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

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

There are 159378 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.

KAB

United States

#118580 Jun 24, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
Given the following info, does it seem likely that your answer is correct?

http://www.genome.gov/15515096

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#118581 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Given the following info, does it seem likely that your answer is correct?
http://www.genome.gov/15515096
This actually reduces your "missing links" quantity, ironically.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118582 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Given the following info, does it seem likely that your answer is correct?
http://www.genome.gov/15515096

That is wonderful supportive evidence for evolution. Not that we need any more but thanks.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#118583 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Given the following info, does it seem likely that your answer is correct?
http://www.genome.gov/15515096
I'm impressed, Kab. I've noted June 24, 2013 on my calendar.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118584 Jun 24, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
As usual, you provide ZERO information and you seem to be pointless.
A horse and donkey will produce either a mule or hinny, depending on the species of the sire and dame. The offspring will be sterile (a "mule," in that sense of the word). No genetic traits can be handed down because there will be no more generations of offspring.
Ligers and tigons have 38 chromosomes, the same as both tigers and lions. They are not sterile, but the chances of a viable offspring is greatly reduced because of their genetic mix.
Am I wrong on this?
I don't know if you're right or wrong on these points, but regarding whether chromosome number matching is required for interbreeding, if the Zone is right, then your well-researched dataless answer is wrong. Do you see why I don't believe anything any of you offer without confirming data?

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118585 Jun 24, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure. Meanwhile, you still apply double standards to protect your religious beliefs from scrutiny while assuming that everything that you think might contradict them must necessarily be incorrect in some way. Cherrypicking. And, that's dishonest. And, you were even dishonest when we discussed the practice. If you have to repeatedly and brazenly lie to maintain your religious beliefs, your religious beliefs must rest upon the shakiest of foundations. Pathetic.
Yes, you are, and clearly you are free to state whatever you want to prove it.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118586 Jun 24, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
This actually reduces your "missing links" quantity, ironically.
What missing links quantity is that?
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118587 Jun 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
That is wonderful supportive evidence for evolution. Not that we need any more but thanks.
Design too, don't forget.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118588 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Design too, don't forget.

Nice unsupported assertion.


Design makes no predictions therefore no predictions support design. In other words something that explains everything (without evidence) explains nothing.

So no.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#118589 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know if you're right or wrong on these points, but regarding whether chromosome number matching is required for interbreeding, if the Zone is right, then your well-researched dataless answer is wrong. Do you see why I don't believe anything any of you offer without confirming data?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...
I didn't post anything that isn't correct. Mules and hinnies are sterile, ligers and tigons aren't, but there is enough genetic drift between tigers and lions to make it problematic and genetics isn't one of my areas of interest.
Post #118536 did not 'offer' any data except that G. Khan was promiscuous, which is extremely well documented. I was asking hypothetical questions.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118590 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you are, and clearly you are free to state whatever you want to prove it.

Likewise.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118591 Jun 24, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't post anything that isn't correct. Mules and hinnies are sterile, ligers and tigons aren't, but there is enough genetic drift between tigers and lions to make it problematic and genetics isn't one of my areas of interest.
Post #118536 did not 'offer' any data except that G. Khan was promiscuous, which is extremely well documented. I was asking hypothetical questions.

KAB likes to tell fibs.

Lying is in the bylaws of his religious cult.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118592 Jun 24, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't post anything that isn't correct. Mules and hinnies are sterile, ligers and tigons aren't, but there is enough genetic drift between tigers and lions to make it problematic and genetics isn't one of my areas of interest.
Post #118536 did not 'offer' any data except that G. Khan was promiscuous, which is extremely well documented. I was asking hypothetical questions.
I will again demonstrate how data tells the true story. Post #118536 is not the Khan post, and here is your post which is wrong if the Zone is correct,

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...

Isn't data wonderful?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#118593 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I will again demonstrate how data tells the true story. Post #118536 is not the Khan post, and here is your post which is wrong if the Zone is correct,
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...
Isn't data wonderful?
Cut the crap, a-hole. MY post was 118537 - I misread or mis-typed it by one digit. Get over your undeservedly sanctimonious self.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#118594 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know if you're right or wrong on these points, but regarding whether chromosome number matching is required for interbreeding, if the Zone is right, then your well-researched dataless answer is wrong. Do you see why I don't believe anything any of you offer without confirming data?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...
Chromium Man gave links supporting his statement that some species with variable numbers of chromosomes can still breed just fine. Yet you claim its dataless?

In any case, you have demonstrated that supplying you with data is futile, as you will simply cherry pick what you think supports you and ignore what does not.

If Datum A allows that a flood was possible,
And Datum B rules out a flood.

Then Datum B wins. Its called falsifiability and a single verified datum ruling out a hypothesis successfully falsifies it, no matter how many other data do not.

Just as, a single case of variable chromosomes in a single species proves that the hypothesis "must have the same number of chromosomes in a species" is false. End of story.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#118595 Jun 24, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What missing links quantity is that?
Between modern humans and our chimp-like ancestors.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118596 Jun 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
No shit. You were the one who said Germans were not Germanic. Back to the ravine for you!
I said that, Germans were not the only Germanic tribes, like the ways many people like you used to think.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118597 Jun 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxons
Where DID English... and where IS English... are two different things.
You must be aware that you mixing tenses.
Can you name a four letter word for someone who intentionally tries to
deceive through use of words? Starts with an "L", ends with an "R".
Stop mincing words, English belongs to England.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118598 Jun 25, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
No, silly. Only things that exist can own other things.
The earth do exist, so tell me who owns the earth? i hope you know that we are all temporary owners.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118599 Jun 25, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You can use the language, but you also abuse it. Using the adjective
form of "own" as a verb is abusing the language. Do you know what
adjectives and verbs are?
Blah! blah! blah! that does not change the fact that, English belongs to England and again, what makes you think that you are perfect?

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 13 min Dogen 27,472
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 22 min IB DaMann 58,596
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr Hedonist Heretic 2,045
News Intelligent Design Education Day 16 hr Subduction Zone 8
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 21 hr Regolith Based Li... 219,629
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) Feb 23 Sentinel 1,758
News Betsy DeVos' Code Words for Creationism Offshoo... Feb 16 scientia potentia... 1
More from around the web