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

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

There are 157428 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

United States

#113685 Apr 8, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
CM wrote:
"Pure speculation. Where is the data from any Biblical, historic, geologic or oceanographic source to support that supposition?"
I invited you to provide a source (any credible source) of your proposition. I did not defame you or your speculation. If you can offer a reasonable and rational reference that the mountains were hills prior to the hypothetical flood and a cause and effect for the prestigious mountain growth afterward along with the ancillary effects that would result, you are still cordially invited to do so.
If you interpreted this invitation as a condemnation for fabricating a scenario to fit a biased conclusion, perhaps that is your conscience is talking, and not my post.
Isn't my speculation on a par with yours? Why are you seeking more from me than you do yourself? Please don't misundersand. I will provide whatever I can find. That's where we often differ.
KAB

United States

#113686 Apr 8, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This would be a lie.
The bible says nothing about requisite geological activity after the flood.
The bible says nothing about where the water went.
The bible presents a teaching story that is pregnant with metaphors and you reject it's teaching.
You're off topic again.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#113687 Apr 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't my speculation on a par with yours? Why are you seeking more from me than you do yourself? Please don't misundersand. I will provide whatever I can find. That's where we often differ.
I muse over objective cause and effects regarding A flood as described in Genesis. You purport a supportive argument regarding THE flood as described in Genesis. I don't hold you to a higher standard than myself, you balance yourself on a lower one. I
I have no issue with you speculating, I've issues with you professing.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#113688 Apr 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You're off topic again.
LOL! We spend far, far more time off topic than on. Would you like to be held to task? Precisely WHAT facts are missing from the evolution debate? Consideration of cultural biases vs. income brackets and the decline of US educational scores among the developed nations - particularly in comparison to those which are not impelled and unduly influenced by theocratic balderdash?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113689 Apr 8, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>It's distressing to realize that this person can probably operate a motor vehicle. And vote.
Voting is more difficult than driving and can ultimately be more harmful. Also bad drivers tend to filter themselves out of the population of drivers sooner or later. Not so with voting. They will return for election after election. Lastly, though I F is an extreme example of this lunacy there are quite a few like him.

In other words, be afraid, be very afraid!
LowellGuy

United States

#113690 Apr 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I do, and you are correct, "adhere" being a critical qualifier in your characterization. Regarding words, explain how the name "Easter" derives from the Bible and adherence to it.
That isn't what I said. Go back and read it again. I thought you didn't like having words put in your mouth, yet here you are doing that to another.
LowellGuy

United States

#113691 Apr 8, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
YES! It “exist now” and it “didn’t exist” must be applied to TIME and must not violate the law of non-contradiction found in nature as an absolute truth! I think and speak in universal terms (absolute truths) and the way you people are defining time by the observation of nature is flawed! I discovered Time as an absolute truth (universal law) observed in nature which its self is an absolute truth and you and the rest of the people who think like you, including your flawed scientific method used to falsifiably validate the origin of species as a non-fixed biological reproductive species! Anyways, this conversation is about time so let’s keep it to what is time on a universal scale!
I know time is a universal concept which makes it ETERNAL (good bye to thinking time travel is possible) because time having no beginning or ending, what numbers are you going to put on the “date” to travel to when an absolute current date on the universal scale has no beginning or ending?!
Anyways, what is your universal definition for time?! Once again, you must think on the universal scale.
<quoted text>
I ALWAYS thought like this naturally. I just discovered the tool to explain how I think from Aristotle called the law of non-contradiction! You can’t even speak about reality (absolute truths) because you reject it when I speak in absolute truths because you cherry pick to speak ONLY about the absolute truths you like and you reject the absolute truths you dis-like and this validates your way of thinking violates the law of non-contradiction!
A. Chromiuman either accepts absolute truths
B. Chromiuman either rejects absolute truths
The law of non-contradiction states if you reject one absolute truth then you must reject ALL absolute truths!
You pick both answers you’re only out for yourself or a group of people who think like you and their own self-centered, biased, want things ONLLY there ways and this is not a universal way of thinking. You are either for all or for yourself!!
MOTIVES DETETECTED BY APPLYING THE LAW OF NON-CONTRADICTION TO INDIVIDUAL THINKING!
I already know your answer but I want to check your integrity level.
Choose either A or B would you please above and let US see if you or out for the good of all or your own selfish, biased and prejudice desires! I AWAIT YOUR ANSWER! ABSOLUTE TRUTHS DON’T COMPROMISE WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ACCEPTS SOME AND REJECTS OTHER! Because this is why we have people like YOUR-SELF with contradictory thoughts in their heads trying dis-proving absolute truths they dis-like!
OH, DID I TELL YOU I AM ABLE TO READ YOUR OWN MIND TO DETERMINE YOUR BEHAVIOR WITH WHAT YOU POST TO ME AND KNOW IF YOU ARE UP TO GOOD (ACCEPT ONLY ABSOLUTE TRUTHS) OR NO GOOD (REJECTING ABSOLUTE TRUTHS?! Chuckling!
Demonstrate the eternity of time. Good luck.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113692 Apr 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Voting is more difficult than driving and can ultimately be more harmful. Also bad drivers tend to filter themselves out of the population of drivers sooner or later. Not so with voting. They will return for election after election. Lastly, though I F is an extreme example of this lunacy there are quite a few like him.
In other words, be afraid, be very afraid!
One has been concerned for some time.

One is not alone.

"...A state that required a bare minimum of intelligence and education - e.g., step into the polling booth and find that the computer has generated a new quadratic equation just for you. Solve it, the computer unlocks the voting machine, you vote.
But get a wrong answer and the voting machine fails to unlock, a loud bell sounds, a red light goes on over the booth - and you slink out, face red, you having just proved yourself too stupid and/or ignorant to take part in the decisions of grownups. Better luck next election!
No lower age limit in this system - smart 12-yr-old girls vote every election while some of their mothers - and fathers - decline to be humiliated twice." - RAH.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113693 Apr 8, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>One has been concerned for some time.
One is not alone.
"...A state that required a bare minimum of intelligence and education - e.g., step into the polling booth and find that the computer has generated a new quadratic equation just for you. Solve it, the computer unlocks the voting machine, you vote.
But get a wrong answer and the voting machine fails to unlock, a loud bell sounds, a red light goes on over the booth - and you slink out, face red, you having just proved yourself too stupid and/or ignorant to take part in the decisions of grownups. Better luck next election!
No lower age limit in this system - smart 12-yr-old girls vote every election while some of their mothers - and fathers - decline to be humiliated twice." - RAH.
Yes, one of my favorite authors.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113694 Apr 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, one of my favorite authors.
Pret' decent idea, too...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#113695 Apr 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, it appears that Infinite Force would more aptly be named Infinite Farce.
The man, and I assume it is a man, truly has psychological problems.
I would go for Impotent Farce myself, but it could be a competition with Impudent Farce or merely Indolent Fool.
KAB

United States

#113696 Apr 8, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I muse over objective cause and effects regarding A flood as described in Genesis. You purport a supportive argument regarding THE flood as described in Genesis. I don't hold you to a higher standard than myself, you balance yourself on a lower one. I
I have no issue with you speculating, I've issues with you professing.
What did I profess? My words, not yours, would be best since your side virtually always gets it wrong when making assertions about what I have stated.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#113697 Apr 8, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Pret' decent idea, too...
I saw bits and pieces of "Starship Troopers" yesterday. Don't get me started on how stupid it is to have a person who hates the book direct the movie that the book was based upon.

Again, the core idea was a democracy where you had to qualify to vote. Anyone could vote if they qualified. The price was kept rather dear on purpose.
KAB

United States

#113698 Apr 8, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! We spend far, far more time off topic than on. Would you like to be held to task? Precisely WHAT facts are missing from the evolution debate? Consideration of cultural biases vs. income brackets and the decline of US educational scores among the developed nations - particularly in comparison to those which are not impelled and unduly influenced by theocratic balderdash?
Time data which supports macro-evolution.
KAB

United States

#113699 Apr 8, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
That isn't what I said. Go back and read it again. I thought you didn't like having words put in your mouth, yet here you are doing that to another.
Precisely. That's why I didn't state anything about what you stated except for the one word "adhere" which I quoted. I merely issued a challenge.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113700 Apr 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I saw bits and pieces of "Starship Troopers" yesterday. Don't get me started on how stupid it is to have a person who hates the book direct the movie that the book was based upon.
Again, the core idea was a democracy where you had to qualify to vote. Anyone could vote if they qualified. The price was kept rather dear on purpose.
That movie was an Abomination Unto Nuggen.

Also Unto Me.

Heinlein had a couple of other ideas for improving the votimg process - one involved disintegration as a forfeit for being unable to answer the question(s). He didn't much like that one.

Another involved a charge for trying - success earned a refund.

Wasn't it the Roman Empire discovered that universal suffrage resulted in literal "mob rule"?

Level 4

Since: Apr 12

Lansdale, PA

#113701 Apr 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Given that you have been watching me, which has involved considerable interaction between myself and Dogen, it is quite reasonable to expect you would have observations to address to him, as you have to me. There is, of course, no obligation to do so. I just thought you might want to help him as you do me.
I watch when I have time, which recently, I haven't had. I am genuinely curious when someone rejects one of the most supported theory in science, I want to understand why people tend to believe in books written 2000 years ago literally, when they are best taken allegorically.
As far as I know Dogen and I are on the same side of the fence as far as evolution is concerned, broadly speaking. So you can see why my subject of interest is people like you.

Also I am not under any illusion that I will be able to change your mind through a debate like this.
KAB

United States

#113702 Apr 8, 2013
rpk58 wrote:
<quoted text>
I watch when I have time, which recently, I haven't had. I am genuinely curious when someone rejects one of the most supported theory in science, I want to understand why people tend to believe in books written 2000 years ago literally, when they are best taken allegorically.
As far as I know Dogen and I are on the same side of the fence as far as evolution is concerned, broadly speaking. So you can see why my subject of interest is people like you.
Also I am not under any illusion that I will be able to change your mind through a debate like this.
I understand perfectly. Why question what you already believe?
As to changing my mind, don't sell yourself short. Confirming data changes my mind in a heartbeat. That's primarily how I got to where I am, and that will continue to be the case. I believe what I believe because I challenged what I use to believe, and I continue to challenge what I believe.

You may also note that my inquiry regarding Dogen has nothing to do with his beliefs. I would do the same if he was on my side. My take is that his approach is seriously flawed. The scary part is that, at least according to him, he's in a position to influence others' mental health!

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#113703 Apr 8, 2013
marksman11 wrote:
<quoted text>That is because you don't want to understand it. GOD doesn't send anyone to hell. He has done all he can possibly do to keep you from going to hell only stoping short of nulling your free will. It's as if Jesus is nailing signs on the gateway to hell saying, "Danger" "Do not Enter", turns to you and says, "You will enter hell over my dead body".....and people like you will step over his dead body and walk right in. You go to hell because you choose to. He made the way of escape, and you choose not to take it. I have no pity for you.
You are hostage to a mythical God and his man-made dogma. There is no heaven, there is no hell....it's all nonsense of the highest order.

I have pity for you and your brain....it's wacked.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#113704 Apr 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You're off topic again.

You mean the bible is off topic?

[Please, oh please, make him say it!!!]

If not then please answer my questions.

Feel free to PM me if you are worried about clogging up the forum with off topic information.

Or are you just running scared, as usual?

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
Can the universe be God's brain? (Jun '07) 5 min Regolith Based Li... 96
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 17 min 15th Dalai Lama 51,560
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 18 min Regolith Based Li... 218,743
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Joe Momma 24,676
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 4 hr ChromiuMan 1,124
The Fossil Record Does Not Support The Theory O... 20 hr MADRONE 47
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... Tue Dogen 460
More from around the web