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

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

There are 148408 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!

#119462 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
How would you seek to prove there was a "universal" bottleneck 4500 years ago?
How would you seek to prove there was a fire-breathing dragon living in my basement?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#119463 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
How would you seek to prove there was a "universal" bottleneck 4500 years ago?
By the way, this is as explicit an admission that KAB has no clue what he's talking about as we're likely to ever get.
KAB

United States

#119464 Jul 10, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Since that has already been explained to you, repeated asking of that same question is dishonest. Why do you constantly have to lie to defend your religious beliefs? Why is honesty so caustic to you?
There have been a number of failed attempts to explain, but none have or can change the fact that cosmic ray exposure measurements just don't have one year resolution. Ask the scientists, which none of you apparently are.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119465 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
How would you seek to prove there was a "universal" bottleneck 4500 years ago?

Genetic bottlenecks are identified by the loss of genetic variation.

There is no universal bottleneck 4,500 years ago therefore there was no global flood. Period.

Giant pandas and the golden snub-nosed monkey show evidence of a severe bottleneck that took place about 43,000 years ago.

Galápagos Islands giant tortoises about 88,000 years ago

Humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, cheetahs, rhesus macaques, orangutans and tigers.- 70,000 years ago.
KAB

United States

#119466 Jul 10, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Because the effects a one year inundation would be detectable over hundreds or thousands of years. How many times to you have to be told this??? Can you name any *REAL* major flood who's effects disappeared as soon as the flood subsided?
I have not stated that the effects of the global flood disappeared as soon as the flood subsided. Isn't this consideration about the work done in the Atacama? That involved cosmic ray exposure measurements.
KAB

United States

#119467 Jul 10, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
There isn't anything "logical" or "evidentiary" about Hebrews 11:1. It is equally applicable to the monster under the bed, 7 years bad luck in breaking a mirror and astrology. Why do you insipidly insist that your favorite Bible passages are "data"?
Hebrews 11:1 is the starting point data for questions regarding Hebrews 11:1, which is what began this analysis. Perhaps you missed that.
KAB

United States

#119468 Jul 10, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The mass extinction and deposition layer would be detectable over hundreds of millions of years. The KT boundary was first proposed as "proof" of the global flood - and as quickly dismissed as wishful thinking.
Funny how an abject lack of evidence for any of hundreds of (geologic and historically modern) biblical claims are met with "but that doesn't prove it didn't happen", but if a tooth were missing from a fossil jaw the same folks would claim it debunks warehouses full of evolutionary data.
Oh, BTW KAB... did you happen to check out the topology of the Red Sea bottom at the lat and long you cited?
I did not peer beneath the surface of the Red Sea.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#119469 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
There have been a number of failed attempts to explain, but none have or can change the fact that cosmic ray exposure measurements just don't have one year resolution. Ask the scientists...
The scientists have been consulted. They are in agreement that a one year resolution of anything is not necessary to detect a global catastrophic flood.
KAB wrote:
...which none of you apparently are.
But at least we're not a jackass.
KAB

United States

#119470 Jul 10, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
A number of untrue statements, the silliest of which is the idea that people (other than scientists, of course) are actually convinced by data.
Most of your beliefs are well removed from the data. How does one who values data join such a obviously warped, data adverse, mind control cult like the Watchtower cult? The clear answer is that such people would never join such a cult.
Your observations further expose your error and ignorance.
KAB

United States

#119471 Jul 10, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean random human to random human?
Yes

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#119472 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I have not stated that the effects of the global flood disappeared as soon as the flood subsided.

To meet your BS requirement of a one year resolution that is exactly what would be required. Everything would have had to have occurred and recovered within a year.
KAB wrote:
Isn't this consideration about the work done in the Atacama? That involved cosmic ray exposure measurements.
Atacama was not the only thing referenced. You need to see about that CRS.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#119473 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not peer beneath the surface of the Red Sea.
Obviously, the author(s) of the story didn't either.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#119474 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I have not stated that the effects of the global flood disappeared as soon as the flood subsided. Isn't this consideration about the work done in the Atacama? That involved cosmic ray exposure measurements.
Right. The evidence all disappeared over the following 4500 years, despite the fact that flood evidence from millions of years ago still exists. But, only from that one flood, the greatest flood the planet would have ever known. But, evidence from much smaller floods continues to exist around the world from much longer ago, as well as from more recently.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119475 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I have not stated that the effects of the global flood disappeared as soon as the flood subsided.

But you really need that to be true for your theology to work.

And it isn't true, is it.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119476 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Hebrews 11:1 is the starting point data for questions regarding Hebrews 11:1, which is what began this analysis. Perhaps you missed that.

No, sorry. Heb. 11:1 was thrown in by you as a smokescreen and therefore is not relevant to this conversation.

Perhaps you forgot that.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119477 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not peer beneath the surface of the Red Sea.

More smokescreen.

You just can't quit your compulsive lying.



ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The mass extinction and deposition layer would be detectable over hundreds of millions of years. The KT boundary was first proposed as "proof" of the global flood - and as quickly dismissed as wishful thinking.
Funny how an abject lack of evidence for any of hundreds of (geologic and historically modern) biblical claims are met with "but that doesn't prove it didn't happen", but if a tooth were missing from a fossil jaw the same folks would claim it debunks warehouses full of evolutionary data.
Oh, BTW KAB... did you happen to check out the topology of the Red Sea bottom at the lat and long you cited?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119478 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Your observations further expose your error and ignorance.

No, my observations were dead-on-balls accurate. Review my post again and prove me wrong if you can.

Remember, your cult members are uneducated and ignorant EVEN BY CULT STANDARDS!! More H.S. drop outs than college graduates by far.


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
A number of untrue statements, the silliest of which is the idea that people (other than scientists, of course) are actually convinced by data.
Most of your beliefs are well removed from the data. How does one who values data join such a obviously warped, data adverse, mind control cult like the Watchtower cult? The clear answer is that such people would never join such a cult.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119479 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes

Why does it matter? We share over 70% of the same DNA with zebra danios.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#119480 Jul 10, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read and understood it then you can explain how the measurement technology/methodology would detect a one year inundation. I suggest the approach to take is to assume a one year inundation 4500 years ago and consider how that would affect the data collected/observed by the scientists.
Why would you need a one year resolution to show that sediments that have not been moved before or since a single event are still there? You are either too stupid to understand or, as I think, just lying to seem like you know something. They were not trying to find a particular time period and they didn't need to. If you are looking to see how old something is and you determine that the age is older than a flood you think occurred then it is logical that the flood did not occur when you think it did. For a flood that is claimed to have eroded the Grand Canyon, it was apparently as gentle a spring breeze on the sediment of the Atacama.

The surface sediment of the Atacama shows ages exceeding 100,000 years.

This sediment would not be where it is if a flood of global scale occurred 4500 years ago.

The sediment is there.

NO FLOOD.

I know, I know. These guys weren't looking for evidence of a global flood. You would look for the flood because you feel that somehow that would magically change the results. You know why tehy weren't looking for evidence of a global flood? They weren't morons.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#119481 Jul 10, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it matter? We share over 70% of the same DNA with zebra danios.
Huh..'magine that. Must have happened when Jonah had to relieve himself in those 3 days within their Megalodanio ancestor.

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) 4 min Critical Eye 187,317
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 min ChristineM 27,409
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 26 min Critical Eye 179,487
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 31 min Critical Eye 6,193
News This year's first batch of anti-science educati... 2 hr Critical Eye 7
Will Gravitational Waves Reveal the Origin of t... 7 hr Critical Eye 4
Poll Theory of Intelligent Design (Apr '09) 9 hr MIDutch 2,852
More from around the web