Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 199285 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: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#121029 Aug 28, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
your rule is if you say you produced it then show it. evidently you are just being dishonest. but that is to be expected.

I produced it. It is on the previous page. I am not breaking my rule. Now if you can't find it all you have to do is to admit to your idiocy.

My rule is there for quotes that are hard to trace down. Going to the previous page is as easy as can be.

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#121030 Aug 28, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
you keep over looking that first life had nothing passed to it from any prior life. it had nothing but itself to build upon. it had nothing but it self to build upon and with out any prior information it even became more complex with out any prior complexity. other words it self taught itself from nothing and as time went on it taught itself to be more complex so to speak.
No, you do not understand how first life may have formed. Let me find a simple video for you, It might make it easier to understand:

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#121031 Aug 28, 2014
Good night wondering. I will answer your questions in the morning. There is no rush so try to ask properly thought out questions. This also gives you extra time to find the post that you missed.
wondering

Morris, OK

#121032 Aug 28, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you do not understand how first life may have formed. Let me find a simple video for you, It might make it easier to understand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =U6QYDdgP9egXX
not talking about how first life formed. talking about how it acquired the information it needed to continue on after it formed. i see you are still lost. and as far as you answering anything. i won't hold my breath because you never do. but you sure play the heII out of youtube like it is a science class. is that where you got your education? lol
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121033 Aug 28, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really saying that chemicals produced the information in the DNA CODE?
That is all that's required in every day experience.

Worldwide.

If there's a mechanism we're missing can you tell us what it is and provide evidence of it?

Thanks in advance.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121034 Aug 28, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>One could reason that since people (well some people) are intelligent, an "intelligence" was required to generate them.
One could, but it doesn't necessarily follow in reality. Intelligence is not required. If you don't believe me, ask any parent.
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
I disagree with your premise.
It doesn't matter. You could disagree with me if I said dogs bark. You're still wrong.
comment

Waynesboro, PA

#121035 Aug 28, 2014
how to
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121036 Aug 28, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>If you approach something and it recoils in fear, it has a survival instinct.
That may be true. But if you have repelling magnets they do not recoil from each other due to fear. Similarly, organisms without at least a basic nervous system cannot have emotions. So this pretty much goes for all life which is not an animal.
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
I must admit I admire your sense of certainty on matters about which there can be no certainty. Well, maybe it's your hubris I admire.
Actually if you make erroneous statements then we can be certain. If you're specifically referring to the possibility of an intelligence that created life or the universe I have never made a positive claim either way. But we can be certain of the validity of certain claims, due to the evidence available to back up said positions.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121037 Aug 28, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
Bacteria replicate in an attempt to survive.
That's not an attempt. That's simply reproducing. Reproducing will not help bacteria survive past their own lifespan. The LINEAGE either survives or it does not. Unless you can demonstrate bacteria are intelligent then they aren't purposely attempting anything.

Cue Jim Ryan territory.
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
what behavior ensures the survival of an organism? that would be self-preservation. it is universal among living organisms. thus survival instinct.
Indeed, plants show GREAT survival instinct when I introduce them to my chainsaw and lawnmower.

Apparently it's not very good.
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
it could be said that reproduction in any way is a survival instinct to insure future life. on this level you have to think of survival of the species, not the individual. many species kill their mate after mating thus the survival instinct is the mating itself to insure future offspring even though it is deadly on an individual bases.
So you're either claiming that intelligence is required to OVERCOME fear of individual survival which means going AGAINST survival instinct. Or that they're stupid. Either way you're going against Wolfie's claims, and this doesn't matter anyway as the organisms you're referring to are animal and thus have a base intelligence.
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
each organism exists as the result of reproduction. no reproduction=no survival
instead of just sticking to your fairytale of life does not require/not all life has survival instinct, show some evidence of what you say.
Already have. You just ignored it or are too stupid to take it into account. Figure that's already an integral part of your modus operandi. An instinct, if you will.

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#121038 Aug 28, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
not talking about how first life formed. talking about how it acquired the information it needed to continue on after it formed. i see you are still lost. and as far as you answering anything. i won't hold my breath because you never do. but you sure play the heII out of youtube like it is a science class. is that where you got your education? lol
Part of how life formed involves where and how it acquired the information.

The only reason I am lost is because I do not know how to explain to an idiot a concept that has been explained a thousand times before by other people.

And what is wrong with YouTube? It has many proper science based videos on it. Oh wait, they can't explain how the information got their in the first place to you either.

It looks like you gave up. You forgot to go back one page and to see how you used the term information incorrectly. Once again you showed that I was not name calling.

Thanks. Any other false accusations that you care to make, moron?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121039 Aug 28, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm,.... I never get a straight answer to that simple question. Because you are too cowardly to answer since your belief system requires you to believe that the universe made itself and then made life, and that is unscientific, moreover, it's comically stupid
If that's the case then how come it's always you who resorts to straw-men and waging a one-man irony meter genocide?(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121040 Aug 28, 2014
bohart wrote:
Put the monkey back on the computer, he knows what DNA is
But apparently you don't as you're unable to answer me.

As usual.
bohart wrote:
If that's what you choose to believe
Belief is unnecessary when one has evidence. And the evidence shows that chemistry creates life from non-living matter every single day all over the entire planet.

As I said, if there's a mechanism we're missing then please tell us what it is and present the evidence of it.
bohart wrote:
your so called proof is like finding a marble deposit and claiming that as proof of the Lincoln memorial, that trees are proof of log cabins, iron ore as proof of steel. If they could self assemble into those things it would work. It works the same way with the puddle of goo, it does not self assemble and come to life
Then who assembled all the trees?
bohart wrote:
even with your belief in the astronomical luck theory.
There is no such theory. Once again you're beating up a caricature to avoid addressing the subject the way we describe it.
bohart wrote:
By the way, scientists say that here and there are certain elements that are mineral components of life, that's a quadrillion million miles from saying that life can self assemble and make the leap from dead matter to living. Only a zealot of the evolution religion would claim it
Again, that has nothing at all to do with the claims made by evolution.
bohart wrote:
Did the universe make itself then make life?... yes or no
No and yes.
bohart wrote:
Did the universe create itself then create life?.....yes or no
This is a repeat of the same question so the answers are the same: No and yes.
bohart wrote:
Did the universe just happen , then life just happened?....yes or no
Yes and yes.
bohart wrote:
Did a creator create the universe and all life,..yes or no
Unkown and yes.

So Bozo, since all your claims and all your questions are ALWAYS answered (not that that ever stops you from continually beating up straw-men of course) then how come you always give all the flaws in your position a free pass?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121041 Aug 28, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
.
I don't see the argument as is there change. Yes there is change. For me here are the problems:
1. We haven't tested the genome prior to observing a change (in the gene expression, blue eyes for instance) So we don't know if any new information has been added to the genome.
2. We don't know enough about junk DNA to know if this has any effect or even if there are other possibilities or influences that are already present.
3. Change that is observed is minute. I believe there is a limit. So I don't believe there can be enough minute changes over time to account for the complexity required to add a new structure (like a wing from a limb)
.
By setting up the argument as change versus no change, you have created a strawman.
Look out guys, he's using the how do you know where you there argument! OH NOES!!!

Since when were your beliefs ever relevant, Messy?(shrug)

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#121042 Aug 28, 2014
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>He done it with power and Jesus now has all power.
OK, so thatÂ’s what your Sunday school teacher told you when you were an infant

As an adult you really should provide evidence to prove such a claim?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121043 Aug 28, 2014
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Then it didn't emerge and you dodged the statement. What are you referring to that has always existed?
I didn't doge the statement at all, you just have severe reading comprehension problems.
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>What would you call whatever the bacteria did to form a nylon digesting enzyme if not a drive for survival? Certainly all the bacteria could have died, but they didn't.
Oh, so you're claiming that we're claiming that the individual evolved in their own lifetime in response to external stimuli? Like a man growing gills if he's doused with water?

Here's a hint - before you go criticizing science at least go and TRY to learn the basics first.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#121044 Aug 28, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really saying that chemicals produced the information in the DNA CODE?
Yes. Chemical reactions produced it; chemical reactions read it; chemical reactions *are* it.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121045 Aug 28, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
translated to " it is your believe"
i did not ask you for proof. i asked for evidence. i said and say again "then it is simple. show the solid scientific evidence that says without a doubt, that the universe created itself. show it instead of just stating what you believe." <<<<<do you see me asking for "proof" or "evidence" there?
trying the "proof" bs is just a coward dodge of the showing of evidence that you say there is. it is nothing more but what you believe. the same as others believe in a creator. the only evidence is in what you both believe.
Don't be stupid, Wonder Woman. Evidence renders belief superfluous.

You can pretend that all this is an issue of two opposing yet equal belief systems, but it's not. This is why people think you're a creationist. Because you say dumb creo stuff.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#121046 Aug 28, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you do not understand how first life may have formed. Let me find a simple video for you, It might make it easier to understand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =U6QYDdgP9egXX
Thats a great vid. Funny to read the criticisms on the youtube site too. They just don't get it, because they just don't want to get it.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#121047 Aug 28, 2014
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Did the universe make itself then make life?... yes or no
No. No, nothing can 'create itself'.
Did the universe create itself then create life?.....yes or no
No. Nothing can 'create itself'.
Did the universe just happen , then life just happened?....yes or no
This is the closest to what happened, but even it isn't quite correct.

The universe is uncaused--it 'just happened'. Life was a product of the laws of physics ac ting inside the universe. the causal agent was not the universe itself, but life was caused by the chemical reactions leading to life.
Did a creator create the universe and all life,..yes or no
No.

Now i tis your turn:

Did your creator make itself and then make all life?
Did your creator create itself and then create all life?
Did your creator just happen, then life just happened?
Did some other creator create your creator and then your creator created all life?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#121048 Aug 28, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
where did the first life get its information? shock treatment?
Since the definition of information has been highlighted on this thread since yesterday why are you asking the same dumb questions?

Hence your creationist leanings.

You may not be a true full on creationist, but you're just like 'em.(shrug)

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) 1 min Patriot AKA Bozo 60,087
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min TeaRumpster 1,395,101
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 3 min Denny CranesPlace 228,549
News How can I get involved in the Hillary Clinton c... 3 min Go figr 7
News Supreme Court Immigration Ruling Leaves Million... 3 min serfs up 45
News Putin's New Rival: StalinBy Anna Nemtsova 8 min DYING RUSSIA 1
News If Donald Trump Was President, Here's What Woul... (Oct '15) 10 min Earl 9,762
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 14 min Earl 3,429
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 23 min Sharrp Shooter 388,040
News Hillary Clinton wavers on Second Amendment righ... 1 hr spocko 1,113
News African-Americans should start voting for Repub... 3 hr Young Trumpenstein 264
More from around the web