Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 168824 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.

frank

Oakland, CA

#27345 May 21, 2012
ARGUING with IDIOTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Social law? Funny, name one!
Exactly like I said, you are a coward refusing to be challenged. Be gone
Not just one, there are whole libraries on social laws, social law refers to the interaction of organisms with each other such as human beings :-)

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#27346 May 21, 2012
The Nerd wrote:
<quoted text>
You say no here but your statement suggest that you are in agreement with me. Neanderthals and humans sharing a common ancestor would pretty much omit neanderthals from being the immediate predecessor to anatomically modern-day humans.
No one claims that Neanderthals are the immediate predecessor. Neanderthals were not in Africa when H. Sapiens arose.
frank

Oakland, CA

#27347 May 21, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/323...
As we dig up more, Neanderthals look less and less like brutish ape-men, and more like a different racial group of humans (the ‘all out of Africa’ theory has been shown to be impossible by several DNA studies). The latest reconstructions you see, like this Neanderthal child from Gibraltar, look more like modern humans with each re-modelling. Add to that that we know a lot of them had red hair…. I think the argument for them just being another version of human gets stronger.
http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.co...
They were different no doubt, but I have read from at least 3 different sources that from early to late , they see a clear progression in features becoming more human like.
And yes that was a reconstruction of a skull using the methods we have today, in forensic sculpting.
There is another example of this in the second link.
Surprisingly, DNA studies show that most humans have a touch of Neanderthal in them—at least 1 to 4 percent of a person's genetic makeup.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#27348 May 21, 2012
The Nerd wrote:
There is a difference in genes that correlates to cognitive development.Which actually supports the fact that Neanderthals are part of God's created "Animal Kinds" and have no real relation to Humans. In short, Neanderthals lack the "Image of God" whereas Humans have advance cognitive capabilities.
You've gone completely off the rails.

First, you can't discuss Neanderthals and use terms like "Animal Kinds". If you acknowledge that Neanderthals exist, then anything found in Genesis is mythology and had no bearing on the discussion.

Second, where do you get the idea that Neanderthals didn't have advance(d) cognitive capabilities?

Third, where do you get the idea that humans are the only things that do have such capabilities? How do you disprove that a whale as these abilities? Or an octopus?

Fourth, if man was created in "God's Image", you've got a lot of explaining to do about what God looks like and why.

“Rising”

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#27349 May 21, 2012
rpk58 wrote:
<quoted text>No one says that Nearderthals were immediate predecessors to modern humans. How can they be when we co-existed?
They were very much similar to us, and all evidence says that there was interbreeding between us. That means that they were very close to us genetically - probably a sub species. Cousins, metaphorically.
All indicators show they were not ones to tangle with up close and personal. They went after big game with spear in hand , and often got
hurt in the process. But I'm convinced we exterminated them, all indicators point to Sharpens being the warring tribes of numbers
poor neanderthal didn't stand a chance against hundreds when their groups were always no more than several dozen and mostly less.
But when I look at those reconstructions I believe they could pass as one of us now , at least until it opened it's mouth.
Yes then it's curious difference and unique oddity would give it away.

Since: May 12

Smyrna, GA

#27350 May 21, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
You've gone completely off the rails.
First, you can't discuss Neanderthals and use terms like "Animal Kinds". If you acknowledge that Neanderthals exist, then anything found in Genesis is mythology and had no bearing on the discussion.
How does Genesis contradict the existence of hominids?
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Second, where do you get the idea that Neanderthals didn't have advance(d) cognitive capabilities?
Where did you get the idea that they do? Based off certain scientific papers, we would could easily conclude that they didn't.

Researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany have documented species differences in the pattern of brain development after birth that are likely to contribute to cognitive differences between modern humans and Neanderthals.

Whether cognitive differences exist between modern humans and Neanderthals is the subject of contentious disputes in anthropology and archaeology. Because the brain size range of modern humans and Neanderthals overlap, many researchers previously assumed that the cognitive capabilities of these two species were similar. Among humans, however, the internal organization of the brain is more important for cognitive abilities than its absolute size is. The brain’s internal organization depends on the tempo and mode of brain development.

Discussions about the cognitive abilities of fossil humans usually focus on material culture (e.g. the complexity of the stone tool production process) and endocranial volumes. "The interpretation of the archaeological evidence remains controversial, and the brain-size ranges of Neanderthals and modern humans overlap," says Jean-Jacques Hublin, director of the Department of Human Evolution at the MPI-EVA in Leipzig where the research was conducted. Hublin adds, "our findings show how biological differences between modern humans and Neanderthals may be linked to behavioural differences inferred from the archaeological record."

http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx...
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Third, where do you get the idea that humans are the only things that do have such capabilities? How do you disprove that a whale as these abilities? Or an octopus?
How many whales or octopus's have you seen engage in abstract thought, create a musical symphony, plant flowers on a beautiful day, decorate homes to their specification, put in place on walls the beauty of thought provoking art. Create thought-provoking art, Engage in complex mathematics, make the choice by reason to go against "inherent personality" and "basic instincts". Be completely aware of mortality and reason what happens after one dies. How many whales have you seen engage in any of these complex cognitive abilities?
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Fourth, if man was created in "God's Image", you've got a lot of explaining to do about what God looks like and why.
Why can't God's Image be a non-physical representation?

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#27351 May 21, 2012
john wrote:
darwinisom and hitlerisom are the same in one, both probacate one human over another , both , are corruped thinking and should be banned from human society, as they encourage bloodshed ,hate crimes . sectarianisom . once darwin is abolised and renounced as a hoax then all these political gangsters polpots, mao s hitlers, musolinies will be gone.....good riddance
So before Charles Darwin there was no bloodshed, no hate crimes, no political gangsters? You really need a history lesson.

BTW, Hitler committed all his crimes in the name of God, the Christian God. You should read more.

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#27352 May 21, 2012
thewordofme wrote:
Well folks another religious fundamentalist wacko is predicting the end of the world as we know it (teotwawki).
Its going to be May 27th. this time...next Sunday.
Prepare yourself...for the laughter that will immediately ensue on Monday the 28th.
http://www.the-end.com/
Well... DARN! I was planning to attend Memorial Day Services this next Monday.

.....Do we still have time to have the cookout on Sunday though?

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#27353 May 21, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You're forgetting that if we can't provide a complete account of the entire history of life on Earth, step by step, mutation by mutation, organism by organism, for the full 4.5 billion years, up to and including abiogenesis and perhaps also the Big Bang, then any gaps of knowledge at all whatsoever mean that the whole of Darwinism is "suspect" and probably completely and utterly wrong and is only supported by the scientific community to continue the atheist evolutionist Darwinist paradigm?
Now you've got it;)

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#27354 May 21, 2012
The Nerd wrote:
<quoted text>
How would you feel if I replace the word 'animals' with the word 'creatures'?
Fine. You're a creature, too...

Since: May 12

Smyrna, GA

#27355 May 21, 2012
FossilBob wrote:
<quoted text>
Fine. You're a creature, too...
So true.
So true.

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#27356 May 21, 2012
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
So before Charles Darwin there was no bloodshed, no hate crimes, no political gangsters? You really need a history lesson.
BTW, Hitler committed all his crimes in the name of God, the Christian God. You should read more.
Sure! No killing, wars, slavery, etc., EVER happened before Darwin.

Gott mit uns. Sigh...

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#27357 May 21, 2012
The Nerd wrote:
<quoted text>
How does Genesis contradict the existence of hominids?
Perhaps it does not. Perhaps God created many species of hominids and just made sure they left fossil remains in a sequence consistent with evolution. Just like He did with all the other creatures, too. Just our luck that his little game happened to be consistent with the pattern predicted by evolution. No, even AnswersnGenesis does not claim that, do they? They reckon that the animals found in upper layers were better at running from the Floods, lat to be caught.

But I am curious. How come God made sure there were no early fossils of flowering plants of any kind? Were flowers better at running from the Flood than ferns and mosses?

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#27358 May 21, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/323...
As we dig up more, Neanderthals look less and less like brutish ape-men, and more like a different racial group of humans (the ‘all out of Africa’ theory has been shown to be impossible by several DNA studies). The latest reconstructions you see, like this Neanderthal child from Gibraltar, look more like modern humans with each re-modelling. Add to that that we know a lot of them had red hair…. I think the argument for them just being another version of human gets stronger.
http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.co...
They were different no doubt, but I have read from at least 3 different sources that from early to late , they see a clear progression in features becoming more human like.
And yes that was a reconstruction of a skull using the methods we have today, in forensic sculpting.
There is another example of this in the second link.
Overall Neanderthal brain mass may have been higher than ours.

However, the forebrain (cerebral cortex) was smaller. Therefore its likely that their ability to think abstractly was lower than ours.

Still, raises the question of what all the rest of that big brain of theirs was for.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#27359 May 21, 2012
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
So before Charles Darwin there was no bloodshed, no hate crimes, no political gangsters? You really need a history lesson.
BTW, Hitler committed all his crimes in the name of God, the Christian God. You should read more.
Darwin invented racism too. Don't forget that one.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#27360 May 21, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Benjamin Franklin was one of our greatest independent thinkers. His free thinking and philosophical viewpoint gave rise to disputes that led to the American Revolution. Among his phenomenal achievements was the US Patent office which has been directly responsible for many if not most of our greatest inventions the world enjoys today.
So you have re-baptised ben Franklin as a modern-day Creationist. You are as bad as the Mormons.

You do realize that ben wouldn't even recognize your version of Christianity, don't you?

Since: May 12

Smyrna, GA

#27361 May 21, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it does not. Perhaps God created many species of hominids and just made sure they left fossil remains in a sequence consistent with evolution. Just like He did with all the other creatures, too.[/quote]
See that's not so hard to believe is it? We know that the Earth has been here for a few billion years and hominids roamed the Earth for millions of years undergoing evolutionary pressure, becoming the subjects of genetic drift influenced by their different environments and some mutation events. Why wouldn't they evolve? Did the domesticated dog not evolve from several forms of wild canine variants that are no longer in existence today?
[QUOTE who="Chimney1"]<q uoted text>
No, even AnswersnGenesis does not claim that, do they?
I hope you realize that every creationist you talk to doesn't necessarily co-sign to the crap that answersingenesis spills out on a daily basis. However, you and answeringenesis have something in common. You both believe that hominids were some sort of distant cousin of ours. That's a sentiment that I just simply can't agree with.

Since: May 12

Smyrna, GA

#27362 May 21, 2012
wow that tags in that previous post are all screwy.:p my bad.

Redo.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it does not. Perhaps God created many species of hominids and just made sure they left fossil remains in a sequence consistent with evolution. Just like He did with all the other creatures, too.
See that's not so hard to believe is it? We know that the Earth has been here for a few billion years and hominids roamed the Earth for millions of years undergoing evolutionary pressure, becoming the subjects of genetic drift influenced by their different environments and some mutation events. Why wouldn't they evolve? Did the domesticated dog not evolve from several forms of wild canine variants that are no longer in existence today?
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, even AnswersnGenesis does not claim that, do they?
I hope you realize that every creationist you talk to doesn't necessarily co-sign to the crap that answersingenesis spills out on a daily basis. However, you and answeringenesis have something in common. You both believe that hominids were some sort of distant cousin of ours. That's a sentiment that I just simply can't agree with.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#27363 May 21, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
You think YOU'RE bored with hearing the same crap.
You all have been collectively giving the exact same response to every question for 4000 years.
"Dunno, maybe it's magic".
At least our answers MEAN something.
And our answers are useful!

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#27364 May 21, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it does not. Perhaps God created many species of hominids and just made sure they left fossil remains in a sequence consistent with evolution. Just like He did with all the other creatures, too. Just our luck that his little game happened to be consistent with the pattern predicted by evolution. No, even AnswersnGenesis does not claim that, do they? They reckon that the animals found in upper layers were better at running from the Floods, lat to be caught.
But I am curious. How come God made sure there were no early fossils of flowering plants of any kind? Were flowers better at running from the Flood than ferns and mosses?
Well, Oaks and Elms are DEFINITELY faster runners than ferns:)

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 3 min Brian_G 332,883
News Hillary Clinton: Confederate Flag 'Shouldn't Fl... 3 min Changail 37
News Governors vow to fight SCOTUS ruling on gay mar... 3 min NorCal Native 573
News Why the Confederate flag flies in SC 6 min PolakPotrafi 2,136
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min woodtick57 186,272
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 10 min Eagle 12 9,334
News The Kremlin's Cold War Dreams 14 min John 1
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 56 min Grey Ghost 1,251,358
News Donald Trump surges, and Democrats cheer 2 hr Orchestration 66
More from around the web