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

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

There are 143899 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!

#116373 May 26, 2013
OOOOObama wrote:
Atheists should try to debate with, or refute the responses of REAL Christians, such as Biblical scholars and Apologetics websites. They have the answers for EVERYTHING. One of my favorites is www.gotquestions.org . Atheists like to take cheap shots at the arrogant and not very educated Christians, but can they challenge actual THEOLOGIANS and SCHOLARS, and generally knowledgeable Christians?
&fe ature=share&list=PL348B28C 103B3C9E0

http://youtu.be/4KBx4vvlbZ8

http://youtu.be/H7XUsgat1j0

http://youtu.be/83NLkGZHTSw
http://youtu.be/V8bHEWQOsiU

http://youtu.be/zPsmYWbY-VA

You act as though this never happens. It happens ALL THE TIME. And, guess what? Never has a single one resulted in someone presenting actual evidence of the existence of God or the veracity of the Bible in its entirety. Isn't that just the weirdest thing?
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116374 May 26, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Specifically, what species of fish is capable of the allegation?
How were plants created before 99.8% of all other matter in the solar system? What ACTUAL real evidence is there that does not DISPROVE a global flood?
Tyre? Exodus? Red Sea? Talking animals? The sun and moon stood still? Staves turned into snakes? Etc., etc...?
If the Bible is not a demonstrated fallible document, would you not be more observant of facts vs. "truths."
I don't know what species of fish are capable of swallowing a man whole.
Were plants created before 99.8% of all other matter in the solar system?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#116375 May 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Are reliability and certainty the same thing? Clue: Must something be certain to be reliable?
It's your demand for certainty, not mine. I'm the one that asserts (rightly, I might add) that there is no such thing as absolute certainty in science. You assert that there is. If there is such a thing, you must demonstrate such for your assertion to be accepted. People who understand how science works all disagree with you and agree with me. People who don't understand how science works think you know what you're talking about. Sorry, but I'm going to have to go with the people who know how science works on this one.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#116376 May 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Job 26:7
A flat or, at best, hemispheric Earth doesn't prove God exists. Nor does the misunderstanding of the word "hang" outside of poetic license.

Laurence Taylor was a monster. That's poetic license. Was he actually a monster? By your convoluted and ridiculous standards, he clearly was, because it's a possible meaning of the word as used if one ignores the context, and because I've chosen that meaning out of all the possible ones, that makes it so.

Well, in YOUR version of reality, it does. Out here in ACTUAL REALITY, it ain't like that at all. But, as long as it makes you happy, that's all that matters. Don't let things like intellectual integrity get in your way.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116377 May 26, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_1:1
Bear in mind I am not a trinitarian and I acknowledge that this is one of the JWs 'broken clock moments' when they actually are on the right side.
What's (single item) next?
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116378 May 26, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Its a shame the one missing element is you being proved right.
I don't expect invisible purple ping-pong balls to be convincing, but you might consider what the chances are I could get what I did provide right without having seen it or at least having been told about it.
See?
No
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116379 May 26, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Except the rest of the verse says the word was God.
So, yea, you can believe what you want if you are willing to preform vivisection (lit. to cut the life out of) on the Bible.
This is a fairly common literary device called chiasmus and the Bible uses it at a number of junctures.
I take the Bible at its Word, so bring on the data for chiasmus.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116380 May 26, 2013
MIDutch wrote:
<quoted text>
Sprinkling the blood of a sacrificed dove on a lepers toes to cure his/her leprosy.
Pi=3.
The sun standing still in the sky.
Letting livestock copulate in front of striped sticks resulting in their offspring having striped coats.
QED
Need I mention those are just assertions, all of which have been discredited with data?
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116381 May 26, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
A flat or, at best, hemispheric Earth doesn't prove God exists. Nor does the misunderstanding of the word "hang" outside of poetic license.
Laurence Taylor was a monster. That's poetic license. Was he actually a monster? By your convoluted and ridiculous standards, he clearly was, because it's a possible meaning of the word as used if one ignores the context, and because I've chosen that meaning out of all the possible ones, that makes it so.
Well, in YOUR version of reality, it does. Out here in ACTUAL REALITY, it ain't like that at all. But, as long as it makes you happy, that's all that matters. Don't let things like intellectual integrity get in your way.
I see you're still having trouble understanding my standards.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#116382 May 26, 2013
OOOOObama wrote:
Atheists should try to debate with, or refute the responses of REAL Christians, such as Biblical scholars and Apologetics websites. They have the answers for EVERYTHING. One of my favorites is www.gotquestions.org . Atheists like to take cheap shots at the arrogant and not very educated Christians, but can they challenge actual THEOLOGIANS and SCHOLARS, and generally knowledgeable Christians?
I never meet a theologian I could believe....they all talk apologetics and bullsh!t. They can no better refute real science than you can.

All of them that have exposed themselves to conversations with people such as Dawkins and Hitchens (may he rest in peace) loose miserably.

You see the problem for the religions is that science is true and factual, and the religions are nothing but a con.

We are disproving the old myths that the Bible has propagated for centuries. There is NO magik in this world

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#116383 May 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for a very weighty post, the scientific recognition that the Noachian flood could have happened. It's most unfortunate that it has taken this long for your side to acknowledge that, and in what position does it put those on your side who have so often proclaimed confirmation that it didn't happen?
Sorry I didn't meet your high intellectual standards KAB.

You DO understand that that thought is behind EVERYTHING in science, such as evolution, and the Noachian flood NOT happening.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#116384 May 26, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Me too, knowing that according to you empirical evidence is never certain, and knowing that the source of the legend has been demonstrated to be reliable.
The source has NOT been certified to be 100% reliable.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#116385 May 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
"We would expect to observe a uniform, worldwide blanket of randomly sorted boulders, cobbles, sand, and silt overlain by a layer of clay. This blanket would overlie any pre-existing geologic record. Since the Flood allegedly took place a mere 5000 years ago, this evidence should still remain with very little erosion. But this worldwide blanket does not exist."
http://www.evolution.mbdojo.com/flood.html
Unlike the Alvares's K-T boundary discontinuity, which IS worldwide.
And dates back 66 million years.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#116386 May 27, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you're still having trouble understanding my standards.
So, you DON'T strategically avoid any and all definitions of words that would contradict your understanding of the Bible? REALLY? Mister "I choose #8?" Mister "look, these guys colloquially referred to the moon as hanging, therefore that's the most pertinent definition of hang?" REALLY?

Do you simply refuse to believe that you could be a liar, or do you know you lie but justify it by saying to yourself that it's in defense of the Bible?
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116387 May 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry I didn't meet your high intellectual standards KAB.
You DO understand that that thought is behind EVERYTHING in science, such as evolution, and the Noachian flood NOT happening.
Yes, I do understand that and have stated such from the beginning. It's your side that has long attached certainty to the Noachian flood not having happened. I only point to data which makes ToE not a believable story.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#116388 May 27, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
The source has NOT been certified to be 100% reliable.
That is correct, but no confirming data for any purported error has yet been provided here.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#116389 May 27, 2013
OOOOObama wrote:
Atheists should try to debate with, or refute the responses of REAL Christians, such as Biblical scholars and Apologetics websites. They have the answers for EVERYTHING. One of my favorites is www.gotquestions.org . Atheists like to take cheap shots at the arrogant and not very educated Christians, but can they challenge actual THEOLOGIANS and SCHOLARS, and generally knowledgeable Christians?
If by challenge you mean mop the floor with, then the answer would be a resounding yes. The problem is that even the most credentialed apologists just seem to be too thick to know it's happened, even as they knock the Mr. Clean out of their ears.

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#116390 May 27, 2013
OOOOObama wrote:
Atheists should try to debate with, or refute the responses of REAL Christians, such as Biblical scholars and Apologetics websites. They have the answers for EVERYTHING. One of my favorites is www.gotquestions.org . Atheists like to take cheap shots at the arrogant and not very educated Christians, but can they challenge actual THEOLOGIANS and SCHOLARS, and generally knowledgeable Christians?
If you review the history of science and the debates with religion, you will find that many of the people questioning biblical inerrancy and literalism were themselves theologians and biblical scholars. It turns out when you actually study the Bible and the real world the real world doesn't mesh well with a literal interpretation of the Bible. I find that fundamentalists are the least knowledgeable of all Christians.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#116391 May 27, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The legend has not been confirmed impossible, and you're entitled to your opinion, which in your case stands on a virtually completely data-free foundation of no credibility.
Without breaking the laws of nature, it is impossible. As I said, until you prove it possible, since it has to break the laws of nature, it is impossible by definition.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#116392 May 27, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I do understand that and have stated such from the beginning. It's your side that has long attached certainty to the Noachian flood not having happened. I only point to data which makes ToE not a believable story.
Without breaking the laws of nature, it is impossible. As I said, until you prove it possible, since it has to break the laws of nature, it is impossible by definition.

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
What Motives Created Social Darwinism? 2 min Chimney1 91
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 21 min Zog Has-fallen 74
The Definition of a Creationist Scientist 57 min Chimney1 100
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 2 hr DanFromSmithville 173,361
Darwinism: Science or Philosophy? 3 hr Zog Has-fallen 55
Is the Evolutionary theory mathematically prove... 10 hr Chimney1 134
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory 23 hr Chimney1 420
More from around the web