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

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 ... Full Story
KAB

Des Moines, IA

#115148 May 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
So what??? That does not negate the evidence against the flood.
That's correct. The evidence against the flood has been negated on different grounds.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#115149 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
That's correct. The evidence against the flood has been negated on different grounds.
Only in your dreams.
KAB

Des Moines, IA

#115150 May 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
{head/desk}
Ever hear of stomach acids, loony?
I haven't yet seen data regarding the stomachs of all sufficiently large sea creatures. Hey, how about that woman still alive after 17 days in the belly of the collapsed factory!
KAB

Des Moines, IA

#115151 May 10, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>The Atacama certain;y never flooded at that time.
Nor did the Hindu Kush, nor the Great Sandy.
EPIC FAIL.
Come to think of it, the Ararat Massif wasn't underwater then, either.
To bring this to conclusion, all you have to do to win me over is provide confirming data which withstands scrutiny. Otherwise, your assertions are worthless.
KAB

Des Moines, IA

#115152 May 10, 2013
Elohim wrote:
<quoted text>That is not the flood of Noah. Nice try. At least you admit the Earth is older than Bishop Usher calculated.
Thanks for the compelling proof confirming the crater sediment is not from the flood of Noah. Oh, you didn't provide any? Sorry, my bad.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#115153 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't yet seen data regarding the stomachs of all sufficiently large sea creatures. Hey, how about that woman still alive after 17 days in the belly of the collapsed factory!
Good thing for her it wasn't a fish or she'd have died in under 3 minutes.
KAB

Des Moines, IA

#115154 May 10, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
As we have repeatedy provided documentation for by numerous, diverse methods, a global flood could not have happened at any point within the past several hundred million years on planet earth.
End of story.
If any of what has been provided had withstood scrutiny I wouldn't continue the pursuit.
KAB

Des Moines, IA

#115155 May 10, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
"What if you" just bought a freshly printed lottery ticket with last week's winning numbers on it? It doesn't mean that you've "won" a single red cent.
Even aside from your obvious mental infirmities regarding the cause of the slough and the contents of the crater, the calculated dates of "the basin-scale erosive slide" and "Da Flud" miss each other.
What's the resolution and error probability on the time estimates involved? BTW, it would be interesting to see you relate your "analogy(?)" element-by-element to the crater.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#115156 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If any of what has been provided had withstood scrutiny I wouldn't continue the pursuit.
To any reasonable, rational adult, ALL of the evidence we have presented against the possibility of a global flood withstands scrutiny.

Unfortunately, you're much too dishonest to consider this.

The fact that you bring up outlandish "What ifs..." regarding each and every piece of evidence submitted is laughable.

**IF**

"If dingleberries were diamonds I could open a Kay Jewelers in my pants." (Credit: John Stewart, "The Daily Show" - 5/8/13)

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#115157 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What's the resolution and error probability on the time estimates involved? BTW, it would be interesting to see you relate your "analogy(?)" element-by-element to the crater.
A miss is as good as a mile - or in this case about 200 miles. BTW, it would be interesting to see your psych profile related element-by-element to that of an Islamic extremist's.
HTS

Sidney, MT

#115158 May 10, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You have just hit the mark for completely insane.
Modern dating techniques are established, stable, repeatable and accurate.
Go find anonther point to assualt fire plug, this one is old news and well refuted.
You are established, unsatable, repeat nonsense and are inaccurate.
Radiometric dating is worthless, and that fact is established by blind studies... something that is foreign to those who swallow evo-koolaid.
Example: 10 year old samples from Mt. St. Helens were radiometrically dated to over 300,000 years old.
I would say that a 30,000 fold margin of error = worthless.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#115159 May 10, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Radiometric dating is worthless, and that fact is established by blind studies... something that is foreign to those who swallow evo-koolaid.
Example: 10 year old samples from Mt. St. Helens were radiometrically dated to over 300,000 years old.
I would say that a 30,000 fold margin of error = worthless.
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/mt_st_he...

Because radiometric dating utterly refutes their biblical interpretations, young-Earth creationists (YECs) are desperate to undermine the reality of these methods. As part of their efforts, YEC Dr. Steve Austin and his associates at the Institute for Creation 'Research'(ICR) collected a dacite sample from Mt. St. Helens, Washington State, USA, which probably erupted in 1986 AD. Austin et al. then ineffectively separated the sample into several mineral and glass 'fractions', submitted the dacite and its 'fractions' for potassium 40-argon 40 (K-Ar) dating, and subsequently used the bogus results to inappropriately attack the K-Ar method. Austin's conclusions on this project are summarized at the ICR website.

The 'research' efforts of Austin and his colleagues and their 'expertise' in radiometric dating have been widely criticized, including by Joe Meert (also here), Karen Bartelt and company and myself at No Answers in Genesis and in my web debate with Dr. David Plaisted at Tim Thompson's 'A Radiometric Dating Resource List'

AUSTIN FAILED TO PROPERLY USE THE K-Ar METHOD

Considering that the half-life of potassium-40 (40K) is fairly long (1,250 million years, McDougall and Harrison, 1999, p. 9), the K-Ar method cannot be used to date samples that are much younger than 6,000 years old (Dalrymple, 1991, p. 93). Considering the statements at the Geochron website and the lowest age limitations of the K-Ar method, why did Austin submit a recently erupted dacite to this laboratory and expect a reliable answer??? Contrary to Swenson's uninformed claim that ' Dr Austin carefully designed the research to counter all possible objections', Austin clearly demonstrated his inexperience in geochronology when he wasted a lot of money using the K-Ar method on the wrong type of samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Figure 4 in Austin's report, by itself, indicates that ancient zoned grains (phenocrysts and perhaps some xenocrysts) were common in Austin's dacite from Mt. St. Helens. It's also obvious from Austin's text that he was unsuccessful in adequately separating the volcanic glass from the much older minerals. Austin should have known that if he wanted to date the 1986 AD eruption the phenocrysts needed to be entirely removed from his 'fractions' and that another method besides K-Ar dating would have been required. Furthermore, when Austin submitted his samples to Geochron Laboratories, he failed to heed warnings from the laboratory about the limitations of their equipment. Both Austin and Swenson ignored the implications of zoned minerals and Bowen's Reaction Series on the age of the dacite. Obviously, it's Austin's improper use of the K-Ar method and not the method itself that is flawed. Rather than recognizing the flaws in Austin's essay, Swenson simply parrots Austin's erroneous claims without really understanding the chemistry and mineralogy of dacites.

MUCH More at link above

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#115160 May 10, 2013
R.A.T.E. Sheesh!

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#115161 May 10, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Radiometric dating is worthless, and that fact is established by blind studies... something that is foreign to those who swallow evo-koolaid.
Example: 10 year old samples from Mt. St. Helens were radiometrically dated to over 300,000 years old.
I would say that a 30,000 fold margin of error = worthless.
Agreed. Worthless.
Of course, you could have said that Dr. Austin and the ICR purposefully conducted a flawed radiometric analysis in methodology, execution and interpretation, but that would indicate that the whole pack and kaboodle of creationist unintelligible design pseudoscientists are as twisted as earthworms on a hot salt lick.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115162 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
There is global 4500 year old flood evidence.

False, as we have seen.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#115163 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
To bring this to conclusion, all you have to do to win me over is provide confirming data which withstands scrutiny. Otherwise, your assertions are worthless.
You've never heard of the Hindu Kush before, have you?

Never mind. Here's your data.

http://www.assess-hkh.at/mains/geology.php

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115164 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You apparently think that if some flood data remains for tens of thousands of years, it all does.

You apparently think (?) that the 2nd most cataclysmic event in earths 4.5 billion year history would have left no evidence at all, but it would.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115165 May 10, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You should stop lying, liar.

I tell you he can't. He lies compulsively. It is beyond his voluntary control

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115166 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What if you have a 1.4 million year old crater whose sidewall loose material only made its way from the sidewalls into the crater lake once, and that was about 4500 years ago.

I, and several others, went into some detail exposing this lie.

Don't you remember what the data suggested?

It was also demonstrated, about the same time, that the side was was not damaged by a flood, but rather likely by an earth quake.

Followers of the Father of Lies apparently have short memories.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115167 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think the animal's belly would be too small?

No.

I do think that your brain is far too small for your skull, however.

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 7 min Aura Mytha 133,645
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 3 hr Kong_ 626
How would creationists explain... 5 hr TurkanaBoy 393
Science News (Sep '13) 5 hr positronium 2,944
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) Dec 22 Chimney1 13,624
Creationism coming to Ohio classrooms? Not with... Dec 20 nobody 7
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) Dec 19 Zach 4
More from around the web