It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the ...

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

There are 150559 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.

marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109940 Feb 7, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
You just stated that jesus equals god. GOD the biggie thus, of creation.
Have to let that sink in for a while.
Kind of annuls anything else you state.
GUYS...I FOUND ONE!!
You definately have found one. Don't you wish you could refute him? Jesus being the creator is basic christianity. You should know that, should you not?
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109941 Feb 7, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
What? They evolved but they didn't evolve? I suppose this is Marky's Theory of Semi-Evolution.
Micro has never been debated. Human from non-human evolution has never been observed.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109942 Feb 7, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Chimney was right.
The quotemine, and source: an interview, and the twists made by 'anti-evolutionists' dissected.
The usual mispresentation, quotes out of context, ascribing of ulterior motives.
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2009...
She should sue.
This is abnormal.
Red herring. I don't even read discovery, the quotes I presented came from Eugenie Scootts own book. So sorry for quote mining the original source. Also, it was ridiculous to post that site to start with. It was sickenly biased. THe closing words were...

"And so, class, what have we learned from this?[Hands go up.] Okay, altogether now: Creationism is a bottomless pit of slime."

Quote mine that!

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#109943 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>It was scientists that got it wrong to begin with.
I suppose if you squint in a weird backhanded early bronze age tribal shamanistic view (that is, through Marksman11's glasses) you could stretch to say that Moses and his predecessors WERE sort of like scientists trying to makes sense of their world...
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109944 Feb 7, 2013
MAAT wrote:
I frankly find it normal that state and church/organised religion are seperated.
The French system is even more to my liking, where the state can force religions to treat people as human beings with human rights.
They may need that in France. We don't need that here. It is not a problem.
MAAT wrote:
I never understood why churches should not pay tax.
At least utility and county tax.
But that's a different topic.
Fine, I'll be glad for the church to pay taxes, but lets get prayer back in school, and evolution out, then we'll meet you at the tax office. Don't forget to check out our new Nativity Scene as you come in.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109945 Feb 7, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Until you get the wording correct, you will always look like a fool.
Compared to who? You? I'll take you one anytime. Why do you think you are so intellectually impressive? You're lucky I even reply to you.
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>There is no difference between "macro" and "micro" .... except the time scale.
See, you are no intellectual giant. Human from non-human evolution has never been observed. Micro has. I don't expect you to understand that. I stated for those that do understand it.
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text> If moths split into two groups, one where they developed stingers and the other where they developed pincers, would they still be moths?
Yes.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109946 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text> No you don't. You predict PE, and it has never been observed.

This is False. PE was observed which is why it is part of the ToE.

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> You predict macro-evolution, and it has never been observed.

This is false. Macroevolution evidence has been observed in the environment, in the genomic record and in the fossil record.

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> Panspermia has been supported by some in this group, it has never been observed.

This is correct.

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> Observation is meaningless when it comes to your philosophical beliefs.

We are discussing science. You are the one who keeps bringing philosophical beliefs to the table.

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> THe Cambrian Explosion,

The Cambrian period is a period of evolution just like all the others.

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> the flaws of the fossil record,

The fossil record is what it is. It is a fact there is a fossil record.

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> evolution of the gaps,

All periods contain evolution therefore there are no "gaps".

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text>the need to fabricate hoaxes,

You mean like fake human footprints near actual dinosaur footprints?

[QUOTE who="marksman11"] <quoted text> the the biggest prediction concerning human from non-human evolution is that creation predicts it could never be observed, and it hasn't.

Then creationism is falsified as multiple lines of evidence from multiple fields of science attest to human evolution.

Genetics proves human evolution.
The fossil record proves human evolution.
Anthropology proves human evolution.
Artifacts
Genomic mapping
anatomy
physiology
radiometric dating
just to name a few
All prove human evolution.


“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109947 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>It was scientists that got it wrong to begin with.

Science does not expect it will always get everything right on the first try.

Science does expect that it will be able to correct errors with new information.

To err is human.
To correct the error is science.
To remain steeped in fundamentalism is eternal ignorance.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109948 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You definately have found one. Don't you wish you could refute him? Jesus being the creator is basic christianity. You should know that, should you not?

Actually, this is not fundamental to Christianity even though the vast majority of modern denominations believe this.

This is not an original concept in Christianity and there is no reference to the belief before about 80 a.d.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109949 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Micro has never been debated. Human from non-human evolution has never been observed.

Again, from the scientific definition of 'observable' this is factually untrue.

Evolution is:
Observable
Testable (& repeatable)
Falsifiable

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109950 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Red herring. I don't even read discovery, the quotes I presented came from Eugenie Scootts own book. So sorry for quote mining the original source. Also, it was ridiculous to post that site to start with. It was sickenly biased. THe closing words were...
"And so, class, what have we learned from this?[Hands go up.] Okay, altogether now: Creationism is a bottomless pit of slime."
Quote mine that!

Do you even understand what a quotemine is?

You took and repeated a quote out of proper context.

You are guilty of quotemining. Period.

If it was accidental then just apologize and we go on with life.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109951 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>They may need that in France. We don't need that here. It is not a problem.<quoted text>Fine, I'll be glad for the church to pay taxes, but lets get prayer back in school, and evolution out, then we'll meet you at the tax office. Don't forget to check out our new Nativity Scene as you come in.

Prayer is not out of school.

Did you not know that?

Any child can pray in school if they wish to do so. I utilized that freedom frequently before pop quizes.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109952 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Compared to who? You? I'll take you one anytime. Why do you think you are so intellectually impressive? You're lucky I even reply to you. <quoted text>See, you are no intellectual giant. Human from non-human evolution has never been observed. Micro has. I don't expect you to understand that. I stated for those that do understand it.<quoted text>Yes.

Assertions, assertions, assertions. Not a fact to be found in any of yours posts.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#109954 Feb 7, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>They are not the same thing. A pound can be measured, and if multiplied 2000 times can be observed until it reaches a ton. A yard can be measured, and if observed mulitied 1760 times one can observed as a mile. Micro evolution has never been observed reoccuring to the point of becoming another completely different life form. Weight and distance has been observed and measured. Microevolution to something completely different has never been observed and never been measured. Apples and oranges my friend, apples and oranges. two have observable scientific evidence. Human from non-human evolution doesn't.
Again, and I have to say its getting boring to point this out to you over and over....we do observe small scale evolution and its the SAME PROCESS. But the world has been around a long time, so unless you can offer a sound scientific reason why that process should stop at some point, evolution is the expected result.

Now, obviously we cannot sit and watch huge chunks of evolution occurring before our eyes because its a slow process. So does science just say "bah, then we can never know!". Its smarter than that.

Like any good detective, it says:

IF this evolution happened, what do we expect to find that we can observe NOW?

If this evolution did NOT happen, what do we expect to find that we can observe NOW?

That is how theories in science are confirmed. Actually finding the observable predictions.

Such as....a continuum of ape-hominid intermediate skulls getting more and more apelike the further back we go over the last 4 million years.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#109955 Feb 8, 2013
I guess we shouldn't believe in the French Revolution, then,
because we never saw it and we don't see it now.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109956 Feb 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, and I have to say its getting boring to point this out to you over and over....we do observe small scale evolution and its the SAME PROCESS.
It is not the same process. We have observed small scale change, but there is no reason to think that it will lead to a totally different creature. It is even laughable to me to even think that it could. You are assuming it can and science is not about assumptions. It is about observable, testable, and replicatable facts.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text> But the world has been around a long time, so unless you can offer a sound scientific reason why that process should stop at some point, evolution is the expected result.
Since when does one have to prove a fantasy impossible? It's not up to me to show why it can't happen. It's up to you to prove that it did and you can't do that. If you could this forum wouldn't exist. Why is it that in the Cambrian, these life forms show up fully formed without any sign of an evolutionary ancestor, and remain in stasis until their extinction? You are never going to be able to support your philosophy until you bring observation back into the scientific method. Chemical evolution at the current time looks impossible to have ever produced the origin of life, so there is every reason to think that biological evolution can also not perform this same "magic". In the words of Chen, "We (meaning you) need to find a new theory."
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#109957 Feb 8, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
I guess we shouldn't believe in the French Revolution, then,
because we never saw it and we don't see it now.
You can believe what you want, but if you call it science, it has to be observable, testable, and replicatable. In history, there is no such thing as historical certainy. THe best you can do is observe all the logical and available evidence and have a psychological reaction in your mind.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#109958 Feb 8, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Mike, do you suppose even Creationists are evolving?
Doubtful.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#109959 Feb 8, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>It was scientists that got it wrong to begin with.
Sort of. Some were amateurs. In any event, science fixed itself. Only a moron would see that as some sort of fatal flaw.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#109960 Feb 8, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Micro has never been debated.
Oh really? What happened to that fully formed bullshit?
marksman11 wrote:
Human from non-human evolution has never been observed.
It has.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 5 min macumazahn 11,268
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 33 min Chimney1 195,306
Science News (Sep '13) 52 min scientia potentia... 3,574
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Scout 29,403
Posting for Points in the Evolution Forum (Oct '11) 12 hr DanFromSmithville 14,561
Ribose can be produced in space 19 hr DanFromSmithville 3
Cheap Kitchen Units UK Fri jojoyus 1
More from around the web