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

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

There are 160242 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

Wilson, NC

#112392 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
I love it when you know you are nailed.
ALL plants need sunlight to survive. And Plants are the base of the animal food chain.
HOW LONG IS THAT BIBLICAL DAY AGAIN!?!?!?!
Lets see how fast our cult control little one changes the subject.
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You are obviously lying again. How could animal live for a day (which in your mind is at least millions of years) without plants?
The Hebrew is your problem, not your friend. You must think that a large garbage track is actually a bible!
You are odd so there is at least you at odds here.
Hello.
Why do you keep spinning your wheels about animals living without plants when nothing requires that to have been the case?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112393 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember, just yesterday, when I caught you in a lie.
Ah,... good times.
Anyhoot, I am not biting on your doublethink today. I get to live in a world where my beliefs are not completely inconsistent with reality. I like it better than my former religious delusions. You might too.
Would you mother be proud of you knowing you lie to people every day?
Would you mother be proud of you knowing you lie to YOURSELF every day?
I cannot get you out of the whole you have dug for yourself.
Cult members are like drug addicts. They all have their drug of choice, but if that drug did not exist they would likely be addicted to something else. What would you be addicted to if not for the JW cult?
It would be whoever was driven by and building on the foundation of what is confirmed correct.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112394 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Only in concept.
Hebrews 4:13
Psalm 139:7-10
Also not in the bible is trinity, Jehovah, Rapture, Incarnation, Divinity, Fall (capitalized), the golden rule, all men are created equal, Two of every kind of animal went on Noah's ark, that the kingdom of heaven is somewhere you go, Purgatory, Sacrament, Bible, immortal soul, Eucharist/Communion, Apostles' Creed, Easter, eternity (in new testament), second Coming, Christmas, Sabbath on any day except Saturday,......
The bible also does not claim to be perfect. Actually the bible makes no self referential comments at all (obviously, but some people believe it).
There is also nothing in the bible that would lead one to expect that Armageddon is coming.
Gen. 2:17. The first of many choices extended by YHWH, pointless if there was no choice.

You also seem to have overlooked 2 Tim. 3:16 and Revelation 16.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112395 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Where an objective, non-cult member, would agree that you did not just get you butt splattered all over the pavement.
As I suspected, that's the one I used.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112396 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you against learning things for yourself? Ar you helpless?
Oh yes: it is against your cult's rules to read other bibles and to learn things that might conflict with their (your) beliefs.
Only they never say that EXPLICITLY, do they?
Okay, a few questions. You do like answering questions, don't you?
What does Jesus look like at this moment?
By what name does he go by?
Did you become a JW after ONLY reading the bible or after being exposed to WatchTower propagan..... er.... LITERATURE?
You really ought to stop pulling stuff out of that end of the horse before you get buried by it.

I became a JW only after studying the Bible. It's required.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112397 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, humans have known the world is round for at least 3,500 years.
Job was written nearly a thousand years after that around 600 b.c.
Look it up yourself.
Thanks for playing.
Job's inconceivable (at the time) info was that Earth had no visible/tangible means of support, and I have looked it up, and there is no confirmation of the 600 b.c. timestamp.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112398 Mar 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Newton believed lead could be turned to gold with magical incantations, but he was still partially correct in the notion of gravity. Nikola Tesla was completely insane, hallucinations and delusions brought on by a combination of genetics, drinking, and drugs, but has helped modern technology enter a new age .... three times in my short life time actually. We don't accept their delusions and hallucinations just because they were correct on one or two things, we simply discard them and recall the great contributions they offered the species.
You are so illogical you think that just because they hypothesized one correct notion that the entire story is valid, that would be as silly as saying one correct notion is invalid just because one flaw can be proven. The problem with your bible is that it's all assertions, and most of the assertions are simply myths and legends repeated, with the settings and character names changed to suit a different culture. The ancient Arabs gave us iron, metal "from the sky," do you accept their entire religion because they got that one thing correct?
I don't accept the Arab religion (Islam) because it has been proven their book is not what they purport it to be.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112399 Mar 18, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't accept the Arab religion (Islam) because it has been proven their book is not what they purport it to be.
And the Bible is? LOL! No - there is no need for you to reply with your typical dogmatic, simplistic and dataless assertions.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#112400 Mar 18, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's certain you're not an engineer since you don't understand/accept use of common design elements across various designs.
Like the line of Homo species that finally led to us humans.

Nature is generally parsimonious.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#112401 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Then stop making unconfirmed assertions about it, and I won't feel compelled to set the record straight. I have no objection to you posting what you think about something if you state it as such. When you assert that something unconfirmed is so, that's another matter.
Considering that you regard the Bible as infallible even though you don't think it should be held accountable "point by point", and considering that it makes claims that evidence flatly contradicts, such as the WW Flood, I am curious.

Please answer this question seriously.

What would be your criterion for actually deciding the Bible was not infallible? Do you have one?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#112402 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't accept the Arab religion (Islam) because it has been proven their book is not what they purport it to be.
They have just as many twisting, apologetic, non-answer answers for the faults in their book, as you do for yours. Well, fewer, because it contains fewer errors in the first place but that is to be expected because it was based on the words of one man and its a lot shorter.

The point is, Islamic and Christian scholars have been pointing out the real flaws in each others' book for the last millennium and some, and refining the justifications for their belief in their own.

You each have what you think are watertight justifications but both sets look equally absurd to an objective, rational observer.

All "sacred books" were written by humans, not God, and contain errors. Period.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#112403 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again, unexplained/unconfirmed assertion,
"Not possible that the intermixing of the tiny group of survivors and all of their offspring could preserve these separate lines."
Perhaps we'll find you got it wrong, and the goatherders were right. Where would that put you in the rankings?
You mean you cannot understand that its basically impossible for eight people to repopulate the earth in three separate "clades" that never mix, which is what the Neanderthal and Denisovan finds require.
Think before you respond

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112404 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's certain you're not an engineer since you don't understand/accept use of common design elements across various designs.

I understand that someone powerful enough to create the universe could do so in any way that suited him without human limitations. Common design elements are just that, a product of human limitation.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112405 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you keep spinning your wheels about animals living without plants when nothing requires that to have been the case?


BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You have been ingesting mushrooms of questionable origin. You just can't get that much separation from reality with crack.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112406 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be whoever was driven by and building on the foundation of what is confirmed correct.

No. It would be whomever fit best into your delusional system about what is confirmed correct.

I you were really interested in what was true you would be an agnostic, at least as a path to find out what was true.

Let me rephrase: what needs are being satisfied by your cult membership.


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember, just yesterday, when I caught you in a lie.
Ah,... good times.
Anyhoot, I am not biting on your doublethink today. I get to live in a world where my beliefs are not completely inconsistent with reality. I like it better than my former religious delusions. You might too.
Would you mother be proud of you knowing you lie to people every day?
Would you mother be proud of you knowing you lie to YOURSELF every day?
I cannot get you out of the whole you have dug for yourself.
Cult members are like drug addicts. They all have their drug of choice, but if that drug did not exist they would likely be addicted to something else. What would you be addicted to if not for the JW cult?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112407 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Gen. 2:17. The first of many choices extended by YHWH, pointless if there was no choice.
You also seem to have overlooked 2 Tim. 3:16 and Revelation 16.

First of all you should quote your source:
http://www.sandersweb.net/bible/verse.php

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112408 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Gen. 2:17. The first of many choices extended by YHWH, pointless if there was no choice.
You also seem to have overlooked 2 Tim. 3:16 and Revelation 16.

Non sequiturs. I have already outright refuted your mythunderstanding of 2 Tim. Rev is just a history of the fall if Israel after the Jewish rebellion and hopes for the future. It had to be written in code so the Romans would not catch on to the actual meaning of the book.


Things Not In The Bible:
trinity,
Jehovah,
Rapture,
Incarnation,
Divinity,
Fall (capitalized),
the golden rule,
all men are created equal,
Two of every kind of animal went on Noah's ark,
kingdom of heaven is somewhere you go,
Purgatory,
Sacrament,
Bible,
immortal soul,
Eucharist/Communion,
Apostles' Creed,
Easter,
eternity (in new testament),
second Coming,
Christmas,
Sabbath on any day except Saturday,......
biblical claim to be perfect. Actually the bible makes no self referential comments at all (obviously, but some people believe it).
There is also nothing in the bible that would lead one to expect that Armageddon is coming.
----------

I usually only pick at low hanging fruit but since all your fruit hangs low.....

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112409 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
As I suspected, that's the one I used.

So you are aware you are a failure here.

What rank do you hold in your cult? Would they demote you if they knew what a failure you are?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112410 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You really ought to stop pulling stuff out of that end of the horse before you get buried by it.
I became a JW only after studying the Bible. It's required.

One non-sequitur. And you nominally answered one question out of ... lets see.... 7

That is batting 14%. Pretty bad. And the question you answered was not a direct answer.

Are you afraid of the truth?

You know you are.


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you against learning things for yourself? Ar you helpless?
Oh yes: it is against your cult's rules to read other bibles and to learn things that might conflict with their (your) beliefs.
Only they never say that EXPLICITLY, do they?
Okay, a few questions. You do like answering questions, don't you?
What does Jesus look like at this moment?
By what name does he go by?
Did you become a JW after ONLY reading the bible or after being exposed to WatchTower propagan..... er.... LITERATURE?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112411 Mar 19, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Job's inconceivable (at the time) info was that Earth had no visible/tangible means of support, and I have looked it up, and there is no confirmation of the 600 b.c. timestamp.
Since the Watchtower was in error many times in the past, are you obligated to believe that all the current teachings are Godís truth?

The information for Job's assertion comes from the existing knowledge of the time.

I did not say exactly 600 b.c., now did I. That is why you didn't quote me.

Some of the book could have been written as much a 300 years earlier (though not likely) but the last additions to the book were not till 500 b.c. or after.




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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 min The RED X Sniper 61,115
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr THE LONE WORKER 220,533
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 10 hr Science 28,312
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 14 hr Subduction Zone 2,643
News Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) 20 hr Regolith Based Li... 99
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) Mar 16 Dogen 180,394
How can we prove God exists, or does not? (May '15) Mar 15 fransherrell 227
More from around the web