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

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

There are 151419 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.

HTS
#115226 May 11, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I missed this post by How's That for Stupid.
Here is one study:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/...
And another paper:
http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/evolution...
Radiometric dating is sound since the mathematics are correct. We know that without contamination the dates given by it should be correct. When an anomalous date appears it is time to see what went wrong.
As an analogy if we drop something it should accelerate at roughly 9.8 m/sec^2.
There are many exceptions to this "rule". For example a tall enough height could mean that air resistances becomes a factor. The object dropped could be a magnet in a conducting tube and it will slow due to eddy currents. The object could be dropped from an extreme height where the Galilean simplification could no longer be used. The list goes on and on.
The same applies to dating rocks. Radiometric dating is so well accepted that operator error is assumed if a "wrong" answer is received. As I said, there were several things Austin could have done wrong. By telling a place to simply date a sample he was the operator and he was wrong. If the sample had xenocrysts or phenocrysts he was wrong since he did not tell the testing site. If he did not keep his sample pure he was wrong with his handling and again wrong by not telling the testing site. The first thing done if you get an anomalous date is to date again. Stevarino did not do that now, did he? Austin is not a complete idiot. He probably knew that his sample could have failed. Like most creatards he probably is not honest.
Yet another load of BS posted by SZ.
I asked you for a study documenting the accuracy and reproducibility of radiometric dating on lava flows of known dates.
I surmise from your response that you do not have any such data at your disposal.
You have nothing but conjectures.
If you want to prove the accuracy of radiometric dating, you must blindly test samples of historically known dates.
You apparently know nothing about science.
The spirit of a true scientist is to QUESTION dogma...
You seem content to go-with-the-flow.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

#115227 May 11, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet another load of BS posted by SZ.
I asked you for a study documenting the accuracy and reproducibility of radiometric dating on lava flows of known dates.
I surmise from your response that you do not have any such data at your disposal.
You have nothing but conjectures.
If you want to prove the accuracy of radiometric dating, you must blindly test samples of historically known dates.
You apparently know nothing about science.
The spirit of a true scientist is to QUESTION dogma...
You seem content to go-with-the-flow.
You ignored the second paper that dealt with that.

But I will find another one for you. You do realize that all of this has been dealt with before.

And How's That for Stupid, you should not use words that you do not know the definition of.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

#115228 May 11, 2013

A word of warning, you do know that there is a reason that we laugh at creatard sites when they try to do science, right?
KAB
#115229 May 11, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Good thing for her it wasn't a fish or she'd have died in under 3 minutes.
Not without data confirming that end result. Do you know how long it takes without oxygen to become brain dead?
KAB
#115230 May 11, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
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)
You are clearly a serious student of science. Do you think "data, all the data, and nothing but the data" could serve as your motto?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#115231 May 11, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
A word of warning, you do know that there is a reason that we laugh at creatard sites when they try to do science, right?
'Cos they's funny!!
KAB
#115232 May 11, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>You've never heard of the Hindu Kush before, have you?
http://www.assess-hkh.at/mains/geology.php
Before I waste my time, is this data better than what you provided for the Ararat Massif? Think and examine your offering carefully yourself before you answer. This could be your last chance to get my attention if you prove to be an unreliable source of pertinent data.
KAB
#115233 May 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Did the authors declare that they know what caused the slough, or that they were providing a list of all possibilities, or did they just offer a couple of possibilities?
KAB
#115234 May 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Still we only get the assertions?
Still can't distinguish a question from an assertion I see.
KAB
#115235 May 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Yes, it would.
KAB
#115236 May 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
How big of a flood?
We have evidence of large regional floods from millions of years ago.
The fact is that thousands of scientists looked all over the world for evidence of a global flood and ended up throwing in the towel.
There are places where there would HAVE to be flood evidence (off shore sediment layers) and no evidence has ever been found.
No global flood evidence ANYWHERE.
No global flood.
It ain't rocket science.
Since you mention off-shore sediment layers, such must have been examined, so you can provide data for what was found which negates the occurrence of the global flood. Is there at least confirmation that layers from the 4500 years ago timeframe have been found.
KAB
#115237 May 11, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
How big of a flood?
We have evidence of large regional floods from millions of years ago.
The fact is that thousands of scientists looked all over the world for evidence of a global flood and ended up throwing in the towel.
There are places where there would HAVE to be flood evidence (off shore sediment layers) and no evidence has ever been found.
No global flood evidence ANYWHERE.
No global flood.
It ain't rocket science.
Would there have to be evidence in a global scale flood gauge collected when the flood waters overtopped the sides, which are hundreds of feet higher than the surrounding terrain, and washed the inside wall loose material down into the crater?
KAB
#115238 May 11, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
According to your "standard," there are shortcomings in the evidence for H2 + O = 1 molecule of water + energy.
That can be observed to occur directly present tense real-time.
KAB
#115239 May 11, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. He can't, but he should. He's tied up his sense of self into his lies. Now, his lies are part of his identity. It will take far more than we can do here to turn his lying ass around.
KAB
#115240 May 11, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Between stomach acid, the need for breathable air, and the need for potable water, name a single oceanic organism...ANY oceanic organism...heck, ANY EUKARYOTE...inside whose stomach a grown man could survive for three days. Has that net been cast wide enough for you?
Do you accept that British seaman James Bartley survived 15 hrs in the stomach of a sperm whale?
KAB
#115241 May 11, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, relatively speaking. You are talking about a Semitic Assyrian King, which means Sargon lies millennia after the purported events of Adam, the Flood, Babel, and other obvious myths in Genesis. Genesis is the main point of contention between fundamentalist nutcases and scientific evidence, after all. I am not surprised if the Chronicles of the Jewish people contain references to Assyrian Kings who existed.
Just as I am not surprised that Schliemann found Troy, generally supposed before that to be a mythical city from Homer's Iliad. Yet the discovery of Troy does not prove that Achilles mother was really the river goddess Thetis, which is also in the Iliad.
Are you starting to grasp the concept of a mythical/historical narrative? And perhaps, are you starting to see how easily one could grow with a people before they developed rational and analytical methods to sort the wheat from the chaff? The Japanese had a similar tradition with history merging into myth at the earliest points (the Sun God being the ultimate ancestor of the Emperor's line etc).
Its not even rare. The oral tradition of the NZ Maori had careful recall of ancestral lines since landing in NZ, but...merging back to the myths of Maui fishing the islands out of the Ocean.
Its the same narrative structure the world over. Myth -> history and a fuzzy line between them.
For every source, a key consideration is whether there is anything from it which can be confirmed incorrect? Of course, not everything is testable, and not all of what is tested yields a conclusive result relative to the matter being considered. I suspect the sources to which you refer contain confirmable errors. I know that is true of the Quran. The Bible has, so far, had numerous assertions of error lodged against it but none confirmed. That builds a record of reliability.

What is obvious myth about the Adam account? I accept that you think it's a myth, but that's not the point, is it?

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115242 May 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you accept that British seaman James Bartley survived 15 hrs in the stomach of a sperm whale?
That was an urban legend, idiot.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#115243 May 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Not without data confirming that end result. Do you know how long it takes without oxygen to become brain dead?
Let's find out. Get a plastic bag and a rubber band...

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#115244 May 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you accept that British seaman James Bartley survived 15 hrs in the stomach of a sperm whale?
I never heard of James Bartley prior to your post. So I looked it up.
This is what was among the findings:

Two scholarly papers have attacked the question, Edward B. Davis's "A Whale of a Tale: Fundamentalist Fish Stories" (Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 1991) and R. Gambell and S.G. Brown's "James Bartley  A Modern Jonah or Joke?" (Investigations on Cetacea, 1993). Here's what they say:

(1) The story has appeared over the years in numerous publications, both secular and religious. An 1896 story in the New York Times gives essentially the account above and says it came from "The Mercury of South Yarmouth, England, in October 1891," but it sounds a little skeptical.

(2) The Yarmouth Mercury of August 22, 1891, carried a story entitled "Man in a Whale's Stomach / Rescue of a Modern Jonah," which gives the account above. There's no byline nor any indication that the writer spoke with Bartley, the ship's captain, or any of the sailors.

(3) In June 1891 a rorqual whale was beached near the town of Gorleston, just south of Great Yarmouth, and was killed, stuffed, and exhibited around England.

(4) Sperm whales are capable of swallowing humans. They live on squid, which they swallow whole. In 1955 a 405-pound squid was removed intact from the belly of a sperm whale.

(5) In 1906, Lloyd's of London reported that Star of the East, a British ship, had set sail from Auckland, New Zealand, in December 1890 and arrived in New York in April 1891, so it might have been near the Falkland Islands in February. However, it was not a whaling ship, and there was no James Bartley on the crew list.

(6) Also in 1906, the wife of J.B. Killam, captain of the Star of the East, wrote that she'd been with her husband all the years he commanded the ship and that no one had been lost overboard during that time. "The sailor has told a great sea yarn," she said.

What do we make of all this? Davis speculates that the story was cooked up by some pale fellow to take advantage of publicity surrounding the Gorleston whale exhibition and that it's been passed along by the gullible ever since. He's probably right  how could anyone survive overnight in a whale's stomach without suffocating? But in the absence of a smoking gun, or a quotation from Bartley, I guess we'll never know for sure.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#115245 May 11, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you accept that British seaman James Bartley survived 15 hrs in the stomach of a sperm whale?
No.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bartley

Not until empirical evidence (stories are NOT empirical evidence...EVER) emerges.

How many people need to tell a story for it to be true? 10? 100? 1000? Just tell us the threshold.

The time to accept a claim as true is when the evidence supports it and not a moment before.

When's the last time you took psychotropic drugs?

#### Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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

Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 12 min Blitzking 201,464
Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 44 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 16,171
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 1 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 216
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr One way or another 40,680
Scientists create vast 3-D map of universe, val... 5 hr One way or another 17
The conscious God or the inanimate nature 12 hr THE LONE WORKER 34
Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) 14 hr ChristineM 96

#### Evolution Debate News

More Evolution Debate News from Topix »

More from around the web