Added: 2 years ago
From: AstronomySquared
Views: 3,225
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (76)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Sounds like a religion to me!

  • @Mogley52 I've read ever link you spammed, every one is either fake or debunked by science, creationism is not science.

  • @ThatCanadianGuy23 You didn't respond directly, possibly to get the last word. I shall do the same.

    Why don't you need to read a book or talk to a scientist? The reason you don't accept evolution is because of what you think of it. When you see reality, it makes much more sense than you think. If you actually took the time to do this, you would accept evolution.

  • @ThatCanadianGuy23 You should read a book or talk to a scientist.

  • @ThatCanadianGuy23 "I reject evolution on the basis of plenty of actual evidence"

    Who convinced you evolution was false? A creationist website? Shockofgod? These sources cherry-pick the evidence and literally lie to you. Creationist websites are definitely biased to their belief. You should talk to an evolutionary biologist about this. There is so much evidence for evolution that today 99% of scientists accept it. In reality, people don't accept it because it contradicts their beliefs.

  • @ThatCanadianGuy23 How any unbiased person can still reject evolution completely beats me. The evidence is overwhelming. Evolution theory has changed a lot since Darwin's time, but it is not in any way being shown to be false. I highly doubt 99% of scientists would accept a theory with no evidence. Sure, almost everybody in the 1st millennium thought the world was flat, but that's what the evidence appeared to be pointing to at the time. It's debate over until you can do this with evolution.

  • @ThatCanadianGuy23 I agree that evolution is not a fact, but it is supported by so much evidence it is a bit ridiculous to deny it.

  • @AtheismIsCorrect, that is incorrect. Evolution IS a fact. It is observed on a regular basis.

    You are conflating the concept of scientific theory with the colloquial.

    Keep in mind that scientific "theories" never become "fact." They are two distinct descriptions that are nonlinear. Apples and oranges, if you will.

  • @Mogley52 QUIT SPAMMING NOW

  • the 3 people that disliked this are asian and feel bad that they relate to crabs

  • alrighty heres a question for evolutioists can the body survive without the brain?and can the brain survive without the body?

    also this starter cell um how exactly is it it was able to survive under the elements? and "evolve "did it decide hmm i need to survive the elements so im going to evlove into something that can survive the elements? evolution takes millions of years dont it? so um long before it accomplished that i think the elements would have destroyed it.

    or did it plop into a big...

  • @HYE123666 First off, our evolve time, from an amphibian, to mammal, to Australopithecus, to Homo Sapiens, took over 7 MILLION YEARS. Now, I'm no professor, but after the extinction of the dinosaurs, we were able to thrive, basically anywhere we wanted to! So yes, our cell would've survived.

  • @HYE123666 Your first question assumes evolution happens one step at a time. This is false. The "starter cell" evolved naturally. As the organic material it contained served more functions, the cells with the most beneficial functions were selected by the environment. The cell didn't "decide" and it certainly wasn't aware of the gradual evolution. It's false to assume "the elements" would destroy every form of life. The ones that it wouldn't destroy, would be the ones selected for.

  • 2 people are unevolved.

  • The creature Carl was holding in his hand looks so cute ^^

  • I hope my children evolve to have the same voice as him.

  • Evolution IS fact

  • Carl Sagans proof of evolution is a fact....Crab faces resemble Warrior faces...What is he trying to say warriors evolved from crabs???

  • @Cherubim64 Holy shit, I hope this is a joke.

  • @Cherubim64 Stop saying that darwing is wrong and evolution is not a fact if you don't have any prove to say that. That way you will stop looking like an ignorant.

  • Darwin has another way than the Designer? Did Darwin create God? or his own god?The Creator of the Universe is not a biproduct of human speculation..The Creator of the Universe has the truth of the Universe and all creation..Darwins theory is flawed indeed..to the One Who Designed and Created....There is no need to change anything in the book of Genesis..to the Darwinian theory.....The Bible cannot be subjugated to all the scientific flaws....that i find in darwins theory...

  • @Cherubim64 If god created the world and in 7 days later create human, why is it that you can find a 4 billion years bacteria fosil, a 240 million years dinosaur fosil, and yet the oldest human fosil ever found is arround 160 thousand years old. If we can find a bacteria thats 4 billions years old why there isn't any trace of a human 4 billions years a go? There is a lot of prove of evolution in our own eyes to be a fact. There hasn't been any prove that god made human and the world in 7 days.

  • @rayyvnzla that does not provr evolution. Desides I have prof that cardon dating can not work. So how do you know that these fosils are that old?

  • @kg4bga Carbon/radioactive decay can only be off by so much. A creationist says that...

    *The decay rate is not the same

    *We don't know how active the creature was to begin with

    4.5 billion years is 750,000 times longer then 6000 years. There is no way that the decay rate can get 750,000 times faster nor can the energy in the creature increase 750,000 times.

  • @rayyvnzla Carbon dating methods are based on assumptions...Its a known fact that there are problems with carbon dating and radiometric dating methods.You might take those figures of being accurate but what assures you they are?Have you done these tests yourself?And how can you prove the validity of these tests?If you learn the facts about carbon dating and other dating methods you might find those figures are no where near as precise as you think...Bacteria fossil 4 billion years old??No way

  • @Cherubim64 Carbon dating is inaccurate, but not by millions of years. So you can assume that a bacteria fossil was created long, long, long before any human was. And other radiometric methods are much more accurate, some incredibly e.g. uranium-lead radiometric dating which has an error margin of 2-5% which in the case of a time span of a few billion years can be off to only a few million years. This concludes that earth was created many billions of years ago. Just sayin'

  • @Cherubim64 It is people like you that are causing the decline of the overall intelligence of America. You really believe in a book created by men in the desert over 2000 years ago? The book of Genesis is asinine, and so is God.

  • @jol223334 Intelligence existed way before any darwinian theory even came into existence..The darwinian theory of evolution and darwinian mechanism can't even explain intelligence...Its a dead theory and mythological ...Thats what your theory is a man made philosophy not a factual science. ..And theres no observed evidence to it as required by science..Speculations with no coherence. You believe in a man created 1800 philosophy.associated with marxism and freudism.

  • @Cherubim64 Here is the problem with religious people, you guys feel that science needs to have an explanation for everything right now at this very moment, and if science does not have an answer when you snap your fingers then the theory is incorrect. Here is the problem that is an argument from ignorance. Just because we don't have an answer for it now does not mean that there is no way to explain it. With the advancement of technology we will eventually explain intelligence.

  • @Cherubim64 Second, evolution has been observed in laboratories, so your argument that it has never been observed is false. Scientists make prediction based on genetic evidence, fossil evidence, etc... on what types of transitional forms will be found, and not be found. Third, the Biologists definition of evolution is the change in a gene pool population from generation to generation, by mutation, genetic drift, and natural selection. Once again all these things have been observed.

  • 2 people are creationists

    And I actually think that, not just a joke...

  • In a juvinile sense of humor. Carl Sagan's got crabs.

  • lmao @ 1:30

  • not a single advancement in technology is a product of macroevolution

  • its a great story about the warrior faces but it was probably just coincidence plus the fact that human beings are hard wired to look for patterns, thats why people think they see jeebus's face on slaces of toast

  • @bigmanoooo1 *slices

  • Sagan is my God!!

  • Dawkins dismisses this little tale as false in 'The greatest show on earth'. For him, the crabs carapaces resemble warriors faces by sheer coincidence and not artificial selection. And Dawkins is probably right given that it's his field of expertise.

    I still want to believe Sagan's explanation though!

  • I want to make love to his voice

  • @Richy15251 I'll agree there. he does have a way with words and having those short breaks and slight emphasis on the words.

  • I PITY THE FOOL

  • Comment removed

  • Here is a more in depth video from a biologists lecturing to Evangelicals ."Can an Evangelical Christian Accept Evolution? - Part 1"

  • Not only can they accept evolution, but they can interject ID into the mix and claim it as their own, as if they knew it all along...

  • If we understand basic chemistry and physics, we know that all of the atoms in the universe came from hydrogen and helium that formed after the 'Big Bang.'

    All the heavier elements came from fusion reactions within stars - and all the elements heavier than iron (Fe) came from 'supernova,' the explosion of big stars.

    So, the iron in our blood and the carbon in our brain all came from dead stars.

  • In fact, all the atoms on earth came from ancient stars that blew up billions of years ago.

    We are all walking, talking stardust --

    this cosmos become AWAKE,

    looking back at itself . . .

    Thank you, Carl.

  • Go Sagan!

  • The arrogance and ignorance of the previous comment astounds me.

  • What did it say, it was voted down out of existence

  • Oh, something about the arrogance and ignorance of scientists/atheists/etc.

  • ass

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more