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.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#108855 Jan 25, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>
You have faith because you accept things you can not emperically <sic> prove. Like a naturalistic origin of life, and human from non-human evolution.
We have proof of human from non-human evolution….keep up.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#108856 Jan 25, 2013
And God said,“Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

No matter how an ideologue wants to waffle, interpret or rationalize, "day" is definitively 12 hours +/- of daylight in one breath and (light, dark, evening plus morning) a 24 hour "day" in the next. Whether it's in Godian, Godese or Godoslavian, in the biblical creation myth a "day" must be a literal 24 hours and a week is 168 hours.
Now KAB, Mark, GH... quit yer diatribes, posturing, sidestepping, hypothesizing and blustering and fit the known FACTS to your story.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108857 Jan 25, 2013
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
If the local area was in something of "basin" (as it relates to landforms) then it would be possible to stand at the border of the basin and look at the top of mountains that are in the depression.
It would also be possible for the flood to cover the tops of mountains in that "basin" without the flood spreading to neighbouring countries.
Can you not understand that?
Yes I can. Is that what happened?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#108858 Jan 25, 2013
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it interesting that you word your idea like that.
It is very illuminating, as such.
I find it interesting that you said: "...the phylogenies are adjusted to accomodate that information..."
Instead of:
"...the information is adjusted to accomodate that/those phylogenies..."
To say "the phylogenies are adjusted to accomodate", suggests that the phenomena itself is modified for/at 'your' convenience.
Thats why I dont find evolutionary data to be credible.
You are the ones making your own sense of what is occurring.
You fabricate your own meaning and knowledge.
GH, the point is as I stated. If you understand what the other poster is attempting to say, address the content and move on. Choosing to deride them on spelling, grammar, syntax, phraseology, punctuation, et al is merely a hobgoblin. Move on.

However, this is not what you attempted. Your proposal is that phylogenies should not be updated to fit new information, but rather that information should be "adjusted to accomodate" existing classifications. A telling point, indeed. One can easily detect your predilections for dogma and doctrine, even if understanding it is (thankfully) beyond my ken.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108859 Jan 25, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you ever address MikeF's telling you that the Bible is mistaken in its telling us the earth was made before the sun??
I think that qualifies as a MAJOR faux pas by god....don't you??
I did address it. The major faux pas was by MF!
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108860 Jan 25, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No you don't. You ignore data every single time we post it and just claim "Well just MAYBE there still WAS a global flood!" Then you ask us to post the same thing again because you claimed you never saw it.
As it is, you lack data to support this. Data merely showing there was a flood at somewhere at sometime coupled with "Well just MAYBE!" is insufficient.
<quoted text>
Been done hundreds of times over.(shrug)
As I stated, because you can't!
Infinite declarations of "been done" will never substitute for the simple saved post link example which would take no more effort to post than "been done" everytime I issue the challenge. Again, you won't because none exist. There's one simple way for you to prove me wrong. The ball's (dead ball) in your court!
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108861 Jan 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
How ya figure? It shoots down your Hebrew slaves assertion.
I haven't made a Hebrew slaves assertion.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108862 Jan 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
That was an introductory sentence. A preface, Mr English Expert. The sun isn't mentioned until the 4th day. Genesis 1:16-19
<quoted text>
So what?
Genesis 1:16-19 addresses the sun's relationship to the earth. The Hebrew word used is not the same word for create used in Genesis 1:1, thus denoting a different type of activity.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108863 Jan 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I did address it. The major faux pas was by MF!
*sigh*

Biblically, was the Earth made before the Sun?

Or did the deity make the Sun beforehand, but just kept in his back pocket for a later "peekaboo"?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108864 Jan 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Genesis 1:16-19 addresses the sun's relationship to the earth. The Hebrew word used is not the same word for create used in Genesis 1:1, thus denoting a different type of activity.
Sure. That's a matter of case.

"Fish" is not the same word as "fishing".

Sorta.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108865 Jan 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
My "So what?" was in response to your question:
<quoted text>
Perhaps I should have said "How does it matter?". However, I doubt you would have replied to that either. You have a history of ignoring things.
I did reply. It doesn't matter to me because I didn't raise the point. I just made an observation stemming from the data provided. You know I love to take note of how data is used.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#108866 Jan 25, 2013
Dogen wrote:
scientific community is NOT divided on the subject of evolution.

GH wrote:
Keep repeating it; you might its the best way to convince yourself.

But as long as person within that scientific community dont accept the theory as valid; there is a division in the scientific community on the matter.

Well, unless "division" means something else to you.

If we spent more time discussing facts and less time on semantic quibbling, we might accomplish something.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108867 Jan 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have so little shame in your blatant quest to discredit other posters that you even throw "data" from your own Holy Bible onto the compost heap? What a disgustingly low bar of ethics and morality you creationists set for yourselves.
Gen 1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth"(day one)
Gen 16 "God made two great lights - the greater light to govern the day..." (day four)
Did you notice that "create" and "made" are different words? Why is that do you think?

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#108868 Jan 25, 2013
GH, #108844 was a really lovely post.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108869 Jan 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been over this. You invoke ridiculous interpretations such as equating the use of the word "day" in Genesis 2 to have the same meaning in Genesis 1 - which it clearly doesn't have. Hell, it's not even the same author.
What's clear is what the possibilities are since that's determined entirely and objectively by language mechanics. That's data! Your desire (not data) is for your view to be the only possible conclusion. Get use to disappointment.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108870 Jan 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Optimistic speculations by GH are your newest source of data? Genesis states all the Earth, not a hypothetical basin somewhere north of the Persian Gulf.
I agree.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108871 Jan 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
And God said,“Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
No matter how an ideologue wants to waffle, interpret or rationalize, "day" is definitively 12 hours +/- of daylight in one breath and (light, dark, evening plus morning) a 24 hour "day" in the next. Whether it's in Godian, Godese or Godoslavian, in the biblical creation myth a "day" must be a literal 24 hours and a week is 168 hours.
Now KAB, Mark, GH... quit yer diatribes, posturing, sidestepping, hypothesizing and blustering and fit the known FACTS to your story.
How do evening and morning relate to day?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#108872 Jan 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you notice that "create" and "made" are different words? Why is that do you think?
You ask that in English - by far and away the most populated language in the world. Would you care to speculate on how impoverished the Hebrew language was by comparison 4500 years ago? Phooey. Why am I even contemplating semantics and nuances with the likes of you?

---------
Why don't we cut to the chase with all integrity and the bullshyte aside; there is only one rigorously honest reason threads like this one are created and continue for more than a page and a half.

"Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me."

Go suck your thumb.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108873 Jan 25, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>*sigh*
Biblically, was the Earth made before the Sun?
Or did the deity make the Sun beforehand, but just kept in his back pocket for a later "peekaboo"?
You're beginning to get the idea. From the perspective of the earth, which is the perspective of the first chapter of Genesis, the sun was not initially "made" visible as a luminary until the "cloud cover" eased a bit.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#108874 Jan 25, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Sure. That's a matter of case.
"Fish" is not the same word as "fishing".
Sorta.
I the Hebrew Genesis case it's not two different forms of the same word.

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
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 7 min DanFromSmithville 161,700
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 15 min In Six Days 1,639
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr thetruth 18,841
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 2 hr Paul Porter1 13,692
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 2 hr Kong_ 178,597
The Definition of a Creationist Scientist 3 hr Zog Has-fallen 3
proof of gods existence .....or lack there of 23 hr Chimney1 14
More from around the web