Creation vs. Evolution (1 Viewer)

[Jayrok]

larry_boy_44, your posts accomplish two things.1) Ecourage Christians to doubt their faith because of how ridiculous your arguments are.2) Encourage Atheists to continue in their atheism because of how ridiculous your arguments are.Congratulations and pat yourself on the back.

and a chuckle..

 

[Kleck]

Give me an A

:Buzzer:Next?

Dt's MulesThe apostrophe really helped narrow it down.

Ding! Ding! Ding!Tell him what he's won Don Pardo....It's a brand new member number!

*** Please send PM to Pete the Puma to collect your prize.

 

[bueno]

God: "Adam!"Adam looks around, then looks up. "What?"God: "I need some of your DNA?"Adam: "What?"God: "I said I need some of your DNA!"Adam looks defensive. "What for?"God: "I'm going to make you a woman."Adam looks puzzled. "Wassat?"God: "A woman, Adam. A companion."Adam: "What for?"God: "Well you remember what those lions were doing? Don't you want to do that too?"Adam scratches his head. "What for?"God pauses. "To propagate the species, Adam."Adam scrunches his nose. "Huh?"God: Little ones Adam."Adam looks askance. "Why would I want them?"God sighs in impatience. "Listen, suppose I make it so sh does all the cooking and laundry too?"Adam scratches his head. "Yeah, that would be good. Can she clean the cave too?"God: "I suppose."Adam scratches his head again. "God?"God: "What?'Adam: What's DNA?"God: "Oh just give me a damn rib. You've got plenty!"

 

[full grown man]

Someone throw in some sacrilege quick. Thanks, Bueno.

 

[bueno]

Someone throw in some sacrilege quick. Thanks, Bueno.

Has to be read with Bill Cosby in mind.

 

[tangfoot]

also, if species are so for sure right right now, why did the magazine New Scientist in September of 2004 say that the scientific community is considering reclassigying ALL species?????

Link? With context, please.

 

[tangfoot]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

link?

http://home.att.net/~creationoutreach/pictures/fish.htm

Another unbiased opinion...

 

[tangfoot]

CAN they mate? Or will they not mate? There is a huge difference between can't and won't...

You realize that it's NOT possible for them to choose, right?If they CAN mate, but WON'T, the end result is the same...extinction.The beetles didn't have a big powwow and figure out which species CAN mate with each other and pair off like that...

 

[tangfoot]

The continents don't fload on top of water...

The over/under on Larry's first science-based fact has been decided...Those of you who took OVER 7.5 pages win.

 

[tangfoot]

Did Larry ever attempt to explain how there was a "field" of water above the sky?Did God hold it up? I must have missed the "science" behind that one.

 

[full grown man]

Did Larry ever attempt to explain how there was a "field" of water above the sky?Did God hold it up? I must have missed the "science" behind that one.

Since you asked so nicely, maybe he will answer.Nice pile on there buddy.

 

[the rover]

The continents don't fload on top of water...

The over/under on Larry's first science-based fact has been decided...Those of you who took OVER 7.5 pages win.

he may have stumbled on this fact, but his premise is wrong. he was arguing that the continents can't move because they don't float on water. in context, he still hasn't correctly identified a scientific fact.

 

[tangfoot]

Nice pile on there buddy.

I kept replying while playing catchup. I was expecting them to be spaced out by Smoo, at the very least.

 

[the rover]

Nice pile on there buddy.

I kept replying while playing catchup. I was expecting them to be spaced out by Smoo, at the very least.

ignore full grown man. he's obviously never been to a larryboy thread before.

 

[full grown man]

Nice pile on there buddy.

I kept replying while playing catchup. I was expecting them to be spaced out by Smoo, at the very least.

ignore full grown man. he's obviously never been to a larryboy thread before.

ive stood by a time or two...to his credit though, he stays on message, no matter how many of ya'll try to derail him

 

[tangfoot]

ive stood by a time or two...to his credit though, he stays on message

He did? What was his message? It disappeared in a puff of logic.per the literary reference, Larry would get MUCH further learning evolution by reading the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. There's nothing in that book which is untrue.Edit to add the quote:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing." "But," says Man, "the earth and the universe are a dead give away -aren't they? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore , by your own arguments, you don't. QED." "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic. "Oh that was easy ," says man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

 

[Daywalker]

I love following Maurile's replies in evolution threads. I feel like Affleck in Good Will Hunting.

 

[ElGatoLoco]

The sad fact is there can be faith and science both - but too many people of faith don't believe in metaphors.

Metaphors don't exist?! This is a dark day for creative writing classes.I think humans were a result of DNA from space aliens that was injected into the lifeforms that already existed on Earth. It's a theory.

 

[full grown man]

ive stood by a time or two...to his credit though, he stays on message

He did? What was his message? It disappeared in a puff of logic.per the literary reference, Larry would get MUCH further learning evolution by reading the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. There's nothing in that book which is untrue.

He is struggling in a world where his faith is unaccepted. A message board, for some, is a difficult forum to negotiate. Much less have a debate with the depth and breadth of the topic at hand. He certainly tries though. My hope is that it does cause him and those who participate to renew their faith daily.

 

[tangfoot]

I think humans were a result of DNA from space aliens that was injected into the lifeforms that already existed on Earth. It's a theory.

It's more of a theory than Larry's got, to be sure.

 

[tangfoot]

My hope is that it does cause him and those who participate to renew their faith daily.

I would argue for a questioning of a faith that requires such blatant disregard for all that reasonable people call "science".

 

[full grown man]

My hope is that it does cause him and those who participate to renew their faith daily.

I would argue for a questioning of a faith that requires such blatant disregard for all that reasonable people call "science".

Many times my questioning and doubting of science has brought about the same response, so I feel for him.

 

[ElGatoLoco]

also, if species are so for sure right right now, why did the magazine New Scientist in September of 2004 say that the scientific community is considering reclassigying ALL species?????

Link? With context, please.

Somebody posted the link earlier in the thread...here.

 

[the rover]

also, if species are so for sure right right now, why did the magazine New Scientist in September of 2004 say that the scientific community is considering reclassigying ALL species?????

Here's the article.

so the proposed system would give creater weight to evolutionary concerns.

Because this scheme sorts organisms loosely into just a few hierarchical divisions, it tells us relatively little about how they are related in evolutionary terms. And that, advocates of the new naming scheme say, is hindering our understanding of the natural world.

this doesn't help you, larry. you need to read and understand things before you try to argue them.

 

[tangfoot]

Somebody posted the link earlier in the thread...here.

Under the Linnaean system, a taxonomist who wishes to name a group of organisms must also assign that group a rank, such as genus or family. But there are not enough of these to cope with the increasingly complex branching of the evolutionary tree now being discovered.

This doesn't help Larry's cause at all.

 

[The Football Freak]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

actually I think you posted the link before that said some beetles live under water...if they live underwater they wouldn't need to be on the ark...if the beetles are all linked to eachother, then they only need the beetles who could survive in water to survive, then the rest could breed of off those and after a few generations they'd forget how to survive in water if they hadn't done it in a while...

hahahahahahahahahahahahahah that was ####### funny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Animals can adapt by forgetting they evolved. Honey, I need to be amphibious again, I lost my car keys in the pond...

 

[The Football Freak]

You realize they pretty much "made' chihuahuas in a lab, right?

That is just pure gold sig material there!

 

[larry_boy_44]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

link?

http://home.att.net/~creationoutreach/pictures/fish.htm

It died in mid-bite. That doesn't mean it was fossilized in mid-bite. See, if someone chokes to death on a chicken bone and then is fossilized, he'd look like he'd been fossilized in the act of eating a chicken. Same principle.

a few questions about this:1. why didn't it float up to the top of the water? (how did it get to the bottom of the body of water?)2. why didn't it decay?3. why did no one else eat the dead fishes?

 

[the rover]

You realize they pretty much "made' chihuahuas in a lab, right?

That is just pure gold sig material there!

larry, can we go back to this? what labs created chihuahas?

 

[larry_boy_44]

Larry,Did your seminar cover fossil sorting? Why is it that the fossils of "advanced" species like chimpanzees are found only in the top layers of the earth's soil; and the layers buried very deep contain only, like, mollusks and stuff -- no mammals, no reptiles?If it's because, during the flood, all the mammals swam to the top while the mollusks sank to the bottom . . . why are the fossils of flowering plants found only near the top? Did oak trees run faster than tree ferns to escape the flood?

he covers archeology tommorow night, unfortunately, I have to work tommorow night...hopefully he talks about it some on Wednesday, too... }=O(

 

[larry_boy_44]

Larry,Did your seminar cover fossil sorting? Why is it that the fossils of "advanced" species like chimpanzees are found only in the top layers of the earth's soil; and the layers buried very deep contain only, like, mollusks and stuff -- no mammals, no reptiles?If it's because, during the flood, all the mammals swam to the top while the mollusks sank to the bottom . . . why are the fossils of flowering plants found only near the top? Did oak trees run faster than tree ferns to escape the flood?

Wouldn't the mammals sink down by the mollscks after they drawned?

actually, though...aren't sea animals generally less evolved than land animals?I know people float when they're dead... I'm pretty sure animals do, too... same with trees...most "higher" life forms float when dead...but that's just guesstimation on my part, don't take it as fact...

 

[Mr. Pickles]

actually, though...aren't sea animals generally less evolved than land animals?I know people float when they're dead... I'm pretty sure animals do, too... same with trees...most "higher" life forms float when dead...but that's just guesstimation on my part, don't take it as fact...

oh, ok. on this one point, i won't take your word as gospel. thanks for the heads up, guy.

 

[larry_boy_44]

why are the "prehistoric" amber the ones that contain the air that has more oxygen, but that is what would be needed for the giant animals?

Because less carbon dioxide-prodcuing life-forms (animals) and more oxygen-producing life-forms (plants) means a higher-oxygen mixture?

Since when were there giant beavers, dragonflyes, deer, etc. in the dinosaur times?

Never. Why, you find some?

why would the way the Bible describes the pre-flood earth 'cause the exact right mis of oxygen/pressure to make animals grow bigger and then we find proof of animals growing bigger not prove something?

Assuming that we do find proof of these conditions, it does prove something - that these conditions existed. It doesn't mean the Bible is suddenly bulletproof.

1. how did the plants get above ground?2. how was there more PRESSURE? I see how oxygen could be change by a different plant/animal mix, but not pressure...3. has the oxygen % changed in the last 50 years?4. There are fossils of 8 foot beavers, etc... I posted a link to some stuff about it beofre, I think... if not I will when I get home later...

I thought you had said you had a reason for there being more pressure that didn't necessitate a divine being? Didn't we have a discussion about that? If you're saying there's no actual proof of that (and that's been my understanding, but you seemed so sure) then there's no problem.

The reason for there being more pressure is that before the Flood there was a layer of water above the current 6 layers of the atmosphere. During the Flood it fell to the earth, which is what caused the flood...my questions were about evolution itself, not necessarily the argument...it was asking how plants, who don't have legs, got above ground...how more oxygen due to those plants answer my question.. it doesn't, because what I was talking about also need 2 times the pressure...also, we have lost a % of plants in the last 50 years, or at least everyone says we have... has the % of oxygen changed any?lastly, explain fossils of animals 8 times larger than they should be...

 

[Dickies]

so water fell from space to create the flood?

 

[larry_boy_44]

About how everything started:

There was a single celled organism that started deep in the ocean when the entire earth was covered with water (pre-super continent days) and it evolved over time to become every living thing on earth.  Evolution explains the latter.

how is a supercontinent possible if all the continents are connected under water??? How did they move? The continents don't fload on top of water...

The same way they do now, causing earthquakes.

really? So, the ground in between the continents under water... what happened to it? How'd they move over the trenches in the ocean? How did they reconnect to the other rocks?

Are you seriously asking me to explain the idea of tectonic plate shifts?Here.

You have to understand that this link is not from creationists.org so he won't take the time to read it or believe it.

I read it and it didn't answer the question...let's say the plates originally were like this

abcd

efgh

ijkl

mnop

now, due to plate shifts, you get this:

ebgd

cjkh

lign

maop

how did they pass eachother?

How did North America get over the plate that is now the Atlantic Ocean? How'd the Atlantic Ocean get int he middle?

This isn't one of those puzzles that are missing a piece, all the pieces are there on earth, so we can't say they moved out of the way, there is no where to move...

so what happened?

 

[the rover]

Larry,Did your seminar cover fossil sorting? Why is it that the fossils of "advanced" species like chimpanzees are found only in the top layers of the earth's soil; and the layers buried very deep contain only, like, mollusks and stuff -- no mammals, no reptiles?If it's because, during the flood, all the mammals swam to the top while the mollusks sank to the bottom . . . why are the fossils of flowering plants found only near the top? Did oak trees run faster than tree ferns to escape the flood?

Wouldn't the mammals sink down by the mollscks after they drawned?

actually, though...aren't sea animals generally less evolved than land animals?I know people float when they're dead... I'm pretty sure animals do, too... same with trees...most "higher" life forms float when dead...but that's just guesstimation on my part, don't take it as fact...

BEDEVERE: Tell me. What do you do with witches?VILLAGER #2: Burn!VILLAGER #1: Burn!CROWD: Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...BEDEVERE: And what do you burn apart from witches?VILLAGER #1: More witches!VILLAGER #3: Shh!VILLAGER #2: Wood!BEDEVERE: So, why do witches burn? [pause]VILLAGER #3: B--... 'cause they're made of... wood?BEDEVERE: Good! Heh heh.CROWD: Oh, yeah. Oh.BEDEVERE: So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.BEDEVERE: Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?VILLAGER #1: Oh, yeah.RANDOM: Oh, yeah. True. Uhh...BEDEVERE: Does wood sink in water?VILLAGER #1: No. No.VILLAGER #2: No, it floats! It floats!VILLAGER #1: Throw her into the pond!CROWD: The pond! Throw her into the pond!BEDEVERE: What also floats in water?VILLAGER #1: Bread!VILLAGER #2: Apples!VILLAGER #3: Uh, very small rocks!VILLAGER #1: Cider!VILLAGER #2: Uh, gra-- gravy!VILLAGER #1: Cherries!VILLAGER #2: Mud!VILLAGER #3: Uh, churches! Churches!VILLAGER #2: Lead! Lead!ARTHUR: A duck!CROWD: Oooh.BEDEVERE: Exactly. So, logically...VILLAGER #1: If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.BEDEVERE: And therefore?VILLAGER #2: A witch!

 

[The Football Freak]

About how everything started:

There was a single celled organism that started deep in the ocean when the entire earth was covered with water (pre-super continent days) and it evolved over time to become every living thing on earth.  Evolution explains the latter.

how is a supercontinent possible if all the continents are connected under water??? How did they move? The continents don't fload on top of water...

The same way they do now, causing earthquakes.

really? So, the ground in between the continents under water... what happened to it? How'd they move over the trenches in the ocean? How did they reconnect to the other rocks?

Are you seriously asking me to explain the idea of tectonic plate shifts?Here.

you realize your link doesn't explain how continents drift, just how mountains are formed, etc...

Do you need people to bring information to your feet on a gold tray and prostrate themselves? Educate yourself, this thread is amazingly hilarious and horrendously pathetic! You have so many errors on so many levels about so many things it boggles my mind! It seems like every single argument you make has something in it that is completely wrong, from biology to geology, and on and on. How old are you? And be honest...If you are a kid then I apologize and you should really bone up before you argue with adults. If you are an adult go live in the library for the next few years and read until your eyes hurt!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The sad fact is there can be faith and science both - but too many people of faith don't believe in metaphors.

Metaphors don't exist?!

No biggie. We've still got the lock.

 

[the rover]

The sad fact is there can be faith and science both - but too many people of faith don't believe in metaphors.

Metaphors don't exist?!

No biggie. We've still got the lock.

nicely done.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Only humans have souls, right? My dog can't go to heaven.So, why spend so much time and effort to build an ark to save all of the species of animals? Why not just tell Noah to build a canoe?

 

[larry_boy_44]

See, they put a scorpion in a hyperbaric chamber, and it grew to 4 times its normal size in the chamber...At the University of Tokyo in 1985 they were growing a cherry tomato "tree" using hyperbaric technology...The plant grew to 6' feet tall in 1985 and was giving off 900 tomatoes per year. Before it died it was almost 30 feet tall...

A Google search turned up nothing about this. Do you have a link?

no, I didn't get a link... lolI'll ask him on Wednesday...like name of study and stuff...}=O) *notes thing he needs to ask*I found more people referncing this, so I don't know if its an urban legend...*looks on Snopes*nope nothing there, either...no one refutes this claim (which should be easy if its fake), and I can't find any proof...

 

[larry_boy_44]

They know it in Connecticut (IQ 113,) but not in -- what state did you say you're from, Larry?http://www.commonalty.com/iq.txt

Wisconsin, and I have a really, really high IQ, actually... like way above "genius" level...

 

[LHUCKS]

They know it in Connecticut (IQ 113,) but not in -- what state did you say you're from, Larry?http://www.commonalty.com/iq.txt

Wisconsin, and I have a really, really high IQ, actually... like way above "genius" level...

"like way"

 

[larry_boy_44]

I must have missed it, did he ever explain what the heck dinosaurs have to do with creation or evolution??How old is he claiming the earth is?  Hopefully he's not going to tell me 6000 years or so.  The proof the earth is far older then that is pretty overwhelming, and it's a shame when Christians/creationists try to stick to the outdated theory the earth was so young.

BabyD, he checks in with his creationist stuff every once in a while. In short, he's a young earth creationist with little understanding of evolution or scientific method. Occasionally, he gathers a bunch of creationist arguments together and then posts them in a big regurgitation of senseless, formless, argument, where any half-understood argument (or more often just a couple buzzwords) may be applied in an attempt to refute scentific observation or the effect of physical laws.As arguments fall apart, it apparently becomes vitally important that lizards are kind of like dinosaurs, only smaller.Oh, and new today--plate tectonics cannot be accurate because it would cause continents to unroot themselves and climb over each other. I'm still waiting for an explanation of that one.

I wasn't saying plate tectonics aren't real...I'm saying there couldn't have been a super continent, 'cuz they can't drift apart with tectonic plates in the way...well, maybe, but how?my question was, how did one plate get around another so there is a plate in between where there used to be plates next to eachother....so, simplylate a plate b plate c plate dthen, switched:cbadhow did that happen?

 

[larry_boy_44]

larry, all this creation stuff is completely bogus, but you're a gamer if nothing else.

I wouldn't go that far. You'd pretty much have to be an athiest to say that.However, seeing as how I was not there at Creation, I really can't say how long ago it, and to what extent. I DO think claiming the earth is 4000-6000 years old is ridiculous...I don't the writers of the Bible intended their geneologies to be used as an addition guide to the beginning of creation. I just don't see that.Let's try this question to larry boy:What was the first thing created?

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth"it was form and void... so a void earth covered in water with nothing on it and nothing living...

 

[The Football Freak]

I must have missed it, did he ever explain what the heck dinosaurs have to do with creation or evolution??How old is he claiming the earth is?  Hopefully he's not going to tell me 6000 years or so.  The proof the earth is far older then that is pretty overwhelming, and it's a shame when Christians/creationists try to stick to the outdated theory the earth was so young.

BabyD, he checks in with his creationist stuff every once in a while. In short, he's a young earth creationist with little understanding of evolution or scientific method. Occasionally, he gathers a bunch of creationist arguments together and then posts them in a big regurgitation of senseless, formless, argument, where any half-understood argument (or more often just a couple buzzwords) may be applied in an attempt to refute scentific observation or the effect of physical laws.As arguments fall apart, it apparently becomes vitally important that lizards are kind of like dinosaurs, only smaller.Oh, and new today--plate tectonics cannot be accurate because it would cause continents to unroot themselves and climb over each other. I'm still waiting for an explanation of that one.

I wasn't saying plate tectonics aren't real...I'm saying there couldn't have been a super continent, 'cuz they can't drift apart with tectonic plates in the way...well, maybe, but how?my question was, how did one plate get around another so there is a plate in between where there used to be plates next to eachother....so, simplylate a plate b plate c plate dthen, switched:cbadhow did that happen?

They slowly move apart from each other as new land swells up from the molten core that the plates float upon. This upswell of land happens at many continental plate joinings. Over immense amounts of time that distance becomes greater and greater as the plates shift over the planet.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Larry let's concentrate, for a moment, on collection problems. A simple experiment might be enlightening.Start out in the Middle East. Travel to what is now California. Climb the mountains and capture one male and one female condor. Bring them back. Do you think you could do it? You have one week (we're ignoring the other millions of species for simplicity). Oh, and by the way, there is no sexual dimorphism in condors (you can't tell their gender by looking at them). Another possible problem is they tend not to sit and wait for capture but instead fly away.

before the flood a few things were true:1. tropical climate WORLDWIDE, there was no polar climates or any of that...2. all animals ate plants, no meat-eating until after the flood3. no animals were "afraid" of humans until after the floodso all the animals were probably in one area, so it probably wasn't even that difficult...

 

[The Football Freak]

Larry let's concentrate, for a moment, on collection problems. A simple experiment might be enlightening.Start out in the Middle East. Travel to what is now California. Climb the mountains and capture one male and one female condor. Bring them back. Do you think you could do it? You have one week (we're ignoring the other millions of species for simplicity). Oh, and by the way, there is no sexual dimorphism in condors (you can't tell their gender by looking at them). Another possible problem is they tend not to sit and wait for capture but instead fly away.

before the flood a few things were true:1. tropical climate WORLDWIDE, there was no polar climates or any of that...2. all animals ate plants, no meat-eating until after the flood3. no animals were "afraid" of humans until after the floodso all the animals were probably in one area, so it probably wasn't even that difficult...

No polar climates? So the flood shifted the magnetic poles and in doing so changed how we rotate on our axis as we rotate around the sun? Amazing that rain could do all that...

 

[larry_boy_44]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

link?

http://home.att.net/~creationoutreach/pictures/fish.htm

Another unbiased opinion...

ITS A FOSSIL!!its a picture of a fossil... you can't be biased about a fossil, you just state what is there...what is the issue you have with it?

 

[larry_boy_44]

also, if species are so for sure right right now, why did the magazine New Scientist in September of 2004 say that the scientific community is considering reclassigying ALL species?????

Here's the article.

so the proposed system would give creater weight to evolutionary concerns.

Because this scheme sorts organisms loosely into just a few hierarchical divisions, it tells us relatively little about how they are related in evolutionary terms. And that, advocates of the new naming scheme say, is hindering our understanding of the natural world.

this doesn't help you, larry. you need to read and understand things before you try to argue them.

all I said is our current species aren't necessarily the "kinds" that Noah had on the ark, because we don't really know exactly what a species is, it changes all the time...I never said why, nor does it really matter...