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

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

There are 164923 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.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113387 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:


The slide occurred around 4200 cal BP, when the surface
connection with Lake Laflamme (Bouchard and Saarnisto, 1989)
was possibly still active (Fig. 7A). As the LIS decayed, its geometry evolved and the ice margin would have receded toward the site of the subglacial lake. As the distance to the ice margin decreased, the ice-surface slope above the lake would have increased causing the lake volume to shrink. At the same time, the reduced ice thickness would reduce water pressure in the lake, whereas the pressure of pore fluids in low permeability sediments would remain high and could promote slope instability. The MWD could thus be related to slope instabilities associated with the rapid exorheic drainage through channels observed on the outer crater rim following the deglaciation (see section 2.4).
Another trigger mechanism of the MWD could have been an
earthquake, as the area is seismically active ..
Adams et al., 1991

http://www.geotop.ca/upload/files/publication...


" If other study sites in such low
productivity environments suffer from old carbon effects, this new
sedimentary record from northernmost Ungava has produced
a reliable new means of dating the disappearance of the last
remnants of the Laurentide Ice Sheet at 6850 cal BP, which coin-
cides with a major climatic and environmental transition
throughout the eastern Canadian Arctic."

----------

Nice data. Seems to refute your conjecture.

“Lies require commitment.”
― Veronica Roth, Divergent

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113388 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You were on a reasonable roll until you made the unreliable book assertion which remains unconfirmed.

Sorry, it has been confirmed.

Anyone else disagree?

I thought not.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113389 Apr 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, I will take a look at it and get back to you.
If it is real science, and not some creatard nonsense, what do you want to be that you misinterpreted it?

DING, DING, DING, DING, DING, DING, DING!

We have a winner!

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113390 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You just revealed that it's a sure bet that misinterpretation is your pre-conclusion. How objective is that?

It is a conclusion based FIRMLY on SZ's knowledge of you and your posts.


“I'm telling you a lie in a vicious effort that you will repeat my lie over and over until it becomes true”
&#8213; Lady Gaga

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113391 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Something caused a massive amount of loose material to come down off the crater sidewalls an estimated 4200 years ago. If you want a list of specific possibilities, Dr. Dogen purportedly has a million, not including a global flood. Personally, I think he's lying and really doesn't have anywhere near that number. Even the geologists involved only give 2.

And neither of them agree with you.

Nor does your time for the flood agree with the data of 4,200 years.

Nor have you accounted for thriving civilizations continuing, uninterrupted, through that entire period.

Nor have you been honest about the nature of the collapse.

Nor do you have any evidence for this global flood.

The failure of the global flood puts a blight on your literal understanding of the bible.

In simpler terms, you lost again.

“Things come apart so easily when they have been held together with lies.”
- Dorothy Allison, Bastard Out of Carolina

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113392 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as you're being objective, an extremely desirable trait, quote a single science fail of mine.

Do you just want your EPIC fails or a full account of every science fail you have posted.

Even the first would take some time to go back and accumulate.

Lets make it easier. Can you think of one thing about science that you have said that is actually true?

I am sure there are some, but none come to mind.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113393 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If you look at a brushed wall of the firn how many layers can you discern by eye within one year's accumulation?

Rather than list fallacies you commit, perhaps it would be better to explain the workings of denial.

“Lies and secrets, Tessa, they are like a cancer in the soul. They eat away what is good and leave only destruction behind.”
- Cassandra Clare, Clockwork Prince
KAB

Wilson, NC

#113394 Apr 3, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
And did either one of them cite da flud?
They recognized that water could have washed it down.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#113395 Apr 3, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
No blanks. Poor zombiefella.... all that's left of him is a hand to type with and it doesn't even realize the brain pan never made it out of the churchyard.
Apparently I was right. This time NOTHING BUT BLANKS.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113396 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently I was right. This time NOTHING BUT BLANKS.

you would recognize them.

“Your hypocrisy insults my intelligence.”
&#8213; Toba Beta
KAB

Wilson, NC

#113397 Apr 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
The Himalayas are at least 60 million years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himalayas
Humans,.... no matter who is doing the counting, are only a couple million, at most.
BTW, I see you're already running out of live ammunition and starting to fire more blanks.
“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”
&#8213; Adolf Hitler
Do you suppose that rock's age determines how high it is above sea level, or could 60 million year old rock change elevation over time?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113398 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you suppose that rock's age determines how high it is above sea level, or could 60 million year old rock change elevation over time?
KAB, how long have you been trying to debate on this topic?

You have not learned one whit of geology.

The elevation of one particular stratum does not have very much to do with its age at all.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#113399 Apr 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
The slide occurred around 4200 cal BP, when the surface
connection with Lake Laflamme (Bouchard and Saarnisto, 1989)
was possibly still active (Fig. 7A). As the LIS decayed, its geometry evolved and the ice margin would have receded toward the site of the subglacial lake. As the distance to the ice margin decreased, the ice-surface slope above the lake would have increased causing the lake volume to shrink. At the same time, the reduced ice thickness would reduce water pressure in the lake, whereas the pressure of pore fluids in low permeability sediments would remain high and could promote slope instability. The MWD could thus be related to slope instabilities associated with the rapid exorheic drainage through channels observed on the outer crater rim following the deglaciation (see section 2.4).
Another trigger mechanism of the MWD could have been an
earthquake, as the area is seismically active ..
Adams et al., 1991
http://www.geotop.ca/upload/files/publication...
" If other study sites in such low
productivity environments suffer from old carbon effects, this new
sedimentary record from northernmost Ungava has produced
a reliable new means of dating the disappearance of the last
remnants of the Laurentide Ice Sheet at 6850 cal BP, which coin-
cides with a major climatic and environmental transition
throughout the eastern Canadian Arctic."
----------
Nice data. Seems to refute your conjecture.
“Lies require commitment.”
&#8213; Veronica Roth, Divergent
Especially since the ice was gone about 6850 cal BP.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#113400 Apr 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
KAB, how long have you been trying to debate on this topic?
You have not learned one whit of geology.
The elevation of one particular stratum does not have very much to do with its age at all.
I know. Please explain that to Dr. D. He won't accept anything from me.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113401 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. Please explain that to Dr. D. He won't accept anything from me.
That is because you are constantly wrong.

When he was taking about how old the Himalayas were he was talking about how old the mountain range was, not how old the strata that make it up were.

So you interpreted what he was saying incorrectly.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113402 Apr 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
DING, DING, DING, DING, DING, DING, DING!
We have a winner!
Yes, and since I had to leave for a while I was satisfied by showing there was no flood at the time period of the slide in the lake.

Poor KAB is desperately grasping at straws. He is trying to find any geologic phenomenon from any time period to see if it can be explained by a global flood.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#113403 Apr 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
That is because you are constantly wrong.
When he was taking about how old the Himalayas were he was talking about how old the mountain range was, not how old the strata that make it up were.
So you interpreted what he was saying incorrectly.
Let's see. 60 million years rising at one inch per year is roughly 6 million feet. Aren't the Himalayas about 30,000 feet high? Are you sure he wasn't just talking about how old the rock is, you technical wizard, you?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113404 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's see. 60 million years rising at one inch per year is roughly 6 million feet. Aren't the Himalayas about 30,000 feet high? Are you sure he wasn't just talking about how old the rock is, you technical wizard, you?
I have seen the figure 50 million years. And of course you forgot a couple of very important factors. They are also being eroded as they grow, and they did not necessarily grow at the rate they are growing now.

The mountain range started to grow 50 million years ago, the rocks in them would be a range of ages, though the youngest rock would be on the order of 60 million years old.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113405 Apr 3, 2013
KAB, don't you check the links supplied to you?

The Wiki link that was supplied to you says that the mountain range started to form 50 to 60 million years ago. The growth would have really taken off only in the last 10 million years. That was when India ran into southern Asia. And of course erosion was going on as the mountains grew.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#113406 Apr 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently I was right. This time NOTHING BUT BLANKS.
What blanks? You shot yourself in both feet.
You correctly stated that raising the mountain chains would not be inconsequential. In fact, it would be such a momentous occurrence that it would surely be included in the flood story - and it isn't.
Where is the account of 8 people struggling to repopulate a barren and lifeless world? That isn't worth a mention in your tome? No, what is worth mentioning is God IMMEDIATELY needing to be appeased with animal sacrifices.
Raising mountain chains? Not a peep. For that matter, even REAL cataclysms such as the Santorini event are mysteriously missing from your all knowing oracle.

You correctly stated that phytoplankton, a major source of the Earth's oxygen, is in the ocean. I understand you aren't bright enough to extrapolate what would happen if you covered it with 2-5 MILES of fresh water and a third that much more silty runoff, and I know you aren't bright enough to quit spouting idiocy. You're just another JW zombie and quite honestly, what little novelty you once offered in bantering with and through your absolute lack of intelligence, honesty, integrity and content is getting quite boring - especially when you keep revisiting things like your vapid and inane "global rain guage."

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) 35 min Frindly 83,830
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 1 hr Frindly 3,226
Ten Reason Why Evolution Is a Lie (Jul '09) 10 hr MIDutch 1,996
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 22 hr Regolith Based Li... 223,191
Time Dec 9 THANKS 2
Evolution exposed Dec 8 Dogen 6
Roy Moore doesn't represent me. Dec 7 Dogen 2
More from around the web