Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 172079 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.

FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#82133 Mar 22, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
Like i will always say, assertions, libels or slanders against God, his word( the bible) and his church, will never change the original plan of God.
Let the criticisms keeps coming while the work of God and his glory, keeps increasing.
Halleluyah!!!
Yes, and the fields are ripe but the workers are few, but thanks be to God we have good strong people like yourself. Nice to see you back. God bless you for your work here.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#82134 Mar 22, 2013
Man has science and a higher level of intelligence. But that science and intelligence has limitations. That limitations is/ are nothing but DEATH!
Man must die, but God can never die.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#82135 Mar 22, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
Man has science and a higher level of intelligence. But that science and intelligence has limitations. That limitations is/ are nothing but DEATH!
Man must die, but God can never die.
Every time you post, this thread dies a little bit more. If we let it die, will you die along with it?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#82136 Mar 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Noah did build an Ark and then the world was flooded and everything was more or less killed.
Have you ever considered working out how much water was needed to cover the earth to a depth suggested in the babble

Here let me help,

Genesis 7:(KJV)
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

That would take about 4,500,000,000 cubic kilometres, that’s about 270 times more water than is on earth

To cover the earth as claimed it can only be rationalised that water fell at a rate of over 9 metres per hour for 40 days and 40 nights. That’s approximately 95 times higher than the highest ever recorded rainfall and it is claimed that it lasted 80 times longer than that recorded rainfall.

So that’s the rain kiboshed

Then of course we have the complete impossibility even using today’s modern technology of building a wooden vessel the size stated.

Then of course we have the impossibility of collecting animals from other (unknown) continents, say Australian and American being collected and herded into the ark

Then of course we have the impossibility of feeding over 16 million animals for a period of over a year, storage of that food and the resultant mucking out.

Then of course we still have fresh water creatures and salt water creatures, had the earth been deluded to such an extent the salt water from the sea would have polluted the fresh water and vice versa. Hence the fresh water creatures would be no longer. The same would have been repeated for the salt-water creatures. The simple fact that you eat fish proves the whole story to be a fabrication.

Then of course we have the geological evidence that shows that no event as described in the babble actually happened.

Then of course we have the DNA evidence that shows there was no such mass extinction event at the time described in the babble

This is obviously a story that you have simply taken someone’s word for and not bothered considering that actual logistics.

A story based on faith, not fact, so you cannot make the claim that Noah did anything, you can only claim that “it is my belief that Noah did whatever”

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#82137 Mar 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"In other words, at no time since when there has been land based animal life has the whole Earth been underwater"
We have human eye witnesses that claim other wise. You have ...... Oh ya a few more billion years.
Say what?

You have witnesses to say the whole earth was flooded?

This I have to see, please supply some sort of reference to these witnesses.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#82138 Mar 22, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you ever considered working out how much water was needed to cover the earth to a depth suggested in the babble
Here let me help,
Genesis 7:(KJV)
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
That would take about 4,500,000,000 cubic kilometres, that&#8217;s about 270 times more water than is on earth
To cover the earth as claimed it can only be rationalised that water fell at a rate of over 9 metres per hour for 40 days and 40 nights. That&#8217;s approximately 95 times higher than the highest ever recorded rainfall and it is claimed that it lasted 80 times longer than that recorded rainfall.
So that&#8217;s the rain kiboshed
Then of course we have the complete impossibility even using today&#8217;s modern technology of building a wooden vessel the size stated.
Then of course we have the impossibility of collecting animals from other (unknown) continents, say Australian and American being collected and herded into the ark
Then of course we have the impossibility of feeding over 16 million animals for a period of over a year, storage of that food and the resultant mucking out.
Then of course we still have fresh water creatures and salt water creatures, had the earth been deluded to such an extent the salt water from the sea would have polluted the fresh water and vice versa. Hence the fresh water creatures would be no longer. The same would have been repeated for the salt-water creatures. The simple fact that you eat fish proves the whole story to be a fabrication.
Then of course we have the geological evidence that shows that no event as described in the babble actually happened.
Then of course we have the DNA evidence that shows there was no such mass extinction event at the time described in the babble
This is obviously a story that you have simply taken someone&#8217;s word for and not bothered considering that actual logistics.
A story based on faith, not fact, so you cannot make the claim that Noah did anything, you can only claim that &#8220;it is my belief that Noah did whatever&#8221;
Have you ever considered the water was beneath the crust in the first place and it came when the fountains of the deep were broken?

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#82139 Mar 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, and the fields are ripe but the workers are few, but thanks be to God we have good strong people like yourself. Nice to see you back. God bless you for your work here.
Thanks and may the almighty continue to bless and reward you for your good works, amen.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#82140 Mar 22, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Every time you post, this thread dies a little bit more. If we let it die, will you die along with it?
Likewise. That statement is also applicable to you.
All mortals, whether intelligent or not, must die. Yes or no?
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#82141 Mar 22, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Thanks and may the almighty continue to bless and reward you for your good works, amen.
Thank you my brother. Those who hunger and thirst for the true and right things in this life and the one to come, will find what they are looking for in our lord.

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#82142 Mar 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Have you ever considered the water was beneath the crust in the first place and it came when the fountains of the deep were broken?
Um, no.

And it still would have cooked Noah and company. From either above or below that much water would have cooked every living being on the face of the Earth, including those on the Ark.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#82143 Mar 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Have you ever considered the water was beneath the crust in the first place and it came when the fountains of the deep were broken?
It is only a liar that can deny that/ this.
God bless!

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#82144 Mar 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you my brother. Those who hunger and thirst for the true and right things in this life and the one to come, will find what they are looking for in our lord.
By his GRACE, AMEN!!!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#82145 Mar 22, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of the multi-gigabit code, smaller than any manmade storage device, are you speaking of as evidence against "Bible Myth? DNA coding is very sophisticated and requires a lauguage convention.
DNA : When Is A Code Not A Code ?
http://www.science20.com/chatter_box/dna_when...

Excerpt:

A code is a symbol which stands in place of a symbol. The four letters CAGT most definitely form a code, being symbols for the names of the four major components of DNA. The names guanine, adenine, thymine and cytosine are not codes: they are primary symbols. Primary symbols stand for real things and not for symbols. The real physical entities guanine, adenine, thymine and cytosine are not codes. If anyone wants to call them codes, let them point to the symbols which might be replaced by these 'codes'.

A computer code is a set of numerical values sufficient and necessary to the production of an end state from an initial state.

DNA is necessary but not sufficient to the production of an end state from an initial state.

To claim that computer code and DNA are both codes is an abuse of the power of words. It is decidedly not scientific.

end quote
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#82146 Mar 22, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA coding is very sophisticated...requires a lauguage convention.
DNA is Not a Code
http://livinglifewithoutanet.wordpress.com/20...

Excerpts:

This argument comes down to using words improperly. A code, by the strictest definition, is in fact something designed by intelligent beings. It is a system of symbols that either arbitrarily or by some system represent various things. The alphabet I’m using to write this blog is a code. There’s nothing about the individual letters that have any inherent meaning. They don’t do anything in and of themselves. By agreement between multiple humans, we have a legend, or a key, which most of us learned in grammar school. By using this legend, we can look at anything in the code “English” and through substitution, come to the knowledge of the concepts sybolized by the various letters.

This is the traditional idea of a code, and it is what theists think they mean when they argue that DNA is a code. The thing is, DNA is not that kind of a code. DNA is a a polymer, which is composed of individual chemical units called nucleotides. There are four types of these nucleotides, and we humans have decided to call them adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine. These names are not entirely arbitrary, but in the end, there’s nothing magical about them. We could call them Blob, Clob, Dob, and Emu, and they’d still be the same. Our language — the code we humans use to communicate — is just a way for us to give each other information and keep things separate in our own minds.

The nucleotides in DNA are often said to be the “blueprints” or “code” which define a sequence of messenger RNA which in turn defines at least one protein. In a sense, these proteins are the building blocks of life, and DNA is the “code” which determines the qualities of the life that will be built.

The problem with the theist argument, however, is that the DNA code is not arbitrary, and it does not rely at all on the agreement of sentient beings. In fact, it is exactly the same in nature as any other dynamic chemical process. When you see an explosion on TV, you’re watching a chemical reaction that was controlled by the same kind of “code.” Crystals grow based on such a code. Stars give off light and energy from the same kind of code.

All DNA is, to the chagrin of creationists, is a very, very complicated organic molecule that can react in a staggeringly large number of ways with other organic molecules.
..........

So, here is the ultimate problem with this particular theist argument. DNA is not an arbitrary set of symbols that “stand for” something else that will be interpreted through some kind of a legend. It is a set of chemicals which are nonthinking, and have no choice but to do what they do, in the same way that a crystal has no choice but to grow when in the presence of the appropriate aqueous solution.

DNA is not a “code” in the normal sense of the word. We call it a code because doing so gives us an easy way to think of the process by which a strand of DNA is responsible for the building of a living thing.

That’s it. When we look at a particular sequence of nucleotides, we can recognize that the chemical reaction they facilitate will produce a certain protein. This is no different from looking at a few grams of sodium or potassium and recognizing that in the presence of water, they will react in very specific ways to produce a violent exothermic reaction. If DNA is a code, then so is every other molecule in the universe. It’s just the consistency of the laws of nature. This, in the presence of that, will do the other.

So no, DNA is not a code. It is analogous to a code in enough ways that it makes sense for us to refer to things like the “genetic code,” but in the end, we’re just not talking about the kind of code that would make the theist argument valid. Sorry, theists, but you fail on this one, too.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#82147 Mar 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Have you ever considered the water was beneath the crust in the first place and it came when the fountains of the deep were broken?
Yes I have considered it, as has many other people including scientist. The fact is that so much water has never existed on earth, anywhere, ever

May I repeat –

That would take about 4,500,000,000 cubic kilometres, that’s about 270 times more water than is on earth

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#82148 Mar 22, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> It is only a liar that can deny that/ this.
God bless!
Are you, a known and rampant liar accusing me of lighting because the facts I am specifying don’t mesh with your wet dreams of magic?

We know you are good at accusing people of all sorts on heinous behaviour (including child murder) when it suits you, that of course does not make it true it just means that you have a sad personality defect

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#82149 Mar 22, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
There were techs out at the site working on it. The approach comes in at Cross Sound, so they turned to early when the needles started moving, There was a big SE storm so before they cross checked their yaw on the ADI's, bam. We were getting knocked around alot. I was a teen ager. As Jnu was the capitol, many legislatures from the interior put their kids on the flight, because it was the day before school started. FAA was covering it up.
Perhaps. Though there seems to be errors made all around. Still going over the FAA report (and the weird article about ghosts).

I would expect that if Sisters VOR was undergoing maintenance, ATC would have been notified and a NOTAM issued. We never did *anything* to a navaid without coordination with ATC.

/offtopic

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#82151 Mar 22, 2013
a_friend wrote:
<quoted text>
Proof is important to back up your claims.
Actually... Evidence is what is important to back-up a claim. As of yet, no religious believer has offered anything better than words in an ancient book, warm fuzzy feelings, and "I said so" as evidence of their 'god'
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82152 Mar 22, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Of late we seem to be getting a lot of circumstantial evidence that most of the stories from the Bible are just myth, i.e. not true.
I'm wondering how this is going to effect the myths about god. His stories from His book are mythical, just like all the other gods who have been discarded over time.
What "information of late", do tell.......fabricated by those receiving grants?
CBOW

Dover, PA

#82153 Mar 22, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>How can someone deny the existence of something that has no evidence of existing in the first place? BTW... warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing are not evidence of existence of anything other than warm fuzzy feelings, words in an ancient collection of stories and millions of people believeing
There is also no evidence to prove that the Bible is just a story. Grimm fairytales are stories, the Bible is history derived from the Dead sea scrolls.

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.

Republican Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Nikki Haley Supports Spartanburg "Resettlement"... 11 min Trumpeter 7
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 39 min AMERICAN SUNSHINE 190,677
News 14 GOP Hopefuls Speak in Trump-Free Forum 44 min kuda 28
News Fox News announces GOP debate field 45 min USA Today 6
News Planned Parenthood seeks fed study of fetal tis... 52 min Responsibility 213
News GOP hopefuls take on illegal immigration in deb... 59 min USA Today 17
News States' targets shift in final Obama climate ch... 1 hr Drama Clowns 10
More from around the web