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

Full story: Asheville Citizen-Times

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 ...
Comments
126,161 - 126,180 of 136,131 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128380
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll take that as a no, an answer you wouldn't state explicitly yourself since you know that crossing that threshold acknowledges that it is a judgment call as to when Tyre would be considered rebuilt. Do you want me to pile moron?

Incorrect

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128381
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Atoms are confirmed. Macroevolution is not.

This is incorrect.

Both are confirmed. But only macroevolution is confirmed by direct observation.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128382
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet still SMALLER than the premier seaports of the area.

Illrelevant.

typical yellow KAB smokescreen.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128383
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't yet provided data confirming no 4500 ybp bottleneck for even one land dependent species. Is it really that difficult?

Not our job.

The fact that there none are known refutes creotardism.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128384
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't know if Tyre is rebuilt better than spec unless you know what the spec is.

Sorry, your made up equivocation impresses no one.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128385
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
No quote was required.

No, none are required for lying.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128386
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I abandoned my former course and chose my present one thru testing, unlike so many who never let go of what they are born into, as if it is probable they were born into what is most correct.

This is what cults delude you into beliving.

You are not qualified to do any testing when you brain has been hijacked. Basic mind control cult stuff. How do you think mind control cults get so many members?

Some cults do much better than the JWs in that they are able to attract intelligent people. JWs are limited to the less educated and less intelligent.
KAB

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128387
Mar 29, 2014
 
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course this bat guano nonsense means something to you. Wild.
It's unfortunate if the reference I provided doesn't mean anything to you, since it is key to properly understanding the full reality of the determination that the Cheetah bottleneck was around 10,000 years ago, most importantly that it could have actually been 4500 years ago.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128388
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's unfortunate if the reference I provided doesn't mean anything to you, since it is key to properly understanding the full reality of the determination that the Cheetah bottleneck was around 10,000 years ago, most importantly that it could have actually been 4500 years ago.

The reference has meaning.

Your misunderstanding what the article states is not my problem.
KAB

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128389
Mar 29, 2014
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I posted something that addressed your concern yesterday, but I'll just repeat the part that summarizes the article:
Thus, an event like the Biblical flood should leave its mark in most animals' DNA—but Charlesworth (an evolutionary biologist at the University of Edinburgh in the U.K. and the editor-in-chief of the evolutionary biology journal Biology Letters), says "there's absolutely no evidence of any kind of bottleneck in the very recent past in the vast majority of species."
http://www.popsci.com/article/science/which-a...
Your whole reference is a summary. It provides no data. Recall that other recently provided references state that large vertebrates overwhelmingly experienced a bottleneck about 10,000 years ago. Do they all show genetic evidence of that bottleneck?

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128390
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't yet provided data confirming no 4500 ybp bottleneck for even one land dependent species. Is it really that difficult?
It isn't my job to provide evidence to support your wild ass assertions. You need to provide data that shows a bottleneck at that time for every species studied so far. Your smokescreen is up to avoid doing that because you can't.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128391
Mar 29, 2014
 
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what cults delude you into beliving.
You are not qualified to do any testing when you brain has been hijacked. Basic mind control cult stuff. How do you think mind control cults get so many members?
Some cults do much better than the JWs in that they are able to attract intelligent people. JWs are limited to the less educated and less intelligent.
You can say that again.
KAB

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128392
Mar 29, 2014
 
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is incorrect.
Both are confirmed. But only macroevolution is confirmed by direct observation.
Please cite a case of direct macroevolution observation.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128393
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Your whole reference is a summary. It provides no data. Recall that other recently provided references state that large vertebrates overwhelmingly experienced a bottleneck about 10,000 years ago. Do they all show genetic evidence of that bottleneck?
I realize what I referenced was a summary, and lacked hard data. This was an ARTICLE from "Popular Science" that was providing a science critique of the newly-released movie "Noah".

I again refer you to the final part of this article:

Thus, an event like the Biblical flood should leave its mark in most animals' DNA—but Charlesworth [Brian Charlesworth, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Edinburgh in the U.K. and the editor-in-chief of the evolutionary biology journal Biology Letters] says "there's absolutely no evidence of any kind of bottleneck in the very recent past in the vast majority of species."

....unless you can prove otherwise.
KAB

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128394
Mar 29, 2014
 
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what cults delude you into beliving.
You are not qualified to do any testing when you brain has been hijacked. Basic mind control cult stuff. How do you think mind control cults get so many members?
Some cults do much better than the JWs in that they are able to attract intelligent people. JWs are limited to the less educated and less intelligent.
No cult needed.
It's a simple probability analysis, given the number of denominations, the distribution of the human population among them, and the number of beliefs in play, to determine that overwhelmingly most people are not born into the most correct denomination, since likely very few or just one would rank as most correct, especially given the extent to which they contradict one another.
KAB

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128395
Mar 29, 2014
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>It isn't my job to provide evidence to support your wild ass assertions. You need to provide data that shows a bottleneck at that time for every species studied so far. Your smokescreen is up to avoid doing that because you can't.
It's recognized that bottlenecks aren't always detectable.
KAB

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128396
Mar 29, 2014
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
I realize what I referenced was a summary, and lacked hard data. This was an ARTICLE from "Popular Science" that was providing a science critique of the newly-released movie "Noah".
I again refer you to the final part of this article:
Thus, an event like the Biblical flood should leave its mark in most animals' DNA—but Charlesworth [Brian Charlesworth, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Edinburgh in the U.K. and the editor-in-chief of the evolutionary biology journal Biology Letters] says "there's absolutely no evidence of any kind of bottleneck in the very recent past in the vast majority of species."
....unless you can prove otherwise.
A dataless assetion establishes nothing to be proven otherwise. As a starting point the cheetah bottleneck data weighs against the assertion.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128397
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's recognized that bottlenecks aren't always detectable.
Citation, please?

How does one "recognize" that which is not detectable?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128398
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
A dataless assetion establishes nothing to be proven otherwise.
Such as a dataless assertion that suggests a global flood inundating the earth for a full year? Killing all animal life (save a scant few on an equally mythical boat)? An event which would absolutely provide CONCRETE genetic evidence for this near extinction event?
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>As a starting point the cheetah bottleneck data weighs against the assertion.
So now a single species genetic bottleneck of (about) 10,000 to 12,000 years ago is evidence FOR a global flood 4500 years ago?

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128399
Mar 29, 2014
 
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
No cult needed.
It's a simple probability analysis, given the number of denominations, the distribution of the human population among them, and the number of beliefs in play, to determine that overwhelmingly most people are not born into the most correct denomination, since likely very few or just one would rank as most correct, especially given the extent to which they contradict one another.
It would require that the most correct denomination be known or that data exist to determine that correctness. Not possible. This is just some crap you have dreamt up to justify your choices or lack of choice to yourself. I often forget that you are you biggest victim.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 22 min Kong_ 172,455
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 4 hr Lawrence Wolf 114,800
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism 10 hr Zog Has-fallen 343
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 11 hr TedHOhio 154
Science News (Sep '13) Tue positronium 2,846
Natural Selection Not The Only Process That Dri... (Jan '14) Aug 25 reMAAT 20
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) Aug 25 ChristineM 286
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••