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

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

There are 148276 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

#112009 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
That works for me. I'll just sit on the sidelines and provide data as I see the need unless someone requests my fuller participation.

R I G H T .

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112010 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>

We have compelling evidence for other big events far further back in time. Asteroid hits, massive vulcanism, ice ages, continental drift, even localised floods such as the Badlands in the US and the Black Sea...many of these reckoned at millions of years ago...(All have recognized unique markers. None have been confirmed for the global flood)
...so if there was a world wide total inundation within the last 10,000 years, anyone reasonable would expect some pretty strong evidence for it (No unique markers have been identified to observe), or dismiss it for what it is, a cultural creation myth claim no more credible than any other (except that it's documented in a demonstrated reliable history source).
So the Noahic Flood is established as "a cultural creation myth claim no more credible than any other...."
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>That works for me. I'll just sit on the sidelines and provide data as I see the need unless someone requests my fuller participation.
That works for me, as well.
I request that you provide your data that the Bible is a demonstrated reliable history source.
KAB

United States

#112011 Mar 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
I am with you up to "it's documented in a demonstrated reliable history source". I know of no such source and the ones we have examined have all failed (Britannica, Bible, Koran)
You have only asserted that the Bible has failed. Confirming that continues to prove elusive.
KAB

United States

#112012 Mar 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Depends on the sediment. Nile flooding cross-sections correspond to the length of the flooding season (about 2 weeks). Of course Nile floods are minor compared to a global flood.
Science can date Nile flood sediment back about 7,000 years.
Sorry for the lack of specificity. The cross-section of interest is that related to the diameter of the core (i.e., horizontal cross-section).

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112013 Mar 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Since only the last is true (if metaphorical and highly biased) it is the only one that makes sense to discuss.
Naw, you get a buzzer for that. There were no snakes in Ireland to drive out. Even metaphorically. One can easily defend a claim that the pagans were no better or worse than their 5th century/migration period/middle ages Catholic successors.(But it would be far off-topic and let's not launch into it.)

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112014 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You have only asserted that the Bible has failed. Confirming that continues to prove elusive.
I request that you provide your data that the Bible is a demonstrated reliable history source.
KAB

United States

#112015 Mar 11, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You are squinting through a dry sunny day hoping I'll find some fog in the moonlight for you.
Drop the bone and walk away, KAB. It doesn't matter if there is one core sample from the crater or a barge full of them - there is no indicator of a global flood, just a mundane slough of material from the crater wall itself.
Planet-wide there are incalculable hundreds of thousands of core samples - none indicating that the Noahic Flood is more than imaginary event or at "best" a gross exaggeration of a regional one. Even the Bible ITSELF provides logical contradictions that it occurred as recounted - as has been exhaustively pointed out to you.
Nothing provided has withstood scrutiny, including your marine contamination hypothesis.
KAB

United States

#112016 Mar 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
It is certain that certain things in science are certainly certain, but certain things are certainly not certainly certain.
Capice?
That's been my point all along. Welcome aboard. Now if you can only convince the Guy and the rest of the gang. They won't accept it from me. What's worse, they refuse the conclusion to which confirming scientific data leads.
KAB

United States

#112017 Mar 11, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
So the Noahic Flood is established as "a cultural creation myth claim no more credible than any other...."
<quoted text>
That works for me, as well.
I request that you provide your data that the Bible is a demonstrated reliable history source.
We'll start with your side's favorite Bible non-error, Pi=3.
Pi expressed as one digit is 3. The Bible nowhere shows Pi=3 used to make anything. The whole notion stems from a description of a "round" basin which doesn't clarify the resolution of the measurements, exactly how they were made, or the precise shape of the basin (i.e., round vs a "perfect" circle).

Which point do you want next?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112018 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing provided has withstood scrutiny, including your marine contamination hypothesis.
YOUR scrutiny? LOL! You survey the research you've asked for and the physical evidence presented and continually say, "Nope, that's not the data I'm looking for. Nope, that's not data I'm looking for. There isn't any data here that supports my demonstrably reliable book - the data must be wrong or missing."

KAB wrote:
<quoted text>I'll just sit on the sidelines and provide data as I see the need unless someone requests my fuller participation.
I REQUEST that you provide your data that the Bible is a demonstrated reliable history source.

Or as with SO MUCH other data, is Matthew 5:37 not within your scrutiny?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112019 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
We'll start with your side's favorite Bible non-error, Pi=3.
Pi expressed as one digit is 3. The Bible nowhere shows Pi=3 used to make anything. The whole notion stems from a description of a "round" basin which doesn't clarify the resolution of the measurements, exactly how they were made, or the precise shape of the basin (i.e., round vs a "perfect" circle).
Which point do you want next?
By most accounts, Solomon's palace and temple were a masterworks. Do you presume that they would be able to cast a huge metal tub but not make it "round" in the classic sense? I will even grant that pi = 3 is an approximation and a limitation of the arithmetic systems available at the time.
However, what is at issue is not whether Solomon's craftsmen were incompetent or scribes were poor mathematicians, but whether the Bible is confirmed error free (which we know it is not) or a "demonstrably reliable source" - an allegation which you have yet to begin to accomplish, especially regarding the Pentateuch.

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#112020 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
Sorry for the lack of specificity. The cross-section of interest is that related to the diameter of the core (i.e., horizontal cross-section).
Hey. It's a demonstrated reliable core. Prove it isn't.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#112021 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
How many times do I have to state that I know of no physical data confirming the global flood before your side stops acting as if I have asserted otherwise?
It's your incessant "could have!" crap that brings it on. Of course there is no physical data. Because it NEVER HAPPENED!
KAB

United States

#112022 Mar 11, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
YOUR scrutiny? LOL! You survey the research you've asked for and the physical evidence presented and continually say, "Nope, that's not the data I'm looking for. Nope, that's not data I'm looking for. There isn't any data here that supports my demonstrably reliable book - the data must be wrong or missing."
<quoted text>
I REQUEST that you provide your data that the Bible is a demonstrated reliable history source.
Or as with SO MUCH other data, is Matthew 5:37 not within your scrutiny?
I don't just "say". I have provided data and/or identified holes in data provided by others. I have never stated that the data must be wrong or missing. I have always shown what is wrong or missing about the data provided.
KAB

United States

#112023 Mar 11, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
By most accounts, Solomon's palace and temple were a masterworks. Do you presume that they would be able to cast a huge metal tub but not make it "round" in the classic sense? I will even grant that pi = 3 is an approximation and a limitation of the arithmetic systems available at the time.
However, what is at issue is not whether Solomon's craftsmen were incompetent or scribes were poor mathematicians, but whether the Bible is confirmed error free (which we know it is not) or a "demonstrably reliable source" - an allegation which you have yet to begin to accomplish, especially regarding the Pentateuch.
It's not clear to me. Are you counting Pi=3 as a Bible error or not?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112024 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You have only asserted that the Bible has failed. Confirming that continues to prove elusive.

Actually that was pretty easy. We have examined multiple examples. The bible isn't even clear about who killed Goliath. Sure, it is just a scribal error..... but it is a scribal error IN the BIBLE.

You have only asserted that the Bible is a "demonstrated reliable history source". Confirming that continues to prove elusive.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112025 Mar 11, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Naw, you get a buzzer for that. There were no snakes in Ireland to drive out. Even metaphorically. One can easily defend a claim that the pagans were no better or worse than their 5th century/migration period/middle ages Catholic successors.(But it would be far off-topic and let's not launch into it.)

It was a metaphor to those who concocted the metaphor.

That's all I'm saying.

In reality the pagans were probably BETTER people.

BTW, St. Patrick was not even from Ireland. At least the original Patrick wasn't.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112026 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing provided has withstood scrutiny, including your marine contamination hypothesis.

We are not the ones that need to need to provide data that withstands scrutiny, per the scientific method.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112027 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
That's been my point all along. Welcome aboard. Now if you can only convince the Guy and the rest of the gang. They won't accept it from me. What's worse, they refuse the conclusion to which confirming scientific data leads.

That has not been my experience with "the gang". They seem willing to go where science is. They only get their nose out of joint when the conclusions are twisted or forced.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112028 Mar 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
We'll start with your side's favorite Bible non-error, Pi=3.
Pi expressed as one digit is 3. The Bible nowhere shows Pi=3 used to make anything. The whole notion stems from a description of a "round" basin which doesn't clarify the resolution of the measurements, exactly how they were made, or the precise shape of the basin (i.e., round vs a "perfect" circle).
Which point do you want next?

Um..... you need to go back and reread that passage again.

How many times are the terms, almost, about, approximately,..... used in that passage? The Bible states those were the measurements.

Are you saying the bible is lying or in error at this point?

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) 18 min ChristineM 186,644
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 45 min Critical Eye 5,891
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) 52 min Critical Eye 1,735
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Brian_G 27,246
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 13 hr Serah 179,239
Poll How Do You View The New Millerite Adventist Inv... (Apr '15) Feb 1 Critical Eye 10
News New poll: Americans overwhelmingly oppose Unite... Jan 30 DanFromSmithville 7
More from around the web