Added: 2 years ago
From: bladdan
Views: 5,429
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (196)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • missing link should clearly show human-ape link, and does not need debate or justification.

  • Comment removed

  • okay, the term missing link means a link between humans and apes, how can this be the link if it precedes humans and apes?

  • @121Blayne, Correct! I thought of that myself. This is not the missing link between primate evolving into a human.

  • what a lot of crap, it's a flippin an animal species, evolusionist must have a pea brain.one skeleton and it's the missing link, they are such asholes.

  • @mrBobcaruana1956 *cough* genetic testing *cough*

  • @phackitnow It's a lemure, not a reptile.

  • @tyrantslayer24 Ok still this lemure dose not make sense in a Darwin world of evolution. It has a tail, and thumbs, and apes, and monkeys do not have a thumbs. How would evolution loose the tail (this would make sense), and the thumb, only to regain the thumb again latter in the evolution process?

    I do not doubt the fact that this wonderful find is real, but let's not throw it in the family tree just because we are getting desperate to find the so called messing link!

  • @phackitnow I agree with you, I think they rushed this discovery without mush study on the animal. There was an article published a few weeks ago saying it was not part of the family tree.

  • Unfortunately Ida is just another embarrassment to the scientific community. This is all we need right now.

  • testing

  • It sure stunned the world and will be in all the papers for the next 100 years as the greatest con in the year 2009. What a joke. When will you ever learn?

    Google:

    'Eighth wonder' Ida is not related to humans, claim scientists, guardian

  • con? hardly, they just made mistakes in the analysis

  • ***********

    red2seata @

    ***********

    ++ "con? hardly, they just made mistakes in the analysis." ++

    One man's mistake is the evolutionist's theory of evolution.

    The Hobbits and Ida the Darwinius fell over next Ardi the AArdipithecus ramidus. How long will this deception last?

  • so... you don't thing anything evolves? at all?

  • red2seata @

    ++ "so... you don't think anything evolves? at all?" ++

    We have to look at the scientific evidence and not to the daydreams and wild ideas of evolutionists who argue that ... over a vast period of time manKIND descended from a pond full of bacteria.

    A mouse-like creature never evolved into a bat. This is a wacky idea with zero evidence. A parrot never evolved from a dinosaur.

    Only evolutionists supported the Hobbits and Ida ... We told them they were wrong.

  • fail creationist. im just gonna assume ur trolling

  • red2seata @

    ++ "fail creationist. im just gonna assume ur trolling." ++

    In a court case or a debate ... when the second party fails to being any evidence to the discussion ... but can only say ... NO ... It is great evidence that the second party is wrong.

  • i really hope u didnt just say that no evidence has been provided for evolution

  • I knew something was going to happen! There studies were so inconclusive and it really seems that they just jumped to a conclusion out of desperation. You want me to by into darwinian theory, you gotta do better than this. It turns out this is not related to primates at all. It is an early ancestor of the lemur.

  • it's a lemur.

  • How did you decide this?

  • i looked it up.

  • Ah well that's convincing. (sarcasm)

    This animal is a transitional form between lemurs and monkeys. It has some of the characteristics of both. For example, darwinius masilae lacks a grooming claw, which is a necessary trait to be considered a lemur.

    Next time, "look it up" in a source outside of creationist propaganda.

  • im not the one swallowing all the propaganda...do the research...science institutes have concludedit's NOT a link...believe the lie...but that's exactly what it is.And you have willingly exchanged the truth for a lie...the lie that this theory is a scientific fact! It's not.there is NOTHING factual about it.Not one measily shred of hardcore definitive evidence.Which is what im demanding seeing evolutionists claim its a FACT..

  • I gave you one reason that scientists say it's a transitional form (and for the record, the experts agree that it is.) You've yet to give any evidence that it isn't. Simply claiming that it's just a lemur doesn't make it so.

  • and have you bothered to check why SO MANY believe it is not??and not all of the research against it is from creationists.."simply claiming that it's just a lemur doesn't make it so"? and claiming it's a missing link might make it so? can you explain to me the discovery of man made metal balls found in rock supposedly 3bn yrs old?Or a forged steel hammer foundd in shale hundreds&thousands of yrs old?Or an Aliminium wedge found with mammoth bone in it millions of yrs old?thanks.

  • "SO MANY?"

    Name some, please. I gave an example of why Ida is not simply a lemur (no grooming claw.) What reason do you have to say that she is?

    As for the missing link statement, scientists rarely use the term, as it is misleading. It's mostly used by creationists and the media. Darwinius Masilae would be better described as a "transitional species," as she has the traits of both a prosimian and a simian.

    Please cite your sources for your alleged artifacts, as well.

  • Since you refuse to cite a source for anything, I looked up your supposed artifacts.

    The "man made metal balls" were found to be naturally-made pieces of pyrite.

    The "Londond Hammer" was found loose in a creek bed near London, TX. The owner refused to allow any tests to be performed on it. The "shale," as you call it, is most likely a concretion that could have taken place in a few decades (do you have hard water?) That is, unless it's an all-out fraud.

  • The aluminum wedge was harder to find, but I found a couple articles, and I read up on aluminum. Aluminum wasn't discovered until the 1800's. Are you saying that there were mammoths living with people until at least the 1800's?

  • the organisms are different but the DNA hasnt evolved. it is the same structure with the same components. just rearranged.

    what organism is there that has all the exact same parts as it did a billion years ago?

    not only does the theory of evolution not support DNA, but it doesnt support how life came to be either.

  • like you said before we really dont know anything with absolute certainty. So i will just assume what you really meant was that Neuroscience's stance is that our memories and thoughts are functions of the physical brain.

    scientists try to figure out how the universe and everything in it works. but we dont know everything.

    so scientists are trying to put together this big puzzle, but they dont have all the pieces, so they try to cram together ones that dont fit.

  • "In fact one of the requirements for a good scientific theory is that it must be falsifiable."

    so what may i ask is something that would falsify the theory of macro-evolution?

    since fraud and deceit havent changed peoples minds. not to mention the gaps in the theory such as if all organisms are evolving, why hasnt DNA evolved for over a billion years?

  • It wasnt so much the unanswered part, as the part about how over the years science has made many "discoveries" that later turn out to be completely wrong.

  • I do accept your apology.

    I believe that even though someones body can die, their soul will live on, to whatever future they made for themselves.

    you sound like a smart person, so im sure you know that all matter is made of atoms and all atoms are made of smaller parts that are made of smaller parts and so on until basically what you have is energy held together by energy, that energy being light.

  • In the bible it says that God is light, and so i believe God is all around us.

    That being said I believe God affects our world through probability and chance.

    I dont think you will be able to understand this because your perception of probability is fundamentally different from mine.

    However you most certainly accept that there are many things in the universe science cant explain, and many things they think they know change drastically over time.

  • Just giving an example:

    the ancient south american cultures discovered ways of predicting the exact times of solar and lunar eclipses, were able to find the exact number of days in a year, and map our galaxy. All without the use of a telescope. I doubt we will ever know how they accomplished so much with their temples and psychedelic drugs. Science just cant explain it.

  • Just because they are closer to modern day humans than most other mammals doesnt mean we evolved from them.

    Albeit we may be a type of ape there is still no proof that we descended from any of those apes, just because we have similar DNA doesnt prove such a bold assumption

  • If evolution was true, and scientific fact, then scientists, in a lab, would be able to change an organism into a different organism.

    If it happens just by chance then it should be no problem to do it in a lab.

    for something to be scientific fact it must be able to be repeated in a lab

    of course it cannot be and that is why you are quite foolish.

    and what is this " thousands of times" ? macro evolution has never once been observed or any real proof given

  • Im sorry but scientists saying something is a link without fossil evidence just doesnt cut it.

    they can make up all the stories they want but the fact is they dont have proof.

    If they changed very very slowly over millions of years then there would be fossil evidence of AT LEAST ONE creature evolving and changing to something else.

    ill break it down since you obviously dont get it. they say we came from monkeys, i want to see a fossil between the monkey they say we came from and us.

  • I wasnt quoting him but that is what he said. In fact he had a whole chapter on the problems with the theory of evolution. I wonder why evolutionists today refuse to acknowledge those problems?

    also they have found over 250 million fossils. NOT ONE is any type of link between 2 different genus's OR a deffinent link between 2 species.

    you saying the links are there we just havent found them is like saying god is there we just cant see him. you have blind faith in something that will damn you

  • having a god for every bullshit thing and searching the heavens for answers is rediculous ignorant garbage. but there are things you cant explain or prove. like the birth and existence of the very first living organism. that abiogenesis THEORY may work, but yet again most theories are disproven and discarded. theists wont give up their grounds until they see proof for themselves, which i believe "ida" is not the answer.

  • The Sky News report is full of dogshit. Ida "finally" disproves creationism? Sorry but Creationism has been a crock of lies for at least 100 years.

  • AHAHA so many scientists are saying this is NOT in fact a human ancestor

    read 'Voodoo Science' it tells about how science research done in "secret" as it was said in this video is almost always false and for the purpose of misleading.

    as more scientists see the research, they are all saying how it is not related to humans, but also that the research that was done was very shitty.

    sorry evolution you still dont have your 'missing link'

    Darwin said if no link was found, it was all for naught.

  • Voodoo Science? Sure that's a reliable science source...

  • It was written by a scientist to inform federal judges how to tell the difference between good solid science, and bull shit science used to gain recognition, money, and to misinform.

    way to judge a book by the cover, just tells the type of people who believe in a theory that has so many holes it make a porn star look prude

  • You fucking crazy, man? You sound insane, do you realize that? You should be medicated.

  • Are you talking about NDS525 or soccerdude?

  • Who do I believe?

    News coming from the History Channel?

    News coming from Voodoo science?

    ........

  • I've studied the book 'Voodoo Science' and it looks like a terrible source of information...

    If these scientist want wealth why did they spend a million bucks just to get it?

    Please investigate, like me, before you comment...

  • what is a million bucks compared to a show on the history channel, a movie, and being in countless science tex books?

    a good investment thats what you call a millionbucks in that sense.

    and no matter what you say it doesnt change the fact that theydidthe research in secret, and released their findings before they could be scrutinized by other professionals. why would you do your work in secret if not to conceal some authenticity of your findings

  • This could change religion itself! If I was one of the scientist I would want to make sure I was right and knew a lot about this fossil before reveling it to the world... and please learn to type it takes me such a long time to read your comments. I'm sorry if my answer is wrong... I just don't get your comment with all the punctuation errors.

  • Hey is Kent Hovind still in jail?

  • well then, if they can "play god" and make life happen, then i will believe and creationism will be out the door for good. but until then, its another idea ready to be flushed.

  • >of course you can talk shit, but it is more useful if you can also think up something intelligent to say.

    define intelligent please. apparently im too stupid to know. please dont say its you...

    >please enlighten me

    i am under the impression that you are a scrawny 4 eyed bookworm bitch ready to get his lights knocked out by punks like me. you may not look like that, but you fall under the same stereotype.

  • "i am under the impression that you are a scrawny 4 eyed bookworm bitch ready to get his lights knocked out by punks like me."

    Frustrated much? Work on proving the divinity of your raped, lying madman.

  • im not proving anything. what started out as a debate whether or not this monkey rat is our great x 46456448 grandpa is our ancestor has turned into an all out brawl between an agnostic and monkey man believers.

  • >a number of people are working on abiogenesis. if they dont have a working model yet, that does not constitute evidence for the "magic man did it" theory.

    what the fuck is abio genesis? is it another idea ready to be flushed down the toilet like half of every other idea that pops out of "experts" heads?

  • "what the fuck is abio genesis? is it another idea ready to be flushed down the toilet like half of every other idea that pops out of "experts" heads?"

    Let's talk about abiogenesis. How's your organic chemistry?

    :)

  • my organic chemistry is just fine thank you very much. it seems to me that a bunch of matter and chemicals and all that good stuff getting together and forming people that arue with each other about stupid shit that no onecan prove on either side of the argument

  • "my organic chemistry is just fine thank you very much. it seems to me that a bunch of matter and chemicals and all that good stuff getting together "

    So go read Kauffman's work on autocatalytic sets, Margolis's on microdomains, the recent work on spontaneous ribosome formation and self-catalyzing enzymes and get back to me.

    "stupid shit that no onecan prove "

    Well, except for the fact that science has all the evidence on its side and religion doesn't have any more than the Easter Bunny.

  • fine then i will. not. kauffman must be as rediculous as constantine or joan.

    once science finds a monkey man, then i will believe. but for now, they only have a monkey rat.

  • "fine then i will. not. kauffman must be as rediculous as constantine or joan."

    Well, except for the fact that Kauffman has actual evidence for his claims. You don't have any.

    "once science finds a monkey man, then i will believe."

    OK, so check out the numerous hominid fossils.

    It must be hard to argue without knowing anything about what you're debating about.

  • i guess every history textbook in the world has to be modified...

    if scientists found anything of real importance relating to this issue, we would already know about it.

    i was debating about whether or not this monkey rat is my ancestor, i dont who invited you into this.... you changed the subject.

  • "i was debating about whether or not this monkey rat is my ancestor"

    No, you were just making unsupported pronouncements from a position of ignorance along with bizarre empty physical threats.

    "i dont who invited you into this.... you changed the subject."

    It's called a public forum. And the subject is evidence. Your lack of it and our surfeit of it.

    Maybe you should consider an education before you try to overthrow the foundations of modern biology. Just a thought.

  • if this kauffman guy is so right, and evolution has all the evidence it needs, how come its not in all the textbooks in schools? how come creationism still stands a valid point? you are just as stupid as me. and so are every other person that believes in any of this and religions.

    public forums. your statements were irrelevent to mine and whoever that other guys was.

  • "and evolution has all the evidence it needs, how come its not in all the textbooks in schools?"

    Evolution is in all reputable high school biology textbooks.

    "how come creationism still stands a valid point?"

    In what world did creationism ever stand as a valid point? Valid points are supported by evidence.

    "you are just as stupid as me."

    Don't flatter yourself. I'm giving you about a 100 IQ.

  • but kauffman's finds arent. so he must not be that important. i read the evolution section in my biology book. and it was as bogus as the bible. IQ? did you know IQ dont mean shit? just so you know, mine is 155 (results from an official test), and it dont mean shit.

    let me go way back to my arguement before you came in. scientists finds dinosaurs, monkey rats, mammoths, but cannot find the link in evolution just before homo sapien...

  • "but kauffman's finds arent. so he must not be that important."

    Probably because it's organic chemistry.

    " mine is 155 (results from an official test), "

    I think you're lying.

    "did you know IQ dont mean shit?"

    Doesn't. And it does-- if it didn't mean shit, retarded people would be walking around with 160 IQs.

    Another "tell" of intelligence is spelling and grammar.

  • but that dont make him important for EVERYONE to know.

    you dont have to believe me.

    and, know it dont really meen jak shit. eny sykology man wuld say dat to u.

    find your monkey man, and i will believe in evolution. and if god makes a grand appearance, like the bible says he would, then i bet you and i are both screwed...

  • "find your monkey man, and i will believe in evolution"

    I answered this before. Check out australopithecus, neandertalensis, other hominids. This is under anthropology and is well-documented by physical evidence.

    "and if god makes a grand appearance, like the bible says he would, then i bet you and i are both screwed..."

    If the Giant makes a grand appearance, like Jack and the Beanstalk said he would, you and I are both screwed.

  • your big nerdy words arent my physical evidence of monkey men.

  • "your big nerdy words arent my physical evidence of monkey men."

    Then I guess you'll have to increase your vocabulary until you can read about it in grownup books. Ask your parents to get the anthropology book down for you, it might be on a shelf that's too high for you to reach.

    zzzzz

  • "scientists ... cannot find the link in evolution just before homo sapien..."

    This statement is also incorrect. If you're going to insist on using god of the gaps fallacy, at least get the fallacy right.

  • >theyre not going to prove if its a rat, if thats what youre hoping for

    ok mr insufferable know it all. research years from now just may MAYBE prove me right. but im sure you are hoping this will lift religion's strong grip on the world.

    >youre welcome

    arent you tough stuff talkin shit on the internet. i can talk shit too. you want to keep on? you may be halfway around the world from me, but judging by the way you are acting, i have a pretty good impression on who you are.

  • "constantine I, christian persecuter sees a vision "in my name you will conquer" and has his troops paint a sign on their shields. wins the battle the next day. you cant explain that"

    Did he hallucinate or did he devise Catholicism, a means by which Rome could once again rule the world?

    Mohammed Atta believed in Allah and caused trillions of dollars worth of damage to the United States using only boxcutters.

    Does this mean Islam is true? Argument from a position of fanaticism holds no water

  • i really dont believe he was hallucinating, and if it was a political move, it was a daring one. saw the vision one day, wins the battle the next. coincidence? if he lost it, christianity would not be here today, would it?

    mohammed atta is irrelevant. so is islam. this was supposed to be creationism vs evolution.

  • "mohammed atta is irrelevant. so is islam. this was supposed to be creationism vs evolution."

    Mohammed Atta is absolutely relevant to your ridiculous argument from a position of "fanaticism validates religious fairy tales."

    Props to you for even knowing about Constantine. Maybe you also know about Mithra and all the similarities between Mithraism and the jesus cult.

  • mohammed atta has nothing to do with this.

    mithraism has hardly any similarities to christianity. yes, i know about it. constatine the jesus freak slayer sure fell for christianity.

  • "mohammed atta has nothing to do with this."

    He has about as much to do with it as Joan of Arc did. That is to say, everything: fanaticism isn't proof of anything.

    "mithraism has hardly any similarities to christianity. yes, i know about it. "

    Then you know that it has virgin birth, crucifiction, resurrection after three days.

    "constatine the jesus freak slayer sure fell for christianity."

    The romans developed christianity into a soft power mind control mechanism. You're fooled.

  • was mohammed a 14 year old field worker that won battles?

    do you not know how different roman and hebrew cultures were?

    romans developed it? i thought jesus was a jew..

  • "was mohammed a 14 year old field worker that won battles?"

    You seem to have trouble with analogies. He took down the world's largest economy with 19 people armed with boxcutters. Point is, your point is invalid.

    "romans developed it? i thought jesus was a jew."

    That's why the Vatican isn't located in Rome.

    Er, wait...

  • then allah must have given him superpowers or something. er wait, maybe you have your analogies between boxcutters and a little girl beating the shit out of the english. point is, your point is just as invalid.

    "i will build my church upons this rock (referring to peter)" or something like that. do you know about the bodies that were found buried beneath the basilica? they think one may be peter... but this monkey rat may be our grandma...

  • " point is, your point is just as invalid."

    Your own failure of understanding doesn't invalidate my point.

    ""i will build my church upons this rock (referring to peter)" or something like that. do you know about the bodies that were found buried beneath the basilica? they think one may be peter.."

    So where's the proof? We're all about proof, right?

    Where's evidence that it's Peter? Where's evidence that Jesus even existed at all?

  • i dont think you understand either. the american economy wasnt completely devasted by a handful of boxcutters, like how you made it sound. a handful of radical muslims have nothing to do with with a little girl tearing the english apart.

    yes we are. and NEITHER OF US have it.

  • " like how you made it sound. a handful of radical muslims have nothing to do with with a little girl tearing the english apart."

    I need to explain it to you a fourth time.

    The fact of Joan's fanaticism, and Atta's fanaticism, and the men who followed them, doesn't prove your convoluted, unsupported, vague thesis in any way.

  • joan of arc is a fanatic is your OPINION. atta is a fanatic is your OPINION. since when were your OPINIONS facts?

  • You don't believe that Islamist suicide bombers are religious fanatics?

  • fine then, yes i do believe islam extremists are fanatics, but not joan of arc. therefore, your atta statements are irrelevant, because YOUR OPINIONS ARE NOT FACTS. and neither are mine. i was just bringing history into the argument.

  • "fine then, yes i do believe islam extremists are fanatics, but not joan of arc."

    This statement is ludicrous. She was the very definition of a religious fanatic and probably would have eagerly accepted the term.

    " YOUR OPINIONS ARE NOT FACTS. and neither are mine."

    I'm not stating opinions. My statements are based on facts and literal definitions of words.

    You don't have sufficient information to make meaningful statements on any of these subjects. It's sad, really.

  • you arent stating opinions? really? i think you are a dumbass, and you think i am too. and we both can argue to prove it. so why are you still bugging me? its sad. really. that my aruement was that this animal was not our missing link, and you had to come on in and make this a dumbass rediculous fight on who is right and who is wrong. its sad really. because in the end, everyone else that reads this will believe that both of us are dumbasses. its sad, really. so drop it?

  • "i think you are a dumbass, and you think i am too."

    Yes, humans are dumbasses. This is why we should proceed forward from the evidence.

    There is abundant evidence supporting evolution. There is none WHATSOEVER supporting creationism.

    Arguing against evidence when you haven't got any yourself is like trying to destroy a main battle tank by blowing dandelion seeds at it.

  • wheres my monkey man? once again, im an AGNOSTIC. and my ORIGINAL ARGUMENT was that this monkey rat is not our ancestor. why are you still bothering me? now you are the dumbass picking a fight...

  • "wheres my monkey man?"

    In the anthropology classroom. What you're doing, btw, is engaging in god of the gaps fallacy.

    " im an AGNOSTIC"

    Are you agnostic about Thor, Osiris and Poseidon? What about Rubigus, the god of wheat blight?

    I think agnosticism is pretty silly.

    "now you are the dumbass picking a fight..."

    No, I'm the dumbass who realizes he's a dumbass and proceeds in a very slow, boring and methodical way from the physical evidence.

  • he really is? i never heard of his find. the one monkey man that would blow creationism out of the water? i think creationism would be gone by now..

    oh yeah, they just might be real to.

    you can think what you want.

    no you are the dumbass who thinks his nerdy knowledge in chemical (insert big word here, im too stupid) is superior and argues on youtube over an opinion that has nothing to do with his argument, that is that this animal is not the missing link.

  • "i think creationism would be gone by now.."

    People believe all kinds of insane shit. Now they're grasping at straws more and more-- religion is in precipitous decline all over the world.

    "oh yeah, they just might be real to. "

    The Easter Bunny might be real too. Where's the evidence?

    "no you are the dumbass who thinks his nerdy knowledge in chemical (insert big word here, im too stupid) is superior "

    Well it is, isn't it?

  • ok

    i found money under my pillow when i lost a tooth when i was a kid. hows that for proof.

    if your knowledge was so superior, tell me. can you not tell what sarcasm is? and i will tell you the 5th time, my argument was that this is not a missing link. apparently your "superior" nerdacy isnt catching on to that.. you are asking me for proof in something i dont place my faith in. you, on the other hand, is placing faith in people who think they are smart just like you. superior my ass...

  • "my argument was that this is not a missing link. "

    The prevailing opinion is that this is the ancestor of all primates.

    "you, on the other hand, is placing faith in people who think they are smart just like you. superior my ass... "

    Between the two of us, only one can spell and use proper grammar. If you were smart that would tell you something.

    Your qualifications for attacking evolutionary biology are what, precisely? Perhaps you should learn how to spell first...

  • really? apparently you havent read all the comments of my original argument. it could be anything but that.

    and if you are so smart, how come you havent decided to walk away yet and let me say whatever the hell i want to say like all the others?

    i was attacking anythng, dumbass, all i said IN THE BEGINNING was that this animal could be anything but our ancestor, how many times do i have to tell you? you may use big words but apparently you cant get me to quit, can you?

  • "i was attacking anythng, dumbass, all i said IN THE BEGINNING was that this animal could be anything but our ancestor, how many times do i have to tell you? you may use big words but apparently you cant get me to quit, can you?"

    Quit!?

    Why would I want an ignorant christian who can't spell to stop blathering? You're discrediting christianity, making them look like ignorant, ill-educated hayseeds!

    Stop!? I order you to continue, even after I've left.

  • i will continue, because i am a dumbass. and you will too, because you know it all. anyone that argues with a dumbass on youtube, is a dumbass. dumbass.

    now you are a bitch. thinking you know it all and argueing with a retard. congratulations, you earned a new level in my opinion of you.

  • "this animal is not the missing link. "

    Here's how the christian lie works. Every time a gap is filled, that means that there are now two NEW gaps that need to be filled, on either side of the fossil filling the previous gap.

    There are numerous hominids. The fact that you'd even argue this point shows your own lack of education on the subject.

  • really dude, whatever. if the important find was found, there would be no debate. you can dig up dinos, but not a full skeleton of what could possibly be the REAL MISSING LINK. really, you dont have the proof you need to whipe creationism from the minds of believers worldwide. get me that proof. the proof all the theists in the world are looking for. then you can boast about your "superior" nerdular nerdence.

  • "get me that proof."

    Go to an anthropology class.

    "you can boast about your "superior" nerdular nerdence. "

    Your anti-intellectualism is characteristic of the stupid and ignorant. Intelligence intimidates you; arguing against the intelligent and well-informed is futile for people like you.

    "if the important find was found, there would be no debate. "

    No, there would always be stupid people. Are you aware that people were still arguing that the earth was flat as late as 1950?

  • i dont need to waste money to be taught by someone who thinks they know it all to see proof with my own eyes.

    i am not the least bit intimidated by you, that is why we are still here. because your big words on youtube make you feel like tough stuff. and i, like any other proud "dumass", can still argue with you.

    propaganda. america's current economy is bush's fault....(that is sarcasm too, do i need to give you a lesson in economics if you dont believe me?)

  • "i am not the least bit intimidated by you, that is why we are still here. because your big words on youtube make you feel like tough stuff. and i, like any other proud "dumass", can still argue with you."

    Yes, you're working hard to make christians look ignorant and stupid.

  • hey dumbass, since when did i say i was christian? do you think that everyone that knows about constantine and joan is a christian? i just stated opinions.......... OPINIONS THAT ARENT FACTS. now you are looking like a dumbass, as dumbass as me.

  • "hey dumbass, since when did i say i was christian? do you think that everyone that knows about constantine and joan is a christian?"

    Now you're lying.

    "i just stated opinions.......... OPINIONS THAT ARENT FACTS."

    You sure did.

    "now you are looking like a dumbass, as dumbass as me. "

    You're flattering yourself again.

  • i will repeat myself again, you can believe what you want.

    ok, right back at you bitch.

  • oh ima reel gud crishtun. i watch porn, cuss, and argue with another dumbass bitch on u tub

  • See how good you are at following orders? You're so completely dominated psychologically that you have no choice but to do what I've told you to do.

    Now, hop to it. More badly-spelled, badly-reasoned, angry screeds. And hurry up about it.

    I'm going to leave now and when I come back I expect to see pages and pages of creationist tripe from you. And make it good.

  • now, wut dus yur false sense of mind control hav to do with this? im hear cuz i hav notin else to doo tonite. u must feel reel big now. eye shud sho u my mussells.

    agnostic, bitch, agnostic. goddamn. i can spell curse words right. hows that for a dumbass christian?

  • and you have yet to show me my monkey man. what was all of this for? i think i made you look like as big of an idiot as i am. haha, i am following orders very well. and you can believe i am a creationist if you want, but i truely believe i brought out the dumbass in you. i guess i will leave too, and i expect to find some more dumbass arguements over nothing when i come back.

    cant even stay on topic... so smart you are.

  • "america's current economy is bush's fault....that is sarcasm too, do i need to give you a lesson in economics"

    The economy crashed on Bush's watch, you ignorant, illiterate dumbfuck.

    Wow, I have to say, I talk to a lot of Youtube retards-- republican fools who can't spell yet think, inexplicably, that they know shit from Shinola-- but you really are a prize moron.

    I order you to talk lots more here. Don't hide your light under a bushel-- really get out there and represent christianity.

  • laisse faire, goverment has little to no influence on the economy, you ignorant illiterate dumbfuck.

    i am? then why are you still bothering me? you are just as dumb arguing with a retard on youtube. goddamn you are low. if not lower.

  • You can't even spell laissez-faire.

    "you are just as dumb arguing with a retard on youtube."

    Except that I'm getting you to do exactly what I want you to do. Part of that is to entertain me-- I find you hilarious and ridiculous. The other part is to get you all fired up to represent christians so that I can leave and you will still be outputting lots of badly-spelled, angry ranting.

    Do you understand now?

  • then why are you doing it? i dont represent anyone. bitch. you must be angry too, that is why you are here, bitch.

    do you understand now insufrable no it oll bitch

  • > a cladistic analysis shows that it belongs to a clade called haplorrhini, which includes monkeys and apes

    goddamn mr know it all, you know youre right. im gonna laugh my ass off at you when they disprove this as a link in our evolution.

    >but then again i am not in telepathic contact with a jewish cosmic zombie

    neither am i, thanks for judging me, smartass.

  • 20 years ago... then another 2 years of secrecy... it makes me think what else is under raps

  • Look you theists just need to come out and say it. You're wrong. People say you shouldn't tell people you're right and they're wrong grey area bla bla well there is no grey area here. People will look back and say look how primitive they were adam and eve what is this fuckin fairy tale...Well you guys need to be man enough to admit that you're full of shit. You don't have to start practicing your lame religion, you just have to admit that it is all a lie told to keep the masses under control

  • hmmm.... it looks like a rat to me. scientists use their imagination just as much as religious leaders do. dont tell me you are buying this too. are you easily convinced? you are insulting a lot of people with your brash words...

  • I'm sorry if I insulted anybody but I'm fed up with religion. See the movie "Jesus Camp" here on Youtube and you will understand. And it really irritates me you would ask me if I'M easily convinced. Umm hello you're the one believing in a jewish cosmic zombie, as it was put below, with no solid evidence that he is even really there. This is a fossil that I can look at, that can be analyzed and obviously is real and exists. Don't you think a creationist scientist woulda debunked it if were fake

  • i am agnostic. but do consider that the number of theists outweight the number of atheists. and people do take things personally. i see both points of view. and both tend to buy anything that appears to be true. i can clearly see that this creature is real, but i am not convinced that it is a link to our evolution.

  • No dude fuck that. Religion is a greedy blood sucking human concept that serves no purpose but to separate us world wide. What makes you think you know better than people who do this for a living? To be specific this is not the perfect evidence but it is good enough of a leg to stand on for sure. As if the other mountains of research that have been done don't matter, but whatever. Science really does not make a habit out of lying because scientist are constantly judging and analyzing eachother.

  • i dont know everything. and i sure as hell dont know more than these guys. but i do know that scientists can come up with and debate over the dumbest irrelevant shit. like whether or not pluto is a planet. they say this fossil could possibly be one of our ancestors. and i say it looks like a rat to me, but thats my opinion. this animal has been dead for years. nobody knows what it is. further research could possible prove, that it may be a rat. it will take more than this to debunk religion.

  • "i do know that scientists can come up with and debate over the dumbest irrelevant shit" ok but this was discovered not invented and there is really no debate here if others analyze it with different conclusions then maybe but for now its pretty clear...and yes scientists know what it is. bones are distinguishable between species; a human skeleton would be found to be human, a rat to be a rat, a whale to be a whale, a monkey to be a monkey, etc. whatever the case, religion is not common sense

  • religion is a set of beliefs and moral values. your argument is against creationism, which is a belief found in most religions. scientists dig up dinosaurs, mammoths, and zillion year old monkey rat named ida but not the one step in evolution before homo sapien. once they find that animal, creationism will be debunked. creationism's argument is that life could not just "happen". going way back to the very first life form, something had to make that life form come into being. science fails there.

  • the first life form formed on its own from atoms, which can be made from energy, heat, h2o, oxygen, nitrogen, etc

  • you answered what it is made from, not how it became alive. how did a handful of matter and energy come together and become a living organism? you cant prove the existence of a higher being scientifically. explain this: joan of arc, 14 year old girl, winning battles because God told her to. constantine I, christian persecuter sees a vision "in my name you will conquer" and has his troops paint a sign on their shields. wins the battle the next day. you cant explain that.

  • "how did a handful of matter and energy come together and become a living organism? "

    Abiogensis is a young scientific field, no one claims to know the answer to that question except for people who cling to ancient superstitions.

    "you cant explain that. "

    Is that a joke? Satire?

  • the chemicals bonded and started to move around in order to adapt to their environment. How come viruses always mutate? hmm

    Scientists yet can't answer how life started, but i'm sure they'll find out one day.

    And where did God come from? somebody had to "create" him/it.

  • "how did a handful of matter and energy come together and become a living organism?"

    Read Kauffman's work on autocatalytic sets, decades-old scientific work recently proved out by laboratory experiments on self-catalyzing enzymes. Should be some light reading for you.

    "you cant prove the existence of a higher being scientifically."

    In other words you don't have any evidence.

    "explain this: joan of arc, 14 year old girl, winning battles because God told her to."

    Fanaticism.

  • "and zillion year old monkey rat named ida but not the one step in evolution before homo sapien. once they find that animal, creationism will be debunked."

    No, that's not how evolution works. Creationists will point to the gap between that fossil and humans. That's because there is no "The missing link", every single fossil is a transitional fossil, some are just more remarkably relevant due to their emerging traits that become fundamental in future organisms.

  • "religion is a set of beliefs and moral values. your argument is against creationism, which is a belief found in most religions."

    It's a belief found in most witchdoctor superstitions, a belief for which there is not a single solitary shred of evidence.

    We've provided our evidence. Where's yours?

  • "it will take more than this to debunk religion. "

    Religion doesn't need to be debunked. It's never been "bunked" in the first place-- that is, it is pure bunk.

    Where's the evidence that jesus was anything other than a lying deluded madman?

    For that matter, where's the evidence that he even existed at all as a literal figure?

  • religion as pure bunk is an opinion.

    if jesus really rose from the dead, would you be able to find evidence?

  • "religion as pure bunk is an opinion.

    if jesus really rose from the dead, would you be able to find evidence?"

    If Jack and the Beanstalk really existed would you be able to find evidence?

    It's an absolutely ludicrous assertion. It's up to you to provide evidence or admit that he was just a tortured madman.

    Since that's too hard for you, try this one on. Where's evidence that he ever existed as anything other than a fairy tale?

  • Unfortunately pious people have no value for facts and rational, logical thoughts.

    If they do than their faith is being tested.

    I guess that's why many Republicans are Christians :P

  • oopps I meant -- If they do thEn their faith is being tested/

  • it is so small! cute!!

  • As a former Creationist I find this outstanding and reassuring. I don't think we need this missing link to confirm a theory that has already been proven as fact. I would like to see what the Creationists have to say about this missing link. Probably something illogical.

    Viva La Evolución!

  • Same old same old, I expect. No matter how much evidence we pile on, some people simply refuse to go with what evidence dictates. Congratulations on overcoming your creationist beliefs, akhan.

  • lmfao i knew it now no one cud say im rogn . religion is fake as so is god.

    and to gods belivers their sayin is " we were made from gods image" dan i guess their god is a fuckin monkey

  • This is a proof that you are a Fuckin monkey ASSHOLE.

  • "This is a proof that you are a Fuckin monkey ASSHOLE."

    ..and that is proof that sentences are hard for you.

  • lol thats fucking hilarious haha, thats exactly wut theyl say to haha

  • no god..yay!

    down with religion

  • Another very interesting thing is to see how now, suddenly, there was a missing link! Outside the hard core scientific world, nobody knew there was a missing link. Everybody thought the evolutionism was very well proven. Now they found out it was not. And, of course, there is much more "missing links", but people don't want to talk about those because they want to exclude God, What they don't know is that all of this does not favor or goes against the existence of God. Anyway, interesting...

  • Missing links arent missing proof.

    There was enough proof to verify evolution around 20 years ago.

  • Unbelievable how someone can think that Ida can question religion... What the Christian faith says is that God created everything, including the Human Being, but doesn't say how. If we find out that God chose to create Man through an evolution until a point in which he decided to create souls, that's just fine and does not go against anything. But it looks like there are people really wanting to exclude God from reality. They are missing the most important. They are lost.

  • I knew it,.,.

  • Awesome! Another piece of true evidence that gives God one more less place to hide! 'But the earth is only 10000 years old - how can this be?", I hear them say....."Grow up", says I, "ditch your gods, and get the net!". The sooner religion dies, the better. Evolution rules, creationism just.....well.....doesn't.....­..

  • Pfff your sentence had no sense, science is real, but i don't saying that religion is false but evolution is something true, like universe and something else matters...sory for my bad english...i'm french

  • Can't wait for the Creationists response to this, lol.

    "The devil put it there to test our faith!!" lol

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