If you are a creationist in the year 2011 then either you have been poorly educated or you are blind. The best thing that evolutionists can do is to ignore these idiots, let the ignorant fucks think what they want, they only make fools of themselves
If you are a creationist in the year 2011 then either you have been poorly educated or you are blind. The best thing that evolutionists can do is to ignore these idiots, let the ignorant fucks think what they want, they only make fools of themselves
Clips like this are completely pointless, even if creationists don't realize it. Anyone who is intelligent enough to honestly consider the issues that are presented here is likewise intelligent enough not to think that Richard Dawkins can't answer simple questions about genetic information, or that there is even a point to be made about genetic information with respect to "God." What are you trying to do with this clip?
this is the truth about God... Gods needs your prayers, without your belief he is nothing if you do not possess knowledge of God you do not possess knowledge of the devil. simple equation one cancels the other... I honestly hope we pass that point when we get out of the religious cocoon we're in... to me religion is just another form of control another form of goverment for this pale blue dot.
Well if one man can't give you the answer on the spot, it must most definitely imply that the opposing "theory" (or should I say "faith" which is a belief with no evidence) is correct.
Every time I see this in another incarnation it gets more and more repugnant. This piece of garbage is poorly edited and doesn't even have the person who did the original interview (who was a woman by the way). Why don't you creatards look into why he hesitated. He was lied to to get an interview. The pause is him realizing he has a bunch of creationists in his house under false pretenses. Isn't one of your commandments have something about bearing false witness. Hypocritical wankers!
@PIPBoy2ooo You're right. Rereading that statement it looks like I just came off shift and was a bit pissed off. It's like these guys have Teflon coated brains that let real facts just slide right off.
As I'm looking at the rating of this video it just shocks me...truth can slap people in the face, yet people will still argue with you. Just simply amazing.
I must say that the video seems like it has been edited and cut.
Although the truth is that there has never been any scientific evidence by observation or test of a natural increase of information in the DNA by mutations.
The tests with bananaflies is nowadays considered a disaster. The mutations never increased the information, it only changed and mutated the information allready described by the DNA. All the mutations were also bad for the fly.
First point:- it was definately edited to portray r dawkin's in a false light. Second point:-How do we know r dawkins was even interviewed by this person?
if this video clip wasnt edited, which it looks like it was, the reason mr. dawkins couldnt give an intelligent answer is because the interviewed didnt ask a very intelligent question.
Dawkins is not even a complete atheist. If you read his book The God Delusion he actually leaves room for the existence of God. So inconsistent for somebody to write nearly 400 pages devoted to convincing people that God does not exist, yet he is not even sure himself! What a joke, just like everybody who follows him.
and when i say evoulation can be seen today. i dont mean there r completely new animals poppin up everywhere.
for example. If u take a group of grey kangaroos, and move them to a different location, like an island. And on that island the grey coat of the kangaroos were not good camoflage. Natural selection would take place and soon they find that the kangaroos develops a different colour coat and becomes a new species.
i am glossin of quickly because there is a work limit.
No matter how long natural selection goes on for, kangroos will always remain kangroos!!! Natural selection only selects fittest individuals within a species.
@awaisau393 We were derived from Chimps. Is it me, or are we not called chimps?
Natural Selection chooses the fittest within all living things. Wolly Mammoths, Dinosaurs, Dodos etc, extinct. There is intra and intra specific competition.
@awaisau393 While they might still "seem" like kangaroos to u, it might not be a genetical kangaroo, if u know what i mean. The fact that the kangaroo has a different coat/becomes bigger/ becomes a carnivore doesnt make it a "kangaroo". It will be called something else.
A real life example (that can be seen right now) are wolves and dogs. Wolves are bigger, have sharper teeth and most of them have a relatively different coat. According to your logic, wolves should be called dogs as well.
@awaisau393 "Kangaroos will always remain kangaroos"? That was possibly the worst example you could have come up with... Macropus agilis Macropus dorsalis Macropus eugenii Macropus greyii Macropus irma Macropus parma Macropus parryi Macropus rufogriseus Macropus antilopinus Macropus bernardus Macropus robustus Macropus rufus Macropus titan Macropus pearsoni Macropus fuliginosus Macropus giganteus
Poorly constructed video. It proved nothing. It merely was edited to discredited a man who is a Professor in biology.
u argue all the facts that prove the theory of evolution. but there r no facts for creationism . I personally havnt looked up proofs for creationism because i didnt think any1 believed in such a silly idea.
next ur goin 2 be tellin me the world is only 2000 years old and that all the evidence points to this.
My main aim is to prove that Evolution is nothing but a theory long been rejected by science. Every step of modren science points towards creation. Update ur scientific knowledge. No one has claimed that the earth or the world is 2000 years old. You evolutionists just love imagining things...
@awaisau393 It has been claimed by creationists that the "young earth" is 6000-1000 years old.
And the word Theory does not testament that it has not been proven. Infact, Theory is one of the greatest titles a hypothesis (that's the word you're mistaking it for) can gain.
Theory of Gravity anyone?
You need to re-check your own "research," sir.
I realize i am answering a 2 year old comment, but i do so for future readers. And i sincerely hope that you've done more research since then.
This is the lamest argument for creationism ever. What's this say. You take a video and edit it so that it makes someone look stumped. Why is the answer clipped out? He spent 11 seconds tying to come up with a good explanation for but you edit it out. You don't want anyone to hear the answer?
I find that MUCH more interesting and suspicious that the 11 second pause.
Instead of trying to discredit the accepted theory, why don't you formulate one and have it peer reviewed. I have yet to see one.
@awaisau393 Partially correct. He asked the camera man to stop recording so that he could take the time to formulate a proper answer to the question it's done ALL the time in interviews. The rest of that is a lie, he completed the interview.
watch?v=WoXzF9zDy_k
This is the type of dishonesty I am talking about. It is only necessary when arguing from a position of weakness.
@itsolive1 I know. I'm asking WHY was it edited out.
Answer: Because this is the best tactic that creationists can come up with. By the way, the interviewer was a woman. So this is not just editing to make Prof. Dawkins look bad, it is a flat out lie and falsification.
Where in the definition of evolution does it say for something to evolve it must turn into a fish or an ant or a fly?
The only reason people can get the common cold is that it is constantly evolving so that our white blood cells cannot destroy it immediately. But no it hasn't turned into a fly...recently
Flu virus is still a flu. If our immune system cant detect it it doesnt mean that flu virus has become a different species. No matter wat happens to a flu virus it wont evolve to a different species. You should read work of Prof. Lee Spatner if you want to find out more about it...
Yes, but there aren't dramatic changes over night. Obviously it starts with small changes like that. Do you seriously think we believe, that one day a germ had a baby and it was an elephant? Its a really shitty arguement that the flu doesn't completely change, because our agruement is it took millions of years, and I doubt Sir Spatner has watched a flu mutate for millions of years....i highly doubt......If you wait long enough it will be completely changed.
No matter how many mutations a germ goes through over millions or even billions of years, it will always remain a germ. Mutations dont have a "time mechanism" or a "brain", which tells them "ohhh its been a couple of million years, so i should take place again". Even the fossil record tells us the living species have not gone through any change over millions of years. Refer to my videos on fossil record.
If the "germ" has enough changes, it would not look much like a "germ" anymore. For instance if it develops collagen and starts sticking together in a colony as a multi-cellular organism. About the "time mechanism", you are right, that would be a completly ignorant mis-understanding of the Evolutionary process.
You may want to read up on the subject before you argue against it.
Mutations have indeed been shown to increase the genetic information present in organisms. But let's leave that alone for a second, for this is certainly not the smoking gun that will serve to disprove evolution. The Amoeba, a single celled organism, is to date the LARGEST genome that has been sequenced. It's genome contains 670 billion base pairs. Contrast that with the human genome, which contains 3.2 billion base pairs. A more complex organism does not mean MORE genetic information.
horizontal transfer... symbiosis>absorption of the symbiont>taking up gens from the symbiont... recombination... what you need more religious ostriches? go, and push your heads into the sand once again!
Why did he stop? Because it is not easy to explain it to "John Doe"s... do you know those terms?
Its funny how you defend your father while he himself couldnt. We all understand english.. was it too hard for him to say, "it is not easy to explain it to "John Doe"s... do you know those terms?"??? Obviously you are a greater genuis than him so go and teach him bit of evolution...
yeah, that was a hoax... but there are evidences... are you trying to say something like all money are bogus money, because there are some bogus money? logic doesn't seem to be your forte.
Dawkins wasnt posed this question by a 7 year old, so he is not thinking HOW to EXPLAIN the answer but he is thinking the answer it self because he knew the people who are filming him arent normal people from street who he can sell his "scientific woble" to but they have done extensive research on the subject before posing the question.
Dawkin has spent his whole life defending the theory and it is amazing that when he is asked a SIMPLE question, he is utterly helpless and cant answer.
I dont know which planet McMonster is on! I think he needs a psychaitrist. EVOLTUTION AND SCIENCE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. SCIENCE IS A "FACT". While EVOLUTION IS A THEORY PUT FORWARD BUY AN AMATURE ENGLISH NATURALIST CHARLES DARWIN ON MERE ASSUMPTIONS AND NO SCIENTIFIC BACKING. I have given mcmonster sooo many lectures in PMs but he doesnt seem to learn anything. He is so arrogant!
Nothing like a long winded whine of an evolutionist who got out done by the big bad creationist.
I love how evolutionist take a mere theory and make it so personal unto themselves. Can any of them show where making a theory personal is scientific? Maybe it's part of the scientific method. I wonder if emotions are a part of the scientific peer review?
Hate? Not hate Ike, I pity you. there is such wonder and beauty and amazement to be had by seeing the world through the eyes of reason. you sadly have decided against that and are mired in silly creation folk tales that lost all relevance for grown ups centuries ago.
I don't hate you or anybody else. there is no need for hate. However I am angered by blatant and relentless dishonesty added to the kind of sanctimonious pomposity you and the clown who posted this worthless pack of lies display.
Last word? Aw....stick around! I'd love to know what the hell that jew killer comment was about. I have an idea but even you couldn't stoop to that could you? Could you? I know your morals are shot but you're not going there??? Are you?
I don't believe in withes so, thanks I'll stick to reason and observation if that's ok. Wonder why there's not so many witches around these days....oh that's right you christians murdered them all...and any thing that dared to move. How many slaughtered Ike? Witches? Grow up!
Ikester- by resorting to such filth you reveal nothing other than your own depraved and desperate state of mind. you asked in your message to me if I was proud of what I wrote. I stand by every syllable. you are a liar. a deliberate and disgusting liar. the jew killer comments is the most sickening piece of vile behaviour I've seen in a long time.
ikester- you were asked to cite a lie of mine about creationism or shut up. not much of a choice since the liar here is you.
eveything I've said about creationism & you is true. you hate filled PM to me- from which you cowardly blocked me from responding- was an embarassment. your cowardice and dishonesty are shameful.
Jew Killer? How dare you! you are a sad pitiful desparate little man. what you lack in scientific understanding you also lack in basic human decency.
yeah that leaves 230,000 papers in the primary sientific research literature on evolution. I'll ask again (becasue it's such fun watching you dance) HOW MANY DID YOU READ AS YOU "REFUTED EVOLUTION"?
Dancing? Sorry I won't dance for you because you are not my type. Though I don't know what your preference is.
As far as reading 230,000 papers, I very seriously doubt you have read them all, nor could you prove it. Besides, I'm a liar according to you. so why would you believe what I say anyway?
I'm not claiming to have refuted 150yrs of science you are. It has no bearing on anything. but your reading is clearly relevant. the theory consists of 230,000 papers in research journals. How many have you read?
yeah- how many proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem were submitted to the Journal for Theoretical Biology? Answ. none. Bias? Don't be so stupid. Creationism doensn't get published in the science literature because it's not science. wise up ffs!
Oh really? why do you write tripe that would embarass an infant? Why do you tell pathetic childish lies? why can't you think for yourself? why can't you quote people acurately?
You are defending dawkin like hes your dad! lol. Let me tell you what is being accepted and what is not by the society. According to evolution all the sick, handicaped and disabled people are an obstacle in the "healthy evolution" of the society so kill them all! does that happen? NO! every one instead respects, helps and is compationate towards them! so its the evolution which teaches cruelty and not religion.
Dawkins is quite capable of defending himself- he'd make a lughing stock of you in his sleep. What offends me is the sheer dishonesty of creationists.
No it doesn't. it shows that I am sick to the back teeth of creationist dishonesty and stupidity. you smear me with hitler then think you can be sanctimonius about getting the slap you deserve. you wouldn't know an argument about the science if it bit you on the lip.
calling a liar a liar is a public duty I didn't resort to anything. what you see in this video is a refusal by the creationist communtiy to engage in decent behaviour. you are in no position to preach to anyone. your pathetic hitler routine was good for a laugh though. Proof that one can actually scrape BENEATH the barrel.
'Mcmonster, I went to your youtube home page. It would seem I'm older then you so that makes you the child in this discussion.' .Not necessarily if you include mental age.
Quote: calls religion a 'virus' and faith-based education 'child abuse'. Criticizes conservative U.S. evangelicals and warns his audience of the influence of 'Christian fascism' and 'an American Taliban.' In part two of his series entitled 'The Virus of Faith,' Dawkins attacks the teaching of 'religion' to children, calling it child abuse. Dawkins compares Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, and calls the New Testament 'St. Paul's nasty, sado-masochistic doctrine of atonement for original sin
Sounds like the kettle calling the pot black. But then again, it's okay when you guys do it, correct? You and Dawkins should not dish out what you can't take (telling others to shut up). But then again that's how your type of belief works. If it ends up being the only voice, it's the only way it can win.
eh.....Darwin was ridculed and widely condemned when his ideas were published. His work gained acceptance when it was tested and found to fit with observation. It did not become the cornerstone of the entire field of life science by silencing others. lying prick.
why don't you know that? come on, you're older than me! Where the hell have you been!?
This was so funny, had to add it to my favorites. By the way. Every .1% difference in DNA is 3 million base pairs difference. So 99.8% means 6 millions things different between us and chimps. This is because there are over 40 billion base pairs in our DNA.
whats funny is fools like yourself being taken for a ride by the lying degenerates who made this video. you then help disseminate the lies and THEN pontificate about the dishonesty of scientists.
no, your brain is so addled by the cult you have succumbed to that you are deaf to many many things. you don't hear whining- you also are incapable of hearing reason, honesty, integrity, insight.....
And I guess you are an evolutionist like Dawkins who believes that Christians are a virus on society. So when do you and him, plus all the others who think like you. Start your elimination of these Christian viruses? Hitler had some good ideas I hear. He liked the term: Survival of the fittest.
oh grow up you stupid little child. the attempt to link evolution and hitler is as honest as the day is long. If you don't understand the science, and clearly you haven't the faintest idea, the option to not comment would be wiser than these pathtic lies
there are many scientists who work in evolutionary biology who are better christians than you.
If you can't cite Dawkins accurately or honestly- and you can't- then why not do the decent thing and shut up. He nowhere said that CHRISTIANS are a virus. he has likend religious belief to a virus.
a simmilar distinction to saying flu is a virus versus people with the flu are a virus.
Is not Christian a religous belief? Dawkins said this for a broad coverage and not to single out any particular group. Example: If I say science lies, who all did I just cover that's involved in science? Everyone correct. But If I say evolutionists are liars. Then I single out a specific group.
why is this so difficult for you. are you that stupid? Are you that dishonest? Dawkins compared religious faith- with its blind unquwstioning belief in absurdities- to a virus. that is not the same as saying christians are a virus- we kill viruses- hitler killed viruses- dawkins is hitler...blah blah...
your lies are just sickening. go away and sin no more you pathetic little child.
Besides, by what right does Dawkins have to classify any group of humans as a virus? If he has determined this by science, then he is not very scientific now is he? But we both know how and why he said this. It's from the hate the evolution breeds into everyone who believes it. Just as you hate me for no other reason.
"It's from the hate the evolution breeds into everyone who believes it"
You don't get out much do you? certainly not to a library or bookstore. you make these blanket absurd accusations then squeal like a stuck pig if anyone dares critisise your religion.
you haven't even the honesty to accurately quote Dawkins or retract when your LIE is pointed out.
More childish than the list of idiotic LIES on your godawful website? you haven't a shred of honesty or integrity. How fucking
DARE you pontificate to anyone! your list of comparisons of creation vs. evolution is such utter infantile deceit. paraphrasing huxley- I'd rather be descended from the lowest worm than use the tactics that come so naturally to you.
My my, such langauge. And all in the defense of what? Evolution. So what would you like to do next? Kill me maybe? It's what Hitler did with all those who "disagreed" with him. He believed in evolution as well. Do you actually believe that your view is the only view that should be allowed?
No, I belive that ideas should be tested as evolution has and creationinsm CAN'T.
I have no interest in killing anyone. I'd like you to learn some basic human decency and integrity ans stop your pathetic LIES about things you don't understand.
your droning on about hitler is utterly pathetic and contemptible. I've been an active anti fascist all my adult life and paid a price for it too.
Then evolution should no longer be a theory, and now be an absolute. So do you have evidence that makes evolution a absolute? If you do, you could win the Nobel Prize.
you simply don't get it do you. the theory consists of hypotheses based on observation. those hypotheses generate predictions that are tested against further observations. that's how the scientific method works. It doesn't deal in absolute truth. everything is questioned.
Didn't you read what I wrote about testing theories? Maybe you did and didn't understand.
I see science break their own rules everyday. So don't preach how holy and maral they are.
No absolutes? Well then you can't imply that someone is absolutely lying unless you can claim you have absolute proof to prove it. Which means that evolution will always be in question and up for debate whether you like it or not.
Also, what is it that I have to get? You seem to think that everyone has to believe as you do before they get it. But don't seem to understand that some people get it but will never believe it. Just as you will never get creation or ever believe it, and that's your choice. And I have made mine. So what is your problem, do you not believe in choice?
truth is not a democracy. what you don't get because you are simply too dishonest and stupid is that evolution has nothing to do with hitler. there is a mountain of evidence in 230,000 peer reviewed research journals that you have never bothered to read. and on the creationist side.....nothing.
LOL, would you have your journals peer reviewed by creation scientists? Just as much as we would have our peer reviewed by you guys. Those who "hate" creationists and all Christians will never give a non-bias view because they are to bias not to.
wrong wrong wrong. There was an creationist article published in the reviewed literature a few years back and the morons lept for joy! so please don't tell me you wouldn't relish an article on creationism in the science literature.
See, and rejected for what reason? Because it pointed to a creator, and not the Darwin god. rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the "creature" more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
there are no creation scientists. there are scientists who referee work anonymously, the work gets questioned, corrected if necessary resubmitted, re reviewed and either rejected or eventually published. you don't know any of this do you?
ROBERT V. GENTRY is a nuclear physicist and a YEC. Now why would you say he is not a creation scientist? And what would you deem to use to descredit him that would be about his education, or scientific?
Do half lives lie? What is the half life of a polonium halo? A million years, or a few seconds? Sorry, the debunk was a lie as is the rest of evolution.
you are wrong. I think that a basic understanding of the scientific method (which you lack) would be nice if you are going to discuss science. you can't discuss science any more than I can discuss ancient greek as you haven't the first clue what science is or what it does.
I belive in knowledge. I don't believe we are free to choose that 2+2=7
Okay, name off the method steps since you seem to have them memorized. And I'll give you examples of where you have not followed them here in your attempt to discredit creation from the very first post.
You are done because you know I am right. You dodge me question about listing the method steps because you also know I'm right. Nice dodge though. Ignoring leads to ignorance. And so far you have made the perfect example of that since you ignore every question you cannot answer.
"huxley again- I would rather be descended from the lowest worm than adopt the tactics of dishonest creationists."
According to what you believe, you are the after birth of a chimp. Which was the after birth of what ever came before it. But if you choose a worm, maybe you can start another theory on that.
you are simply howling your own ignorance. I could ask you to name one single solitary biologist who claims we came from chimps but I'll spare you the mental effort. There isn't one.
Evolutionary theory says humans and higher primates have a common ascestor. since you've refuted the theory shouldn't you know that?
Why don't you type in "99.9 chimp dna" and see how many websites claiming this show up. You see, we are 99.9% different between one another in our DNA. But now several sites are claiming that Chimps are 99.9% different. Which means there are chimps running around with our DNA.
Why do you always come out with the same answer.I have never dodged your questions and neither has anyone on this board.McMonster65 has answered all your questions but you refuse to accept any evidence,calling it lies.Your final act is to end up blocking people when you are totally beaten.
"It's not a question of choice. I reject it because there is not a shred of evidence to sustain it and there is a powerful natural explanation"
Yep, no natural explaination. Why would a God be needed of the explaination was natural? Why do you think that science does not have all the answers? Natural explainations does not get you all the answers.
I rejoice that evolution is up for debate- it shows the scientific method at work. The debate for you however is over. you sit in a pile of your own dung waving around a redundant book of bronze age folktales, brainlessly chanting "god did it". I think I'll stick with science if it's all the same.
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS ADMITS TO INTELLIGENT DESIGN?
SEARCH: Richard Dawkins admits to Intelligent Design.
VIEW: Richard Dawkins admits to Intelligent Design.
WATCH: Richard Dawkins admits to Intelligent Design.
KNOW: Richard Dawkins admits to Intelligent Design.
SHARE: Richard Dawkins admits to Intelligent Design.
Dawkins: Civilisation with high level of technology from elsewhere in universe seeded self replicating molecules on this planet?
mat2112moneychangers 2 months ago
Haha. Nice job spelling the conclusion out with close to no exposition. Ridiculous.
dujl 5 months ago
You creationist scum are a menace.
lukebeevers93 7 months ago
This is pitiable. I laughed.
theacdcstone 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are a creationist in the year 2011 then either you have been poorly educated or you are blind. The best thing that evolutionists can do is to ignore these idiots, let the ignorant fucks think what they want, they only make fools of themselves
skattio1 9 months ago
If you are a creationist in the year 2011 then either you have been poorly educated or you are blind. The best thing that evolutionists can do is to ignore these idiots, let the ignorant fucks think what they want, they only make fools of themselves
skattio1 9 months ago
Clips like this are completely pointless, even if creationists don't realize it. Anyone who is intelligent enough to honestly consider the issues that are presented here is likewise intelligent enough not to think that Richard Dawkins can't answer simple questions about genetic information, or that there is even a point to be made about genetic information with respect to "God." What are you trying to do with this clip?
instereovideos 11 months ago
this is the truth about God... Gods needs your prayers, without your belief he is nothing if you do not possess knowledge of God you do not possess knowledge of the devil. simple equation one cancels the other... I honestly hope we pass that point when we get out of the religious cocoon we're in... to me religion is just another form of control another form of goverment for this pale blue dot.
keldah26 1 year ago 2
Well if one man can't give you the answer on the spot, it must most definitely imply that the opposing "theory" (or should I say "faith" which is a belief with no evidence) is correct.
Alexiaden93 1 year ago
Every time I see this in another incarnation it gets more and more repugnant. This piece of garbage is poorly edited and doesn't even have the person who did the original interview (who was a woman by the way). Why don't you creatards look into why he hesitated. He was lied to to get an interview. The pause is him realizing he has a bunch of creationists in his house under false pretenses. Isn't one of your commandments have something about bearing false witness. Hypocritical wankers!
ptango101 1 year ago 14
This has been flagged as spam show
@ptango101 so you are saying YOU can answer the question? bobo :)
CnChenn 1 year ago
@ptango101 Don't even waste your energy on this piece of creationist crap. They probably won't survive much longer anyways ;)
PIPBoy2ooo 1 year ago
@PIPBoy2ooo You're right. Rereading that statement it looks like I just came off shift and was a bit pissed off. It's like these guys have Teflon coated brains that let real facts just slide right off.
ptango101 1 year ago
@ptango101 GODDAMN IT YOU ARE MY HERO
NoNameLikeThisOne 1 year ago
What a poorly edited video
TheEnglishWay1 1 year ago
Oh no, he didn't answer a question! That must means all Atheists are wrong for not having blind faith...
MeatLoafEnchilada 1 year ago
As I'm looking at the rating of this video it just shocks me...truth can slap people in the face, yet people will still argue with you. Just simply amazing.
Crackmandan 1 year ago
LOL, that's the Dawkins I know.
shorobor 1 year ago
I must say that the video seems like it has been edited and cut.
Although the truth is that there has never been any scientific evidence by observation or test of a natural increase of information in the DNA by mutations.
The tests with bananaflies is nowadays considered a disaster. The mutations never increased the information, it only changed and mutated the information allready described by the DNA. All the mutations were also bad for the fly.
pascalandren 2 years ago
First point:- it was definately edited to portray r dawkin's in a false light. Second point:-How do we know r dawkins was even interviewed by this person?
mrjollyrich76 2 years ago
if this video clip wasnt edited, which it looks like it was, the reason mr. dawkins couldnt give an intelligent answer is because the interviewed didnt ask a very intelligent question.
nthomas87 2 years ago
:)))))
eincekaya 2 years ago
and!!! does anyone know what he actual response was?? wat a waste of 1min of my life.
spikeannoyed 2 years ago
lol, this video wasnt stupid at all.
josharounder 2 years ago
Dawkins is not even a complete atheist. If you read his book The God Delusion he actually leaves room for the existence of God. So inconsistent for somebody to write nearly 400 pages devoted to convincing people that God does not exist, yet he is not even sure himself! What a joke, just like everybody who follows him.
2400bc 2 years ago
So you've read The God Delusion?
teaknees 2 years ago
u obviously didnt get the point he was making when he talks about not being 100% atheist. go read the book and come back to us
spikeannoyed 2 years ago
fine, what proof is there for creationism ??
bloycey 2 years ago
Teh s@me pwoof taht radnom mutitions mekes lanigane better.
srice555 2 years ago
u are the best <3
teaknees 2 years ago
and when i say evoulation can be seen today. i dont mean there r completely new animals poppin up everywhere.
for example. If u take a group of grey kangaroos, and move them to a different location, like an island. And on that island the grey coat of the kangaroos were not good camoflage. Natural selection would take place and soon they find that the kangaroos develops a different colour coat and becomes a new species.
i am glossin of quickly because there is a work limit.
lilzeus7 2 years ago
No matter how long natural selection goes on for, kangroos will always remain kangroos!!! Natural selection only selects fittest individuals within a species.
awaisau393 2 years ago
@awaisau393 We were derived from Chimps. Is it me, or are we not called chimps?
Natural Selection chooses the fittest within all living things. Wolly Mammoths, Dinosaurs, Dodos etc, extinct. There is intra and intra specific competition.
alphabet701 1 year ago
@alphabet701 Answer the question in the video.
CnChenn 1 year ago
@awaisau393 While they might still "seem" like kangaroos to u, it might not be a genetical kangaroo, if u know what i mean. The fact that the kangaroo has a different coat/becomes bigger/ becomes a carnivore doesnt make it a "kangaroo". It will be called something else.
A real life example (that can be seen right now) are wolves and dogs. Wolves are bigger, have sharper teeth and most of them have a relatively different coat. According to your logic, wolves should be called dogs as well.
wallofjustin 9 months ago
@awaisau393 True, and if a camoflague becomes ineffective, natural selection takes place until the one with the most effective camoflague is left.
back to the video. it is well known this video is a hoax.
ShadeOnTheUtube 8 months ago
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
Evolution is not been rejected, i would like to no where u found this information from.
I would like to hear the evidence that points to creation.
I would like also to hear how old u believe the world (universe) is. And ur other creation beliefs.
Because i can give u a huge list of evidence that proves evolution. From carbon dating, fossil records, and many other things.
evolution is true and it can be see today.
lilzeus7 2 years ago
Poorly constructed video. It proved nothing. It merely was edited to discredited a man who is a Professor in biology.
u argue all the facts that prove the theory of evolution. but there r no facts for creationism . I personally havnt looked up proofs for creationism because i didnt think any1 believed in such a silly idea.
next ur goin 2 be tellin me the world is only 2000 years old and that all the evidence points to this.
haha i hope u do some serious reseach some day.
lilzeus7 2 years ago 6
My main aim is to prove that Evolution is nothing but a theory long been rejected by science. Every step of modren science points towards creation. Update ur scientific knowledge. No one has claimed that the earth or the world is 2000 years old. You evolutionists just love imagining things...
awaisau393 2 years ago
@awaisau393 so.. if one man can't anwser a question you're argument becomes valid?
man, It's a shame i dont belive in god, then i'd be as smart as you
WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU , LALALALALALALALAALALALALAAALALALALAA
dannes22 9 months ago
@awaisau393 It has been claimed by creationists that the "young earth" is 6000-1000 years old.
And the word Theory does not testament that it has not been proven. Infact, Theory is one of the greatest titles a hypothesis (that's the word you're mistaking it for) can gain.
Theory of Gravity anyone?
You need to re-check your own "research," sir.
I realize i am answering a 2 year old comment, but i do so for future readers. And i sincerely hope that you've done more research since then.
ShadeOnTheUtube 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@awaisau393 What science are you talking about?
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@awaisau393 What science are you talking about?
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
Dawkin is a stupid moron! never had respect for that guy, He is a populist.
turbofritz2 2 years ago
This is the lamest argument for creationism ever. What's this say. You take a video and edit it so that it makes someone look stumped. Why is the answer clipped out? He spent 11 seconds tying to come up with a good explanation for but you edit it out. You don't want anyone to hear the answer?
I find that MUCH more interesting and suspicious that the 11 second pause.
Instead of trying to discredit the accepted theory, why don't you formulate one and have it peer reviewed. I have yet to see one.
chodaboy51500 2 years ago 2
There was no answer!!! Dawkins told the camera man to stop recording and refused to complete the interview!!!
awaisau393 2 years ago
@awaisau393 Partially correct. He asked the camera man to stop recording so that he could take the time to formulate a proper answer to the question it's done ALL the time in interviews. The rest of that is a lie, he completed the interview.
watch?v=WoXzF9zDy_k
This is the type of dishonesty I am talking about. It is only necessary when arguing from a position of weakness.
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
@chodaboy51500 dude it was edited out this was broadcasted everywhere on television my moms boyfriend who studied him even told me so.
itsolive1 5 months ago
@itsolive1 wasn't*
itsolive1 5 months ago
@itsolive1 No, I'm saying the answer was edited out in THIS video.
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
Comment removed
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
@itsolive1 I know. I'm asking WHY was it edited out.
Answer: Because this is the best tactic that creationists can come up with. By the way, the interviewer was a woman. So this is not just editing to make Prof. Dawkins look bad, it is a flat out lie and falsification.
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
@chodaboy51500 oh i gotcha.. but in the real interview he didn't even answer the question which annoyed be whatever im not gonna argue anymore :)
itsolive1 5 months ago
Argue against the evolution of bacteria, does god create new forms of bacteria every day?
jsekar711 3 years ago
I have never seen or heard about a bacteria turning into a fish or an ant or a fly. You must be reading some novels...
awaisau393 3 years ago
Where in the definition of evolution does it say for something to evolve it must turn into a fish or an ant or a fly?
The only reason people can get the common cold is that it is constantly evolving so that our white blood cells cannot destroy it immediately. But no it hasn't turned into a fly...recently
jsekar711 3 years ago
Flu virus is still a flu. If our immune system cant detect it it doesnt mean that flu virus has become a different species. No matter wat happens to a flu virus it wont evolve to a different species. You should read work of Prof. Lee Spatner if you want to find out more about it...
awaisau393 3 years ago
Yes, but there aren't dramatic changes over night. Obviously it starts with small changes like that. Do you seriously think we believe, that one day a germ had a baby and it was an elephant? Its a really shitty arguement that the flu doesn't completely change, because our agruement is it took millions of years, and I doubt Sir Spatner has watched a flu mutate for millions of years....i highly doubt......If you wait long enough it will be completely changed.
BrutalNewfie666 3 years ago
No matter how many mutations a germ goes through over millions or even billions of years, it will always remain a germ. Mutations dont have a "time mechanism" or a "brain", which tells them "ohhh its been a couple of million years, so i should take place again". Even the fossil record tells us the living species have not gone through any change over millions of years. Refer to my videos on fossil record.
awaisau393 3 years ago
If the "germ" has enough changes, it would not look much like a "germ" anymore. For instance if it develops collagen and starts sticking together in a colony as a multi-cellular organism. About the "time mechanism", you are right, that would be a completly ignorant mis-understanding of the Evolutionary process.
You may want to read up on the subject before you argue against it.
chodaboy51500 2 years ago
@jsekar711 No, but nature DOES create new forms of bacteria every day.
chodaboy51500 5 months ago
they missed out the part where he says "turn the cammeras off im thinking!" hahha.
BestVideosEver01 3 years ago
Mutations have indeed been shown to increase the genetic information present in organisms. But let's leave that alone for a second, for this is certainly not the smoking gun that will serve to disprove evolution. The Amoeba, a single celled organism, is to date the LARGEST genome that has been sequenced. It's genome contains 670 billion base pairs. Contrast that with the human genome, which contains 3.2 billion base pairs. A more complex organism does not mean MORE genetic information.
EmpiricalTruth 3 years ago
horizontal transfer... symbiosis>absorption of the symbiont>taking up gens from the symbiont... recombination... what you need more religious ostriches? go, and push your heads into the sand once again!
Why did he stop? Because it is not easy to explain it to "John Doe"s... do you know those terms?
DamnedNationalists 3 years ago
Its funny how you defend your father while he himself couldnt. We all understand english.. was it too hard for him to say, "it is not easy to explain it to "John Doe"s... do you know those terms?"??? Obviously you are a greater genuis than him so go and teach him bit of evolution...
awaisau393 3 years ago
ok... it will be better (and more cleaver) to ask Dawkins why did he do so...
DamnedNationalists 3 years ago
btw, he is neither my father nor my leader. we (agnostics, atheists, and scientists) do not need leaders unlike you... ;)
DamnedNationalists 3 years ago
"scientists" what kind of science are you talking about? based on lies, fabrications and propergenda?
awaisau393 3 years ago
science is based ol lies? hahahahahahaha
DamnedNationalists 3 years ago
not science, theory of evolution is based on lies and fabrications. Piltdown Man is one of the examples, you want some more?
awaisau393 3 years ago
yeah, that was a hoax... but there are evidences... are you trying to say something like all money are bogus money, because there are some bogus money? logic doesn't seem to be your forte.
DamnedNationalists 3 years ago
What exactly is the "evidence" would ou like to comment?
awaisau393 3 years ago
ok, visit DonExodus2's channel... u can find something there...
DamnedNationalists 3 years ago
I always love when Creationists put this vid out as a "victory!"
You have to understand Dawkins is a genius, but an intellectual snob. What your seeing in that moment of hesitation is remarkable restraint.
He's thinking : "how do I explain something incredibly complex to a complete and total cretin!"
The very question shows the utter lack of understanding Creationists have of the Theory of Evolution.
bshieldsbb01 4 years ago
Dawkins wasnt posed this question by a 7 year old, so he is not thinking HOW to EXPLAIN the answer but he is thinking the answer it self because he knew the people who are filming him arent normal people from street who he can sell his "scientific woble" to but they have done extensive research on the subject before posing the question.
Dawkin has spent his whole life defending the theory and it is amazing that when he is asked a SIMPLE question, he is utterly helpless and cant answer.
awaisau393 4 years ago
Dawkins is a moron!!
turbofritz2 2 years ago
I dont know which planet McMonster is on! I think he needs a psychaitrist. EVOLTUTION AND SCIENCE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. SCIENCE IS A "FACT". While EVOLUTION IS A THEORY PUT FORWARD BUY AN AMATURE ENGLISH NATURALIST CHARLES DARWIN ON MERE ASSUMPTIONS AND NO SCIENTIFIC BACKING. I have given mcmonster sooo many lectures in PMs but he doesnt seem to learn anything. He is so arrogant!
awaisau393 4 years ago
Then you show your lack of understanding of science.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
Nothing like a long winded whine of an evolutionist who got out done by the big bad creationist.
I love how evolutionist take a mere theory and make it so personal unto themselves. Can any of them show where making a theory personal is scientific? Maybe it's part of the scientific method. I wonder if emotions are a part of the scientific peer review?
ikester7579 4 years ago
1.Evolutionist is not a word,unless creationist have brought out their own dictionary.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
How many words have been redefined by science to make evolution "sound" more true?
ikester7579 4 years ago
Mcmoster, I'll let you have the last word. it will be the only thing that will satisfy your hate.
ikester7579 4 years ago
Hate? Not hate Ike, I pity you. there is such wonder and beauty and amazement to be had by seeing the world through the eyes of reason. you sadly have decided against that and are mired in silly creation folk tales that lost all relevance for grown ups centuries ago.
McMonster65 4 years ago
I don't hate you or anybody else. there is no need for hate. However I am angered by blatant and relentless dishonesty added to the kind of sanctimonious pomposity you and the clown who posted this worthless pack of lies display.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Last word? Aw....stick around! I'd love to know what the hell that jew killer comment was about. I have an idea but even you couldn't stoop to that could you? Could you? I know your morals are shot but you're not going there??? Are you?
McMonster65 4 years ago
Witches also have been believing this long before Darwin. The high level witches practice what is called morphing. Look it up.
ikester7579 4 years ago
I don't believe in withes so, thanks I'll stick to reason and observation if that's ok. Wonder why there's not so many witches around these days....oh that's right you christians murdered them all...and any thing that dared to move. How many slaughtered Ike? Witches? Grow up!
McMonster65 4 years ago
I would not talk jew killer.
ikester7579 4 years ago
say what?
McMonster65 4 years ago
Ikester- by resorting to such filth you reveal nothing other than your own depraved and desperate state of mind. you asked in your message to me if I was proud of what I wrote. I stand by every syllable. you are a liar. a deliberate and disgusting liar. the jew killer comments is the most sickening piece of vile behaviour I've seen in a long time.
McMonster65 4 years ago
ikester- you were asked to cite a lie of mine about creationism or shut up. not much of a choice since the liar here is you.
eveything I've said about creationism & you is true. you hate filled PM to me- from which you cowardly blocked me from responding- was an embarassment. your cowardice and dishonesty are shameful.
Jew Killer? How dare you! you are a sad pitiful desparate little man. what you lack in scientific understanding you also lack in basic human decency.
McMonster65 4 years ago
One peer review paper and that is supposed to make everything in science no-bias. WOW. What a joke.
ikester7579 4 years ago
yes. there was one once and it failed. why do you expect a science journal to publish what ios not science.
McMonster65 4 years ago
yeah that leaves 230,000 papers in the primary sientific research literature on evolution. I'll ask again (becasue it's such fun watching you dance) HOW MANY DID YOU READ AS YOU "REFUTED EVOLUTION"?
McMonster65 4 years ago
Dancing? Sorry I won't dance for you because you are not my type. Though I don't know what your preference is.
As far as reading 230,000 papers, I very seriously doubt you have read them all, nor could you prove it. Besides, I'm a liar according to you. so why would you believe what I say anyway?
ikester7579 4 years ago
nice to have you admit that you are a liar.
I'm not claiming to have refuted 150yrs of science you are. It has no bearing on anything. but your reading is clearly relevant. the theory consists of 230,000 papers in research journals. How many have you read?
McMonster65 4 years ago
At least I can tell the truth, ever tries it? But then again if you did, we would all know evolution is a lie.
ikester7579 4 years ago
Not good enough. I cited specific deplorable lies from your pathetic website. can you do the same? No.
McMonster65 4 years ago
yeah- how many proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem were submitted to the Journal for Theoretical Biology? Answ. none. Bias? Don't be so stupid. Creationism doensn't get published in the science literature because it's not science. wise up ffs!
McMonster65 4 years ago
Mcmonster, I went to your youtube home page. It would seem I'm older then you so that makes you the child in this discussion.
ikester7579 4 years ago
Oh really? why do you write tripe that would embarass an infant? Why do you tell pathetic childish lies? why can't you think for yourself? why can't you quote people acurately?
McMonster65 4 years ago
You are defending dawkin like hes your dad! lol. Let me tell you what is being accepted and what is not by the society. According to evolution all the sick, handicaped and disabled people are an obstacle in the "healthy evolution" of the society so kill them all! does that happen? NO! every one instead respects, helps and is compationate towards them! so its the evolution which teaches cruelty and not religion.
awaisau393 4 years ago
Dawkins is quite capable of defending himself- he'd make a lughing stock of you in his sleep. What offends me is the sheer dishonesty of creationists.
McMonster65 4 years ago
"You are defending dawkin like hes your dad!"
They both believe they are the after birth of a chimp, so that makes them related in that sense.
ikester7579 4 years ago
wrong wrong wrong wrong. a chimp giving birth to a human would be a miracle. that's your department. I dont belive in such nonsense. you do.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Again you're only proving how ill educated you really are.Try reading a book explaining the basic principals of evolution.You do know what a book is?
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
LOL, how pathetic. When all else fails, resort to insults and personal attacks. It just shows how weak your arguement really is.
ikester7579 4 years ago
No it doesn't. it shows that I am sick to the back teeth of creationist dishonesty and stupidity. you smear me with hitler then think you can be sanctimonius about getting the slap you deserve. you wouldn't know an argument about the science if it bit you on the lip.
McMonster65 4 years ago
calling a liar a liar is a public duty I didn't resort to anything. what you see in this video is a refusal by the creationist communtiy to engage in decent behaviour. you are in no position to preach to anyone. your pathetic hitler routine was good for a laugh though. Proof that one can actually scrape BENEATH the barrel.
Enjoy your delusions.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Personal insults? 'I would not talk jew killer'.
'Mcmonster, I went to your youtube home page. It would seem I'm older then you so that makes you the child in this discussion.' .Not necessarily if you include mental age.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
Quote: calls religion a 'virus' and faith-based education 'child abuse'. Criticizes conservative U.S. evangelicals and warns his audience of the influence of 'Christian fascism' and 'an American Taliban.' In part two of his series entitled 'The Virus of Faith,' Dawkins attacks the teaching of 'religion' to children, calling it child abuse. Dawkins compares Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, and calls the New Testament 'St. Paul's nasty, sado-masochistic doctrine of atonement for original sin
ikester7579 4 years ago
Sounds like the kettle calling the pot black. But then again, it's okay when you guys do it, correct? You and Dawkins should not dish out what you can't take (telling others to shut up). But then again that's how your type of belief works. If it ends up being the only voice, it's the only way it can win.
ikester7579 4 years ago
eh.....Darwin was ridculed and widely condemned when his ideas were published. His work gained acceptance when it was tested and found to fit with observation. It did not become the cornerstone of the entire field of life science by silencing others. lying prick.
why don't you know that? come on, you're older than me! Where the hell have you been!?
McMonster65 4 years ago
This was so funny, had to add it to my favorites. By the way. Every .1% difference in DNA is 3 million base pairs difference. So 99.8% means 6 millions things different between us and chimps. This is because there are over 40 billion base pairs in our DNA.
What evolutionists don't want you to know.
ikester7579 4 years ago
whats funny is fools like yourself being taken for a ride by the lying degenerates who made this video. you then help disseminate the lies and THEN pontificate about the dishonesty of scientists.
you are a disgrace.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Do I hear another whine?
ikester7579 4 years ago
no, your brain is so addled by the cult you have succumbed to that you are deaf to many many things. you don't hear whining- you also are incapable of hearing reason, honesty, integrity, insight.....
pathetic.
McMonster65 4 years ago
And I guess you are an evolutionist like Dawkins who believes that Christians are a virus on society. So when do you and him, plus all the others who think like you. Start your elimination of these Christian viruses? Hitler had some good ideas I hear. He liked the term: Survival of the fittest.
ikester7579 4 years ago
oh grow up you stupid little child. the attempt to link evolution and hitler is as honest as the day is long. If you don't understand the science, and clearly you haven't the faintest idea, the option to not comment would be wiser than these pathtic lies
there are many scientists who work in evolutionary biology who are better christians than you.
McMonster65 4 years ago
If you can't cite Dawkins accurately or honestly- and you can't- then why not do the decent thing and shut up. He nowhere said that CHRISTIANS are a virus. he has likend religious belief to a virus.
a simmilar distinction to saying flu is a virus versus people with the flu are a virus.
simple but not simple enough for you.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Is not Christian a religous belief? Dawkins said this for a broad coverage and not to single out any particular group. Example: If I say science lies, who all did I just cover that's involved in science? Everyone correct. But If I say evolutionists are liars. Then I single out a specific group.
ikester7579 4 years ago
why is this so difficult for you. are you that stupid? Are you that dishonest? Dawkins compared religious faith- with its blind unquwstioning belief in absurdities- to a virus. that is not the same as saying christians are a virus- we kill viruses- hitler killed viruses- dawkins is hitler...blah blah...
your lies are just sickening. go away and sin no more you pathetic little child.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Besides, by what right does Dawkins have to classify any group of humans as a virus? If he has determined this by science, then he is not very scientific now is he? But we both know how and why he said this. It's from the hate the evolution breeds into everyone who believes it. Just as you hate me for no other reason.
ikester7579 4 years ago
you are just bawling your stupidity. READ THIS SLOWLY THEN READ IT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN- REPEAT UNTIL IT SINKS IN.
DAWKINS DID NOT CALL CHRISTIANS A VIRUS. YOU ARE LYING.
McMonster65 4 years ago
"It's from the hate the evolution breeds into everyone who believes it"
You don't get out much do you? certainly not to a library or bookstore. you make these blanket absurd accusations then squeal like a stuck pig if anyone dares critisise your religion.
you haven't even the honesty to accurately quote Dawkins or retract when your LIE is pointed out.
pathetic
McMonster65 4 years ago
You should know what a cult is. You believe the same thing that Hitler did. Survival of the fittest, and natural selection.
ikester7579 4 years ago
you need a course in morals.
I have it on good authority that hitler believed that 2+2=4 My spies tell me you belive the same thing. you NAZI!!!!!
If you're older than me why do you have so much growing up to do?
McMonster65 4 years ago
Yep, here we go with more immaturity. Using these childish come backs.
ikester7579 4 years ago
More childish than the list of idiotic LIES on your godawful website? you haven't a shred of honesty or integrity. How fucking
DARE you pontificate to anyone! your list of comparisons of creation vs. evolution is such utter infantile deceit. paraphrasing huxley- I'd rather be descended from the lowest worm than use the tactics that come so naturally to you.
McMonster65 4 years ago
My my, such langauge. And all in the defense of what? Evolution. So what would you like to do next? Kill me maybe? It's what Hitler did with all those who "disagreed" with him. He believed in evolution as well. Do you actually believe that your view is the only view that should be allowed?
ikester7579 4 years ago
No, I belive that ideas should be tested as evolution has and creationinsm CAN'T.
I have no interest in killing anyone. I'd like you to learn some basic human decency and integrity ans stop your pathetic LIES about things you don't understand.
your droning on about hitler is utterly pathetic and contemptible. I've been an active anti fascist all my adult life and paid a price for it too.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Then evolution should no longer be a theory, and now be an absolute. So do you have evidence that makes evolution a absolute? If you do, you could win the Nobel Prize.
ikester7579 4 years ago
you simply don't get it do you. the theory consists of hypotheses based on observation. those hypotheses generate predictions that are tested against further observations. that's how the scientific method works. It doesn't deal in absolute truth. everything is questioned.
Didn't you read what I wrote about testing theories? Maybe you did and didn't understand.
McMonster65 4 years ago
I see science break their own rules everyday. So don't preach how holy and maral they are.
No absolutes? Well then you can't imply that someone is absolutely lying unless you can claim you have absolute proof to prove it. Which means that evolution will always be in question and up for debate whether you like it or not.
ikester7579 4 years ago
Also, what is it that I have to get? You seem to think that everyone has to believe as you do before they get it. But don't seem to understand that some people get it but will never believe it. Just as you will never get creation or ever believe it, and that's your choice. And I have made mine. So what is your problem, do you not believe in choice?
ikester7579 4 years ago
truth is not a democracy. what you don't get because you are simply too dishonest and stupid is that evolution has nothing to do with hitler. there is a mountain of evidence in 230,000 peer reviewed research journals that you have never bothered to read. and on the creationist side.....nothing.
McMonster65 4 years ago
LOL, would you have your journals peer reviewed by creation scientists? Just as much as we would have our peer reviewed by you guys. Those who "hate" creationists and all Christians will never give a non-bias view because they are to bias not to.
ikester7579 4 years ago
wrong wrong wrong. There was an creationist article published in the reviewed literature a few years back and the morons lept for joy! so please don't tell me you wouldn't relish an article on creationism in the science literature.
the article was subsequently rejected!
McMonster65 4 years ago
See, and rejected for what reason? Because it pointed to a creator, and not the Darwin god. rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the "creature" more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
ikester7579 4 years ago
Wrong wrong wrong. It was removed because the acting editor abused the peer review process and reviewed it himself and not anonymously.
jesus loves me! I've heard that you make him puke though.
McMonster65 4 years ago
O yes, more immature insults. How weak your arguement is that you just keep resorting to them.
ikester7579 4 years ago
what's insulting? you are a lying idiot- get over it
McMonster65 4 years ago
there are no creation scientists. there are scientists who referee work anonymously, the work gets questioned, corrected if necessary resubmitted, re reviewed and either rejected or eventually published. you don't know any of this do you?
McMonster65 4 years ago
ROBERT V. GENTRY is a nuclear physicist and a YEC. Now why would you say he is not a creation scientist? And what would you deem to use to descredit him that would be about his education, or scientific?
ikester7579 4 years ago
the fact that his fantasies about polonium halos has been debunked time and time and time again by geologists and physicists.
McMonster65 4 years ago
Do half lives lie? What is the half life of a polonium halo? A million years, or a few seconds? Sorry, the debunk was a lie as is the rest of evolution.
ikester7579 4 years ago
ok then name five of the geologists who have debunked this stuff. Just five, since you know they are lying.
McMonster65 4 years ago
what's his PhD on?
McMonster65 4 years ago
give some evidence for this "bias" like a list of a few papers submitted that were rejected for bogus reasons.
you can't
Lie #345834
McMonster65 4 years ago
Untrue,but to be reviewed in a scientific journal it first has to be science.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
you are wrong. I think that a basic understanding of the scientific method (which you lack) would be nice if you are going to discuss science. you can't discuss science any more than I can discuss ancient greek as you haven't the first clue what science is or what it does.
I belive in knowledge. I don't believe we are free to choose that 2+2=7
McMonster65 4 years ago
Okay, name off the method steps since you seem to have them memorized. And I'll give you examples of where you have not followed them here in your attempt to discredit creation from the very first post.
ikester7579 4 years ago
I have done. you responded with your hitler routine.
I'm bored with your lies and your stupidity.
McMonster65 4 years ago
You are done because you know I am right. You dodge me question about listing the method steps because you also know I'm right. Nice dodge though. Ignoring leads to ignorance. And so far you have made the perfect example of that since you ignore every question you cannot answer.
ikester7579 4 years ago
thats it I KNOW you are right. Cant begin to understand the basics of the method but YOU have overturned 150 years of work you don't understand.
A dodge btw would be answereing a question about lies with tripe about hitler.
you are a liar and a coward.
huxley again- I would rather be descended from the lowest worm than adopt the tactics of dishonest creationists.
McMonster65 4 years ago
"huxley again- I would rather be descended from the lowest worm than adopt the tactics of dishonest creationists."
According to what you believe, you are the after birth of a chimp. Which was the after birth of what ever came before it. But if you choose a worm, maybe you can start another theory on that.
ikester7579 4 years ago
you are simply howling your own ignorance. I could ask you to name one single solitary biologist who claims we came from chimps but I'll spare you the mental effort. There isn't one.
Evolutionary theory says humans and higher primates have a common ascestor. since you've refuted the theory shouldn't you know that?
McMonster65 4 years ago
Why don't you type in "99.9 chimp dna" and see how many websites claiming this show up. You see, we are 99.9% different between one another in our DNA. But now several sites are claiming that Chimps are 99.9% different. Which means there are chimps running around with our DNA.
ikester7579 4 years ago
Oh dear......the similarity in our DNA is evidence of common ancestry NOT that we evolved FROM chimps.
This is so elementary but you don't get it. Odd that....
McMonster65 4 years ago
How do you manage to tie your shoe laces?
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
You are worse and just the dirt from the ground.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
Why do you always come out with the same answer.I have never dodged your questions and neither has anyone on this board.McMonster65 has answered all your questions but you refuse to accept any evidence,calling it lies.Your final act is to end up blocking people when you are totally beaten.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
I can discredit an intelligent designer.You exist.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
"you will never get creation or ever believe it, and that's your choice"
It's not a question of choice. I reject it because there is not a shred of evidence to sustain it and there is a powerful natural explanation.
McMonster65 4 years ago
"It's not a question of choice. I reject it because there is not a shred of evidence to sustain it and there is a powerful natural explanation"
Yep, no natural explaination. Why would a God be needed of the explaination was natural? Why do you think that science does not have all the answers? Natural explainations does not get you all the answers.
ikester7579 4 years ago
If you believe we evolved from chimps then you do not understand evolution.
FEAROFFEET 4 years ago
I rejoice that evolution is up for debate- it shows the scientific method at work. The debate for you however is over. you sit in a pile of your own dung waving around a redundant book of bronze age folktales, brainlessly chanting "god did it". I think I'll stick with science if it's all the same.
McMonster65 4 years ago