Evolution vs. Creation

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

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#36833 Aug 7, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Keep drinking the Koolaid.
The universe had come about by the explosion of this single point with zero volume. This great explosion that marked the beginning of the universe was named the ‘Big Bang’ and the theory started to be so called. It has to be stated that ‘zero volume’ is a theoretical expression used for descriptive purposes. Science can define the concept of ‘nothingness’, which is beyond the limits of human comprehension, only by expressing it as ‘a point with zero volume’. In truth,‘a point with no volume’ means ‘nothingness’. The universe has come into being from nothingness. In other words, it was created.
OK, we now have to scenarios on the table:

1) The universe popped into existence 13.7 billion years ago as an infinitely small and infinitely dense point.

2) The universe was created 6000 years ago by a brutally savage dimwitted baby raper.

I should point out that both scenarios are yours.
wolverine

Greeley, CO

#36834 Aug 7, 2012
Waste Of Time KJV.....You Wallow In The Seeds OF Corruption.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36835 Aug 8, 2012
wolverine wrote:
Waste Of Time KJV.....You Wallow In The Seeds OF Corruption.
Well he IS a creationist.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36836 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
I have seen many posting claiming evolution is a fact. Let's see the proof.
Facts have proof.
2+2=4. Is a fact and easily proven.
Done and done. All you need to do is go back and address it. But since you openly admitted evidence doesn't matter to you because Godmagic all you can do is blow hot air.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36837 Aug 8, 2012
Portal wrote:
<quoted text>Its amazing how humans will spend untold billions on religion, politics and space exploration.....while the earth slowly dies around them.....intelligent life? Where? Not on this rock!SETI lost its funding...based on the fact that ETs would have contacted humans long ago
No they wouldn't.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36838 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You attacked assuming the posting said scientific theory when only the word theory was used. I was simply pointing out the correct meaning of the word Theory that was used correctly in that post. Your response was that of an idiot.
Well since *we were* takling about *scientific* theories and you're using incorrect terminology your response here is that of someone who is incapable of dealing with reality and resorting to ad-hom instead.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36839 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
As stated many times scientific theory's are tested and tested they may work in thousands of test. But once a scientific theory fails a test it must then be adjusted or scraped. left unchanged after a failure Relativity is nothing more then a equation. And yes that equation is currently the best equation science has. But it does not have a Scientific theory of Relativity and teaching it as a theory in science is wrong.
I just demonstrated it works. You claiming it's "wrong" is a convenient lie so you can portray science is flawed without even having to back up your claims like we do. Relativity works and is fairly accurate, but not as accurate as quantum mechanics. But it's not "wrong".

Note how you have to lie and misrepresent others to make your case, all the while avoiding evidence, either presenting it or addressing it.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36840 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
It's funny that you have evolution proof and science doesn't. Hmmm
Science doesn't deal in "proof", it deal with evidence. I have evidence because science has evidence. It has been presented. It has gone unaddressed by a single creationist here. The only alternative options you've provided is Godmagic and that evidence doesn't matter. Hmmm.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36841 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
The word Theory was used correctly.
And for the real idiots I'll point out again that there is a difference between scientific theory and a theory.
And evolution is a scientific theory. We know the definition of scientific theory. You don't. And I demonstrated evolution works. It works because it's a working scientific theory that has lots of evidence. It still stands because you're unable to address it without resorting to misrepresentation. Not our problem.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36842 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
By your definition a sun burn would be evolution. "the skin changed colors to make him look more like the alpha male"
As usual you misrepresent others. Make claims that evolution doesn't then claim evolution makes them. Well done, you're an official reality denier.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36843 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
The modern definition of species (this new term was introduced to help explain evolution) before the term was "kind"
And there is no evidence of one kind ever evolving into another kind.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Spe...
"This basic taxonomic unit is remarkably stable. Species tend to remain the same throughout their geological history. As noted by eminent evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould, the macroevolutionary patterns of species are typically ones of morphological stability during their existence, a phenomena known as "stasis." In presenting the theory of punctuated equilibria, Niles Eldridge and Gould noted: "Most species, during their geological history, either do not change in any appreciable way, or else they fluctuate mildly in morphology, with no apparent direction." Once a species appears, the fossil record does not change much during its existence, which may be several million years. This view accords well with the view of creationism, which references a clear-cut boundary between species, as well as stability during their existence."
The reverend Moon is a liar and a complete fruitcake. Because of this your info is flawed.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36844 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Science!
No, it is not a scientific theory if it fails a test. I don't say this science does.
It's no longer a theory it's just an equation. one that works well with large items but fails with tiny items.
Misrepresentation.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36845 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
Yes a God other then then one in the bible could have created through evolution.
Then if there's a God it is nowhere near as limited as the petty little wizard you believe in. Evolution works. Fact.
KJV wrote:
But we would really need to see something changing from one kind to another.
Demonstrated.
KJV wrote:
Nature simply does not build it destroys
It does both.
KJV wrote:
Using nature as a builder to take one speck of life that either a God created or self started life that speck grew into all life that ever existed? Nature can't do that.
Incorrect.
KJV wrote:
An F16 is very simple next to a human yet nature never built one or anything close to it in billions and billions of years not one jet aircraft.
(Ridicules? Yes maybe but it makes the point)
No it doesn't. Apart from only being an analogy the analogy itself is flawed. Planes are not naturally self-replicating organisms, like life is.
KJV wrote:
Nature erodes, burns, hurricanes, tornados, earth quacks, meteor impacts,
Rain, winds, hail, snow, freezing and thawing, ice ages and on and on.
And all these create. Storm causes wind and rain and floods, causes plants and weeds to grow in areas which previously didn't have them.
KJV wrote:
And volcanos don't build they move lava and spew out clouds of dust. Land may form from the lava but some ocean was lost.
Ocean is not lost, it is displaced. It is also replenished by rain. Notice that things cycle as long as there is energy, for energy creates.
KJV wrote:
Building from one speck of frail life to all that we see today is beyond nature.
Your claim is baseless and you offer Godmagic as an alternative as if it's adequate. It's not.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36846 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Keep drinking the Koolaid.
You're repeating fallacies which we addressed months ago. The only rational conclusion can be is that you're just another dishonest fundie liar for Jesus who finds reality theologically inconvenient. Not ad-hom, merely an observation.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36847 Aug 8, 2012
Rogue Angel wrote:
<quoted text>
You choose to frown.
Knowledge is to be feared. There's a whole world of it out there which KJV must protect himself from.

Oh, and spoilt it for everyone else too.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#36848 Aug 8, 2012
JBH wrote:
As of August August 7, 2012, medals results for London Olympics are as follows
If we gave a crud we'd be in the olympics forum. We're not.

Why do you hate kittens?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#36849 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA is not a road map.
It blue prints.
Many blue prints look a like to the untrained eye.
If your claiming that all geneticists are untrained, then you're even stupider then I first thought. If that's possible.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#36850 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
The word Theory was used correctly.
And for the real idiots I'll point out again that there is a difference between scientific theory and a theory.
I'm sure the fundies here appreciate your clarification.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#36851 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike
You should write a book!
You could call it "How I flushed my soul away in one easy step"
Can't flush away what doesn't exist.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#36852 Aug 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike
Your responding with "Lier lier"
And adding no proof is really childish don't you think? Oh never mind. I forgot you don't think.
You made a claim about science which I challenged. Rather than respond to that challenge, you post this bullshit.

Since you refuse to back up your accusation of science, I am left to assume you were lying. Again.

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
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 3 min Sunnier 283,627
Ferguson Police Are Being Relieved Of Their Dut... 4 min blacksnake 4,678
Carly Fiorina actively explores 2016 presidenti... 4 min Cat74 9
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min PantsUpDontLOOT 163,162
Prioritizing healthcare overhaul was a mistake:... 7 min SirPrize 17
In chairman fight, Jeff Sessions is battling hi... 14 min Cat74 2
Obama immigration plan good, not great for economy 16 min blacky from africa 59
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 19 min Teaman 1,143,956
New fear: What happens in Ferguson if no charges? 26 min Freebird USA 2,887
Hagel's departure could pave way for 1st woman ... 43 min tha Professor 29
Republicans challenge Obama's executive actions... 58 min Le Jimbo 167

US Politics People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE