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

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

There are 165003 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.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115193 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the reference. Here's a quote from it,
"Studies by a group of British scientists have suggested that some river beds have been dry for 120,000 years."
It's still not data, but it's a step closer. See if you can discern the most significant word in the statement and explain why it's significant.
If they have been dry for 120,000 years, then there could be no global flood at all.
KAB

Dover, DE

#115194 May 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if god had used the Holy Helicopter to assemble all the animals for Noah, I suppose he might have let Jonah use the Sacred Submarine.
Or maybe the whole thing's just a story.
You don't seem to be seriously trying to ascertain how it could be done. Your confirmation bias appears to be affecting your attitude toward the exercise.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#115195 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. Following the usual pattern, you've made the assertion. Now provide the data which confirms. You don't just go to the Atacama and say it sure is dry here. It probably hasn't rained here for thousands of years. Well, I know you would, but the scientists are different. Something has to be measured. What is it?

Since we have provided this data before why don't you look it up yourself?

It gets tiresome having to endlessly repeat the lesson for the slow learners.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#115196 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the reference. Here's a quote from it,
"Studies by a group of British scientists have suggested that some river beds have been dry for 120,000 years."
It's still not data, but it's a step closer. See if you can discern the most significant word in the statement and explain why it's significant.

Studies.

Because it is something you have never done.
KAB

Dover, DE

#115197 May 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm quite sure they do.
I'm certainly relieved I'm not the one reduced to substituting a steady flow of name-calling for data.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#115198 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't seem to be seriously trying to ascertain how it could be done. Your confirmation bias appears to be affecting your attitude toward the exercise.

Reminder: the burden of proof is on you.

We have confirmation.

You have confirmation bias.

do you discern the difference?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115199 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't seem to be seriously trying to ascertain how it could be done. Your confirmation bias appears to be affecting your attitude toward the exercise.
Well, it's better than how you are ignoring 90% of reality just so you can pretend this myth actually happened. If you cannot explain how it could be done, you have to invoke magic, and thus all your "global flood" nonsense itself becomes moot.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#115200 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm certainly relieved I'm not the one reduced to substituting a steady flow of name-calling for data.

That would be quite an improvement for you.

Remember, you are the one who has had nothing for the entire length of time you have been here. By any objective basis you have lost every battle and have not even put forth a decent fight.

Pretending you are doing well is not the same thing as actually doing well.

Go back to lying. It is the one thing for which you have demonstrated outstanding skill.
KAB

Dover, DE

#115201 May 10, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>You are mistaken.
The Ararat Massif, at least, has not been submerged for millions of years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Ararat
Of course the Ararat Massif hasn't been submerged for millions of years. It's not even submerged now! BTW, I didn't see any info in your reference, let alone data, regarding submergence of Ararat. Noah's flood is mentioned without even questioning it.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115202 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course the Ararat Massif hasn't been submerged for millions of years. It's not even submerged now! BTW, I didn't see any info in your reference, let alone data, regarding submergence of Ararat. Noah's flood is mentioned without even questioning it.
If it was not submerged in millions of years, no global flood could have happened during that entire time.
KAB

Dover, DE

#115203 May 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
More lies. We're discussing that evidence right now! Do try and pay attention.
<quoted text>
Nice little word game you play here, Mr Phony Baloney. Flooding may have occurred all over the earth 4500 years ago but there was no global flood over the entire earth at one time. Period.
I see you got the point. Since flood evidence exists, how do you use that data to conclude there was no global flood? Does your confirmation bias help?
KAB

Dover, DE

#115204 May 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Only in your dreams.
Actually, it's in the record of this forum.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#115205 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course the Ararat Massif hasn't been submerged for millions of years. It's not even submerged now! BTW, I didn't see any info in your reference, let alone data, regarding submergence of Ararat. Noah's flood is mentioned without even questioning it.

thank you for admitting Ararat has not been submerged for millions of years.

Yet another refutation of the flood myth.

Good catch.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#115206 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you got the point. Since flood evidence exists, how do you use that data to conclude there was no global flood? Does your confirmation bias help?

I see you got the point. Since no global flood evidence exists, how do you use that data to conclude there was a global flood? Does your confirmation bias help?

Remember who has the onus of proof.

But you refuse to acknowledge that truth.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#115207 May 10, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll give you the same challenge SZ
Reference a study that documents the accuracy and reproducibility or radiometric dating.
I'm waiting.....
SZ was busy refuting other Christian lies....so I'll answer for him just this once..:-)

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/wiens.html

As a bonus the above site is Christian, and the scientist presenting is a Christian

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#115208 May 10, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Austin didn't "use" the K-Ar method. He submitted a sample to a reputable lab. If evolutionists claim that Austin incorrectly collected a the year old sample, what reassurance is there that a 50 million year old sample is "correctly" collected?
What about the numerous other samples that have been collected from volcanic lava flows of known dates that have yielded equally worthless results? The Hualalai basalt lava flow in Hawaii, which erupted between 1800 and 1801, was determined to be 22 million years old by the Potassium-Argon Method.* Sunset Crater in Arizona, which erupted around AD 1064, was dated at 250,000 to 270,000 years. Mt. Etna basalt, which erupted in Sicily in 1792, was dated at 1.41 million years.*. Many other examples of volcanic lava flows of known dates have been blindly subjected to radiometric dating and have yielded similarly worthless results.
Austin, S.A., 1996. Excess Argon Within Mineral Concentrates from the New Dacite Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Volcano. CEN Tech.J., 10(3):335-343
Funkhouser, John G., and Naughton, John J., Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 73, No. 14, July
1968, pp.4601-4607.
Austin, S.A.,(edit),1994. Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe, Institute for Creation Research, Santee, CA, pp
Do you know of any study that documents that radiometric dating of lava flows of historically known dates is accurate and reproducible? Why do no such studies exist?
You said, "K-Ar method cannot be used to date samples that are much younger than 6,000 years old".
You are therefore assuming that all fossils are older than 6,000 years old. Therefore, none of the dates assigned to australopicithine fossils are valid. If a fossil is 4,000 years old, it will date much older.
Are you a scientist in the field of radiometric dating??

If not, you know nothing, and are full of sh!t.

Go here: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/wiens.html

Just hate these people trying to sound sooo educated and getting their info from Aig or ICR or some such place.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#115209 May 10, 2013
Creatard fundamentalists evangelicals have been trying to discredit radiometric dating ever since it came out in the 1950's

They have ALL failed....don't believe me....just go to ANY scientific site that uses radiometric dating and ask the webmaster for help in your school paper..:-)

The creatards on here know nothing about the science.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#115210 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you got the point. Since flood evidence exists, how do you use that data to conclude there was no global flood? Does your confirmation bias help?
Flood evidence exists?????????

I had no idea!!!!!!

Can you point me too it?????

It's not those creatards George Mcready Price, Henry M. Morris, and John C. Whitcomb junkscience crapola is it??

I haven't heard of any mainline geology group endorsing a flood scenario.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#115211 May 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. Following the usual pattern, you've made the assertion. Now provide the data which confirms. You don't just go to the Atacama and say it sure is dry here. It probably hasn't rained here for thousands of years. Well, I know you would, but the scientists are different. Something has to be measured. What is it?
Red something, you effing imbecile.

http://geography.about.com/od/physicalgeograp...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#115212 May 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's unfortunate you have such a limited mind.
Your willingness to dismiss all evidence that doesn't support your Bible story and accept anything that in any way could be construed to support it demonstrates your intellectual dishonesty. You lie to us, but you lie to yourself first.

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 Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 1 hr Frindly 3,555
No Evidence for Creation, a Global Flood, Tower... 2 hr Zog Has-fallen 84
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 7 hr DanFromSmithville 223,194
Evolution is Fantasy 7 hr Water Meter Parker 1
Time 12 hr THANKS 9
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 13 hr Frindly 84,105
Alabama people are the Anunnaki Fri Mrs parker science 1
More from around the web