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
108,341 - 108,360 of 136,248 Comments Last updated 5 hrs ago

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#110398 Feb 17, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for your reply Maat,
There is one thing I have found that most all of them just reject out of hand. Tell them Adam and Ever never existed and therefore there was no need for Jesus, and see what the reaction is..:-)
Oh, they'll still insist on this: http://www.google.com/imgres...

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#110399 Feb 17, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe Mr. Ingersoll got some of his data from Thomas Jefferson's writings in the 1700's Also Higher Criticism had started in the early to middle 1800's I believe.
Some of KAB's post is telling:

"I know nothing of Mr. Ingersall... I know that his assertions are either unconfirmed or wrong."

I'd have to call that prejudice.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#110400 Feb 17, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Deut. 31:9. Your turn.
Folklore.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#110401 Feb 17, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not data; that's just a link to data.
And, the Bible is not evidence of the Bible's veracity, any more than my testimony is evidence of my testimony's veracity. Try again.
Hehehe.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110402 Feb 17, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
When the link is to a volume or location which is much more general than the specific data needed at the time, I will make such an observation virtually every time. If someone wants to make a specific point they can be expected to provide the specific confirming data/reference. If one line/page is all that's needed then the reference should not be a book.
Specific conclusions or precise data it is based on should only be provided to peope of whom we know they will scrutinize all the material with a fine toothcomb and present us with a razorsharpanalysis and either supporting evidence or point out the way to falsify it.
You are not in that category, and we doubt you even read any.
That's apart from understanding it.
So the future can only hold more books, 101's ander other sorts of introductory marterial.

I'm royal with the we's.;p

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110403 Feb 17, 2013
sjeez apart form the simple practical issue of material in a PDF, all or nothing. And usually you will find the page open at the requested information.
If not then information is considered provided.
And why be mentally lazy!

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110404 Feb 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, they'll still insist on this: http://www.google.com/imgres...
9QEwAQ&dur=2558
The horrible thing is that the original does not state rib but side.
So they are frankly equal.
Womens rights hard fought to be able to study, work a.s.o.
It's like we are going back to the dark ages.
So all in all another testimony to stupidity.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#110405 Feb 18, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
That was written by Robert Ingersoll in the late 1800's. You see they had already noticed that there were anachronisms and other unsolvable problems with the Pentateuch's text. Enough problems that many many of the scholars believe Moses did not write it and that possibly Moses was fictitious.
Higher criticism has found 2 creation stories and 2 flood stories blended together in the Genesis chapter, and then there are the anachronisms of Abraham and Ur of the Chaldee's and the rescue of Lot from the city of Dan, and the list of Edomite Kings that was not known to Moses.
There is also two descriptions of the covenant between God and Abraham. Two stories about the naming of Isaac. Two stories about the renaming of Jacob. Two versions of the Ten commandments. Some refer to God as Yahweh and others as Elohim.
All of this and more comes from the Documentary Hypothesis and is now accepted by essentially all mainline and liberal theologians.
If you add to all of this the fact that the Exodus is a fictional story that kind of leaves Moses in a vacuum. Was he real or not.
It is obvious you've never read or researched "The Signature of GOD" by Grant Jefferies.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#110406 Feb 18, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Just read the Pentateuch critically.......
You should follow your own advice concerning human from non-human evolution.
marksman11

Asheville, NC

#110407 Feb 18, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
That was written by Robert Ingersoll in the late 1800's. You see they had already noticed that there were anachronisms and other unsolvable problems with the Pentateuch's text. Enough problems that many many of the scholars believe Moses did not write it and that possibly Moses was fictitious.
Higher criticism has found 2 creation stories and 2 flood stories blended together in the Genesis chapter, and then there are the anachronisms of Abraham and Ur of the Chaldee's and the rescue of Lot from the city of Dan, and the list of Edomite Kings that was not known to Moses.
There is also two descriptions of the covenant between God and Abraham. Two stories about the naming of Isaac. Two stories about the renaming of Jacob. Two versions of the Ten commandments. Some refer to God as Yahweh and others as Elohim.
All of this and more comes from the Documentary Hypothesis and is now accepted by essentially all mainline and liberal theologians.
If you add to all of this the fact that the Exodus is a fictional story that kind of leaves Moses in a vacuum. Was he real or not.
Robert Ingersoll was an evolutionist, but he wasn't a scientist. He was a lawyer. Funny how you'll take his 19th. century philosophy and discard that from a micro-biochemist professor. In reality, it supports my claim that human from non-human evolution is not science, but a humanist philosophy.
LowellGuy

United States

#110408 Feb 18, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Robert Ingersoll was an evolutionist, but he wasn't a scientist. He was a lawyer. Funny how you'll take his 19th. century philosophy and discard that from a micro-biochemist professor. In reality, it supports my claim that human from non-human evolution is not science, but a humanist philosophy.
So, you won't bring up Simon Greenleaf anymore, then?
KAB

United States

#110409 Feb 18, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
So if no one gives you data to back up what they say do you just discard/ignore what they are saying and believe its not true??
No
KAB

United States

#110410 Feb 18, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Just read the Pentateuch critically and you'll find your data.
You are the one attempting to make a point. Provide specific references which you think make the point(s). The whole Pentateuch does not relate to your individual points. Cite the specific passage(s) which do. Do your homework. Short of that, you have nothing.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#110411 Feb 18, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Deut. 31:9. Your turn.
That's an assertion, it's not data or evidence at all, he asked for data.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#110412 Feb 18, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You should follow your own advice concerning human from non-human evolution.
Alright, if humans didn't evolve from another species, then how did humans come into being? Note, I asked how, "god dun it" isn't how, that's who.
KAB

United States

#110413 Feb 18, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not data; that's just a link to data.
And, the Bible is not evidence of the Bible's veracity, any more than my testimony is evidence of my testimony's veracity. Try again.
The question raised is about authorship of the document, not veracity. A statement from the document about its authorship is data about its authorship. Try to stay on point!
KAB

United States

#110414 Feb 18, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Specific conclusions or precise data it is based on should only be provided to peope of whom we know they will scrutinize all the material with a fine toothcomb and present us with a razorsharpanalysis and either supporting evidence or point out the way to falsify it.
You are not in that category, and we doubt you even read any.
That's apart from understanding it.
So the future can only hold more books, 101's ander other sorts of introductory marterial.
I'm royal with the we's.;p
Thanks for the razor sharp commentary on razor sharp analysis. It's so characteristic of you.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#110415 Feb 18, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The question raised is about authorship of the document, not veracity. A statement from the document about its authorship is data about its authorship. Try to stay on point!
I owned a book that made the claim it was written by the "Mad Arab" Abdul Alhazred, it's called the Necronomicon. Was it written by Abdul?
KAB

United States

#110416 Feb 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
That's an assertion, it's not data or evidence at all, he asked for data.
By definition, an assertion requires a statement declaring a position. I made no such statement. I merely provided data.
KAB

United States

#110417 Feb 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I owned a book that made the claim it was written by the "Mad Arab" Abdul Alhazred, it's called the Necronomicon. Was it written by Abdul?
Is the data conclusive?

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) 4 min Lawrence Wolf 115,188
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 49 min Aura Mytha 305
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 2 hr Subduction Zone 172,506
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 2 hr TedHOhio 200
Science News (Sep '13) Thu positronium 2,848
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Wed 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

•••