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

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

There are 159275 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.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#114948 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You have yet to provide data confirming the flood didn't happen.
And you haven't provided data confirming that people haven't been abducted by spacemen. Are you calling all those abduction stories by all those unrelated and unfamiliar people lies? Are you saying they're crazy? Liar, Lunatic, or Lord, right? Are they liars, lunatics, or are they actual victims of alien abductions? If you can't prove their stories are false, shouldn't we accept them as true?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#114949 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it your understanding that there is no evidence confirming anything in the Bible as correct, or are you just considering anything unproven as supernatural, or what? Please clarify what you do and don't accept in the Bible.
Anything? No. EVERYTHING? Yes. The time to accept that everything in the Bible is true is when everything in the Bible has been confirmed true with ACTUAL EVIDENCE. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Until that occurs, the correct and justified position is to reject all claims that have not been demonstrated true with evidence.

Has the flood been demonstrated true with evidence? You have already admitted it has not. Therefore, the only JUSTIFIED position is to reject it. That doesn't require assertion of the contrapositive; it just means the claim has not been demonstrated to be true. The burden of proof has not been met.

Do try to be honest with yourself for once. I promise, it won't hurt forever.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#114950 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I just wasn't thinking about and chose to continue not thinking about AIDS and wasn't sure just what you wanted since it was completely off topic.
So, you lied. Gotcha.
KAB

Kirkland, WA

#114951 May 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually we have. Since a Biblical flood would leave massive evidence behind the lack of evidence in this case is data that it did not happen.
And as usual you do have it backwards. We don't even need to show "data it did not happen". This is the sort of claim that the positive side has to give evidence for. If I claim I can fly by flapping my arms really fast you don't have to find data that I can't do it. It is up to me to demonstrate that I can.
Your flood claim is on the same order. You have to give some sort of evidence that the flood happened.
Remember KAB without any evidence YOU lose.
That sword cuts both ways. Provide data confirming what massive evidence of a global flood 4500 years ago must be available, and have been discovered and recognized today.
KAB

Kirkland, WA

#114952 May 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
In every post, you reveal the systematic destruction of the rational faculty evident in your kind of believer. Faith is the Enemy of Reason said Martin Luther. He was right. You cannot even see it, can you...
I certainly can't see your confirming data, but that's because you haven't provided any. You just assert it exists. The Guy (that's your guy) has stated I shouldn't accept dataless assertions.
KAB

Kirkland, WA

#114953 May 8, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Just about everyone here has done exactly that.
Also, you have yet to provide data confirming the flood *DID* happen.
What have I stated consistently about physical data confirming the flood?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#114954 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
That sword cuts both ways. Provide data confirming what massive evidence of a global flood 4500 years ago must be available, and have been discovered and recognized today.
Bullshit. There was no global flood. Get over it.
Elohim

Branford, CT

#114955 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
That sword cuts both ways. Provide data confirming what massive evidence of a global flood 4500 years ago must be available, and have been discovered and recognized today.
There was no global flood ergo there is no evidence of one occurring.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#114956 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
YOUR error is in assuming an error in the Bible without confirming data. I don't assert that there is extra-Biblical data confirming Nebuchadnezzar's conquering of Egypt, and then not provide any. It's your side that asserts but doesn't provide confirming data.
Why don't you follow my lead in confirming that Canada never conquered America? Provide the confirming historical records accepted by all sides and demonstrating that Egypt's sovereignty does not have a 40 year gap.
Other then the Bible there is no mention of Egypt being conquered by ol' Neeby. I can find nothing in any other literature.

Do you know of any confirming outside source. Thid would mean that Egypt was desolated twice by Biblical interference

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#114957 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What have I stated consistently about physical data confirming the flood?
There isn't any. Game over.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#114958 May 8, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually we have. Since a Biblical flood would leave massive evidence behind the lack of evidence in this case is data that it did not happen.
And as usual you do have it backwards. We don't even need to show "data it did not happen". This is the sort of claim that the positive side has to give evidence for. If I claim I can fly by flapping my arms really fast you don't have to find data that I can't do it. It is up to me to demonstrate that I can.
Your flood claim is on the same order. You have to give some sort of evidence that the flood happened.
Remember KAB without any evidence YOU lose.
From what I've seen on this forum KAB consistently loses.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114959 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
That sword cuts both ways. Provide data confirming what massive evidence of a global flood 4500 years ago must be available, and have been discovered and recognized today.
What!? No, I don't have to provide "data". I merely have to mention some of the facts that do not fit in with the idea of a global flood.

As was already pointed out the lack of genetic or population bottlenecks alone debunks the flood myth. Add to that the fact that there should be physical evidence of a flood and there is none shows there was no flood.

We have already made our case. You have nothing. You lose.
KAB

Kirkland, WA

#114960 May 8, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
According to a completely subjective standard that nobody can agree upon and apply to consistently achieve the same results. When you make up your own rules, and they only apply to you, and they only apply the way you want, and nobody else can reliably duplicate your results, you fail.
<quoted text>
It is NEVER the course of wisdom to accept claims before there is evidence. Just because you might end up being right doesn't mean you're justified. If I throw a dart at a dartboard with a map on it, and I declare that a terrorist attack will occur in that city sometime in the future, should you accept that claim or not?
<quoted text>
There's a difference between "X did not occur" and "I don't accept your claim that X occurred." You have already demonstrated that you don't understand the concept of rejection not being an assertion of the contrapositive.
You have yet to demonstrate that Canada never conquered America. Why do you assert that it never occurred, when you can't prove it never occurred?
You always overlook the value of a demonstrated reliable source.

I have provided proof Canada never conquered America, just as I have provided proof Earth is not cubic in shape. You may be the only one who thinks there's still a chance that each may not be correct.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114961 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What have I stated consistently about physical data confirming the flood?
I don't know. Maybe that there is none?

Without evidence you lose.
KAB

Kirkland, WA

#114962 May 8, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Absence of universal genetic bottlenecks dating to 4500 years ago and emanating from the Middle East.
If we DID discover universal genetic bottlenecks, would that confirm the flood?
Remember, you've already said that the methodology for detecting and dating genetic bottlenecks is of dubious merit. But, if the scientific community was unanimous (we'll disregard the creationist outfits, as they are inherently anti-science) about a universal genetic bottleneck dating back to 4500 years ago, and leading all life back to the Middle East, would you accept that as evidence that supports the flood, or would you dismiss it because of the faulty methodology for finding such bottlenecks?
What you propose would be evidence that supports the flood, but it would not be evidence that confirms the flood, and of course it would be prudent to scrutinize the data for weaknesses/errors.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#114963 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You always overlook the value of a demonstrated reliable source.
Again, according to your own subjective standard.
KAB wrote:
I have provided proof Canada never conquered America,
Wrong. You have merely pointed out that nobody says Canada conquered America. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.
KAB wrote:
just as I have provided proof Earth is not cubic in shape.
You don't care how much you lie, do you?
KAB wrote:
You may be the only one who thinks there's still a chance that each may not be correct.
Science says that the Earth COULD be cubic, though the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of it being an oblate spheroid. Science always acknowledges the possibility, no matter how remote, that our current understand could be overturned by new evidence. You, however, insist that your understanding of X is absolute and infallible, as it cannot be wrong. How did you come to know everything there is to possibly know?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#114964 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What you propose would be evidence that supports the flood, but it would not be evidence that confirms the flood, and of course it would be prudent to scrutinize the data for weaknesses/errors.
But, you WOULD accept the validity of such results, even though you have already cast aspersions upon the methodology behind how genetic bottlenecks are detected and dated. I just want that to be clear.

If the genetic bottleneck that must necessarily exist in all life on Earth for the flood story to be true isn't detected, you attribute that to faulty methodology or incompetence. If the genetic bottleneck that must necessarily exist in all life for the flood story to be true is detected, it's valid.

So, to summarize: if the evidence contradicts your story, it must be faulty, but if the evidence supports your story, it must be valid. How is that not exactly confirmation bias?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#114965 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it your understanding that there is no evidence confirming anything in the Bible as correct, or are you just considering anything unproven as supernatural, or what? Please clarify what you do and don't accept in the Bible.
No evidence supports your bible's supernatural claims, none. Provide such evidence or your are merely proving yourself to be delusional.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#114966 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What you propose would be evidence that supports the flood, but it would not be evidence that confirms the flood, and of course it would be prudent to scrutinize the data for weaknesses/errors.
That's not how science works, and explains why you are still very stupid

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#114967 May 8, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What you propose would be evidence that supports the flood, but it would not be evidence that confirms the flood, and of course it would be prudent to scrutinize the data for weaknesses/errors.
You know KAB I've been thinking (always a bad idea) scientists (which early on were Christians) since the 1600's have been doubting and researching whether there was a flood or not.

The consensus of opinion since the early 1800's was that there was NO flood. I have no data on this, but I doubt if any scientist of today supports a flood either.

Do you think there is any scientific data that exists today or any mainline geological scientist that supports a Noachian flood??

I don't think you will find any mainline archaeologist that will support that the earth was wiped clean 4300+- years ago.

I've been looking for years for a flood and the wiping clean of the earth for a few hundred years, and can find no supporting evidence that I would trust for either.

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) 4 min IB DaMann 58,050
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr Hedonist Heretic 1,849
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 9 hr Subduction Zone 27,261
News Intelligent Design Education Day Sun replaytime 2
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Sun replaytime 219,597
News Betsy DeVos' Code Words for Creationism Offshoo... Feb 16 scientia potentia... 1
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) Feb 15 bofo 1,756
More from around the web