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

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

There are 150645 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.

KAB

United States

#110711 Feb 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one seeking to restrict.
An honest person would have quoted
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_science
since we are having a discussion about science.
If I had referred to "data science" I would have used the definition for "data science", but since my reference was to "data", I, surprisingly, used the definition for "data". At least I'm starting to appreciate why you found that restrictive since you would prefer to apply the definition for "data science" to the word "data". Let me know when you get agreement from the keepers and protectors of the dictionaries on that.
KAB

United States

#110712 Feb 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This just goes back to Sumerian beliefs about the origin of the sky (why is the sky blue?) and the origin of rain.
I say Gen 1:8 is about god playing with a yo-yo. You're free to rationalize otherwise.
No need. You've sufficiently outed yourself.
KAB

United States

#110713 Feb 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Therapy is ineffective against psychotic disorders without adjunct psychotropic meds.
You're the doctor, and you're probably right. If you don't take your meds, the therapy probably won't work.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110714 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
So is it your understanding that "make" only applies to creating (i.e., forming) a material object?
asah accomplish, a setting, attributing/founding to by division.
And i explained that hebrew is a language in motion.
Create as in finished thing does not feature.
And i explaied that the jewish calendar does indeed start with the world being made but actually at least one year before. So it's a reordering, redividing. Also that it is arbitrarily choosen since from reading the tanakh it is simply impossible to conclude anything about the actual date.
But we also discussed that the grammar used in genesis implies nothingmore but a day of 24 hours, and this is because the intent was to establish six working days and one resting day. So placed first to make believers clear what the proper behaviour is. But not a creation account as such. At most a creation account of priestly intent. That keeps in step with the second set of commandments genesis 34. On holidays, food etc.
And reading it in the proper hebrew way, you are even hard pressed to find all the days. Where it not for the numbering.

The calendar and what went on before. I did not go to deep into that, because i feel it is upto people to read up if they are interested.

We went over this word meaning with Tangled Bank.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110715 Feb 21, 2013
But KAB if you think yotting down gen. 1:6,7
constitutes data, then no matter what we post(and you must admit that we've posted so much more then you of this kind of data and even linked and sourced it), you will always misunderstand data and the scientific method.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#110716 Feb 21, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
If you see 404 you don't go yelling data less, but kindly state the link can not be accessed. Or you google for it.
Simply write online hebrew interlinear bible
But i also gave you BDB.
And i did mention the 10,000 page plus version of the commented translation of every hebrew word.
verb asah-accomplished, use here however 'making'.
So more then enough sourced data. And on biblos which is accessable you can compare any and all versions.
It's just you that have the wrong kind of it.
Ot rather your lazyness.

biblical Hebrew only has about 8,000 words to begin with. Most later words are from compounding classic words, european words (and other imports), and slang.
KAB

United States

#110717 Feb 21, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
I still wonder what version of the translations you use i.o.w. what bible.
I left the hebrew i for i once got the silly complaint that no hebrew source was present. Even though you will only see numbers.
In case the interlineair could no be accessed from this forum:
uiamr
andhe-is-saying
&#1492;&#1460;&#14 97;
&#1488;&#1457;
aleim
Elohim
&#1497;&#1456;&#14 92;&#1460;&#1497;
iei
he-shall-become
&#1512;&#1464;&#15 11;&#1460;&#1497;& #1506;&#1463;
rqio
atmosphere
 &#1514; &#1456;
bthuk
inmidst-of
&#1497;&#1460;" &#1492;&#1463; &#1464;
emim
thewaters
&#1493;&#1460;&#14 97;&#1492;&#1460;& #1497;
uiei
andhe-shall-become
(The following is the translations as you will find in most christian bibles.)
. And God said, Let there
be a firmament in the midst
of the waters, and let it
divide the waters from the
waters.
6
&#1497;&#1500; & &#1502;&#1463;&#14 89;&#1456; &#1460;
mbdil
cseparating
' &#1497; &#1461;
bin
between
&#1502;&#1463;&#14 97;&#1460;
mim
waters
&#1500;&#1464;&#15 02;&#1464;&#1497;& #1460;
lmim
towaters
:
:
1:7 * &#1506;&#1463;# &#1493;&#1463; &#1463;
uiosh
andhe-is-makingdo
&#1492;&#1460;&#14 97;
&#1488;&#1457;
aleim
Elohim
&#1488;&#1462;&#15 14;
ath

&#1470;
-
&#1492;&#1464;&#15 12;&#1464;&#1511;& #1460;&#1497;&#1506; &#1463;
erqio
theatmosphere
&#1500;& &#1489;&#1456; &#1461; # &#1493;&#1463; &#1463;
uibdl
andhe-is-cseparating
' &#1497; &#1461;
bin
between
&#1497;&#1460;" &#1492;&#1463; &#1463;
emim
thewaters
&#1512; &#1488;&#1458; &#1462;
ashr
which
(The following is the translation as you will find in most christian bibles.)
And God made the
firmament, and divided the
waters which [were] under
the firmament from the
waters which [were] above
the firmament: and it was
so.
7
&#1495;&#1463;&#15 14; , &#1502;&#1460; &#1463;
mthchth
fromunder
&#1500;&#1464;&#15 12;&#1464;&#1511;& #1460;&#1497;&#1506; &#1463;
lrqio
totheatmosphere
' &#1489;&#1461;&#14 97; 
ubin
andbetween
&#1497;&#1460;" &#1492;&#1463; &#1463;
emim
thewaters
&#1512; &#1488;&#1458; &#1462;
ashr
which
&#1502;&#1461;&#15 06;&#1463;&#1500;
mol
fromon
&#1500;&#1464;&#15 12;&#1464;&#1511;& #1460;&#1497;&#1506; &#1463;
lrqio
totheatmosphere
&#1493;&#1463;&#14 97;&#1456;&#1492;& #1460;&#1497;
uiei
andhe-is-becoming
&#1470;
-
' &#1499;&#1461;
kn
so
:
:
&#1511;&#1456;&#15 12;&#1464;&#1488; 1:8 # &#1493;&#1463; &#1460;
uiqra
andhe-is-calling
&#1492;&#1460;&#14 97;
&#1488;&#1457;
aleim
Elohim
&#1500;&#1464;&#15 12;&#1464;&#1511;& #1460;&#1497;&#1506; &#1463;
I love it when the program dictates the computer to end like in hebrew and the end of the word, so your beginning.
But DOGEN IS RIGHT, no cloudcover.
And it's obvious spheres of godly infuence are meant.
As you note and I quote,

"divided the waters which [were] under the firmament from the
waters which [were] above the firmament"

Is this not an allowable translation from the Hebrew?

It is not obvious that spheres of godly infuence are meant.

Please provide confirming data if you are going to take the position that the above is not an allowable translation.
KAB

United States

#110718 Feb 21, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
If you see 404 you don't go yelling data less, but kindly state the link can not be accessed. Or you google for it.
Simply write online hebrew interlinear bible
But i also gave you BDB.
And i did mention the 10,000 page plus version of the commented translation of every hebrew word.
verb asah-accomplished, use here however 'making'.
So more then enough sourced data. And on biblos which is accessable you can compare any and all versions.
It's just you that have the wrong kind of it.
Ot rather your lazyness.
I accessed the link directly and the Hebrew interlinear displayed perfectly. Allowable meanings of the words rendered "waters" and "made" are all that's at issue. If there is something not allowable about those meanings then provide data to confirm that.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#110719 Feb 21, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I was talking about Hamm's version. It's virtually impossible to even consider that the creationists actually know what it really means.

Point taken.
KAB

United States

#110720 Feb 21, 2013
MIDutch wrote:
<quoted text>
As if your interest is worth anything.
If it isn't of interest, then ignore it. We JWs don't force. We offer and leave when not welcome. Regarding the latter, remember you are only one person in this forum and you too are free to leave whenever you want.
KAB

United States

#110721 Feb 21, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
It think it little more than flowery prose.
<quoted text>
Genesis 1:
16 God made two great lightsthe greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good."
I don't need to resort to a dictionary. If the god of the bible wanted to say it differently, he would have. It says what it says.
Even flowery prose has meaning, but you didn't share your understanding.

On the other point, I fully agree. It says what it says.
KAB

United States

#110722 Feb 21, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
asah accomplish, a setting, attributing/founding to by division.
And i explained that hebrew is a language in motion.
Create as in finished thing does not feature.
And i explaied that the jewish calendar does indeed start with the world being made but actually at least one year before. So it's a reordering, redividing. Also that it is arbitrarily choosen since from reading the tanakh it is simply impossible to conclude anything about the actual date.
But we also discussed that the grammar used in genesis implies nothingmore but a day of 24 hours, and this is because the intent was to establish six working days and one resting day. So placed first to make believers clear what the proper behaviour is. But not a creation account as such. At most a creation account of priestly intent. That keeps in step with the second set of commandments genesis 34. On holidays, food etc.
And reading it in the proper hebrew way, you are even hard pressed to find all the days. Where it not for the numbering.
The calendar and what went on before. I did not go to deep into that, because i feel it is upto people to read up if they are interested.
We went over this word meaning with Tangled Bank.
So, asah is not restricted to only mean forming a material object, correct?

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110723 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I accessed the link directly and the Hebrew interlinear displayed perfectly. Allowable meanings of the words rendered "waters" and "made" are all that's at issue. If there is something not allowable about those meanings then provide data to confirm that.
No cloud cover.
And about waters not meaning waters i posted an entire thesis.
I'm not going to repeat information that you do not take note of anyway.

The translation is the simpleton version. From greek to latin to english. At a certain point under cultural pressure of outsiders people come to believe that the translation is nd literal nd correct.
It was in any case usefull to the church being created as in terms of having the god given right to dominate the world.
Any disagreement would have you burned at the stake.

Greek and latin had even less words and concepts to start with.
So now we are maybe living in slightly enlightened times were textual criticism and paleo-hebrew are properly studied and results published.
None of it dimishes what people want to believe.
Though i would frankly say that it gives more scope to the meaning.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#110724 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
In an attempt to help you get a grip on reality, here's a sample data posting,
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...
If that is your idea of "data", you should be OVERWHELMED by this...

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2...

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110725 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
So, asah is not restricted to only mean forming a material object, correct?
no, it can appear as suffixed. But then the very thing would make it clear to you that the process is finished.
(The analysis on passages about jesus, from the NT even stated that 'upto' no longer meant till that point. That i would call silly.)
Let's show a christian website on old testament sudies.
It would state that asah is not helpfull for it's meaning is too broad.
You could compare it to rock engravings where a dot is placed near f.i. the head, indicating thinking. Or near the leg, walking. etc.
That is not from the christian website but analog reasoning.
http://www.christianleadershipcenter.org/Bara...
And bara also merits more discussion.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#110726 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I accessed the link directly and the Hebrew interlinear displayed perfectly. Allowable meanings of the words rendered "waters" and "made" are all that's at issue. If there is something not allowable about those meanings then provide data to confirm that.

So,.... you have nothing........ again.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110727 Feb 21, 2013
Great prose.

Should you ever be athirst in the great American desert, try this experiment, if your caravan happen to be supplied with a metaphysical professor.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#110728 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If it isn't of interest, then ignore it. We JWs don't force. We offer and leave when not welcome. Regarding the latter, remember you are only one person in this forum and you too are free to leave whenever you want.
Verses refuting JW beliefs,#1
Hebrews 6:1-3

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#110729 Feb 21, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>no, it can appear as suffixed. But then the very thing would make it clear to you that the process is finished.
(The analysis on passages about jesus, from the NT even stated that 'upto' no longer meant till that point. That i would call silly.)
Let's show a christian website on old testament sudies.
It would state that asah is not helpfull for it's meaning is too broad.
You could compare it to rock engravings where a dot is placed near f.i. the head, indicating thinking. Or near the leg, walking. etc.
That is not from the christian website but analog reasoning.
http://www.christianleadershipcenter.org/Bara...
And bara also merits more discussion.
I suggest that you KAB start reading back from where you started.
All variant meanings have been discussed as well as the reason for it.
B beth house/dwelling
R rosh head/chiefly
LowellGuy

United States

#110730 Feb 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If I had referred to "data science" I would have used the definition for "data science", but since my reference was to "data", I, surprisingly, used the definition for "data". At least I'm starting to appreciate why you found that restrictive since you would prefer to apply the definition for "data science" to the word "data". Let me know when you get agreement from the keepers and protectors of the dictionaries on that.
Didn't even look. What you call "data science" (clearly you looked at the URL and dismissed it outright) is wikipedia's disambiguation text for the URL. I guess one click and one minute is more trouble than it's worth to use words in the proper context. You just bore false witness in the name of preserving your faith. I'm sure God appreciates that.

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) 26 min Richardfs 11,701
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 55 min Igor Trip 195,614
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 hr Thinking 29,551
Humans Performing Dentistry 8000 Years Before F... 19 hr MIDutch 1
Science News (Sep '13) Tue scientia potentia... 3,621
News Exposing the impotence of the Neo-Darwinian theory (Jan '15) Tue asar 12
Posting for Points in the Evolution Forum (Oct '11) Tue ChristineM 14,570
More from around the web