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
105,941 - 105,960 of 136,272 Comments Last updated 20 min ago

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#107975 Jan 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
what's your definition of a False Christian?
I don't know, but a false Scotsman is one who puts sugar in his porridge.
I have sometimes suggested that Evolutionists should play that game too.
Anyone who is embarrsing to Evolutionists was not a true Evolutionist.

We frequently have to apologize for Ernst Haeckel and his doctored up embryos.
So why don't we say that he was not a true Evolutionist?

Ian Plimer, in his 1988 debate with Duane Gish, was so rude and undiplomatic that many members of the audience converted the wrong way.
So why don't we say that he was not a true Evolutionist?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#107976 Jan 17, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Still no comprehension/reasoning improvement I see.
Still no evidence or defensible position, I see.

You forgot the comma in your post, FYI.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#107977 Jan 17, 2013
MazHere wrote:
Perhaps you could find the research that 'falsifies' the modern bird footprints being what they appear to be.

As I understand it, we have no evidence whether it was a bird or a dinosaur.
So the burden of proof is on anyone making a claim either way.
As I see it, the burden of proof is on anyone making a claim on a fifty-fifty function.
When someone says there is a God, I ask,How do you know?
When someone says there isnt a God, I ask,How do you know?

MazHere wrote:
Perhaps you can find these loosers redating the strata which I am expecting any time soon when they have quacked enough about it. Perhaps these are hidden under your fake credentials.

You mean there is a party of Loosers, going around redating strata?
Oh, my goodness!
Everyone watch out for Loosers in your area!
And when you see them, call 911 immediately!

MazHere wrote:
I thought so! It appears you are the flucker!]

Lilith is a flucker?
If she is, I guess I need to take biology class all over again!

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#107978 Jan 17, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Isn't that what I just said? THe tire tracks are observable. I don't know what vechicle it was, just that it was a vehicle.
Or, it was God who made the tracks. You don't know. You weren't there. You didn't OBSERVE it!

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107979 Jan 17, 2013
KAB wrote:
In my previous 2 posts I initially put my response to the second on the first. Sorry about that.
No worries.

The idea is clear.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#107980 Jan 17, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Then show me. Sorry but I don't think you can.<quoted text>That is nothing but wishful thinking with absolutely no observable scientific evidence at all to support it. Please show me how haphazard, without aim or method, mutations can fabricate the most extremely complex form of matter in the universe. I don't think you can. I think all you can do is claim that it can.<quoted text>I don't think we can understand how consciousness works, but I think it even extremely more unlikely that something like consciousness and self awareness could ever be originated by something that is not self aware or even living. To propose something in some other field with the same scenario and probabilites would be considered by those in that field as insane.
What does "emergent properties" mean?

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107981 Jan 17, 2013
Worth reflecting upon.
The judaism forum is also involved with the issue
Frijoles:
Science does not work with the notion of "correct" - it looks at competing explanations and selects the best (i.e. most likely) based on an analysis of data (i.e. evidence) and than couches their conclusions in terms of probibility (i.e. estimates how likely their explanation fits the data).
In science one is not only always seeking data driven explanations, but refining those explanations. Its the "refining process" that you are alluding to when you say that science is always contradicting itself, or that science is correcting itself.
Its not an either/or. Its a question of best, with a statistical qualification.
Bible thumpers who grow up with rigid either/or categorical modes of thinking have a problem with this notion. They tend to be hung up on binary categories - correct/wrong, with the bible as the process to provide the standard, not data driven analytical analysis
For Creationism to be a valid scientific construct, it should be 1) data driven,
2) hypothesis tested, and
3) statistically qualified.
As far as I am aware, in the broad sense, Creationism has never been able to withstand these processes. Therefore, Creationism is an ideology, not a scientific discipline.
If you want to teach ideology(religion) along side with science in schools, than that is certainly your right in a private school. But dont call Creationism science, because it isnt. Intelligent Design is not science, it is junk science, for the reasons expounded above in the previous paragraph.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#107982 Jan 17, 2013
MazHere wrote:
Nothing in the bible can be falsified but much has been confirmed.
You really need to take a look at REAL archeological studies. Much in the Bible has been falsified.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#107983 Jan 17, 2013
HI guys. Just touching base. Haven't been on Topix in quite a while.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#107984 Jan 17, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
I know that fact.
But the snow/ice data was directed to yo directly.
I could ask you to accept it on fate (as written in exodus). Grammar and the clear mention of morning and evening of the first day a.s.o., and g-d saw it was right.
Exodus (some pages back when i came on the forum after some absense, so not too far back.) also explaines it as being exactly a week. Exo. 30 ?
I would not know were i put it anymore. The main arguement was in a different thread. Tangled Bank and Mike F. also tackled it.
Your reaction was that you would decide yourself whether you found it convincing.
As i recall you did not, then. Or an argument from convenience since it would exclude research outside of the scope of the timeframe we set.
Your snow/ice reference leaves me cold, and what does it have to do with the acceptable possible meanings of yowm?

Yowm is not used to mean a week in Exodus 30 or anywhere in Exodus.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107985 Jan 17, 2013
Me neither so as far as i know you have been around al the time. ;)

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107986 Jan 17, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Your snow/ice reference leaves me cold, and what does it have to do with the acceptable possible meanings of yowm?
Yowm is not used to mean a week in Exodus 30 or anywhere in Exodus.
Even though they were place close together i gave you a link to pages of Greenland icedata. And still you complained, and for some reason could not watch the almost neverending list of DATA.
---
Sorry what I meant is that they make it clear that the days constitute a week, so as to emphazise the celebration and restday of sabbath.

Level 2

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#107987 Jan 17, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What's your definition/description of a true Christian?


I think most fun is had when we allow the christians to define chrsitianity

here is one: take any ten of the 38,000 christian sects and ask a leader of each of those ten, if your person is a christian; any time at lest eight of those ten say yes, that person is a christian.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#107988 Jan 17, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
... Life is not matter. Even matter is not matter. You do not understand your postulate...
Do you not understand that you need to redefine physics in light of the fact that "Even matter is not matter", according to you?

I would be perfectly justified if I said that a few years from now they will say that even evolution is not evolution.

As a matter of fact, I'll start now...
ChromiuMan wrote:
Mutation and genome changes due to environmental factors are going to happen.
I agree. But "Mutation and genome changes due to environmental factors" does not automatically suggest general "evolution".

We can see mutation right before our eyes; but evolution only occurs in your minds, as such.
ChromiuMan wrote:
Humans adapt their environment to themselves and don't like to remember that it is a two way street - that's part of why you think we are "special." When homo sapiens reacts to environmental stressors in fundamental ways, you can call it "deterioration", "degradation" or Satan's work/God's will as you please. A rose is a rose is a rose... and roses have thorns.
If "A rose is a rose is a rose...", then whats difference does it make whether you call "environmental stressors" "Satan's work/God's will"?

A thing is what it does so we dont have to call it anything.

We describe things for the sake of our convenience, whether we are scientists or godbots; evidence and proof and science etc are just ways of rationalizing our preferences.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#107989 Jan 17, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
HI guys. Just touching base. Haven't been on Topix in quite a while.
Ah well, in your absense we've used your klein bottle for catching the milk of god the fathers breasts.
Odes of Solomon 19

Just to make the topic a bit more sciency.
So wash it unless you like milk in your coffee.
Or alternatively feces given civetcats and indian elephant digestive tract coffee combined with the notion of using healthy feces to remedy some lifethreatening stomachbug conditions where antibiotics have started to fail.

I hope you don't mind.:))
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#107990 Jan 17, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Via the coalescence of matter into the right place to form an organic system with organic structures much along the lines of the very precise phyisics required to coalesce the universe into galaxies etc.
Do not forget OH bright one, that the description of dark energy requires faith as you are believing in a powerful force that controls the universe, that is unseen and unable to be described..a mystery!
Actually the support for my paradigm is past needing to be testable, as they are already scientifically supported. All I need to do is wait for the physics to arrive that can apply them to organic matter.
Perhaps research into teleportation may provide more information.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-m...
So how did elements organize themselves into a complex factory of metabolizm and reproduction if a superior intelligence was not involved? I suggest the evocation of a deity still sounds more plausible than your scenario!
Now I have answered your question with what I think and have the scientifically confirmed basics of energy producing matter and coalescence theory that brings matter together in form as my scientific support.
Now I will ask you the same questions. So far I don't think any of you have ever answered my questions, you just like to quack!
What scientific mechanism do you propose could organize elements into a complex factory of reproduction? How is this testable?
My bet is that I will get more twoddle from you. Evos can ask questions, can't answer anything, and still like to stand on their pedestal suggesting "dirt did it" is better than "God did it".
It was written "...they hated me without a cause..." [Jesu(s): John 15:25]

These atheists here are only attempting to use science to justify their hatred for God, calling it "scepticism".

But the thing about scepticism is that it has no boundaries nor rules; you can be sceptical about anything for any reason. You can be sceptical about the reality of the very ground you walk on. After all, who knows what is really real, so that we know what is not?

So even if God came to earth with all the Havenly Hosts, brilliant with Glory; they could deny Him. They dont have to say "GOD IS HERE???!!!"; they could say "LOOK, EXTRATERRESTRIALS; ARE THEY ATTACKING US???!"

Tragic, I tell you .
KAB

Oxford, NC

#107991 Jan 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>That's a bit difficult.
Let's try to narrow the field: what's your definition of a False Christian?
One who considers himself to be a Christian, but can be directly shown to be willfully out of harmony with one or more Bible positions.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#107992 Jan 17, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The only way that fossils would align with creationism is if there were fully formed modern animal remains resting directly on a globally uniform bedrock. This scenario DOES NOT EXIST.
How much bedrock have they tested?

Globally uniform bedrock?

Is there even such a thing as "globally" uniform bedrock; seeing that the earth's crust is continually being transformed?

" Even the tops of mountains have bedrock that formed at depth in the earth and has been uplifted and eroded. Our mountains are simply places where the bedrock has been worn down less than the bedrock of the neighboring areas. Different rocks resist erosion to different degrees, depending on their composition, texture, and structure. This phenomenon, termed differential erosion" [http://www.maine.gov/doc/nrim c/mgs/explore/bedrock/faq.htm]

If I find out that you have not explored and tested EVERY "globally" uniform bedrock BEFORE you made that statement; I will send a bolt of lightening to strike you where the sun dont shine.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#107993 Jan 17, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You speak of the improbability of chemicals forming self replicating and complex structures within a billion years and a fifth of a billion square miles...
Timing is superfluous to the discussion.

The question is the source/origin of the potential or influences which made life and things emerge.

Time is not a cause in nor of itself; so there is no need to involve time when discussing cause(s) of the world as such.

Chenicals did not form themselves; there were influences that caused chemicals to interact in particular ways to produce different chemicals.

As such, even if chemicals did form "self replicating complex structures", they would have done so under the influence of that which is influencing them (the chemicals).

So we are still looking for a original cause... and that infinite regress crap is crappy, so dont come with it.

Science informs us that the universe had a beginning, so there was a "First Cause".
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#107994 Jan 17, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Uh-oh, Mazzys in danger of hell fire!
Not really.

"By their fruit ye shall know them" [Jesu/s]; so there is no sin in calling a person who acts like a fool, a "fool".

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 11 min Kong_ 115,249
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 1 hr TedHOhio 172,524
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 2 hr TedHOhio 209
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 2 hr TurkanaBoy 320
Science News (Sep '13) Thu positronium 2,848
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Aug 27 Zog Has-fallen 343
Natural Selection Not The Only Process That Dri... (Jan '14) Aug 25 reMAAT 20
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••