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

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

There are 154837 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.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114747 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
The failed word is conquer.
But in context he did conquer the Egyptian army army.
He just did not conquer Egypt.
And he did not win his battle in Egypt.
And again, this is not the battle, war, call it what you will that Zeke prophesized. Bro's account mentions that Nebby's daddy sent him to attack Egypt. Nebby's daddy dies in 605 AD roughly 20 eyars before the start of the Tyre attack and therefore at least 20 years before the prophesy.

As I said, another fail by KAB.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114748 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this a relevant question or simply a distraction from the fact that 'Canada' is a name that has long been in use?
I say distraction.
Is that what you want considered, the region that someone called Canada and beginning with with the time when they first did that?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114749 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not think you would. So, why did you make the argument in the first place?
Dogen wrote:
Do you want to consider a translation of a lost original document from a pagan priest to be confirmed reliable?
I have simply provided what a record states. I have made no assertions beyond that. What have you done?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114750 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Whereas Tyre was THE island and whereas it is described as an island it would be redundant of the prophecy to thus describe it.
Ezekiel 26:5 - Out in the sea...
Ezekiel 26:6 - and her settlements on the mainland
Ezekiel 26:8 - He will ravage your settlements on the mainland
Ezekiel 26:17 -“‘How you are destroyed, city of renown,
peopled by men of the sea!
Not a reference to the minor villages on the shore, to be certain.
==========
It goes on to say :he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls", of course these refer to the city on the island, not the mainland which was simply a string of villages.
Ezekiel 26:10 ...when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through.
Never happened. The city gates were around the city..... on the island.
Ezekiel 26:12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea.
The wealth of Tyre was behind the walls. The political an religious leaders were behind the walls. And since none of this, as outlined above, actually occurred.....
Ezekiel 26:14 -....You will never be rebuilt, for I the Lord have spoken, declares the Sovereign Lord.
In flagrante delicto it was not tore down (at that time) and WAS rebuilt.
Grand imperial prophetic failure.
Nearly a bad as the JW failures.
Ezekiel 26:19 - when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you,
Also never happened.
And the Coup de grâce:
Ezekiel 26:21 You will be sought, but you will never again be found"
Epic and complete failure.
The question you are too cowardly to answer is that if a prophecy is partially wrong, then isn't it ALL wrong?
Keep running. Keep distracting. I will keep reminding.
Why didn't you mention that Ezekiel 26:5 refers not to what Tyre was, but to what it was to become, "out in the sea"?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114751 May 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't matter.
Nebby was not the king at that time. His father was. This was the recorded battle against Necho II in about 605 BC, long before the prophesy. Your Bro even says so.
Give up, Zeke made a terribly flawed prophesy. If you cannot admit this small truth how do you ever expect to see the big picture.
Nebby would have had to conquer Egypt later when he was king and after his encounter with Tyre.

I see the big picture because I don't have blinders preventing me from considering all the data.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114752 May 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
It also has a time stamp on it since it referred to Nebby's father as being alive. That puts it at 605 BC at the latest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabopolassar
The siege on Tyre lated 13 years from 585 to 573 BC, then he attacked Egypt again. Zeke prophesized Nebby would win the second attack, he didn't.
Another failed prophesy brought to you by KAB.
I wonder if anyone has ever lost a battle, but won the war?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114753 May 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
I must say that the Tyre and now Egypt prophecies of Zeke have inspired some truly Olympic quality straw grasping by our local creatards.
Not to mention the energetic scramble by the defenders of the indefensible to defend the indefensible.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114754 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Nebby would have had to conquer Egypt later when he was king and after his encounter with Tyre.
I see the big picture because I don't have blinders preventing me from considering all the data.
Zeke's prophesy had a date.

The victory that you linked was one before he became king. It is well known. Your source says it was before he was king. You are just to dense to realize that.

The blinders are upon you. You make the assumption that EVERYTHING in the Bible is true and try to force the data to agree with that. I look and see what the data actually says. And the data says that the Bible fails. Time after time. Book after book.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114755 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I wonder if anyone has ever lost a battle, but won the war?
It has happened. You still have nothing that backs up your claim that Nebby might have won.

It is always incumbent upon the person making the positive statement, in this case you, to provide evidence for his or her claim. If you cannot find any evidence then the status quo stands. And the status quo says that Nebby lost.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114756 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to mention the energetic scramble by the defenders of the indefensible to defend the indefensible.
Of course you do that too. Your straw grasping is what is rather humorous for all to see.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114757 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Why didn't you mention that Ezekiel 26:5 refers not to what Tyre was, but to what it was to become, "out in the sea"?
It doesn't.

Again everyone except for maybe a tard or two knows that those verses point to Tyre being an island.

Your excursion into the Stupid will not save you.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114758 May 3, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
From your source KAB, read how Nebby's father sends Nebby against Egypt, that means this was 605 BC or earlier:
"Berossus [...] at length comes down to Nabopolassar, who was king of Babylon and the Chaldaeans. And when he was relating the acts of this king, he describes to us how he sent his son Nebuchadnezzar against Egypt, and against our land [Judah], with a great army, upon his being informed that they had revolted from him; and how, by that means, he subdued them all, and set our temple that was at Jerusalem on fire; nay, and removed our people entirely out of their own country, and transferred them to Babylon [1]; when it so happened that our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia."
http://www.livius.org/be-bm/berossus/berossus...
There it is. As I said the article has a time stamp that tells you this was the attack on Necho II. The recorded victory of Nebby over Egypt, a mere battle in the field. Not a war against the country. That came much later and Nebby lost.
You didn't continue to the non-time-stamped statement that Nebby conquered Egypt. Why is that do you think?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114759 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but you are wrong as always.
==========
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm relieved that the prophecy doesn't state that Nebby conquered the island of Tyre.
Whereas Tyre was THE island and whereas it is described as an island it would be redundant of the prophecy to thus describe it.
Ezekiel 26:5 - Out in the sea...
Ezekiel 26:6 - and her settlements on the mainland
Ezekiel 26:8 - He will ravage your settlements on the mainland
Ezekiel 26:17 -“‘How you are destroyed, city of renown,
peopled by men of the sea!
Not a reference to the minor villages on the shore, to be certain.
==========
It goes on to say :he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls", of course these refer to the city on the island, not the mainland which was simply a string of villages.
Ezekiel 26:10 ...when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through.
Never happened. The city gates were around the city..... on the island.
Ezekiel 26:12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea.
The wealth of Tyre was behind the walls. The political an religious leaders were behind the walls. And since none of this, as outlined above, actually occurred.....
Ezekiel 26:14 -....You will never be rebuilt, for I the Lord have spoken, declares the Sovereign Lord.
In flagrante delicto it was not tore down (at that time) and WAS rebuilt.
Grand imperial prophetic failure.
Nearly a bad as the JW failures.
Ezekiel 26:19 - when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you,
Also never happened.
And the Coup de grâce:
Ezekiel 26:21 You will be sought, but you will never again be found"
Epic and complete failure.
The question you are too cowardly to answer is that if a prophecy is partially wrong, then isn't it ALL wrong?
Keep running. Keep distracting. I will keep reminding.
According to the prophecy, whose settlements were on the mainland?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114760 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
So you have examined all of them....?
That is now pending clarification of and agreement on what is meant by Canada.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114761 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't continue to the non-time-stamped statement that Nebby conquered Egypt. Why is that do you think?
What on Earth are you rambling about now. There was on attack on Egypt mentioned in your link. It was before the Tyre prophecy by 20 years.

How dense are you tonight KAB?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114762 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
According to the prophecy, whose settlements were on the mainland?
The island Tyre's settlements were on the mainland. That is why they were referred to that way.

Do you have to give up ALL capabilities to think logically when you become a creatard? Is that one of the requirements?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#114763 May 3, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Nebby would have had to conquer Egypt later when he was king and after his encounter with Tyre.
I see the big picture because I don't have blinders preventing me from considering all the data.
And yet Tyre still stands.

And Nebby never conquered Egypt.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#114764 May 3, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you forgotten them already?
As I recall, they weren't present.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114765 May 4, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that what you want considered, the region that someone called Canada and beginning with with the time when they first did that?

I just want you to acknowledge the facts for once.

For example Tyre, at the time of Nebby, was an island city.

The facts have never been your friend.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114766 May 4, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I have simply provided what a record states. I have made no assertions beyond that. What have you done?

You have made no assertions? Are you kidding? You have done nothing but make assertions.

I have demonstrated a failed prophecy.

You have provided no contrary data.

As noted before, this constitutes a loss on your part.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 min Into The Night 23,571
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 16 min It aint necessari... 216,904
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr IB DaMann 48,837
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 9 hr One way or another 179,742
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 16 hr GoTrump 1,047
Evolution in action (May '16) Wed Thick cockney cha... 36
Richard Dawkins tells the truth Dec 5 Timmee 9
More from around the web