@d3ltadrive the bible isn't supposed to be taken literally??? It's only the foundation of Christianity. The cause of wars and millions of deaths. Only the word of God. Only God's infallible law. Only the book that every Christian turns to for every argument, question or belief. Sorry, I'm not gonna buy that crap you're selling. If you are saying that, you might as well finish off the deed and become Atheist. It's ok, you won't get struck by lightning.
creationism and evolution dont reject each other. the bible never actual states how the world was made or how long ago, it only states that God made it. creation happened about 12000 years ago and it was the creation of mans spirit, of Gods chosen people. the bible is not meant to be taken literally, it is symbolic because everything is meant to have several meanings and several truths.
Thanks. You said evolutionists are sophomoric because they refuse to distinguish between micro and macro but then you say they use "variation (micro)" to show how "reptiles evolved from fish(macro)". Have they not just defined it then? In other words, they implied that many, many, small changes eventually total up to be considered one big one. Perhaps, if the word "kind" wasn't shifted about, things could be comprehended better by both sides.
@ThatCanadianGuy23 All the scientific proof points to ancestry. If we're made in Gods image, sorry...but we woulden't have chimpanzee ERV'S . And you can observe common ancestry, There was only two cat's on Noah's Ark! Now it's not far from 50.
@JimmyFingerz1 Common ERV's doesn't prove common ancestry at all.ERV's can be transmitted by infection between different species.Your common ancestry hypothesis is based on your faith in evolution not on science.
@ThatCanadianGuy23 it is a common mistake is to believe that something is only testable if it is directly observable. this is not so. In fact, Chromosome 2 is a test of common ancestry: if the vestigal telomeres and centromeres are not there, then common ancestry is ruled out.But, they are there, as predicted. That is how theories are tested.
@ThatCanadianGuy23 Consensus has Everything to do with Science. You most Obviously have NOT read or know anything about... Evolution, Scientific Evidence, Theory or Objective Reasoning...
The Theory of Evolution is one the most voluminously accepted theories... because of the "Immense Mass Of Evidence" it contains. Genetic Theory is coherent to and correlative to, The Theory Of Evolution. Evolution is the Universally accepted Scientific Paradigm, it is taught in EVERY non-religious College and University on Earth.
Both Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI have accepted it's validity. To deny Evolution is either Disingenuous, Nescient, Rationally Ignorant or Intellectually INSANE.
@ThatCanadianGuy23 look at the video your commenting on idiot ..... look at the likes , and look at how many people laugh at stupid creationists like you , your ignorant not be moron , and kindly don't reply back,i don't wanna waste my time on some idiot like you
@ThatCanadianGuy23 haha , your retarded , I know that know .... A stupid creationist talking about Science,you know nothin
Evolution is demonstrated,its not contingent on other factors , Its observable too and it has been tested .
Do you know the theory of Gravity has a legitimate flaw too ? In fact it has plenty of flaws in deep space , Relativity crashes in deep space and theory of Gravity is never clearly explained or explainable,Gravity destroys religion more than Evolution,Do u know ?
@ThatCanadianGuy23 It is a fact , I know it , and I am not going to debate about this or explain things . I don't got time , Believe whatever you want to ,leave the science to the scientists .......
Epigenetic evolution puts a spiritual aspect into the change in genetic information over time. Dr. Bruce Lipton is a great source of info on epigenetics, the idea that YOU CONTROL THE DESTINY OF YOUR GENES.
@ThatCanadianGuy23 your a strict creationist ? wtf do you use the net if you think Science is wrong ? Its the same ,The science of Internet , and the science of Evolution ,They are facts -_-
@mogely52, stop getting your info from Creationist websites, Go to a real library in a REAL University and do some real research, enlighten yourself man!..stop being stuck in the 1st century FFS!
This video would be okay if not for the flat out lies. Creationists present an argument, and then the evolutionist comes up with a sophomoric response. Evolutionists have to borrow from Christian presuppositions, otherwise they have no place to start. Evolutionists claim to follow logic, but can't even say where logic comes from. They claim to believe in morality, but can't say where it comes from. They claim to believe in the laws of science even though the laws may contradict their "theory".
@YHWHisSovereign Horrible examples! What your saying is you can't use logic or have morality unless you can say where it "comes from"? I wish creationists would understand that evolution is not in direct conflict with creation. We all have to accept evolution happened!! You need NO presuppositions to observe that...
@jerahmia I'm saying that you have no justification for using logic or morality. This applies only to atheists, and not theistic evolutionists. Creationists come in a broad category, but those who believe the Bible is infallible see the direct conflict between the Bible and evolution. One might believe that God got it all started, and perhaps helped out species evolve into other species, but either God is using supernatural powers to put things together, or it is happening naturally, not both.
@jerahmia You have to start with presuppositions to get anywhere. Even if its just observing something. You presuppose that what you are seeing is actually happening and that your eyes are sending the correct information to your brain. Furthermore you presuppose that your interpretation of what your are observing is correct. With any science experiment, you have to accept a certain number of assumptions. These might be reasonable(presupposing that your reasoning is correct) or they might not be.
@YHWHisSovereign What type of these "reasonable" presuppositions come from a Christianity?? Where in the bible does explain the origin of logic? Your saying someone who never read the bible or believed in Christianity would not know how to appropriately use it?
@jerahmia god is logical and as such has endowed his creation with the ability to understand and use presuppositions and logic. now the atheistic world view can not account for logic, (no-one has ever been able to prove that logic has come from natural selection and to simply say well we just evolved this way is god of the gaps kind of answer, cause NOTHING in atheism lends its self to the development of logic) or to account for morality, and it can't account for emotions like love, or altruism
@RedLetterChristian "god is logical" Then why are all the arguments in favor of it's existence fallacious?
"atheistic world view" Lack of a belief does not a belief make.
"prove that logic has come from natural selection" And anyone trying to look for it in a biological field of science is ignorant beyond their ability to understand one
"like love, or altruism" I guess ignoring actual science is easier than learning it huh? plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/
@RedLetterChristian On a side note, I love the Gish-gallop style of commenting.. saying so many wrong things that actually addressing them all would take more time and space than it took to write. Kudos.
@YHWHisSovereign Does logic come from somewhere? What is logic to you? And how does logic become evidence against the theory of evolution? Also, I have never heard of "evolutionists" making claims they believe in morality. What exactly is morality?Please expand on this.
@thybigballs Logic is the nature of reality. Where does it come from? From an evolutionary standpoint, it came by chance. From a Christian perspective, God is reality, and logic is the nature of God. We can account for the existence of logic, which is universal, immaterial, and invariable because these are the same attributes of God. Objective morality can only be defined with respect to God. Science is incapable of determining morality,and society is incapable of determining objective morality
@YHWHisSovereign I sorry, I had asked for an example for the following statement of yours: "Creationists present an argument, and then the evolutionist comes up with a sophomoric response". I didn't quite ask where the logic came from.
@YHWHisSovereign How many logic classes have you taken? I ask because logic students don't usually approach it so flippantly. Logic is a human achievement borne from ancient Greek philosophers who developed a systematic + dispassionate way of examination to keep personal biases and opinions at bay. Those who deride it as less than one's [naturally] superior opinion are often at the losing end. Key differences: micro/macro = time span. Morality/ethic = an evolutionary values for survival.
@YHWHisSovereign You said, "Creationists present an argument, and then the evolutionist comes up with a sophomoric response". Could you please provide an example for this statement? Any examples of evolutionists borrowing Christian presuppositions to build a scientific theory would be a bonus. Thanks
@thybigballs A good example of a sophomoric response is with the subject of macro/micro evolution. Evolutionists refuse to distinguish between the two, but anyone can see the great leap from variation within kind to transforming into another kind. They use the fact that variation (mircro) occurs to "prove" that reptiles evolved from fish (macro). Has uniformity of nature been proved from the evolution model? No, but evolutionists assume it even though it can only come from an orderly creator.
@YHWHisSovereign I'll attempt to explain in super simple terms what exactly micro and macro evolution so that maybe you will no longer be confused. Micro evolution is a small change(s) and macro evolution is many micro changes combined over a longer period. Perhaps creationists are confused by this simple concept because they routinely redefine what the word "kind" means. Does an orderly creator automatically mean a god? Your god? An anthropomorphic being that craves burnt offerings?
@YHWHisSovereign Sorry, but we have witnessed evolution. We have witnessed the evolution of new behaviors, new capabilities, new morphological structures and new species.
i believe in evolution but i also encourage people to believe in whatever they want especially if its a dogmatic approach that helps to be morally righteous individuals. everyone i know that believes in creationism is very down to earth and humble in their beliefs. All the people who make videos such as this that belief in evolution however are very pushy and condescending.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from traits having survival value. It doesn't produce those traits. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation (ICR) Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. ICR scientists have written excellent articles on "Vestigial" Structures, Fossils, Genetics, Mutations, "Junk DNA," Natural Selection, Age of The Earth, Dinosaurs and The Bible, etc., etc. Just peruse their articles archive.
DEBATE IS NOT OVER. In Darwin's time not enough science was known to refute macro-evolution. There was no understanding of genetics. Darwin thought the cell was just a simple glob. No one knew about DNA, RNA, proteins. Modern evolutionists now know, but the theory is entrenched as gospel and a lot of personal motives are at stake as well. Just saying that something evolved doesn't make it so! Schools should present both sides! Read my article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature can only work with the "cards" it has. Nature is not a genetic engineer! It can't invent new genes. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
We creationists don't accept defeat most of the time (when you think that we should), because most of the time when evolutionists present evidence against arguments 1 to 10, we are able to present counter evidence showing your arguments against 1 to 10 are wrong. We don't need to go to 11 to avoid 1 to 10. (But we bring up 11, 12, 13, ... anyway, just because we might as well.)
There used to be I recall around 180 supposedly vestigal organs. Now few serious contenders remain. You can bring up any particulars. Many (though not all) pseudogenes are now realized to have some role to play (though not fully understood as yet) as they are active in the genome. But I do believe that some vestigal genes (for example, one of the the vitamin C genes) and others (perhaps even a vestigal organ or two) likely do exist...
@tubewatch59 So you were telling me that science thought that some organs served no purpose but over time learned what that purpose was? ok, cool. How about the remnants of the third eyelid in human eyes which is completely vestigial and serves NO PURPOSE whatsoever or what about the human tail? or the fact that chickens have genes to develop teeth, or the fact that whales have genes that produce hind legs? kind of weird that those things exist within the perfect creatures god created...sloppy..
What about the remnants of a third eyelid, do you think demonstrates that creation couldn't be true? As I said, it may be the remnants of a previously functional third eyelid that became lost to humans as it was no longer under strong selection pressure to maintain functionality. Yet now we likely suffer some eye irritations that may not be the case (due to blowing dirt etc.) if we still had that function operational...
It is said that while no modern birds have teeth, there are some in the past that apparently did. In addition i believe that a French team mangaged to genetically cause teeth to be formed in a bird by chimerically combing some mouse cells in chicken embryos. Why is this incompatible with creation? Different organisms with often very similar sets of genes, undergo different developmental pathways. Intentionally (or not) these pathways may be disrupted in some minor ways.
I should think that also applies to whales. In fact, even if whales never did have hind legs (calling inot question the evolutionary assumption that they must have once had legs) the fact that they are built according to the mammalian body plan, makes it likely that a developmental pathway error is going to produce some abnormal setting into motion of a development cascade to attempt to develop a hindleg assembly. If it isn't lethal, it will likely occur now and then.
I think that you see a problem for creationists, perhaps you're using some kind of a transplanted version of the moral objection (If a good God exists, then why is there evil and suffering in the world?) into biology, namely that if a good God created life, then why are there biological errors and abnormalities in existence?
The existence of evil and suffering, isn't logically inconsistent with Biblical creationism.
Biblical creationism says that after the humans sinned, God cursed the formerly "good" creation and could it to become a suffering creation. So (in the creationist framework) you would have a good argument against creationism if the bibe said that all of creation was good, and left it at that. Then we would observe evil and suffering and ask where that fits into the biblical account of existence? But the Bible does explain why it was that suffering exists.
Even ID (intelligent design without a commitment to Biblical creationism) also explains the existence of errors in biology. In any designed system as we know it, errors usually creep in over time, simply because there are far more ways to vary a system which results in errors in function, than there are ways to vary the system such that errors in function never occur. It's the way system configurations tend to move - towards a state of more probable state distribution.
Probably for the same reasons that they are assumed to exist from within the evolutionary perspective. It's because over time errors can creep in and damage systems, especially when they are not under strong selection pressure for their conservation. For example, if vitamin C is readily available (it mostly is), then the loss of vitamin C gene function might well occur. It's a sign of some evolution having taking place.
"I have yet to see UNREFUTABLE evidence for evolution.."
Ooh my, it doesn't matter how much unrefutable evidence for evolution comes in, if you've decided so strongly you don't believe it, you will never accept the evidence, now matter how obvious it is. When is this Endangered species of Creationists gonna fade away...?
They are probably gonna be around for 4 billion years, til' the sun turns to a red giant eating the earth, then they'll say "I told you Armageddon was coming!!!!"
All you macro evolution and life spontaneously coming from non living material believers do realized you have been brainwashed since grade school, and by TV shows, movies. Micro evolution, or mutation does happen, yes, but this is not the same as what macro is, or spontaneous generation of life. No new species, or more accurate "kind" ever comes from it. No evidence ever been found in over 100's of years, only frauds, which later proven as frauds.
micro+micro+micro+...+micro=macro. How can u go up the stairs without taking it step by step?! Whats wrong with u ppl!? IT IS ALL IN SCIENCE BOOKS AND ARTICLES! Its not matter of believeing it or not, ITS MATTER OF SEEING THE FACTS!
ps. "spontaneous generation of life" is not evolution ITS BIOGENESIS.
There is no evidence of macro evolution period. Zero, nothing, ziltch. All evidence that proves creation and disproves macro evolution IS buried, hidden away. If you think that that randomness can create complex design then you are living in denial. In the end, when you times comes, and you pass away, you will find the truth. By then it may be too late for you.
The evidence for Creation is continuously snubbed by those who know nothing about evolution or Creation. I have yet to see UNREFUTABLE evidence for evolution. Evolution is struggling to survive. Natural selection is accepted by Creationists, which may lead to adaptation. This is not evolution as declared by many evolutionists. Frogs do not turn into princes. Evolution, like Creation relies on faith, despite evidence for the latter.
@JesuismyKing Disprove evolution or admit you don't have a single fact to present.
Theist idiots like you do not turn into rational humans, either. That only proves that theism is a dead end and has no future. Evolution is a fact supported by millions of pieces of evidence in museums, laboratories and universities around the world. Creationism is supported only by ignorance and denial.
Thankyou for your comment and your sad ad hominem attack! I always supported the evolutionist argument, until I saw the overwhelming evidence for the Pseudo science that it is. But then I'd expect the sort of comment you sent me from someone who's brain is a result of millions of mutations, and an accident! You Disprove Creation! Why should the onus be on Creationists? You carry on with YOUR Religion, believing you came from pond scum. You need more faith than I do !
@JesuismyKing Exactly what "overwhelming evidence"? Jo like a creationist to claim "evidence" without providing any. Your "ad hominum" charge is as baseless as your beliefs. It's simply another attempt at diverting attention from the fact that you evade the direct question. What you think are "attacks" are no more than statements of observed fact.
I repeat, evolution is supported by millions of pieces of evidence and accepted by scientists all over the world. Where is your proof?
@PhuqueUTube3 How can you even ask where the proof is? IT IS EVERYWHERE TO BE FOUND. You dumbass ignorent fool! Did you ever pay attention in school or use your own brains? Eat shit and die!
@zebase There is no proof of creationism. Prove it, you dumb theist shithead. You are a delusional asshole.
I paid far more attention that you did. I use my brains and I am far smarter that you will ever be. You are a liar and a coward. Talk like that to my face and I'll kick the shit out of you.
@PhuqueUTube3 You call me a liar and a coward. You don't even know who I am cockface XD. I happen to study Aerospace Engineering... so don't tell me shit. Go and have incest porn... in that case you will have a higher chance of getting smart kids ;). Eat shit and die! :P
@zebase YOu are a coward. Tell you what. I'll pay your way from wherever you are to where I am. Then tell me to "Eat shit and die." The next ten seconds after that will be a life-changing experience for you. You'll never look, walk, talk, or think the same again.
You "study aerospace engineering? What a laugh, a stupid piece of shit like you couldn't study how to work at Burger King.
Come on, you puking little liar. The ball is in your court. Put up or shut up.
@zebase First of all you moron, I am not a creationist. I am an atheists. Secondly, I'll pay your way here from whatever bridge you live under. The we'll see how you "fuck me up". I'll give you that life-changing experience.
I'm not a bit concerned, cowards like you only talk tough when hiding behind a keyboard. I put my money and my skin where my mouth is. Answer the email ,chickenshit.
@PhuqueUTube3 Yeah you are the man... XD. You and your stupid threats :P. Buy me a ticket from The Netherlands to where you live! Because I'm not wasting any good money on a shiteater like you ;). Eat shit and die!
@zebase If you were not such an noncomprehending idiot, you would have noticed I said I would pay YOUR way here. It was not a threat, asshole. It was a certainty. But maybe pretending not to understand is your way of running and hiding? I new you did not have what it takes to try me on.
I also remind you (again!) that I am not a creationist. But maybe simple sentences are too much for you? Come on, asshole, let's get it on. I will pay your way.
@zebase Done deal. I'll need a few things. Your real name, address, Passport number, telephone, and proof of a visa for Brazil. FYI, you will not be able to cash in the ticket, I know that's what you're thinking, but I will be the only one able to cash it in. It's an electronic booking and, if you do not show up, I'll get my money back.
I have done this before and am not as stupid as you think. Don't judge others by yourself. Come and get it, jerkwad. This will be fun.
@PhuqueUTube3 You really think I'm giving you that information XD. That would be stupid XD. I'd rather tell you to EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!
@zebase I knew you would keep finding excuses to hide. I also knew you'd lose it completely and post a very coherent, intelligent (for you) comment like this. ROFLMAO
I gave you everything you need to know about me, even my phone number. Yet, you "couldn't find me" despite that's "what you do for a living". YOu even claim you make "1.2 million a year" doing it .
Never mind. I accept your surrender. I expected no less.
@zebase Keep running and hiding little boy. Everyone saw the temper tantrum you thew yesterday. Pretty sad for a 47 y/o that even has to lie about that 1.2 Million a year. People that make that kind of money don't brag about it. Especially they don't feel they have to keep saying it.
You're a liar and a sad excuse for a human being. Yes, I knew you'd result to lies, bragging, and temper tantrums.. I don't have toi be that smart for that. You renege on your surrender?
@PhuqueUTube3 Did you totally lose your mind? You are talking complete nonsense :P. 47 y/o ..... 1.2 million a year. Lies???? I have not told you one lie ;).
BTW you still didn't tell me what it is that you do for a living XD? You are probably the one working at Burger King hahahahaha.
@zebase For everyone to see. My apoligies, I confused you with Brian4. But You have to furnish me your information for me to pay your way here. If you were an honest and fair person, you'd make me a similar offer for Die Nederlands. I used to live in Utrecht and I wouldn't mind visiting old friends there. After You ran and hid before I arrived, of course. I do recognize internet cowards when I see them. So send me your information by PM on here. No one will be holding their breath.
I wish people would let go of their baggage and just read. Joseph Campbell does a great job explaining the significance of the mythical traditions of the past eras. I was raised a christian, and sure, as with any religion, it has many relevant teachings about morality. But we are a science civilization, no matter what we claim. Ever been to a doctor? Ever use a computer? Objective morality is fixed culturally and temporally. It, like all living things, DIES yet is born again in a new way.
@wikiporno2 roger morneau a trip into the supernatural,the signs,bloodline ect... god exist proof by german scientist! who control what u read,look and learn at school?and the medias?ect i don t have time even the patience to explain.so make a deal with urself,search by ur own will be surprise!
The bible proves history and creation. It all comes down to choice. Choose this life or choose life eternal life. As for me and my house. I will serve the Lord
FORGET TRYING TO HELP THEM. SAVE YOURSELF SOME TIME AND JUST ENJOY LIFE. SCIENCE WILL CRUMBLE RELIGION IN THE FUTURE ANYWAY. THEY ARE MIND FVCKED AND YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT ONCE IT'S BEEN IMPLANTED IN THEIR HEAD.
@AgentsAnonymous Go to pubmed and use the search term "evolution" You will find over 294 thousand articles that reference evolution. Pretty amazing what you can find when you look shit up for yourself.
@AgentsAnonymous Nothing in science has actual, undeniable, irrefutable "proof" for it. If you want that, turn to math. Where numbers are clear and stuff can be proven.
My stomach turned over when that annotation popped up. Let me get this straight, AiG made their own peer review system that automatically rejects anything that doesn't support their own pre-conceived beliefs, is from the same people who basically say that if evidence goes against scripture then REALITY must be wrong, and gets debunked all the time? I could imagine a parody where AiG directors are faking checking their own papers going 'see! see! it's correct, can we turn it in now?!' Ah my head!
@RiseAgainstTyranny That depends a lot on how you are defining Neanderthals. Some classify them as a sub-species as Homo sapiens-neanderthalus and others as their own species, Homo neanderthalus. (spelling?) Actually, language would be the most important aspect of consciousness in my book. Without it, the accumulation of knowledge by the species becomes extremely difficult by the simple limiter of death. Also, I think social structure in a species is explainable without using self-awareness
Love that kind of challenge (tho i doubt you'll get any responses worth a nickel). On the other hand I don't think you should have asked that they try to disprove evolution at any point as this (in their heads) gives them an out in the sense of a false dichotomy, of not having to prove themselves right just prove others wrong and 'winning' by default...
So where's your link in the comments to Meyer's 4 August 2004 peer-reviewed paper in Proceedings?
Dr. McDiarmid to Dr. Hans Sues: "I have seen the review file and comments from 3 reviewers on the Meyer paper. All three with some differences among the comments recommended or suggested publication. I was surprised but concluded that there was not inappropriate behavior vs a vis [sic] the review process." "Re: Request for information," 1-28-2005, cited in US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE
@MorganMarvinson you do realise that was a literature review and not any actual proposal of intelligent design. It contained no evidence and did not rebut any of the data supporting evolution. I know you are a troll but you should really actually read these things before you post. It tends to make your trolling more sucessful.
@Xaiano Undoubtedly you may wish to come across as being knowledgeable on this subject, but a review of the literature that supports intelligent design IS an article on intelligent design.
The one who accuses me of being a troll follows me around YouTube with nothing substantive to say. That is, by definition, a troll.
This is slightly off topic, but a subject that may be interesting to readers. Isn't it interesting that Evolution only leads to conscious awareness with humans? Do you think any other species will ever develop self-awareness or any ability to mentally reflect on the world as a whole? It reminds me that there is much we know, but even more that we don't.
@DaveLeech1989 Technically, Evolution has only SO FAR led to conscious awareness in humans... that we know of. Actually, I have heard good arguments that Neanderthal's were aware of their own consciousness, and they weren't human.
@Pinage When we had the time to sit down and actually think, instead of being involved in the Three F's of early primal life. (Fighting, Fucking or Fleeing.)
I mean the Theory of Evolution, not just changes (evolution). I don't dispute it. But, the scientific community takes results of empirical observation and experiments and attempts to fit these into the Theory of Evolution, instead of letting the evidence lead the way. It's because they have invested their beliefs around the Theory of Evolution. Science doesn't have an opinion or belief, it's just evidence and observations.
Well said dinkipooxa . It certainly condenses the concept. No one really has the intellectual capacity to make such conceptual-dependent concepts. Let us define the word "exists" as something that can be measured consitently between all observers. That which can be measured exactly by many observers with each measurement contradicting the other observations made with exact precision means that the object has no real definition.
@dinkipooxa So you think formal education is not derived from bettering the intellect of students? Is that what you are trying to get at with your ambiguous statements?
@dinkipooxa And you do not seem to think that the religious need to substantiate their claims that something divine exists? That's called shifting the burden of proof. This is not about philosophy of the teachings so do not try to come up with philosophical arguments to try and void the need for proof for the claims presented by the religious.
@dinkipooxa Your experience has nothing to do with if something is actually happening or not. Have you ever experienced the chemical reaction between Uranium and Electrons? No? This does not allow you to dismiss it because you personally have not observed or seen evidence for it. Another example is the orbit of Pluto. We have not known about it for long enough to have seen it orbit the sun yet we know it does. Your argument does not apply to this situation. Maybe in matters of subjectivity.
@dinkipooxa Evolution is true as in it happens. I would hope you don't let the theory part throw you off. After all the Helio-centric theory is true. And as well it met much resistance from the church when it was proposed.
Okay. I''ll put up. First, study quantum physics like I have. Study the subject of "Holographic Universe." Examine the concept of "action at a distance." Lookup "quantum foam." The conclusion? Scientists prove that matter can be desctroibed best as a wave function. Otherwise it doesn't really exist. Time and space are not provable. You want to tell me what id "REAL"? You can't prove reality exists but you experience it. So don't tell me about proving God exists. Nothing "exists."
@karldrago If no thing exists than there is no thing to speculate about. saying "nothing exists" proves itself as fallible reasoning in its own statement. Only some thing can exist. If no thing existed then we wouldn't experience it. Even if everything is a hologram, that is something.
Wow. Another excellent exercise in straw men. Here I was afraid he was gonna challenge my belief...
I'm a theist, but I believe in evolution. To quote Darwin himself, there is no "conflict between believing in God and evolution." There's that debunked.
@BraunBrothers Yet Darwin through his extensive research eventually abandoned a belief in god because what he had learned shattered what was taught of god. Earlier on yes he said things like that but in the end it changed. Your form of Christianity is more loose and less rigid than those of old, allowing for more wiggle room such as evolution. Which I mean if you really look at it evolution does happen, so either the beliefs bend or they break under pressure.
@CtheWolfe Thanks for the reply! But even after he developed his theories, he was quoted as saying, "I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. – I think that generally ... an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind." Not only that, but he also said that it was "absurd to doubt that a man might be an ardent theist and an evolutionist." He also interpreted the Bible literally, which I believe was a mistake.
@BraunBrothers Well I mean there is no disclaimer in the beginning of the Bible saying "Caution much of this is not to be taken literally, doing so would defy much of the natural processes of the universe" And I mean for thousands of years the faith has been taught as literal truth, its really only been the last couple hundred years in which we have started to unravel the universe around us, which forces the loosening of the teachings. Then you have like the creationist museum... like WTF?
@CtheWolfe Yeah I can absolutely understand what you're saying. Religion accepting evolution has only become popular (key word= popular) in the last hundred years, but religious writers for more than a thousand years have commentated on the idea that the creation account need not to be taken literally.
@CtheWolfe Reality depends on the goggles you choose to see it through. Religion is an ancient science used against most people in an attempt to control (much like the bible speaks of the great deceiver) so the religious institutions play both sides of the coin whether or not they realize it. But the core of the teachings can and have been used for personal and collective empowerment that is so profound it cannot be understated. The flip side is that people have used it for destruction as well
@DaveLeech1989 I find it amusing how people seem to think we need religion to be good. If you look at the atheist populations of countries, as religion declines, so does crime, the standard of living goes up, education goes up. Religion holds us back from living for each other and doing right by each other because it forces us to segregate and gives us a sense of entitlement over one another. While I agree if we all could just get along things would be great, religion prevents that.
@CtheWolfe My last message must not have sent. You are more religious than you realize. You think religion is a magical entity that destroys the world. It is people that use religious teachings for hatred, not religion itself. I'm not sure if you are giving credit to this teaching, it has shaped civil rights and the secular humanistic view of life. Without it, you would not think the way you do.
@CtheWolfe Even if there was no religion, people would still act the way they do. It's not religions fault, it is the fault of greedy people, and they would act the same whether or not there is religion.
@CtheWolfe Btw I never said anything about religion, brother. I people should embrace a teaching, a philosophy, one that is too often over-looked and short-lived.
@CtheWolfe All social problems (war, poverty, greed, hatred) can be solved by embracing the new testaments main teaching; Love thy neighbor as thyself. This is only if the majority of people would adopt this kind of mentality. What kind of problems- other than natural disasters or alien invasions- could we possibly face if everyone was looking out for and taking care of each other?
@DaveLeech1989 Wow are you really going to say that the new testament is all like that? How about the parable in Luke 19 that ends with verse 27 in which the moral is "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." The moral of the parable is that if you oppose your lord you will die. How is that love thy neighbor? Only if he does not oppose you? We do not need false beliefs to be good to each other.
@CtheWolfe You either take the bible all literally and as a whole or you reject the whole thing. It is littered with garbage like this verse, which goes against the grain of almost all of his other teachings. Do you think such truth wouldn't be littered with crap to lead people away from one another? It's not just about being good to one another. It's about being self-less and taking care of one another. It doesn't require belief in jesus christ, just a belief in that teaching.
@CtheWolfe Another thing you're missing that's a little more on topic is that You can embrace The Theory of Evolution and Creationism at the same time. Evolution doesn't explain the nature of the universe, it only partly explains the nature of life on earth. It should also be mentioned that there has never been a transient fossil between two species found. It rests on much evidence, as well as assumptions and paradoxes
@DaveLeech1989 I am sorry but I think you fail to grasp the fact that every fossil is a transitional one. Think of evolution as a film. Standard TV shoots film at 24-26 frames per second. Now if evolution were lets say 1 or two seconds of film. You know one position on screen to another. Then each frame which is nearly indistinguishable from the one before it and the one after it, is your transitional fossil. Everything is constantly in transition.
@DaveLeech1989 You wont find a fossil that is half crocodile or half duck, such a mutation in that extreme would not allow it to breed with anything else, thus its chance for survival is non existent. Its a gradual smooth shift its not a sudden BAM Half duck Half Crocodile. To think thats how it happens is completely against evolution. And there are tons of transitional fossils between our great ape ancestors and humans. Go look them up, all the ones in the museums are legit fossils.
Another thing you might find a problem with is Evolution and Biogenesis. They contradict one another, yet they are both embraced in the same "science". One of them has to change, there is no way life only ariss from other life, and at the same time we all came from one ancestor. It's a paradox. I'm not saying Evolution is incorrect, just that it isn't anywhere near a completely whole perspective.
@DaveLeech1989 Um not to knock on you but you do not seem to understand the key difference(and it is not an issue in the slightest). Evolution does not ever try to explain where life comes from, merely how it evolves. Abiogenesis tries to explain how life happened. Once it did happen then evolution can occur. Evolution needs life to happen, but it is pretty well understood why and how evolution takes place. Evolution is the science of changing life, abiogenesis is the science of how life starts.
@DaveLeech1989 Science is a methodical way to learn about the world around us. It is a tool we use to understand things. Evolution falls under this category. The divergence of species, the variety, the changes etc are all evolution and its these things we try to understand. If species were static you would not have any of the domestic dogs we have today. Hard to believe but Chihuahua's come from wolves(somewhere in the past) We have just bred them to be the way they are.
@DaveLeech1989 There is also something called ring species. What this means is that if you visualize the animals being in a ring of the same species, ones on one side cannot breed with the ones on the other. We have got dogs to this point. A chihuahua cannot mate with a great dane for instance. Yet they can both breed with the dogs in between each other on this ring. Its pretty interesting. And this is how different species are formed over time they diverge to this point.
@DaveLeech1989 And I agree evolution does rest on a pile of evidence. There is so much evidence for it, its this gigantic heap that people ignore. The funny thing is to disprove evolution would be simple, merely one legit fossil out of order from time period would prove the entire concept wrong. Yet we have never found a fossil outside the range of time periods(strata) we expect to find them. I would recommend reading up on the subject. Evolution is true my friend.
@CtheWolfe I don't agree with the scientific "community" (more like science nazis) making science itself take a specific stance on the nature of life and using the theory of evolution as the centerpiece. I don't disagree that it may be true, but there are still so many unanswered questions, and science itself is just observations of phenomena. How does the community claim that evolution is science? Evolution is an idea, and a very good one. Many people forget what science really is.
Creationists cannot show us one single peer-reviewed article, not even one that has been submitted and rejected. But they'll just offer up more excuses.
The way I see it is this; How can you have something by chance or coincidence if there are no grounds for the chance or coincidence itself? Who's chance is it? How does anything happen by chance at all? Where is the framework for anything? If energy can't be created or destroyed then either the universe is infinite and will never cease- which is something humans (as infinite beings) will never grasp, or there is is something beyond physical measures that can't be measured by science
The irony here is that you have creationists arguing against something they have no knowledge or experience with, and atheists arguing against something they have no knowledge or experience with. The two sides use different methods of approaching an argument that are irrelevant and don't apply to the side they are arguing against. Having an argument this way will always be a paradox and nothing will be definitively answered if answer must be "who's right and who's wrong?"
Sorry bud but that's not true entirely. Many atheists, myself included, actually have a better knowledge of the holy texts than the people who just blindly blather on about how they're correct. As well as a good knowledge of the evolutionary world (post secondary education), it's the knowing about both sides that makes people stop believing and it's annoying to hear ignorant people tear down lifetimes worth of work in the name of a safety blanket they won't let go of.
@boblajoe1 Fair enough, I can't claim that evolutionists don't know theology and I also can't claim that christians don't know science. But I can still claim the later part of my comment which was the main point and that is this; neither side of this argument can prove the other wrong. You can't use science to explain something that is not physical, and you can't use something that's not physical to explain science. Anyone debating who's right or wrong is wasting their breath.
@d3ltadrive the bible isn't supposed to be taken literally??? It's only the foundation of Christianity. The cause of wars and millions of deaths. Only the word of God. Only God's infallible law. Only the book that every Christian turns to for every argument, question or belief. Sorry, I'm not gonna buy that crap you're selling. If you are saying that, you might as well finish off the deed and become Atheist. It's ok, you won't get struck by lightning.
paramattic70 1 week ago
This was awesome :) They cant respond, since all they have is lies. Thank you for this, this video should go viral!
bary1234 1 month ago
creationism and evolution dont reject each other. the bible never actual states how the world was made or how long ago, it only states that God made it. creation happened about 12000 years ago and it was the creation of mans spirit, of Gods chosen people. the bible is not meant to be taken literally, it is symbolic because everything is meant to have several meanings and several truths.
d3ltadrive 1 month ago
Thanks. You said evolutionists are sophomoric because they refuse to distinguish between micro and macro but then you say they use "variation (micro)" to show how "reptiles evolved from fish(macro)". Have they not just defined it then? In other words, they implied that many, many, small changes eventually total up to be considered one big one. Perhaps, if the word "kind" wasn't shifted about, things could be comprehended better by both sides.
thybigballs 1 month ago
video: 2009
now: 2011
still no paper linked in the description.
tuseroni 2 months ago
I...love...you :DDDD
AnAverageBox 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 Like what? Pre-cambrian bunnies?...What refutes it?
JimmyFingerz1 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 All the scientific proof points to ancestry. If we're made in Gods image, sorry...but we woulden't have chimpanzee ERV'S . And you can observe common ancestry, There was only two cat's on Noah's Ark! Now it's not far from 50.
JimmyFingerz1 2 months ago
@JimmyFingerz1 Common ERV's doesn't prove common ancestry at all.ERV's can be transmitted by infection between different species.Your common ancestry hypothesis is based on your faith in evolution not on science.
TheEaglestar1 1 month ago
@JimmyFingerz1 Which two kinds of cats did Noah take?
thybigballs 1 month ago
You can't debunk God..this means he's real! Just like big foot
JimmyFingerz1 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 it is a common mistake is to believe that something is only testable if it is directly observable. this is not so. In fact, Chromosome 2 is a test of common ancestry: if the vestigal telomeres and centromeres are not there, then common ancestry is ruled out.But, they are there, as predicted. That is how theories are tested.
teddansonLA 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 common ancestry has been tested to death. The most famous example would be the fusion of human chromosome 2.
teddansonLA 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 huh ? I know more than you .. damn your too persistent , Like a troll
djay00009 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 Consensus has Everything to do with Science. You most Obviously have NOT read or know anything about... Evolution, Scientific Evidence, Theory or Objective Reasoning...
other then how to SPELL the words.
Redshift313 2 months ago
The Theory of Evolution is one the most voluminously accepted theories... because of the "Immense Mass Of Evidence" it contains. Genetic Theory is coherent to and correlative to, The Theory Of Evolution. Evolution is the Universally accepted Scientific Paradigm, it is taught in EVERY non-religious College and University on Earth.
Both Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI have accepted it's validity. To deny Evolution is either Disingenuous, Nescient, Rationally Ignorant or Intellectually INSANE.
Redshift313 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 I have asked scientists and professors bitch, you are so fucking stupid , Don't waste my time now .... its annoying .... cya
djay00009 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 look at the video your commenting on idiot ..... look at the likes , and look at how many people laugh at stupid creationists like you , your ignorant not be moron , and kindly don't reply back,i don't wanna waste my time on some idiot like you
djay00009 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23
Two word comment?? I am afraid you can't count. Therefore I shall consider you mentally retarded and won't speak to you :)
squallz13 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 haha , your retarded , I know that know .... A stupid creationist talking about Science,you know nothin
Evolution is demonstrated,its not contingent on other factors , Its observable too and it has been tested .
Do you know the theory of Gravity has a legitimate flaw too ? In fact it has plenty of flaws in deep space , Relativity crashes in deep space and theory of Gravity is never clearly explained or explainable,Gravity destroys religion more than Evolution,Do u know ?
djay00009 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 It is a fact , I know it , and I am not going to debate about this or explain things . I don't got time , Believe whatever you want to ,leave the science to the scientists .......
djay00009 2 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23
You are a fucking moron.
squallz13 2 months ago
@squallz13 exactly , I dunno if he's a troll or a really uneducated person ..... but its pointless to debate with creationists ...
djay00009 2 months ago
Epigenetic evolution puts a spiritual aspect into the change in genetic information over time. Dr. Bruce Lipton is a great source of info on epigenetics, the idea that YOU CONTROL THE DESTINY OF YOUR GENES.
xxxxLetsRidexxxxx 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThatCanadianGuy23 Evolution is a fact , keep being happy with your religion and your imaginary friend .... cya dumbass
djay00009 3 months ago
@ThatCanadianGuy23 your a strict creationist ? wtf do you use the net if you think Science is wrong ? Its the same ,The science of Internet , and the science of Evolution ,They are facts -_-
djay00009 3 months ago
@mogely52, stop getting your info from Creationist websites, Go to a real library in a REAL University and do some real research, enlighten yourself man!..stop being stuck in the 1st century FFS!
psycho3968 3 months ago
brilliant
psycho3968 3 months ago
This video would be okay if not for the flat out lies. Creationists present an argument, and then the evolutionist comes up with a sophomoric response. Evolutionists have to borrow from Christian presuppositions, otherwise they have no place to start. Evolutionists claim to follow logic, but can't even say where logic comes from. They claim to believe in morality, but can't say where it comes from. They claim to believe in the laws of science even though the laws may contradict their "theory".
YHWHisSovereign 5 months ago
@YHWHisSovereign Horrible examples! What your saying is you can't use logic or have morality unless you can say where it "comes from"? I wish creationists would understand that evolution is not in direct conflict with creation. We all have to accept evolution happened!! You need NO presuppositions to observe that...
jerahmia 4 months ago
@jerahmia I'm saying that you have no justification for using logic or morality. This applies only to atheists, and not theistic evolutionists. Creationists come in a broad category, but those who believe the Bible is infallible see the direct conflict between the Bible and evolution. One might believe that God got it all started, and perhaps helped out species evolve into other species, but either God is using supernatural powers to put things together, or it is happening naturally, not both.
YHWHisSovereign 4 months ago
Comment removed
YHWHisSovereign 4 months ago
@jerahmia You have to start with presuppositions to get anywhere. Even if its just observing something. You presuppose that what you are seeing is actually happening and that your eyes are sending the correct information to your brain. Furthermore you presuppose that your interpretation of what your are observing is correct. With any science experiment, you have to accept a certain number of assumptions. These might be reasonable(presupposing that your reasoning is correct) or they might not be.
YHWHisSovereign 4 months ago
@YHWHisSovereign What type of these "reasonable" presuppositions come from a Christianity?? Where in the bible does explain the origin of logic? Your saying someone who never read the bible or believed in Christianity would not know how to appropriately use it?
jerahmia 4 months ago
@jerahmia god is logical and as such has endowed his creation with the ability to understand and use presuppositions and logic. now the atheistic world view can not account for logic, (no-one has ever been able to prove that logic has come from natural selection and to simply say well we just evolved this way is god of the gaps kind of answer, cause NOTHING in atheism lends its self to the development of logic) or to account for morality, and it can't account for emotions like love, or altruism
RedLetterChristian 4 months ago
@RedLetterChristian "god is logical" Then why are all the arguments in favor of it's existence fallacious?
"atheistic world view" Lack of a belief does not a belief make.
"prove that logic has come from natural selection" And anyone trying to look for it in a biological field of science is ignorant beyond their ability to understand one
"like love, or altruism" I guess ignoring actual science is easier than learning it huh? plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/
infinity730 3 months ago
@RedLetterChristian On a side note, I love the Gish-gallop style of commenting.. saying so many wrong things that actually addressing them all would take more time and space than it took to write. Kudos.
infinity730 3 months ago
@YHWHisSovereign LIES??? You people do it all the time. One word for you. Ignorance!!!
gateman42 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gateman42 said "One word for you. Ignorance!!!"
You believe that you have an invisible, magical superfriend with whom you can communicate telepathically, and you call others ignorant?
Get a clue. You're in a cult, and you are willfully ignorant of the evidence that refutes your "holy" book's ridiculous claims.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@YHWHisSovereign There are Christian Evolutionist so your statement dies
ebilly99 3 months ago
@YHWHisSovereign Does logic come from somewhere? What is logic to you? And how does logic become evidence against the theory of evolution? Also, I have never heard of "evolutionists" making claims they believe in morality. What exactly is morality?Please expand on this.
thybigballs 1 month ago
@thybigballs Logic is the nature of reality. Where does it come from? From an evolutionary standpoint, it came by chance. From a Christian perspective, God is reality, and logic is the nature of God. We can account for the existence of logic, which is universal, immaterial, and invariable because these are the same attributes of God. Objective morality can only be defined with respect to God. Science is incapable of determining morality,and society is incapable of determining objective morality
YHWHisSovereign 1 month ago
@YHWHisSovereign I sorry, I had asked for an example for the following statement of yours: "Creationists present an argument, and then the evolutionist comes up with a sophomoric response". I didn't quite ask where the logic came from.
thybigballs 1 month ago
@YHWHisSovereign How many logic classes have you taken? I ask because logic students don't usually approach it so flippantly. Logic is a human achievement borne from ancient Greek philosophers who developed a systematic + dispassionate way of examination to keep personal biases and opinions at bay. Those who deride it as less than one's [naturally] superior opinion are often at the losing end. Key differences: micro/macro = time span. Morality/ethic = an evolutionary values for survival.
SFGadFly 1 month ago
@YHWHisSovereign You said, "Creationists present an argument, and then the evolutionist comes up with a sophomoric response". Could you please provide an example for this statement? Any examples of evolutionists borrowing Christian presuppositions to build a scientific theory would be a bonus. Thanks
thybigballs 1 month ago
@thybigballs A good example of a sophomoric response is with the subject of macro/micro evolution. Evolutionists refuse to distinguish between the two, but anyone can see the great leap from variation within kind to transforming into another kind. They use the fact that variation (mircro) occurs to "prove" that reptiles evolved from fish (macro). Has uniformity of nature been proved from the evolution model? No, but evolutionists assume it even though it can only come from an orderly creator.
YHWHisSovereign 1 month ago
@YHWHisSovereign I'll attempt to explain in super simple terms what exactly micro and macro evolution so that maybe you will no longer be confused. Micro evolution is a small change(s) and macro evolution is many micro changes combined over a longer period. Perhaps creationists are confused by this simple concept because they routinely redefine what the word "kind" means. Does an orderly creator automatically mean a god? Your god? An anthropomorphic being that craves burnt offerings?
thybigballs 1 month ago
@YHWHisSovereign Sorry, but we have witnessed evolution. We have witnessed the evolution of new behaviors, new capabilities, new morphological structures and new species.
It's that simple.
MrFungus420 1 week ago
i believe in evolution but i also encourage people to believe in whatever they want especially if its a dogmatic approach that helps to be morally righteous individuals. everyone i know that believes in creationism is very down to earth and humble in their beliefs. All the people who make videos such as this that belief in evolution however are very pushy and condescending.
rigatony019 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 5 months ago
@Mogley52 The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies only to closed systems. Life, and the universe itself as wel as the earth are not closed systems.
NUTCASE71733 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from traits having survival value. It doesn't produce those traits. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation (ICR) Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. ICR scientists have written excellent articles on "Vestigial" Structures, Fossils, Genetics, Mutations, "Junk DNA," Natural Selection, Age of The Earth, Dinosaurs and The Bible, etc., etc. Just peruse their articles archive.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DEBATE IS NOT OVER. In Darwin's time not enough science was known to refute macro-evolution. There was no understanding of genetics. Darwin thought the cell was just a simple glob. No one knew about DNA, RNA, proteins. Modern evolutionists now know, but the theory is entrenched as gospel and a lot of personal motives are at stake as well. Just saying that something evolved doesn't make it so! Schools should present both sides! Read my article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature can only work with the "cards" it has. Nature is not a genetic engineer! It can't invent new genes. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
We creationists don't accept defeat most of the time (when you think that we should), because most of the time when evolutionists present evidence against arguments 1 to 10, we are able to present counter evidence showing your arguments against 1 to 10 are wrong. We don't need to go to 11 to avoid 1 to 10. (But we bring up 11, 12, 13, ... anyway, just because we might as well.)
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@tubewatch59 I'd love to see the counter evidence...why do vestigial genes and organs exist?
RicardoArenas 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
There used to be I recall around 180 supposedly vestigal organs. Now few serious contenders remain. You can bring up any particulars. Many (though not all) pseudogenes are now realized to have some role to play (though not fully understood as yet) as they are active in the genome. But I do believe that some vestigal genes (for example, one of the the vitamin C genes) and others (perhaps even a vestigal organ or two) likely do exist...
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@tubewatch59 So you were telling me that science thought that some organs served no purpose but over time learned what that purpose was? ok, cool. How about the remnants of the third eyelid in human eyes which is completely vestigial and serves NO PURPOSE whatsoever or what about the human tail? or the fact that chickens have genes to develop teeth, or the fact that whales have genes that produce hind legs? kind of weird that those things exist within the perfect creatures god created...sloppy..
RicardoArenas 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
What about the remnants of a third eyelid, do you think demonstrates that creation couldn't be true? As I said, it may be the remnants of a previously functional third eyelid that became lost to humans as it was no longer under strong selection pressure to maintain functionality. Yet now we likely suffer some eye irritations that may not be the case (due to blowing dirt etc.) if we still had that function operational...
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
It is said that while no modern birds have teeth, there are some in the past that apparently did. In addition i believe that a French team mangaged to genetically cause teeth to be formed in a bird by chimerically combing some mouse cells in chicken embryos. Why is this incompatible with creation? Different organisms with often very similar sets of genes, undergo different developmental pathways. Intentionally (or not) these pathways may be disrupted in some minor ways.
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
I should think that also applies to whales. In fact, even if whales never did have hind legs (calling inot question the evolutionary assumption that they must have once had legs) the fact that they are built according to the mammalian body plan, makes it likely that a developmental pathway error is going to produce some abnormal setting into motion of a development cascade to attempt to develop a hindleg assembly. If it isn't lethal, it will likely occur now and then.
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
I think that you see a problem for creationists, perhaps you're using some kind of a transplanted version of the moral objection (If a good God exists, then why is there evil and suffering in the world?) into biology, namely that if a good God created life, then why are there biological errors and abnormalities in existence?
The existence of evil and suffering, isn't logically inconsistent with Biblical creationism.
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
Biblical creationism says that after the humans sinned, God cursed the formerly "good" creation and could it to become a suffering creation. So (in the creationist framework) you would have a good argument against creationism if the bibe said that all of creation was good, and left it at that. Then we would observe evil and suffering and ask where that fits into the biblical account of existence? But the Bible does explain why it was that suffering exists.
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
Even ID (intelligent design without a commitment to Biblical creationism) also explains the existence of errors in biology. In any designed system as we know it, errors usually creep in over time, simply because there are far more ways to vary a system which results in errors in function, than there are ways to vary the system such that errors in function never occur. It's the way system configurations tend to move - towards a state of more probable state distribution.
tubewatch59 5 months ago
@RicardoArenas
Why do they exist from a creationist perspective?
Probably for the same reasons that they are assumed to exist from within the evolutionary perspective. It's because over time errors can creep in and damage systems, especially when they are not under strong selection pressure for their conservation. For example, if vitamin C is readily available (it mostly is), then the loss of vitamin C gene function might well occur. It's a sign of some evolution having taking place.
tubewatch59 5 months ago
Evidence? You want evidence? Well, uh, see yeah, there was uh this thing... it was um....
jj79tr 5 months ago
"I have yet to see UNREFUTABLE evidence for evolution.."
Ooh my, it doesn't matter how much unrefutable evidence for evolution comes in, if you've decided so strongly you don't believe it, you will never accept the evidence, now matter how obvious it is. When is this Endangered species of Creationists gonna fade away...?
They are probably gonna be around for 4 billion years, til' the sun turns to a red giant eating the earth, then they'll say "I told you Armageddon was coming!!!!"
aboyborninjune 6 months ago
All you macro evolution and life spontaneously coming from non living material believers do realized you have been brainwashed since grade school, and by TV shows, movies. Micro evolution, or mutation does happen, yes, but this is not the same as what macro is, or spontaneous generation of life. No new species, or more accurate "kind" ever comes from it. No evidence ever been found in over 100's of years, only frauds, which later proven as frauds.
MegaDude1969 6 months ago
@MegaDude1969
micro+micro+micro+...+micro=macro. How can u go up the stairs without taking it step by step?! Whats wrong with u ppl!? IT IS ALL IN SCIENCE BOOKS AND ARTICLES! Its not matter of believeing it or not, ITS MATTER OF SEEING THE FACTS!
ps. "spontaneous generation of life" is not evolution ITS BIOGENESIS.
kamikaziu 5 months ago
There is no evidence of macro evolution period. Zero, nothing, ziltch. All evidence that proves creation and disproves macro evolution IS buried, hidden away. If you think that that randomness can create complex design then you are living in denial. In the end, when you times comes, and you pass away, you will find the truth. By then it may be too late for you.
MegaDude1969 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MegaDude1969
dude...u really know nothing about evolution. Go read books.
kamikaziu 5 months ago
The evidence for Creation is continuously snubbed by those who know nothing about evolution or Creation. I have yet to see UNREFUTABLE evidence for evolution. Evolution is struggling to survive. Natural selection is accepted by Creationists, which may lead to adaptation. This is not evolution as declared by many evolutionists. Frogs do not turn into princes. Evolution, like Creation relies on faith, despite evidence for the latter.
JesuismyKing 6 months ago
@JesuismyKing Disprove evolution or admit you don't have a single fact to present.
Theist idiots like you do not turn into rational humans, either. That only proves that theism is a dead end and has no future. Evolution is a fact supported by millions of pieces of evidence in museums, laboratories and universities around the world. Creationism is supported only by ignorance and denial.
PhuqueUTube3 6 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3
Thankyou for your comment and your sad ad hominem attack! I always supported the evolutionist argument, until I saw the overwhelming evidence for the Pseudo science that it is. But then I'd expect the sort of comment you sent me from someone who's brain is a result of millions of mutations, and an accident! You Disprove Creation! Why should the onus be on Creationists? You carry on with YOUR Religion, believing you came from pond scum. You need more faith than I do !
JesuismyKing 6 months ago
@JesuismyKing Exactly what "overwhelming evidence"? Jo like a creationist to claim "evidence" without providing any. Your "ad hominum" charge is as baseless as your beliefs. It's simply another attempt at diverting attention from the fact that you evade the direct question. What you think are "attacks" are no more than statements of observed fact.
I repeat, evolution is supported by millions of pieces of evidence and accepted by scientists all over the world. Where is your proof?
PhuqueUTube3 6 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 How can you even ask where the proof is? IT IS EVERYWHERE TO BE FOUND. You dumbass ignorent fool! Did you ever pay attention in school or use your own brains? Eat shit and die!
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase There is no proof of creationism. Prove it, you dumb theist shithead. You are a delusional asshole.
I paid far more attention that you did. I use my brains and I am far smarter that you will ever be. You are a liar and a coward. Talk like that to my face and I'll kick the shit out of you.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 You call me a liar and a coward. You don't even know who I am cockface XD. I happen to study Aerospace Engineering... so don't tell me shit. Go and have incest porn... in that case you will have a higher chance of getting smart kids ;). Eat shit and die! :P
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase YOu are a coward. Tell you what. I'll pay your way from wherever you are to where I am. Then tell me to "Eat shit and die." The next ten seconds after that will be a life-changing experience for you. You'll never look, walk, talk, or think the same again.
You "study aerospace engineering? What a laugh, a stupid piece of shit like you couldn't study how to work at Burger King.
Come on, you puking little liar. The ball is in your court. Put up or shut up.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 I fuck you up any day. Come and get me motherfucker. Creationist scumbag
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase First of all you moron, I am not a creationist. I am an atheists. Secondly, I'll pay your way here from whatever bridge you live under. The we'll see how you "fuck me up". I'll give you that life-changing experience.
I'm not a bit concerned, cowards like you only talk tough when hiding behind a keyboard. I put my money and my skin where my mouth is. Answer the email ,chickenshit.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 Yeah you are the man... XD. You and your stupid threats :P. Buy me a ticket from The Netherlands to where you live! Because I'm not wasting any good money on a shiteater like you ;). Eat shit and die!
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase If you were not such an noncomprehending idiot, you would have noticed I said I would pay YOUR way here. It was not a threat, asshole. It was a certainty. But maybe pretending not to understand is your way of running and hiding? I new you did not have what it takes to try me on.
I also remind you (again!) that I am not a creationist. But maybe simple sentences are too much for you? Come on, asshole, let's get it on. I will pay your way.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 Then buy me a ticket.... From Amsterdam (Schiphol) airport to where you live ;).
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase Done deal. I'll need a few things. Your real name, address, Passport number, telephone, and proof of a visa for Brazil. FYI, you will not be able to cash in the ticket, I know that's what you're thinking, but I will be the only one able to cash it in. It's an electronic booking and, if you do not show up, I'll get my money back.
I have done this before and am not as stupid as you think. Don't judge others by yourself. Come and get it, jerkwad. This will be fun.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 You really think I'm giving you that information XD. That would be stupid XD. I'd rather tell you to EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!EAT SHIT AND DIE!!!
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase I knew you would keep finding excuses to hide. I also knew you'd lose it completely and post a very coherent, intelligent (for you) comment like this. ROFLMAO
I gave you everything you need to know about me, even my phone number. Yet, you "couldn't find me" despite that's "what you do for a living". YOu even claim you make "1.2 million a year" doing it .
Never mind. I accept your surrender. I expected no less.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 Yeah you know everything XD. You saw it all coming. Keep telling yourself that. 1.2 million a year :P WTF are you talking about hahaha?
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase Keep running and hiding little boy. Everyone saw the temper tantrum you thew yesterday. Pretty sad for a 47 y/o that even has to lie about that 1.2 Million a year. People that make that kind of money don't brag about it. Especially they don't feel they have to keep saying it.
You're a liar and a sad excuse for a human being. Yes, I knew you'd result to lies, bragging, and temper tantrums.. I don't have toi be that smart for that. You renege on your surrender?
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 Did you totally lose your mind? You are talking complete nonsense :P. 47 y/o ..... 1.2 million a year. Lies???? I have not told you one lie ;).
BTW you still didn't tell me what it is that you do for a living XD? You are probably the one working at Burger King hahahahaha.
zebase 5 months ago
@zebase For everyone to see. My apoligies, I confused you with Brian4. But You have to furnish me your information for me to pay your way here. If you were an honest and fair person, you'd make me a similar offer for Die Nederlands. I used to live in Utrecht and I wouldn't mind visiting old friends there. After You ran and hid before I arrived, of course. I do recognize internet cowards when I see them. So send me your information by PM on here. No one will be holding their breath.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@zebase Temper, temper, little boy. YOU may have to pay for those words if you ever work up the nerve to confront me face-to-face.
PhuqueUTube3 5 months ago
@PhuqueUTube3 I wouldn't waste any time on a person like you. Excluding this conversation of course XD. You still didn't answer my question ;).
zebase 5 months ago
I wish people would let go of their baggage and just read. Joseph Campbell does a great job explaining the significance of the mythical traditions of the past eras. I was raised a christian, and sure, as with any religion, it has many relevant teachings about morality. But we are a science civilization, no matter what we claim. Ever been to a doctor? Ever use a computer? Objective morality is fixed culturally and temporally. It, like all living things, DIES yet is born again in a new way.
TheOverpowered1 6 months ago
darwin was a satanist like is actual relatives bush familly!
22kokabora 6 months ago
@22kokabora 0/10. trolling is an art. try harder.
wikiporno2 6 months ago
@wikiporno2 roger morneau a trip into the supernatural,the signs,bloodline ect... god exist proof by german scientist! who control what u read,look and learn at school?and the medias?ect i don t have time even the patience to explain.so make a deal with urself,search by ur own will be surprise!
22kokabora 6 months ago
@22kokabora try. harder. you're embarrassing yourself.
wikiporno2 6 months ago
@wikiporno2 ya u right like the weapons of mass destruction in irak!continue to eat cnn n fox news!n ur scientist and remember u r the best!
22kokabora 6 months ago
@22kokabora stop trolling. seriously. you're bad at it.
wikiporno2 6 months ago
@wikiporno2 THE SIGNS EPISODE 9 dailymotion
22kokabora 6 months ago
The bible proves history and creation. It all comes down to choice. Choose this life or choose life eternal life. As for me and my house. I will serve the Lord
GodzzzSon 6 months ago
FORGET TRYING TO HELP THEM. SAVE YOURSELF SOME TIME AND JUST ENJOY LIFE. SCIENCE WILL CRUMBLE RELIGION IN THE FUTURE ANYWAY. THEY ARE MIND FVCKED AND YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT ONCE IT'S BEEN IMPLANTED IN THEIR HEAD.
tkathryyn 6 months ago
"Science has over 240000 peer-reviewed articles supporting evolution"
Show me the one proving it.
AgentsAnonymous 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgentsAnonymous
Science doesn't prove. In fact you cannot prove anything. You cannot prove your own existence to anyone but yourself.
theviolator23 6 months ago
@AgentsAnonymous Go to pubmed and use the search term "evolution" You will find over 294 thousand articles that reference evolution. Pretty amazing what you can find when you look shit up for yourself.
ethurial 6 months ago
@AgentsAnonymous Nothing in science has actual, undeniable, irrefutable "proof" for it. If you want that, turn to math. Where numbers are clear and stuff can be proven.
Travaillons 6 months ago
My stomach turned over when that annotation popped up. Let me get this straight, AiG made their own peer review system that automatically rejects anything that doesn't support their own pre-conceived beliefs, is from the same people who basically say that if evidence goes against scripture then REALITY must be wrong, and gets debunked all the time? I could imagine a parody where AiG directors are faking checking their own papers going 'see! see! it's correct, can we turn it in now?!' Ah my head!
Nverdis 7 months ago
Hiya!
adamlgo 7 months ago
@RiseAgainstTyranny That depends a lot on how you are defining Neanderthals. Some classify them as a sub-species as Homo sapiens-neanderthalus and others as their own species, Homo neanderthalus. (spelling?) Actually, language would be the most important aspect of consciousness in my book. Without it, the accumulation of knowledge by the species becomes extremely difficult by the simple limiter of death. Also, I think social structure in a species is explainable without using self-awareness
seleroan 8 months ago
How about I like the video first because there's a picture of Double H Haggard and Hovind along with discovery institute douche-hole and Ken sCam.
brmadman4455 8 months ago
Love that kind of challenge (tho i doubt you'll get any responses worth a nickel). On the other hand I don't think you should have asked that they try to disprove evolution at any point as this (in their heads) gives them an out in the sense of a false dichotomy, of not having to prove themselves right just prove others wrong and 'winning' by default...
yazerith 9 months ago
So where's your link in the comments to Meyer's 4 August 2004 peer-reviewed paper in Proceedings?
Dr. McDiarmid to Dr. Hans Sues: "I have seen the review file and comments from 3 reviewers on the Meyer paper. All three with some differences among the comments recommended or suggested publication. I was surprised but concluded that there was not inappropriate behavior vs a vis [sic] the review process." "Re: Request for information," 1-28-2005, cited in US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE
MorganMarvinson 9 months ago
@MorganMarvinson TROLL! LOL
srexob715 9 months ago
@MorganMarvinson If that comment is geared towards something I said, than I am confused. That incident has nothing to do with my post.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@MorganMarvinson you do realise that was a literature review and not any actual proposal of intelligent design. It contained no evidence and did not rebut any of the data supporting evolution. I know you are a troll but you should really actually read these things before you post. It tends to make your trolling more sucessful.
Xaiano 8 months ago
@Xaiano Undoubtedly you may wish to come across as being knowledgeable on this subject, but a review of the literature that supports intelligent design IS an article on intelligent design.
The one who accuses me of being a troll follows me around YouTube with nothing substantive to say. That is, by definition, a troll.
MorganMarvinson 8 months ago
This is slightly off topic, but a subject that may be interesting to readers. Isn't it interesting that Evolution only leads to conscious awareness with humans? Do you think any other species will ever develop self-awareness or any ability to mentally reflect on the world as a whole? It reminds me that there is much we know, but even more that we don't.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 Technically, Evolution has only SO FAR led to conscious awareness in humans... that we know of. Actually, I have heard good arguments that Neanderthal's were aware of their own consciousness, and they weren't human.
seleroan 9 months ago
@seleroan An interesting point. At what point in our evolutionary history did we (human or otherwise) become aware of our own consciousness?
Pinage 8 months ago
@Pinage how do you know other creatures don't have consiousness? it isn't like we can ask them how they feel.
Xaiano 8 months ago
@Xaiano Exactly.
Pinage 8 months ago
@Pinage When we had the time to sit down and actually think, instead of being involved in the Three F's of early primal life. (Fighting, Fucking or Fleeing.)
allieron 7 months ago
I mean the Theory of Evolution, not just changes (evolution). I don't dispute it. But, the scientific community takes results of empirical observation and experiments and attempts to fit these into the Theory of Evolution, instead of letting the evidence lead the way. It's because they have invested their beliefs around the Theory of Evolution. Science doesn't have an opinion or belief, it's just evidence and observations.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
Comment removed
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
Well said dinkipooxa . It certainly condenses the concept. No one really has the intellectual capacity to make such conceptual-dependent concepts. Let us define the word "exists" as something that can be measured consitently between all observers. That which can be measured exactly by many observers with each measurement contradicting the other observations made with exact precision means that the object has no real definition.
karldrago 9 months ago
@dinkipooxa So you think formal education is not derived from bettering the intellect of students? Is that what you are trying to get at with your ambiguous statements?
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@dinkipooxa And you do not seem to think that the religious need to substantiate their claims that something divine exists? That's called shifting the burden of proof. This is not about philosophy of the teachings so do not try to come up with philosophical arguments to try and void the need for proof for the claims presented by the religious.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@dinkipooxa Your experience has nothing to do with if something is actually happening or not. Have you ever experienced the chemical reaction between Uranium and Electrons? No? This does not allow you to dismiss it because you personally have not observed or seen evidence for it. Another example is the orbit of Pluto. We have not known about it for long enough to have seen it orbit the sun yet we know it does. Your argument does not apply to this situation. Maybe in matters of subjectivity.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@dinkipooxa Evolution is true as in it happens. I would hope you don't let the theory part throw you off. After all the Helio-centric theory is true. And as well it met much resistance from the church when it was proposed.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
Okay. I''ll put up. First, study quantum physics like I have. Study the subject of "Holographic Universe." Examine the concept of "action at a distance." Lookup "quantum foam." The conclusion? Scientists prove that matter can be desctroibed best as a wave function. Otherwise it doesn't really exist. Time and space are not provable. You want to tell me what id "REAL"? You can't prove reality exists but you experience it. So don't tell me about proving God exists. Nothing "exists."
karldrago 9 months ago
@karldrago "You can't prove reality exists but you experience it"
Think about it for a second!
eleminatus 9 months ago
@karldrago If no thing exists than there is no thing to speculate about. saying "nothing exists" proves itself as fallible reasoning in its own statement. Only some thing can exist. If no thing existed then we wouldn't experience it. Even if everything is a hologram, that is something.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
Wow. Another excellent exercise in straw men. Here I was afraid he was gonna challenge my belief...
I'm a theist, but I believe in evolution. To quote Darwin himself, there is no "conflict between believing in God and evolution." There's that debunked.
BraunBrothers 10 months ago
@BraunBrothers Yet Darwin through his extensive research eventually abandoned a belief in god because what he had learned shattered what was taught of god. Earlier on yes he said things like that but in the end it changed. Your form of Christianity is more loose and less rigid than those of old, allowing for more wiggle room such as evolution. Which I mean if you really look at it evolution does happen, so either the beliefs bend or they break under pressure.
CtheWolfe 10 months ago
@CtheWolfe Thanks for the reply! But even after he developed his theories, he was quoted as saying, "I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. – I think that generally ... an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind." Not only that, but he also said that it was "absurd to doubt that a man might be an ardent theist and an evolutionist." He also interpreted the Bible literally, which I believe was a mistake.
BraunBrothers 10 months ago
@BraunBrothers Well I mean there is no disclaimer in the beginning of the Bible saying "Caution much of this is not to be taken literally, doing so would defy much of the natural processes of the universe" And I mean for thousands of years the faith has been taught as literal truth, its really only been the last couple hundred years in which we have started to unravel the universe around us, which forces the loosening of the teachings. Then you have like the creationist museum... like WTF?
CtheWolfe 10 months ago
@CtheWolfe Yeah I can absolutely understand what you're saying. Religion accepting evolution has only become popular (key word= popular) in the last hundred years, but religious writers for more than a thousand years have commentated on the idea that the creation account need not to be taken literally.
BraunBrothers 10 months ago
@CtheWolfe Reality depends on the goggles you choose to see it through. Religion is an ancient science used against most people in an attempt to control (much like the bible speaks of the great deceiver) so the religious institutions play both sides of the coin whether or not they realize it. But the core of the teachings can and have been used for personal and collective empowerment that is so profound it cannot be understated. The flip side is that people have used it for destruction as well
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 I find it amusing how people seem to think we need religion to be good. If you look at the atheist populations of countries, as religion declines, so does crime, the standard of living goes up, education goes up. Religion holds us back from living for each other and doing right by each other because it forces us to segregate and gives us a sense of entitlement over one another. While I agree if we all could just get along things would be great, religion prevents that.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe My last message must not have sent. You are more religious than you realize. You think religion is a magical entity that destroys the world. It is people that use religious teachings for hatred, not religion itself. I'm not sure if you are giving credit to this teaching, it has shaped civil rights and the secular humanistic view of life. Without it, you would not think the way you do.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe Even if there was no religion, people would still act the way they do. It's not religions fault, it is the fault of greedy people, and they would act the same whether or not there is religion.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe Btw I never said anything about religion, brother. I people should embrace a teaching, a philosophy, one that is too often over-looked and short-lived.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe All social problems (war, poverty, greed, hatred) can be solved by embracing the new testaments main teaching; Love thy neighbor as thyself. This is only if the majority of people would adopt this kind of mentality. What kind of problems- other than natural disasters or alien invasions- could we possibly face if everyone was looking out for and taking care of each other?
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 Wow are you really going to say that the new testament is all like that? How about the parable in Luke 19 that ends with verse 27 in which the moral is "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." The moral of the parable is that if you oppose your lord you will die. How is that love thy neighbor? Only if he does not oppose you? We do not need false beliefs to be good to each other.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe You either take the bible all literally and as a whole or you reject the whole thing. It is littered with garbage like this verse, which goes against the grain of almost all of his other teachings. Do you think such truth wouldn't be littered with crap to lead people away from one another? It's not just about being good to one another. It's about being self-less and taking care of one another. It doesn't require belief in jesus christ, just a belief in that teaching.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe Another thing you're missing that's a little more on topic is that You can embrace The Theory of Evolution and Creationism at the same time. Evolution doesn't explain the nature of the universe, it only partly explains the nature of life on earth. It should also be mentioned that there has never been a transient fossil between two species found. It rests on much evidence, as well as assumptions and paradoxes
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 I am sorry but I think you fail to grasp the fact that every fossil is a transitional one. Think of evolution as a film. Standard TV shoots film at 24-26 frames per second. Now if evolution were lets say 1 or two seconds of film. You know one position on screen to another. Then each frame which is nearly indistinguishable from the one before it and the one after it, is your transitional fossil. Everything is constantly in transition.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 You wont find a fossil that is half crocodile or half duck, such a mutation in that extreme would not allow it to breed with anything else, thus its chance for survival is non existent. Its a gradual smooth shift its not a sudden BAM Half duck Half Crocodile. To think thats how it happens is completely against evolution. And there are tons of transitional fossils between our great ape ancestors and humans. Go look them up, all the ones in the museums are legit fossils.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe They are all different species. Every fossil is a separate species.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
Another thing you might find a problem with is Evolution and Biogenesis. They contradict one another, yet they are both embraced in the same "science". One of them has to change, there is no way life only ariss from other life, and at the same time we all came from one ancestor. It's a paradox. I'm not saying Evolution is incorrect, just that it isn't anywhere near a completely whole perspective.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 Um not to knock on you but you do not seem to understand the key difference(and it is not an issue in the slightest). Evolution does not ever try to explain where life comes from, merely how it evolves. Abiogenesis tries to explain how life happened. Once it did happen then evolution can occur. Evolution needs life to happen, but it is pretty well understood why and how evolution takes place. Evolution is the science of changing life, abiogenesis is the science of how life starts.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 Science is a methodical way to learn about the world around us. It is a tool we use to understand things. Evolution falls under this category. The divergence of species, the variety, the changes etc are all evolution and its these things we try to understand. If species were static you would not have any of the domestic dogs we have today. Hard to believe but Chihuahua's come from wolves(somewhere in the past) We have just bred them to be the way they are.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 There is also something called ring species. What this means is that if you visualize the animals being in a ring of the same species, ones on one side cannot breed with the ones on the other. We have got dogs to this point. A chihuahua cannot mate with a great dane for instance. Yet they can both breed with the dogs in between each other on this ring. Its pretty interesting. And this is how different species are formed over time they diverge to this point.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@DaveLeech1989 And I agree evolution does rest on a pile of evidence. There is so much evidence for it, its this gigantic heap that people ignore. The funny thing is to disprove evolution would be simple, merely one legit fossil out of order from time period would prove the entire concept wrong. Yet we have never found a fossil outside the range of time periods(strata) we expect to find them. I would recommend reading up on the subject. Evolution is true my friend.
CtheWolfe 9 months ago
@CtheWolfe I don't agree with the scientific "community" (more like science nazis) making science itself take a specific stance on the nature of life and using the theory of evolution as the centerpiece. I don't disagree that it may be true, but there are still so many unanswered questions, and science itself is just observations of phenomena. How does the community claim that evolution is science? Evolution is an idea, and a very good one. Many people forget what science really is.
DaveLeech1989 9 months ago
Creationists cannot show us one single peer-reviewed article, not even one that has been submitted and rejected. But they'll just offer up more excuses.
LoopQuantumGravity1 10 months ago
Mr. T FTW!!!!
cinharrison1022 10 months ago
The way I see it is this; How can you have something by chance or coincidence if there are no grounds for the chance or coincidence itself? Who's chance is it? How does anything happen by chance at all? Where is the framework for anything? If energy can't be created or destroyed then either the universe is infinite and will never cease- which is something humans (as infinite beings) will never grasp, or there is is something beyond physical measures that can't be measured by science
DaveLeech1989 10 months ago
The irony here is that you have creationists arguing against something they have no knowledge or experience with, and atheists arguing against something they have no knowledge or experience with. The two sides use different methods of approaching an argument that are irrelevant and don't apply to the side they are arguing against. Having an argument this way will always be a paradox and nothing will be definitively answered if answer must be "who's right and who's wrong?"
DaveLeech1989 10 months ago
@DaveLeech1989
Sorry bud but that's not true entirely. Many atheists, myself included, actually have a better knowledge of the holy texts than the people who just blindly blather on about how they're correct. As well as a good knowledge of the evolutionary world (post secondary education), it's the knowing about both sides that makes people stop believing and it's annoying to hear ignorant people tear down lifetimes worth of work in the name of a safety blanket they won't let go of.
boblajoe1 10 months ago
@boblajoe1 Fair enough, I can't claim that evolutionists don't know theology and I also can't claim that christians don't know science. But I can still claim the later part of my comment which was the main point and that is this; neither side of this argument can prove the other wrong. You can't use science to explain something that is not physical, and you can't use something that's not physical to explain science. Anyone debating who's right or wrong is wasting their breath.
DaveLeech1989 10 months ago