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

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

There are 160849 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.

TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#137355 Aug 6, 2014
DAN wrote:
<quoted text>The flood water seems to have drained primarily to the present ocean basins.
You not only lack any understanding of basic physics, like buoyancy, but also the ability of logical thinking.

I shall teach you basic logic.

You cannot flood the earth using the water that already exists. If there is dry land anywhere, then that means you have to have additional water come from somewhere else. The entire reason that there is dry land is precisely because there isn't enough water to cover it up.
The amazing thing about sea level is that it is the lowest you can go and still be on the "surface". Water necessarily rushes downhill to the lowest level it can get: Sea level. Thus, dry land is necessarily above and beyond what the water >can< cover.

Hence, if the land was drowned during the flood, per definition the should have been water ADDED to the existing oceans. to cover the highest mountain, Everest, 2.5 times more water to be precisely.

When the flood receded, 2.5 times the current amount of water must drain or go somewhere.
I think I would already have understood this when I was a 12 year old boy or so.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#137356 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I know you think that.
WE - not me alone - KNOW that - not only know it.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#137357 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Show some understanding. Describe the results of the leaky bucket experiment.
I think I already made this comment about a dozens times:
WHY should I do YOUR job?

I notice you fail to answer.
Describe me the results of the bucket experiment and how it supports your claims.

You are a coward and f*ckhole.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137358 Aug 6, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =WYW_lPlekiQXX
Brilliant! I haven't seen that movie in a long time. What an appropriate clip.

Personally, I don't think he needs one, but he could certainly have a fleet if he liked. I wonder if KAB has seen this movie and thinks that it is a documentary? If so he should check out Prometheus. It might make his posts more interesting with those elements added in.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137359 Aug 6, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
I think I already made this comment about a dozens times:
WHY should I do YOUR job?
I notice you fail to answer.
Describe me the results of the bucket experiment and how it supports your claims.
You are a coward and f*ckhole.
I couldn't agree more.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#137360 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The claims weren't mine. They were in the Pingualuit article, and no evidence was given. They were made by experts tho, which usually is enough for your side to accept them.
Here was your claim: "I accept the slide cause claims as possibilities."
And you did because, in other posts, you claim it to be evidence for the flood.

Again you are a coward, not accounting for your claims. Like a real F*CKHOLE.

No the article wasn't providing any evidence for the slide to be caused by a flood.
Because there wasn't a flood. WEIRD isn't it?

And no evidence was given?
Let's put an end to this comedy.
Normal questions are hardly possible to pose at you, you only get sh!t answers, hence let's summarize the article, shall we?

The slide reported was by its composition and structure a translational slide: "by the extent of the transparent acoustic
facies. CAT-Scan and X-ray images indicate that part of the internal sedimentary organization (fine laminations) has been preserved, suggesting a translational slide" (p. 3905). And here comes the explanation for the slide, i shall quote it directly (p. 3905):

"The slide occurred around 4200 cal BP, when the surface
connection with Lake Laflamme (Bouchard and Saarnisto, 1989) was possibly still active (Fig. 7A). As the LIS (Laurentine ice sheet) decayed, its geometry evolved and the ice margin would have receded toward the site of the subglacial lake. As the distance to the ice margin decreased, the ice-surface slope above the lake would have increased causing the lake volume to shrink. At the same time, the reduced ice thickness would reduce water pressure in the lake, whereas the pressure of porefluids in low permeability sediments would remain high and could promote slope instability. The MWD could thus be related to slope instabilities associated with the rapid exorheic drainage through channels observed on the outer crater rim following the deglaciation (see section 2.4)."

Because from geology we know that saturation of soil with water is one of the most important causes of landslides. Especially when the structural integrity of the soil is impaired by heavy pressure of the intruding water.

An earthquake could have triggered the landslide because the area is and was struck by a
Ms = 6.3 earthquake in 1989. We know from other postglacial areas in the world that increased seismic activity is associated with glacio-isostatic rebound following the deglaciation. Thus, past land uplift has been observed in the nearby (120 km) Salluit region. Quote: "Unfortunately, no data are available for glacio-isostatic rebound in the Kangiqsujuaq region, but the crater area has an uplift rate of about 0.4 m 100 a1 since 1 ka BP". In other words: Pingualuir area has all the hallmarks of a typical postglacial region, with land uplift, still experiences intraplate earthquakes today.

In other words: the normal type of landslide every geologist expects after deglaciation of a subglacial lake when the ice sheet covering it melts away.

End comedy.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137361 Aug 6, 2014
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually no. KAB's delusion about buoyancy is not claiming such. As water could get under downward facing portions of the body they would indeed float.
His idea is equally silly, so we need to make fun of what he actually claims and do not need to exaggerate or misconstrue it.
Actually yes. On further thought, KAB is claiming that the ice caps would only float if there was water on the underside (downward facing part of the ice) when as you point out the human body and the ice caps have numerous downward facing surfaces. So, in general, my understanding of KAB's misunderstanding of buoyancy is fairly accurate. Saying that his misunderstanding of buoyancy would leave a person drowned, much as he claims the ice wouldn't be impacted is correct.
KAB

United States

#137362 Aug 6, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Don't sell yourself short. Your standards include using irrelevant material as a matter of course. Knowledge, but you can't make a horse or a dumb ass drink. You can only show them the water.
It's important to set priorities on knowledge acquisition since no one can learn everything (Ecclesiastes 12:12).

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#137363 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's important to set priorities on knowledge acquisition since no one can learn everything (Ecclesiastes 12:12).
"...much study wearies the body" IOW, better to stay stupid.
KAB

United States

#137364 Aug 6, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Why don't you think the paper addresses them?
I don't remember seeing any such references.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you think the lack of any foreign debris in the basin-scale slide layer rules out flooding of the crater?
I don't.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>What leads you to believe that the flood never happened?
I haven't yet been lead to believe the flood never happened, but I appreciate any serious sincere confirmed data based efforts to lead me there.
KAB

United States

#137365 Aug 6, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you think that dating of mummified remains is another piece of solid evidence refuting a global flood? Is it because the techniques are validated, well understood and provide consistent results? Why do you think God is an alien being? There is nothing alien about him based on my understanding is there?
I don't think that dating of mummified remains is another piece of solid evidence refuting a global flood.

Relative to beings on Earth, YHWH is alien.

I don't know what your understanding of God is.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#137366 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't remember seeing any such references.
(This question was about whether the ages of the valleys were established in the article).

Don't lie again, KAB, you little notorious liar.
See my post #137360.
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't.
(Question was: Why do you think the lack of any foreign debris in the basin-scale slide layer rules out flooding of the crater?)

So you don't think that the lack of foreign debris in the basin-scale slide layer rules out flooding of the crater. Hence, you think that a worldwide flood would leave no single sediment in the crater? No salt deposits? No remnants of marine life? No plants remnants floating in the water due to the mass extinction of plants due to the flood?

Ah, yes. how plausible.
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't yet been lead to believe the flood never happened, but I appreciate any serious sincere confirmed data based efforts to lead me there.
I haven't been lead to believe it never happened that the flying spaghetti monster landed on Pingualuit with his purple spacecraft with yellow dots, but I appreciate any serious sincere confirmed data based efforts to lead me there.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#137367 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think that dating of mummified remains is another piece of solid evidence refuting a global flood.
Relative to beings on Earth, YHWH is alien.
I don't know what your understanding of God is.
It does when those desiccated mummies have been desiccated for over 4,500 years.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137368 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It's important to set priorities on knowledge acquisition since no one can learn everything (Ecclesiastes 12:12).
Why do you prioritize irrelevant material over facts?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137369 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't remember seeing any such references.
<quoted text>
I don't.
<quoted text>
I haven't yet been lead to believe the flood never happened, but I appreciate any serious sincere confirmed data based efforts to lead me there.
Do you think someone like you with your admitted bad memory and unwillingness to provide, review or understand data should be claiming there was no flood? Don't you think everyone now understands that you aren't here to claim a flood occurred, but to provide a caricature of a flood supporter in order to ultimately show the silliness of concluding biblical allegory actual occurred?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137370 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't yet been lead to believe the flood never happened, but I appreciate any serious sincere confirmed data based efforts to lead me there.
So you came to this conclusion independently? I see.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137371 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Relative to beings on Earth, YHWH is alien.
Then you are claiming the Bible is wrong in saying we are made in the image of God? Don't you think your position that the Bible is wrong will be a problem for your fellow JW's?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#137372 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think that dating of mummified remains is another piece of solid evidence refuting a global flood.
I agree. The dating is important in determining the age of the mummified remains. I agree with you that it is the mummified remains themselves that are an important piece of evidence refuting the flood. You are correct.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#137373 Aug 6, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
My standard does not demand I read an irrelevant article.
What am I supposed to gain from reading the YEC article?

Knowledge, oh king of Irrelevance.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#137374 Aug 6, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I am only partially incorrect for not including all the downward facing surfaces perhaps, but that he is as you say silly and worthy of ridicule.

Yep.

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min Subduction Zone 66,349
What does the theory of evolution state? 2 min MADRONE 108
Why isn't intelligent design really science? 2 hr pshun2404 34
Mathematicians PROVED evolution IMPOSSIBLE! 2 hr pshun2404 81
An atheist told me this. 4 hr pshun2404 18
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr Regolith Based Li... 28,478
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 12 hr Agents of Corruption 221,195
More from around the web