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

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

There are 151419 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.

wondering

Morris, OK

#134762 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
One more time you complete and utter moron, you wanted a working definition of "kind". I gave you one. I succeeded since my definition works.
And you are the idiot that first used the word. That is why I challenge your idiocy.
How hard to you need to beaten with your own stupidity before you see your error?
again you are a lying jack wagon. i did not use that word and still haven't.

I replied to your post of ""Evolution says that kind gives rise to the the same kind. They have a working definition of kind. Creationists don't."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

You were responding to free servant with that post.

“Don't Like Bumping Your Butt?”

Since: Jul 14

Stop Hopping Down The Trail!

#134763 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
MAFAO!!!
It doesn't you idiot. You challenged me to come up with a working definition of "kind".
I did. I succeeded. Your complaint shows that you are an imbecile.
My definition works. You were too afraid to even try.
I won't try to put a word or define a word that does not belong in science and that science does not use. You on the other hand are too much of an idiot to understand that.

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#134764 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't define clade, I linked the definition. Or did you forget that fact already? You challenged me to define "kind' and I succeeded at that. I found a use of "kind" that follows your foolish Bible yet it is factually correct.
You, like most chickenshit creationists, did not even try to define the word that you abuse so badly.
I don't think he understands. He doesn't get that "kind" can be defined to mean something, but that colloquial use and the Bible do not define what is meant by "kind". No one knows so quoting the Bible has no meaning. You are almost holding his hand and yet, nothing.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#134765 Jul 5, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
again you are a lying jack wagon. i did not use that word and still haven't.
I replied to your post of ""Evolution says that kind gives rise to the the same kind. They have a working definition of kind. Creationists don't."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...
You were responding to free servant with that post.
Not lying you idiot, I was mistaken. Okay it was Free Servant that first misused "kind" in this debate. But then you stuck your nose in this business and I am willing to bet that you have used the "kind reproduces kind" argument many times yourself. By sticking your nose into someone else's business you took up Free Servant's mantle. I succeeded at your challenge and you were unable to reciprocate. That shows that you are not only an idiot, but a dishonest one at that.
wondering

Morris, OK

#134766 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
MAFAO!!!
It doesn't you idiot. You challenged me to come up with a working definition of "kind".
I did. I succeeded. Your complaint shows that you are an imbecile.
My definition works. You were too afraid to even try.
why would i try to define a word that science does not use. i guess i could just make up crap like clade and kind are synonyms like you did but i prefer the approach of science doesn't use it so there is not a scientific definition of kind, working or non-working. don't be sore for looking foolish. you did it to yourself.
wondering

Morris, OK

#134767 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Not lying you idiot, I was mistaken. Okay it was Free Servant that first misused "kind" in this debate. But then you stuck your nose in this business and I am willing to bet that you have used the "kind reproduces kind" argument many times yourself. By sticking your nose into someone else's business you took up Free Servant's mantle. I succeeded at your challenge and you were unable to reciprocate. That shows that you are not only an idiot, but a dishonest one at that.
it is a public forum isn't i can jump in where ever i want.
i am still waiting for you to show me evidence where science uses clade and kind as synonyms. oh that is right science doesn't do that. only imbecile idiots as yourself do.
wondering

Morris, OK

#134768 Jul 5, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I don't think he understands. He doesn't get that "kind" can be defined to mean something, but that colloquial use and the Bible do not define what is meant by "kind". No one knows so quoting the Bible has no meaning. You are almost holding his hand and yet, nothing.
i am guessing you did not define kind in science terms because you knew in the sense we were speaking of that the word "kind" does not exists for that and is not used in science in that way. you are smarter than your pal.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#134769 Jul 5, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
why would i try to define a word that science does not use. i guess i could just make up crap like clade and kind are synonyms like you did but i prefer the approach of science doesn't use it so there is not a scientific definition of kind, working or non-working. don't be sore for looking foolish. you did it to yourself.
Well then why did you stick your ugly mug into the conversation? And I did not "make up stuff'. Now you are forgetting your own challenge. What a moron. You challenge me to come up with a working definition of kind, I did so. It not only follows your precious scripture it was scientifically accurate too.

And you are of course the one that is looking like an idiot. I made a tiny mistake conflating one moron with another. And who knows, you might be a sock puppet or vice versa. You made a challenge that you did not like when it was met.
wondering

Morris, OK

#134770 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Not lying you idiot, I was mistaken. Okay it was Free Servant that first misused "kind" in this debate. But then you stuck your nose in this business and I am willing to bet that you have used the "kind reproduces kind" argument many times yourself. By sticking your nose into someone else's business you took up Free Servant's mantle. I succeeded at your challenge and you were unable to reciprocate. That shows that you are not only an idiot, but a dishonest one at that.
so you did not lie you made a mistake. mistakes usually happen when a person gets flustered after being shown how big of an idiot they are.

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#134771 Jul 5, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then why did you stick your ugly mug into the conversation? And I did not "make up stuff'. Now you are forgetting your own challenge. What a moron. You challenge me to come up with a working definition of kind, I did so. It not only follows your precious scripture it was scientifically accurate too.
And you are of course the one that is looking like an idiot. I made a tiny mistake conflating one moron with another. And who knows, you might be a sock puppet or vice versa. You made a challenge that you did not like when it was met.
You made this mistake early on and not after actually providing a definition. To call it the result of being flustered is a lie really wouldn't you say. Even if you were to have gotten flustered, to comment that this is the result of being shown wrong, would be inaccurate and still a lie.

“Don't Like Bumping Your Butt?”

Since: Jul 14

Stop Hopping Down The Trail!

#134772 Jul 5, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You made this mistake early on and not after actually providing a definition. To call it the result of being flustered is a lie really wouldn't you say. Even if you were to have gotten flustered, to comment that this is the result of being shown wrong, would be inaccurate and still a lie.
He is an idiot. I did what he asked and I gave a working definition of kind. He is just another creationists loser creationists that could not do the same.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#134773 Jul 5, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
why would i try to define a word that science does not use. i guess i could just make up crap like clade and kind are synonyms like you did but i prefer the approach of science doesn't use it so there is not a scientific definition of kind, working or non-working. don't be sore for looking foolish. you did it to yourself.
My god, it you ate the whole halfwit pie.

I did not make up anything. Why do creationists go full tard when they are shown to be pathetically wrong?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#134774 Jul 5, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
so you did not lie you made a mistake. mistakes usually happen when a person gets flustered after being shown how big of an idiot they are.
No, it was just a simple mistake. You tards forget to give out programs describing exactly what sort of fools that you are. I thought you were the same person. As I said, you could even be sock puppets of each other. You would not be the first creationist to play that game.
wondering

Morris, OK

#134775 Jul 5, 2014
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
i know more about science than you will ever learn. only similarities have been observed. now if you beg to differ it should be easy for you to show evidence of actual non-human to human evolution. you can't because that doesn't exist. only similarities have been observed. a to z is is observed as the alphabet. you can't call a to z with 1/2 the letters missing an observed alphabet. you can however say it is observed to be similar to the alphabet.
For the 23rd time!
You are a NASTY deceiver.
Explain how you manage to say that you know more about science than we do, while you do not know one speck of:
1) embryology
2) physiology
3) genetics
4) biochemistry
5) fossil record

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#134776 Jul 5, 2014
Rabbit On Crack wrote:
<quoted text>
He is an idiot. I did what he asked and I gave a working definition of kind. He is just another creationists loser creationists that could not do the same.
What's up doc?

“Don't Like Bumping Your Butt?”

Since: Jul 14

Stop Hopping Down The Trail!

#134777 Jul 5, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>What's up doc?
My blood pressure is what is up. As I was out just a hopping and a bopping I came across a snake. This was no ordinary snake because it could talk. It looked me right in the eyes and said he was going to eat my furry little but. I said you have to catch me first and you will never guess what happened. He said holly helll a talking rabbit and fainted. So I just filled my pipe, smoked a bowl and hopped along my way.

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#134778 Jul 5, 2014
Rabbit On Crack wrote:
<quoted text>
My blood pressure is what is up. As I was out just a hopping and a bopping I came across a snake. This was no ordinary snake because it could talk. It looked me right in the eyes and said he was going to eat my furry little but. I said you have to catch me first and you will never guess what happened. He said holly helll a talking rabbit and fainted. So I just filled my pipe, smoked a bowl and hopped along my way.
Two and two is four, Carson City is the capital of Nevada, uh, George Washington was the first president...

“Don't Like Bumping Your Butt?”

Since: Jul 14

Stop Hopping Down The Trail!

#134779 Jul 5, 2014
Four and four is nine. Hawaii is the capital of Florida, uh Obama is the best president ever.

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#134780 Jul 5, 2014
Rabbit On Crack wrote:
Four and four is nine. Hawaii is the capital of Florida, uh Obama is the best president ever.
Oh carrots are divine, you get a dozen for a dime, it's magic. They fry, a song begins; they roast and I hear violins, it's magic.

Better than George W. Bush anyway.

“Don't Like Bumping Your Butt?”

Since: Jul 14

Stop Hopping Down The Trail!

#134781 Jul 5, 2014
Three old men named Dan, Wondering and Sub where talking one day about how bad their hands jerk and shook

Dan said my hands shake and jerk so bad that when I shaved this morning I cut my face several times.

Wondering said mine are worse than that, my hands shake and jerk so bad that when I went to trim my flowers, I accidentally cut them all down.

Sub said you guys have no clue. Mine hands shake and jerk so bad that when I was going pee this morning I came three times before I was done.

I will be here all week,,, well til Monday then back to the bump and grind of work.

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) 10 min DanFromSmithville 16,272
The conscious God or the inanimate nature 11 min THE LONE WORKER 55
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 12 min DanFromSmithville 201,628
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 20 min DanFromSmithville 40,786
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 1 hr Reno Hoock 241
Scientists create vast 3-D map of universe, val... 12 hr Chazofsaints 18
News Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) Wed ChristineM 96
More from around the web