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

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 ... Full Story

“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.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111665 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
The deepest roots of creation myths must necessarily reside in primitive shamanism, and in that regard "my contribution" is entirely relevant since the original writings of Genesis are not only unavailable, but are almost certainly evolved from language(s) predating Akkadian (Enuma Elish).(Please spare me the irrational apologetic fideism.)

As much as it might be a somewhat interesting exercise in abstraction/distraction, does anyone (besides KAB and Marky) honestly consider lay interpretations across at least four distinct and separate language families of snatched words and phrases from stories that have absolutely no bearing on the evidenced origin of humans to be relevant to "facts in evolution debate?" o.O
KAB

United States

#111666 Mar 5, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
We already know that Hebrews 11:1 is your "supportive data," KAB. What else do you have?
Hebrews 11:1 is only supportive data for the fact that Bible-defined faith must be based on supportive data. You should accept or reject the Bible on supportive data. Do you really want an example of something correct in the Bible, or does it make more sense to provide an example of a purported error which can be scrutinized for confirmation? Perhaps you prefer to just declare confirmation and not allow challenge.
KAB

United States

#111667 Mar 5, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The deepest roots of creation myths must necessarily reside in primitive shamanism, and in that regard "my contribution" is entirely relevant since the original writings of Genesis are not only unavailable, but are almost certainly evolved from language(s) predating Akkadian (Enuma Elish).(Please spare me the irrational apologetic fideism.)
As much as it might be a somewhat interesting exercise in abstraction/distraction, does anyone (besides KAB and Marky) honestly consider lay interpretations across at least four distinct and separate language families of snatched words and phrases from stories that have absolutely no bearing on the evidenced origin of humans to be relevant to "facts in evolution debate?" o.O
The dataless assertions continue. I think evolution should be considered entirely on its own merits.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111668 Mar 5, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Hebrews 11:1 is only supportive data for the fact that Bible-defined faith must be based on supportive data. You should accept or reject the Bible on supportive data. Do you really want an example of something correct in the Bible, or does it make more sense to provide an example of a purported error which can be scrutinized for confirmation? Perhaps you prefer to just declare confirmation and not allow challenge.
Since you're offering, yes please. I would like supportive data of "an example of something correct in the Bible..." as long as it is pertinent to additional facts in the evolution debate.
-
While you are at it and if it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you also explain how, "Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld" might be construed as supportive data?

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
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 10 min Sketch 173,949
New review critical of "Origins" 39 min DanFromSmithville 35
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Aura Mytha 116,796
Can the universe be God's brain? (Jun '07) 3 hr susanblange 70
Need clarification on evolution 3 hr Dogen 15
Bobby Jindal: "I'm Not an Evolutionary Biologist" 5 hr Strel 11
The problem of evil and hate (Oct '13) 6 hr The Dude 357
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••