It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate

There are 20 comments on the Asheville Citizen-Times story from Mar 15, 2009, titled It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate. In it, Asheville Citizen-Times reports that:

I would like to respond to the letter 'Recent letter offered no examples of Darwinian disingenuousness,' . He responds to an article with, 'He says evolution is 'so riddled with holes,' yet fails to provide a ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Asheville Citizen-Times.

Level 2

Since: Jun 08

Franklin, NC

#72124 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
All I demand is "show me".
Let me observe it too!!!
OK! Road Trip!!!! When do you want to go to the Smithsonian?
marksman11 wrote:
And you hate it because you know you can't do that with human from non-human evolution.
Does this mean we aren't going to the Smithsonian?
marksman11 wrote:
Why? IT'LL NEVER BE OBSERVABLE....
It is at the Smithsonian!(and every other museum with a human origins display). So why don't you want to go?
marksman11 wrote:
and thus....is NOT SCIENCE!!!
But it is! Since human evolution can be falsified, e.g., with the discovery of a 3 million year old fossil with modern human anatomy, then it is SCIENCE!!!
thewordofme

Tucson, AZ

#72125 Jan 2, 2012
Hello marksman11, I hope you are well.

You write:
“It isn't hard to see that you are the typical atheist and spiritually blinded. You can't see because you don't want to see. So with that said, "I wish you happiness, and enjoy your faith" because that is what kind of belief system you have.....a faith based one....whether you admit it or not.”

With all due respect my friend, you are a typical evangelical fundamentalist or Young Earth Creationist. You refuse to accept reality and cannot see the truth. Your faith is a classic case of the blind leading the blind. The very definition of faith is believing without evidence. I believe what I do because of the evidence available all over the internet and in colleges and universities. Your faith in magic doesn’t allow you to seek the truth…and for that I feel sorry for you.

You write:
“I never said none of it can be true. I'm just saying that you need to be honest as I am. If you had been in this group at all in the last three years you would clearly see that I have always stated that my creationists beliefs are faith based beliefs. And they are not beliefs steeped in blind faith. I have very good reasons for believing the way I do. I notice you never took me up on the reasons I believe as I do in my other posts to you. Wanna challenge me on the resurrection of Jesus? I have yet to meet anyone who denies the resurrection of Jesus that I can't ask 5 questions and tell they've never studied it. Wanna try me? Or are you gonna hide behind "Jesus" never existed in the first place. If you actually believe that with all the evidence available today, then you my friend are a waste of time.”

I am as honest as you are and possibly more because I don’t ‘Lie for Jesus’. As regards the resurrection, I won’t ‘challenge’ you, but I will rise to the occasion…ask me your questions friend. As a scientist I am open to new proofs, I try to never hide behind dogma. Personally I think the question of Jesus’ reality is up in the air. At this point the evidence seems to be lacking for his actual real historical presence as a man/god.

In this vein I will say that I believe that most of the Bible is fiction. I know for a fact that the creation story, Adam and Eve, Noah’s flood, Tower of Babel, and the Exodus are nothing but myths. There is real evidence that those are fictions. Also there’s the real possibility that Moses and other patriarchs are fiction…Moses almost certainly is, because of the dating anomalies.

“Pay it forward!”

Level 4

Since: Oct 09

Harrisburg

#72126 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Did I ever claim that? See, you must twist and warp. THat is why your arguments are so weak.<quoted text>Science is not qualified for such an experiment. It isn't qualified to deal with the supernatural, so such a study is based in ignorance. Science needs to stick within its limitations and stay out of theology and philosophy. That is why human from non-human evolution is so ridiculous. It isn't science, it is philosophy even to the point of being to some a humanistic religion. Science needs to get away from guys like you and get back to the scientific method which seperates science from the dreamers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...

And that is just one of many articles documenting scientific studies that show prayer does not affect healing - positively or negatively.

“Pay it forward!”

Level 4

Since: Oct 09

Harrisburg

#72127 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Did I ever claim that? See, you must twist and warp. THat is why your arguments are so weak.<quoted text>Science is not qualified for such an experiment. It isn't qualified to deal with the supernatural, so such a study is based in ignorance. Science needs to stick within its limitations and stay out of theology and philosophy. That is why human from non-human evolution is so ridiculous. It isn't science, it is philosophy even to the point of being to some a humanistic religion. Science needs to get away from guys like you and get back to the scientific method which seperates science from the dreamers.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1849...

“Pay it forward!”

Level 4

Since: Oct 09

Harrisburg

#72128 Jan 2, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>...
It is taught in all schools, even religious universities teach it and it alone...
For example:

Duquesne University - "Founded in 1878 as a Catholic college by the Congregation of the Holy Spirit, Duquesne is the largest and most comprehensive Catholic university in Pennsylvania, and the only Spiritan institution of higher education in the world."

http://www.duq.edu/biology/undergraduate-prog...

Level 2

Since: Jun 08

Franklin, NC

#72129 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
Fossils have been observed, but it is your biased interpretation of them that is wrong.
Another unsubstantiated claim. Please provide evidence to support your claim.
marksman11 wrote:
Fossils do not show heritage. They can not tell you who their grandfather was, let alone a distant relative.
The anatomy of a fossil shows relatedness. The more similar the anatomy is to a certain species the more related the fossil is to said species.
marksman11 wrote:
All they can tell you is that they once existed, died, and left an image of themselves. The rest is interpretation.
Not true. Fossils can provide info on diet, age, health, injuries, physical dimensions, the kind of locomotion, the type of environment, and degree of relatedness to other species.
marksman11 wrote:
DNA? You can't even explain the pathway of how it orginally came into existence.
Complimentary base pairing..........which is the same property that allows DNA to be analyzed for the nested hierarchies which show the expected pattern of evolution.
marksman11 wrote:
It is amazing that human from non-human evolution is still accepted seeing all the flaws in its inability to deal with its own origins.
But all your incredulous claims (flaws) have been answered. Got any new ones?
marksman11 wrote:
I guess that is why it isn't taught much in school anymore.
I guess you aren't familiar with end of school testing.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#72130 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm the only one that demands adherence to it.

LOL. You don't even know what it is!!!!!!

Hysterical. You are a hoot.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#72131 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You need to understand that there are scientists.....and then there are human from non-human evolutionists. They are not even close to being the same thing.
This would be a LIE!

The VAST majority of scientists, from ALL scientific disciplines, accept human evolution from ancestral primates.

The miniscule minority of scientists who do not ONLY do so because of their devotion to a childishly ridiculous, bronze age "literal and inerrant" goat-herder interpretation of the Bible or Koran.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#72132 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe one day you'll become enlightened and finally understand.

Yea, Mike! Just because you are educated and understand science, use logic, and don't engage in major defense mechanism don't mean you can tell marky what reality is.

Level 2

Since: Jun 08

Franklin, NC

#72133 Jan 2, 2012
KAB wrote:
....Perhaps it's partly due to the fact that I don't just go along with the crowd, parrotting what others say. I'm a stickler for carefully analyzing ALL the data and not being afraid to draw unpopular conclusions to which that data points, such as a present human population "point-of-origin" bottleneck in the Middle East.
You do realize that the data points to a point-of-origin bottleneck in the Middle East that happened 50,000 years ago - supporting the "out of Africa" migration, and not the hypothetical global flood catastrophe claimed to have occurred 4500 years ago.
thewordofme

Tucson, AZ

#72134 Jan 2, 2012
Hello Charles Idemi,

You wrote:
"I am myself and others including you are themselves or their selves...
Any scientist that dis-regards God and the bible whether he or she calls his or herself a christian,are nothing but a science apologist...
The bible is a book that has given us an insight into the past...Lets embrace it..."

Is English your first language??

The Bible is a collection of myths mostly. Both fictional and real characters roam through the pages and it uses real landmarks to set the fiction. The early timelines are not useful at all and one must be careful in reading the Bibles supposed motives of its characters.

The Old Testaments depiction of the god character is terrible. He is vindictive, evil, misogynistic, and creepy...what up with his wanting so many foreskins from his peeps?

When I think of his people...the currant Christian evangelical fundamentalists, I think of them in their roll in the Republican Party...they want total control over women's health and bodies, wanting to teach the Bible in science classes, wanting the USA to be a Biblical theocracy and ruled by Biblical laws. They are horrid people and really have to be watched or they'll screw over you.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#72135 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Did I ever claim that? See, you must twist and warp. THat is why your arguments are so weak.<quoted text>Science is not qualified for such an experiment. It isn't qualified to deal with the supernatural, so such a study is based in ignorance. Science needs to stick within its limitations and stay out of theology and philosophy. That is why human from non-human evolution is so ridiculous. It isn't science, it is philosophy even to the point of being to some a humanistic religion. Science needs to get away from guys like you and get back to the scientific method which seperates science from the dreamers.

You don't understand what you don't understand. You argue from your heart but your head is never engaged and you tend to spew what you FEEL to be true even if the reality is far far from your beliefs. Evolution is well established fact. You may not like it, but the reality is what it is. You can run, you can hide, you can cry, you can shout, but evolution is established and is now at the front of modern medical science.

Today evolution is saving millions of lives. In a few years it will be billions. Over 20 medical technologies tied directly to evolution and twice that number tied to Genetics. There are no longer any questions here. You are beating your chest over your fallen hero of creationism, but you need not have such anguish. god is still in charge, it is just a Bigger God than what you are used to.

Level 2

Since: Jun 08

Franklin, NC

#72136 Jan 2, 2012
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What genetic markers do you have in mind, and exactly how do they demonstrate no bottleneck? Be specific, otherwise you have nothing but an assertion.
The same ones you had in mind when you thought they supported your hypothesis of a Middle East bottleneck 4500 years ago.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#72137 Jan 2, 2012
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>All I demand is "show me". Let me observe it too!!! And you hate it because you know you can't do that with human from non-human evolution. Why? IT'LL NEVER BE OBSERVABLE....and thus....is NOT SCIENCE!!!

This is not true and you know it. The evidence of evolution (list provided to you just yesterday) stands and not one area of it are in question.

One of your many problems is you get hooked on one idea and your mind is not open so you miss it when it is refuted.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#72138 Jan 2, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>That i say is your headache...
I gave you where to get informations about the authenticity of the bible you refuse to go check it,it shows that you are afraid of the truth...
There was no population drift from the east until after the flood...Your statements are fabricated lies from its very foundation...

This is your claim which you have no evidence for.

You dispute the authority of the bible therefore you are in league with SATAN.

You can go to your master when you die.

Level 2

Since: Jun 08

Franklin, NC

#72139 Jan 2, 2012
KAB wrote:
Did you not notice that time was not part of the data in their study
It was not part of the actual data - but the time proxy used for the Middle East bottleneck was the 50kya "Out of Africa" migration, with the Beringia migration of 12-20kya as the proxy for the 2nd bottleneck.

From Amos and Hoffman:
"We find evidence of two primary events, one ‘out of Africa’ and one placed around the Bering Strait, where an ancient land bridge allowed passage into the Americas."
-and-
"There is a strong consensus that modern humans originated in Africa and moved out to colonize the world approximately 50 000 years ago."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2...
KAB wrote:
The "left Africa" part is an assumption based on other info.
It is not an assumption, and Amos and Hoffman were very clear about that when they wrote:

"There is a strong consensus that modern humans originated in Africa and moved out to colonize the world approximately 50 000 years ago."

Fig. 4 of their study provides the data which shows where the "Africans" first migrated 50 kya - the Middle East, which is further confirmed by their statement:
"... populations in the Middle East are nearer to the origin than some of the within-Africa populations."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2...

A good summary of Amos and Hoffman's paper from Science News:
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/10...

"The team uncovered strong signs of this imbalance between rare alleles and heterozygosity in two populations--one, in people living today in the Middle East, and the other in the Yakut, who live near the Bering Strait. That indicated to the researchers that the first bottleneck occurred as people migrated out of Africa to the Middle East about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago, and the second, 19,000 kilometers away, when they crossed the ancient land bridge in the Bering Strait to the Americas."
Elohim

Gloucester, MA

#72140 Jan 2, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>Irony!!!
Yours is a waste of resources which covers money and others...
What the hell are you trying to say?Once again you babble incoherently.
Elohim

Gloucester, MA

#72141 Jan 2, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are an ATHEIST.
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST because he denies the Complexity of gods creation
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST because he makes god fit his microgod definition
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST because he distorts the bible and forces profound stories to be literal and thus preforms vivisection on them.
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST because he is ignorant of the real meaning of the bible and teaches falsely.
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST because he is ignorant of the origins of his own religion.
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST because he denies the observation and research to understand gods universe.
Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST. By his own definition Charles Idemi is an ATHEIST.
Somewhere Madeline O'Hare is spinning in her grave.
Elohim

Gloucester, MA

#72142 Jan 2, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text>If really there was a global flood,it would have no effect on the west,south and north which have no human presence then except the east...
God intension of the flood was targetted at humans whose are only in the east then...
Not according to the supposed written word of your god. All was supposedly destroyed.
Elohim

Gloucester, MA

#72143 Jan 2, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You intention is not to support the bible. You have denied the veracity of the bible. You have admitted to being an atheist. You drive people away from god by creating hostility in others from you own hostility. You attempt to make ignorance in others from your own ignorance. You speak with authority of the author of lies. If Christianity is destroyed Satan will have people like you to thank.
Amen Brother Dogen!

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
No Place For ID? 28 min Chimney1 75
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Chimney1 18,851
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Chimney1 161,765
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 2 hr Chimney1 1,671
Why Are There No Transitional Animals Today? (Mar '09) 3 hr yoo 895
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 20 hr Paul Porter1 13,692
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 21 hr Kong_ 178,596
More from around the web