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

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

There are 151492 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.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118918 Jun 28, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you Christian?
Jesus was Jewish, therefore by your own reasoning you belong to the Jews. But then, Jesus never saw the New Testament. He was centuries gone by the time it was assembled at the order of the Roman Emperor Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus, so perhaps you belong to the Romans.
Shall we call you Carolus Idemius from here on?
The same Romans killed Jesus the Christ according to the wishes of the Jewish authorities. What is your point?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118919 Jun 28, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> The same Romans killed Jesus the Christ according to the wishes of the Jewish authorities. What is your point?

There is evidence that the feelings of the Jewish mob was a late addition to the gospels. When the sentiment turned anti-Jewish late in the 1st century there may have been some insertions.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#118920 Jun 28, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> The same Romans killed Jesus the Christ according to the wishes of the Jewish authorities. What is your point?
According to doctrine, God set up the whole thing. His Chosen People, the Romans, Judas, Jesus - it was all a setup to make a sacrifice of Himself to Himself, fulfilling His own prophecy and plan and they were just pawns in His schizo game.
Nevertheless, You belong to the Jews and/or the Romans, according to your own parameters and logic of "English BELONGS TO England."

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#118921 Jun 28, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't intelligence relative (e.g., me being relatively more intelligent than you)?
You have homework to do, KAB - or are you "forgetting" to address those 14 points? You are intelligent to
>ignore<
them, since they are indefensible.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...
And how about that parting of the Red Sea? Shall we add it onto the list?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118922 Jun 28, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
There is evidence that the feelings of the Jewish mob was a late addition to the gospels. When the sentiment turned anti-Jewish late in the 1st century there may have been some insertions.
What insertions ?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#118923 Jun 28, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
According to doctrine, God set up the whole thing. His Chosen People, the Romans, Judas, Jesus - it was all a setup to make a sacrifice of Himself to Himself, fulfilling His own prophecy and plan and they were just pawns in His schizo game.
Nevertheless, You belong to the Jews and/or the Romans, according to your own parameters and logic of "English BELONGS TO England."
If there was a frame up in Jesus stories, the issue of Jesus to date, would have been long dead, but on the contrary.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#118924 Jun 28, 2013
Man-on-Fire wrote:
<quoted text>
But I will agree it is a creationist site after doing more reading. But that is the problem with any links. They either come from a evolutionists site or a creationists site. It is a no win argument for both sides based on that alone. Both sides back their links because the links back their beliefs.
There aren't "evolutionist" websites and "creationist" websites. There are "creationist" websites and SCIENCE websites. We accept information on science websites because they're dealing in science. We don't accept the crap on creationist websites because they're NOT science. When it comes to science, give me science, not religion. If that's biased, call me biased. I prefer my science to be science. That's the best kind of bias.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#118925 Jun 28, 2013
Man-on-Fire wrote:
<quoted text>
DO you just make it a habit of reading something and making a reply like you read something else.
As I stated "So if in one breath an evolutionists says "science and the theory of evolution do not refute the existence of God or gods"
then in the next breath they say "God is not real, he is a made up myth". Which one is a lie?
If you read that it says and quote again "evolutionists say" not evolution says or science says.
God is as demonstrably real as Zeus. Christians call Zeus a made-up myth. With God and Zeus enjoying equal amounts of evidence to support their existence...well, you can see where that ends up. If you don't want to be told you believe in imaginary wizards who watch you when you pee, STOP BELIEVING IN THEM.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118926 Jun 28, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> What insertions ?

Early editing of the N.T. included insertions, deletions, rewording, and of course a number of copy errors.

Most of the last chapter of Mark is an insertion that was added long after the main text of that book. The earliest versions we have end after verse 8.




“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118927 Jun 28, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> If there was a frame up in Jesus stories, the issue of Jesus to date, would have been long dead, but on the contrary.

Why would it have been long dead? Religious texts are amazingly enduring. There are religious books that are 1500 years older than the oldest book of the O.T. that are still quite popular.

There is no logic in your assertion that they would have been long dead.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118928 Jun 28, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Incredulity doesn't prove anything. It was once "unbelievable" that something 150 tons could fly. Ignorance and incredulity are not evidence of anything other than ignorance and incredulity.
<quoted text>
In this universe, rare things happen ALL THE TIME. But, more to the point, you're cherrypicking again. You find one thing that you think supports your story, and you don't seek to discount or dismiss it, but everything that you think contradicts it gets discounted and dismissed. Dishonest. Par for the course. Keep up the good work, liar.
The principles of flight have always existed. Understanding and accomplishment took a while.
Rare and coincidence are not identical. A coincidence of two rare things is more than just rare.
I seek to discount everything (Acts 17:11). That's how one keeps from being misled. You should try it.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118929 Jun 28, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The principles of flight have always existed. Understanding and accomplishment took a while.
Rare and coincidence are not identical. A coincidence of two rare things is more than just rare.
I seek to discount everything (Acts 17:11). That's how one keeps from being misled. You should try it.

No, this is just another of your batshit crazy rationalizations

No one here is more mislead than yourself. Remember, you are the only one here who is a member of a discredited cult that puts words into the bible to manipulate it to say what they want it to say.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118930 Jun 28, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Deal.
1)Where are the genetic bottlenecks circa 4300 YA? 2)Why are there evidences of uninterrupted human civilizations on 6 of the 7 continents throughout the time of the flood? 3)How did the human population bloom from 8 individuals to numbers large enough to build the Tower of Babel within just a couple generations? 4a) Similarly, who did Cain build a city for just 2 generations removed from the Garden of Eden? 4b) What "strangers" was Cain marked for to safeguard his safety? 5)How did Methuselah survive the flood? 6)Who recorded Jonah's soliloquy while he was inside the fish? 7)Where is there geological evidence of a global flood? 8)Where is there environmental evidence of a global flood?(The Pingualuit Crater is a tired old joke. Don't even try it.) 9) Is it rational to believe that plants were created before the sun, moon, other planets, stars and other galaxies? 10) Why do Creationists ignore the 9th commandment? 11) When did God change the Earth from a disk into a sphere and why didn't anyone notice?
12) Why does the Jesus story share elements with other older stories? 13) Why was Ray Franz unjustly disfellowshipped? 14)How many times has the GB failed by prophesying the end of the world?
Is that enough for a start?
I work one issue at a time. Which do you want first?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118931 Jun 28, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I work one issue at a time. Which do you want first?

As you have the obligation under the scientific method to provide evidence it is your choice.

Since we know you have nothing other than doubletalk it will not really matter which one you start with. You have had countless opportunities to provide data but you run to your trusty assertions.





ChromiuMan wrote: Deal. 1)Where are the genetic bottlenecks circa 4300 YA? 2)Why are there evidences of uninterrupted human civilizations on 6 of the 7 continents throughout the time of the flood? 3)How did the human population bloom from 8 individuals to numbers large enough to build the Tower of Babel within just a couple generations? 4a) Similarly, who did Cain build a city for just 2 generations removed from the Garden of Eden? 4b) What "strangers" was Cain marked for to safeguard his safety? 5)How did Methuselah survive the flood? 6)Who recorded Jonah's soliloquy while he was inside the fish? 7)Where is there geological evidence of a global flood? 8)Where is there environmental evidence of a global flood?(The Pingualuit Crater is a tired old joke. Don't even try it.) 9) Is it rational to believe that plants were created before the sun, moon, other planets, stars and other galaxies? 10) Why do Creationists ignore the 9th commandment? 11) When did God change the Earth from a disk into a sphere and why didn't anyone notice? 12) Why does the Jesus story share elements with other older stories? 13) Why was Ray Franz unjustly disfellowshipped? 14)How many times has the GB failed by prophesying the end of the world? Is that enough for a start?
Read more at http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TFA...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#118932 Jun 28, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The principles of flight have always existed. Understanding and accomplishment took a while.
But, that's not what you said. You said BELIEVABLE. It was not believed that such a thing could ever occur. In fact it's relatively safe to say that, if you were to ask someone 300 years ago if it was believable that something 150 tons in weight would be able to fly, they'd laugh right in your face and tell you that it was ridiculous and impossible under any circumstances.

And, Christians back then would have also said that it was impossible for the Moon to have been part of the Earth.

In all those cases, it's incredulity that you're relying upon as a standard. Incredulity is a poor standard because it's so easily driven by ignorance and the Dunning-Kruger effect.
KAB wrote:
Rare and coincidence are not identical. A coincidence of two rare things is more than just rare.
You'd have to define "rare" in that case, because two rare things occurring can be, and often is, merely a coincidence.
KAB wrote:
I seek to discount everything (Acts 17:11).
Which is why we have seen you only ever discount and dismiss things you think contradict the Bible stories, and never the things you think would support it. Is THAT merely a coincidence? Surely not, as the pattern is not just a couple of instances, but many.
KAB wrote:
That's how one keeps from being misled. You should try it.
Your primary concern is misleading yourself. Once you've done that, everything you do from there on out is only a charade of intellectual integrity. You don't care about reality; you only care that you believe in a reality that makes you feel good and special.

You have yet to explain WHY the pattern of creation we see in things made by man is what it is. I already gave you a believable (to use YOUR standard) and evidence-based explanation. What's YOUR explanation? Not description, mind you...I know how you do fail to understand that they're different words with different meanings. Please, explain why the pattern of creation is what it is in man-made things.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#118933 Jun 28, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I work one issue at a time. Which do you want first?

I can answer the Ray Franz question for you. The answer is because he told the truth and telling the truth is not permitted of watchtower cult members, especially members of the governing body.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Franz
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118934 Jun 28, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
It happens all the time. Look at the Vietnam War Memorial, for example. It was designed intelligently, yet it was not designed within the context of that which surrounds it.
Many other examples can be had, but that's one off the top of my head.
Care to rethink your stupid and DATALESS assertion?
Not based on top of your head reasoning. There's likely a hole in that.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118935 Jun 28, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
That's stupid, your "design" nonsense asserts that all animals were created in their present state at the same time. A Precambrian rabbit would demonstrate this, however a Precambrian rabbit would falsify parts of the theory of evolution, just as cooled superconducting metals have falsified portions of the theory of gravity.
Your words, not mine.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118936 Jun 28, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't quote a record.
Your dataless assumption is compounded with additional error.
Sorry, it was MF who provided the quote.
KAB

Wilson, NC

#118937 Jun 28, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The New Quebec Crater is entirely entirely explainable by natural processes and content. Calling it a "global scale flood gauge" is akin to calling it an "alien crash site". Doing either is unsubstantiated and disingenuous.
You can claim that the letter "C" is pronounced "Zaphod Beeblebrox", but it remains the letter "C" and is pronounced "see", as in what you are loathe to either accomplish or admit.
What would happen to the loose debris on the sidewalls of the crater if there was a global flood?

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 Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 9 min Chimney1 205,303
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Brian_G 18,676
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 hr THE LONE WORKER 43,360
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 9 hr Reno HOOCK 921
Questions about first life Sun Upright Scientist 18
Carbon and isotopic dating are a lie Aug 27 One way or another 16
evolution is correct. prove me wrong (Jul '15) Aug 27 FallenGeologist 35
More from around the web