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

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

There are 163801 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.

LowellGuy

United States

#112843 Mar 25, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes they are and you have the right to make that obvious claim. You don't have the right to intepret them as being anything other than what they are. Evidnce that something once existed, died, and left an image of itself. Anything above tha is interpretation because fossils can not show heritage.<quoted text>No they do not! You interpret them that way. The only way to make your claim is to observe them while living and their evolution. You can't do that, and you have no right to scientifically make these claims because of it. THis is nothing more than your biased interpretation and your self imposed claim of being and intermediate. I don't blame you for this flaw. You have just consumed the cool aid.<quoted text>YOU CAN"T PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE I DEMAND BECAUSE IT DOESN"T EXIST.......and the evidence I demand is the demands of the scientific method for a valid theory!!!!You think evolution is strong becuse of what it predicts???? Have you not rea the hisry of Evolutionary theory? It predicts that biological systems evolve into someting completely different over eons of time......until....OPPS, the Cambrian fossils have them appearing suddenly.....so just as SUDDENLY....Evolution predicts punctuated equalibria!!!! Evolution can always bend and twist to meet what ever predictions, or new evidence demands. You can do that when the stupid theory is not observable. Isn't that fact handy!!!!<quoted text>I have had extreme success in here! You guys are ignorant, so I know you'll never admit it, but I get e-mails from lurkers, and not been around much ately due to speaking engagements. You guys have no idea what trouble your philosophy is in.
Talk of matters scientific from a guy who says he can't tell if a skull belongs to humans or elephants unless it's currently part of a living organism because he needs to see if there is a soul using some unexplained soul detecting method isn't exactly credible.
LowellGuy

United States

#112844 Mar 25, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You, as usual, are confused about what science is and does.
An eclipse is a fact.
Gravity is a fact.
Evolution is a fact.
Science explains the fact of an eclipse, gravity and evolution through theories.
Wrong. Eclipses are not facts; they are theories. Marksman11 said so.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#112845 Mar 25, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Eclipses are not facts; they are theories. Marksman11 said so.
Then Markie's got some catching up to do, as his thread page record is currently being eclipsed by HTS.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Asheville, NC

#112846 Mar 25, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Another of your lies that you can just get ignored with some spell.
Listen Lady, just because you are too ignorant to know that science can explain an eclipse, then to relate that to time travel as not being scientific, but a fantasy, does not make me a liar. It makes you ignorant.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112847 Mar 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Objectively and carefully examine each of them using reason and logic and supplementary data if available, then draw your conclusion. That's the best anyone can do. As to your ability to make a meaningful assessment in keeping with these criteria, I'm reminded that you still think there's a chance that Earth is cubic in shape.

From the tone of your post I think you know you have objectively lost this round.

Moving on, where are we on the flood data?

The weatherman says there is a chance of showers next week. Is that evidence for a global flood or what?

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112848 Mar 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Since just saying it is worthless you'll need to keep doing so until you provide confirming data.
Again, you seem to be the one that is confused. One does not just accept something is reliable, perfect, kicks-butt and whatever else. That has to be proved.

Math problem in the bible.
Math problem in the koran.

Both sides say it is not really a problem. Objectively speaking the Koranic solution is no wilder than your notions on Pi.

And on review of LG's post, you seem to be dodging.


LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
I have. You think we should accept any and all claims from a source if someone has decided, using a subjective standard, that said source is "reliable," and that this reputation serves as evidence for the veracity of the source's claims. Valid logic and rational skepticism do not recognize this as a legitimate justification for accepting a claim as true. How many times do I need to say it? Has it not gotten through your thick cult-addled pate yet?

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112849 Mar 25, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one has demonstrated the bible as a reliable source in any way, yet you claim it's the authority.

Oh, I think it reliable in some ways.

One of Bart Ehrman's views on textual criticism is that if something does NOT support the bible's authors view then that thing is more likely to be true, historically. There are plenty of places in the bible where god comes off looking like, to be perfectly frank, an ass.

Why would god's people put those things in if they were not true?

I am being a bit silly, but my point is more serious.

And there is evidence that plenty of the events narrated in the bible actually occurred. Exactly how well the biblical narrative reflects historical reality is uncertain. Most "histories" written an ancient times were strongly politically (and religiously) motivated.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112850 Mar 25, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Eclipses are not facts; they are theories. Marksman11 said so.

I have some facts and theories about Marksman too.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/images/belfry.jpg

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112851 Mar 25, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Listen Lady, just because you are too ignorant to know that science can explain an eclipse, then to relate that to time travel as not being scientific, but a fantasy, does not make me a liar. It makes you ignorant.

Refuted by me a page or so back.

You don't even understand what a scientific theory is.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112852 Mar 25, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are writing as if a collection of myths and chronicles extending over a millennium or more with scores of separate stories, characters, miracles and prophecies can be "verified" as a whole piece.
It does not work that way.
It is logically possible that one story in the Bible might be correct while another is a myth or a mixture of fact and myth.
So for example, if Swami Shakir Guru Wugmug was supposed to have levitated on a Street Corner in Delhi in 1953, then proving to me that the street corner exists would not convince me that the Swami really levitated there. Even hearing a circle of old women recalling that they definitely saw him do it would not convince me either.
Likewise you could even faithfully report that a huge Tsunami struck in the Indian Ocean a few years ago killing 250,000 people, in Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and Thailand, but that does not mean I am going to buy any "explanation" for this event based on God being angry at Indonesians.
Your "global flood gauge" in Canada was a single site where alternative explanations NOT requiring a world wide flood are perfectly valid. Not only that, but as repeated many times, there is so much evidence that is NOT around that WOULD BE around if a WW flood HAD occurred, that any rational person would have to conclude no WW Flood could have occurred within the last 10,000 years.
Your bias is betrayed in your pre-assessment reference to that which is to be assessed as including a collection of myths.

I have never stated that the existence of a location mentioned in the Bible confirms that any specific event took place there. Also, you didn't identify the women as a demonstrated reliable source.

Why should you accept any one of multiple unconfirmed possible explanations for something?

I see that since you wasted your space on the above you weren't able to provide any data for the most practical of the points, confirming that the flood could not have happened.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Asheville, NC

#112853 Mar 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, I'm referring to those parts of the Old Testament which are not historical accounts. One might accept that one generation begat another, that there existed a city, that there was a war, that so-and so was a king - AFTER non-biblical corroborating evidence is uncovered. On the other hand, there is also stuff like Noah, Jonah, the Garden of Eden, talking animals, etc., etc.... AKA MYTHOLOGIES.
That is easy enough to ignorantly claim, now I challenge you to prove it, especially with the existence of a supernatural deity that you also can't disprove.
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Ditto. I don't know why you reply, either.
Within our capabilities, the arrow of time points in only one direction. That is not a philosophy. Nitpicking the details of where, "how fast" and "when" is the "waste of time" that makes your GPS work.
You really don't believe that do you? You really don't know that all a GPS is is a locator for a satalite (SP)to locate and track? THere is no science in time travel. It, like human from non-human evolution is a fantasy!!!
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112854 Mar 25, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
One error in the Quran "confirmed" to YOUR satisfaction. Not to any Muslim's obviously. A mullah could straighten you out on your mistake in five minutes, to his complete satisfaction, while all his followers gave you that "gotcha!" grin of absolute satisfaction that the Quran's unique place as the only True and Perfect, Final Message of God to Humankind, was preserved. God is Great!
Likewise there are multiple errors confirmed in the Bible. Not confirmed to your satisfaction, obviously. But to anyone rational and objective, confirmed.
I haven't yet had opportunity to interactively consider the Quran point with any Muslims. If/when that occurs, they can present their reasoning, and if it doesn't pass the sniff test, it doesn't matter what they say or how they feel about or view it. The case will have to be able to stand or fall on its own logical, and in this case, mathematical merits. The same is true for the Bible.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112855 Mar 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Your bias is betrayed in your pre-assessment reference to that which is to be assessed as including a collection of myths.
I have never stated that the existence of a location mentioned in the Bible confirms that any specific event took place there. Also, you didn't identify the women as a demonstrated reliable source.
Why should you accept any one of multiple unconfirmed possible explanations for something?
I see that since you wasted your space on the above you weren't able to provide any data for the most practical of the points, confirming that the flood could not have happened.

Few people can say so little in so many words.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112856 Mar 25, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>That is easy enough to ignorantly claim, now I challenge you to prove it, especially with the existence of a supernatural deity that you also can't disprove.
See any of a hundred or so of my posts to you.


marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text> You really don't believe that do you? You really don't know that all a GPS is is a locator for a satalite (SP)to locate and track? THere is no science in time travel. It, like human from non-human evolution is a fantasy!!!
You make a lot of assertions for someone who cannot support anything he says.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112857 Mar 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't yet had opportunity to interactively consider the Quran point with any Muslims. If/when that occurs, they can present their reasoning, and if it doesn't pass the sniff test, it doesn't matter what they say or how they feel about or view it.
You mean like the sniff test of pi=3.0. You are right, it does not matter what you say or how you feel about or view it.

Very good point.

BTW, you COULD actually look it up and see the reasoning for yourself..... But that would require you to want to learn something.


KAB wrote:
<quoted text> The case will have to be able to stand or fall on its own logical, and in this case, mathematical merits. The same is true for the Bible.
Pi=3.0. Epic fail. Bible thus falsified and not a reliable source.

News at 11.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112858 Mar 25, 2013
Hey, KAB!

Did you WASTE your life going to college?

“What, though, of higher education, received in a college or a university? This is widely viewed as vital to success. Yet, many who pursue such education end up with their minds filled with harmful propaganda. Such education wastes valuable youthful years that could best be used in Jehovah’s service.”

Watchtower: April 15, 2008

I think I remember you saying you wasted valuable youthful years absorbing propaganda!


Only one point in the post!
Only one question.

Do you need to ask clarifying questions or can you figure this one out?

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112859 Mar 25, 2013
Hey KAB.

Is everything the watchtower says correct?

If no, then can you name something it said that you disagree with?

Sorry, two questions in one post.

Ask all the clarification questions you like?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112860 Mar 25, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
I pointed a few out in your last post.
One is called 'confirmation bias'. You might want to look it up.
While you are at it you might want to investigate how the Scientific Method deals with confirmation bias, very skillfully.
You provided no data confirming anything in conjunction with my last post.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112861 Mar 25, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing meets the standard for demonstrated reliable.
Science comes the closest which was my point.
Among religious texts I would have to give the nod to the Tao te Ching as it has no confirmed errors.
I provided confirmation of an error in the Tao, albeit partially by default.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#112862 Mar 25, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text> You mean like the sniff test of pi=3.0. You are right, it does not matter what you say or how you feel about or view it.
Very good point.
BTW, you COULD actually look it up and see the reasoning for yourself..... But that would require you to want to learn something.
<quoted text> Pi=3.0. Epic fail. Bible thus falsified and not a reliable source.
News at 11.
I've both seen and provided analysis of the explanation of the Quran's math formula. Given your manifest disposition toward learning, I'm not surprised you don't remember.

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) 4 hr Eagle 12 - 32,607
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Eagle 12 - 80,071
News Intelligent design (Jul '15) Sat Dogen 571
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Sep 23 ChromiuMan 222,780
What's your religion? Sep 22 Zog Has-fallen 4
Life started in Tennessee proof. Sep 15 Science4life 1
Science News (Sep '13) Sep 8 Ricky F 4,001
More from around the web