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

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

There are 154689 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 Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115288 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears we're at an evidence stalemate, none provided by either side.

No, it is a win for rationality.

Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence. You provided non therefore there is no reason to believe it.

Unless you want to accept that the universe is made up entirely of invisible purple ping-pong balls.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115289 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Likewise, you have nothing but supposition until you provide data confirmimg survivial is not possible.

incorrect as note above.

Plus the digestion time for fish is very rapid. In the range from a couple hours to a couple of days at most. Their digestive track is much simpler than in "higher" animals.

Feel free to look it up.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115290 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What is the data which confirms a man could not survive 3 days inside a sea creature? Conjecture is all that has been provided so far.
Regarding the Pluto challenge, how cold is it, and survive for how long?

-380 degrees F on average.
3 days.

Please provide references to actual scientific research on human survivability on Pluto and not just conjecture.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115291 May 12, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it possible for a naked man to survive on the surface of Pluto?

KAB is too stupid to understand argument by analogy.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#115292 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What is the data which confirms a man could not survive 3 days inside a sea creature? Conjecture is all that has been provided so far.
Regarding the Pluto challenge, how cold is it, and survive for how long?
Stomach acid. NOT CONJECTURE.
Lack of breathable air. NOT CONJECTURE.
Drowning. NOT CONJECTURE. Hell, even YOUR fantasy of Jonah in a coma ends up with Jonah drowning.

I want to know if a naked man could survive on the surface of Pluto for three days. You tell me why or why not.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#115293 May 12, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Stomach acid. NOT CONJECTURE.
Lack of breathable air. NOT CONJECTURE.
Drowning. NOT CONJECTURE. Hell, even YOUR fantasy of Jonah in a coma ends up with Jonah drowning.
I want to know if a naked man could survive on the surface of Pluto for three days. You tell me why or why not.
Hehehe. Beat ya to it.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#115294 May 12, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
How's this for data re: hyperaridity of the Atatcama:
http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/33/4/321.f...
Exposure ages were determined from the concentration of in situ–produced cosmogenic 21Ne in quartz clasts. Details on the samples, experimental procedure, age calculation, and the isotope data are provided in Table DR1 (see footnote one). The exposure ages of the clasts from the sediment surface are generally very old. From sites A, B, and C, 4 individual clasts were analyzed per site along with 1 amalgamated sample (Repka et al., 1997) of 24 clasts from site A. The majority of the ages are older than 19 Ma (n = 9) with clusters at 20 Ma (n = 3) and 25 Ma (n = 5)(Fig. 4). One clast yielded an exposure age of ca. 37 Ma. Few clasts are younger: one age is ca. 9 Ma, and two identical ages are ca. 14 Ma. The site best protected from runoff erosion (A) yielded no clasts younger than 19 Ma and contained the oldest clast. The amalgamated sample gives a mean age of 23.3 ± 0.2 Ma (±1&#963;) for site A. The samples of the other two sites (B and C) contain the three younger clasts, together with five clasts of ages indistinguishable from those of site A. The samples from the riverbed of the Quebrada de Jazpampa (D) and the alluvial fan (E) both give ages ca. 120 ka.
<<end cut/paste>>
More at link above
Thank you for providing data, and since you're providing it, I hope you understand that the cosmogenic exposure measurements made determine the total surface exposure time of the sample. The measurements are incapable of detecting a one year hiatus in that exposure. If any/all of this is over your head I can provide additional tutorial as needed.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#115295 May 12, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, come on! You not seriously proposing this is fact, are you? You're even nuttier than I thought.
I just asked the question since I presently know little about the matter.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#115296 May 12, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure it is. If evidence were presented that explained all the facts better than oblate spheroid Earth, was demonstrable, and was not contradicted by any of the facts, science would accept the new understanding. You wouldn't. That's because you don't understand how science works. Not my fault.
Indeed, the understanding of the precise shape of Earth will continue to be refined by additional data, but cubic is absolutely not on the list of possibilities, and the way you responded indicates you know that is true, but you won't just simply acknowledge it. Science accepting absolutes is anathema to you, as well as showing you to be wrong for stating otherwise, repeatedly.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#115297 May 12, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Assertions, assertions, assertions. Where's your data, jackass?
Oh, that's right! Everyone else is required to submit data for your absurd 'scrutiny' but you're free to pull goofy shit out of your ass anytime you like.
I was asked for a magic-free scenario, and I gave one. I did not state that this is what occurred.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#115298 May 12, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
The mere fact that someone wrote something at some time in no way serves as evidence of the phenomenon. How many people have to tell a story, written or otherwise, for it to be accepted as true? 1? 10? 1000? What is the threshold where it goes from a story to reality?
By your logic, spacemen DO abduct people because some people have written that it occurs.
Your words, not mine.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#115299 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears we're at an evidence stalemate, none provided by either side.
I accept your admission that you don't provide evidence. Admission to yourself is the first step to recovery.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#115300 May 12, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I accept your admission that you don't provide evidence. Admission to yourself is the first step to recovery.
Then you DannyBoy need to admit you are a idiot. Won't matter though. For there is no recovery for you. lol

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#115301 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, the understanding of the precise shape of Earth will continue to be refined by additional data, but cubic is absolutely not on the list of possibilities, and the way you responded indicates you know that is true, but you won't just simply acknowledge it. Science accepting absolutes is anathema to you, as well as showing you to be wrong for stating otherwise, repeatedly.
It most certainly is. The odds of it being cuboid instead of spheroid get worse and worse with every piece of evidence, but the possibility always remains, no matter how remote, that the Earth is actually a cube. Just like the possibility always remains, no matter how remote, that a man might live inside a whale's stomach for three days.

Game. Set. Match.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115302 May 12, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Likewise, you have nothing but supposition until you provide data confirmimg survivial is not possible.
so you're pretending that stomach acids are as safe as air.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#115303 May 12, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
so you're pretending that stomach acids are as safe as air.
I think the facts of the responses from you and everyone else are causing KAB's stomach acids to surge.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#115304 May 12, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a lie. Evolution is observable an has been observed. Evolution has been tested. Evolutionary research is repeatable and most of it has been replicated.
The fact of evolution is as solid as anything we have and the ToE is the best and only explanation for evolution as it has been observed.
What people don't understand is that evolution is not some new and unproven idea. The disagreement with evolution is a religious one and not a scientific one.
Dogen, I see that you still parroting the same recycled dogma that has been soundly debunked over and over again. If you ever can present some actual science behind your asinine claims, I would be delighted to humiliate you even more than you have already done to yourself.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115305 May 12, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I think the facts of the responses from you and everyone else are causing KAB's stomach acids to surge.
.... and forehead vain to extend.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#115306 May 12, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
No. There is NO evidence that supports the claim that a man could live three days inside a whale's stomach. There IS evidence that contradicts the claim that a man could live three days inside a whale's stomach. Your list of "what ifs" are nothing more than desperate flailing. As soon as you have datum one that supports human survival inside the digestive system of a cetacean, you'll start having a point. Until then, it's just you denying reality.
Is it possible for a naked man to survive on the surface of Pluto?
What does a temperature of minus 350 degrees and no atmosphere have to do with a whale's stomach. If you want to make a scientifically valid point, then do so.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#115307 May 12, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Stomach acid. NOT CONJECTURE.
Lack of breathable air. NOT CONJECTURE.
Drowning. NOT CONJECTURE. Hell, even YOUR fantasy of Jonah in a coma ends up with Jonah drowning.
I want to know if a naked man could survive on the surface of Pluto for three days. You tell me why or why not.
A man could not survive in the belly of a whale for three days UNLESS God intervened.
Don't forget about all of the myths and miracles that you blindly swallow... such as man evolving from a worm.

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) 17 min Richardfs 48,556
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 hr Snap 216,714
Richard Dawkins tells the truth 8 hr Timmee 9
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 9 hr Into The Night 23,503
Science News (Sep '13) 14 hr _Susan_ 3,985
Might life have spontaneously have started mill... Sun The Northener 642
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) Dec 3 Aura Mytha 179,707
More from around the web