Im a bigoted christian "butt-head"-probably-according to you-but anyway, I give this video a thumbs up! The anology(based on fact, I believe) of your grandfather with the two helmets was brilliant and emotionally impactful. Have a nice day,hairyreasoner.
wow. this has to be one of the most......powerful, heartfelt, moving vlogs i have ever seen on you yube. thank you for sending me over here to watch. i sit here, in tears, moved and speechless.
namaste'....im so glad i found you, hairyreasoner. :)
This is an excellent analogy. I have always wondered why Christians hold themselves in such high esteem when their belief was such a random act, based primarily on geography. What makes them right and all others wrong?
Here is a question - why does their god see fit to exclude atheists from their belief system? Why does religion seem so irrational to me and so obvious to them? What is different about our emotional requirements and intellect that separate us?
My grandfather served in the Royal Navy during WWI. Like you, I never got to know him, but I have his diary, service record and campaign medals. Hard to believe it's coming up on the 100th anniversary of the wars beginning.
Also, Neph really needs to get laid. Seriously laid.
This Video is just brilliant, in the most general and overhwelming way. without wanting to sound over opinionated or self important i think that all of you poring over scientific theory, mutual belittlement and so forth are really missing the point.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Every prominant evo scientist, including naturalist Darwin, has stated in their own books that the fossils do not show clear evidence of transition,and that life forms appear abruptly in the fossils without predecessor. Don't believe me? Watch my video "The Fossil Record Part 1" and see a "few" of thier statements for yourself.
What you believe is what they tell the public. What evo scientists tell each other is a whole different thing.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The HOX genes of humans and apes are in different locations in their chromosomes, and in different chromosomes! By itself, this proves human and ape DNA could not be related!
But then, you have your "It could happen!" ideas. How is your belief, your faith, not denial of science and how is it rational?
Tell us another "It could happen!" story. let's hear the story of how HOX genes moved to different chromosomes and locations in the DNA. Get an illustrator and make a kiddie book of it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Mathematics verifis the odds of a single smaller protien arising by random molecular interaction is 10^950 - that's 1 to a number greater than every particle of matter in the known universe. According to the precepts of science, this is impossible times impossible times impossible.
You see, I have science that verifies such things can't arise naturally. You have only "It could happen!" imaginative scenarios. Guess who is talking about science, and who is talking from faith?
Random? Odd that you would say this, as no one describes the natural forces in action as random, any more than they would describe the formation of a crystal as random.
The need to construct a straw man does not speak well of you or your argument.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"You can't tell proteins/peptide chains from DNA"
They are not the smae. Protien is a superfolded chain of amino acids. The end product is a machine desigend to match the form of specific molecules and perform a specific task. In other words, the end product, the protien molecule, can only be a product of design, because it cannot arise by chane and be interdependant at the same time! It's impossible.
I know they aren't the same... I meant that you specifically as an individual cannot distinguish between the two with your limited reading/education on the subject and I base this claim on your misuse of terms.
As for your attempts at probability... The process by which proteins are synthesized isn't random. It's algorithmic and requires no guiding design. It is easy for you to claim these things don't arise naturally when you're the one sitting as judge of what is and is not natural.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The HOX genes of humans and apes are in different locations in their chromosomes, and in different chromosomes! By itself, this proves human and ape DNA could not be related!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
These, information, algorithms, and linguistics, are products of intelligence. Nature cannot produce them. You can fantasize all you like about "it could happen", but these factrs will never change. It is a product of intelligence, and it's complexity defies evo theory. Faith is not science.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
So long as you are unwilling to investigate on your own, you will remain unknowledgable. I don't do homework for others anymore. I've wasted enough of my time finding sources for people who are unwilling to make a few clicks with their mouse and type a few words.
DNA's supporting systems use algorithms to store information. This is empirical evidence of supernatural design because algorythms and information are products only of intelligence and cannot be produced by nature. Therefore, "evolution" could not be the origin of DNA. This is proof, empirical evidence, that DNA has a SUPERnatural origin.
DNA has not only a primary structure (the nucleotides linked in a chain), but also a secondary, tertiary and quaternary structure.
Does it not occur to you that algorithms - even math itself - are nothing more than a tools created by man to form models of what is found in nature? Does the fact that ~3.1415927 multiplied by the diameter of a circle, reveals the circumference tell us that a circle was designed by a mathematician? Or does the fact that PI can be calculated to millions of places beyond the decimal and still not perfectly model nature tell us that math only attempts to model what nature created?
Give me and example of non-material information. In your brain information is stored as chemical and electrical signals, resulting in physical changes to your physical neurons. Your very argument stems from the information contained within the physical structure of physical DNA. Without the physical, there is no information.
Again, Nephilim; nothing aside from the physical has EVER been confirmed to exist. And that's DESPITE tens of thousands of years of claims and attempts.
One of the best indicators of failure in any concept is the presence of contradiction. In just one exchange we see you first proclaim; `DNA's supporting systems use algorithms to store information.` and then in following up you state; `Information is immaterial also, as are algorithms. Sorry.` Is DNA immaterial?
If you can't even maintain consistency in your argument through a single exchange, how can you ever hope to present a credible point?
One can wax philosophical all day long about the complexity of arrangement of sand grains on a beach and the extreme odds against them taking any particular arrangement. When the next wave comes along and rearranges them, you can start all over again with the same observations. Chemicals have properties which guide the way they interact. Nucleotides are chemicals and have ways they can join, and ways they can't. Such simple rules often lead to what we see as great complexity.
That's an interesting fantasy about how it could have happened. But it's not science without evidence it has or can, and since we know information and algorithms are immaterial and that information requires a sender and reciever, it goes into the toilet. I see you gazing out the window, images flying through your head... "Yea! I can see how that might happen. Wow. Evolution is so cool."
I didn't give an explanation of how 'IT', might have happened. But perhaps you should be aware that in the real world, montmorillnite clay catalyzes the induction of nucleotides into vesicles where they self-assemble (due to their chemical properties), and the vesicles then engage in true Darwinian competition despite being pre-biotic.
Simple rules, interacting, can present the illusion of great complexity. Simple-minded people seem fascinated with the illusion and proclaim "god".
Interesting that you think demonstrable mechanisms and properties constitute a 'fantasy' while an unevidenced entity, performing what can only be classified as "magic" - violating even the most basic of that which governs physical interaction - is somehow credible and believable. Chemicals behaving as is demonstrated daily, leaves you bewildered and confused while impossible entities whipping up everything on a spoken word from their non-existent mouth leaves you satisfied?
@NephilimFree First of all, thank you for blocking me (that was sarcasm) Algorithms as you say are in fact immaterial. They are nothing but patterns and "algorithm" is the name we gave these patterns and are our ways to explain them. Algorithms are not man made, they were just created by man in order to comprehend the world around him. Algorithms are man made. The fact that what we call "algorithms" are found in nature does not mean that algorithms but that we can understand the world around us
That's fantastic. You can't tell proteins/peptide chains from DNA. Proteins have secondary, tertiary and quaternary structure. DNA does not. Even if it did, those attributes do not refer to information storage. At all.
An algorithm is a set of steps that achieve a predictable goal given a specific input. Every chemical reaction fits this description, some with many intricate steps. Look up something like a diels-alder reaction. Chemistry is natural, undirected, and algorithmic.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The wages of sin is death. That is why God sacrificed Jesus. For God, who is pure and Holy, sin must be paid for with death. He will not allow sin into His kingdom. In the end, there will be no more sin, no more death, no suffering.
The Bible states God was satisfied by the sacrifice of Jesus. That means it was sufficient. For this, God accepts anyone's following of Him as payment for their sin through Jesus.
And again, God stopped the hand of Abraham. He would not accept it.
You're unblocked Harry. So if you ask God such a thing and open the bible to just the right page consistently, how can that be chance harry>? How can it be chance for years and be consistent? You know, the bible doesn't speak of all subjects on evey page. Far from it. Some subjects occupy a page, or 5 pages. Others are in limited places. Nobody has such luck. if they did, casinos woul;d all go out of business.
And there's so much more. You know, most of the major events of the Bible have been verified by archeology. The bible is historical record, not mythology. See? And then there are the supernatural properties of the bible that simply could not have been devised by the 40 different authors of it's books who lived in different centuries and never knew each other. And there's the explainations in it of what has happened to the Earth, in considerable details, that precicely matches it's geology.
Are you trying to witness to me? Are you? It is hypocritical of you to do so. You blocked me so long ago. For a simple, sincere, honest question. How could I trust you now?
You do a disservice. You are disenguous and surely that's a sin. The laying of traps.
I admire the service your grandfather gave to his country Harry. My dad was in Korea. You're right about upbringing determining religious beliefs, though I wouldn't call that "random chance". But you see Harry, there's God, and there are the angels He threw out of heaven for pride (and their offspring), not unlike humanist pride. People who are religious have relationships with their "god". Knowing which one is the real one is the trick. Christians have it right, and the proof to back it up.
Thank you for your comment. I must say that your father faced no picnic in Korea.
However, I sincerely meant what I said; it is very easy to picture you defending a belief in any one of a number of gods. It's easy to see you justifying a belief in a deity other than the one you were raised to fear. You would be just as certain in your recognition of Allah had you been reared in another part of the world.
But Harry, what you can't seem to grasp is that people actually have a relationship with God. They feel God's presence in an undeniable way. It's very powerful. God does supernatural things for Chriswtians too. Example: A Christian who is close to God can ask Him to show them something in the Bible that discusses precicely a question they have. They pray over it and open their Bible, and voila! There it is. And the response is specific to a specific question, and it's consistent.
Sir, can't you see that such a response can come from within? These people are looking for answers. The search informs what they will find. And they find it. It's pat. It's simple, and it's comforting, I feel no disdain for them. I understand it. They just don't want to search or think anymore. I'm not so lazy or shallow.
But Harry, if you ask God to tell you something if you are forgiven of your sins, and you open the Bible to,
"Son, be of good cheer. Thy sins be forgiven thee"
...in red letters, at the top right of one of the 2,000+ pages in the Bible...
And igf you ask Him why you have a hard time giving up sinful things, and open the Bible to John 15 which tells us we can't do it without His help, and so on and so forth...
It's not coincidence Harry. It could not be consistent if it were chance.
NF is a dangerous piece of shit. Take a look at his video "Challenge to Atheists and Evolutionists"
Someone writes:
"Stoning unruly children to death is not my idea of justice."
The sick bastard replies:
"You mean dashing their heads against rocks. God's justice is not cruel, it's justifiable. The children of heathen cultures grow up to be adversaries of God. A few seconds of pain with an eternity of bliss afterward is an inconcievable price to pay for eternity with God."
holy shit. if that's not insanity, please tell me what is. i bet as well that he is opposed to abortion. interestingly, this would lead me to question whether he is opposed to abortion in non-Christian societies...
You are the sicko if you think allowing blood-kusting giants who raped any female regardless of age, who threw babies into a fire alive to sacrifice them to thier parents, the angels, and who killed men for sport, and who ate men for food should be allowed to destroy believers in God and turn the world into their kind of culture.
Even Satlin, an atheist mass murderer of Christians, wasn't THAT wicked.
...because the replacement religion was so much better, right? What about that story in Judges where Jepthah sacrificed his own daughter in return for slaughter of the Ammonites? That was a burnt offering, as I recall. The character Yahweh didn't have a problem with that. Why would he have a problem with further human sacrifice? It's not murder if it guarantees an afterlife in heaven, right?
One more thing. In both world wars, most generals were mass murderers of Christians.
There's no indication given in the text that God actually approved of the action. There are quite a few passages in the bible in which God condemns human sacrifice. Because God didn't stop him does not mean God approved. In WWI and WWII, mass murder was commited by Stalin and Hitler. Stalin was an atheist, who burned every church in Russia and specifically mass murdered Christians. Hitler was a pantheist who hated Christianity once he'd become the Furer and murdered the Jews, who worship God.
Abraham showed that Yahweh approved the intention of child sacrifice. Yahweh chose to honor Jephthah's wishes with the slaughter of the Ammonites instead of rejecting the offer. Yahweh could have sent a cow out of the door instead of Jephthah's daughter if he wanted, but he chose the daughter. He could have stopped the sacrifice at the last moment like for Isaac, but didn't. The list goes on. If all this isn't an indication that Yahweh wanted the sacrifice, I don't know what is.
Abraham did not show that God approves of human sacrifice. He did not let Abraham perform the killing. He stopped his hand before he could apply the knife!Sorry, the Bible is clear on the matter. God hates human sacrifice, and He stated regarding the actions of the Hittites and Cannaites.
I was under the impression that the story of Abraham and Isaac was that one should not even withhold their progeny from Yahweh (Gen 22:15-8). Jephthah did not withhold his, but there was no stopping of the knife for his daughter.
The clear thing is that Yahweh doesn't want sacrifice to Molech; Molech is a different god, and Yahweh is jelous of him.
Yahweh enabled a nation of child sacrificers to be wiped out with his own child sacrifice.
You guys should call into my radio show. I promise I wont embarrass you he he :-) Click my name to listen into my radio show. I did one tonight on Atheism and errors.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Nephilimfree is awesome. I have talked to him and no offense but he has more knowledge in his little pinky than you have in your whole body when it comes to biblical facts. I would stop criticizing and take notes, your looking very foolish.
There is no doubt whatsoever that Nephilimfree can quote the bible more easily than me. None. I'd imagine I'd beat him in a Harry Potter trivia contest, however. Both claims are as relevant to our understanding of the real world.
I have talked to him and no offense but he has more knowledge in his little pinky"
He is one of the more dishonest people on youtube, only before you of course. Neph's major strength is appealing to the scientifically uneducated of youtube (Christians) and making it seem like he knows what he is talking about by cramming scientific vocab words together like a bad startrek episode. If you really think he is smart ask him about his theories about the sun going around the earth.
One last thing... never EVER let a creationist try to challenge the science and make the argument I mentioned below without also forcing them to prove their own claims.
They can't have it both ways... challenging the established facts of science, while their own beliefs remain on ivory pedestals unable to be touched.
Oh, and to sum up NephilimFree's entire line of reasoning from what I saw as I skimmed through his complete and utter nonsense:
"I can't understand how all of this DNA and evolution stuff could have possibly worked... so it simply CAN NOT be true!"
Never mind that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists with PhDs and all sorts of other higher education in microbiology and such, who DO understand it, and HAVE proved it all to be true...
My father's father was in the German SS believe it or not... a simple farmer, forced in to it at the wrong end of a gun... deserted, and went to Austria just before the Russians liberated it. Came to America in 1956...
8. It takes a rare personality to persist in an argument in a hostile forum. 9. the most rational and to-the-point arguments are the most effective (my opinion) followed by good clean humour. Should I go on? this exchange was very enlightening! Nice to see us all having good clean fun, eh?
Are you afraid to answer questions but insist on asking them? Here's mine:
Did apes split into our "races" as they are called by evos? Let's hear your views for the origin of these different peoples. Is it related to evolutionism? If you believe in evolution, how did we get these different peoples if it were not for the same causes that you believe speciation occurs? Man evolved, right? Does "speciation" cause new species of butterfly but is not the cause of the different peoples of the earth?
Actually he serves an excellent use: if it weren't for the fools, how would we know the wise? And by coming up with these outrageous lines of bullshit, he pushes us to be that much better to respond to him. Were I as paranoid as Nephy is I'd think that it was all part of his plan.
I have just followed all 200+ entries in this discussion and have been delightfully entertained and educated. My compliments to NephilimFree - it couldn't have happened without him. By the way, I think he's well beyond paranoia, and I don't think he's a fool. Persistent certainly... foolish, no....
As I said, even he has his uses. He's kind of Larmackian force of natural selection, causing us to stretch ourselves and get better at understanding the sciences and how they apply to each other. I've said in many of my posts to him, "rant on, you just make my job easier". The ones that do really concern me are the ones we aren't reaching here. Those who are still in the pews, voting against the future, blaming science for their woes rather than taking personal responsibility for their lives.
What strikes me as sad is that Youtube creationists like NephilimFree, VFX, and the like seem to be so bright and articulate in defending their positions that it's an incredible disappointment when it is revealed that most if not all of their accusations fail under minor scrutiny. Such a waste of potential.
But I agree with Magick205: The more I research the claims of creationists, the more I learn about natural science and it's discoveries.
How can you attribute any "education" that you may have received here unless you qualify it by saying that you have learned about pathology? Nephimimfree makes this discussion regarding our world possible only in the same way that Bundy and Gacey contibuted to our understanding of how humans should treat eachother.
Folks--Nephy has gone to How DNA Destroys Evolution 1-6 to again spew his nonsense--he is being protected there by his buddy who blocks posts critical of Nephy,or especially,disprove his junk.
1. If you insult NephilimFree he (eventually) disappears and then he's no fun any more. 2. Evos strengthen their arguments with practice. 3. Creationists read science too. 4. A good debate generates an audience. (look at yer 'views' Errl)(and who are all these 1,266 people anyway?) 5. Creationists are not going away any time soon. 6. Bullshit tends to become obvious if you give it a chance. 7. Snide personal attacks do NOTHING for an argument.
"Did apes split into our "races" as they are called by evos?"
No.
"If you believe in evolution, how did we get these different peoples if it were not for the same causes that you believe speciation occurs?"
A change in allele frequency in a population. A species is one that can mate with fertile offspring and a sub species is one that can mate but doesn't have fertile offspring.
I originally was not interested in the Karoo formation, but now thanks to your insistence, I am asking you now for a proper citation. What peer-reviewed article has been published that states that there were no transitional fossils found in the Karoo formation?
And again, how much longer will it take you to cite a Newsweek Poll that YOU can supposedly find in "3 seconds?"
By the way Neph, I googled for the Universitys website, and this is what they had to say:
"The rocks of the Beaufort Group [of the Karoo supergroup] contain fossils that illustrate several important threads of the evolutionary tapestry of life on earth. One of the most important is the one which traces the evolution of the mammals from their early reptilian ancestors."
Web . wits . ac . za/geosciences/bpi/collections . htm
Did the apes split off into our "races" as they are called by evolutionists? Tell us. Let's hear your views for the origin of these different peoples. Is it related to evolutionism? If you believe in evolution, how did we get these different peoples if it were not for the same causes that you believe speciation occurs? Man evolved, right? You do believe that, we know. So tell us, does speciation cause new species of butterfly but is not the cause of the different peoples of the earth?
"That's your decision, but your silence will do nothing to refute what I've said."
The Bernard Price Institute for Paleontology in Johannesburg estimates 40K fossils have so far been recovered from the Karoo Formation. Evolutionist Robert E. Sloan, a paleontologist at the Univ. of Minnesota estimates the Karoo Formation contains 800 billion fossil vertabrates, the average size of which is about the size of a fox.
Not one of these 40k which has been recovered thus far appears transitional.
This comment is hilarious because you stated in your videos that there this was in Australia and that the average size was a dog, now you say the "Karoo Formation" which is in Africa has 800 billion fossil vertebrates about the size of a fox. This is a testament to how you don't do research but instead make broad assumption off so little.
To clarify, I don't expect all users to cite sources for all their comments, but when another user asks for a citation, I believe that it's the obligation of the other to provide one.
I know your type nephilim. Small town, not popular in High School, ridiculed a lot, so you found religion and felt safe and wanted. You may have a had a girlfriend once or twice, but not married and no kids. (You've watched 36000 videos in a year and half on youtube, so I feel sorry for them if you do have wife/kids) You judge others because of your own inadequacies and fear of rejection or ridicule. Which is apparent because of how you screen comments on your own videos. I feel sorry for you...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"you are the embodiment of the Lunatic Fringe"
How can that be when atheists represent 1% of the world's population?
"what do you mean by "evo" this time? Anthropologists? Biochemists? Genetic Scientists? Archaeologists? Cosmologists? Geologists? Immunologists? Molecular Biologists? Petrologists?"
2007, Pew Research Values Study: Percentage of people identifying themselves as atheist, agnostic or "no religion" by year of birth: Date of birth <1946 : 5% 1946-1964: 11% 1965-1976: 14% 1977+: 19%
I'm sure when that number represents 1/3 of the population,you'll become one to, right. Your previous reply to me stated that because 1/3 of the world believed in Christianity, it must be true. They can't all be delusional, can they? Yes! But that doesn't mean your an idiot, just a conformist.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"let alone the Academic or Scientific communities"
Which community? The creationists or evos? 60 yrs of discrimination against creationsts in the work place does not create evidence of evolution! Business managers who hire only like-minded people do the same thing every day.
In 1987 there were about 700 scientics, 3 yrs later, about 24,000. Today, who knows. Evolutionism is dying. The world is becoming more religious. We're moving toward world-wide government sanctioned religion.
At one point it was considered heresy to claim that the world was round. HERESY! Religious groups would have killed you for speaking against their beliefs.
And then someone went and sailed around the world. Go figure.
worldwide government sanctioned religion? god forbid! haha, i made a funny.
but really, are you fucking serious? theocracy in this, a modern world? no thanks. i'm happy with lengthened lifespans, technology, critical thought, and the advance of humanity.
"Ignorance is destroyed by knowledge. When you don't seek it but cling blindly to nonscience, you can expect to turn out like yourself." Oh, the irony of this statement is without end. And bringing up the Karoo supergroup? Considering that the majority of the vertabrate fossils there are theraspid mammal-like reptiles (Read: Transitional Fossils) dosn't do much for your argument either.
"the contributions of creationism to real science, remain exactly nil"
Only in your head. The laws of science were codified by creationists. perhaps you should contact Dr. Patrick Young, inventer of Kevlar, and tell him he's not a YE creationist.
If mutation is the mechanism for evolutionary change, life would be based upon mutation, and it would embrace it and integrate systems designed to utilize mutations for evolutionary development. Why then does all life demonstrate the opposite by having a system designed to remove mutations which cause morphological change with 3 levels of error correction? Why would DNA Recombination provide this function if evolution required mutation and if mutations were morphologically advantageous?
"Genetic recombination is the process by which a strand of genetic material (usually DNA; but can also be RNA) is broken and then joined to a different DNA molecule. In eukaryotes recombination commonly occurs during meiosis as chromosomal crossover between paired chromosomes. This process leads to offspring having different combinations of genes from their parents and can produce new chimeric alleles."
Alberts, B. et al., Molecular Biology of the Cell, 3rd Edition. Garland Publishing, 1994
And additional mutation can be caused by the mechanism of transformation where in which a prokarotic organism (bacteria) can uptake free DNA in the environment and incorporate it into it's own genome. The first example of this type of mutation was discovered in the rise of antibiotic resistance in various Shigella species. They were able to splice in their new DNA and improved themseleves and their multicoding genome quite efficently. And became very virulent as a result.
God did create all life forms intsantaneously over a period of 6 days by groups. Life does adapt. Creationists do not dispute that fact. But adaptation does not create new kinds. It does not create new morphological features, body plans, or homologies. Adaptation is limited. A creature may adapt to have a larger nose, but it will not get a nose. It may adapt to have a longer beak, but it will not develop a beak.
DNA's supporting systems use algorithms to store information. This is empirical evidence of supernatural design because algorythms are not found anywhere in nature except in the DNA molecule. How do you suppose nature put this amazing ability into DNA if algorithms do not exist in nature? The obvious is that it cannot happen. Therefore, "evolution" could not be the origin of DNA. This is proof, empirical evidence, that DNA has a SUPERnatural origin.
Neph, you talk like someone who actually has some credibility left, when it, along with the contributions of creationism to real science, remain exactly nil, zero, squat, jack shit.. We have witnessed your rampant gullibility and seen your credibility not only destroyed by other Ewetoobers, but by yourself as well. What's fucking silly Neph is your claim to represent some "majority".. you don't represent the majority of christians, let alone the Academic or Scientific communities..
And of course, what do you mean by "evo" this time? Anthropologists? Biochemists? Genetic Scientists? Archaeologists? Cosmologists? Geologists? Immunologists? Molecular Biologists? Petrologists? Yeah, they're all very silly Nephi.. but they understand that your steaming bowl of bullshit ain't no ice cream sundae.
Your creation as science gobbledeegook is totally irrelevant outside of Ewetoob and survives only on Internet vlogs in the fitting company of UFO's, wacky conspiracy theories and Bigfoot and Elvis sightings.. You don't just fail on many levels Nephilimfree, you fail on every level.
"You have no idea how silly evos look to the majority of people in this world for thier religious faith in what we know cannot take place."
Actually, you'll find quite the contrary. At least here in Europe. I've had many a laugh with my students and your self-contradicting videos and comments. Keep 'em coming, they're great for entry level critical thinking classes because of their ease of "debunkability".
College educated my ass.. Nephi's reality denying supernatural concoction of nonsense would be laughed out of the lecture halls of any accredited University.. If Nephi will show his degree I will, on camera, shove a lawn dart covered in Tabasco sauce up my own ass or convert to christianity.. at Nephi's discretion.
In addition, there is that earlier ad hom, in which you insinuated that accepting evidence from a "creation scientist" would make me "mentally healthier."
Again, what does this have to do with your refusal to cite your sources?
I don't lie for God. Do you honestly believe Christians do that? If you do, you have a real problem with understanding what it means to be a Christian.
"You just commented that you had no idea what article I was referencing"
What article? If you can't tell me what it is, I can't help you. I discuss with many people at once and don't keep databases on my comments you know.
"What article? If you can't tell me what it is, I can't help you."
Keeping track of your articles is not my responsibility. But if you truly want to know, this is what you said:
"According to Newsweek a magazine poll, in 1987 only 0.14% of all scientists believed in creation, and 10 years later 5% believed in creation, and the number of scientists who believe in creation increased from 700 in 1987 to 24,990 in 1997."
I've helped you in your homework. Care to finish the job?
"When your professors asked you to cite your sources for term papers..."
If you ever get over your fear of Google, you'll be better off. If i knew what article you are referring to, i just MIGHT do a little of your homeworks and cite a reference for you. If i google and find lots of sources, I'm not providing anything, because it will just prove that you expect others to do things for you because you're afraid of the truth.
Not to mention the fact that LittleM did mention looking for your source:
"BTW, I couldn't find the article using my search engines. Maybe if you had cited it, we'd be able to pinpoint where you got this information more easily."
If you simply provided sources at the begining, it would have solved the whole argument.
"How could it be ad-hominim when it is directly relating to the subject spoken of?"
Don't be dishonest. You just commented that you had no idea what article I was referencing, so don't pretend that what you said was directly related to it.
"Go find out what one is and compare it to my statement."
Your statement was an attack against me rather than an address of the topic itself. It's an ad-hom.
Now that you know, you should know better than to do it again.
"BTW, I couldn't find the article using my search engines"
I don't do other people's homework. Google will not give you a disease. I am involved in discussion in numerous threads. I don't even know what article you're referring to, but i am more than vcertain if you told me, I'd show you how you are just to lazy, uncioncerned, or deeply in denial to actually try to find it.
You claimed to have attended college a few posts ago. When your professors asked you to cite your sources for term papers, did you try to use the "I gave you the information, You look it up," excuse on them too?
Care to provide the burden of proof that I am lazy, unconcerned, or in denial? Cite your source to show that the article exists.
If atheism were true why is it true that there cannot be an infinite number of causes? How could it be that the First Cause is not personal and intelligenct and made a choice to create, for something to exist instead of allowing nothingness to remain?
Im a bigoted christian "butt-head"-probably-according to you-but anyway, I give this video a thumbs up! The anology(based on fact, I believe) of your grandfather with the two helmets was brilliant and emotionally impactful. Have a nice day,hairyreasoner.
ScrapGoldBass 1 year ago
wow. this has to be one of the most......powerful, heartfelt, moving vlogs i have ever seen on you yube. thank you for sending me over here to watch. i sit here, in tears, moved and speechless.
namaste'....im so glad i found you, hairyreasoner. :)
jakluk4 1 year ago
This is an excellent analogy. I have always wondered why Christians hold themselves in such high esteem when their belief was such a random act, based primarily on geography. What makes them right and all others wrong?
Here is a question - why does their god see fit to exclude atheists from their belief system? Why does religion seem so irrational to me and so obvious to them? What is different about our emotional requirements and intellect that separate us?
scottyinmesquite 2 years ago
Fundamentalism is absolute hell.
I fucking hate fundamentalism and bigotry.
hunchbacked 2 years ago
Glad i stumbled across this.A great story and a level of articulation i can only dream of. You sir have a new subscriber.
pilgrimpater 2 years ago
This is a great poin - well prepared and presented - Excellent food for thought! Thanks Hairy for the reasoning.
Evangelander 2 years ago 2
Excellently well said, HR.
My grandfather served in the Royal Navy during WWI. Like you, I never got to know him, but I have his diary, service record and campaign medals. Hard to believe it's coming up on the 100th anniversary of the wars beginning.
Also, Neph really needs to get laid. Seriously laid.
ThePilum 2 years ago
You are a natural born narrator / orator Hairy.
atrumira 2 years ago
I see Nephilumfree still comes by for regular beatings.
Great vid. I just did not see twist coming, and it really made me think.
pumkinpi2 2 years ago 2
This Video is just brilliant, in the most general and overhwelming way. without wanting to sound over opinionated or self important i think that all of you poring over scientific theory, mutual belittlement and so forth are really missing the point.
Hairy, your fucking awesome!
1Meursault1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Every prominant evo scientist, including naturalist Darwin, has stated in their own books that the fossils do not show clear evidence of transition,and that life forms appear abruptly in the fossils without predecessor. Don't believe me? Watch my video "The Fossil Record Part 1" and see a "few" of thier statements for yourself.
What you believe is what they tell the public. What evo scientists tell each other is a whole different thing.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
you've pretty much spammed this whole board with your comments..isnt it great that you can comment as much as you want?
So how about you stop being a hypocrite by censoring your board and only letting the most sycophantic bullshit slip through.
hef31 2 years ago 6
Hey Nephi, check it.. watch?v=joLUDEMlf_k
You are Rebuked by Real Christians even crazier than you.. pretty funny.
SofaKingLoaded 2 years ago 2
So Neph, you are basing your arguments on a book by Darwin written 150 years ago huh?
Typical. Maybe pick up a textbook written in, oh, the last 50 years!!!
wysiwyg666 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The HOX genes of humans and apes are in different locations in their chromosomes, and in different chromosomes! By itself, this proves human and ape DNA could not be related!
But then, you have your "It could happen!" ideas. How is your belief, your faith, not denial of science and how is it rational?
Tell us another "It could happen!" story. let's hear the story of how HOX genes moved to different chromosomes and locations in the DNA. Get an illustrator and make a kiddie book of it.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Mathematics verifis the odds of a single smaller protien arising by random molecular interaction is 10^950 - that's 1 to a number greater than every particle of matter in the known universe. According to the precepts of science, this is impossible times impossible times impossible.
You see, I have science that verifies such things can't arise naturally. You have only "It could happen!" imaginative scenarios. Guess who is talking about science, and who is talking from faith?
0o
NephilimFree 2 years ago
Random? Odd that you would say this, as no one describes the natural forces in action as random, any more than they would describe the formation of a crystal as random.
The need to construct a straw man does not speak well of you or your argument.
pumkinpi2 2 years ago
What is the religious person's opinion of "random?"
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"You can't tell proteins/peptide chains from DNA"
They are not the smae. Protien is a superfolded chain of amino acids. The end product is a machine desigend to match the form of specific molecules and perform a specific task. In other words, the end product, the protien molecule, can only be a product of design, because it cannot arise by chane and be interdependant at the same time! It's impossible.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
Neph,
I know they aren't the same... I meant that you specifically as an individual cannot distinguish between the two with your limited reading/education on the subject and I base this claim on your misuse of terms.
As for your attempts at probability... The process by which proteins are synthesized isn't random. It's algorithmic and requires no guiding design. It is easy for you to claim these things don't arise naturally when you're the one sitting as judge of what is and is not natural.
Spacemonkey2084 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The HOX genes of humans and apes are in different locations in their chromosomes, and in different chromosomes! By itself, this proves human and ape DNA could not be related!
NephilimFree 2 years ago
No Neph.
Your failure at basic comprehension does not constitute proof.
And I'm not the public. I do work in bioinformatics in the labs here. I read the published work and I work on research.
Spacemonkey2084 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
These, information, algorithms, and linguistics, are products of intelligence. Nature cannot produce them. You can fantasize all you like about "it could happen", but these factrs will never change. It is a product of intelligence, and it's complexity defies evo theory. Faith is not science.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"One can wax philosophical all day long about the complexity"
"Chemicals have properties which guide the way they interact"
You shoot your own foot.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
This really is an amazing video.
The videos that I love most are the ones that take a perspective I hadn't considered and really drive it home and you do just that here.
Spacemonkey2084 2 years ago 2
great video
deRoyLight 2 years ago
hairy, this is truly remarkable and awesome - the latter I tend to overuse but it is completely appropriate here.
This video forces me to think of my atheism - I am ashamed of the certainty of my own certainty sometimes.
Peace,
and is it too soon for me to give you a big hug?
Hope not.
{{Elaina}}
Elaina43 2 years ago
Loved this video. awesome ending.
mar8les 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So long as you are unwilling to investigate on your own, you will remain unknowledgable. I don't do homework for others anymore. I've wasted enough of my time finding sources for people who are unwilling to make a few clicks with their mouse and type a few words.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
DNA's supporting systems use algorithms to store information. This is empirical evidence of supernatural design because algorythms and information are products only of intelligence and cannot be produced by nature. Therefore, "evolution" could not be the origin of DNA. This is proof, empirical evidence, that DNA has a SUPERnatural origin.
DNA has not only a primary structure (the nucleotides linked in a chain), but also a secondary, tertiary and quaternary structure.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
Does it not occur to you that algorithms - even math itself - are nothing more than a tools created by man to form models of what is found in nature? Does the fact that ~3.1415927 multiplied by the diameter of a circle, reveals the circumference tell us that a circle was designed by a mathematician? Or does the fact that PI can be calculated to millions of places beyond the decimal and still not perfectly model nature tell us that math only attempts to model what nature created?
Beastt17 2 years ago
Algorithms are problem solving procedures which require the gathering and comparison of information.
Information is immaterial also, as are algorithms. Sorry.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
Give me and example of non-material information. In your brain information is stored as chemical and electrical signals, resulting in physical changes to your physical neurons. Your very argument stems from the information contained within the physical structure of physical DNA. Without the physical, there is no information.
Again, Nephilim; nothing aside from the physical has EVER been confirmed to exist. And that's DESPITE tens of thousands of years of claims and attempts.
Beastt17 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
One of the best indicators of failure in any concept is the presence of contradiction. In just one exchange we see you first proclaim; `DNA's supporting systems use algorithms to store information.` and then in following up you state; `Information is immaterial also, as are algorithms. Sorry.` Is DNA immaterial?
If you can't even maintain consistency in your argument through a single exchange, how can you ever hope to present a credible point?
Beastt17 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
One can wax philosophical all day long about the complexity of arrangement of sand grains on a beach and the extreme odds against them taking any particular arrangement. When the next wave comes along and rearranges them, you can start all over again with the same observations. Chemicals have properties which guide the way they interact. Nucleotides are chemicals and have ways they can join, and ways they can't. Such simple rules often lead to what we see as great complexity.
Beastt17 2 years ago
That's an interesting fantasy about how it could have happened. But it's not science without evidence it has or can, and since we know information and algorithms are immaterial and that information requires a sender and reciever, it goes into the toilet. I see you gazing out the window, images flying through your head... "Yea! I can see how that might happen. Wow. Evolution is so cool."
Science is not fantasy.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
I didn't give an explanation of how 'IT', might have happened. But perhaps you should be aware that in the real world, montmorillnite clay catalyzes the induction of nucleotides into vesicles where they self-assemble (due to their chemical properties), and the vesicles then engage in true Darwinian competition despite being pre-biotic.
Simple rules, interacting, can present the illusion of great complexity. Simple-minded people seem fascinated with the illusion and proclaim "god".
Beastt17 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
Interesting that you think demonstrable mechanisms and properties constitute a 'fantasy' while an unevidenced entity, performing what can only be classified as "magic" - violating even the most basic of that which governs physical interaction - is somehow credible and believable. Chemicals behaving as is demonstrated daily, leaves you bewildered and confused while impossible entities whipping up everything on a spoken word from their non-existent mouth leaves you satisfied?
Beastt17 2 years ago
You are funny and sad at the same time.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
@NephilimFree First of all, thank you for blocking me (that was sarcasm) Algorithms as you say are in fact immaterial. They are nothing but patterns and "algorithm" is the name we gave these patterns and are our ways to explain them. Algorithms are not man made, they were just created by man in order to comprehend the world around him. Algorithms are man made. The fact that what we call "algorithms" are found in nature does not mean that algorithms but that we can understand the world around us
lefayad1991 1 year ago
NephilimFree,
That's fantastic. You can't tell proteins/peptide chains from DNA. Proteins have secondary, tertiary and quaternary structure. DNA does not. Even if it did, those attributes do not refer to information storage. At all.
An algorithm is a set of steps that achieve a predictable goal given a specific input. Every chemical reaction fits this description, some with many intricate steps. Look up something like a diels-alder reaction. Chemistry is natural, undirected, and algorithmic.
Spacemonkey2084 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It is a sacrifice because Jesus took the punishment we deserve in place of us.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
How does that work?
mar8les 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The wages of sin is death. That is why God sacrificed Jesus. For God, who is pure and Holy, sin must be paid for with death. He will not allow sin into His kingdom. In the end, there will be no more sin, no more death, no suffering.
The Bible states God was satisfied by the sacrifice of Jesus. That means it was sufficient. For this, God accepts anyone's following of Him as payment for their sin through Jesus.
And again, God stopped the hand of Abraham. He would not accept it.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
You're unblocked Harry. So if you ask God such a thing and open the bible to just the right page consistently, how can that be chance harry>? How can it be chance for years and be consistent? You know, the bible doesn't speak of all subjects on evey page. Far from it. Some subjects occupy a page, or 5 pages. Others are in limited places. Nobody has such luck. if they did, casinos woul;d all go out of business.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
And there's so much more. You know, most of the major events of the Bible have been verified by archeology. The bible is historical record, not mythology. See? And then there are the supernatural properties of the bible that simply could not have been devised by the 40 different authors of it's books who lived in different centuries and never knew each other. And there's the explainations in it of what has happened to the Earth, in considerable details, that precicely matches it's geology.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
Are you trying to witness to me? Are you? It is hypocritical of you to do so. You blocked me so long ago. For a simple, sincere, honest question. How could I trust you now?
You do a disservice. You are disenguous and surely that's a sin. The laying of traps.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
I admire the service your grandfather gave to his country Harry. My dad was in Korea. You're right about upbringing determining religious beliefs, though I wouldn't call that "random chance". But you see Harry, there's God, and there are the angels He threw out of heaven for pride (and their offspring), not unlike humanist pride. People who are religious have relationships with their "god". Knowing which one is the real one is the trick. Christians have it right, and the proof to back it up.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
Thank you for your comment. I must say that your father faced no picnic in Korea.
However, I sincerely meant what I said; it is very easy to picture you defending a belief in any one of a number of gods. It's easy to see you justifying a belief in a deity other than the one you were raised to fear. You would be just as certain in your recognition of Allah had you been reared in another part of the world.
With all due respect, it seems a fool's errand.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
But Harry, what you can't seem to grasp is that people actually have a relationship with God. They feel God's presence in an undeniable way. It's very powerful. God does supernatural things for Chriswtians too. Example: A Christian who is close to God can ask Him to show them something in the Bible that discusses precicely a question they have. They pray over it and open their Bible, and voila! There it is. And the response is specific to a specific question, and it's consistent.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
Sir, can't you see that such a response can come from within? These people are looking for answers. The search informs what they will find. And they find it. It's pat. It's simple, and it's comforting, I feel no disdain for them. I understand it. They just don't want to search or think anymore. I'm not so lazy or shallow.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
But Harry, if you ask God to tell you something if you are forgiven of your sins, and you open the Bible to,
"Son, be of good cheer. Thy sins be forgiven thee"
...in red letters, at the top right of one of the 2,000+ pages in the Bible...
And igf you ask Him why you have a hard time giving up sinful things, and open the Bible to John 15 which tells us we can't do it without His help, and so on and so forth...
It's not coincidence Harry. It could not be consistent if it were chance.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
NF is a dangerous piece of shit. Take a look at his video "Challenge to Atheists and Evolutionists"
Someone writes:
"Stoning unruly children to death is not my idea of justice."
The sick bastard replies:
"You mean dashing their heads against rocks. God's justice is not cruel, it's justifiable. The children of heathen cultures grow up to be adversaries of God. A few seconds of pain with an eternity of bliss afterward is an inconcievable price to pay for eternity with God."
He is a sicko.
jhbbunch 2 years ago 2
holy shit. if that's not insanity, please tell me what is. i bet as well that he is opposed to abortion. interestingly, this would lead me to question whether he is opposed to abortion in non-Christian societies...
btw, excellent video.
ezekielvictor 2 years ago
You are the sicko if you think allowing blood-kusting giants who raped any female regardless of age, who threw babies into a fire alive to sacrifice them to thier parents, the angels, and who killed men for sport, and who ate men for food should be allowed to destroy believers in God and turn the world into their kind of culture.
Even Satlin, an atheist mass murderer of Christians, wasn't THAT wicked.
Wake us kid.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
I don't think any of that you psychotic idiot. What a whacko. You are a sick piece of shit.
jhbbunch 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
...because the replacement religion was so much better, right? What about that story in Judges where Jepthah sacrificed his own daughter in return for slaughter of the Ammonites? That was a burnt offering, as I recall. The character Yahweh didn't have a problem with that. Why would he have a problem with further human sacrifice? It's not murder if it guarantees an afterlife in heaven, right?
One more thing. In both world wars, most generals were mass murderers of Christians.
Ercular 2 years ago
There's no indication given in the text that God actually approved of the action. There are quite a few passages in the bible in which God condemns human sacrifice. Because God didn't stop him does not mean God approved. In WWI and WWII, mass murder was commited by Stalin and Hitler. Stalin was an atheist, who burned every church in Russia and specifically mass murdered Christians. Hitler was a pantheist who hated Christianity once he'd become the Furer and murdered the Jews, who worship God.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
"In WWI and WWII, mass murder was commited by Stalin and Hitler."
Stalin came to power in 1924, Hitler in 1933.
Please stick to the facts.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
Right Harry. I should not have included WWI. That was just a booboo. I put two sentances together by mistake.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
I think it's a bit more meaningful and revealing than a "booboo."
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
Abraham showed that Yahweh approved the intention of child sacrifice. Yahweh chose to honor Jephthah's wishes with the slaughter of the Ammonites instead of rejecting the offer. Yahweh could have sent a cow out of the door instead of Jephthah's daughter if he wanted, but he chose the daughter. He could have stopped the sacrifice at the last moment like for Isaac, but didn't. The list goes on. If all this isn't an indication that Yahweh wanted the sacrifice, I don't know what is.
Ercular 2 years ago
Abraham did not show that God approves of human sacrifice. He did not let Abraham perform the killing. He stopped his hand before he could apply the knife!Sorry, the Bible is clear on the matter. God hates human sacrifice, and He stated regarding the actions of the Hittites and Cannaites.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
NephilimFree,
I was under the impression that the story of Abraham and Isaac was that one should not even withhold their progeny from Yahweh (Gen 22:15-8). Jephthah did not withhold his, but there was no stopping of the knife for his daughter.
The clear thing is that Yahweh doesn't want sacrifice to Molech; Molech is a different god, and Yahweh is jelous of him.
Yahweh enabled a nation of child sacrificers to be wiped out with his own child sacrifice.
Ercular 2 years ago
God has never accepted human sacrifice... except for once. He sacrified His only begotten Son so that all of mankind could have forgiveness.
But jesus lives. He is not dead. He took the punishment we all deserve for disobeying God, who is Holy and hates sin.
Human sacrifices were practiced by practitioners of false religions, not by those of God.
NephilimFree 2 years ago
Excellent.
feralshrew 2 years ago
Beautiful, simply beautiful.
TheDarkKnight987 2 years ago
You guys should call into my radio show. I promise I wont embarrass you he he :-) Click my name to listen into my radio show. I did one tonight on Atheism and errors.
shockofgod 2 years ago
"I promise I wont embarrass"
You'll only embarrass yourself.
sweatytoothmadman 2 years ago
Very compelling video, brother. I hope that helmets go out of fashion soon; I think that heads fit better in books anyhow.
billygutter01 2 years ago 3
Excellent comment. I couldn't agree more.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
great vid...5 stars
mp9yq9tx 2 years ago
Thank you for this video.
Seionai 2 years ago
I absolutely loved that...!
RodHullIOnceWasHim 2 years ago
A masterpiece of reason.
dasapostate 3 years ago 2
One word.
Brilliant.
Tothemattresses 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Also by the way Nephilimfree has much better video quality than you...
shockofgod 3 years ago
"Also by the way Nephilimfree has much better video quality than you..."
Point conceded. A very good, relevant point it is, too.
hairyreasoner 3 years ago
i'd be more careful with the sarcasm... the person on the receiving end may not have the mental capacity to grasp it.
ezekielvictor 2 years ago
Perhaps you could comment on my video.
hairyreasoner 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nephilimfree is awesome. I have talked to him and no offense but he has more knowledge in his little pinky than you have in your whole body when it comes to biblical facts. I would stop criticizing and take notes, your looking very foolish.
shockofgod 3 years ago
There is no doubt whatsoever that Nephilimfree can quote the bible more easily than me. None. I'd imagine I'd beat him in a Harry Potter trivia contest, however. Both claims are as relevant to our understanding of the real world.
hairyreasoner 3 years ago
A brilliant refutation of the point made in the video.
Oh wait...
Munkatten 3 years ago
I have talked to him and no offense but he has more knowledge in his little pinky"
He is one of the more dishonest people on youtube, only before you of course. Neph's major strength is appealing to the scientifically uneducated of youtube (Christians) and making it seem like he knows what he is talking about by cramming scientific vocab words together like a bad startrek episode. If you really think he is smart ask him about his theories about the sun going around the earth.
sweatytoothmadman 2 years ago
I do think you are in the top 5 of intelligent youtube posters.
Rationally refreshing.
blaziermissy 3 years ago
Beautiful, rational, poignant video.
Well done.
Let's end the hatred of race and religion and nationalism.
Let's stop waiting for a Sky Daddy to vindicate us and rescue us.
Let's work together to solve our very real problems.
With respect and, dare I say it, love for one another
we can literally live in paradise on this beautiful planet.
If we choose to cling to our "isms" and "righteousness",
the experiment will soon be over.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
Amen.
hairyreasoner 3 years ago
Moving, loved the punchline, if I were credulous it would surely make me reconsider. I hope this video is seen by many.
winestainalert 3 years ago
First class video and a very profound point very well made.
paulchartley 3 years ago
WOW great video. I think i got to go smoke one and contemplate that stuff.
Thanks
ragetony 3 years ago
One last thing... never EVER let a creationist try to challenge the science and make the argument I mentioned below without also forcing them to prove their own claims.
They can't have it both ways... challenging the established facts of science, while their own beliefs remain on ivory pedestals unable to be touched.
eagleeye1975 3 years ago
Oh, and to sum up NephilimFree's entire line of reasoning from what I saw as I skimmed through his complete and utter nonsense:
"I can't understand how all of this DNA and evolution stuff could have possibly worked... so it simply CAN NOT be true!"
Never mind that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists with PhDs and all sorts of other higher education in microbiology and such, who DO understand it, and HAVE proved it all to be true...
eagleeye1975 3 years ago
HO-LEE FUCK! Wonderful point you just made!
My father's father was in the German SS believe it or not... a simple farmer, forced in to it at the wrong end of a gun... deserted, and went to Austria just before the Russians liberated it. Came to America in 1956...
Simply amazing video.
eagleeye1975 3 years ago
Wonderful vid!
Chrismorgan1983 3 years ago
8. It takes a rare personality to persist in an argument in a hostile forum. 9. the most rational and to-the-point arguments are the most effective (my opinion) followed by good clean humour. Should I go on? this exchange was very enlightening! Nice to see us all having good clean fun, eh?
garythegrunt 3 years ago
check yer hotmail Errl
garythegrunt 3 years ago
Are you afraid to answer questions but insist on asking them? Here's mine:
Did apes split into our "races" as they are called by evos? Let's hear your views for the origin of these different peoples. Is it related to evolutionism? If you believe in evolution, how did we get these different peoples if it were not for the same causes that you believe speciation occurs? Man evolved, right? Does "speciation" cause new species of butterfly but is not the cause of the different peoples of the earth?
NephilimFree 3 years ago
Neph... go outside for a while.
freedom0f5peech 3 years ago 3
Poor, drooling Neph. 80+ comments and none answering the point of the video. You're a brain-dead christian because you were taught to be one.
hairyreasoner 3 years ago
Actually he serves an excellent use: if it weren't for the fools, how would we know the wise? And by coming up with these outrageous lines of bullshit, he pushes us to be that much better to respond to him. Were I as paranoid as Nephy is I'd think that it was all part of his plan.
magick205 3 years ago 2
I have just followed all 200+ entries in this discussion and have been delightfully entertained and educated. My compliments to NephilimFree - it couldn't have happened without him. By the way, I think he's well beyond paranoia, and I don't think he's a fool. Persistent certainly... foolish, no....
garythegrunt 3 years ago
As I said, even he has his uses. He's kind of Larmackian force of natural selection, causing us to stretch ourselves and get better at understanding the sciences and how they apply to each other. I've said in many of my posts to him, "rant on, you just make my job easier". The ones that do really concern me are the ones we aren't reaching here. Those who are still in the pews, voting against the future, blaming science for their woes rather than taking personal responsibility for their lives.
magick205 3 years ago
What strikes me as sad is that Youtube creationists like NephilimFree, VFX, and the like seem to be so bright and articulate in defending their positions that it's an incredible disappointment when it is revealed that most if not all of their accusations fail under minor scrutiny. Such a waste of potential.
But I agree with Magick205: The more I research the claims of creationists, the more I learn about natural science and it's discoveries.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
garythegrunt:
How can you attribute any "education" that you may have received here unless you qualify it by saying that you have learned about pathology? Nephimimfree makes this discussion regarding our world possible only in the same way that Bundy and Gacey contibuted to our understanding of how humans should treat eachother.
He's a scourge.
hairyreasoner 3 years ago
Folks--Nephy has gone to How DNA Destroys Evolution 1-6 to again spew his nonsense--he is being protected there by his buddy who blocks posts critical of Nephy,or especially,disprove his junk.
pontecanis 3 years ago
Cool. Thanks for the tipoff. Who's got his back on this one?
magick205 3 years ago
jesusLostChildren777 is the buddy helping Nephy do his thing.
pontecanis 3 years ago
At least it's not WeAlFalDown. That's a guy who should never have been allowed a camera. What a total Hovind-head. Thanks for the tip.
magick205 3 years ago
What I learned from Hairy's buds on Utoob:
1. If you insult NephilimFree he (eventually) disappears and then he's no fun any more. 2. Evos strengthen their arguments with practice. 3. Creationists read science too. 4. A good debate generates an audience. (look at yer 'views' Errl)(and who are all these 1,266 people anyway?) 5. Creationists are not going away any time soon. 6. Bullshit tends to become obvious if you give it a chance. 7. Snide personal attacks do NOTHING for an argument.
garythegrunt 3 years ago
behave, Errl
garythegrunt 3 years ago
"Did apes split into our "races" as they are called by evos?"
No.
"If you believe in evolution, how did we get these different peoples if it were not for the same causes that you believe speciation occurs?"
A change in allele frequency in a population. A species is one that can mate with fertile offspring and a sub species is one that can mate but doesn't have fertile offspring.
Ultimately what is your point?
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
sweaty--ironically,Darwin did not believe in the concept of race;he felt the differences among humans too small altogether to sustain such a concept.
pontecanis 3 years ago
"only your refusal to cite sources for many of your claims, such as the one you just made"
The Bernard Price Institute for Paleontology in Johannesburg
Did you miss that part. Do your own homework. If i said food was in the kitchen would you ask ewhere it is?
NephilimFree 3 years ago
I originally was not interested in the Karoo formation, but now thanks to your insistence, I am asking you now for a proper citation. What peer-reviewed article has been published that states that there were no transitional fossils found in the Karoo formation?
And again, how much longer will it take you to cite a Newsweek Poll that YOU can supposedly find in "3 seconds?"
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
By the way Neph, I googled for the Universitys website, and this is what they had to say:
"The rocks of the Beaufort Group [of the Karoo supergroup] contain fossils that illustrate several important threads of the evolutionary tapestry of life on earth. One of the most important is the one which traces the evolution of the mammals from their early reptilian ancestors."
Web . wits . ac . za/geosciences/bpi/collections . htm
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
Brilliant video 5/5
AtheistGlitch 3 years ago
Did the apes split off into our "races" as they are called by evolutionists? Tell us. Let's hear your views for the origin of these different peoples. Is it related to evolutionism? If you believe in evolution, how did we get these different peoples if it were not for the same causes that you believe speciation occurs? Man evolved, right? You do believe that, we know. So tell us, does speciation cause new species of butterfly but is not the cause of the different peoples of the earth?
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"Did the apes split off into our "races" as they are called by evolutionists?"
Now your attacking old theories that aren't held by modern science.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
"That's your decision, but your silence will do nothing to refute what I've said."
The Bernard Price Institute for Paleontology in Johannesburg estimates 40K fossils have so far been recovered from the Karoo Formation. Evolutionist Robert E. Sloan, a paleontologist at the Univ. of Minnesota estimates the Karoo Formation contains 800 billion fossil vertabrates, the average size of which is about the size of a fox.
Not one of these 40k which has been recovered thus far appears transitional.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
This comment is hilarious because you stated in your videos that there this was in Australia and that the average size was a dog, now you say the "Karoo Formation" which is in Africa has 800 billion fossil vertebrates about the size of a fox. This is a testament to how you don't do research but instead make broad assumption off so little.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
Changing the subject in desperation?
I said NOTHING about transitional fossils, only your refusal to cite sources for many of your claims, such as the one you just made.
How much longer will it take you to cite a Newsweek Poll that YOU can supposably find in "3 seconds?"
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
To clarify, I don't expect all users to cite sources for all their comments, but when another user asks for a citation, I believe that it's the obligation of the other to provide one.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Your creation as science gobbledeegook is totally irrelevant outside of"
...your head?
NephilimFree 3 years ago
I know your type nephilim. Small town, not popular in High School, ridiculed a lot, so you found religion and felt safe and wanted. You may have a had a girlfriend once or twice, but not married and no kids. (You've watched 36000 videos in a year and half on youtube, so I feel sorry for them if you do have wife/kids) You judge others because of your own inadequacies and fear of rejection or ridicule. Which is apparent because of how you screen comments on your own videos. I feel sorry for you...
bulletwork 3 years ago
bulletwork----Kudos, very well said indeed!!
pontecanis 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"you are the embodiment of the Lunatic Fringe"
How can that be when atheists represent 1% of the world's population?
"what do you mean by "evo" this time? Anthropologists? Biochemists? Genetic Scientists? Archaeologists? Cosmologists? Geologists? Immunologists? Molecular Biologists? Petrologists?"
I mean the lunatic fringe. :o
NephilimFree 3 years ago
2007, Pew Research Values Study: Percentage of people identifying themselves as atheist, agnostic or "no religion" by year of birth: Date of birth <1946 : 5% 1946-1964: 11% 1965-1976: 14% 1977+: 19%
I'm sure when that number represents 1/3 of the population,you'll become one to, right. Your previous reply to me stated that because 1/3 of the world believed in Christianity, it must be true. They can't all be delusional, can they? Yes! But that doesn't mean your an idiot, just a conformist.
bulletwork 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"let alone the Academic or Scientific communities"
Which community? The creationists or evos? 60 yrs of discrimination against creationsts in the work place does not create evidence of evolution! Business managers who hire only like-minded people do the same thing every day.
In 1987 there were about 700 scientics, 3 yrs later, about 24,000. Today, who knows. Evolutionism is dying. The world is becoming more religious. We're moving toward world-wide government sanctioned religion.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
At one point it was considered heresy to claim that the world was round. HERESY! Religious groups would have killed you for speaking against their beliefs.
And then someone went and sailed around the world. Go figure.
LectricNightConcepts 3 years ago
worldwide government sanctioned religion? god forbid! haha, i made a funny.
but really, are you fucking serious? theocracy in this, a modern world? no thanks. i'm happy with lengthened lifespans, technology, critical thought, and the advance of humanity.
ezekielvictor 2 years ago
"We have witnessed your rampant gullibility"
Ignorance is destroyed by knowledge. When you don't seek it but cling blindly to nonscience, you can expect to turn out like yourself.
"your claim to represent some "majority".. you don't represent the majority of christians"
The majority of Christians are YE believers. You need knowledge to defeat the cling.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"Ignorance is destroyed by knowledge. When you don't seek it but cling blindly to nonscience, you can expect to turn out like yourself." Oh, the irony of this statement is without end. And bringing up the Karoo supergroup? Considering that the majority of the vertabrate fossils there are theraspid mammal-like reptiles (Read: Transitional Fossils) dosn't do much for your argument either.
magick205 3 years ago 2
"the contributions of creationism to real science, remain exactly nil"
Only in your head. The laws of science were codified by creationists. perhaps you should contact Dr. Patrick Young, inventer of Kevlar, and tell him he's not a YE creationist.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
If mutation is the mechanism for evolutionary change, life would be based upon mutation, and it would embrace it and integrate systems designed to utilize mutations for evolutionary development. Why then does all life demonstrate the opposite by having a system designed to remove mutations which cause morphological change with 3 levels of error correction? Why would DNA Recombination provide this function if evolution required mutation and if mutations were morphologically advantageous?
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"Genetic recombination is the process by which a strand of genetic material (usually DNA; but can also be RNA) is broken and then joined to a different DNA molecule. In eukaryotes recombination commonly occurs during meiosis as chromosomal crossover between paired chromosomes. This process leads to offspring having different combinations of genes from their parents and can produce new chimeric alleles."
Alberts, B. et al., Molecular Biology of the Cell, 3rd Edition. Garland Publishing, 1994
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
This has been explained to you many times, DNA recombination does not remove mutations it multiplies them.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
And additional mutation can be caused by the mechanism of transformation where in which a prokarotic organism (bacteria) can uptake free DNA in the environment and incorporate it into it's own genome. The first example of this type of mutation was discovered in the rise of antibiotic resistance in various Shigella species. They were able to splice in their new DNA and improved themseleves and their multicoding genome quite efficently. And became very virulent as a result.
magick205 3 years ago
God did create all life forms intsantaneously over a period of 6 days by groups. Life does adapt. Creationists do not dispute that fact. But adaptation does not create new kinds. It does not create new morphological features, body plans, or homologies. Adaptation is limited. A creature may adapt to have a larger nose, but it will not get a nose. It may adapt to have a longer beak, but it will not develop a beak.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
If you think otherwise, find an algorithm in nature outside the DNA molecule, or an example of information that does not require intelligence.
Turn the world uside down. Let's see it.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
DNA's supporting systems use algorithms to store information. This is empirical evidence of supernatural design because algorythms are not found anywhere in nature except in the DNA molecule. How do you suppose nature put this amazing ability into DNA if algorithms do not exist in nature? The obvious is that it cannot happen. Therefore, "evolution" could not be the origin of DNA. This is proof, empirical evidence, that DNA has a SUPERnatural origin.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"College educated my ass"
0o It helps you to say that?
"Nephi's reality denying supernatural concoction of nonsense"
You have no idea how silly evos look to the majority of people in this world for thier religious faith in what we know cannot take place.
"If Nephi will show his degree I will"
I think you believe claiming I am not educated does something to hurt my feelings. lol
NephilimFree 3 years ago
Neph, you talk like someone who actually has some credibility left, when it, along with the contributions of creationism to real science, remain exactly nil, zero, squat, jack shit.. We have witnessed your rampant gullibility and seen your credibility not only destroyed by other Ewetoobers, but by yourself as well. What's fucking silly Neph is your claim to represent some "majority".. you don't represent the majority of christians, let alone the Academic or Scientific communities..
SofaKingLoaded 3 years ago
.. you are the embodiment of the Lunatic Fringe.
And of course, what do you mean by "evo" this time? Anthropologists? Biochemists? Genetic Scientists? Archaeologists? Cosmologists? Geologists? Immunologists? Molecular Biologists? Petrologists? Yeah, they're all very silly Nephi.. but they understand that your steaming bowl of bullshit ain't no ice cream sundae.
SofaKingLoaded 3 years ago
Your creation as science gobbledeegook is totally irrelevant outside of Ewetoob and survives only on Internet vlogs in the fitting company of UFO's, wacky conspiracy theories and Bigfoot and Elvis sightings.. You don't just fail on many levels Nephilimfree, you fail on every level.
SofaKingLoaded 3 years ago
"You have no idea how silly evos look to the majority of people in this world for thier religious faith in what we know cannot take place."
Actually, you'll find quite the contrary. At least here in Europe. I've had many a laugh with my students and your self-contradicting videos and comments. Keep 'em coming, they're great for entry level critical thinking classes because of their ease of "debunkability".
finchfrance 2 years ago
"In addition, there is that earlier ad hom"
Sweaty, I don't talk to you.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
That's your decision, but your silence will do nothing to refute what I've said.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
College educated my ass.. Nephi's reality denying supernatural concoction of nonsense would be laughed out of the lecture halls of any accredited University.. If Nephi will show his degree I will, on camera, shove a lawn dart covered in Tabasco sauce up my own ass or convert to christianity.. at Nephi's discretion.
SofaKingLoaded 3 years ago
"You completed avoided my question."
Nonsence. I asked you what article and you have not said. Stop complaining if you can't tell me what it is you want.
"It's YOUR "homework" to provide citations when asked. Not mine."
Then tell me what you seem unable to find or stop complaining!
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"Your statement was an attack against me"
Attacks are unwarranted. My comment was the truth. The truth is always warranted.
"Now that you know, you should know better than to do it again."
What I know is what I say.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"My comment was the truth."
Neph, what does the fact that you refuse to cite sources have anything to do with what I believe or don't believe in?
It's an ad hom, and your denial is disingenuous.
"Do you honestly believe Christians do that?"
You've just shown that it's possible.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
In addition, there is that earlier ad hom, in which you insinuated that accepting evidence from a "creation scientist" would make me "mentally healthier."
Again, what does this have to do with your refusal to cite your sources?
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
"Don't be dishonest."
I don't lie for God. Do you honestly believe Christians do that? If you do, you have a real problem with understanding what it means to be a Christian.
"You just commented that you had no idea what article I was referencing"
What article? If you can't tell me what it is, I can't help you. I discuss with many people at once and don't keep databases on my comments you know.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"What article? If you can't tell me what it is, I can't help you."
Keeping track of your articles is not my responsibility. But if you truly want to know, this is what you said:
"According to Newsweek a magazine poll, in 1987 only 0.14% of all scientists believed in creation, and 10 years later 5% believed in creation, and the number of scientists who believe in creation increased from 700 in 1987 to 24,990 in 1997."
I've helped you in your homework. Care to finish the job?
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
"When your professors asked you to cite your sources for term papers..."
If you ever get over your fear of Google, you'll be better off. If i knew what article you are referring to, i just MIGHT do a little of your homeworks and cite a reference for you. If i google and find lots of sources, I'm not providing anything, because it will just prove that you expect others to do things for you because you're afraid of the truth.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"If you ever get over your fear of Google..."
You completed avoided my question.
Both students and professionals cite sources for the reader's benefit. Why do you refuse to extend that same courtesy?
It's YOUR "homework" to provide citations when asked. Not mine.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
Not to mention the fact that LittleM did mention looking for your source:
"BTW, I couldn't find the article using my search engines. Maybe if you had cited it, we'd be able to pinpoint where you got this information more easily."
If you simply provided sources at the begining, it would have solved the whole argument.
LectricNightConcepts 3 years ago
"The University of Edinburgh has had such a number of complaints about targeting of students by the Edinburgh Creation Group"
Not surprising. Evos hate the truth. it scares them that thier fantasies of evolution are worn out.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"Not only is this an ad-hom"
How could it be ad-hominim when it is directly relating to the subject spoken of?
Well, it's can't be.
"I thought you said that you weren't known for ad-hominem attacks"
I'm not. I have not made one. Go find out what one is and compare it to my statement.
God loves you, but you don't love Him. And that is sad.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"How could it be ad-hominim when it is directly relating to the subject spoken of?"
Don't be dishonest. You just commented that you had no idea what article I was referencing, so don't pretend that what you said was directly related to it.
"Go find out what one is and compare it to my statement."
Your statement was an attack against me rather than an address of the topic itself. It's an ad-hom.
Now that you know, you should know better than to do it again.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
"BTW, I couldn't find the article using my search engines"
I don't do other people's homework. Google will not give you a disease. I am involved in discussion in numerous threads. I don't even know what article you're referring to, but i am more than vcertain if you told me, I'd show you how you are just to lazy, uncioncerned, or deeply in denial to actually try to find it.
"What isn't academic?"
Go back and read my posts and see.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
"I don't do other people's homework."
You claimed to have attended college a few posts ago. When your professors asked you to cite your sources for term papers, did you try to use the "I gave you the information, You look it up," excuse on them too?
Care to provide the burden of proof that I am lazy, unconcerned, or in denial? Cite your source to show that the article exists.
LittleMachiavelli 3 years ago
If atheism were true why is it true that there cannot be an infinite number of causes? How could it be that the First Cause is not personal and intelligenct and made a choice to create, for something to exist instead of allowing nothingness to remain?
NephilimFree 3 years ago