@sydneygordonhill It is a valid comparison and it's not his fault if you can't understand the point he's making. Transitional fossils don't show one species transforming into another in the way kirk cameron described (croco-duck) BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS. Like what was said in the video, every fossil is the transition between what the species was and what it's becoming. It makes perfect sense, go read a book.
I like the scientific content condensed into a small video. Indeed, most of the videos in this line are very concise and interesting. But...I could do without the anti-religious commentary. It is childish and unnecessary. Science can be confusing, but we don't need any help figuring out when public figures make ridiculous statements. Let's stick to the facts and scientific theories...
Yeah but to say that there is NO CREATOR at all is to also say that there is no reward in the end therefore why in the hell are we even here. I believe if evolution is a reality it is a product of a god. If you look at genesis we could say that god created light was a metaphor for the big bang.
@wishingfreedom "...there is no reward in the end therefore why in the hell are we even here." What do you think this is, a computer game? You're alive. Make the most of it. Find meaning for yourself. Leave the world a better place than you left it. Reproduce. Bring about world peace. Just don't expect the torture of an eternal life.
@wishingfreedom Why should there be a reward? Why does life need a point? Animals die without a reward, why the hell were they even there? and sorry, but in the bible when god said "let there be light," water already existed, so no it isn't a metaphor for the big bang. The people that wrote it were just guessing.
However, although the fact of evolution does not negate the possibility of a God, "theistic evolution", wherein God may or may not intervene occasionally in the process, is still a religious belief. In practice, even a religious scientist must approach the study of evolution in strictly naturalistic terms.
I can't speak for all atheists, but I myself do not object to you or anyone else believing in a God; I object to the confusion of that belief with knowledge, the dishonesty of asserting that gaps in what we know are proof of God's existence, the outright lies and distortion of facts by creationists to try to support myths, and their resorting to physical and/or psychological threats when failing to convince others by means of facts and logic, which is a tool of charlatans. (Cont'd...)
There is still a place for God in the theory of evolution, people take religious scriptures to literal. Evolution is a process that was initiated by God. People who do not accept the theory of evolution believe that man appeared out of thin air, just because man evolved from primates does not mean that God did not create man. God knew that to create such a complex being that is man he must have started with a simpler organism.
@JDGallus If god has infinite power, then he doesn't *need* to start anywhere. In fact, he could have made life start on the surface of the sun. The fact is, with evolution you don't NEED a god, same with physics explanation for cosmogony. A universe that formed from the big bang, without a god, would look identical to ours; That is no coincidence.
Potholer, c'mon. The first part depressed me. The corruption of the minds of innocent, unsuspecting children is never a pleasant thing, I'm sure you'll agree. :(
DAWKINS: NOBODY knows how it got started. We know the kind of event that it must have been. We know the sort of event that must have happened for the origin of life.
BEN STEIN: And what was that?
DAWKINS: It was the origin of the first self-replicating molecule.
Even with mountains of evidence, constant peer review, intense scrutinization, years of research by world leading university's and verifiable data vs K. Hovind,if creationists still 100% deny any chance of evolution then they truly are Morons. God controls every aspect of their life b4 during and after. Even told what to think, how to adore and not question anything. Stop mocking the very Science that your lives depend on. Stop using anything Science has improved. Nothing left to do but insult
7:25 what kind of crappy comparison was that??!! You're comparing the alleged evolution of a species over millions of years (so you say) to the development of one organism (George Bush) ?? Where in your puny little mind, of which half of it must have been sucked out during a freak vacuuming accident, as you so politely put it, does that make any sense at all???
@19navyseal91 Its impossible to identify the perfect intermediate. Is it that you don't understand the analogy? Slow growth and small changes added up produce big change.
@19navyseal91 "You're comparing the alleged evolution of a species over millions of years.. to the development of one organism (George Bush)??.. Where in your puny little mind... does that make any sense at all???"
Actually, thats NOT what he compared. It seems your own puny little mind failed to grasp his actual point he made in his analogy.
- well one is evolution and the other is growth and development, what processes does reproduction, mutation, natural selection, speciation .etc parallel?
@types10000 "Well one is evolution and the other is growth and development"
Indeed they are. But so what? He wasnt directly comparing "evolution" to "growth and development"- He was comparing two systems that involve change and demonstrating how both processes lack an instantaneous change from one thing to another. Baby bush didnt instantly become adult bush, & we KNOW it happened- but we will NEVER find a clear "moment" when it DID happen. The same is true for evolution. Savvy?
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
I don't no how lame evolutionist can be ? saying that natural powers can creat all of this, ears, eyes, the ability to talk to think , Respiratory system,Reproductive system,Digestive System,Musculoskeletal system,Immune system,Nervous system....... it even can give organs the ability to fly lolololol,really how lame are you ? =.=""""""""""""""""""""""""
@mtbee9 You think the mother nature do creat humans birds and intellegence ! and i'm the lame one ???, Biology is the one that showed me the Dna the code of Information, and i'm not the one claiming that nature do have an intellegent mind ! you do tend to reject the one who created you and guide you to the right path, that's why you are the lame one .
@YamiYami17 "i'm not the one claiming that nature do have an intellegent mind "
Neither am I. Evolution is not a planned process but one determined by many factors such as the environment. (Hence my comments that you do not understand evolution)
I do not accept wild claims based on ancient mythology - there have been many religious claims of gods from many countries, most now abandoned. Current religions will follow suit as they are not based on facts!
@mtbee9 According to some sources, evolution is an all pervasive process that is moving in one direction. This begs the question, why would evolution move in the direction it is moving in and why does the cosmos have the form it does? If there is nothing guiding it, why this particular direction and why this particular form?
@TheHistoryguy10 "why would evolution move in the direction it is moving in" Because it is a natural process and follows natural laws. Just like meteors colliding with planets, and stars dying when they have used up all their fuel. It just is - not everything has to have a reason why!
Take a rock lying on the ground - does it have a reason for being there, or a plan for the future? No - it's just a rock. It will stay where it is until something happens to it - what or when ever that might be.
@mtbee9 Right, this form of thinking could be applied to anything in the cosmos, including human beings. Does a human being have to have a reason for being there? No, it's just a human being. This form of thinking leads to "meaninglessness" where everything is devoid of meaning. In this sense, things just exist in the natural order of things without any real direction. Think of a bridge spanning from nowhere to nowhere. I have come across many people who think in this way.
@TheHistoryguy10 "things just exist in the natural order of things" Correct.
There is no evidence to suggest that everything was created for a reason and with a purpose in mind. Many humans 'want' there to be reason - doesn't mean there is one!
@mtbee9 "No evidence?!" What kind of evidence would one need to have a reason for the meaning of things? It appears to me that you are suggesting that some things may have a reason for being and some things may not. Is this true? Also, when you say "mind," is this the mind of man or that of a higher Being? Who has a purpose in mind? Now, in this system of thought (naturalism) everything is placed on an equal plane. It can be said that man is no more than the grass. Are you really 63?
@TheHistoryguy10 "some things may have a reason for being and some things may not."
Nope, I cannot think of anything natural that has a reason for being, except for the fact that it was born, where the reason for it's being is it's parents activity! If it wasn't for your parents you wouldn't be here. End of story!
All life is equal in one sense - it was produced by it's parents. Depends on your viewpoint. Yes I am 63 - why does that matter. I have no reason to lie on youtube though many do.
@mtbee9 Well if you saw the videos i provide you will understand why i claim that for nature to do what it did to start from molecules to bring up a human being it surely need a magestic mind !
..
Also your argument is so old and so wrong, it's not because chrsitianity is wrong or buddiest is wrong there for all religions are wrong, islam is without any doubt the truth, the fact that it provides proofs and the fact that you can not debunk anyone of them is enough from a logical view.
@YamiYami17 "islam is without any doubt the truth, the fact that it provides proofs "
Nope no scientific or other proofs have been established for your old stories. You wish that they have been proven, because your book says so and you don't want to accept that it is wrong. I understand that. Sorry but it doesn't make it true!
@mtbee9 Maybe it's your deluded mind or preconception of islam, but for a human being to think that 1.6 billion humans accepted islam just for old stories that's very sad ! I hope you can see this vid /watch?v=s_xh6WQLNOw&feature=related , not for proof but just to maybe wash over your arrogant attitude after that i will bring you the proofs and sure they are a lot !
@YamiYami17 5.2 billion humans know islam is just a bunch of old stories. 1.6B believe what they're told and aren't interested in finding out they're wrong. Because of the rules regarding apostates, it's very likely your 1.6B number is actually much smaller. Stop spamming bullshit videos please. Videos ignorant of science aren't supporting your case.
@HarshColby Lol in fact the athiests are just 16% the majority of those 5.2 do believe in other religions! "Because of the rules regarding apostates" Don't don't embarrass yourself please no just you didn't debunk any proof i provided but now you are lying ? I don't have any interrest in speaking with liars sorry !
@HarshColby You also need to see this vid maybe you will lose your mask of arrogance, going to a hole in ground you don't have anything to be arrogant for ! /watch?v=s_xh6WQLNOw&feature=related
@YamiYami17 More bullshit videos? I'm sure you know that science-illiterate videos don't support your case. You just like posting bullshit.
If only 16% self-identify as atheist, then how many are threatened into not acknowledging their lack of belief? In Christianity it's only social scorn they need to endure, but in Islam, it's death. What moron would accurately report they don't believe?
If 5.7B believe gods, they must all be true. If belief=reality, then all gods must be real. Nice logic.
@HarshColby There is no penalty for apostasy in islam, /watch?v=Q_oKXh2oy8E
and read this :“Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” (Quran 2:256)
@YamiYami17 1. How do you know no human can write that text? Since a human did write it, that's silly. Humans can write any string of characters they want to.
2. Name one fact in the book that no human could have written.
This is not related at all to your previous logic that belief by 1.6B people makes it true.
@YamiYami17 "1.6 billion humans accepted islam" For all that accept the stories of islam there are billions of others in religions that don't. So you only believe islam because many others do? most people thought the Earth was flat, or the sun went around the earth - they were wrong but were at one time the majority. Oh and I'm not arrogant, at least no more so than all the arrogant creationists who think they're right.
@YamiYami17 " /watch?v=s_xh6WQLNOw&feature=related" I watched your lame video that supposedly offers a reason to convert to Islam. Major FAIL. It offers nothing that other religions don't offer - the empty promise of life after death. Nothing more.
Amazing how religions offer something that they can never prove and when you die and find they are wrong there is nothing you can do about it - and you won't even know!
They sure know when they are onto a good scam don't they!
@mtbee9 "that supposedly offers a reason to convert to Islam" ??? didn't this what i said : [ I hope you can see this vid *** , not for proof but just to maybe wash over your arrogant attitude] ? yep i did say this and put a line under Not for proof !
@YamiYami17 "you are angry for nothing" Well Yami I'm not angry at all so I don't know how you got that idea. Disagreeing with someone doesn't necessarily mean someone is angry.
I hope you have a happy holiday season and I hope you understand more about how life really works in the New Year.
@YamiYami17 Natural powers did not create anything simply through natural selection certain mutations became new species. For example, the inmune system was developed due to the necessity of an organism to defend itself from attack. Through mutations, this system was slowly developed. Living beings without IMsystem died while the beings with Imsystem survived. That is Natural selection.
And still wating for a replay to that vid that explain why natural selection is not responsible for the systems in all and i mean all the living organs!
@YamiYami17 I already replied so no need to ask the question.
The bombadier beetle and giraffe neck evolved gradually. We know even of several transitional species for both. but even that would not be needed, as a logical progression could be made. While not strong it would be more of an answer then god did it. So the god did it would fall away.
@NathanWubs The problem is that you are putting all your comments at once very fast so don't be confused please , it's not a chat room , i post whatever i post than i comeback after sometime . well this god did it is the fact that is supported by science, the fact that you opend the cell and find a city like complexity and a CODE of INFORMATION and still think it's funny to say it's made by god then sure you have a problem of humour .
@mtbee9 That's what you thunk, but you're far far away from reality :
Evolution Debunked: /watch?v=2lwiOewUS-0
From 0 to 300 No way /watch?v=AKzr270FeNA
How from scientific observation we can know+prove god (see first 20min) : /watch?v=YI9owlpOQl0&feature=relmfu
For the Miracle of language of Quran:/watch?v=w9vHj4z48q4
There are more if you want to be sure 100%, debunk one prove and you are free to not believe, ignore all of them and try to explain why you did that to god in jugment day.
@YamiYami17 "you're far far away from reality" Well that really applies to you!
Looked at the first video and if you think that a few baseless comments debunks evolution then you have a whole lot of learning to do about what has already been proven and shown to support evolution. I understand that you are brainwashed by religion and cannot look objectively at real science, so I don't expect that anything I or anyone else says will convince you otherwise. Sad really. Enjoy the only life you have!
@mtbee9 Did you debunk anything ? no , did you replay explaining anything ? no , what did you do :
1. Put a claim that the person you're talking with don't know anything about evolution, it the case with every evolutionist!
2. Running away from the proofs that evolution is a big wierd lie !
..
I have in fact this life and the afterlife you surely also do, but it's our choice to chose an afterlife in paradise or in hell fire ! how both we will meet in paradise with god's will :)
@YamiYami17 " proofs that evolution is a .. lie" Nope, no proof was given. " the afterlife you surely also do" That is your unsubstantiated claim. If it helps you get through this life, hoping that there is another then maybe that helps you. But to claim it as fact is bogus.
"chose an afterlife in paradise or in hell fire" Both made up claims - no evidence exists for either.
@mtbee9 Did you debunk anything ? no , did you replay explaining anything ? no , what did you do :
1. Put a claim that the person you're talking with don't know anything about evolution, it the case with every evolutionist!
2. Running away from the proofs that evolution is a big wierd lie !
..
I have in fact this life and the afterlife you surely also do, but it's our choice to chose an afterlife in paradise or in hell fire ! how both we will meet in paradise with god's will :)
@YamiYami17 But it seems that you have decided to ignore what I say and to stop searching for knowledge and just put your fingers in your ears. So the discussion is over.
@NathanWubs I wont say "again i spoke about the chat forum thing" coz it's not chat and i know that i have to give you TIME to answer back , i expect the same from you
@primepost Seems you're an expert on the subject of fossils and evolution. May I suggest you have a look at the following series of 4 youtube videos, where a fellow expert in such matters debunks the work of Harun Yahya: Richard Dawkins debunks "Atlas Of Creation" by Harun Yahya. I'm sure you're going to love it. Enjoy.
@primepost The JREF has $1 million if you can show your religion is true, or a demonstration of any supernatural ability at all. You even get to pick the test and success criteria as long as it's scientific. Have at it.
Since every fossil is a transitional fossil, they would have lost the $1 billion long ago if they were serious. They probably have some non-scientific definition of "transitional" that they're using. They just use the word "transitional" as a smoke screen.
@54eriks Your inability to understand how it can happen slowly doesn't mean it didn't. The rest of us understand it just fine. It just shows there's something about this topic you don't understand. I'm sure there are plenty of things about evolution you don't understand. Learning what we know would be your next step. Somehow, I doubt you'll take that step however.
@HarshColby HarshColby, I doubt that you have even the smallest idea ofthe principles of species formation. And the wily, underperforming theories Tell me not interested. Therefore, in this context can not toil. That is you do not want to know the truth, if all the forces lay hold upon Darwinism. But there are other, much better, expected to calculate species formation theory.
@HarshColby No matter how you "smart" excuse the absurd theory postulates, it does not work. However, the theory of acting and the species may not even be calculated. Indeed, Darwinism is a zombie, which prevents seeing and understanding the other, much better?
Evolution = Evolution is any change across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.[1]
You are talking about before that, which is abiogenesis, Which has nothing to do with evolution.
@NathanWubs With the development of the most robust to do is transfer of genes in parallel on the principle that had already been formulated nomogenezis and of which I speak. And not to tell me anecdotes about the long evolution of the event.
@NathanWubs Maybe tell me what you want. Something abstract chatter is not sentiment. I am not in control of science, but I understand what it does not understand what has already been discovered, but because of the wrong Darwin's theory of domination translated backward. This refers to the principle of horizontal gene transfer, which similar views were already nomogenesis. And the result completely upside down tree species and species formation than Darwin not succeed fantasies.
yay because there shape look the same they were the same lol, if you just could answer one question how a systeme can create it self ... of well you can't.
@Misterb0z Yeah i mean if you don't whant to say why i understand but please don't waste your time putting random comments, if you're still confused here a nother to show you it's impossible to start the whole thing : /watch?v=f0DarH79soo
@transtlantic I will give you the same answer i put in the other video : there is no penalty for apostasy in islam, don't take my words as a holy scirpture see this : /watch?v=Q_oKXh2oy8E
and read this :“Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” (Quran 2:256)
@YamiYami17 I don't need to debunk ppsimmons' crap. He has no credibility. Watch part 3 of the Made Easy series if you want to see that rubbish eviscerated.
@Misterb0z I did give you a vid from ppsimmons ? i couldn't find where ^^"""""
whatever the part 3 is like an evolutionist proving evo wrong ! 1.He brings very nice topic wich is LIFE, coz simply life is not in the material word of atoms and molicules there for we can't not ever never creat animated living stuff robots do not live!,2.he didn't speak about how they did replecate in side the cell -.-,3 The dna is a CODE !!!, in fact it's all momo jambo, here is why : /watch?v=AKzr270FeNA
@Misterb0z Yeah and teh fact Evo is a weird theory for weirdos donsn't me you go chose whatever religion, i will give you the evidance why you have to be chose islam like i gived to you why evo is wrong, See this vid : /watch?v=w9vHj4z48q4
@HarshColby Bs yes indeed this is you answer when you don't have one! when i gave another evolutionist a vid to make him remember how things are complex he said this is in fact a positive thing for Evo lololololololol, is this your science ? i swear to god the biggest insult to science is Evo.
@YamiYami17 The answers are in the scientific literature. Since you obviously are going to ignore science, there's really no point in debating anything with you. Whether evolution is true or not, your bullshit videos are just bullshit with no basis in reality.
@HarshColby Buhahaha! =.= well the vids are also and thank god i said when i put the proves you demands from that i want a replay that deconstruct them coz you know now Evolution like you said is the noon sun, yet still you couldn't answer, and you big argument is the videos are bu***** now prove they are if you can or be silent pls
@YamiYami17 To prove your videos are wrong, simply google the relevant data. Any school child could do it. You can too. Give it a try. If you really want to understand why your claims are wrong, you can always enroll in a basic biology class which covers evolution. Me telling you you're wrong won't do any good, because if you're willing to ignore all the published scientific research, then the word of someone on YT isn't going to make you accept science. Education is the cure for ignorance.
@HarshColby "Any school child could do it" if that's true than sure you are more then capable of doing that aren't you ? i'm not even telling you to write me the answer knowing it a hard and boring thing to do,just give me vids like i'm doing that deconstruct atleast ONE prove that is very wrong ! this just in evo let's not talk about quran coz i know you can't even try to deconstruct it.
@HarshColby ,[because if you're willing to ignore all the published scientific research], it's because Albert Einstein did ignore the theory of luminiferous ether that he reached special relativity!! it's not because he took as a fact.. it's my duty and yours to invastigate in order to give the right infomation to our children, So i really recommand you to have those classes maybe that will stop you from putting your children in it
@YamiYami17 Einstein didn't ignore any published research. He read it and had an understanding of what was going on. It's a tragedy that you're so sure you're right, yet so wrong, and your kids, if you have any, will suffer because of your ignorance and arrogance.
Pick ONE claim and I'll show you how you're mistaken. To pick apart all of your misunderstandings would take a lifetime, and you're not worth the trouble. Pick one. Any one you feel is the most compelling.
@YamiYami17 This is a video about evolution, not abiogenesis, but ok.
First, why would the structure of the first cell be important? Viruses replicate without any DNA and no cell structure analogous to what we see in modern cells. Why, then, would the characteristics of the smallest modern cells be a compelling argument?
No one claims the first cell popped into existence, so the fact that it didn't is agreed. Tisdall knows his audience will think the first life was a modern cell, but it wasn't.
@HarshColby But that's the point called it what you called if you are an evolutionist you have to explain this big probleme it's a part of evolution. "modern cells" ??? there is no modern or prehistoric cells lol,there is no magical cell that can form by it's own and then develope to the simplest cell, Don't beg the argument like the other evolutionist in the vid, if you want to reject it and have faith in Evo that's fine atleast now you know it's a religion and sure the weakest one.
@YamiYami17 In what way is the pre-first modern cell evolution a "big problem"?
Cells today are far more complicated than early cells. Do your research. I'm not going to argue with someone that thinks making stuff up is okay. Try to separate your opinion from statements you can back up with actual facts.
No one claims a cell magically formed. Why the strawman?
(And stop using "evolutionist" as a derogatory term. It's rude. Discuss facts, not perceived ideologies.)
@HarshColby "than early cells" well this early cell that you're speaking about is a term you invented in the two past comments, sir if you can't imagine a simple car that don't have a motor and wheels then you want me to imagine a cell that don't have dna and the replication system of it and the mechanism to make us protein! so i'm calling you to rethink the facts. "evolutionist" if you don't like the term then sure i will not use it .
@YamiYami17 A simpler car was the Model-T. Modern cells are far more complicated than early cells. Do you need examples? No need to imagine a self-replicating system without a cell; check out viruses. Also check out how we replicate DNA for forensic studies without their cell enclosures. Replication does not require modern cell structures. Evolution requires only replication and selection, not complex cells.
Biology is the study of evolution in this context, so biologist is the proper term.
@HarshColby Here what another huuuum athiest ( i think the term is fine no ? ) says about cell complexity : This is true for the types of cells we see now.
But for "life" to begin, all you'd need is a collection of self-replicating molecules.
..
Please "collection of self-replicating molecules" T__T is this science? self-replicating molecules ??? it's like a religious statment witout any logic in it, buddist saying budda god or christian saying jesus god! speaking is easy proving is not.
@YamiYami17 The data supports that self-replicating molecules prior to the first primitive cells, so I'd agree with your quoted text.
Yes. it's science. Check out part three of potholer's series: watch?v=v8nYTJf62sE
Also check out the RNA world hypothesis. Don't claim they're making religious statements if you actually have no idea what evidence they are using. Just because you don't understand it (and/or haven't researched it), doesn't mean they're dreaming up ideas without evidence.
@HarshColby Here is one claim. There is no evidence at all that evolution ever took place in the past. In all recorded history, extending back nearly five thousand years, no one has ever recorded the natural evolution of any kind of creature (living or non-living) into a more complex kind. Furthermore, all known vertical changes seem to go in the wrong direction. An average of at least one species has become extinct every day since records have been kept, but no new...continued
@TheHistoryguy10 "no one has ever recorded the natural evolution of any kind of creature (living or non-living) " Well first of all evolution has been shown to happen - but only with living things - non-living things do not evolve! or even reproduce!
"nothing has ever evolved into higher complexity" So why does the entire fossil record show a gradual change of complexity over Millions of years? and what is your scientific explanation of how they occur?
@TheHistoryguy10 The problem with that kind of argument (aside from the fact that it completely disregards the fact that there is a huge amount of evidence that evolution happens, and there have been observed instances, and that changes in DNA are cumulative, etc) /ramble
The problem with that kind of argument is that you're assuming that if something hasn't been observed, that means we can't know it happens. We haven't observed Pluto making a complete orbit. Does that mean we don't know it did?
@HarshColby You have used that example before. This could be said about anything, like a drop of water on the island of Palawan in the Phillipines. I have never seen that drop of water but this does not mean that it is no there. Both Pluto and the drop of water are particular things. However, evolution is this all pervasive process that has happened and is happening, but is nowhere found. Sure, you could say this or that particular thing points to it, ...
@TheHistoryguy10 The point about Pluto is what we observe tells us exactly where is was in the past and where it will be in the future. That's different from the water drop we know nothing about.
Evolution is a pervasive process that is found in every living organism. Nowhere found?
@TheHistoryguy10 Of couse it is, evolution has been observed in a smaller scale, in bacteria, which are currently evolving inorder to be inmune to antibiotics.
We know what happens when DNA keeps changing: the population changes. We know that these changes accumulate. We know that the longer changes accumulate, the more different the DNA will be from the original.
To say these changes must stop at some nebulous point (beyond speciation, since that has been observed), you must identify a plausible mechanism to stop it.
Just as if you said Pluto has not made a complete orbit, you'd need a mechanism to prevent it.
@HarshColby ...species have evolved during that time. Stars explode, comets and meteorites disintegrate, the biosphere deteriorates, and everything eventually dies, so far as all historical observations go, but nothing has ever evolved into higher complexity. So what is going on? How does this prove evolution?
@YamiYami17 "i will give you the evidance why you have to be chose islam" Thanks. but I happen to live in a sane world, where creepy men who marry little girls because they claim to have been 'given a message' by an 'angel' while 'lying in a cave' are rightly jailed for significant lengths of time. Why would I dedicate my life to such nonsense?
Tzortzis' attempts as statistics to disprove evolutionary theory are as ill informed as the rest of his sophistry.
More importantly, they're merely re-iterations of works by members of the Discovery Institute - works that have been debunked years, if not decades ago.
@Alphacaliber Well thanks for the correcion of the word, in french english are quiet the same all latin so i may do a lot of mistakes but i will try my best to keep what i write readable.
@NathanWubs The biggest argument for Evolutionist is "people don't know what evolution is" !!!
quite amazing as argument =.= I believe everyone knows what is evolution exept evolutionist. Just to think that a non-living molecules can form a living cell is extraordinary ridiculous, and if we try to close our eyes on that and try to invastigate the motors of evolution it will only get worse!
a. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
b. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.
That is the definition that scientist would give you. ((Which should be follow, as its their scientific theory))
@YamiYami17 So, are you willing to start at the definition that science gives you? If the answer is yes, then I am willing to converse further with you.
If you answer no, then there is no point. As it means that you are not willing to even listen to the definition of the field that evolution is about. Meaning you do not care about the truth at all. You only care what creationist say, who made up strawman definitions.
@YamiYami17 "Evolution is any change across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins."
You would be allowed to go from this one as well if you like. States the same thing just a bit different.
@YamiYami17 O my mistake, you may even use this definition of evolution to make it even simpler.
"Evolution is the process of change in all forms of life over generations, and evolutionary biology is the study of how evolution occurs. The biodiversity of life evolves by means of mutations, genetic drift and natural selection."
You can use anything that is either what I have provider or similiar too.
If you include Big Bang, Abiogensis, then gameover.
@NathanWubs "If you include Big Bang, Abiogensis, then gameover" Really ? what a nice running from facts. So you're saying it did Evolve but not from 0 is that what are you saying ? Look i have the ways to make it clear that god(swt) do exist, by big bang and logical arguments or by quran ( book that is impossible for human being to write ) or by showing you that evo is a horribale theory , so ofcourse no problem with me not using Abiogensis or a miracle so clear to us.
I am not running away from the facts, I am trying to make clear what evolution is and what it is not. If you want to talk about Abiogenesis that is fine. If you want to talk about The Progresion of the universe that is fine too. But do not label it as evolution as it is not.
So here is the choice again. Can you accept one of the three definitions that I gave you, or something similiar? Or Game Over ?
@NathanWubs I accept ! but let me clear something, Evolution is the one who opend the door for Abiogensis, so if we won't to speak about evolution we have to know from where things started, coz if you don't have the base then logiclay everything that follows is just nonesense, And the big topic is "Is god exist or not" so me dbunking evolution is equal to proving god exist, First tell me about Natural selection how it did it lol : /watch?v=AsXuERTQsv8&feature=related,
@YamiYami17 please do not give me links to proselytizing videos, that do not understand what evolution is.
No, evolution talks about the diversity of life, not the origins. Evolution and Abiogensis stand up on their own merrits and can fall on their own merrits.
No, debunking evolution, just means that evolution is incorrect. It does not mean you can make the logical leap. A is incorrect, now B is correct and then automatically C. (C being Allah)
@NathanWubs I rechecked and found that i didn't make a mistake the video i gave is talking about natural selection not the origins of life, so i need an answer for it, coz it's important it shows that natural selection must have a brain to come up with the stuff in the vid ( but we know it don't have one so logicaly natural selection is not the responsible for those stuff)
@YamiYami17 The video that you showed me started talking about the big bang, then abiogenesis, and then why this Mr. Martin stopped being a scientist. Then it talks about how irreducible complexity. Of the Bombardier Beetle and of the Giraffe.
It does not talk about natural selection at all.
The assumption is made that these features of this beetle and of the Giraffe were evolved like snap.
You want me to explain the evolution of the two species?
@NathanWubs "irreducible complexity. Of the Bombardier Beetle and of the Giraffe" It was speaking about natural selection, but well i don't want to insist on you, non don't explain anything if you don't want too
@NathanWubs "just means that evolution is incorrect" logicaly if you have two options to explain how a thing is formed ( 1. formed it self naturally or 2.created by a creator in a one shot ) then sure if 1 is incorrect applay the second is correct , saying No, is 1.going against logic or
2. saying that there is a third explanation for complex system to exist! and that's is just unlogical.
and no for Allah (swt), we can't know much on who god really is from science but his existance yes!
@YamiYami17 You are wrong. If you think those are the only two options.
I will give you one post to look up the history of evolution. Then you will see the different theories that are out there. Which is a hell of a lot more then 2. Its not a 50%/50% that is a false dichotomy. So if you are not willing to accept that there might be other explanations, then 1 evolution or 2 god did it. then there is no use in talking to you further.
@NathanWubs "I will give you one post to look up the history of evolution" ? what post aliens did it ? bring me this third argument please i'm starving to see it !
@YamiYami17 Its not Illogical to not assume anything. Its Illogical to assume that there are two state to begin with, when no evidence has presented itself. Science does not assume anything to begin with it follows the evidence.
If evolution is debunked, science will re-examen the evidence and will come to another conclusion. Which gives loads of possibilities.
@NathanWubs "If evolution is debunked, science will re-examen the evidence and will come to another conclusion." Totally agree. Nobody yet has an alternative theory to how life developed. Some people will never accept the facts.
@mtbee9 Yes, that is the problem, people like to think to much in black and white. And especially in evolution that is kinda a bad thing to do. Its like being with someone for 3 or 4 years, we only sometimes will see minor changes but not a lot of change. But if someone suddenly comes back after a three year period, they will not o wow what a change. Then to name a point where they specifically changed from their old self to new self is very hard.
@mtbee9 Sorry, for babbling but cannot help myself. Another example is going from white to black. When is the exact point that you can say, this is only white and this is only black? Its very hard to tell and making a fix point on it, is not kinda fair.
That is why I enjoy the notion everything is a transitional form really.
@NathanWubs You are dreaming if evo is incorrect than god do exist, it's not a rocket science, you have something complex in front of your eyes you have revelations and you have a serie of prophets and you have a miracle, all these aren't a joke but facts you can check theme
@YamiYami17 We can talk about fossil, but it is not necessary as they are the weakest case for evolution to begin with. As even if the whole fossil record would suddenly turn into a hoax then it would not invalidate evolution, by the definition that science gives it. Fossil are handi base materials though.
@NathanWubs Evolutionist calculated that the humans started existing as humans of our age 200.000 years a go, now if there is any fossil of human older than 200.000 sure and i think even you will agree ,it will be the death shot for all the parts of the theory , Don't you think that ???
@YamiYami17 Nope, I do not agree. It would be a great finding an the theory would need to indeed be revised. Science lives for those kind of discoveries that change our scientific understanding. Just like the discovery recently, that neutrons in certain conditions might be faster then light.
@NathanWubs "It would be a great finding an the theory would need to indeed be revised" False argument, all evolutionist do agree that evolution will collapse simply for the reason of time , if you don't have enough time to go with the natural selection process but you have the complexity of humans, then sure you have a big big big problem revise what you're writing .
@YamiYami17 "all evolutionist do agree that evolution will collapse simply for the reason of time" As evolution is supported by all the evidence the time scale fits in perfectly, so no problem.
Do you have another theory that can compete with evolution and is supported by facts!
i will never understand why any one demonize the scientific process, oh ya for money
DeszuDjizlas 1 hour ago
Totally bunk argument. You compare George bush growing up to evolution then actually say you can't point out one species changing to another
sydneygordonhill 4 days ago
@sydneygordonhill It is a valid comparison and it's not his fault if you can't understand the point he's making. Transitional fossils don't show one species transforming into another in the way kirk cameron described (croco-duck) BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS. Like what was said in the video, every fossil is the transition between what the species was and what it's becoming. It makes perfect sense, go read a book.
iHeartElectricalEng 3 days ago
I like the scientific content condensed into a small video. Indeed, most of the videos in this line are very concise and interesting. But...I could do without the anti-religious commentary. It is childish and unnecessary. Science can be confusing, but we don't need any help figuring out when public figures make ridiculous statements. Let's stick to the facts and scientific theories...
Mementolaurie 4 days ago
Yeah but to say that there is NO CREATOR at all is to also say that there is no reward in the end therefore why in the hell are we even here. I believe if evolution is a reality it is a product of a god. If you look at genesis we could say that god created light was a metaphor for the big bang.
wishingfreedom 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@wishingfreedom "...there is no reward in the end therefore why in the hell are we even here." What do you think this is, a computer game? You're alive. Make the most of it. Find meaning for yourself. Leave the world a better place than you left it. Reproduce. Bring about world peace. Just don't expect the torture of an eternal life.
Misterb0z 4 days ago
@wishingfreedom But then the BB would have to have happened after the earth was created, which is just silly.
HarshColby 4 days ago
@wishingfreedom Why should there be a reward? Why does life need a point? Animals die without a reward, why the hell were they even there? and sorry, but in the bible when god said "let there be light," water already existed, so no it isn't a metaphor for the big bang. The people that wrote it were just guessing.
iHeartElectricalEng 3 days ago
Chimpanzees and humans are geneticly similar by 98%. What percentage is the genetic similarity between horses and zebras?
enigma1863 5 days ago
@enigma1863 Closer, since they can interbreed, but I'm not aware of any precise estimates.
HarshColby 5 days ago
@JDGallus
(Continuing...)
However, although the fact of evolution does not negate the possibility of a God, "theistic evolution", wherein God may or may not intervene occasionally in the process, is still a religious belief. In practice, even a religious scientist must approach the study of evolution in strictly naturalistic terms.
SpaceOdyssey56 1 week ago
@JDGallus
I can't speak for all atheists, but I myself do not object to you or anyone else believing in a God; I object to the confusion of that belief with knowledge, the dishonesty of asserting that gaps in what we know are proof of God's existence, the outright lies and distortion of facts by creationists to try to support myths, and their resorting to physical and/or psychological threats when failing to convince others by means of facts and logic, which is a tool of charlatans. (Cont'd...)
SpaceOdyssey56 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is still a place for God in the theory of evolution, people take religious scriptures to literal. Evolution is a process that was initiated by God. People who do not accept the theory of evolution believe that man appeared out of thin air, just because man evolved from primates does not mean that God did not create man. God knew that to create such a complex being that is man he must have started with a simpler organism.
JDGallus 1 week ago
@JDGallus If god has infinite power, then he doesn't *need* to start anywhere. In fact, he could have made life start on the surface of the sun. The fact is, with evolution you don't NEED a god, same with physics explanation for cosmogony. A universe that formed from the big bang, without a god, would look identical to ours; That is no coincidence.
iHeartElectricalEng 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't create groups as new theories arise, they all add a little bit to the truth if put together properly.
JDGallus 1 week ago
Potholer, c'mon. The first part depressed me. The corruption of the minds of innocent, unsuspecting children is never a pleasant thing, I'm sure you'll agree. :(
TheCircusReject 2 weeks ago
Ken Ham + Children = Intellectual Pedophile.
nolobede 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BEN STEIN: Well, how did it start?
DAWKINS: NOBODY knows how it got started. We know the kind of event that it must have been. We know the sort of event that must have happened for the origin of life.
BEN STEIN: And what was that?
DAWKINS: It was the origin of the first self-replicating molecule.
BEN STEIN: Right, and how did that happen?
DAWKINS: I told you, WE DON’T KNOW.
BEN STEIN: So you have no idea how it started
DAWKINS : NO NOR HAS ANYONE ELSE
robertfusion 2 weeks ago
Creationist- mentally and morally retarded devoid of independent and intelligent thought with no common sense or reason.
paramattic70 3 weeks ago
@paramattic70 or metaphors. metaphors throughout bible, why not Genisis? made for people without science and to change religion.
animaljp3 2 weeks ago
Even with mountains of evidence, constant peer review, intense scrutinization, years of research by world leading university's and verifiable data vs K. Hovind,if creationists still 100% deny any chance of evolution then they truly are Morons. God controls every aspect of their life b4 during and after. Even told what to think, how to adore and not question anything. Stop mocking the very Science that your lives depend on. Stop using anything Science has improved. Nothing left to do but insult
paramattic70 3 weeks ago
suck my arse
HalfEatenDimSim 3 weeks ago
@19navyseal91
Even with all of the scientific evidence in the world you still cannot convince religious fanatics to stfu lol
birrymays 3 weeks ago
7:25 what kind of crappy comparison was that??!! You're comparing the alleged evolution of a species over millions of years (so you say) to the development of one organism (George Bush) ?? Where in your puny little mind, of which half of it must have been sucked out during a freak vacuuming accident, as you so politely put it, does that make any sense at all???
19navyseal91 3 weeks ago in playlist Theory of Evolution
@19navyseal91 Its impossible to identify the perfect intermediate. Is it that you don't understand the analogy? Slow growth and small changes added up produce big change.
Johnf85 2 weeks ago
@19navyseal91 "You're comparing the alleged evolution of a species over millions of years.. to the development of one organism (George Bush)??.. Where in your puny little mind... does that make any sense at all???"
Actually, thats NOT what he compared. It seems your own puny little mind failed to grasp his actual point he made in his analogy.
SidewaysGts 1 week ago
the analogy of comparing a growth of a baby to man with the transition of a species is a horrible one
realoverfake 3 weeks ago
@realoverfake "The analogy of comparing a growth of a baby to man with the transition of a species is a horrible one"
Why?
SidewaysGts 1 week ago
@SidewaysGts
- well one is evolution and the other is growth and development, what processes does reproduction, mutation, natural selection, speciation .etc parallel?
types10000 1 week ago
@types10000 "Well one is evolution and the other is growth and development"
Indeed they are. But so what? He wasnt directly comparing "evolution" to "growth and development"- He was comparing two systems that involve change and demonstrating how both processes lack an instantaneous change from one thing to another. Baby bush didnt instantly become adult bush, & we KNOW it happened- but we will NEVER find a clear "moment" when it DID happen. The same is true for evolution. Savvy?
SidewaysGts 1 week ago
6:55 Lol look at that thing
realoverfake 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no theory of evolution. Only a list of animals Chuck Norris allows to live.
tomdevine6 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
Watch:
"youtube.com/watch?v=INH-lNUQQZg"
"youtube.com/watch?v=lutJYDxP6ys"
"youtube.com/watch?v=R9ike7PKd8U"
Regards.
TrumpetCallofGodLT 4 weeks ago
240p
bje717i 4 weeks ago
@bje717i
It was 2007, what do you expect ?
The quality is more than enough for the purpose of the video, which turned out amazing.
I wish people didn't make stupid, pointless comments.
TheUnchainedMind 3 weeks ago
@TheUnchainedMind Calm down. I still enjoyed the video.
bje717i 3 weeks ago
Chickens with teeth? Science has gone too far!
JonasAlbrecht 1 month ago
Comparing evolution to the growth of George Bush, just brilliant.
Z4RUM4N 1 month ago in playlist From Big Bang to Us -- Made Easy
@Z4RUM4N If only georgie was more highly evolved...
hheintze1 3 weeks ago
manipulating the children. that is religion.
krank34 1 month ago
Comment removed
HarshColby 1 month ago
I don't no how lame evolutionist can be ? saying that natural powers can creat all of this, ears, eyes, the ability to talk to think , Respiratory system,Reproductive system,Digestive System,Musculoskeletal system,Immune system,Nervous system....... it even can give organs the ability to fly lolololol,really how lame are you ? =.=""""""""""""""""""""""""
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "how lame are you" Well obviously nowhere near as lame as you are!
Try reading about biology before going on a rant about something you clearly do not understand.
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 You think the mother nature do creat humans birds and intellegence ! and i'm the lame one ???, Biology is the one that showed me the Dna the code of Information, and i'm not the one claiming that nature do have an intellegent mind ! you do tend to reject the one who created you and guide you to the right path, that's why you are the lame one .
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "i'm not the one claiming that nature do have an intellegent mind "
Neither am I. Evolution is not a planned process but one determined by many factors such as the environment. (Hence my comments that you do not understand evolution)
I do not accept wild claims based on ancient mythology - there have been many religious claims of gods from many countries, most now abandoned. Current religions will follow suit as they are not based on facts!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 According to some sources, evolution is an all pervasive process that is moving in one direction. This begs the question, why would evolution move in the direction it is moving in and why does the cosmos have the form it does? If there is nothing guiding it, why this particular direction and why this particular form?
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "why would evolution move in the direction it is moving in" Because it is a natural process and follows natural laws. Just like meteors colliding with planets, and stars dying when they have used up all their fuel. It just is - not everything has to have a reason why!
Take a rock lying on the ground - does it have a reason for being there, or a plan for the future? No - it's just a rock. It will stay where it is until something happens to it - what or when ever that might be.
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Right, this form of thinking could be applied to anything in the cosmos, including human beings. Does a human being have to have a reason for being there? No, it's just a human being. This form of thinking leads to "meaninglessness" where everything is devoid of meaning. In this sense, things just exist in the natural order of things without any real direction. Think of a bridge spanning from nowhere to nowhere. I have come across many people who think in this way.
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "things just exist in the natural order of things" Correct.
There is no evidence to suggest that everything was created for a reason and with a purpose in mind. Many humans 'want' there to be reason - doesn't mean there is one!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 "No evidence?!" What kind of evidence would one need to have a reason for the meaning of things? It appears to me that you are suggesting that some things may have a reason for being and some things may not. Is this true? Also, when you say "mind," is this the mind of man or that of a higher Being? Who has a purpose in mind? Now, in this system of thought (naturalism) everything is placed on an equal plane. It can be said that man is no more than the grass. Are you really 63?
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheHistoryguy10 "some things may have a reason for being and some things may not."
Nope, I cannot think of anything natural that has a reason for being, except for the fact that it was born, where the reason for it's being is it's parents activity! If it wasn't for your parents you wouldn't be here. End of story!
All life is equal in one sense - it was produced by it's parents. Depends on your viewpoint. Yes I am 63 - why does that matter. I have no reason to lie on youtube though many do.
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Well if you saw the videos i provide you will understand why i claim that for nature to do what it did to start from molecules to bring up a human being it surely need a magestic mind !
..
Also your argument is so old and so wrong, it's not because chrsitianity is wrong or buddiest is wrong there for all religions are wrong, islam is without any doubt the truth, the fact that it provides proofs and the fact that you can not debunk anyone of them is enough from a logical view.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "islam is without any doubt the truth, the fact that it provides proofs "
Nope no scientific or other proofs have been established for your old stories. You wish that they have been proven, because your book says so and you don't want to accept that it is wrong. I understand that. Sorry but it doesn't make it true!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Maybe it's your deluded mind or preconception of islam, but for a human being to think that 1.6 billion humans accepted islam just for old stories that's very sad ! I hope you can see this vid /watch?v=s_xh6WQLNOw&feature=related , not for proof but just to maybe wash over your arrogant attitude after that i will bring you the proofs and sure they are a lot !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 5.2 billion humans know islam is just a bunch of old stories. 1.6B believe what they're told and aren't interested in finding out they're wrong. Because of the rules regarding apostates, it's very likely your 1.6B number is actually much smaller. Stop spamming bullshit videos please. Videos ignorant of science aren't supporting your case.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby Lol in fact the athiests are just 16% the majority of those 5.2 do believe in other religions! "Because of the rules regarding apostates" Don't don't embarrass yourself please no just you didn't debunk any proof i provided but now you are lying ? I don't have any interrest in speaking with liars sorry !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@HarshColby You also need to see this vid maybe you will lose your mask of arrogance, going to a hole in ground you don't have anything to be arrogant for ! /watch?v=s_xh6WQLNOw&feature=related
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 More bullshit videos? I'm sure you know that science-illiterate videos don't support your case. You just like posting bullshit.
If only 16% self-identify as atheist, then how many are threatened into not acknowledging their lack of belief? In Christianity it's only social scorn they need to endure, but in Islam, it's death. What moron would accurately report they don't believe?
If 5.7B believe gods, they must all be true. If belief=reality, then all gods must be real. Nice logic.
HarshColby 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HarshColby There is no penalty for apostasy in islam, /watch?v=Q_oKXh2oy8E
and read this :“Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” (Quran 2:256)
..
Now atleast you can search for another lie !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@HarshColby "If 5.7B believe gods, they must all be true. If belief=reality, then all gods must be real. Nice logic"
Nice logic ??? well if this your logic then you are mentally ill !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 That was your logic. You just didn't recognize it.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby No my logic is this :
1.A man brings texte that no human being can even imitate and claiming that it's from god => true unless i can imitate that texte
2.In the text i find facts that no human could know at that time => It's indeed from god, unless i can explain how the text contains such information
..
Your logic : I don't hear, I don't see , It's all lies, reject reject reject !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 1. How do you know no human can write that text? Since a human did write it, that's silly. Humans can write any string of characters they want to.
2. Name one fact in the book that no human could have written.
This is not related at all to your previous logic that belief by 1.6B people makes it true.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "1.6 billion humans accepted islam" For all that accept the stories of islam there are billions of others in religions that don't. So you only believe islam because many others do? most people thought the Earth was flat, or the sun went around the earth - they were wrong but were at one time the majority. Oh and I'm not arrogant, at least no more so than all the arrogant creationists who think they're right.
mtbee9 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 " /watch?v=s_xh6WQLNOw&feature=related" I watched your lame video that supposedly offers a reason to convert to Islam. Major FAIL. It offers nothing that other religions don't offer - the empty promise of life after death. Nothing more.
Amazing how religions offer something that they can never prove and when you die and find they are wrong there is nothing you can do about it - and you won't even know!
They sure know when they are onto a good scam don't they!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 "that supposedly offers a reason to convert to Islam" ??? didn't this what i said : [ I hope you can see this vid *** , not for proof but just to maybe wash over your arrogant attitude] ? yep i did say this and put a line under Not for proof !
..
you are angry for nothing .
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "you are angry for nothing" Well Yami I'm not angry at all so I don't know how you got that idea. Disagreeing with someone doesn't necessarily mean someone is angry.
I hope you have a happy holiday season and I hope you understand more about how life really works in the New Year.
mtbee9 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Natural powers did not create anything simply through natural selection certain mutations became new species. For example, the inmune system was developed due to the necessity of an organism to defend itself from attack. Through mutations, this system was slowly developed. Living beings without IMsystem died while the beings with Imsystem survived. That is Natural selection.
IamVeryFrozen 2 weeks ago
And still wating for a replay to that vid that explain why natural selection is not responsible for the systems in all and i mean all the living organs!
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 I already replied so no need to ask the question.
The bombadier beetle and giraffe neck evolved gradually. We know even of several transitional species for both. but even that would not be needed, as a logical progression could be made. While not strong it would be more of an answer then god did it. So the god did it would fall away.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs The problem is that you are putting all your comments at once very fast so don't be confused please , it's not a chat room , i post whatever i post than i comeback after sometime . well this god did it is the fact that is supported by science, the fact that you opend the cell and find a city like complexity and a CODE of INFORMATION and still think it's funny to say it's made by god then sure you have a problem of humour .
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "god did it is the fact that is supported by science"
Nope, there is no scientific evidence to support god, whatever god is!
You cannot even define what this invisible, undetectable god is, let alone show that he/it/she created anything!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 That's what you thunk, but you're far far away from reality :
Evolution Debunked: /watch?v=2lwiOewUS-0
From 0 to 300 No way /watch?v=AKzr270FeNA
How from scientific observation we can know+prove god (see first 20min) : /watch?v=YI9owlpOQl0&feature=relmfu
For the Miracle of language of Quran:/watch?v=w9vHj4z48q4
There are more if you want to be sure 100%, debunk one prove and you are free to not believe, ignore all of them and try to explain why you did that to god in jugment day.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "you're far far away from reality" Well that really applies to you!
Looked at the first video and if you think that a few baseless comments debunks evolution then you have a whole lot of learning to do about what has already been proven and shown to support evolution. I understand that you are brainwashed by religion and cannot look objectively at real science, so I don't expect that anything I or anyone else says will convince you otherwise. Sad really. Enjoy the only life you have!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Did you debunk anything ? no , did you replay explaining anything ? no , what did you do :
1. Put a claim that the person you're talking with don't know anything about evolution, it the case with every evolutionist!
2. Running away from the proofs that evolution is a big wierd lie !
..
I have in fact this life and the afterlife you surely also do, but it's our choice to chose an afterlife in paradise or in hell fire ! how both we will meet in paradise with god's will :)
peace!!
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 " proofs that evolution is a .. lie" Nope, no proof was given. " the afterlife you surely also do" That is your unsubstantiated claim. If it helps you get through this life, hoping that there is another then maybe that helps you. But to claim it as fact is bogus.
"chose an afterlife in paradise or in hell fire" Both made up claims - no evidence exists for either.
I prefer to live in a peaceful reality!
mtbee9 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mtbee9 Did you debunk anything ? no , did you replay explaining anything ? no , what did you do :
1. Put a claim that the person you're talking with don't know anything about evolution, it the case with every evolutionist!
2. Running away from the proofs that evolution is a big wierd lie !
..
I have in fact this life and the afterlife you surely also do, but it's our choice to chose an afterlife in paradise or in hell fire ! how both we will meet in paradise with god's will :)
peace!!
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 And that is only with gradual changes. In some case the changes can be quite quick as well and dramatic.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs Talking me science not momo jambo if you can't prove it don't bring it.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 But it seems that you have decided to ignore what I say and to stop searching for knowledge and just put your fingers in your ears. So the discussion is over.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs I wont say "again i spoke about the chat forum thing" coz it's not chat and i know that i have to give you TIME to answer back , i expect the same from you
YamiYami17 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YamiYami17 " why natural selection is not responsible for the systems in all and i mean all the living organs!"
Well it is so no problem. Evolution is true!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@primepost Seems you're an expert on the subject of fossils and evolution. May I suggest you have a look at the following series of 4 youtube videos, where a fellow expert in such matters debunks the work of Harun Yahya: Richard Dawkins debunks "Atlas Of Creation" by Harun Yahya. I'm sure you're going to love it. Enjoy.
ruirodtube 1 month ago
@primepost Trollolol.
Alphacaliber 1 month ago
There is only on thing at the beginning, middle and end of evolution, Chuck Norris
maltesers55 1 month ago
@MrGralgrathor I've read star wars, seemed pretty real to me :)
maltesers55 1 month ago
@primepost The JREF has $1 million if you can show your religion is true, or a demonstration of any supernatural ability at all. You even get to pick the test and success criteria as long as it's scientific. Have at it.
Since every fossil is a transitional fossil, they would have lost the $1 billion long ago if they were serious. They probably have some non-scientific definition of "transitional" that they're using. They just use the word "transitional" as a smoke screen.
HarshColby 1 month ago
Comment removed
HarshColby 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@primepost
Go read a real book.
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
Wat now!!! Bhaha
123Jakeism 1 month ago
How can evolution happen slowly, if it does not happen at all? It is a lie and an empty theory.
54eriks 1 month ago
@54eriks Your inability to understand how it can happen slowly doesn't mean it didn't. The rest of us understand it just fine. It just shows there's something about this topic you don't understand. I'm sure there are plenty of things about evolution you don't understand. Learning what we know would be your next step. Somehow, I doubt you'll take that step however.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby HarshColby, I doubt that you have even the smallest idea ofthe principles of species formation. And the wily, underperforming theories Tell me not interested. Therefore, in this context can not toil. That is you do not want to know the truth, if all the forces lay hold upon Darwinism. But there are other, much better, expected to calculate species formation theory.
54eriks 1 month ago
@54eriks Great comment from someone that hasn't bothered to learn anything.
HarshColby 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HarshColby No matter how you "smart" excuse the absurd theory postulates, it does not work. However, the theory of acting and the species may not even be calculated. Indeed, Darwinism is a zombie, which prevents seeing and understanding the other, much better?
54eriks 1 month ago
@54eriks "species formation"
Evolution = Evolution is any change across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.[1]
You are talking about before that, which is abiogenesis, Which has nothing to do with evolution.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs With the development of the most robust to do is transfer of genes in parallel on the principle that had already been formulated nomogenezis and of which I speak. And not to tell me anecdotes about the long evolution of the event.
54eriks 1 month ago
@54eriks thought that something like this would be your respond. So this is mine *walks away from the person that thinks he controls science*
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs Maybe tell me what you want. Something abstract chatter is not sentiment. I am not in control of science, but I understand what it does not understand what has already been discovered, but because of the wrong Darwin's theory of domination translated backward. This refers to the principle of horizontal gene transfer, which similar views were already nomogenesis. And the result completely upside down tree species and species formation than Darwin not succeed fantasies.
54eriks 1 month ago
4:10 ROFL very nice point
tsysx5 1 month ago
yay because there shape look the same they were the same lol, if you just could answer one question how a systeme can create it self ... of well you can't.
..
for the confused out there see this :
/watch?v=E0zKWqEC1V0
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Yep, that's definitely a video for confused people.
Misterb0z 1 month ago
@Misterb0z Yeah i mean if you don't whant to say why i understand but please don't waste your time putting random comments, if you're still confused here a nother to show you it's impossible to start the whole thing : /watch?v=f0DarH79soo
:P refute it if you can !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17
ah... you are one of those retards who go from video to video preaching religious nonsense...
hey, you dumbshit, what's the penalty for Apostasy in your religion? just asking.
transtlantic 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@transtlantic I will give you the same answer i put in the other video : there is no penalty for apostasy in islam, don't take my words as a holy scirpture see this : /watch?v=Q_oKXh2oy8E
and read this :“Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” (Quran 2:256)
Now sir if you have others questions just ask.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 I don't need to debunk ppsimmons' crap. He has no credibility. Watch part 3 of the Made Easy series if you want to see that rubbish eviscerated.
Misterb0z 1 month ago
@Misterb0z I did give you a vid from ppsimmons ? i couldn't find where ^^"""""
whatever the part 3 is like an evolutionist proving evo wrong ! 1.He brings very nice topic wich is LIFE, coz simply life is not in the material word of atoms and molicules there for we can't not ever never creat animated living stuff robots do not live!,2.he didn't speak about how they did replecate in side the cell -.-,3 The dna is a CODE !!!, in fact it's all momo jambo, here is why : /watch?v=AKzr270FeNA
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@Misterb0z Yeah and teh fact Evo is a weird theory for weirdos donsn't me you go chose whatever religion, i will give you the evidance why you have to be chose islam like i gived to you why evo is wrong, See this vid : /watch?v=w9vHj4z48q4
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Stop spamming bs videos please. This is a science channel.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby Bs yes indeed this is you answer when you don't have one! when i gave another evolutionist a vid to make him remember how things are complex he said this is in fact a positive thing for Evo lololololololol, is this your science ? i swear to god the biggest insult to science is Evo.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 The answers are in the scientific literature. Since you obviously are going to ignore science, there's really no point in debating anything with you. Whether evolution is true or not, your bullshit videos are just bullshit with no basis in reality.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby Buhahaha! =.= well the vids are also and thank god i said when i put the proves you demands from that i want a replay that deconstruct them coz you know now Evolution like you said is the noon sun, yet still you couldn't answer, and you big argument is the videos are bu***** now prove they are if you can or be silent pls
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 To prove your videos are wrong, simply google the relevant data. Any school child could do it. You can too. Give it a try. If you really want to understand why your claims are wrong, you can always enroll in a basic biology class which covers evolution. Me telling you you're wrong won't do any good, because if you're willing to ignore all the published scientific research, then the word of someone on YT isn't going to make you accept science. Education is the cure for ignorance.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby "Any school child could do it" if that's true than sure you are more then capable of doing that aren't you ? i'm not even telling you to write me the answer knowing it a hard and boring thing to do,just give me vids like i'm doing that deconstruct atleast ONE prove that is very wrong ! this just in evo let's not talk about quran coz i know you can't even try to deconstruct it.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@HarshColby ,[because if you're willing to ignore all the published scientific research], it's because Albert Einstein did ignore the theory of luminiferous ether that he reached special relativity!! it's not because he took as a fact.. it's my duty and yours to invastigate in order to give the right infomation to our children, So i really recommand you to have those classes maybe that will stop you from putting your children in it
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Einstein didn't ignore any published research. He read it and had an understanding of what was going on. It's a tragedy that you're so sure you're right, yet so wrong, and your kids, if you have any, will suffer because of your ignorance and arrogance.
Pick ONE claim and I'll show you how you're mistaken. To pick apart all of your misunderstandings would take a lifetime, and you're not worth the trouble. Pick one. Any one you feel is the most compelling.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby Hi Hi sir :D ... humm let see i pick the first one :
From 0 to 300 No way /watch?v=AKzr270FeNA
..
i nead a vid or an explanation please don't tell to go read a whole book even if the vid is 100 hours i will see it, no problem :)
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Okay. Which claim in that video would you like to discuss?
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby The jump from 0 there is no cell and the fact that the simplest cell must have atleast 300 component to function .
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 This is a video about evolution, not abiogenesis, but ok.
First, why would the structure of the first cell be important? Viruses replicate without any DNA and no cell structure analogous to what we see in modern cells. Why, then, would the characteristics of the smallest modern cells be a compelling argument?
No one claims the first cell popped into existence, so the fact that it didn't is agreed. Tisdall knows his audience will think the first life was a modern cell, but it wasn't.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby But that's the point called it what you called if you are an evolutionist you have to explain this big probleme it's a part of evolution. "modern cells" ??? there is no modern or prehistoric cells lol,there is no magical cell that can form by it's own and then develope to the simplest cell, Don't beg the argument like the other evolutionist in the vid, if you want to reject it and have faith in Evo that's fine atleast now you know it's a religion and sure the weakest one.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 In what way is the pre-first modern cell evolution a "big problem"?
Cells today are far more complicated than early cells. Do your research. I'm not going to argue with someone that thinks making stuff up is okay. Try to separate your opinion from statements you can back up with actual facts.
No one claims a cell magically formed. Why the strawman?
(And stop using "evolutionist" as a derogatory term. It's rude. Discuss facts, not perceived ideologies.)
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby "than early cells" well this early cell that you're speaking about is a term you invented in the two past comments, sir if you can't imagine a simple car that don't have a motor and wheels then you want me to imagine a cell that don't have dna and the replication system of it and the mechanism to make us protein! so i'm calling you to rethink the facts. "evolutionist" if you don't like the term then sure i will not use it .
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 A simpler car was the Model-T. Modern cells are far more complicated than early cells. Do you need examples? No need to imagine a self-replicating system without a cell; check out viruses. Also check out how we replicate DNA for forensic studies without their cell enclosures. Replication does not require modern cell structures. Evolution requires only replication and selection, not complex cells.
Biology is the study of evolution in this context, so biologist is the proper term.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby Here what another huuuum athiest ( i think the term is fine no ? ) says about cell complexity : This is true for the types of cells we see now.
But for "life" to begin, all you'd need is a collection of self-replicating molecules.
..
Please "collection of self-replicating molecules" T__T is this science? self-replicating molecules ??? it's like a religious statment witout any logic in it, buddist saying budda god or christian saying jesus god! speaking is easy proving is not.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 The data supports that self-replicating molecules prior to the first primitive cells, so I'd agree with your quoted text.
Yes. it's science. Check out part three of potholer's series: watch?v=v8nYTJf62sE
Also check out the RNA world hypothesis. Don't claim they're making religious statements if you actually have no idea what evidence they are using. Just because you don't understand it (and/or haven't researched it), doesn't mean they're dreaming up ideas without evidence.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby Here is one claim. There is no evidence at all that evolution ever took place in the past. In all recorded history, extending back nearly five thousand years, no one has ever recorded the natural evolution of any kind of creature (living or non-living) into a more complex kind. Furthermore, all known vertical changes seem to go in the wrong direction. An average of at least one species has become extinct every day since records have been kept, but no new...continued
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheHistoryguy10 "no one has ever recorded the natural evolution of any kind of creature (living or non-living) " Well first of all evolution has been shown to happen - but only with living things - non-living things do not evolve! or even reproduce!
"nothing has ever evolved into higher complexity" So why does the entire fossil record show a gradual change of complexity over Millions of years? and what is your scientific explanation of how they occur?
mtbee9 1 month ago
@TheHistoryguy10 The problem with that kind of argument (aside from the fact that it completely disregards the fact that there is a huge amount of evidence that evolution happens, and there have been observed instances, and that changes in DNA are cumulative, etc) /ramble
The problem with that kind of argument is that you're assuming that if something hasn't been observed, that means we can't know it happens. We haven't observed Pluto making a complete orbit. Does that mean we don't know it did?
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby You have used that example before. This could be said about anything, like a drop of water on the island of Palawan in the Phillipines. I have never seen that drop of water but this does not mean that it is no there. Both Pluto and the drop of water are particular things. However, evolution is this all pervasive process that has happened and is happening, but is nowhere found. Sure, you could say this or that particular thing points to it, ...
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
@TheHistoryguy10 The point about Pluto is what we observe tells us exactly where is was in the past and where it will be in the future. That's different from the water drop we know nothing about.
Evolution is a pervasive process that is found in every living organism. Nowhere found?
HarshColby 1 month ago
@TheHistoryguy10 Of couse it is, evolution has been observed in a smaller scale, in bacteria, which are currently evolving inorder to be inmune to antibiotics.
IamVeryFrozen 2 weeks ago
@HarshColby ...but all of them together do not prove this big process.
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
@TheHistoryguy10 Sure it does:
We know what happens when DNA keeps changing: the population changes. We know that these changes accumulate. We know that the longer changes accumulate, the more different the DNA will be from the original.
To say these changes must stop at some nebulous point (beyond speciation, since that has been observed), you must identify a plausible mechanism to stop it.
Just as if you said Pluto has not made a complete orbit, you'd need a mechanism to prevent it.
HarshColby 1 month ago
@HarshColby ...species have evolved during that time. Stars explode, comets and meteorites disintegrate, the biosphere deteriorates, and everything eventually dies, so far as all historical observations go, but nothing has ever evolved into higher complexity. So what is going on? How does this prove evolution?
TheHistoryguy10 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YamiYami17 "i will give you the evidance why you have to be chose islam" Thanks. but I happen to live in a sane world, where creepy men who marry little girls because they claim to have been 'given a message' by an 'angel' while 'lying in a cave' are rightly jailed for significant lengths of time. Why would I dedicate my life to such nonsense?
Misterb0z 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« Tzortzis »
Tzortzis' attempts as statistics to disprove evolutionary theory are as ill informed as the rest of his sophistry.
More importantly, they're merely re-iterations of works by members of the Discovery Institute - works that have been debunked years, if not decades ago.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 'How a systeme (system) can create it self.." What ? Before you spread your shit, make sure you know you arn't wrong.
Alphacaliber 1 month ago
@Alphacaliber Well thanks for the correcion of the word, in french english are quiet the same all latin so i may do a lot of mistakes but i will try my best to keep what i write readable.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Yeah, you are quite confused, when you do not even understand what evolution is.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs The biggest argument for Evolutionist is "people don't know what evolution is" !!!
quite amazing as argument =.= I believe everyone knows what is evolution exept evolutionist. Just to think that a non-living molecules can form a living cell is extraordinary ridiculous, and if we try to close our eyes on that and try to invastigate the motors of evolution it will only get worse!
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17
3. Biology
a. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
b. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.
That is the definition that scientist would give you. ((Which should be follow, as its their scientific theory))
(cont.)
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 So, are you willing to start at the definition that science gives you? If the answer is yes, then I am willing to converse further with you.
If you answer no, then there is no point. As it means that you are not willing to even listen to the definition of the field that evolution is about. Meaning you do not care about the truth at all. You only care what creationist say, who made up strawman definitions.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "Evolution is any change across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins."
You would be allowed to go from this one as well if you like. States the same thing just a bit different.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 O my mistake, you may even use this definition of evolution to make it even simpler.
"Evolution is the process of change in all forms of life over generations, and evolutionary biology is the study of how evolution occurs. The biodiversity of life evolves by means of mutations, genetic drift and natural selection."
You can use anything that is either what I have provider or similiar too.
If you include Big Bang, Abiogensis, then gameover.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs "If you include Big Bang, Abiogensis, then gameover" Really ? what a nice running from facts. So you're saying it did Evolve but not from 0 is that what are you saying ? Look i have the ways to make it clear that god(swt) do exist, by big bang and logical arguments or by quran ( book that is impossible for human being to write ) or by showing you that evo is a horribale theory , so ofcourse no problem with me not using Abiogensis or a miracle so clear to us.
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Yes, really.
I am not running away from the facts, I am trying to make clear what evolution is and what it is not. If you want to talk about Abiogenesis that is fine. If you want to talk about The Progresion of the universe that is fine too. But do not label it as evolution as it is not.
So here is the choice again. Can you accept one of the three definitions that I gave you, or something similiar? Or Game Over ?
As it means you are not looking for truth.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs I accept ! but let me clear something, Evolution is the one who opend the door for Abiogensis, so if we won't to speak about evolution we have to know from where things started, coz if you don't have the base then logiclay everything that follows is just nonesense, And the big topic is "Is god exist or not" so me dbunking evolution is equal to proving god exist, First tell me about Natural selection how it did it lol : /watch?v=AsXuERTQsv8&feature=related,
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 please do not give me links to proselytizing videos, that do not understand what evolution is.
No, evolution talks about the diversity of life, not the origins. Evolution and Abiogensis stand up on their own merrits and can fall on their own merrits.
No, debunking evolution, just means that evolution is incorrect. It does not mean you can make the logical leap. A is incorrect, now B is correct and then automatically C. (C being Allah)
Are you willing to accept?
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs I rechecked and found that i didn't make a mistake the video i gave is talking about natural selection not the origins of life, so i need an answer for it, coz it's important it shows that natural selection must have a brain to come up with the stuff in the vid ( but we know it don't have one so logicaly natural selection is not the responsible for those stuff)
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 The video that you showed me started talking about the big bang, then abiogenesis, and then why this Mr. Martin stopped being a scientist. Then it talks about how irreducible complexity. Of the Bombardier Beetle and of the Giraffe.
It does not talk about natural selection at all.
The assumption is made that these features of this beetle and of the Giraffe were evolved like snap.
You want me to explain the evolution of the two species?
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs "irreducible complexity. Of the Bombardier Beetle and of the Giraffe" It was speaking about natural selection, but well i don't want to insist on you, non don't explain anything if you don't want too
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@NathanWubs "just means that evolution is incorrect" logicaly if you have two options to explain how a thing is formed ( 1. formed it self naturally or 2.created by a creator in a one shot ) then sure if 1 is incorrect applay the second is correct , saying No, is 1.going against logic or
2. saying that there is a third explanation for complex system to exist! and that's is just unlogical.
and no for Allah (swt), we can't know much on who god really is from science but his existance yes!
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 You are wrong. If you think those are the only two options.
I will give you one post to look up the history of evolution. Then you will see the different theories that are out there. Which is a hell of a lot more then 2. Its not a 50%/50% that is a false dichotomy. So if you are not willing to accept that there might be other explanations, then 1 evolution or 2 god did it. then there is no use in talking to you further.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NathanWubs "I will give you one post to look up the history of evolution" ? what post aliens did it ? bring me this third argument please i'm starving to see it !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Its not Illogical to not assume anything. Its Illogical to assume that there are two state to begin with, when no evidence has presented itself. Science does not assume anything to begin with it follows the evidence.
If evolution is debunked, science will re-examen the evidence and will come to another conclusion. Which gives loads of possibilities.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs "If evolution is debunked, science will re-examen the evidence and will come to another conclusion." Totally agree. Nobody yet has an alternative theory to how life developed. Some people will never accept the facts.
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Yes, that is the problem, people like to think to much in black and white. And especially in evolution that is kinda a bad thing to do. Its like being with someone for 3 or 4 years, we only sometimes will see minor changes but not a lot of change. But if someone suddenly comes back after a three year period, they will not o wow what a change. Then to name a point where they specifically changed from their old self to new self is very hard.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Sorry, for babbling but cannot help myself. Another example is going from white to black. When is the exact point that you can say, this is only white and this is only black? Its very hard to tell and making a fix point on it, is not kinda fair.
That is why I enjoy the notion everything is a transitional form really.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs You are dreaming if evo is incorrect than god do exist, it's not a rocket science, you have something complex in front of your eyes you have revelations and you have a serie of prophets and you have a miracle, all these aren't a joke but facts you can check theme
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@NathanWubs Also do you want me to talk about the fossils or just explore those 3 motors of evolution ?
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 We can talk about fossil, but it is not necessary as they are the weakest case for evolution to begin with. As even if the whole fossil record would suddenly turn into a hoax then it would not invalidate evolution, by the definition that science gives it. Fossil are handi base materials though.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs Evolutionist calculated that the humans started existing as humans of our age 200.000 years a go, now if there is any fossil of human older than 200.000 sure and i think even you will agree ,it will be the death shot for all the parts of the theory , Don't you think that ???
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 Nope, I do not agree. It would be a great finding an the theory would need to indeed be revised. Science lives for those kind of discoveries that change our scientific understanding. Just like the discovery recently, that neutrons in certain conditions might be faster then light.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@NathanWubs "It would be a great finding an the theory would need to indeed be revised" False argument, all evolutionist do agree that evolution will collapse simply for the reason of time , if you don't have enough time to go with the natural selection process but you have the complexity of humans, then sure you have a big big big problem revise what you're writing .
YamiYami17 1 month ago
@YamiYami17 "all evolutionist do agree that evolution will collapse simply for the reason of time" As evolution is supported by all the evidence the time scale fits in perfectly, so no problem.
Do you have another theory that can compete with evolution and is supported by facts!
mtbee9 1 month ago
@mtbee9 Intellegent design, a creator, the fact is : the irreducible complexity concept
YamiYami17