Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 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.

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73475 Feb 1, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
The structure of nature does not work the way Darwin thought. A systematic study of systems in nature will give us the facts of how they are patterned and systematically arranged to cycle and reproduce following given pathways that are not linear as Darwin was misunderstanding and ignorant about.
Sorry, but your claim was falsified years ago. And that's just this thread.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#73476 Feb 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you WILL find truth unfortunate.
God didn't do it the way you think it did.
Or it's a liar.
There are no other options.
NO, the Creator can not lie or we would not be here and miracles are beyond your understanding!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73477 Feb 1, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>NO, the Creator can not lie
Stop telling God what to do. It is not limited by your petty limited imagination.
FREE SERVANT wrote:
or we would not be here and miracles are beyond your understanding!
And yours too. Therefore rather than appealing to evidence we do not have, I simply refer to the evidence provided by God itself. Assuming it even exists.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73478 Feb 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you WILL find truth unfortunate.
God didn't do it the way you think it did.
Or it's a liar.
There are no other options.
No it created itself... is your claim. Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science... you imply An effect without a cause.

But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.

In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73479 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
No it created itself... is your claim. Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science... you imply An effect without a cause.
But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.
In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.

You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73480 Feb 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.
You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
So if nothing was created as you claim, you imply that it(Universe) has always been here...is that your claim?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73481 Feb 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.

You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
"No one says any life was created"

I do! I claim God created all life.

"The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes"

This is a lie. You expect spontaneous life coming from rain falling on rocks creating a speck of life and that very first self creating speck of life mutated (against all we know about mutations) for the better billions of times (not once but billions of times) to be the mother of all life on the planet. And then put of the other side of your face you claim bottle neck with Adam and Eve.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73482 Feb 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.
You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
and again...if life is just the result of chemical processes, why can you not show proof, by making the very simplest of simple life forms...such as a single cell organism? It would be apparent that the chemicals are readily available...but yet you can't why not?
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#73483 Feb 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but your claim was falsified years ago. And that's just this thread.
No it was not correctly addressed and spoken to!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73484 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
No it created itself... is your claim.
Not definitively, no. But it's possible.
xxxooxxx wrote:
Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science
Ever heard of Newton's Law of Gravity? Planet Mercury breaks it all the time.

So now what? Put out an APB on Mercury?
xxxooxxx wrote:
you imply An effect without a cause.
This is not a problem in quantum physics. However some of the other hypotheses I mentioned in days past are still cause and effect phenomena, therefore should not offend your incredulous ideas about cause and effect.
xxxooxxx wrote:
But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.
Actually yes it does. The rule is that EVERYTHING must have a cause. If God doesn't, then neither must the universe.
xxxooxxx wrote:
In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.
Not really. Particle/anti-particle pairs have been scientifically observed to spontaneously appear in a vacuum. There is no cause. But this is fine under quantum physics. No magic involved. Although it may seem that way to anyone who doesn't know anything about quantum physics.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73485 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So if nothing was created as you claim, you imply that it(Universe) has always been here...is that your claim?
That is one possibility.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#73486 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
and again...if life is just the result of chemical processes, why can you not show proof, by making the very simplest of simple life forms...such as a single cell organism? It would be apparent that the chemicals are readily available...but yet you can't why not?
Give us time dude...we've only been working on it about 60 years or so. Nature had millions and millions of years.

You expect miracles or something..:-)
1 post removed
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73488 Feb 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
"No one says any life was created"
I do! I claim God created all life.
Who cares?(shrug)
Langoliers wrote:
"The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes"
This is a lie. You expect spontaneous life coming from rain falling on rocks creating a speck of life and that very first self creating speck of life mutated (against all we know about mutations)
You know nothing about mutations. If you knew something about mutations you wouldn't be using anti-scientific creationist arguments.

We know chemistry creates life. We know the first organisms in the fossil record are microbial/bacterial in nature. We hypothesize that chemical processes eventually led to an imperfectly self-replicating organism. Life developed from there. It is acknowledged that this is not a theory and currently only in the hypothesis stage, but a number of scientific institutions are researching the subject as we speak.

However since you object to the concept then I suggest you actually go to Harvard and tell them how they failed to take invisible Jew magic into account.
Langoliers wrote:
for the better billions of times (not once but billions of times) to be the mother of all life on the planet. And then put of the other side of your face you claim bottle neck with Adam and Eve.
Yes, such a bottleneck would be a problem with sexual reproduction, not so much for organisms that don't reproduce that way. Sorry, not our problem.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73489 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
and again...if life is just the result of chemical processes, why can you not show proof
Go visit a maternity ward. Life created purely by natural chemical processes.
xxxooxxx wrote:
by making the very simplest of simple life forms...such as a single cell organism? It would be apparent that the chemicals are readily available...but yet you can't why not?
We're talking about an event with an unknown amount of variables that took place 4 billion years ago that may have even taken place over possibly hundreds of thousands of years. There are numerous potential environmental specifics and countless potential different chemical combinations. Ergo it is not reasonable to expect us to recreate an event that took place so long ago over a period of time potentially longer than recorded human history and do it in just 30 years.

What we do know at least is that we can get to RNA via naturally occurring chemistry, the trick is getting from RNA to DNA. In the meantime while actual biochemists are hard at work doing the research and making discoveries, we have creationists sitting on their fat lazy azzes on their couch at home criticizing it from the sidelines and complaining the scientific community don't listen to them.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73490 Feb 1, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Give us time dude...we've only been working on it about 60 years or so. Nature had millions and millions of years.
You expect miracles or something..:-)
what? you implying faith in science?lmao

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73491 Feb 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Not definitively, no. But it's possible.
<quoted text>
Ever heard of Newton's Law of Gravity? Planet Mercury breaks it all the time.
So now what? Put out an APB on Mercury?
<quoted text>
This is not a problem in quantum physics. However some of the other hypotheses I mentioned in days past are still cause and effect phenomena, therefore should not offend your incredulous ideas about cause and effect.
<quoted text>
Actually yes it does. The rule is that EVERYTHING must have a cause. If God doesn't, then neither must the universe.
<quoted text>
Not really. Particle/anti-particle pairs have been scientifically observed to spontaneously appear in a vacuum. There is no cause. But this is fine under quantum physics. No magic involved. Although it may seem that way to anyone who doesn't know anything about quantum physics.
So Basically, you can created an X amount of Theories that support whether it do or whether it don't, so you can claim to be right under any circumstance.

Rhetorical BS prevails. LMAO
Holy Ghost

Kansas City, MO

#73492 Feb 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one says any life was created. The simplest method to explain why there is life is that it's the result of chemical processes, since life is chemical processes.
You're the only ones suggesting everything was "created" and thus adding extra steps and complicating the process even more.
Its complicated. Its mind boggling in the human sense. Tell a story, write a book.......believe? Don't apply human knowledge and theories to Alien Beings. Its like a race between a ant and H. Bolt(fastest man alive). Most humans cant think beyond earth bound concepts.Humans are heading into the future with an anomaly on the brain. If it continues humans will go the way of the dinosaur.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73493 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
what? you implying faith in science?lmao
No, evidence makes faith superfluous. When evidence is tentative then they do research. If science relied only on "faith" as you say, they'd just take a leaf outta the creationist handbook and sit on their azzes all day making baseless pronouncements and put off any and all research work until Jesus came back.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73494 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So Basically, you can created an X amount of Theories that support whether it do or whether it don't, so you can claim to be right under any circumstance.
Rhetorical BS prevails. LMAO
Actually my posts are in line with the scientific community. You also still can't tell the difference between the terms scientific hypothesis and scientific theory. Also, multiple hypotheses doesn't automatically make all of them, or even one of them right. It could easily be quite possible that they are all wrong. Which is why I already pointed out that scientific hypotheses regarding the very beginnings of the universe are tentative, and it is very dishonest of you to caricature my claims otherwise.

Again, your ignorance of science has no bearing at all on the validity of science. Don't complain to me just because you're unable to maintain a coherent debate.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#73495 Feb 1, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
No it created itself... is your claim. Breaking one of the most fundamental laws of science... you imply An effect without a cause.
But the concept of God creating the Universe does not break the law of cause and effect.
In fact, if you claim that a cause does not need an effect(as you do) then "God dunit with magic" readily applies.
Why would you use something you obviously know nothing about (science) to argue against wat you clearly know nothing about (science)? Stupid much?

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 Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 min litesong 52,968
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 13 min Bluestater 1,223,209
News Riots in Baltimore raise questions about police... 13 min Responsibility 365
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 17 min Guru 187,695
News House GOP Postpones Votes on VA Spending Bill 34 min VIETNAM VET 10
News Immigration Fight Could Return to House This Month 42 min Who Guessed it 36
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 55 min Brian_G 309,737
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 1 hr Brian_G 325,943
News Rand Paul: Societal problems in Baltimore inclu... 5 hr serfs up 121
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 5 hr Jay 180,043
More from around the web