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
106,101 - 106,120 of 136,282 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#108137 Jan 18, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry to disagree my friend, but the extreme complexity of life is not even close to be replicated. But here's the deal. The big debate is does GOD exist or not. Do you not ever wonder how all these things needed for life to exist, how they got here? Can you imagine the math needed to figure out the possibilities, that somehow the building blocks of life exist, "somehow" assembled themselves in such a way that they spontainiously generated into life violating the Law of Biogenesis which has never been observed violated in a lab nor nature, that eventually evolved into the most complex thing in the known universe known as the human brain with billions of interconnected electrical circuts and has the ability of self consciousness and self awareness. Do you see how really hard that is to believe that could even be a possibilty? I don't have that much faith. Fairy tails say that a frog became a prince. Scientists call it evolution.
If only life was a predicted outcome beforehand. Alas, for you, this completely shitcans your argument. Try again, ding dong.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108138 Jan 18, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Go to the PBS site and look up the NOVA episode "The Bible's Buried Secrets". Plenty of examples there.
You're trying to make the point. Provide ONE specific example to get yourself started. Otherwise, you have nothing. If I go to the site, and the first point is easily demonstrated to be erroneous, then I will be reluctant to return to that site for anything more. Your best chance for success is to stay in control, and take your best shot.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108139 Jan 18, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Lets say this, since even the phrase "biblical literalist" varies hugely depending on who it is insisting he knows what the Bible actually means.
If you think your interpretation of the Bible is senior to all the physical evidence we have, you are a moron.
Case closed.
That would be all the evidence you don't provide, since what you have provided has been demonstrated, with data, to be inadequate to achieve the purpose for which it was provided.
Case reopened. In court you have to present convincing evidence, not just declare you have it or it's out there.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108140 Jan 18, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
1,The empirical evidence is a book that was written prior to modern science. It is called the Bible.
This is the message we have heard from him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in him there is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5).
Which he will bring about at the proper time - he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen (1 Timothy 6:15,16)
2.It was light used as the source of energy in the particle accelerator. They have produced photons as well. Don't be lazy and go look up your own research. That is unless you call be a liar and then I'd be glad to make a fool of you and let you be lazy.
3,Desperado! No one doubts the biological process of reproduction. We are talking about the first life/s. Unless you are talking about rocks giving birth, then I guess you are just prepared to look silly for the heck of it.
Yes when data leads to different interpretations based on different assumptions they are not necessarily the way 'other' believers define. Does that come as a surprize to you?
I have many reasons listed as to why I have faith in the God of the bible. A source of light/energy has been OBSERVED to form matter. I also have factual information that so far there is NO observed life in our galaxy or the universe.
What have you got that demonstrates elements can organze themsleves into complex factories themselves or by chance? Do you have any observed evidence that life has arisen in a similar way elsewhere, or even multiple times on the earth, to demonstrate the 'naturalness' of this process?
So is this yet again going to be all about creos supporting their stand with evolutionists chasing us and their own tails and hiding away? Could this be because evos have nothing of merit to offer for their basis for faith? eg elements orgaizing themsleves into complex factories of reproduction whilst hanging around some deep ocean thermal vent, life elsewhere, etc?
What makes you think the evocation a deity is less plausible than suggesting rocks or dirt have intelligence and a plan, or 'luck' did it?
1. Everyone it's own believes. But i do not do the gospel and various christian interpetation.
An exampl would be 'begat'. People unfamiliair with would not known that it can mean birth and adoption.
But mostly for the reason that is was out of the scope of the rules we decided.
But emperical proof would be observation and or experiment that can be repeated.

2.That photons is beyond the point, since i allready stated that photons do have mass, and the fact that electro-magnetic acceleration, means using a tool namely at matter to create matter.
See various what is exactly meant with protons having mass means.

3.Another aunt sally. That we are now not people as at yet finding life does not mean that we will do not know that we will do so so.
A factory? I do not see the relevance of that remark.
You might recall that i mention Montmorillion and darwin pond. Since marine thermal vent do not confirm to to the necessariy qualifiction.
Well god's , luck, or rocks given the way you do not distinquish any difference would be random choices.

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be just as easily dismissed without evidence" - Hitchens





““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108141 Jan 18, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Prophets, even.
II Kings 2:23-24 tells this story of Elisha:
And he went up from thence unto Bethel:and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD, And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
I have had oodlums of children tease me for being bald, but I didn't pray for them to be eviscerated. Rather, I chased and tickled them.
We get he and we get she mentioned.
Coincidence of reality was that i was reading about the goddess Ilithya or a.k.a. Eileithya.
Wondering how much some stories refer to greek-syrian influence.
If at all. Or to diminishing hittite influence.
Usually stories are also parables to make ones own mind up about.
Who says jews took all stories for just the one and only way to interpret!(1,8 million pages do tell that nothing was not discussed.)

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#108142 Jan 18, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You're trying to make the point. Provide ONE specific example to get yourself started. Otherwise, you have nothing. If I go to the site, and the first point is easily demonstrated to be erroneous, then I will be reluctant to return to that site for anything more. Your best chance for success is to stay in control, and take your best shot.
Watch to program. It provides many.

I'll start you on one...there is NO archeological evidence of the Israelites ever being in Egypt. The archeological evidence shows them to have originally been a small Canaanite hill tribe with a handful of villages.

Another...the archeological evidence of the destruction of the Canaanite cities...no Joshua. The cities were destroyed for the most part by internal rioting. And not in one generation, but over a period of several hundred years.

No Moses. No Joshua. Probably no King David. The ONLY archeological evidence of David is a later Hebrew king titled as being "of the House of David".

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#108143 Jan 18, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Everyone it's own believes. But i do not do the gospel and various christian interpetation.
An exampl would be 'begat'. People unfamiliair with would not known that it can mean birth and adoption.
But mostly for the reason that is was out of the scope of the rules we decided.
But emperical proof would be observation and or experiment that can be repeated.
2.That photons is beyond the point, since i allready stated that photons do have mass, and the fact that electro-magnetic acceleration, means using a tool namely at matter to create matter.
See various what is exactly meant with protons having mass means.
3.Another aunt sally. That we are now not people as at yet finding life does not mean that we will do not know that we will do so so.
A factory? I do not see the relevance of that remark.
You might recall that i mention Montmorillion and darwin pond. Since marine thermal vent do not confirm to to the necessariy qualifiction.
Well god's , luck, or rocks given the way you do not distinquish any difference would be random choices.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be just as easily dismissed without evidence" - Hitchens
Just to clarify something...

Photons do NOT have mass, though they do have momentum. They are massless. One indication of this is that only massless particles can travel AT the speed of light (as photons do).

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108144 Jan 19, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
'Allo,'allo.
Good God.

Was that a "Dixon of Dock Green" reference??

Sheesh, I'm getting old.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108145 Jan 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Both of them? Why shouldn't one or the other or perhaps both be?
Ezekiel foretold the utter and permanent destruction of the city, any time then.

It still thrives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyre,_Lebanon

Fail.
The Pencil Dick

Kingston, Jamaica

#108146 Jan 19, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Skepticism is not the same as nihilism.
Well, you have not demonstrated the scepticism that is not the same as nihilism.
LowellGuy wrote:
Your faith, however, is nothing more than gullibility writ large.
I could say the same about you.

You have not failed to demonstrate gullibility in your will to accept fact by consensus; you accept as fact BECAUSE other people accept as fact.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#108147 Jan 19, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Thou shalt not kill.
America gave Saddam Hussain the death penalty, yet homicide is a crime in America..

So I dont see why you find it so difficult to understand that humans generally tend to kill whatever they dont like.

Both Moses and George Bush institute policies to kill who they dont like; I dont see what your problem is really.

ITS A HUMAN THING; NOT A CHRISTIAN NOR MUSLIM NOR JEW THING.
LowellGuy wrote:
...It's the same outcome, and killing people is killing people.
Was Saddam a goat?

Why couldnt they just keep him in prison forever?

Why kill him after he has been rendered harmless (captured, restrained etc)?

You dont seem to to be able to notice when your people do the same crap you find distasteful when others do it.
LowellGuy wrote:
Not suffering a witch to live means either prevent witches from occurring (impossible, as it's a thought pattern) or stop existing witches from continuing their lives (possible).
Well, witches as they were in those days were not the poor defenceless people you seem to think they are.

Back in those days witches used to do blood sacrifice using babies etc.; so chances are, you would be just as pissed as Moses.
LowellGuy wrote:
Whether the whole group stones the witch to death or a single person does it, it could hardly matter less. Religious dogma-based killing is religious dogma-based killing. It's completely irrational and savage no matter who carries it out.
My eyes are brimming with tears.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#108148 Jan 19, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
...That would mean there must be a uniform age to LOWER geologic STRATA...
I appreciate that fact that you said "WOULD mean".

But what you say is in direct conflict with the nature of the earth.

"Even the tops of mountains have bedrock that formed AT DEPTH IN THE EARTH and has been uplifted and eroded."
[http://www.maine.gov/doc/nrim c/mgs/explore/bedrock/faq.htm]

Which means there DOES NOT have to be "...a uniform age to LOWER geologic STRATA..."

You have a habit of "piecing things" together; but the mind automatically seeks meaning and association between things. Many times you may simply be 'imposing' connections where none really are.
ChromiuMan wrote:
... An old Earth anti-evolutionist would argue that all creatures were existent at the time of creation, so wherever the oldest strata is found, there should be modern mammalian fossils.
But such an individual could not argue that all creatures were made at the same time.

Scripture specifically tells that some creatures where created at specific points ("days").
ChromiuMan wrote:
If God Himself were to send lightening bolts to sunder the reaches where the sun don't shine, I hope he tunes down the voltage, because his version of electrotherapy will turn what's left of His flock's brains to ashes.
I agree.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#108149 Jan 19, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Mike is right. Because if God created matter, etc, it still does not prove or even support your contention that the actual God is the same sort of God as the one portrayed in your primitive myths.
So why is the GOD of the bible the only one you guys ever address? WHy is it the only one you ever attack? I don't care about other so-called gods, and evidently, you atheist types don't either. The GOD of the bible says in Romans 1

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

You battle the biblical GOD because this verse is true. You know deep inside that he exists. He put that something in you that tells you that. You deny it and it sets up a bitter struggle within your spirit. You know that he exists by what has been made. You won't admit it, but that is why you are in this group day after day. You can't get away from that "something" that GOD placed inside you.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Life evolved. If you believe in God, it can only mean that God decided it should be that way.
If that be true, then why can't you emperically prove it? Without a doubt? WHy can't scientists replicate it?....all they can do is interpret evidence as if it supports evolution when the truth is, it supports creation better. And you guys continue to jump the gun by puting the cart ahead of the horses by failing to deal with the origin of life by naturalistic means. If the origin of life can't evolve naturally, there is no need to think that life can, or did, either.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text> Never mind what Moses understood - you understand more than Moses could possibly know about mundane things like disease and lightning. As we grow, our understanding grows.
I think you misjudge Moses. He met with GOD, had miraculous experiences that even changed his appearence. GOD let Moses see him from behind as he passed by. He lead millions of people, and saw GOD work miracles. Moses saw things you and I could only dream of.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your clinging to Biblical Literalism is nothing more than the hope of a child that Santa exists. Of course, he does. My mother told me, when I grew out of literal Santarism, that Santa was real but as the spirit of love and giving. That is what "Santa" really meant. Now....
No one ever claimed Santa was the originator of life. GOD did. If you want to compare fairy tales, a fairy tale says that a frog became a prince, scientists call it evolution. So see? it isn't fair to compare fairy tales to what most see as a subject of reality. Let's keep it real.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#108150 Jan 19, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
Mazzy! I am also impressed that so many thousands of scientists have testified in favor of evolutionary theory and none have defected, exposing the whole thing as a hoax.
"In a new book, Evolution Exposed, Roger Patterson shows how he believes some scientists have a bias toward evolution and against looking at true scientific facts. Patterson himself once believed in the theory of evolution. The book is written for students in biology class.

Whether there is a bias or not in the scientific community and the media toward evolution many scientists who were once believed in evolution but now believe in creation, say evolution is not scientific. Maybe not all are now Christians, but many of them, Christians or not, do not hesitate to tell why they believe the theory of evolution is unscientific and does not provide any real answers to man."

http://voices.yahoo.com/scientists-not-believ...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#108151 Jan 19, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Watch to program. It provides many.
I'll start you on one...there is NO archeological evidence of the Israelites ever being in Egypt. The archeological evidence shows them to have originally been a small Canaanite hill tribe with a handful of villages.
Another...the archeological evidence of the destruction of the Canaanite cities...no Joshua. The cities were destroyed for the most part by internal rioting. And not in one generation, but over a period of several hundred years.
No Moses. No Joshua. Probably no King David. The ONLY archeological evidence of David is a later Hebrew king titled as being "of the House of David".
But, at least Noah's flood is real, right?

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#108152 Jan 19, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>So why is the GOD of the bible the only one you guys ever address? WHy is it the only one you ever attack? I don't care about other so-called gods, and evidently, you atheist types don't either. The GOD of the bible says in Romans 1
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
You battle the biblical GOD because this verse is true. You know deep inside that he exists. He put that something in you that tells you that. You deny it and it sets up a bitter struggle within your spirit. You know that he exists by what has been made. You won't admit it, but that is why you are in this group day after day. You can't get away from that "something" that GOD placed inside you.
<quoted text>If that be true, then why can't you emperically prove it? Without a doubt? WHy can't scientists replicate it?....all they can do is interpret evidence as if it supports evolution when the truth is, it supports creation better. And you guys continue to jump the gun by puting the cart ahead of the horses by failing to deal with the origin of life by naturalistic means. If the origin of life can't evolve naturally, there is no need to think that life can, or did, either. <quoted text>I think you misjudge Moses. He met with GOD, had miraculous experiences that even changed his appearence. GOD let Moses see him from behind as he passed by. He lead millions of people, and saw GOD work miracles. Moses saw things you and I could only dream of.<quoted text>No one ever claimed Santa was the originator of life. GOD did. If you want to compare fairy tales, a fairy tale says that a frog became a prince, scientists call it evolution. So see? it isn't fair to compare fairy tales to what most see as a subject of reality. Let's keep it real.
Good morning, Marksman. How ya doing?

Moving right along from the birth to the epiphany to the baptism by John in the Jordan we now find Jesus retiring to the desert for forty days of fasting. Why forty days? A few members of the congregation point out that Moses and the Hebrews wandered around the Sinai Peninsula for forty years.'That's right', agrees Padre, drawing several little circles with his index finger, musing,'It's not a very big place'.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#108153 Jan 19, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>"In a new book, Evolution Exposed, Roger Patterson shows how he believes some scientists have a bias toward evolution and against looking at true scientific facts. Patterson himself once believed in the theory of evolution. The book is written for students in biology class.
Whether there is a bias or not in the scientific community and the media toward evolution many scientists who were once believed in evolution but now believe in creation, say evolution is not scientific. Maybe not all are now Christians, but many of them, Christians or not, do not hesitate to tell why they believe the theory of evolution is unscientific and does not provide any real answers to man."
http://voices.yahoo.com/scientists-not-believ...
&#9726;The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

&#9726;By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/about/faith

No matter what the evidence is, the Bible is true the way we say it's true. If they don't care about evidence, why should anybody care what they say about science?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#108154 Jan 19, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>So why is the GOD of the bible the only one you guys ever address? WHy is it the only one you ever attack? I don't care about other so-called gods...
You just answered your own question.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#108155 Jan 19, 2013
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
America gave Saddam Hussain the death penalty, yet homicide is a crime in America..
Are you sure about that? It was only a few years ago. I'm sure the articles are still around. But, to save you the time, let me assure you that you're a moron and you're wrong.
God Himself wrote:
So I dont see why you find it so difficult to understand that humans generally tend to kill whatever they dont like.
Both Moses and George Bush institute policies to kill who they dont like; I dont see what your problem is really.
ITS A HUMAN THING; NOT A CHRISTIAN NOR MUSLIM NOR JEW THING.
Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we're put on Earth to rise above.

Sounds like you're saying God's laws were devised by man.
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Was Saddam a goat?
Why couldnt they just keep him in prison forever?
Why kill him after he has been rendered harmless (captured, restrained etc)?
You dont seem to to be able to notice when your people do the same crap you find distasteful when others do it.
Remind us all who killed Saddam Hussein and where.
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, witches as they were in those days were not the poor defenceless people you seem to think they are.
Back in those days witches used to do blood sacrifice using babies etc.; so chances are, you would be just as pissed as Moses.
Evidence? By the way, THE ANCIENT HEBREWS HAD HUMAN SACRIFICES. If it wasn't a relatively normal thing, Abraham wouldn't have thought it within God's character to request, nor would Jephthah have considered the sacrifice of his daughter acceptable in any way.
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
My eyes are brimming with tears.
I'm sure, when the shit's stacked that high...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#108156 Jan 19, 2013
The Pencil Dick wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you have not demonstrated the scepticism that is not the same as nihilism.
<quoted text>
I could say the same about you.
You have not failed to demonstrate gullibility in your will to accept fact by consensus; you accept as fact BECAUSE other people accept as fact.
"I know you are but what am I?" Really?

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) 1 hr Chimney1 115,254
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 3 hr Chimney1 210
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 3 hr Chimney1 172,539
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 9 hr susanblange 321
Science News (Sep '13) Aug 28 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

•••