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

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113291 Apr 2, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>

We know Adam and Eve as written in the Bible did not exist because:
The first appearance of Homo-sapiens in the bone record is about 200,000 years ago.
One that isn't observable, 2... the bible gives no dates for the creation of humans.
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text> Both the bones and the DNA confirm this.
Pardon my unbelief, but I must demand that you show me.
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
The DNA also says there was NEVER a time when our genome was down to just one reproducing couple (or 4 couples if you believe the flood).
Again, I don't believe you, show me.
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Also we humans carry a small percentage of Neanderthal genes/blood which testifies to the very early mating with them at a very early time, perhaps 100,000 years ago.
Meaningless, neanderthals were just other humans.
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
This neanderthal connection connects us to earlier yet Homo species such as; Homo-erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo-habilis, etc., etc.
You have to read the science if you want to be really informed. The religious sites will mislead you....they are trying to hold onto their constituents.
They lie for Jesus.
Pardon me, and I don't mean this in an insulting way, but I think you are lying for science, and don't even realise it. I hope I'm wrong, and you can prove me wrong by providing unquestionable, observable, and emperical evidence for my "show me's" above.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113292 Apr 2, 2013
Mark, people who believe the theory of evolution do not have to lie for science. That is a creationist tactic. They think it is okay to lie for Jesus.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113293 Apr 2, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We have intermediates, by objective measurement of their features, and as well explained to you by now. "Intermediate" is not an interpretation, its a series of measurements on actual fossils.
It is only intermediate if you have already preconcluded that evolution must be true. All it is is a specimen that you have interpreted in the light that only evolution can be true. I don't accept it for a second.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
As predicted by evolution.
How many times do I have to say it? When your pet theory is unobservable you can twist it to be what ever you need it to be. Evolution requires eons of time....the Cambrian Explosion.....ok...ummmm...PUN CTUATED EQUALIBRIUM!!!...Has punctuated equalibria ever been observed?.....no!!...well, how do you explain the origin of the brain or eye?.....well.....evolution takes eons of time so with so much time, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!!!.....Sorry, but claiming evolution predicts something, when it is unobservable, isn't very convincing at all. It even morphs into a product of GOD when challenged by the origin of life.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Of course its explained by Creationism!" you say. "Anything can be!"
Well, not really. Creationism as per Genesis says all creatures were here from the first six days. Therefore the fossil record should be as follows:....
No, the bible doesn't say that all creatures were here in the first six days. And example.....GOD created dogs.....and later on wolves evolved. THey are both still dogs, and will never evolve into anything other than a dog. Your post is a typical evolutionist trick in trying to morph micro and macro together as if they are related, they are not.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
What we FIND is what evolution, and not Genesis, predicted.
....again, something unobservable can predict anything which is also not observable.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Believe what you like, the SCIENCE says you are wrong.
No it doesn't. That is you and you don't speak for science because you don't demand adherance to the scientific method.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113294 Apr 2, 2013
Mark, we can and have observed evolution in the laboratory, in the field, in the fossil record, and countless ways using phylogenetic trees.

How do you observe any evidence at all for your beliefs of fairy tales?
bill

Watford, UK

#113295 Apr 2, 2013
guys just live ur lives. some of u have over 4000 posts u been on here everyday all day for years by tyhe looks of it. just enjoy ur lives. this stuff aint productive. ur get old and look back and regret wasteing time on the internet in a cooped up room wasting time when the real world is outside. cheerz

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113296 Apr 2, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why do you guys talk such rubbish about evolution etc when it makes no difference?
Because it does make a difference. It leads many people to think that GOD doesn't exist. You've seen it in here. Evolutionists claiming GOD doesn't exist. Most people are not gullible enough to give these ignorant claims credence, but it might lead a few down the path of ignorance.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Only because you have personally staked your own faith on the proposition that unless the Bible is ALL LITERALLY TRUE, NONE OF IT IS TRUE.
I have stated from day 1 that even if I was an atheist, i'd still reject human from non-human evolution because it clearly fails the scientific method for validity. It is clearly an humanist philosophy and not science.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Catholics, Anglicans, etc, are not so silly as to deny evolution.
Even plenty of former YEC creationist types have actually looked at the evidence of biology, geology, astronomy, cosmology, and physics and can see that the Bible cannot be all taken literally, yet still manage to accept Jesus.
They can speak for themselves, but I don't care who accepts human from non-human evolution, it still fails the scientific methods demand for observability. As far as the bible, I don't take every word literally either. THere are parables, etc.....but what you want to claim is that there are contradictions and false statements. Parables and contradictions are not the same thing. See, you want to infer things that would appear to be reasons for one to doubt that the bible is GODS words to mankind. THere is no doubt to me that the bible is GODS instruction book for mankind, and gives us the pathway to heaven, and if this is true, it is the most important book on the planet.
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Even the Jews do not take the Old Testament literally, and know intimately better than you how the writings emerged, the political and social elements of the writers, the inconsistencies, etc. They KNOW they have an imperfect record and spend a lot of time determining what it should really mean and how its to be interpreted. More of a cryptic puzzle than a literal rendering of history.
I don't think you speak for all Jews. The Jews can believe anything they want, that doesn't make them correct, and why you are infering such puts your motives into serious question.
bill

Watford, UK

#113297 Apr 2, 2013
evolution is true. why come on here and debate it? debating it makes u seem insecyre and gives ammo 2 the creationist. how long does the human live? really want to waste it on here argueing all day/?? sort it out peeps! this is the downfall of huamnity right ere, do something productive.
bill

Watford, UK

#113298 Apr 2, 2013
7746 posts, have u ever been outside subduction zone?
bill

Watford, UK

#113299 Apr 2, 2013
more 2 life than debating this stuff. get outside ppl. over and out.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113300 Apr 2, 2013
bill wrote:
7746 posts, have u ever been outside subduction zone?
Ever day Bill.

And there are people who have many times the posts that I have.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113301 Apr 2, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>

marksman11 wrote:
By the way, if you think Adam and Eve are silly, at least we don't believe that we are kin to tobacco stalks, worms, birds, and beagles. I'm being serious here.

<mike>
No one claimed we evolved from a tobacco stalk and you know it. So why lie about it? You're losing it, Marky.
<chimney>
I will save you the trouble.

It was me, and I said, we (and all animals) share a common ancestor with tobacco (and all plants), not that we are descended from tobacco.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113302 Apr 2, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That particular question has been answered many times.
It has not been answered 1 time in four years. Not once!!!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113303 Apr 2, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Because it does make a difference. It leads many people to think that GOD doesn't exist. You've seen it in here. Evolutionists claiming GOD doesn't exist. Most people are not gullible enough to give these ignorant claims credence, but it might lead a few down the path of ignorance.
How is reject the belief in something there is no evidence for, and that there is massive evidence against, ignorance?
<quoted text> I have stated from day 1 that even if I was an atheist, i'd still reject human from non-human evolution because it clearly fails the scientific method for validity. It is clearly an humanist philosophy and not science.<quoted text>They can speak for themselves, but I don't care who accepts human from non-human evolution, it still fails the scientific methods demand for observability.
Lie all that you want Marky. Human evolution is observable in many ways. You show yourself to be a liar by rejecting them without a valid reason to do so.
As far as the bible, I don't take every word literally either. THere are parables, etc.....but what you want to claim is that there are contradictions and false statements. Parables and contradictions are not the same thing. See, you want to infer things that would appear to be reasons for one to doubt that the bible is GODS words to mankind. THere is no doubt to me that the bible is GODS instruction book for mankind, and gives us the pathway to heaven, and if this is true, it is the most important book on the planet.<quoted text>I don't think you speak for all Jews. The Jews can believe anything they want, that doesn't make them correct, and why you are infering such puts your motives into serious question.
Then why can't you look at the stories in Genesis and Exodus as parables? Many Christians can.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113304 Apr 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
A fusion of two genes.
hahahahaha......I hope you are trying to say that retro viruses made something human? Is that what you are TRYING to say?.....i hope!!!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113305 Apr 2, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>Then I challenge you to show me. Also, show me how I can be related to a tobacco stalk, and NOT EVOLVE FROM ONE!!! You are playing silly word games because you know how ignorant this claim sounds. And make no mistake. Like the rest in here, I alweays give a second chance, but if you can't intelligently communicate with me without cussing I will drop your posts like I'd drop a liberal in a voting booth. I've done it to many in here, and I'd do it to you too. Then like the rest you can moan and gripe that you are so superior that I can't reply to your ignorance, while the truth is I don't even read your posts. If you can't communicate like a mature human being, I won't waste my time reading the ramblings of a mindless head. Your move.
I am just quoting this recent post of Mark's again to show that he is lying in his most recent post.

Meanwhile after I pointed out that he is a LSoS he has not answered me.

Perhaps if we all pointed out this fact he will go away and leave us all alone.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113306 Apr 3, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
OK Marksman. I try not to be rude to you, but this is beyond stupid.
Are you actually too stupid to know the difference between "evolved from a banana" and "are related to a banana by a common ancestor"?
Is this some kinda hillbilly stoopid where you aren't sure if your wife is your first cousin or your niece?
Or are you just playing stoopid and therefore deliberately lying?
Well, I'll let you answer your own question with one word.
Are you stupid enough to think that you are related to a banana? Yes?..or...no?

I bet you don't answer with one word.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113307 Apr 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you related to your cousin?
Are you descended from your cousin or is your cousin descended from you?
Oh wait, in your case that sadly may be true.
By the way, if you don't want to be called a lying sack of shit then don't be a lying sack of shit.
You can play silly word games all you want too, but I'll never be so gullible and ignorant to believe I am related to a tobacco stalk, or a nanner!!! Even having a common ancester with an ape is beyond reality, but a tobacco stalk and a banana? I really do pity the ignorance of you guys, and so does most of the world.
As info, your inability to communicate like an adult has no shock value at all. I can out cuss you any day of the week, I just choose not too. You are not intimidating or intelligent. Using bad language just proves you don't have the intellect to communicate like an adult. But then again, you do believe we are related to tobacco stalks!!!...hahahahahahahahah! !!

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113308 Apr 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I am just quoting this recent post of Mark's again to show that he is lying in his most recent post.
Meanwhile after I pointed out that he is a LSoS he has not answered me.
I most certainly have answered you. Liar!!!
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps if we all pointed out this fact he will go away and leave us all alone.
In your dreams!! I quit replying to dogans drivel just because he has become a waste of time, and doesn't live in reality. Just making up and posting his fantasy world one post at a time. Me going away? No way. I started this group, and I don't need to reply to your ignorance to post in here. The fact that none of you can support your own beliefs in human from non-human evolution is all that needs be continously exposed. I don't need you to do that. In short, never make the mistake that somehow you control me! You don't. You don't even control my dog. Now, go call and cry to aunt nanner about how marksman talked mean at you.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113309 Apr 3, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>You can play silly word games all you want too, but I'll never be so gullible and ignorant to believe I am related to a tobacco stalk, or a nanner!!! Even having a common ancester with an ape is beyond reality, but a tobacco stalk and a banana? I really do pity the ignorance of you guys, and so does most of the world.
As info, your inability to communicate like an adult has no shock value at all. I can out cuss you any day of the week, I just choose not too. You are not intimidating or intelligent. Using bad language just proves you don't have the intellect to communicate like an adult. But then again, you do believe we are related to tobacco stalks!!!...hahahahahahahahah! !!
I wasn't playing silly word games. If anyone was that would be you.

And you are gullible and you are ignorant since you are related to both a tobacco plant and to a banana. In fact it is arguable which of you three is the most intelligent. I am going with the tobacco leaf myself.

And I would like to know when I used "bad language". Sometime a liar needs to be told that he is a liar with a bit more oomph than normal. It obviously worked on you.

Marky, since you are a creationist you might be able to answer this question for me:

Why do creationists think that it is okay to lie for Jesus?

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#113310 Apr 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I am just quoting this recent post of Mark's again to show that he is lying in his most recent post.
Meanwhile after I pointed out that he is a LSoS he has not answered me.
Perhaps if we all pointed out this fact he will go away and leave us all alone.
By the way, above you were replying to....

<MM>
"Then I challenge you to show me"

and of course, you didn't even attempt to address the challenge. You never do.......

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 6 min Blitzking 149,794
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 17 min Aura Mytha 176,966
Dr. James P. Allison, presidential candidate Dr... 47 min paul porter 3
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 59 min paul porter 16,854
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 1 hr DanFromSmithville 1,396
The Natinoal Academy of Sciences Endorses Evolu... 5 hr paul porter 2
Birds Evolved From Dinosaurs Slowly—Then Took Off 5 hr MikeF 22
Creationism isn't a science and doesn't belong ... 6 hr Kong_ 709
More from around the web