented, approximately one and a half millenia ago.
Cybele wrote:
so obviously there is some inaccuracies in the interpretation of the Word.
No shite, Sherlock.
Cybele wrote:
Who ever said it was a valid "scientific" text?
Creationists.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100077 Sep 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, OK. It sounded like some sort of accusation.
It was. She follows 'em but still has problem learning.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100078 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
the Genesis in the bible has been misinterpreted, or should I say, written inaccurately.
Another valid, and highly likely possibility, was that it's made up BS.
Cybele wrote:
But that doesn't mean "nothing" created "everything."
Nor is that our claim. It also has ZERO bearing on the validity of evolution. In answer to the question of what ultimately started off the Big Bang, the CORRECT answer is that no-one knows yet. It is NOT "Science can't explain everything yet so therefore an invisible magic wizard didit."
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100079 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
A fine example of a poster with a restrictive mentality of what can't be done and or accomplished with the human mind. You'd make a great fricking scientist who tells other what can't be done because you said it's impossible...lolol....to fricking funny dude.
I have a link for you. Maybe you should read his work concerning what I spoke of. He summed up idiots of suppressed thinking like you in the following..."..our natural creativity is limited by the prejudices of logic and the structure of accepted categories and concepts." Man was he ever describing individuals like you dude!
http://creativethinking.net/WP01_Home.htm
Gratuitous self-promotion aside I will for now assume that this guy's a great business man and done lots of wonderful things for all the companies he said he's worked for and not a crank. So far there is little evidence you have anything close resembling his abilities of 'creative thinking'.

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 Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min Holy Jumpin Jesus 1,206,978
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 7 min X -Man- 319,836
News Pentagon chief may ease military enlistment sta... 7 min goonsquad 1
News Bristol Palin to marry U.S. Medal of Honor winn... 7 min barefoot2626 519
News Indiana's Religious 'Anti-Gay' Law That Wasn't 10 min Reverend Alan 23
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 10 min red and right 175,843
News Indiana House OKs religious objection bill by w... 12 min goonsquad 120
News Ted Cruz Announces White House Bid 15 min barefoot2626 380
News Cheney: Obama Is 'Worst President in My Lifetime' 1 hr goonsquad 472
More from around the web