The Bad Taste of Evolution

[TinBryn]

or you could create a whole bunch of molecules and pick the sweetest of them, if you made enough you have a very high chance that at least some of them will be very sweet indeed.

[hoygans]

"I cant explain how these proteins are so complex so Goddidit." Very good logic and reasoning there.

[KingHodor]

If god created sweet proteins to please human taste receptors, why did he only put them into plants that grow in remote jungle regions of Western Africa (Brazzein, Pentadin, Thaumatin, Monellin) and South East asia (Mabinlin, Curculin)?

And isn't the fact that protein sweeteners are very closely related to other proteins of wildly different functions a convincing argument AGAINST the creationist idea of "irreducible complexity"?

[JustB3NJI]

"You have'nt even the beginings of a clue of my level of biological understanding "

That is pathetic. If you have this knoledge use it! A smart person 'is' they dont claim to be.

[JustB3NJI]

You're fuidic blather has never been observed outside of a womb or an egg, btw. It never happened the way you wish to twist it into.

I had the experiment done in front on me....YOu  speed it up with some minor jolt of electricity and we had to go to uni to have the technology to better observed this microscopic phenomenon, but er yes it has.

[fudgeman362]

EPIC FAIL.

[rodawnwaun]

great video !!

[zzlgrant]

This video shows a complete lack of understanding of the sective process of evolution. Can anyone seriously be this stupid?

[3gdosrsfs]

Yes there are people that are really stupid....those that believe in the selective process of evolution. Funny....the real evolutionists....you know Stephen Gould, would laugh at you. You should listen to them...they are finally turning around and seeing the err of their ways and admit there is no such proof of macro or general evolution.

[3gdosrsfs]

Yes people who belive ther is such a thing as the selective process of evolution which to this day have never been show to have any basis in fact.

Yo know, observable testable and repeatable science?

[3gdosrsfs]

Oh btw ZZ.....love the insults and ad hom's..the only thing you evol-bangers have....too bad you have not said or done one thing to dispute anything said here other than to ridicule it...sure sign of a loss of the agrument everytime.

[MadeUThink]

Are these videos intended to be real, or are they satirically making fun of how stupid creationists are? I really can't tell.

[3gdosrsfs]

No, they are bait for evolutionists to come here and insults us and not have one factual or honest dispute of the information. Exactly like you did here Made U think....perhaps you need to make yourself think and stop being a

lemming to your God hating professors who have carelessly shoved this nonsense of millions of years and macro evolution and the Big Bang down your throat all these years. Those pictures in the text books do not in any way shape or form match what we actually have found.

[MadeUThink]

Are you serious? "God hating professors"? So the 99.99% of earth and life scientists on the planet are conspiring against the invisible space genie that mom and dad told you was real when you were a baby? No wonder people laugh at you.

[3gdosrsfs]

99.9%? That is wishful thinking...its not even close. I dont laugh at you..I feel very sorry for you and how easily you belive anything you are told in school.

BTW, both my parents believed in evolution and God....I did set them both straight though.

[MadeUThink]

Not 99.9%. 99.99%, and that's from a CREATIONIST FUNDED POLL. Wishful, my ass.

[3gdosrsfs]

So all the evolutionist funded polls aer unbiased I suppose? Creationist poll?

I think not. Oh and there are plenty of non christians and secular folk you cafaw at the idea of evolution.

How about all the polls that show MOST

americans want both taught in school?

Darwin forbid huh?

[MadeUThink]

What does it matter what a majority of non-scientists believe? Most Americans thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, and couldn't find Iraq on a map. Do you want ancient Chinese creation myths taught in science class? Perhaps Greek mythology? Or the story of Ymir, which teaches that the universe was created from the armpit sweat beads of a giant? It's just as valid as saying an invisible space genie named Yahweh shouted "alakazam" and that explains everything. BTW, a stork brought you.

[3gdosrsfs]

Um about those facts....Im sure I'll be waiting billions of years at least eh?

First of all I do not believe in genies.....I believe in an all knowing omnipotent God

who is well beyond yours or my understanding. I know you are so intellegent though that you can't even present one sentence here to defend

your magically primordial potion that all sceince shows could not have happened, with or without an oxygen atmosphere.

Oh yeah I see explosions result in order all the time too. LOL!

[MadeUThink]

What facts r u waiting 4? If you believe in a non-physical being with otherworldly powers who answer's people's requests, then you believe in a genie. A rose by any other name is still a rose. Calling magic "miracles" doesn't make it any more realistic. Calling a genie "God" doesn't either. Saying there's an unprovable entity with specific traits, and all the things that don't make sense are just "because we're too stupid to understand it" is copping out, and pathetically so.

[MadeUThink]

...plus, I think you've managed to not know anything about the primordial soup concept. Science has figured out how cell walls and amino acids formed on their own in the early earth environment, by simulating earth's original atmosphere. It practically assembled itself through the inevitability of chemistry.

[3gdosrsfs]

I dont belive in an invisible space genie.

However you believe ina cosmic explosion. Hey, ask the folk in Japan how well an explosion ordered their lives.

[MadeUThink]

Science believes in a cosmic explosion, because there's evidence that it happened. We just don't know everything ABOUT the explosion. Why are you denying obvious evidence of the explosion if not to protect an emotion-driven worldview?

[3gdosrsfs]

Yes...science BELIEVES ina cosmis explosion but they have more fatal flaws in there belief than anythin they can point to as fact. Never once has anyone observed an explosion that did not result in devastation. That is not an emotionally driven world view but a scientific fact.

[MadeUThink]

What?? What does the concept of the big bang have to do with other kinds of explosions at all, other than matter moving in an outward direction? You really are grasping to explain why your worldview is more relevant than the 99.99% of earth and life scientists who would tell you you're a moron. I know. It's all a conspiracy. Every person working on cures for evolving viruses hates Jesus.

[3gdosrsfs]

Every person working on cures does not believe in evolution. Im not grasping for anything. So far you have failed to show how any of whatyou said shows that evolution works.

also 99.999% of all scientists once believed the world was flat...so much for concensus. A large majorty of Germans gave Hitler power and most radical terrorists praise Osama binladen too.

Consensus is not science. Not even close.

You also belivee in a magical primordial soup.

[MadeUThink]

"Every person working on cures does not believe in evolution."

BWAHAHAHA!! Keep it up! I hope some people on the fence are reading your crap

"also 99.999% of all scientists once believed the world was flat"

There WAS no scientific process back then, so you're wrong. Those people were called "philosophers"

"Consensus is not science"

Agreed. Consensus exists because 99.99% of scientists use science to figure things out

"You also believe in a magical primordial soup."

How's chemistry magical?

[JustB3NJI]

@3gdosrsfs For fucks-sake read something other than the bible, or at least be consistant with the citicism of your fellow nutters!

It was christianity that believed the world was flat.

Even if it wasn't you FAIL because you FAIL to realise that scientists adapt with new information. Look at blood letting, religious people refused to acknolodge that it was a useless and dangerous practice once science had proved other wise because Galen who propagated its useage was praised by the church.

[JustB3NJI]

@3gdosrsfs "I dont belive in an invisible space genie."

Yes you do - GOD.

[3gdosrsfs]

NO I believe in a real person who created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. You however beileive in a magical primordial pond that was struck by lightning and created life.

[JustB3NJI]

@3gdosrsfs He's not a person though is he - He is a hidden mystical being - a 'person' doen't have such powers - Or are you a Danikenist?

[3gdosrsfs]

No actually He is three persons.

Hey also go look up what a person actually is. Or look foolish. The bible tells us He, God, is 3 such persons so clearly He, God , can have supernatural powers...not magical(slight of hand

which is not supernatural BTW.)

Helps to actually understand the terms you use before looking silly trying to look like you know what you are talking about.

Funny how you ignore the magical pond statement, isn't it? LOL!

[JustB3NJI]

@3gdosrsfs What the primodial goo?

Call it magical if you wish, no scientist does and if you did biology beyond high school you'd know a bit more.

This whole concept your twisting is based upon the popularalised and lamenised description. It is merly a case of the building blocks of life being in proximity of one another in an ideal fluidic environment. They meet and in this fluid and like the two poles of a magnet they natually connect when close enough and this builds up from there very slowly

[JustB3NJI]

Scientists have obseved this in a lab on a much smaller scale. So is the "magic" of carbon! Although that magic disappears when you discover the truth.

Tell me does your 3 in 1 god neutalise smells kill bacteria and leave a fresh pine scent at the same time? I had the bible read out to me around 6 times in school. I know enough to know what you say is merly an interpretation and that other Abrihamic sects would disagree with you - Jovos jew and muslims for a start. Easy you forget that.

[3gdosrsfs]

Oh you mean those same scientists just recently caught witholding data to show that global warming is a scam? Yeah I guess I trust them(not).

You're fuidic blather has never been observed outside of a womb or an egg, btw. It never happened the way you wish to twist it into.

You have'nt even the beginings of a clue of my level of biological understanding so the add hom attack is like always useless in your defense.

Now...I do not care what scientists believe. Show me the testable facts.

[JustB3NJI]

@3gdosrsfs Yer, er, I doubt they are all working on the same things. I doubt Einstien was proof reading darwin whilst giving Edwin Hubble a helping hand.

[GabrielGroverMan]

AWSOME!!!!

[JustNotConvinced]

The logic of this video is ass backwards. It's not as if taste buds pre-existed things which would taste sweet and evolution selected sweetness. Sugar is a source of energy and as such the ability to detect and even enjoy sugar was selected because of its obvious benefit.

[BrellK]

Seriously, how do these people get to thinking they understand evolution AT ALL? They come up with ridiculous red herring arguments and think they have proven their point. How sad...

[3gdosrsfs]

Hey bwell...more insults...very good...now where is the beef of your argument?

You know facts to actually dispute this?

Why am I not suprised? Red herring?

Funny.....you evolutionists have been trying now for over two centuries to prove the unprovable....now that is sad.

[BrellK]

My problem is that this argument is completely backwards from how Scientists say evolution works. That's my problem with it. They say (incorrectly) Evolution works a certain way, and then when it doesn't work the way they THINK it works, it's wrong. Well maybe if they actually learned how science works (which is not in this video) they wouldn't have trouble understanding.

Want to talk about the unprovable trying to be proven? No better example than Religion.

[SofaKingLoaded]

Hehe.. oh man.. "if the molecule uncoils it loses it sweetness."

Seriously?