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 5,396)

Showing posts 107,901 - 107,920 of127,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109931
Feb 7, 2013
 
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes. I make it very clear because Darwinists try to morph the term when cornered as if micro and macro are the same thing. That is why I clarify. I believe they evolved, just not into something else.

Microevolution is to macroevolution as seconds are to years.

The first two are both evolution and the second two are both time.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109932
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The observable Cambrian was originally almost all from one site - one snapshot in time - The Burgess Shale. We did not know what was before as there were precious few fossil sites. As more are discivered two things become clear.
1. There is significant evolution during the Cambrian period, with the simplest forms earliest.
2. There is multi-cellular life before the snap-shot period and the Cambrian itself, right back into the Ediacaran.
None of this violates the concept of punctuated equilibrium, but it should remind you that this period of evolution it was not "sudden" except in the millions of year timelines used in geology and evolution. You keep acting like PE was "poof!" one day nothing and the next, a seabed teaming with life. Nobody has EVER suggested that.
Then it does't explain the Cambrian Explosion because the Cambrian refutes Stasis completely. It shows evolution is appearing like steps with a burst of evolution being the risers, followed by times of stasis. Sooo if PE doesn't explain sudden bursts of evolution found in the Cambrian Explosion, then it doesn't support evolution. Did you know that the palenotologist that worked in the Cambrian in China said that Darwinism does not explain the Cambrian? He stated, "We need a new theory."
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You have also been told, before, that the few Ediacaran fossils we have are soft bodied. If the Cambrian was the time when creatures started to develop hard shells and skeletons, which preserve more easily, of course it would look like a sudden increase in the fossils!
The Cambrian in China that was discovered close to the Vietnam border has soft body systems preserved wonderfully. This complex life forms appeared suddenly and without ancestors, and you admit PE can't explain it, and Darwinism definately has no observable answer.....so it appears your philosphy is in deep trouble.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109933
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I would have to read Scott to comment.
I have have, and I suggest you do. By the way, her organization is nothing more than a creation bashing institute. Like I said, they have all these degrees, then hire ACLU lawyers to make a church/state issue of these cases, where if evolution was so scientifically sound, the science would stand on it's own. Well, at tleast these ACLU lawyers are making a little money!
marksman11

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109934
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, they are the same thing: evolution.
Just like a pound and a ton are both weight.
And a yard and a mile are both distance.
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.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109935
Feb 7, 2013
 
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Then it does't explain the Cambrian Explosion because the Cambrian refutes Stasis completely. It shows evolution is appearing like steps with a burst of evolution being the risers, followed by times of stasis. Sooo if PE doesn't explain sudden bursts of evolution found in the Cambrian Explosion, then it doesn't support evolution. Did you know that the palenotologist that worked in the Cambrian in China said that Darwinism does not explain the Cambrian? He stated, "We need a new theory."<quoted text>The Cambrian in China that was discovered close to the Vietnam border has soft body systems preserved wonderfully. This complex life forms appeared suddenly and without ancestors, and you admit PE can't explain it, and Darwinism definately has no observable answer.....so it appears your philosphy is in deep trouble.

This is incredulity of a strawman!

First of all, it is a LIE that there are any more "bursts" of evolution in the Cambrian than in any other period.

ALL of the forms of the early Cambrian have precursors in the PreCambrian. They DO have ancestors. Evolution (of which PE is a part) explains it fully.

Evolution is a fact
The Theory of Evolution is the ONLY theory of origins in science.

All you have is your philosophical notions based on disinformation you have willingly gorged yourself on.

You have never had anything and still don't.

Time to grow up.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109936
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>I have have, and I suggest you do. By the way, her organization is nothing more than a creation bashing institute. Like I said, they have all these degrees, then hire ACLU lawyers to make a church/state issue of these cases, where if evolution was so scientifically sound, the science would stand on it's own. Well, at tleast these ACLU lawyers are making a little money!

The science does stand on its own.

Creationism/ID is nothing more than a way to try to WEDGE religion into schools to indoctrinate our youth with fundamentalist delusions.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109937
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.

You just repeat whatever creotard sites tell you.

Microevolution HAS been observed.
Macroevolution HAS been observed.
Macroevolution HAS been tracked to the macro level.

If you want to believe lies you can. Or you COULD check to see what science has ACTUALLY found.

But you are too gutless.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109938
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We do require observation: observation of the predictions the theory of evolution makes.
No you don't. You predict PE, and it has never been observed. You predict macro-evolution, and it has never been observed. Panspermia has been supported by some in this group, it has never been observed. Observation is meaningless when it comes to your philosophical beliefs.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We have found them in spades. Meanwhile creationists have tried their darndest to find observations that do not match the predictions of evolution, and failed miserably. For 150 years.
That is science, Marksman, whether you think it should be or not.
Just take everything I mentioned above. THe Cambrian Explosion, the flaws of the fossil record, evolution of the gaps, the need to fabricate hoaxes, the the biggest prediction concerning human from non-human evolution is that creation predicts it could never be observed, and it hasn't.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109939
Feb 7, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>

So? It still was scientists that corrected the mistakes. Your fundies didn't contribute anything.
It was scientists that got it wrong to begin with.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109940
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109942
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 107,901 - 107,920 of127,195
|
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.

6 Users are viewing the Evolution Debate Forum right now

Search the Evolution Debate Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 11 min Chimney1 168,604
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 39 min SevenTee 106,056
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 11 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 13,494
Kevin Wingate: ID should be included in science... Apr 17 llDayo 5
Science News (Sep '13) Apr 17 Ricky F 2,671
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) Apr 16 MikeF 1,236
Posting for Points in the Evolution Forum (Oct '11) Apr 15 ChristineM 13,936
•••
•••
•••
•••