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

Full story: Asheville Citizen-Times

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 ...

Comments (Page 5,211)

Showing posts 104,201 - 104,220 of127,239
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Topanga

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106201
Jan 4, 2013
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I can assure you it's data derived from the Bible in conjunction and harmony with physical and other documentary data. If you want we can review it one step at a time, so you can scrutinize it every step of the way.
I don't believe I've ever seen ANY physical or documentary evidence for a world-wide flood. I've seen some stuff from the ABC documentary long ago that featured a con-man trying to pass off fake 'artifacts' from the supposed flood of Noah. Not long after the show it was found that he had manufactured the 'artifacts' at his home.

:-)

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106202
Jan 4, 2013
 
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe I've ever seen ANY physical or documentary evidence for a world-wide flood. I've seen some stuff from the ABC documentary long ago that featured a con-man trying to pass off fake 'artifacts' from the supposed flood of Noah. Not long after the show it was found that he had manufactured the 'artifacts' at his home.
:-)
The "piece of wood from the ark?" I saw that too. lol

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106203
Jan 5, 2013
 
thewordofme wrote:
I don't believe I've ever seen ANY physical or documentary evidence for a world-wide flood. I've seen some stuff from the ABC documentary long ago that featured a con-man trying to pass off fake 'artifacts' from the supposed flood of Noah. Not long after the show it was found that he had manufactured the 'artifacts' at his home.
:-)
I didnít see it, but I read about it.
The guy picked up a splinter from a railroad tie and soaked it in teriyaki sauce. He didnít succeed in fooling Christian Information Ministries International, but he fooled several members of the Institute for Creation Research, including Gish himself.

Every chance Duane Gish gets, he tells the story about the Piltdown Man (which many scientists suspected from the beginning) and the Nebraska Man (which never even made the headlines), and the Ramapithecus (which was uncovered by an Evolutionist).

Thatís a boomerang if ever there was one.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106204
Jan 5, 2013
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing to say that they can't. Nothing to say anyone has any idea what the salt content of the ocean was either as all is speculated based on assumptions.
If I said a crystal ball told me that would be at least as credible as any of the mumbo jumbo you can present.
So, you don't understand chemistry. Great. What is homeostasis?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106205
Jan 5, 2013
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Would that be one that's thinner or thicker than the norm?
Let's put it this way: do you think you know better than all the world's dendrochronologists what flood evidence would look like in tree rings?

Yet another field of scientists that you need to be wholly incompetent for your stories to be true. Is there ANYBODY who can competently perform legitimate science of any kind while keeping your stories true?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106206
Jan 5, 2013
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's rather obvious that you need and are desperate to identify something for which there is no believable story, and will fight to the last keystroke to make it happen. First, Pi=3, and now this. Ventriloquism is a well known established reality. It's time to look in a new direction.
And, despite no mention of ventriloquism, you use that as an apologetic crutch. Why should such excuses have to be made? If the Bible says a creature spoke, why isn't it enough that the creature spoke? Didn't your God have the power to make creatures that spoke? Isn't your God powerful enough to do that, without resorting to trickery and deception?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106207
Jan 5, 2013
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The bristlecone pine won't die until you provide the data, and regarding the data you did provide, maybe it wasn't predominantly rainwater.
Data doesn't kill trees. According to every confirmed and actual piece of evidence, the only trees killed by the Bible are the ones that provided the paper it's printed on and the lumber in its churches.
This is just one aspect of your strategy of debate that is fatally flawed. You persist in demanding data, and when it is provided you ignore that which is pertinent. When asked for data, you ignore that, as well. In your mind (alone) you regard ignore-ance as a victory.

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106208
Jan 5, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
Is there ANYBODY who can competently perform legitimate science of any kind while keeping your stories true?
How about a consortium of KAB, the guy who mows the neighbor's lawn and a night cashier down at the Quicki-Mart?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106210
Jan 5, 2013
 
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You use your labels, and I'll use mine. I am a human being. Apes are not. You say you share a common ancester with apes. I do not. You have no observable, testable, or replicatable evidence to prove such a wild claim. I don't need such. Tell me along the evolutionary line where non-human apes crossed the line becoming human. I bet you can't tell where that line even is. When apes evolved into humans, what evolved? What changed that they were suddenly human? What line was crossed? Show me this line.
You are a mallard who resents being called a duck.

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Subclass: Theria
Infraclass: Eutheria
Order: Primates
Suborder: Anthropoidea
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo (Human) or Pan (Chimpanzee)

It is only your false pride that stands between yourself and reason.
But of course it should be recognized by all that the foundations of faith are not grounded in reason, logic or rationality.

A specific date within the last few million years in which a broadly (un)defined line was crossed in the familial tree? Who says there is one? Will you tell me the exact date, lat. and long. Jonah was swallowed by the fish? Alright, something easier. What kind of fish was it? Cat(fish) got your tongue? Okay. How about... show me the ruins of Enoch? No? Maybe something even easier? Something you must contend occurred only a few thousand years ago and well within the history of civilization, like the exact location of the Tower of Babel or the first Temple of Solomon?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106211
Jan 5, 2013
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a mallard who resents being called a duck.
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Subclass: Theria
Infraclass: Eutheria
Order: Primates
Suborder: Anthropoidea
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo (Human) or Pan (Chimpanzee)
It is only your false pride that stands between yourself and reason.
But of course it should be recognized by all that the foundations of faith are not grounded in reason, logic or rationality.
A specific date within the last few million years in which a broadly (un)defined line was crossed in the familial tree? Who says there is one? Will you tell me the exact date, lat. and long. Jonah was swallowed by the fish? Alright, something easier. What kind of fish was it? Cat(fish) got your tongue? Okay. How about... show me the ruins of Enoch? No? Maybe something even easier? Something you must contend occurred only a few thousand years ago and well within the history of civilization, like the exact location of the Tower of Babel or the first Temple of Solomon?
Mallards aren't ducks! They're birds!

:P
LowellGuy

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106212
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Mallards aren't ducks! They're birds!
:P
You mean, birds made of duck meat.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106213
Jan 5, 2013
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Tree rings apparently provide no way of identifying the flood.
*sigh*

Hopeless.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106214
Jan 5, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Mallards aren't ducks! They're birds!
:P
and the Byrds did "Turn, Turn, Turn" which is almost verbatim from Ecclesiastes 3:1, so that PROVES the Flood was "Eight Miles High".

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106215
Jan 5, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean, birds made of duck meat.
Birds made of mallard meat!^_^

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Wahroonga, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106216
Jan 5, 2013
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Your 'initial statement':
<quoted text>
Post #106055
How in the world would I misunderstand that?!?!
Not that it's any of your business, Maz, but I am an Agnostic. Meaning: I have no position on whether or not there is a Supreme Being. Should evidence be presented for said deity, I'll weigh this evidence at that time. In the mean time, I'll rely on the data that DOES present itself that God (IF he DOES exist) left for us to examine.
You would like to present the science behind the ToE as being flawed. For sure, it's not PERFECT, but despite your protests to the contrary, there BILLIONS of individual pieces of data that belie your hand-waving dismissal of the subject.
Meanwhile, you ONLY have 'faith' to promote for your views.
Questions:
~Do you believe the Universe is less than 10,000 years old?
~Do you believe that Adam was (literally) made from the dust of the earth, and that Eve was made (literally) from Adam's Rib?
~Do you believe that a talking snake tricked them into eating a 'forbidden fruit'?
~World-wide flood?
~Man living in the belly of a 'great fish' for 3 days?
etc?
You are an idiot.

My statement was

"Science is not qualified to speak to such things as deities. You don't have any trouble accepting dark mater do you? Dark matter is a mysterious powerful force that seems to control the universe, is unexplainable and unseen. THIS APPEARS TO DESCRIBE GOD [Emphasis mine]. You shouldn't have any trouble believing in God."

Clearly I am saying that something that is mysterious, unable to be seen, controls the universe is the same description one may use for a God. You have no trouble believing in dark energy because these boofheads tell you it is there hence you should have no trouble believing in God.

Dark energy is just another example of the faithful making up rubbish to save a theory from falsification, yet again.

I do not believe in dark energy and there are geocentric models that do not require such a mystery.

Science is not qualified to talk to God and the only reason you want to misquote me is because you are a gobsmacked and clueless evolutionist.

Evolutionists publish and therefore believe they exist, even though they have no idea what they are talking about with their background noise of confusion and instabily.

"Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias."

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Ado...

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Wahroonga, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106217
Jan 5, 2013
 
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>*sigh*
Hopeless.
You are actually the hopeless one, not KAB, because no matter how many times I put up research that suggests tree ring dating is invalid you lot keep quacking about it.

"The primary conclusion is that the research has invalidating flaws, which are obvious upon inspection. The underlying issue is that the system under which tree-ring research generally is conducted lacks transparency."

http://www.informath.org/ATSU04a.pdf

It appears ring dating methods are about as credible as your evolutionary myth.

Evolutionists publish, therefore they believe they exist, even though they have no idea what they are talking about.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106218
Jan 5, 2013
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You are actually the hopeless one, not KAB, because no matter how many times I put up research that suggests tree ring dating is invalid you lot keep quacking about it.
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
So what does the bristlecone pine sequence show in the appropriate timeframe from about 4 to 5 thousand years ago?


Pardon my mentioning it, but doesn't KAB belong to your lot?
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>"The primary conclusion is that the research has invalidating flaws, which are obvious upon inspection. The underlying issue is that the system under which tree-ring research generally is conducted lacks transparency."
http://www.informath.org/ATSU04a.pdf
It appears ring dating methods are about as credible as your evolutionary myth.
Evolutionists publish, therefore they believe they exist, even though they have no idea what they are talking about.
Just to be clear, THIS is part of your opposition argument to the evolution "myth"?

(circa 2300 BCE)
"Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. 7) And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sonsí wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8) Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, 9) male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah. 10) And after the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth...."
"...For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18) The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19) They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20) The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits. 21) Every living thing that moved on land perishedóbirds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22) Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23) Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark...."

Honestly,
http://www.hark.com/clips/rzxkrqypqg-act-like...

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Wahroonga, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106219
Jan 5, 2013
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Pardon my mentioning it, but doesn't KAB belong to your lot?
<quoted text>
Just to be clear, THIS is part of your opposition argument to the evolution "myth"?
(circa 2300 BCE)
"Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. 7) And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sonsí wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8) Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, 9) male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah. 10) And after the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth...."
"...For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18) The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19) They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20) The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits. 21) Every living thing that moved on land perishedóbirds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22) Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23) Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark...."
Honestly,
http://www.hark.com/clips/rzxkrqypqg-act-like...
Here is another one that thinks he knows the power of God when researchers in many fields themselves have no idea what they are talking about.

Does it make you evos feel better to turn to philosophy than talk observed science?

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Wahroonga, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106220
Jan 5, 2013
 
I can't see former post so sorry if a repost..

Kong said

"Meanwhile, you ONLY have 'faith' to promote for your views.
Questions:
~Do you believe the Universe is less than 10,000 years old?
~Do you believe that Adam was (literally) made from the dust of the earth, and that Eve was made (literally) from Adam's Rib?
~Do you believe that a talking snake tricked them into eating a 'forbidden fruit'?
~World-wide flood?
~Man living in the belly of a 'great fish' for 3 days?
etc?"

You may like to notice the thread topic. Once we establish that evolutionists do not have many facts at all, we can then go over what has been observed and how that better supports creationism. This would be the 4th time at least and you have been a part of that unsucessfully I might add. eg with your 3 digit ghost handed dinosaur without a reversed hallux and continually squarking I have not presented evidence, as if an evolutionist would know what evidence should look like.

Evolutionists do not have many facts at all. You do have much misrepresentation and flawed research.

I am happy to go through my 6 points with you again as an example of support for creationism in general for at least the 4th time. What few 'facts' there are tend more to support creationism. It is not specifically about the bible.

I am happy to talk about the philosophy of why I believe in God and being special and what God can or cannot do, that has nothing to do with TOE as there are theist evolutionists, apparently to your surprise.

The Bible is the only spiritual text where the composers did not take glory for themselves. This itself is almost a miracle given human nature. This is also the way one differentiates those spiritual texts that claim to represent God and those that do not. I am happy to philosophize as to why the God of the bible and NT are supported.

You cannot refute my interpretations of magic or observation because evolutionists only have flawed research in many related fields to offer in challenge to me.

If you wish to divert into such philosophies, all realms that science is not able to speak to at present such as deities and their abilities, and IF there are alternative dimensions etc, then I am happy to discuss what God, a powerful inorganic life form, may or may not be able to do, if you prefer.

We can't use your algorithmic magic because it is all flawed. We could use creos algorithmic magic, but you would struggle. So we are left with talking philosophy or strickly only speaking to what is observed in life and the wet lab.

So which would you like to discuss? Philosophy or science?

The Darwin crowd, don't appear to have many facts at all. That is sustained.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Topanga

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106221
Jan 5, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The "piece of wood from the ark?" I saw that too. lol
It seems that for a while there was a small industry in making 'Ark Artifacts'. A guy named Ron Wyatt really make a living in religious stuff. He supposedly found the Ark, the location of Sodom and Gommorrah, the Tower of Babel, the site of the Red Sea crossing, the crucifixion site of Jesus, and many other things related to Christianity. He truly was the 'Liar for Jesus' king.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 104,201 - 104,220 of127,239
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••