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

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

There are 151411 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.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112896 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You've disproved nothing. You have just sarcastically spewed the same thing as impossible, when the truth is, if there is a GOD, and you can't explain the origin of life without him, then none of those examples are even difficult. It was people like you who ridiculed the Wright Brothers. Just because you "don't get it" doesn't mean you are some kind of ignorant authority.<quoted text>No it isn't because I've always from jump street said that acceptance of GOD is a faith based belief. No less than your human from non-human evolution faith based belief that you can't prove. THe difference is, I admit that my belief in GOD is a faith based belief. You can't be that honest about your belief.
Nice little fallacious logic game you've got rattling between your ears there, Marky Boy. Scientific evidence is fantasy because you have faith that God exists, therefore IF there is a God and IF science doesn't explain the origin of life TO YOUR SATISFACTION, then scientific evidence is fantasy. Not only does that fail objective investigation, it isn't even self consistent.
Why do you keep babbling about the Wright brothers as if you have some brilliant insight? It is a complete non sequitur to the proposition that dark age superstition does not DESERVE ridicule. Your arguments are in the same league as someone who throws salt over their shoulder and asks questions of Magic 8 Balls.
The facts remain. No evidence of a Garden of Eden. No evidence of a Global Flood. No evidence of ID. You revere conclusions prior to and despite of knowledge and ADMITTEDLY no evidence supportive of those conclusions except faith based belief.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112897 Mar 26, 2013
CM wrote:
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.

marksman11 wrote:
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.

"ignorantly claim?"
Point blank, Marky Boy. PROVE WHAT?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112898 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text> I think the Watchtower has printed corrections.
The Watchtower made an error?!?!??! Odds my bodkins.

Citation please?

KAB wrote:
<quoted text> No disagreement immediately comes to mind. I imagine you can prompt me with some ideas to get the mental juices flowing.
I was just trying to determine the level of your brainwashing. Sounds like they used a 100% solution of hexa-Fluoro-Antimonic Acid.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112899 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You know the only way to get a gauranteed response is to show me data.

It is your lack of response to data that is at issue. Since I provide this and you did not refute it,.... that IS the data.

Sounds like your "guarantee" isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112900 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You remember incorrectly. BTW, do you think college is vital to success? If you're not buried by student loans, you may want to consult with some unemployed graduates who are before you answer. Oh, also Bill Gates.

Ah, no college. That explains a lot.

College is not essential to success, but it would be helpful in understanding scientific issues.

BTW, the unemployment rate for college graduates is less than half of that for H.S. graduates. And the earnings are proportionally higher.

Bill Gates is not the norm.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.ht...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112901 Mar 26, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
But not logic. That's the fast track to Obfuscationville.

Wastin away again in Obfusciationville
Searching for my lost shaker of ambiguity
Some people claim that there's a cult to blame
But I know it's nobodys fault.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#112902 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Logic is data. It's the data of proper reasoning. Proclaiming logic as if invoking the word is some sort of talisman, as you constantly do, is not data. Try actually describing the application of the specific elements of logic to situations. That will be data. Dr. D has recently provided a good example with his failed foray into the realm of double negatives. I'm confident you can be just as successful. Perhaps you are too, and that's why you only use the word.
Logic is not evidence (while everything that exists in any way is technically "data"). Logic is a methodological framework. Citing logic as "data" is ultimately a meaningless exercise, as it is self-evident.

If you didn't believe what the Watchtower said before it was corrected by them, you are saying you knew better than they regarding the Bible. Why, then, do you bother with them at all? You're clearly a greater Biblical authority than they are, so you needn't pay attention to them. If anything, they should be seeking YOUR guidance. Why aren't YOU the leader of your own sect of Christianity, rather than being a member of a group whose interpretations of the Bible are, by your own admission, incorrect while your own are not?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112903 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You've disproved nothing. You have just sarcastically spewed the same thing as impossible, when the truth is, if there is a GOD, and you can't explain the origin of life without him, then none of those examples are even difficult. It was people like you who ridiculed the Wright Brothers. Just because you "don't get it" doesn't mean you are some kind of ignorant authority.<quoted text>No it isn't because I've always from jump street said that acceptance of GOD is a faith based belief. No less than your human from non-human evolution faith based belief that you can't prove. THe difference is, I admit that my belief in GOD is a faith based belief. You can't be that honest about your belief.

Sorry dude. This failed before and it fails now.

Evolution is observable, testable by experiments, replicable,.....
There is nothing faith based about it.

You just have faith issues. If evolution is true (and it is) then you feel your faith is threatened.

Grow a pair and man up.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112904 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>I refuse to run your stupid rabbits.

Translation: He has no answers


KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, not what you said. You said eclipses were scientific, just because science helped us understand something doesn't make it scientific. We understand art, scientifically we understand why we like art, produce art, and see art in everything ... but art is still just art.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112905 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You should because all I'm demanding is that you adhere to the scientific method, and you aren't even close!!! That is why you can morph your stupid psuedo scientific fantasy to fit what ever scenario you need it to fit into today. It isn't observable, testable, or replicatable, so just let your fantasies run wild. Observation be damned!!

As noted before, you are repeating an untruth.

Fact 1: Evolution adheres to the scientific method. Evolution is actually a model for how useful the scientific method is.

Fact 2: Evolution is observable. It has multiple and independently verified separate lines of data.

Fact 3: Evolution is testable. Evolution has been tested more than any other theory in the history of science. It has always passed.

Fact 4: Evolutionary tests are replicable and have been replicated, some thousands of times! Some evolution experiments have been replicated by H.S. and even middle school children as part of science fairs !

http://www.juliantrubin.com/topicprojects/evo...


These are the facts of the case and they are undisputed.


“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112906 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You most certainly have not!!<quoted text>Yeah, eons of time were predicted too until the Cambrian Explosion was discovered.....and then with most flawed theories that can not be observed, it just fabricates punctuated equalibria.....as if that is science, rather than another unobserved wild guess fabricated to explain another unobserved wild guess. You can predict anything you want to in a fantasy world where observation has no part in science. Just look at your next wild claim!!!<quoted text> and interpretated.You claim it is "in between" but you don't even know in between what?? Heck, you don't even know what evolved that made a non-human a human? You can't even define the difference between the two!!! I don't have enough faith to believe in human from non-human evolution!!!

Translation: marksman does not actually understand evolution so throws up this straw-man as a stand-in for the real thing.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112907 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>The truth never changes Mike!

Nor does the fact that you will always lie against the truth.

Get an education.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112908 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree he got an education, and that doing so is vital. I'll let him speak to where and how he got his. I know it isn't vital that everyone go to college, and it's now expensive enough to raise serious ROI questions for many.

Educations are like cars, almost everyone needs one, but not everybody needs a Rolls-Royce. Getting good value for ones education dollar is important.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112909 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't presume to remember all specific instances, but generally not if I was knowledgeable enough about the topic or became so.

Double talk for "I will believe anything they tell me".

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112910 Mar 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Logic is data. It's the data of proper reasoning. Proclaiming logic as if invoking the word is some sort of talisman, as you constantly do, is not data. Try actually describing the application of the specific elements of logic to situations. That will be data. Dr. D has recently provided a good example with his failed foray into the realm of double negatives. I'm confident you can be just as successful. Perhaps you are too, and that's why you only use the word.

You mean when I exposed your doubletalk?

Is not characterizing my exposure of your error as "failed" a violation of the 9th commandment.

Oh, yes. They are only suggestions.

Very nice.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Asheville, NC

#112911 Mar 26, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Surprising that after all this time you still don't get it.
Often it is on display that I am one of the few that does get it!!

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#112912 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Often it is on display that I am one of the few that does get it!!
That's right, Marky. Sure you do. Here, have a cookie and go sit down.

See any electrons lately?

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Asheville, NC

#112913 Mar 26, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientific evidence is fantasy because you have faith that God exists, therefore IF there is a God and IF science doesn't explain the origin of life TO YOUR SATISFACTION, then scientific evidence is fantasy.
No, scientific evidence is not a fantasy. Just your interpretation of it is fantasy. You can look at a fossil, and rightfully conclude that something once lived, died, and left an image of itself. You can not say it is an intermediate fossil, and is evidence for heritage. That is your problem. You execute overkill by going to far with your biased conclusions. Scientific evidence is not fantasy, it becomes a fantasy when YOU execute overkill with your illogical interpretations.
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>.
Your arguments are in the same league as someone who throws salt over their shoulder and asks questions of Magic 8 Balls.
No they are not. I present valid scientific reasons of why your belief and acceptance of human froom non-human evolution didn't happen. That is why even though I have requested it many times, you can not tell me what evolved that made a non-human ....a human. It is a valid question, that along with many other reasons casts extreme doubt on the validity of human from non-human evolution.
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>. The facts remain. No evidence of a Garden of Eden. No evidence of a Global Flood. No evidence of ID. You revere conclusions prior to and despite of knowledge and ADMITTEDLY no evidence supportive of those conclusions except faith based belief.
You are ignorant of that fact that you claim your evolutionary belief is based in science when it fails terribly. I honestly claim my beliefs are faith based. You insist on comparing apples to oranges because you are realising that your apples are failing every test, thus you attack my oranges. I don't care your opinion of my oranges, or my creationists beliefs. The validity of my beliefs have nothing to do with the complete failure of your human from non-human evolutionary beliefs. You claim your beliefs are supported by science and I continually prove that completely untrue, and you attacking my beliefs doesn't change that fact at all. All it does is put on display your inability to support your own flawed philosophy. I couldn't care less your opinion of mine.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112914 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Often it is on display that I am one of the few that does get it!!

You don't get it.

Your dearth or scientific knowledge is a sad incrimination of our educational system

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112915 Mar 26, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>No, scientific evidence is not a fantasy. Just your interpretation of it is fantasy. You can look at a fossil, and rightfully conclude that something once lived, died, and left an image of itself. You can not say it is an intermediate fossil, and is evidence for heritage. That is your problem. You execute overkill by going to far with your biased conclusions. Scientific evidence is not fantasy, it becomes a fantasy when YOU execute overkill with your illogical interpretations.<quoted text>No they are not. I present valid scientific reasons of why your belief and acceptance of human froom non-human evolution didn't happen. That is why even though I have requested it many times, you can not tell me what evolved that made a non-human ....a human. It is a valid question, that along with many other reasons casts extreme doubt on the validity of human from non-human evolution.<quoted text>You are ignorant of that fact that you claim your evolutionary belief is based in science when it fails terribly. I honestly claim my beliefs are faith based. You insist on comparing apples to oranges because you are realising that your apples are failing every test, thus you attack my oranges. I don't care your opinion of my oranges, or my creationists beliefs. The validity of my beliefs have nothing to do with the complete failure of your human from non-human evolutionary beliefs. You claim your beliefs are supported by science and I continually prove that completely untrue, and you attacking my beliefs doesn't change that fact at all. All it does is put on display your inability to support your own flawed philosophy. I couldn't care less your opinion of mine.

No.

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) 16 min One way or another 200,957
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Brian_G 40,154
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr _Susan_ 15,727
The conscious God or the inanimate nature 2 hr Fear-God 8
Scientists create vast 3-D map of universe, val... Thu One way or another 4
Proof that all of Christianity is a lie Thu THE LONE WORKER 41
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) Wed Bob of Quantum-Faith 82
More from around the web