Even DARWIN said Evolution is Refuted by the FACTS!

[TheFrustratedAtheist]

cheers, great vid. context is a beautiful thing.

[karlt10]

The stupidity of a 'God or no God' argument is that as more and more Canaanite mythology is discovered/uncovered, the true origins of 'God' become more and more clear.

'God' is nothing more than the evolution of El/Eli/Yahweh.

youtube/4aYaV72MmWo

[Sugardaddy501]

Bullshit statements; darwin nevere refuted his theories that has no evidence.

[TheFallibleFiend]

@Sugardaddy501 You are correct! Darwin never recanted and he never claimed the facts did not support evolution.

[lizazoon]

You can have intelligent design, or you can have a creator. What allmighty creator, would make the cell, the building block of life so complicated, when he has the ability to make it simple ? What car maker makes his spare parts complicated when he has a simpler way ?

[TheFallibleFiend]

@lizazoon There is no actual difference between an intelligent designer and a creator. They both invoke magic. But what has that to do with the topic of the video?

[synsei1]

Organs of extreme perfection and complication. -- To suppose that the eye, [] could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree. YET REASON tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly,

and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case;

[synsei1]

and if any variation or modification in

the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of

believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable

by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.

Charles Darwin in the Origin of Species.

See the power of quote mining !

There's nothing honest you can do to defend a dishonest claim.

[TheFallibleFiend]

@synsei1 That's the sum of it!

[synsei1]

I posted that comment before I saw the whole video (yes the connection was very slow). Then I noticed it was a bit redundant with your vid but I hope youdon't mind me posting the original for viewers to see it in context.

[TheFallibleFiend]

@synsei1 Nope. Appropriate comment. The point needs to be repeated, because the nonsense is being repeated ... endlessly.

[retrogamerist]

@synsei1 Indeed.

[amokaci38]

yes you are right, there is no "missing link found"

fossils proof that there has never been an avolution process. Bees have always been bees birds always birds apes always apes and humans always humans they never changed. Things like "the piltdown man" are deceits which darwinists admited after 60 years of fooling the public

[TheFallibleFiend]

You are very poorly informed. Scientists don't talk about "missing links," but about transitional fossils of which there are many.

You are ignorant of the "Piltdown" story and should refrain from discussing it until you know the facts - by which I mean the actual, COMPLETE facts, not just the half truths and falsehoods related on creationist web sites.

[amokaci38]

You are just lying. Its easy to lie. The Fact is that the piltdown man was a deceit by darwinists, and that Allah created the world

[TheFallibleFiend]

The fact is that you are an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. Nobody knows exactly WHO perpetrated the Piltdown hoax. However, it was evolutionary scientists who proved it was a fake - not the incompetent creationists. You just don't want to do any actual homework, because it's easier be intellectually lazy and shoot your mouth off (or your fingers).

[patrickledford420]

@amokaci38 lol you forget that noone uses that as evidence and your forgetting about the thousands of other fossils just in human evolution THOUSANDS think about it atavisms, homologies, phylogonies, genetics, fossils there is too much evidence to denie it and if you do your just an ignorant ass

[ikvsabre]

and idiots have always been and will always be idiots... like you

[TheFallibleFiend]

Your comment is irrelevant to the video. The truth of evolution doesn't bear on the existence or non-existence of God(s). Neither the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics say anything about the possibility of God(s). Most reasonable people would not agree about what the Bible has "predicted."

[cypher955]

well...it won't let me post anymore

[TheFallibleFiend]

I don't know what causes that. Sometimes it rejects my posts, I change something and then it accepts it.

[cypher955]

you see they found remains of humans from 2 million years ago...so that would be a little problem in the evolutionary theory because if they found human remains from 2 million years ago and it didn't evolve into something else then that's a very damaging thing for the whole theory, that basically debunks the evolutionary theory because over millions of years, it should have evolved into something else but it didn't

[DonsonJack]

@ Cypher, could u give link to a source for your claims.

Besides, being dont necessarily evolve to completely something else, evolution is not a ladder which u keep climbing all the time.

Idea that, if we find something which has pretty much kept the way it was for millions and millions years, would somehow invalidate evolution theory. Is silly and wrong.

[cypher955]

so some things stay the same and some things evolve? ok, but you realize that the evolutionary theory contradicts nature...right? animals don't help each other evolve, they compete for food and kill each other...evolutionary theory has this distorted viewpoint that animals are some how helping other animals survive...it's absurd...every decade we lose species of plant life and species of animals yet over millions of years we created more species than lost? RIDICULOUS !!!

[TheFallibleFiend]

They don't "stay the same," since there is still genetic drift. Populations can evolve if there is some kind of selection pressure, but the pressure is not so great as to wipe them all out.

Evolutionary theory does not "contradict nature." Some animals DO help other animals to survive. It's called symbiosis. Check out clownfish and sea anemone.

[TheFallibleFiend]

"... because over millions of years, it should have evolved into something else but it didn't"

I don't know what you're talking about. There are no "human" remains from 2 million years ago.  Who is the "they" that claims to have found them? Also, no part of the ToE predicts that populations MUST evolve into something else. You're arguing against a theory you don't understand.

[cypher955]

I found a BBC article that said that they found human remains that were 2 million years old...my question is why would it stay human, why not evolve into something even greater than a human

[TheFallibleFiend]

Evolution doesn't say that things evolve into greater things. Populations sometimes evolve. In this case, those earlier humans would probably be recognizable as human, but they were also quite different in appearance. They *did* evolve. They are different species. Homo "human" is a genus, not a species.

[cypher955]

ok, here my out...I've studied evolution and I think it's bullshit...here is what scientists say and my argument against it...scientists say that there was a homo ergaster that evolved into homo georgicus which evolved into homo antecessor ...yada yada yada then one day evolved into homo sapiens which is what we are now...That's what the "scientists" say...continued

[cypher955]

continued...here is what I think is the truth...God put many hundreds of species of humans on earth...africans, homo ergaster, caucasians, homo antecessor, homo georgicus,  and a long list of different humans...what appears to be evolution is not evolution but instead survival of the fittest...caucasians, africans, hispanics, aboriginals, asians are the surviving species of humans...we killed off the other species and we are the only ones left

[cypher955]

continued...to me that makes more sense and it actually holds water if you look at other mammals and look at what is happening today...species aren't multiplying, they are becoming extinct and if you look at plant life, it's also occuring to plant life...we aren't gaining new species of plants, we are losing species and that's why they built a big warehouse to store seeds to try to prevent all plants from becoming extinct

[TheFallibleFiend]

Species are currently becoming extinct faster than they are expanding. That has happened before. Evolution doesn't guarantee survival. Your explanation doesn't explain anything.

[TheFallibleFiend]

"God put many hundreds of species of humans on earth."

Except that doesn't explain anything - like the timeline. Here's an idea - and I'm not trying to be mean - but it is very blunt: you haven't actually "studied" evolution. You've rushed through stuff without actually trying to understand it. Understanding science requires patience.

[cypher955]

no, there's no need to spend my life studying a theory that makes no sense

[TheFallibleFiend]

Most things in science and math don't make sense until AFTER we study them.

[cypher955]

yes, things in math and science always make sense you retard...just because you can't understand them doesn't mean it doesn't make sense...Evolution doesn't make sense from a scientific standpoint because it has no basis in science...hahahaha...if evolution were true, we wouldn't need a warehouse in antartica that stores plant seeds because plants we always be evolving into new species but they aren't !!! We are in fact losing species every decade

[TheFallibleFiend]

I didn't say I didn't understand them. I said they don't make sense until you AFTER you study them. Evolution does make sense, but you have already admitted that you have no intention of trying to understand it.

"because plants we always be evolving"

You are once again dismissing a theory you do not understand.

[cypher955]

ok, for all you evolutionists, how long does it take for an animal to evolve into something else

[TheFallibleFiend]

Individual animals do not evolve, populations evolve. There is no fixed rule for how quickly a population becomes sufficiently different that members of the one set can be considered "something else" from other set. Sometimes there is rapid diversification; other creatures remain relatively stable for long periods.

[cypher955]

you know that's a load of shit

[TheFallibleFiend]

"you know ..."

You're arguing against a theory that you don't understand and have no honest intention of learning about.

[cypher955]

why are evolutionists so damn wordy, why can't you just say what you mean without going on and on about it...I'm looking for evidence that God doesn't exist and Richard Dawkins claims he's got lots of evidence of it but yet doesn't say what it is...why is that

[TheFallibleFiend]

Evolution has nothing to do with the existence of God. It's extremely unlikely that you're looking for evidence of anything. It seems VERY likely that you are attributing rumor to RD and not anything he has actually said or written. Why is that?

[cypher955]

I went and watched Richard Dawkins interview and he spent 9 mins trashing religious people instead of talking about the evidence that he has

[TheFallibleFiend]

A nine minute segment of what? Did he say he had proof there was no God? He has strong evidence for evolution - the same that's available to the rest of us. I'm not aware that he says he has evidence there is no God; rather, all I've ever heard him talk about is the lack of evidence in favor of it.

[mikesinner69]

Most creationist can barely read their own bible. lol

[notNEWW]

hi more video's about evolution too come so plz subscribe. i'm still going through an evolution series but will progress to abiogenesis.

[zacqt]

Perhaps whats more important then the line for line in his books is rather whats not written.-eg...1. X christian pastor,2. his anger at God for the death of his daughter,

3. the change of attitude on his death bed. When cult leaders like darwin change their belief @ the 11th hour, why don't fundamentalist evolutionist stop and concider why.? Simple there's only 2 options: 1. big bang- Fluke or 2. Design -Creator there is no option 3, those that fear accoutability prefer option 1.

[TheFallibleFiend]

I'm not aware that Darwin was ever a pastor, though he did study for the clergy.

Can you cite a specific reference in Darwin's writings where he discusses his anger at God?

3. Darwin didn't have a "change of attitude on his death bed." This is a pious lie that was circulated shortly after his death by a fanatic who wasn't even there.

There are other options, but your whole statement makes no sense. You appear impervious to logic or even basic fact-checking.

[zacqt]

Why would an antichrist/atheist conceed

to being angry at God who apparently doesn't exsist-impervious to logic-hellow. Why do the diciples of Darwit & Dawks

hate the idea that darwin might have got a bit scared on his death bed.? where you there? do your fantiscy facts come from the church of God hating atheist?. Most atheist hate the God they deny. Very few hate budha, Dawkins is the equiv of benny hinn,-just making money from the gullable.The Truth was never popular

what happened to JC?

[TheFallibleFiend]

"Why would an antichrist/atheist conceed"

So your only "evidence" that Darwin was angry at god is your own bias and assertion?

"idea that darwin might have got a bit scared on his death bed.?"

It's not a matter of hating the idea. Whether Dawkins recanted on his deathbed is irrelevant to the evidence for the theory of evolution. But the fact is there is no evidence that he recanted and strong evidence that the person who claimed that was lying.

[TheFallibleFiend]

The Lady Hopewho claimed to have witnessed Darwin recant was not at his bedside during the recantation. We know this because Darwin's daughter WAS there and said the Lady was not present. She lied. Many Christians like to talk about the truth, but they don't have regard for it.

[mikesinner69]

Some people change their mind on their death beds. Darwin lived in a very archaic time. Sometimes when I see hoe religion fogs peoples minds I still feel we live in those times.

[TheFallibleFiend]

Very true. However, it's important to know that what Darwin did is irrelevant to the current evidence we have for evolution.

And while Darwin's opinion is irrelevant, it's an interesting observation on creationism that so many of them pass this unfounded rumor about as if it were fact.

[shedeviltj]

Great video. I am a paleontology student and I have read all of Darwin's books at least once. I am so glad to see someone else saying what I have to tell people all the time. I hope to see more vidoes like this in the near future.

[CBALLEN]

If I was trying to make a new breed I would decide what I wanted and didn't want.I would take the dogs I wanted to breed and then inbreed and line breed until I got what I wanted and they stared to breed to conformity,this would entail breeding out the information that I didn't want so my pure breeds would have less information than the dogs I started with.This is what happened to everything living.

[CBALLEN]

A pure breed dog has a weaker immune system because of this,mongrels have better immune systems because they have more information.Man started out brilliant,he was not a grunting cave man.We are just copies of copies,we have been weakened over the years not made better.I know there have been periods when people had short life spans in the past,but most of that was because of diseases for the most part.People could take hardships better than we can today.

[TheFallibleFiend]

What you are saying is still not relevant to my video.

Most of the rest of what you say is either irrelevant or wrong.

In any case, it's not relevant to the video.

[CBALLEN]

I breed dogs and the goal is to breed out information for things that are deemed flaws.Every time that my dogs breed,they only have the dog that I'm breeding for.I've never been surprised yet.

[TheFallibleFiend]

"I breed dogs and the goal is to breed out information for things that are deemed flaws."

I do not see the relevance of your message to my video; however, of course you are trying to breed out flaws - that's because you're trying to maintain the breed standard, not develop a new breed.

[AntiVenomFangX]

Can you please tell me what these facts are?

[TheFallibleFiend]

Explained in video.

[flylike1]

just look at the findings in the 150 years since Darwin's publication. ground-breaking, and all of it favors evolution

[Greig1424]

there is millions of creationist that have not even read the bible or know anything about what is in the bible

[Brianswers]

The Atheist Experience show had a caller use this quote mine. They made him read the entire page. lol.

[amberview30]

Well, said. I recently read it in the past year and it was sparked by the misquotes by creationists. At least something good comes out of it. It gets more people to read and actually get all the context and the actual words that were said.

[Largo64]

Excellent video. The title is a little misleading, but then I, an atheist, did a video called "Why Don't Atheists Just Shut Up?" It surely tests whether or not people who commented actually watched the video!

I agree with you completely. I was going to say, and now I will just add, that even if, as some creationists insist, Darwin had recanted his hypothesis, the theory, as evidence has expanded it over the last 150 years, does not require Darwin's belief to be viable.

[TheFallibleFiend]

"... the theory, as evidence has expanded it over the last 150 years, does not require Darwin's belief to be viable."

Boogers! I had meant to make that point as well, but got to rambling and forgot. tx for bringing it up.

[TheBigHo111]

I'm a new sub. Great vid. *****

Look forward to more.

[lawilson200]

Well said! Sadly, creationists are far too reliant on quotemining books for their sources.

But, you also said that many modern scientists have not read Darwin. That too is true and I will be one to admit that I did not read Darwin until it was 20 years after I graduated from College. Then again, I have not read Lyell either and he is closer to my field of study. Lyell and Darwin has historical importance, but the sciences they started has long since advanced.

Good video.

[slipcurve]

If one wants to learn of evolution and wants to read only one book, one should not read origin of species. Instead one should choose something more modern. Evolution has come a long way since Charles Darwin.

That was the only point I wanted to add. Great video. I don't understand why you don't have more subs.

[wolfwing1]

Best book I've read so far has to be "Your inner Fish." it looks over all the stuff in our bodies and other animals in light of evolution. :> like we have the genes for many many more scent receptors then we actually use, our smell could be much greater if they went active..:> ANd DOLPHINS that can't smell period, have around the same ammount and none are active...what use does a dolphin have or scent receptors if they never smelled in the past as a different animal?

[Dariusstarkus]

great video;]

[aliboygirl123]

yeh he did