Added: 2 years ago
From: sapiensape
Views: 51,816
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (662)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @iTouchNoDrugs "Bring me a non-theoretical Geological column."

    Go to the Grand Canyon and see it for yourself.

    "Bring me more than just the fossil record..."

    Bring me more than the Bible.

    Genetics confirms the fossil record, which is packed with hundreds of transitional forms, so enough of your bullshit.

    C14 is only used for dating organic material less than 45,000 years old.

    You display a prejudicial and warped understanding of the topics. You can't debunk what you misunderstand.

  • @iTouchNoDrugs "Sedimentary rock is created by high water pressure. As in, enough to float a Navy Destroyer in. That amount of water, all over the earth. Sounds like a flood to me."

    What??? A destroyer displaces less than 10,000 tons - literally a drop in the ocean.

    You clearly have a flawed grasp of basic physics, hydrology, geology and biology. You present false or inaccurate data. You don't understand science history or the process. Your "rebuttals" are full of inaccuracies and slanders.

  • @iTouchNoDrugs "#Charles Walcott. He hid his findings."

    Even if he did commit fraud (which only creationists believe) any inaccuracy from 100 years ago has long been corrected. The Burgess Shale is being excavated and new fossils are being discovered as we speak. None of them falsify natural selection or speciation.

    Punctuated Equilibrium only addresses the rate at which speciation occurs. It does NOT falsify macro-evolution OR Natural Selection!

    Stop using Discovery Institute talking points.

  • @itouchnodrugs..where your theory came from???.. try to research your theory..when where the evolutions started???and ended..are you really sure that darwin is correct in his theory?? ???....yeah we all know that man hav no contentment in life like darwin and you also...do you agree that you came from a apes,orangotan etc.darwin only concluded his story about monkeys...he have no strong evidence

  • @mozzymozzy01 Oh, I'm not a Darwinist, bro! D: Macro-evolution is much different than Micr-evolution, which is really just adaptation, like a species developing better eyesight because they love in poor lighting conditions.

  • you dont really need any proof that its a myth >_<

    a child can see it.

  • There is PLENTY of archeological, historical and Scientific proof that proves things in the Bible actually happened! The universe was created, we were created, there IS a creator! Many prophecies in the Bible have come true, many are going to happen, it's only a matter of time! Repent now while Gods hand is stretched out, for when it's not, it's too late!

  • @TheBook0fEli Many prophecies in the Bible have come true!!! Really? So have all of Jules Verne's prophecies. Doesn't prove anything!

  • @gateman42 It proves the Bible was right, are you too stupid to see that?

  • @TheBook0fEli And Pascal's Wager to start with? You seem to claim a bunch of things but don't provide specifics. That's clear old fashioned bullshit right there, boys and girls. Let's keep it on subject here, shall we. It's a global flood that never happened. I can prove that just by examining one rock formation. What do you have that refutes that? And be specific, because, I will be. Very.

  • Eh, what happened to all the other humans with boats on earth at the time of the flood?

  • @timchilli didn't you read it? this video actually disproves the noah's ark myth.

  • @cuagmirag I know.

  • A Christian literalist response to this video: AAAH! AHHH! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA­AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA­AAH! God will smite you for this. You're going to hell! Plug your ears children. Don't listen!

  • @Samael51760 Rofl, I was rather intrigued by the video. Why is it that Darwinists only offer insults to the other side? =S

    ...I'm a Christian and Creationist. :O

  • @iTouchNoDrugs But creationism isn't even a science. If they have separation of church and state they need separation of church and science too.

  • And yet Darwinism, Neo-Darwinism, and Evolution always "adapts" to fit scientific needs.

    Now, let's get on with the logic. 6,000 something years ago, communicating over long distance took years. Literally. Years to create, translate, create again, and send to another kingdom. However, since books were ridiculously expensive to make, most stories were told by word-of-mouth. We all know what that does to a story. It changes and disfigures it. Now, how could the Aztecs, Myans, Cherokee, Souix...

  • @iTouchNoDrugs and Apache, et cetera, all share the same story? Even the Asian and Eurasian cultures share a rather similar account of a worldwide flood. How, then, without proper means of communication, let alone large boats to traverse the ocean, did these stories become to popular throughout the world? Just mull this over, and let me know what you think. Your opinion is your opinion, after all. =]

  • @iTouchNoDrugs How did all these civilizations live through a global flood to share this story? I thought only noah's family survived. That makes no sense at all. The Native American Indians were living here at the end of the ice age and massive flooding was common for thousands of years. The end of the ice age more than likely caused all kinds of climatic disasters by changing ocean currents and the flow of the jet streams. Just mull that over. They can't all be right.

  • @gateman42 Imagine, for a second, the Biblical world-wide flood actually happened. So then after they land on Mount Ararat, they spread out, all sharing the same story. However, over time, people forget or add pieces of the story due to faulty memory. Then, someone else tailors the story to fit what they think happened. Thus, after a while, nearly every culture shares a similar story. This is how it would have happened. I hope this helps explain what I was driving at. :D

  • @iTouchNoDrugs And, to take this further, if the flood was indeed just a local flood, they would have traveled by land. ;P

  • @iTouchNoDrugs How could Noah's family share that story with anyone without inbreeding to make a family to share it with. And where did Noah's son's find a wife??? Or did they just fuck their mother??? Your whole argument just fell apart!!! And adding pieces to a story is just how the bible got this far. And what your driving at just drove you off a cliff.

  • @gateman42 if they took other families with them, its possible.

  • @kisamakara What the fuck version of the bible do you have? The one you printed for yourself? Did you make it up as you went along, just like the christians?

  • @gateman42 who is you? dumb noob. what on earth are you talking about? you go away and study these things from various sources until then you can keep ''guessing'' and make any accusations to whoever you want.

  • @gateman42 noob check if you are a retard before calling someone else fool. you wanna start a slagging match biatch? keep it to the subject you know youre losing the argument when you cannot present data or information and resort to denial and no answers instead of providing any level analysis. seem like youre full of hate or just scared something you desperately dont want to be true turning out to be so. present info and data and analysis instead of yes/no garbage noob.

  • @iTouchNoDrugs How did all these civilizations live through a global flood to share this story? I thought only noah's family survived. That makes no sense at all. The Native American Indians were living here at the end of the ice age and massive flooding was common for thousands of years. The end of the ice age more than likely caused all kinds of climatic disasters by changing ocean currents and the flow of the jet streams. Just mull that over. They can't all be right.

  • @iTouchNoDrugs of course evolution has "evolved" since darwin, it's how science works, the more evidence you get the more you polish a theory (or refute it, which is not the case). and they may be many flood myths but the fact is that the one featured is said to have ocurred 3000 bc, at that they were already great civilation and yet none has abruply disappeared during that period. besides the idea of noah putting 2 million species in a boat is ridiculous.

  • @cuagmirag So seriously re-hashing a theory just to gain popularity with the scientific community counts as science? Oh, the days when science was honest research and publication are long gone. =/

  • noah ark is fake story probably copied from other beliefs and if a great flood it probably happened close to when life on earth started

  • 142.8 METRES LONG THAT IS

  • TAKE A LOOK AND SEE THIS "all the knowledge" VISIBLE ON GOOGLE EARTH

    142.8 METRES

  • This made up of some fool, talking from there ass ..NOAH ARK IS TRUE ITS IN EAST-NORTH TURKEY, sci-tifick, logigal,accurat,wd all mesurments...go c or u know an ur , on d side of satan, delibretly leading d sheep astray.....

  • The Floods a true story ! It is It is !!! And I'm going to stand here and stamp my feet and scream until you admit it is !!!! Stamp Stamp Stamp !! Boo Hoo Hoo !

  • @Hurricane423 What do you mean the scientific community boycotted Velikovsky? I mean compared to say Muslims boycotting the Satanic Verses? How did they boycott him? Most of the experts in the relevant fields didn't agree with his conclusions. What were they supposed to do, give him a Nobel Prize? Velikovsky's book wa son the desk of St Albert Einstien when he died. Wow I guess that means I should believe! Sheesh

  • @jessieeeperez How do you know that you, as a Christain, are not the own failing God's test? If I was God would I want to spend eternity with irrational toadies that believe in something as fowl as eternal punishment for non-declaration of love? I mean who wants to hang out with immoral sicophants? Perhaps you are the chaf

  • You are very sure of yourself consider there is no information about this "Ark" bar a few vague lines in the Bible. Zero So the Ark was comparably to a modern cruise ship? Did it have electricity, water purifiers, a huge maintenance staff, fridges, freezers, modern navigation as well as the space and vetenarian expertise to keep millions of species alive? I think "it was made up" is a far less problematic explanation of Ark Story.

  • @ma049 According to your very own Darwinistic beliefs, there were MUCH less diseases floating around back then. Thus, people lived longer. Thus, Noah and his sons had a good hundred years or so to build this boat.

  • It's sad how you went thru some trouble just to give "proof" when nobody can explain the word of God is false I pray every night for people like you for Jesus to give you understanding and hope one day for him to open your eyes to the truth god is not author of confusion, it's not rocket science

  • @jessieeeperez It is sad how you fail to believe in Zeus!

  • @jessieeeperez i can expaiin the word of god is false, beause as an adult i do not believe in magic,and that is what god equates to (god= magic skydaddy that does not have to follow the l natureal laws of universe.

  • @mandrillx And yet your own beliefs CHANGE and HIDE evidence in support of the other side. That's a double standard, Monkey Boy D:

  • they found the ark remains in turkey take this video down masher.

  • @kisamakara Yeah... The numbers say it couldn't have happened. Finding a decayed ship in the ground isn't really proof of anything

  • @kisamakara hahahah the ark found in turkey is turning out to be very dubious. (I would have thought the photo of the so called ark room with the hey still on the ground would have been a dead give ) see wnd.com and the so called carbon dating by an unknown lab in iran(name of lab never releast nor has any of of data been releast to be peered reviewed.

  • @mandrillx well its the usual both religions claiming this and that to justify their beliefs, the important thing is human life does not depend on proving the location of the ark. we''ll all find out when we die if its true, its just not a big deal to prove who is right on this the world has more urgent things to deal with.

  • @kisamakara Exactly who are "they"? And I hope you are not basing this 'discovery' on a photo of a boat-shaped rock formation which was first seen in pre-WWII aerial photographs taken by biplanes! The area has been extensively explored many times since then and NO ancient wooden boat parts have ever been discovered - despite what fanatical believers keep trying to persuade the ignorant with. Fanatic pseudo-Christians are full of junk beliefs based on hearsay, myth and general lies.

  • @pretjim2011 turkish scientists did, also found something similar to a large tiedown for a ship too. btw what are you basing your decision on. ill find you the link of the video which i thought was useful give sometime, im busy postgrad.

  • @pretjim2011 youtube.com/watch?v=Eo9MQLYrR1­8&feature=related

  • @kisamakara link not working, whats about?

  • @Hurricane423 "Let's just say I like to stick long sharp pins in the balloons of tradition."

    Science doesn't live and die by tradition or dogma or speculation, especially not from internet amateurs. Science doesn't have a Pope and it doesn't "shut out any opposition". It's a process. That's all.

    He who has the data, wins. But scientists are just people and sometimes radical new ideas are treated with hostility, like plate tectonics, but eventually the facts will turn the tide.

    Got any facts?

  • @Terncote Science was once censored by the pope.

    He who has the data that both sides may interpret the same exact way wins. Everyone has a different definitions of facts, mate. =S

  • "Proof?" I have no proof, but I am free to speculate. Darwin sure as hell did, and all sciences shut out any opposition. Velikovsky's, "Worlds in Collision", was boycotted by the the scientific community because his suggestion that eons of catastrophic earth changes would have wiped out any primitive species. Funny thing, when Einstein died, there was an open copy of Velikovsky's book on his desk. Go figure. Let's just say I like to stick long sharp pins in the balloons of tradition.

  • whahahahahaha what a load of crap .

  • @wildtatz Are you 5 years old?

  • @InternetDarkLord yep and already speak 3 languages !! ain,t that something

  • @wildtatz How many languages can you proofread?

  • InternetDarkLord; neither is there any proof for anything you say.

  • @Hurricane423 I said you have no proof, and you do not. Where is proof of rings like Saturn or a global flood? If you have no proof, I was proven right!

  • I'm still waiting for the "proof" it didn't happen as the (video?) claims. As for a global flood being impossible because of atmospheric pressure, it would be no different than sea level now. Sea level would be whatever level the sea is at the time. Rain wasn't all there was according to the Bible. Fountains of the deep and from above suggest the Earth had a massive amount of water in and around it. The Earth could have had rings of ice like Saturn. Never say never. Anything is possible.

  • @Hurricane423 There is no evidence for anything you say.

  • @Hurricane423 There's a huge difference between what is possible and what is probably. Based on the science of quantum mechanics I can walk thru walls (ref H-bar effects), but I'd have to wait for the equivalent age of the universe for all the particles of my body to "tunnel" through. See where I'm going? Now, as far as proof? The Opeche Shale is quite elegant and the easiest for the layman to understand. It's all about heat and time. So, are you game to learn something new?

  • How do you think bacteria or amoeba survived?

  • Boring text.... make a tweet not a vid nexttime!

  • Just like travelling to a distant planet where you need more and more fuel and you use fuel just to carry fuel so that it becomes impossible the ark would've needed many other ark's to carry the food required for the animals. An elephant alone needs to eat between 200-500 lb of vegetation a day. And an old guy living in the desert would not be able to collect the billions of insects either? Or do we not count them? Someone take the nukes off America until they stop teaching this nonsense!

  • @SocialistRevolution7 It really doesn't take much thought to come up with the idea that maybe he didn't take full grown animals. He may have took babies that didn't need much food and therefore didn't take up much room either.He didn't spend his time gathering animals either.. the same God that created the animals could have them all ready to "get on board" when it was time...

  • @candaceplmr

    A global flood is impossible because the amount of water vapor in the air(humidity) from the evaporating water 24 hours a day 40 days and 40 nights would make air UN-breathable! not to mention the increased atm. pressure from it would even collapse his lungs :D. add to that the death of all plant life .

  • @candaceplmr Fine, I'll grant you the baby point. Where did the raw materials for the boat come from? Also you point is invalid when it's illogical. You must operate within the laws of the universe you can't use 'superpowers' to try and prove a point but that's by-the-by when we discover that Noah was indeed told to collect the animals, no super power here I'm afraid to tell you; "two of every sort shalt THOU bring unto the ark to keep alive with THEE"

  • @SocialistRevolution7 What if the animals got on the ark and all went to sleep, or hybernated for the duration of the flood, certainly God could do that. And noah only needed to bring food for his family, not even God could have simple sustained them also on an empty stomach. Also all the animals could have been babies. Noah didn't gather the animals the Bible says they simple all went into the ark, God can direct animals.

    We can't place limits on what God can do.

  • @RespectMyHate Now that's just daft. I grant, some animals wouldn't have the need for food during the supposed time period but all the other animals would've died if placed into some sort of hypnotic hibernation trance like state. Away from the animals, the universe is governed by a set of rules, these can't broken by a strange being especially just for you to prove a point to yourself, it's an illogical stance for you to take.

  • Actually it turns out he was supposed to bring all food on-board...."And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring unto the ark to keep them alive with thee...and take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shalt be food for thee and for them."

  • @RespectMyHate Actually it turns out he was supposed to bring all food on-board...."And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring unto the ark to keep them alive with thee...and take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shalt be food for thee and for them."

    Now how did he get all the food without people getting suspicious? And how did he store it in one of the hottest places on Earth?

  • @SocialistRevolution7 Ummmmm....don't cruise ships have thousands of passengers that eat thousands of pounds of food ... plus luggage and furniture and mechanics that make the boat function. The ark was in perfect proportion to the boats that are built today...Don't underestimate the power of God or a good boat.

  • @inky2244 the largest cruise ship known holds about 3,600 people. The ark would have been able to hold over 10 million species, not including dinosaurs , it would be inpossible to house all of them on a floating ark.., but i see your jumping to the magic of skydaddy excuse.

  • @inky2244 The thing is cruise ships stock up on food when they dock at the several different locations they plan to attend on that journey. Anyway with regards to feeding it was one guy and his family, where did they have the time? There's many other factors to take into account and when you do the mathematics of it all the only conclusion that one can come to is that it's a lovely story, but that's all. And what makes this religion right? What about the others?

  • "And the bible is _always_ right" k, prove it all.

  • @SaltNPepperish "...also other blogs on the site against evolution, making points so far not refuted."

    You haven't made any points which have not been roundly and repeatedly refuted. No creationist has. No creationist blogger has. No creation "scientist" has.

    You just don't get it do you? You don't need to refute evolution to support the idea of a creator god. All you end up doing is looking more and more stupid.

    Evolution doesn't disprove god, only the ridiculous fairytale called Genesis!

  • @Terncote Bring me a non-theoretical Geological column. Bring me more than just the fossil record, 95.3% of which, I will be so bold as to remind you, consists of CLAMS. No transitional links. You've got no sound evidence either. Don't give me the radio-carbon dating lecture, either. Rock formed 30 years ago at the Mount Saint Helens eruption was tested by Evolutionists. It dated as 14 million years old, give or take a few in certain areas. RC-14 is way off and is complete rubbish. e_O

  • @SaltNPepperish "See, it's completely news to evolutionists that science must be based on observation."

    The "news" is, why do you suddenly give a shit about science?

    There is not a single observation that supports a global flood, a genetic bottleneck like the Ark or the distribution of all earth's species, plant and animal, from Mount Ararat a mere 4,00 years ago.

    Zero! Got it?

    There are millions data points, confirming evolution by natural selection.

    Now kindly STFU!

  • @Terncote I wonder how sedimentary strata has been found all over the earth's surface in a consistent layer covering the planet. CONSISTENT. Created at roughly the same time, nearly the same chemical makeup, and it's a complete shell of sorts.

    ...Sedimentary rock is created by high water pressure. As in, enough to float a Navy Destroyer in. That amount of water, all over the earth. Sounds like a flood to me. =O

  • COMIC-SANS!.. We meet again...

  • Rather than keep arguing, I will just refer people to this blog; argue there in the comments with the points made, if you can refute them. Youtube will not allow me to post a link so it's in parts, go to WordPress, blogger Jitskesez, blog DAWKINS IS A FRAUD, also other blogs on the site against evolution, making points so far not refuted.

  • @SaltNPepperish "Rather than keep arguing," How about you respond to my data, rather than run away like the creationist coward you are? Explain the heat and time problem that the mythical flood represents.

  • @Terncote i give up Terncote, you just cant argue with them. They can somehow accept it as logical to take a system (science) as a tool to prove itself wrong... And somehow thats ok. its like, "the world is as i see it, and my twisted misinformation is how i prove it so, therefore it must be true"

  • @SaltNPepperish "There is no DNA evidence that supports, or even seems to support, evolution by natural selection."

    That is quite simply desperate bullshit. You have no grounds to claim impossibility. You are just pulling stats out of your ass. Prove it is impossible or STFU. Don't just say it is impossible - PROVE IT.

    Everything you say cannot happen, already has happened and the DNA proves it. Jehovah is the hoax and the lie. Stop feeling like a silly dupe and start thinking.

  • @Terncote a good watch -- watch?v=dK3O6KYPmEw

    thats the DNA evidence that quite clearly supports evolution by natural selection.

    though it doesnt matter, when you attempt to argue logically with magic, magic will always win.

  • @paradoxb3 this will of course be disregarded by anyone who doesnt agree with it, because acknowledging it gives it merit to possibly be true.

    science - "here is the evidence, what conclusions can we draw from it?"

    creation - "here are the facts, what evidence can we find that supports it?"

  • @paradoxb3 Feel free to read through this discussion, it's been the evolutionists who have denied evidence and made up facts as they went along. When I said human mitochondrial DNA research agreed with what Genesis says about human origins, the results of that scientific research were denied and ignored; when I pointed out using Statistics that you can't evolve DNA, I got told whoppers like, well it happened because it happened. LOL

  • @paradoxb3

    You know, I love the fact that you're trying to fool us by using the terms Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution synonymously. Nice try, mate. Natural selection allows for Micro-evolutions, which is actually just adaptation - this is an actual scientific law. Macro-evolution is NOT natural selection.

  • @iTouchNoDrugs you know, i love the fact that you're making up stuff. i never used either of those terms in any of my comments.

  • @Terncote Not even hard numbers of statistics and probability or the total absence of any article anywhere that describes evolution at the DNA level of anything here, gives you a clue that you believe a myth.

    People who believe in millions of nonexistent common ancestors and missing links, are not the intellectual superior of people who believe in just one invisible God.

  • @Terncote It seems most Darwinists pull statistics out of their ass as well, and them create graphs that range in the parts per million and hope people only notice the steep drops or inclines. Oldest trick in the booooook. Oooooh. :3

  • @HISTRUTHBEKNOWN "Therefore, nobody saw mindless and lifeless chemical elements collaborating to contrive a simple self-replicating cell or its transmutation into all the life forms that ever lived."

    Therefore? Know what it means?

    Nobody saw Jehovah make the sun and the stars.

    Oh I get it. This is another of your double standards of proof and principle. Science must directly observe unique events from billions of years ago but theists only have to look in their book of stories for proof.

  • @Terncote See, it's completely news to evolutionists that science must be based on observation. They have NO IDEA that when they're discussing origins, they're not discussing science in any way at all. It's *metaphysics.* Darwin's book was published in the Library category of Natural PHILOSOPHY.

  • @SaltNPepperish Evolution is very well scientific. If you took up the time to actually find out what the fuck Evolution is, you'll see that it is science. Just to get one thing straight, it explains the diversity of life, not the origins.

    I'll give you an example of Evolution in another post. YouTube hates giving people room to type.

  • @XxI3ioHazardxX Here we go, example time.

    Suppose a group of birds of the same kind migrated to an island that has a very abundant supply of large food. Now lets say over a few generations, a finch kept producing offspring with small beaks. They will not be able to eat the food because it is too large to eat. They fly off somewhere else and find food that is just the right size. They stay there and are away from the larger beaked birds. The trait for smaller beaks can be passed on to offspring.

  • @XxI3ioHazardxX For the large beaked birds, over many generations, new traits show and create many distinct differences between the two groups of birds. The larger beaked birds become more unique complex and the smaller beaked birds become more unique and complex. This is the result of successfully passing on traits that will not be perfectly copied and pasted to offspring, resulting in variation and new traits. Being allowed to breed allowed mutations to create complexity in the birds.

  • @XxI3ioHazardxX What I said is a factor of Evolution. Natural Selection, Variation, and Adaptation to pressure from the environment. The features of different finches by Darwin and how they were adapted to certain foods allowed Darwin to come up with a hypothesis of why they were like that and not all the same. It wasn't just this, it was many observable things. And Darwin's hypothesis was proven by Modern Genetics and scientists all around the world.

  • @XxI3ioHazardxX

    Sadly you are wasting your time and effort trying to instruct SaltNP. He is immune to reason and evidence and he is a font of equivocation and logical fallacies.

    Thanks for trying though.

  • @Terncote

    So your reasoning is automatically correct? Yeah, that's VERY scientific, Mr. Dawkins. =D

  • @Terncote There is no DNA evidence that supports, or even seems to support, evolution by natural selection. None, zip, nada. You can't start with the DNA of a fern and natural select it into the DNA of a tree; you can't start with the DNA of an amoeba and natural select it into a sea slug or whatever. It's NOT POSSIBLE. So that's why there's no evidence in any DNA from anything here, that it evolved or how it went about it. Evolution is a hoax and a lie.

  • @SaltNPepperish creationists seem to have a vast knowledge about whats IMPOSSIBLE, considering the things they believe are true, like a man building a boat to hold two of everything, floods that can cover the world in water, corpses coming back to life, and a guy who lived in the stomach of a whale for days... i mean really, if science were making such claims you'd be calling me a fool for believing in it...

  • @paradoxb3 With God, all things are possible, but nobody makes that as a scientific claim against other claims. People here think they're so smart and scientific for believing evolution, but real science (math,physics, chemistry etc.) says it's not possible to evolve over 60 million known, separate, identified species of life at random in only 3.5 billion years. People who believe dinosaurs evolved into birds should try and figure out the DNA changes necessary, and know it can't be done.

  • @SaltNPepperish Truetruetrue. Mendalian genetics limits genes. Species can't change into other species over time. Ever. Rehashing the gene pool within any given species would involve the organism dying. Literally.

  • @sapiensape: THE EVIL LYING ATHEIST AND MORON.

    THERE IS NO NEED TO MAKE AN ARK THE SIZE OF A FOOTBALL FIELD FOR A LOCAL FLOOD.

    THIS SITE SHOWS NOAH'S ARK WHICH IS ON THE MOUNTAINS OF ARARAT AS THE BIBLE CLAIMS, AND WHICH MATCHES THE BIBLICAL SIZE. EXPLAIN THE EVIDENCE AWAY LIKE AN EVIL LYING ATHEIST WOULD.

    youtube . com/user/HISTRUTHBEKNOWN#p/a/f­/0/3PSZNYdfawQ

  • @HISTRUTHBEKNOWN Do you realize your caps lock is stuck on? Yelling at people is a very poor way to convince people something is true.

  • @SaltNPepperish "Not only that, evolution isn't a science, since nobody knows how, exactly, anything here evolved in what gradual steps, from what, exactly."

    You're right, it’s not a science, it’s a process. Right for the wrong reason. Soooo close!

    Science doesn’t deal in absolute, immutable answers, thankfully. We leave shuttered prejudice to theists, who can’t even understand that Evolution by Natural Selection isn't actually hostile to the notion of a sentient creator.

    Silly creationists.

  • @Terncote Your a total idiot.Evolution from pond scum to humans is only imagined/presumed and pseudoscience. The scientific method requires an observable testable repeating phenomenon. Pond scum to human evolution never happened, or happens, and cannot happen in defiance of the applicable principle and laws of science. Therefore, nobody saw mindless and lifeless chemical elements collaborating to contrive a simple self-replicating cell or its transmutation into all the life forms that ever lived

  • @Terncote Evolution by natural selection is not possible, which is why evolution theory isn't in any way scientific. Its adherents don't even understand what "science" is and still believe the exact same dogmas Darwin published, regardless of how many times they're told or shown that you can't start with loose proteins and get working DNA, and you can't start with the DNA of a frog and get it to become an amphibian with legs and lungs. Not in a million years and not in 200 billion years, either.

  • @SaltNPepperish Correction, I meant you can't start with the DNA of a *fish* --

    

  • @SaltNPepperish "Scientists have to admit they're wrong all the time, as new data becomes available."

    Not ALL the time but when they are wrong at least they own up. And if they won't, someone will eventually correct them. Yay for the self-correcting process!! Sort of like evolution, you know?

    Creationists never give up their delusions, regardless of the evidence against them. Data be damned!

    I wonder who we can trust more

  • @Terncote They almost never own up. At lest, not the Darwinists.

    #Charles Walcott. He hid his findings. The findings that severely damaged Macro-evolution. So then Dr. Raup literally invents the theory of punctuated equilibrium. It seems that most believers of Macro-evolution are hanging on to a now-deflating life raft in the middle of a storm. He HID them. So then someone ELSE INVENTED a new way for Macro-evolution to stay alive. Say what now?

  • @SaltNPepperish

    You are so not getting so much so spectacularly, it's hard to find a place to begin.

    You aced probability in college did you. OK - what's the probbility of something happening once it has actually happened?

    Apparently you slept through biology since grade school and never studied logic in any formal way.

  • @Terncote To the contrary, I took two semesters of College Biology and aced them both, and have studied Logic and Argumentation as well. I notice, you use a Post Hoc. This would be the opposite of using your brains and a calculator, and actually try to work out the probability of anything here evolving by itself. Good luck with that then.

  • The difference between creationists and scientists was summed up by Bertrand Russell quite well: "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."

  • @VeritasLuxMea100 Scientists have to admit they're wrong all the time, as new data becomes available. Not only that, evolution isn't a science, since nobody knows how, exactly, anything here evolved in what gradual steps, from what, exactly.

  • @SaltNPepperish “Newsflash: There are no transitional fossils…”

    All life is transitional. There are dozens of fossils possessing traits belonging to two other species. To deny this act of dishonest desperation.

    “…the differences between finches on Galapagos do not add up to evidence that dinosaurs can change into birds.”

    Newsflash: Birds ARE dinosaurs. Pay attention!! This has all been done for you before.

    Speciation (full speciation) has been observed. End of story. Get over it.

  • @Terncote Gosh, I have traits belonging to several different species, does that make me a transitional form? My arm and my leg are very similar indeed, does that prove they were once the same limb? Why is it that evolutionists think of life as so simple that pointing out superficial similarities proves all things about a process so impossible that it's never been seen and no evolutionist can describe it for us? Believing dinosaurs changed into birds is the equivalent of believing pigs will fly.

  • @SaltNPepperish Speciation has been documented between fish and amphibians, amphibians and reptiles, reptiles and mammals.

    Just because an evolutionist cannot describe it to you is not a testament of the evolutionists failures but of your own minor grasp on biology and it's processes.

    >>>Believing dinosaurs changed into birds is the equivalent of believing pigs will fly.

    You obviously have no knowledge of the theory.

  • @VeritasLuxMea100 You are lying, there is no known instance where any sort of speciation across species barriers has been observed. All that has been observed is species equilibrium and fossil equilibrium --- no transitional forms either now, or in the past. This is because it's not possible, and anyone who knows what DNA looks like and the kinds of changes that would be necessary, can figure that out.

  • @VeritasLuxMea100 its not that folks like Salt have no knowlege of it, its that they refuse to acknowledge any of it. yes, its there, for anyone to see, but it disagrees with how he *feels* so he must ignore it. people who follow science tend to be open minded, which is why we can be persuaded to change the way we think when valid evidence is submitted. creationists by definition are closed to new discoveries. they've already decided what is fact, and only acknowledge what agrees with it.

  • @Terncote BTW this is also one of those arguments that even top creationists should not be used. When the creationist "experts" won't even use this argument, you know you are arguing with a fool with no more understanding of biology than a 6th grader.

  • @VeritasLuxMea100 This from someone who believes dinosaurs can change into birds, lol.

  • @SaltNPepperish "Another evolutionist who's never heard of Punctuated Equilibrium, which describes a fossil record that is in stasis…"

    Duh! Talk about selective perception! You forgot the PUNCTUATED part where speciation occurs. Don’t believe me, ask an actual biologist if P.E. means evolution by natural selection is a myth. Dare you.

    “…and who must think that a subspecies is the same thing as a new species.”

    Wrong again. You aren’t doing too good at this strawman shit.

  • @Terncote I know that evolotion by natural selection is a myth, because I aced Probability and Statistics in College.

  • @SaltNPepperish ?! Aye ... whats that got to do with anything?

  • @pubuman Evidently you need to take a class in Statistics, and learn how it's not possible, to obtain new data by selecting from old data. Neither is it possible, for all the different DNA of 60 million different known species, to evolve in only 3.5 billion years. If you disagree, grab your calculator and prove me different. Or shut up.

  • @SaltNPepperish if evolution doesnt exist, then adam and eve were no different from you and i, physically, mentally, and genetically. so where did the genetic material for nearly 7 billion completely different individuals come from? but that would imply you use logic in your decisions.

  • @paradoxb3 All people of all races, tall and small, are human. No difference there. All of us are copies (reproductions) of our parents, and they of their parents, and so on, which is why human mitochondrial DNA was such a fit subject for research on human ancestry.

  • @SaltNPepperish first off if all humanity came from 2 people that were no different from us, well... it wouldnt work in the first place as reproducing with your brothers and sisters would quickly produce birth defects and mental handicaps... most likely leading to an inability to breed within the first few generations.... and second, the bible (as well as any sane person) states that reproduction with your siblings is WRONG....

  • @paradoxb3 You forget that at the beginning, our genes were far more diverse. It's scientific research that has determined all humans are descended from one human couple, that means that in the beginning close family married. This didn't become a problem till some generations after the Flood, e.g. Abraham married his half-sister, Moses is the product of a marriage between a nephew and his aunt, it's only when the Israelites become a people that for their health they get laws against incest.

  • @SaltNPepperish once again science used to prove itsself wrong, creationists 1, evolution 0. where exactly did that research come from, besides out of thin air? (things appearing magically may be acceptable to you, but not me) because if science has some research that says definitively we all came from adam and eve, i'd sure like to read it... what museum are their fossils in, btw? but i give up, you win. logic, rational thought, and factual evidence will always be defeated by magic.

  • @SaltNPepperish Speaking of grabbing a calulator, you about ready to address that heat data yet Salt, or are you just going to keep try ing avoid the subject at hand: how geology proves the Noachian Flood a myth?

  • @NorthForkFisherman Geology proves the Noachian Flood true. All fossil bearing layers are sedimentary rock.

  • @SaltNPepperish

    I know who Mitochondrial Eve is and more importantly who she is NOT. Being the common ancestor of all living humans is NOT the same as being the biblical progenitor. M. Eve was the "daughter” of an earlier M. Eve and so on and so on, right back to the first eucaryote cell (and beyond).

    I know you need it to be nice and simple for you but stop trying to turn metaphor into xtian reality and prattling on about virgin births. It’s disingenuous.

  • @Terncote There it is again, the evolutionist inability to process and accept facts. Mte DNA research affirmed that all humans are descended from one mother, who was fully human. It has also affirmed that all humans share the shame father. This happens to be what Genesis says about the origin of the human race. That is just a fact. If she herself had a mother, than THAT mother would have been pointed out as the original, or her mother, in that imaginary evolutionist ancestry you believe in.

  • @SaltNPepperish One of the misconceptions of mitochondrial Eve is that since all women alive today descended in a direct unbroken female line from her that she was the only woman alive at the time. Nuclear DNA studies indicate that the size of the ancient human population never dropped below tens of thousands. (Takahata, N - January 1993 - Mol. Biol. Evol. 10 (1): 2–22) etc.

  • @pubuman So you're asking me to assume other women? From what mother then, since mt. Eve is proven to be the first? Evolutionists are so intellectually dishonest, if science proves them wrong, they plain invent their own facts, just to keep believing humans aren't descended from one human mother, no, they're descended from apes. LOL

  • @SaltNPepperish "So you're telling me that for thousands of years, Mitochondrial Eve had our ancestors by virgin birth?"

    No, you twit! Mitochondrial Eve is a metaphor, it's a figure of speech, it's a little joke at the expense of creationists and you think that it actually refers to Yaweh's spare-rib recipe from Genesis! Only creationists make stupid claims like virgin births.

    And NO, all humans are NOT descended from a single couple. That's a bible story and also a metaphor. Get real, Peppy!

  • @Terncote Do you evolutionists take a special class on how to dismiss scientific evidence whenever it suits you? "Mitochondrial Eve" is not someone creationists invented, but the result of a study called "Mitochondrial DNA and Human Reproduction" published in Science by reputable and peer-reviewed scientists. Other studies have since shown that all humans share a single father as well. Only evolutionists still insist there were other humans and different ancestors. While calling me a twit. lol.

  • @SaltNPepperish "a special class on how to dismiss scientific evidence whenever it suits you?" BWhahahaah. You mean like the heat data that has been presented thus far? You seem to have all the answers there.....except for when it comes to real data. Then you try to change the subject. The issue here is geology (an inorganic process) not evolutionary biology (an organic process). Do I need to explain the difference between the two? And BTW, the Noachian Flood? A MYTH!

  • @SaltNPepperish "You nave NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that one species can change into a whole new different one, yet you believe in evolution anyway."

    It's in the fossil record and the genetic record and it has been directly OBSERVED in living things.

    Stop lying for Jesus, it makes kittens cry when you do.