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

There are 141328 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.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#111645 Mar 5, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
But, as there is controversy, LEGITIMATE controversy, regarding the Bible's reliability, and as any honestly skeptical person would never consider a source's reputation as sufficient justification for accepting absolutely any claim from that source as true prima facie, you can't honestly hold the position you hold. Guess what that makes you? Not just to us, but to yourself. That's sad.

He demands ABSOLUTE proof that the flood did not happen. But his standards for his religious book is that anything goes and it is proven reliable.

What Buggs Bunny referred to as a "hipotwrit"!

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#111646 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You're entitled to your view.

Lowell was not presenting his personal view. He was reflecting on the actual state of affairs as they actually exist. You hand wave does not make that disappear to anyone but yourself.

It comes back to the point I have made over and over again; that you are just here for your own selfish reasons. You just need to keep your cognitive dissonance low and this is a way to do that. In other words it makes you feel better about your programming (er.... "belief").

Can you say "Narcissistic", boys and girls? I knew you could!

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#111647 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you still can't distinguish assertion from supporting data.
Yet all your own "supporting data" stems from the indefensible assertion that we should accept the Bible on faith.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#111648 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
There are only about 7 billion people on the planet now. What proportion do you think hold leprechauns to be real? Whatever the actual number, I know of none that are demonstrated reliable sources. Hey, we're talking error free record here!
Using the four Gospels, please reconstruct for us a perfectly consistent account of the death and resurrection of Jesus, including the order of events, number of witnesses, etc.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#111649 Mar 5, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
He demands ABSOLUTE proof that the flood did not happen. But his standards for his religious book is that anything goes and it is proven reliable.
What Buggs Bunny referred to as a "hipotwrit"!
Amazing that he can't see this logical contradiction in himself. Especially for someone who considers himself quite intelligent and an expert at language.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111650 Mar 5, 2013
CM wrote: "Then this must the first available version of the Bible. I can see how the Creator of the Universe "had a hand" in it..."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/...
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither OEC or YEC was the basis for your post, was it? Why aren't you trying to defend your post on its merits? That would be the scientific approach.
Do I really have to spell it out with finger paints for you, KAB? The beginnings of the written word (or Word, as you please) began with representative art, and representative art predates the creation myth by tens of thousands of years.
At least TRY to make some effort to become relevant, KAB.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111651 Mar 5, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure what you are linking to. I am the only one on that page providing data.
You get the wrong link? Or are you just hoping people won't check?
Page 5479 comment 111584. Check the address bar after clicking the link.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#111652 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
There are only about 7 billion people on the planet now. What proportion do you think hold leprechauns to be real? Whatever the actual number, I know of none that are demonstrated reliable sources. Hey, we're talking error free record here!
There have been billions of eye witnesses, billions of stories, and a few thousand movies about them. If you are basing your evidence on the assertions made in one book, leprechauns have your god beat by quite a bit. Thus, if you hold to your standard of evidence, you cannot deny leprechauns are real, without being a hypocrite. It's as simple as that.
KAB

United States

#111653 Mar 5, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure what you are linking to. I am the only one on that page providing data.
You get the wrong link? Or are you just hoping people won't check?
It's Chrome's post. Did you try reading the link? The post number is the dead giveaway. The issue was his erroneous reference to the first version of Bible writings.
KAB

United States

#111654 Mar 5, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Lowell was not presenting his personal view. He was reflecting on the actual state of affairs as they actually exist. You hand wave does not make that disappear to anyone but yourself.
It comes back to the point I have made over and over again; that you are just here for your own selfish reasons. You just need to keep your cognitive dissonance low and this is a way to do that. In other words it makes you feel better about your programming (er.... "belief").
Can you say "Narcissistic", boys and girls? I knew you could!
Bob wants to know if you feel better now, Doc?
KAB

United States

#111655 Mar 5, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet all your own "supporting data" stems from the indefensible assertion that we should accept the Bible on faith.
Are you going to provide data to confirm that, or do we just have to accept it on faith (Hebrews 11:1)?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#111656 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you going to provide data to confirm that, or do we just have to accept it on faith (Hebrews 11:1)?
You just proved his assertion of you accurate.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111657 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's Chrome's post. Did you try reading the link? The post number is the dead giveaway. The issue was his erroneous reference to the first version of Bible writings.
You're late again, KAB. I'd already addressed that for Dogen and I'd already explained why I allege cave paintings to be a precursor to Da Wurd. Try to keep up.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#111658 Mar 5, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet all your own "supporting data" stems from the indefensible assertion that we should accept the Bible on faith.

I have no problem with the notion that the bible should be taken on faith.

I have problems with the notions that the bible is perfectly accurate and literally true.

As to your suggestion that the 4 gospels tell 4 different stories, this is quite true. But (to a non-literalist) this is not a problem. 4 different accounts, passed down through the decades till they are written down (and subsequently edited and expanded) are what you would expect from humans living at that time.

It is what it is. Whatever happened was interesting enough that it got written down. But the original witnesses did not see fit to see that the story was capture in writing. In historic context this makes perfect sense as they seemed to expect that whatever was to happen was going to happen soon OR they did not think it was worth writing about.


“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111659 Mar 5, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet all your own "supporting data" stems from the indefensible assertion that we should accept the Bible on faith.
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you going to provide data to confirm that, or do we just have to accept it on faith (Hebrews 11:1)?
We already know that Hebrews 11:1 is your "supportive data," KAB. What else do you have?
KAB

United States

#111660 Mar 5, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Using the four Gospels, please reconstruct for us a perfectly consistent account of the death and resurrection of Jesus, including the order of events, number of witnesses, etc.
Good exercise. Let's take it one step at a time, so you can raise your concerns along the way.

Jesus dies: Mt. 27:50; Mr. 15:37; Lu. 23:46; Jn. 19:30
KAB

United States

#111661 Mar 5, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
CM wrote: "Then this must the first available version of the Bible. I can see how the Creator of the Universe "had a hand" in it..."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/...
<quoted text>
Do I really have to spell it out with finger paints for you, KAB? The beginnings of the written word (or Word, as you please) began with representative art, and representative art predates the creation myth by tens of thousands of years.
At least TRY to make some effort to become relevant, KAB.
The specific topic under consideration was original writings which became part of the Bible, not the beginnings of writing. So your contribution was not relevant.
KAB

United States

#111662 Mar 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
There have been billions of eye witnesses, billions of stories, and a few thousand movies about them. If you are basing your evidence on the assertions made in one book, leprechauns have your god beat by quite a bit. Thus, if you hold to your standard of evidence, you cannot deny leprechauns are real, without being a hypocrite. It's as simple as that.
You are simple. I'll definitely grant you that. So simple that, characteristically, you provide no data, just assertions. Since you work with highly advanced mathematical concepts, perhaps you could share some of your data from that with us.
KAB

United States

#111663 Mar 5, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You're late again, KAB. I'd already addressed that for Dogen and I'd already explained why I allege cave paintings to be a precursor to Da Wurd. Try to keep up.
Precursor to Da Wurd was not the topic. Da Wurd was.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111664 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You're entitled to your view.
But, you don't deny anything beyond the last line. Good for you for admitting your intellectual bankruptcy.

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) 3 hr dirtclod 163,757
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 3 hr Chimney1 1,871
How can we prove God exists, or does not? 20 hr Kong_ 80
News British Ban Teaching Creationism As Science, Sh... (Jul '14) 20 hr Swedenforever 159
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) May 19 Kathleen 19,031
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) May 18 SoE 178,597
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) May 15 emrenil 1,243
More from around the web