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

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

There are 164345 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

#113751 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Tsunamis are destructive in their interaction with shorelines. Imagine Tsunamis with no land above water. Also, one source states that vertical shifts of 50 feet can occur virtually instantaneously. The Himalayas are rather striking, don't you think?
Rather striking? Yes, I would dislike being struck with even the collateral energies from what you propose. I rather doubt any life within a couple thousand miles would be unaffected by it - including Noah's little clan.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113752 Apr 9, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Delusional disorder - Grandiose type
DSM IV-TR Code: 297.1
We really need to get him and marksman together.
He's also OCD, and flat wrong.
KAB

United States

#113753 Apr 9, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Rather striking? Yes, I would dislike being struck with even the collateral energies from what you propose. I rather doubt any life within a couple thousand miles would be unaffected by it - including Noah's little clan.
What did that 50 foot shift do where there were no shorelines nearby? Didn't some take their boats out to sea when they knew the Tsunami was approaching? Why would that be, do you think?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#113754 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What did that 50 foot shift do where there were no shorelines nearby? Didn't some take their boats out to sea when they knew the Tsunami was approaching? Why would that be, do you think?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsunami

"Tsunamis have a small amplitude (wave height) offshore, and a very long wavelength (often hundreds of kilometres long, whereas normal ocean waves have a wavelength of only 30 or 40 metres),[22] which is why they generally pass unnoticed at sea, forming only a slight swell usually about 300 millimetres (12 in) above the normal sea surface. They grow in height when they reach shallower water, in a wave shoaling process described below. A tsunami can occur in any tidal state and even at low tide can still inundate coastal areas."

What's your point?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#113755 Apr 9, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Okay, you're startin' to piss me off.
The "Law of Non-Contradiction", or, more properly, "Principle of Contradiction", states that "Contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time".
I'll say that again: "Contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time".
You keep on forgetting the "sense" and "time" bits.
Stoppit.
Infinite Force's Law of Non-Contradiction is actually:

"If something contradicts me, IF, I am absolutely sure it must be wrong".

But because he is batshit insane, he does not realise this, ad nobody can explain it to him.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#113756 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Marksman is not on my side. Long ago I challenged his approach and only occasionally begin to read any of his posts to see if he has changed. He hasn't. You should provide data (I know that's anathema to you) to confirm his nonsense, then if nothing changed, ignore him, like I now largely do you.
Dogmatic viewpoints like yours and Marksman's can be expected to diverge continually as you have no evidential reference point...in science on the other hand, new evidence tends to heals schisms...in religious dogma there is no new evidence, only the sterility of endless scriptural re-interpretation.

We also see an endless parade of attempts to topple evolution by special pleading or fault finding on this particular or that, but no ability to form a coherent overview consistent with all the physical evidence from every field...something that science demands of itself and that evolution provides within a larger framework of biology, physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, and cosmology.
KAB

United States

#113757 Apr 9, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsunami
"Tsunamis have a small amplitude (wave height) offshore, and a very long wavelength (often hundreds of kilometres long, whereas normal ocean waves have a wavelength of only 30 or 40 metres),[22] which is why they generally pass unnoticed at sea, forming only a slight swell usually about 300 millimetres (12 in) above the normal sea surface. They grow in height when they reach shallower water, in a wave shoaling process described below. A tsunami can occur in any tidal state and even at low tide can still inundate coastal areas."
What's your point?
Tsunamis during and/or resulting from the global flood would have been rather innocuous for those on the ark.
KAB

United States

#113758 Apr 9, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Dogmatic viewpoints like yours and Marksman's can be expected to diverge continually as you have no evidential reference point...in science on the other hand, new evidence tends to heals schisms...in religious dogma there is no new evidence, only the sterility of endless scriptural re-interpretation.
We also see an endless parade of attempts to topple evolution by special pleading or fault finding on this particular or that, but no ability to form a coherent overview consistent with all the physical evidence from every field...something that science demands of itself and that evolution provides within a larger framework of biology, physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, and cosmology.
More assertions, but still no specific confirming data examples.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#113759 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Tsunamis during and/or resulting from the global flood would have been rather innocuous for those on the ark.
On the scale of which you are proposing, it is unlikely that it would be as 'innocuous' as you seem to think. In any event, it is just one more of your dataless assertions.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#113760 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
More assertions, but still no specific confirming data examples.
What's good for the goose...

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#113761 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
Tsunamis during and/or resulting from the global flood would have been rather innocuous for those on the ark.
Hmmm... Proposed effect of imaginary tsunami on imaginary boat during imaginary flood. Innocuous for sure. Good call.
KAB

United States

#113762 Apr 9, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
On the scale of which you are proposing, it is unlikely that it would be as 'innocuous' as you seem to think. In any event, it is just one more of your dataless assertions.
It is not a dataless assertion. We have real-time present quantified experience with tsunamis, as you noted.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#113763 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not a dataless assertion. We have real-time present quantified experience with tsunamis, as you noted.
But not extrapolated to your global flood. Much like your demand for one year resolution. AKA Absurd.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#113764 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
More assertions, but still no specific confirming data examples.
The continued existence of 3 incompatible Abrahamic religions, each split into a multitude of competing and mutually incompatible sects, is data enough for my assertion.

Your religions and sects of religions have no empirical grounds on which to develop a consensus.

In science, on the other hand "schisms" - disagreements - are corrected in the long run by new data.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#113765 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not a dataless assertion. We have real-time present quantified experience with tsunamis, as you noted.
You might remember this:
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
A vertical shift of only 50 feet caused the 2004 tsunami. The shifts you propose are many orders of magnitude beyond that and would leave obvious and overwhelming physical evidence. What source states significant differences in mountain heights and oceanic depths pre-flood?
To which you replied:
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Tsunamis are destructive in their interaction with shorelines. Imagine Tsunamis with no land above water. Also, one source states that vertical shifts of 50 feet occur virtually instantaneously. The Himalayas are rather striking, don't you think?
So where is the friggin *DATA* for the 'no land above water' assertion? With your nonexistent 'stealth flood' data?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113766 Apr 9, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Infinite Force's Law of Non-Contradiction is actually:
"If something contradicts me, IF, I am absolutely sure it must be wrong".
But because he is batshit insane, he does not realise this, ad nobody can explain it to him.
ROFL.

Oh, is THAT how he's applying the term?

Still laffin.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113767 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Tsunamis during and/or resulting from the global flood would have been rather innocuous for those on the ark.
There's a species of giant tarantula, just discovered last week, on Sri Lanka.

Thing's a foot across.

Noah somehow found two of those?

Poecilotheria rajaei

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/04/gian...

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#113768 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not a dataless assertion. We have real-time present quantified experience with tsunamis, as you noted.
Here's some data you might be able to grasp:

"Woe unto he who listeneth only to the words of his elders, but learneth not." - Ecc I:11

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#113769 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Continuing your tradition of quoteless misrepresentation, I see.

Accusing others of misrepresentation? You sure that is the way you want to go? Really?!



KAB wrote:
<quoted text> The analysis was restricted to depth of water required to fully mix available dirt.

And you successfully demonstrated how to make mud.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#113770 Apr 9, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
So you accept the parameters as correct?


Continuing your tradition of quoteless misrepresentation, I see.

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) 3 hr Science 82,045
Why does Tennessee smell like Asphalt? Sun Djdjrjrjerj 1
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... Sun Science 2,206
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) Sat Science 33,086
Did humans come from Sturgeons? Oct 16 Science 1
Proof humans come from Tennessee Oct 16 Science 1
Science News (Sep '13) Oct 14 Science 4,005
More from around the web