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

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

There are 162001 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

#119547 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm still seeking data for even one artifact as a checkpoint. Perhaps you could now porvide such or one reference to data for one specific artifact for consideration. If I had found confirming data for the assertions made, I wouldn't be asking.

Perhaps you are not so stupid as to not be able to do your own homework.

Then again, perhaps you are.

Since we have already refuted even the most remote possibility of a global flood isn't this issue moot.

Moot - Rendered unimportant by recent events.

Just in case you were going to ask me to look it up for you.
KAB

Taiwan

#119548 Jul 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
under construction means being in the process of being built.
AKA the point in time between beginning and completion of construction.
You can't be this stupid.
I'm sorry. I forgot to include the word "pyramid". Which pyramid did you have in mind?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119549 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't concern yourself with whether there are "lurkers" watching this forum, why did you indicate there are not? It does prove that what you assert here may not be correct. That's why I seek confirming data for your assertions. I do concern myself with what is correct.

Since when?

You only concern yourself with supporting your own beliefs. Mr. Confirmation Bias.

Lurkers are a red herring. Or do you just like to believe things for which there is no evidence?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119550 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't concern yourself with whether there are "lurkers" watching this forum, why did you indicate there are not? It does prove that what you assert here may not be correct. That's why I seek confirming data for your assertions. I do concern myself with what is correct.
That's a laugh.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119551 Jul 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Since when?
You only concern yourself with supporting your own beliefs. Mr. Confirmation Bias.
Lurkers are a red herring. Or do you just like to believe things for which there is no evidence?
It would seem the latter is so, based on the evidence of this thread.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119552 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry. I forgot to include the word "pyramid". Which pyramid did you have in mind?

Depends on the exact year of the flood. They were being built through the time period in question.

But since we have proven that the flood did not actually happen this is just a mental exercise,..... correct?
KAB

Taiwan

#119553 Jul 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Smokescreen.
Try again.
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
What is your understanding of the SHORTEST time the global flood EVIDENCE could have persisted?
That is the relevant issue, is is not?
I have no idea what the shortest time the global flood evidence in its entirety could have persisted. I'm not a global flood evidence dynamics expert. That's why I seek confirming data for any relevant assertions made.
KAB

Taiwan

#119554 Jul 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
What significant number of IDs? The ones you imagine?
You can drill down into the stats and what you find it the number of posters is only slightly less than the number in that area at that time. Regular posters may get on and elect not to respond to anything.
So, we seem to be alone in our little universe. I am sure someone of your ego would love to believe he has a large audience but taint so.
We are more likely to get drive-by posts than actual lurkers.
If I become convinced there are none giving objective consideration to my input, I'm ought of here.
KAB

Taiwan

#119555 Jul 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Data is a poor substitute for understanding.
Without understanding data is a bunch of numbers.
But you would not know that because you run from both.
Data is the foundation for confirming correct understanding. Understanding itself may be correct or incorrect.
KAB

Taiwan

#119556 Jul 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
I would not seek to prove that.
Science seeks to DISprove (falsify).
You do know that, don't you?
The data disproves the notion of a 4,500 ybp flood as we can see because we find no more bottlenecks there than at any other point in time. We would expect 100% of species to have a major bottleneck there. So far no one in this forum has identified even one.
Da flud is da dead.
I do know that science seeks to falsify, but your side has refused to falsify the 4500 ybp bottleneck posssibility, stating it's my responsibility to prove it true, although you now indicat it's your responsibility to falsify it. Go figure!

BTW, I have provided 2 such bottleneck examples so far.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119557 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no idea what the shortest time the global flood evidence in its entirety could have persisted. I'm not a global flood evidence dynamics expert. That's why I seek confirming data for any relevant assertions made.
But you have shown yourself to be an expert at beating a dead horse.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119558 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Data is the foundation for confirming correct understanding. Understanding itself may be correct or incorrect.
I would consider you an example of incorrect understanding, but I think you understand, you just refuse to accept because it would render your Bible worship moot.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119559 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no idea what the shortest time the global flood evidence in its entirety could have persisted. I'm not a global flood evidence dynamics expert. That's why I seek confirming data for any relevant assertions made.
But floods from older times and of lesser scale have left evidence. The fact that they leave evidence that was not distorted or obliterated by a global flood is again evidence against such a flood.

You will again start your dance to go over the same ground that has been trodden flat with evidence. It is all you have.
KAB

Taiwan

#119560 Jul 13, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you'd look for evidence. There's the answer to your question.
I look for evidence constantly and consistently, and your side constantly refuses to provide it. I do seek to find it myself, but realize I'm only one person, and you represent the opposition, and therefore, could be expected to be more likely to readily have such evidence at the ready.
KAB

Taiwan

#119561 Jul 13, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You would have to find a bottleneck in each and every species you tested, thats how. i.e....
Outside of Noah's ark, did Lions survive the flood? NOPE, only the lions on the ark are alleged to have survived. So they should show a bottleneck.
Pandas? Nope
Horses? Nope
Fruit Bats? Nope
Kangaroos? Nope
Spider monkeys? Nope
Sparrows? Nope.
And so on for around 6000 species of mammals, 20,000 species of birds, etc etc
They ALL should show the same bottleneck.
Considering the vast majority do NOT, the Worldwide Flood is thereby conclusively disproven.
By contrast, the bottleneck at 10,000 years ago displayed by cheetahs shows that they as a species underwent a near extinction event, and provides a strong contrast to the vast majority of other species. As one of the references YOU provided made perfectly clear!
Does science tell us that every population bottleneck in a species is guaranteed detectable genetically? Data please!
KAB

Taiwan

#119562 Jul 13, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Hell, you can't demonstrate that a global flood could form a mountain in the first place.
What do you think thousands of additional feet of water on the lower contours of Earth would tend to do to the areas of higher contours?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119563 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you think thousands of additional feet of water on the lower contours of Earth would tend to do to the areas of higher contours?
We could speculate, but the experiment has never been run.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119564 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you think thousands of additional feet of water on the lower contours of Earth would tend to do to the areas of higher contours?
You have shown no data that supports your claim that there was a global flood at or around 4500 years ago. At the same time you have been unable to refute data that shows such a flood did not happen.

Now you will hem and haw and dodge, but this sums it up all very well.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#119565 Jul 13, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Does science tell us that every population bottleneck in a species is guaranteed detectable genetically? Data please!
Go get it yourself. It is your job you lazy bum.

The funny thing is that you are trapped between two moving walls. One is no evidence for a flood and the other is evidence of things that wouldn't exist if there was a flood. While you are in denial, the walls are still closing in.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#119566 Jul 14, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
It really depends on what is meant by "evidence" in this case.
In her defense there are no 1st persons (eyewitness) accounts of Jesus. There is no direct physical evidence of his life (artifacts, etc). Much of his story can be culled from a collection of attributes of other gods & heros.
However, we have (at the very least) fragments of 3rd hand accounts and mention of him in late 1st century documents. We also have the 4 biblical accounts (which may have had earlier source documents) which tell similar (though clearly not exactly the same) stories.
What is your point?

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) 2 min Subduction Zone 32,042
Is Creationism and Intelligent Design debunked ... 3 min Dogen 229
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 9 min Subduction Zone 74,877
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 17 min Dogen 4,059
Mathematicians PROVED evolution IMPOSSIBLE! 25 min Dogen 300
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 28 min John 138
News In Turkey, no teaching of evolution, but bannin... 3 hr Rossum 2
More from around the web