these are the very same logical fallacies people use on evolution! reading the evolution biology section is a mix of fictional generalizations.. It's a fairy tale starting millions of years ago, in a magical land! even darwin knows there's no transitional evidence. Please prove evolution happens!
Nah. Dembski, Johnson and Denton attack misrepresentations of evolutionary theory, and fail to understand even their own arguments to boot (eg. irreducible complexity).
Arguments based on probabilities don't mean a thing if you don't know what to calculate the probability of. For instance, the probability that a lifeform will assemble through pure chance is entirely irrelevant, as nobody claims that lifeforms assemble through pure chance.
@ScholarVisual There's no proof of one, I personally believe in the existence of one because the universe seems very lonely if there's nothing after this life but this is on faith alone, not science.
@ScholarVisual Yeeaaaaah, it kinda is. An assumption that something is true requires positive evidence. There is no positive evidence for ANY God or Gods. Therefore, to assume that they exist is a fallacy.
@SelectHawk Well if I assert human characteristics to this creator of the universe it could be fallacious. If I were to say this Being loves us and answers prayers without providing evidence then it could be called illogical. But to make the assumption that a systematic structure like dna was created by something is quite rational. Especially since we have only seen systematic structures made by an intellgent agents. Like humans.
@zoidberg96913 HOW CAN THE LITE TAKE MOAR THAN 10000 YEARS TO REACH US, IM NOT EVEN 25, THEREFORE TIS IMPUSSIBLE FOR IT TO REACH MEH. IT MOUST BE JEEBUS WHICH MAEKS THE LIGTE TRAVOL FATSER COS ALL SCEINTISDS R BE WOOKING FOR SETAN!!!!! GOD BLESS ALL EXCEPT FOR ADEIST FAGUTS WHU R GOIN TO BRUN IN HELL!!!.
This reminds me of how the media cuts up Ron Paul,or cuts him out.Anybody can cut up ANY worldview with a little snap and a different paradigm(George Carlin made a living at it). Try actually watch"A Case for the Creator" or "Startling Proof" or just listen to "Why the Bible"on utube by Ravi Zacharias and pray that the Maker would reveal Himself to you.Then throw yourself at His mercy for being such a prideful little idiot,and start loving people with the love and mercy He has offered you.Peace.
@tellnet Over there in Ireland!Cool.Here in Austin the software
guys r still hanging in there,at least til our economic bubbleblows
out.Can't print trillions out of thin air,police the world in undeclared wars,and strap down the working class with the illegal taxes imposed w/o some heavy duty blowback.Our firearm sales are at an all time high as the country prepares for either Obama or Romney(they have the same employer).So the motto is"dig in--reach out".That's why we reach out!Later,boss!
Great vid. Well though out and clearly explained along with prime examples. Its funny that the religious comments are the opposite. "Wait until you meet Jesus" or "God will judge you." Even if you're a crazy creationist, there is something to be learned from this vid (like why creationism is so absurd).
All roads lead to the judgement seat of Jesus Christ. You will get your chance to explain this to your Creator the second you take your last breath of air. See where your little gods are then.
@thybigballs Because i used to be just like the guys doing this video.Thought i knew it all.Then it dawned on me that i was a liar,a thief, a lust-filled slut like every other man on this planet that hated God by the way i lived my life.While in a state of clarity i cried out to this God that i denied my whole life that if He was real and there was a real Person that was all God that really died so i wouldn't have to,then yes,i would follow Him.My heart change is the evidence.
@transtlantic I've watched the demons that run your life go screaming out of others at the name of Jesus Christ.You hate your Judge,but the things in your mind hate Him more. Love,joy,peace...not in that place where you feed your emptiness..your dark passions..nothing you have is worth the love and power i have as the Holy Spirit of the Most High God covers us that are His. Your lies can finally die as you embrace the Truth of Jesus.Sucking face with satan is just weak. We'll pray.
@transtlantic What is "buy bull induced s---"? Is name calling and bad grammer what your sinsoaked demon brain reduced you to? My preaching is useless,you are right. BUT,if you read the book of Matthew..say chapters 5 through 7 the actual Creator God gives a GUNFIRE sermon you will never forget! Or just start with John 3:16-John 3:21 to see why you are in bondage. At least then you would know Who you are up against.He made you,He owns your soul,and He loves you..but you must choose
I also don't like to read the fiction book you call the "Bible", it's full of death, rape, murder, mutilation, blood magic crap, ridiculous myths and a story of a certain zombie jesus.
Why don't you put aside your circular reasoning and start showing evidence for the fairy that you call "God"?
@transtlantic You didn't do your homework.And grammar matters but a little if at all. With your beloved president signing the NDAA,we will probably end up in the same detention center anyway here before long,and we can have long talks about the risen Lord Jesus Christ and all His majesty...then the Holy Spirit can work a miracle in your heart,too,just like He does in so many others.Then the lame fantasy of growin up out of a rok will melt away under the love of the God that made u!
lolol no wonder you are an uneducated roof contractor, you didn't even notice that I am not american. But then again... you probably don't even know what the world looks like beyond your state. LOLOLOL
Zombie jesus stories again? LOLOL
you really are fucked up. Hey, you uneducated dumb shit, do you have any evidence for the fairy that you name "God"?
@transtlantic Basic Instuctions Before Leaving Earth,BIBLE. That's more like it.Yes,i work for a living.It's how we roll in Texas. I missed the "translantic" hint.We can't all be from Texas.That's why so many people are so upset and mad at the God they don't believe in..because they aren't here in Texas.And don't worry,the authorities will get you,too,wherever you are.Rascally carbon footprints tend to make us ALL enemies of the state(thanks to evil-lutionist"thinking").God REIGNS!
@tellnet Your batting a thousand with that sweet little channel of yours,too. We as humans are all locked up by the rebellion against the Creator God. Jesus was crucified so that we could escape the punishment we deserve if we would turn from our rebellion and turn to Jesus Christ and be born into the family of God.That's between you and Him.May the Lord grant you wisdom and a revelation of His mercy before you check out of this life! No sin is worth what it costs to keep.Pray today!
@tellnet A design needs a designer.A map needs a mind to make the map. 3.5 BILLION bits of information in your DNA double helix that seperates you from every other human on this earth.And that evolved. The whole idea is idiotic,as Darwin himself recognized as he wrote about the complex mechanics of the human eye and the impossibilty of chance random mutations forming it.Even a non-Texan could figure that one out.Macroevolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups and even you.Pray to Jesus!
@tellnet Stunning reply! Tell that to the Toyota manufacturer,or to your little fashion show DESIGNERS...it's not a creationist arguement,just a fact. The sun is hot,the moon controls the tides,you need air,the Lord Jesus Christ is your Maker and Judge..you know...facts.Truth hurts,but then it sets ya' free!We'll put you on our prayer list for wisdom and that your god(you),will bow to the Creator God(Jesus)before it's too late! Read Provebs 1 through 3 to get a clue!Take care!
@tellnet Your atheist cult bullshit preaching a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation of exquisitely designed, programmed and engineered species supported by a myth borrowed to ancient paganism is not even bad science fiction. How can your atheist cult account for the honeybees forming a fantastic kingdom of insects with an incredible social structure and skills?
@tellnet Darwinian atheist theologian Rev Richard Dawkins preaching on designoids is pure nonsense. '‘Designoid objects look designed, so much so that some people – probably, alas, most people – think that they are designed. These people are wrong. . . the true explanation – Darwinian natural selection – is very different.’'
@tellnet What's a "gobshite"?You sound like you were in prison by the way you talk.I used to be profane and hot tempered because of my denial of my Creator God.During my time in prison i got to hang out with really smart people like you who were coorporate thieves and whatnot,that found out that Jesus is alive and well.Boy,did they change!Traded misery for joy,selfishness for charity...amazing when at the bottom how much sense it makes to finally look up!May Jesus shine on you,too!
Brent, here in Ireland, an individual who displays an appalling level of intellectual bereftitude, and who insists upon publicly announcing their shortfalls, is commonly referred to as a Gobshite. Giving due consideration to your consistent efforts, and persistent presentations, it is with the greatest of pleasure that we are now in a position to award you with the lifetime achievement of being one of the greatest gobshites it has ever been our honour to encounter.
@tellnet Awesome!Thanks for the word of the day!Here in Texas we have a word for people who have words like that,but Jesus took that word from my vocabulary...the words expose the heart,and that's why i'm concerned with yours.i don't laugh at you,i laugh with you because i used to be just like you and would rip"those gobshites a new one"if they came into my space.Buncha' retards,huh?Totally got that paradigm.It was fun while it lasted.But the seeds of Christ those planted i thank God4!
@brentjones4831 And, now that you mention it... You did say that those exceptionally smart individuals who you look up to are in jail and have irrational beliefs ! Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha .... Says a lot for your IQ. Says it all, actually. Well done Brent. . Anything else you would like to add ? .
@tellnet Not what i wrote,but that's how deceivers play and i understand that.You have no standard for morality except for yourself. i looked up to no-one in the pen,just Jesus Christ. There were some smart guys in there that had lost their way and did dumb things.You are not above that,obviously. Talk about delusional. The only perfection to be found is the God you deny(dark hates the Light),and you will be meeting him soon enough.Better on this side than the other side.Pray for light!
@tellnet yep.You too,will be clicking on more than a half cylinder when your eyes have been opened by recognizing your need,to finally be freed by the Christ out of the prison of doubt...and now you know where to turn!God bless Ireland.Jesus reigns.
@tellnet not this second,gotta get back to work.Read Psalm chapter 19 and Isaiah chapter 40.That will get you started at least.The number 1 selling book of all times is full of incredible insights that even superhuman minds like yours have drawn from for centuries!Actually,it's a library of 66 books written by 40 different authors,so you can even set aside the who made what arguement and just have a Matthew chapter 5 kind of day,knowing that you are one of those Jesus came to save!Later
If you think I am going to waste any more of my time with a gobshite like you, then you are sadly mistaken - you were an aside, an amusment - while I did some repairs.
@tellnet Hey! Check out youtube"Joe Rogan--What is reality"--he hates religion,too,i think, and drops the "f"bomb along with blaspheming God's name,so that kinda sucks,BUT from an artistic point of view i think you will dig it on how this guy just is amazed at the complex nature of the world we live in without getting into the "why" so much. Well put together..make sure you got your speakers on,the sound score is great,too!Peace to ya',Mr.Tellnet(what does that mean?).
@Jefferyxu45 Time+matter+chance=all order in the universe. Brilliant.Jesus said of the false prophets"you will know them by there fruits."....the same applies here...the Christ followers aren't threatened by the delusions of denying the Creator,He told us you would be out in numbers near the end,and here it is..and there you are!Wow!Read Romans the first chapter..it's kind of graphic,but you can handle it.We all need the Savior to get out of this alive.There is no dead atheists,man.
@brentjones4831 The problem I have with you guys is that you ignore all the other religions of the world. Who is to say which Deity is the correct one to believe? Since everyone claims their figure is omnipotent, if you do not tolerate, it essentially becomes a question of which heresy you wish to commit. Fundementalists like you obviously do not tolerate.
@Jefferyxu45 EVERY RELIGION claims to be right.They all may be WRONG,but they can't all be right.The law of non-contradiction(A cannot = non A) is right on target.So just let the Word of God(the one with 63,000 crossreferences within it's cover and is verified by 25,000 real artifacts)speak to you..God used Isaiah to give us His resume in Isaiah chapter 40.Read it for yourself.TRUTH is exclusive.You know that.Jesus,not me,claimed to be THE Truth and THE Way.i believe Him.
@transtlantic Oh! And Happy New Year!My wife and i got in early to avoid the drunk drivers..they were already out in full force here in Austin! Take care,and may the Lord bless you with Himself! Talk about fireworks! Peace
@thybigballs IF your really sincere goto "Just stop and think" on youtube.It's about 15 minutes that really gets to the heart of the issue and gives the reasons that saved a wretch like me....and you,if you realize you aren't this God you so want to deny. My wife and i will be praying for you,Thybigballs! It's in Christ that we love you...Brent and Laura Ps."are you a good person" is 6 minutes that sums it up,too(youtube)..check it out.
I think we can agree that religion is based off of spirituality, is it not? If that is the case, you cannot use logic/scientific reasoning to argue religion, because neither of those base off of spirituality. It's like trying to use math to solve a spelling error, aka incorrect.
@SwornByOath Umm, no. Religion is not 'based' on spirituality, religion claims that something called spirituality exists in the first pace. If you think to can claim something exists, and then use the alleged existence of that thing to support your original claim that the thing exists in the first place, then you have fallen deep into the fallacy of circular reasoning....
@AgeOfScience ...Also, logic and science correspond to what we call 'reality'. Thats the name we give to everything that exists as far as our interactions and observations can tell. If you want to posit that something exists 'beyond' our observable and interactive reality, then how could you ever know what that something is? Calling it 'spiritual' does nothing to solve this problem and the sheer variety of opinions on the subject is very telling. Spiritual = failed hypothesis.
@SwornByOath Carnegie conversion to Darwin was very religious. Religiosity is part of our humanity "I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear," Carnegie wrote. "Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better' became my motto, my true source of comfort."
This video is pretty good, but I think one thing that is lacking is the second step. You give examples of bad scholarship, and play some clips that seem to use bad scholarship, but don't always manage to SHOW how that clip is bad scholarship. I agree with you, which is why I think that your spins on these clips make 100% sense, but to convince those who don't agree with you as much, I feel like a short few lines after each clip are necessary.
current CO2 levels are at 390 ppm and rising. it wont be long before antarctica begins to thaw as fast as greenland currently is, which btw is rising out of the sea at a rate of 1 inch per year. when antarctica thaws enough it too will rise out of the sea. it is connected to every tectonic plate around the world and will crack the earths crust. this isnt doomsday bull, this is science, and quite likely the worse threat facing mankind. other than superstitious beliefs left over from the stoneage.
btw, did you know that moses was a plagirist and stole the ten commandments from egypts religion to start with? compare with ancient egyptian scrolls.
Creationists seem paranoid of other people disagreeing with them. Listen, if you have to change other peoples minds than I think you have a problem. If evolution is false than why do you feel the need to vote down walking with caveman? Why do you watch the flintstones as if it was a documentary? Why build a creationist mesuem? If you have any questions, fire away. Ever since I was a kid who loved dinosaurs I've been answering them all.
@fatcat2939 Remind people that however they may feel about it Evolution is true. People need to understand that whether they like or not dinosaurs did roam the earth and we did evolve from animals. We need to kick creationism and Intelligent Dessign out of the classroom forever! We need to tell children that they came from primates and not from adam and eve. We need to help others see how silly the whole story of creation is and then creationists will die even faster than it is.
@Rainfish14 It is rather those believing in a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation that would be paranoid towards unbelievers in their cult. You are forgetting about your own cathedrals where the relics of Saint Lucy mother ape of humanity and those supporting the fairy tale of land mammals said to have been evolved into whales. The only purpose of Darwinism is to rationalize atheism and the finality of death
@tellnet I was impressed with Carnegie religious conversion to Darwin. Your Darwinian atheistic shit is overwhelming "I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear," Carnegie wrote. "Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better' became my motto, my true source of comfort."
@tellnet It is just that your godless cult preaching a witchcraft evolutionary creation inspired Harry Potter. Darwin must be laughing his ass in hell
@fatcat2939 Thank you. As frustrating as it has been to deal with those 2, I just couldn't give up when I knew, to the very fibre of my soul, that they were wrong. Both in how they approached the subject and with the information that they claimed to have. In this country we fight every day to prevent religious doctrine being taught in all but courses on comparative religions. Religious doctrine doesn't belong in our science classes, just as science should stay out of church.
@raptorcat61 Now Darwinists are fighting to have their cult to be the only one taught in the school system. It is working. I saw a little primary school girl thanking God for her ape ancestry. I guess she is of the theist sect of Darwin. Natural selection who was called GAIA or the goddess of mother earth in Greek mythology looks great vested as a law of science.
You blieve in a god with NO CAUSE to its existence created every thing FROM NOTHING this is special pleading there fore requires faith. I'd also want to see peer reviewd material for your creationism.
@fatcat2939 Of course, who would not believe that land mammals magically altered organs and limbs and atheistically + orderly evolved into whales upon crossing 10 million years and numerous species. Darwinist priests have pieces old fossils together to support the voodoo fairy tale. Enjoy you delusion.
@raptorcat61 Funny how they find insects in amber dated at 10s of millions of years and wow no change. Seems like the only things trapped in amber are the same things that evolution gave up on. Amazing coincidence. Still looking for that evolutionary sequence that is more than an ancient bear, ambelocetus(sp?) and a whale. Just a few thousand intermeds OK. Signing off now but will follow up on sequence if you can provide it for me. Enjoyed talking.
@chrissalt100 Alligators and crocodiles are relatively unchanged, too. Doesn't mean anything other than they have adapted to their environment and their environment has not significantly changed; hasn't required further adaptation. Man hasn't made any outwardly observable changes in the past few thousand years, yet they have found that western man has DNA that matches cro-magnon mixed in with our own. That is DNA that is not found in native Africans. Science wins.
@fatcat2939 You are right Mr Fatcat, but evolutionists can never accept that or their whole world view crashes. We Christians know that they Bible is accurate in all matters related to doctrine and the facts it contains. I don't get you last point. If you are talking about the creation account there is abundant evidence to support a young earth and the creation of organic life. Evolutionists cannot even begin to describe the evolution of long chain polymers, so it all falls down from there
@raptorcat61 No earthquake proof buildings is not science, it is invention and discovery and good design. True science is empirical. You don't even seem to grasp the fundamentals of the scientific method. Science as we know it only began in the about the 13th Century. Read Stark. True science relies on being able to test someting for falsity. You can't do that with evolution because you are not there. Extrapolation from assumed conditions is all that is possible.
@chrissalt100 Really? So the air foil is also not science? it uses the same process of trial and error and test/retest. They had a need and experimented with solutions; that sounds a lot like science at its very rudimentary form. You really do not understand real science, do you? It took science to understand the principles of pressures and forces and how they act of things. It is science to do math, for without math, very little actual science would exist, not even medicine.
@raptorcat61 The practice of empirical science began in the west. The airfoil was only developed into proper flight in the west. The Scientists that made the breakthroughs were Christians. The Wright Bros were Christians. All of the examples you give were about observations in THE PRESENT. Evolution relies on making assumptions about the past from the present . That is not empiricism. No, I understand science well, but you cannot conceed my point without discrediting evolution.
No it doesn't. It relies on observations in the present to derive conclusions about the past. The same happens in physics or any other branch of science: we draw conclusions about things we cannot observe directly from things that we do observe directly. We directly observe evolution happening; we have even directly observed instances of speciation. There is no reason to think these things cannot have happened in the past as well.
@XGralgrathor Assumptions about the past...you just change the words (observations in the present). They must still rely on assumptions about the past (e.g. carbon or nucleic decay and the rate of sedimentary deposition) in order to draw their conclusions. This is not empirical science which relies on observation about things in the present. Non of the science that put men on the moon or advanced medicine relied on 'evolutionary science' .
"You may not be all to familiar with the English language. The words "assumption" and "conclusion" have entirely different meanings."
Well said, XG. You have pointed out one of the most often used lies of creationists; the willful misuse and intentional misrepresentation/changing of the meanings of words in our language in a vain attempt to support an unsupportable argument. Also known as BEARING FALSE WITNESS. Shame on the creationists that resort to that.
@chrissalt100 Actually, the evidence of it CAN AND IS tested all over the world almost every day.
And yes, real science has the standard of being EMPIRICALLY tested, repeatedly, for truth or falsification. That is the first thing you've gotten right. How often is creationism examined, reexamined and tested by the scientific method to prove or disprove it? How often do Creationist "scientists" test it and get the same results?
@raptorcat61 I've been saying this from the start. You can't apply true empirical science to the past, therefore evolution is not a proven theory. It remains a falsifiable hypothesis.
@chrissalt100 Actually, in the case of evolution, geology and other measurable examinations of the natural world, including measuring the speed of light and the movement of stars, there can be and is empirical measurement. Your argument from incredulity is no argument at all, simply a demonstration of your true level of scientific illiteracy.
@raptorcat61 You can measure the speed of light in the present, but not in the past, although there are theoretical models that suggest it was different in the past, but nothing definite, other than to say that evolutionists can't know things were the same in the past as the present. In evolution and geology you can only extrapolate from the present to imagine what happened in the past. That is not empiricism. Creationists acknowledge that but evolutionists refuse to bec they can't
« You can measure the speed of light in the present, but not in the past »
This is false. Using observations of distant celestial objects, we can calculate the speed of light at a distance, and thus in the past.
It is also irrelevant, as we can arrive at reasonable inferences based on present observations that natural constants like the speed of light have not significantly varied since inflation.
@XGralgrathor What I was getting at is that some research has been done that indicates the speed of light may have been different in the past - something you acknowledge. The inflation you speak of takes me to the 'big bang'. This implies a beginning. Given the 1st law of thermodynamics creationists argue that intelligence was needed to create the particularity since you cannot get something from nothing. Believing an explosion created order from chaos without design takes huge faith.
@XGralgrathor Reference: Google - Has the Speed of Light Decayed? Gerald A. Aardsma, Ph.D. The conclusion is that the older data is too imprecise to have any confidence in any major change, but that is not to say new information might yet 'come to light' (pun). My point is that you cannot assume things were the same in the past, but evolutionists make that assumption on just about everything. So, it is not fact but unproven theory. It is fraudulent to claim otherwise, but they do it.
« 1st law of thermodynamics creationists argue that intelligence was needed »
Again: ...!?
Do you people even know what the world "logic" means!?
Look, if you can't be bothered to get your lazy-ass brain into gear to think about the shit you're writing down before pushing the 'send' button, then I can't be bothered with you anymore. Go play outside, kid.
@XGralgrathor Atheism will never be able to answer to the exquisiteness of the designing, programming and engineering of the species. It is simple logic. No reason and 0% probability for anything to end up as a peacock or any other species upon going through an atheistic evolution. It is hard work, a waste of time and an exercise in futility to try proving that an evolutionary creation is even possible.
@alexthasy Exactly. I've quoted Patterson and Gould, gurus of the evolution movement who say there are no reliable intermediary chains. We have the impossibility of forming replicating life at the cell level, the fine tuning of the universe, the evidence of catastrophism in the world's geology, human artifacts found in rocks supposed to be 10s of millions of years old...it just goes on and on but blind evolutionists cannot bear to face the demise of their cherished faith
@XGralgrathor You will one day fully understand the level of asininity of a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation and the occult nature of the myth of natural selection your pope Darwin borrowed to Greek paganism.
@XGralgrathor I am not causing you any prejudice by not sharing your faith in a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary evolution. You remind me of myself as a kid and a Roman Catholic feeling sorry for those lost for not sharing my faith and being lost. It is just that I am trying to get what I am losing for not believing in Darwin and an atheistic evolutionary creation. I am doing a good job and having a good life.
@XGralgrathor In fact a guy like William Lane Craig argues cogently in relation to 'in the beginning'. He has a doctorate in the related science and points to the fine tuning of the universe following the creation event (the big bang) to prove the cosmos and the earth has to be the product of design. This lazy-ass brain has weighed up the evidence on both sides over 25 years and found evolution seriously wanting. So if the best you can do is ad hominem attacks perhaps it is you who is lazy
That is a humorous statement. Where rational people at least base their conclusions about the past on observations, creationists reject the notion that present observations can teach us anything useful about the past, thereby stating that there is no way for them to assert *anything* about the past -
But then they turn around and ignore what they've just said to claim that the bible must be true anyway.
@XGralgrathor This is a complete misrepresentation. We argue you can draw inferences about the past but don't call it empirical science and don't enthrone it by insisting it is fact and cannot be disputed. Believe it by faith by all means, point to your evidence but don't insist it is true to the exclusion of all other explanations. From there don't go on to discriminate against those who prefer an alternative. It is this totalitarian aspect creationists object to.
@XGralgrathor This is another bad misrepresentation. Rational people accept they cannot be sure of the past based on observations in the present, but evolutionists accept with blind faith that what they assume about the past is fact rather then supposition. Creationists admit that they can't prove as a fact that the cosmos was created. All we say is that the evidence points to it. If evolutionists were honest they would do the same. But you won't bec your world view fails if you do.
@chrissalt100 Where do you get extrapolation from ASSUMED conditions? We have the evidence of what the Earth's environment was, going back to when it first cooled. That is from climatology and geology. I suppose that you don't believe in tectonic shift either, even though CURRENT measurements prove it. These are exact sciences, unlike saying "God did it", which is a big assumption and a leap of faith, not a testing of evidence.
@raptorcat61 Oh dear, there is none so blind... you have just proved my point. I studied geology. Evolutionists and creationists make assumptions about the past from the geology before us, but that does not make it emprically proven. We say the evidence points to flood geology happening quickly. Evolutionists say it was slow and gradual. In the end neither can say with certainty what happened in the past, yet evolutionists fraudulently say they can. I studied plate tectonics in the 70s.
« We say the evidence points to flood geology happening quickly »
Which it manifestly doesn't. Any interpretation of the geological record that ***takes into account*** what we observe of geological and geophysical processes in ***the present*** will conclude that certain geological formations must have formed over deep time. Any view that proposes rapid formation must exclude such evidence.
@XGralgrathor This is illogical - evolutionists rely on assumptions about geological activity in the past. Observations in the present, such as events around the Mt St Helen's eruption proved that stratification happens really quickly (from river flooding). We have dinosaurs buried so fast they are half way through giving birth. We have found very rapid switches in polarity captured in rock that evolutionists said happened over millions of yrs. In fact they can happen in days.
@XGralgrathor Correct they form conclusions, they do not prove it as a fact through empiricism as evolutionist fraudulently claim. They have to extrapolate from the present to assume what happened in the past. Creationists do the same and reach different conclusions. But evolutionists don't want to acknowledge this so they just mock young earth geology because their world view cannot allow any other theory to exist. It is all about bias not empirical science.
« Correct they form conclusions, they do not prove it as a fact »
You are confused about the purpose of science. The purpose of science is not to produce facts. The purpose of science is to *take* facts, and *explain* them. The purpose of science, in other words, is to produce theories for facts. Theories constitute our understanding of facts.
The alternative the biblical literalist offers us is to simply accept any old bullshit without ever being able to determine its accuracy.
@XGralgrathor A classic evolutionists circular argument. First you must identify the 'facts' . That requires relying on events which you have never actually seen, so they are not really facts, but items given to interpretation. Having called them facts you then 'explain' these facts according to the same assumptions you have about them - assumptions prejudiced by a pre-existent evolutionary world view. Creationists are more honest. We admit our designer prejudice.
« Observations in the present, such as events around the Mt St Helen's eruption proved that stratification happens really quickly »
Except that the layering formed in such instances is nothing like the layering we find in other geological formations. Which is exactly why geologists, some 200 years ago now, were forced to reconsider their estimates of the age of the Earth. Or did you not think they'd examined the differences between such formations by now, boy?
@XGralgrathor Wrong. A river damned by the eruption burst through and created a mini grand canyon in hours, with stratification the same as rocks deemed to be old. Evolutionists would have said it took millions of years. Geologists were not forced to do anything. Lyell proclaimed an old earth because he wanted to disprove Christianity, so he rewrote geology. He had a great impact on Darwin, whose grandfather had produced a book in the 18th C called zoonomia in which he proposed evolution.
« A river damned by the eruption burst through and created a mini grand canyon in hours, with stratification the same as rocks deemed to be old. »
No, it didn't. The stratification formed in such rapid events is easily distinguished from the stratification in ancient formations like the Grand Canyon, by any geologist with a modicum of training and without the determination to establish biblical inerrancy.
@XGralgrathor (2) Come on, give me the references or basis for your claim re stratification. You have abused me for not providing a reference and called me a lazy-ass (a simple google transaction would have done it - as I provided). So where is your 'ass' now?. How was the layering different?? Prove your point, I'm open to learning something here. If you can't my point stands re fast geological events, not slow and gradual as you evos assume.
@XGralgrathor This comes from work done by scientists on lava flows which I read years ago in a creationist technical journal which I no longer have. The researches found rapid, multiple changes in polarity and contrasted it with evolutionary assumptions that they took millions of years to happen. Given lava flows happen quickly, the changes would have happened very fast. This shows you can't assume the past is the same as the present.
@XGralgrathor No they don't exclude such evidence at all. It is taken into account and weighed against the creationist perspective to produce a counter conclusion from the available evidence. In either the evolutionist or creationist case it is about drawing conclusions from evidence, but it is not empirical science which must be done in the present under falsifiable conditions. creationists accept this but evolutionists claim only one set of conclusions is possible.
Yes, they do. For instance, they maintain that recently formed rock is dated old because they forgot to take into account the fact that they were measuring xenoliths in stead of igneous rock. Such evidence is filtered out through their biblical glasses.
@XGralgrathor No they don't ignore xenoliths. As I understand it radiometric dating methods make assumptions about the absence of radiogenic argon and are therefore unreliable. Human artifacts have been pulled from rocks dated at 10s of millions of years. Carbon dating also has a fatal flaw.
@XGralgrathor Here is a quote for you Mr Gralgrathor, from the guru of evolution himself - Gould ‘The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and “fully formed.
You know that quote mining in this fashion is a form of lying, right?
You know as well as everybody else that Gould does *not* support your position, and that using his words as if to suggest he does is simply dishonest.
Because you know this, you might have bothered to look up what Gould actually meant when he used those words. But you didn't. Because you're lazy. And that's why I'm done with you.
@chrissalt100 Actually, geology has no bearing on evolution. Two different fields. If you have studied geology, as you claim, then you would know that. So your statement makes you a liar.
Flood geology? what does that have to do with evolution? Nothing. Geology is geology Evolution is evolution. Only a true scientific illiterate would think that the two are interchangeable.
@raptorcat61 What! evolution relies on the fossil record found in rocks they say are dated at millions of years. The world is covered in sedimentary rocks - laid down by water, proving it has played a dominant role in rock formation, so you are dead wrong! The same rock formations span continents proving continental drift happened very rapidly, not over billions of years. Sea shells are found on Everest . Water based catastrophism has clearly been dominant.
@raptorcat61 Rubbish. Evolutionists use geology all the time to support their assumptions about the time needed to evolve life. Fossils found in rocks are used to justify evolutionary beliefs. Flood geology has everything to do with it because it points to the accuracy of the biblical account - which you, of course, reject. Their are flood legends across the world - incomprehensible unless Man witnssed a catastrophic flood event. Couple that to the geological record and voila!
@chrissalt100 They only use geology to help with the era dating process of fossils. The fine tuning of those dates are done through one or more of the current dozen different dating processes, of which carbon dating is but 1, but NOT THE ONLY one. Of course an honestly educated person would know all of that and not try to confuse the issue as you have so poorly done.
@raptorcat61 Nonsense, geology is used (abused) to justify evolutionary dogma. There is no such thing as fine tuning of dates because the dating methods rely on uniformitarian assumptions. There i
This has been flagged as spam show
these are the very same logical fallacies people use on evolution! reading the evolution biology section is a mix of fictional generalizations.. It's a fairy tale starting millions of years ago, in a magical land! even darwin knows there's no transitional evidence. Please prove evolution happens!
dwightee 21 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1. this video attacks arguments and not the content of Creationism.
2. the same can be said of Evolutionism.
3. try to attack Intelligent Design. Even Richard Dawkins in 'Expelled' admits we "may have been created."
4. proof that there IS a God is through mathematics, probability and statistics. Probs and Stats will KILL evolution any day!
5. Want proof against evolution. refute these: "Darwin on Trial" P Johnson, "Evolution Theory in Crisis" M Denton, "No free lunch" william Dembski
reynandvalenzuela 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reynandvalenzuela
Nah. Dembski, Johnson and Denton attack misrepresentations of evolutionary theory, and fail to understand even their own arguments to boot (eg. irreducible complexity).
Arguments based on probabilities don't mean a thing if you don't know what to calculate the probability of. For instance, the probability that a lifeform will assemble through pure chance is entirely irrelevant, as nobody claims that lifeforms assemble through pure chance.
MrGralgrathor 1 day ago
this video attacks arguments and not the content.
reynandvalenzuela 1 day ago
Comment removed
dwightee 21 hours ago
@reynandvalenzuela hey ryan Agree!
dwightee 21 hours ago
Some fail to understand, absolute certainty can not be attained.
We can be virtually certain that our understanding is not perfect.
We can be virtually certain of the validity of a proposition that has overwhelming evidence as to make denial ridiculous.
fatcat2939 3 days ago
What follows is an incredibly stupid waste of 25 minutes...
bluenotejazz 5 days ago
The more I see, the more I find a look at creationism a great tool in teaching critical thinking to my son.
JimBCameron 5 days ago
LOL. The beginning to this is funny. These are all fallacies. But the assumption of a creator is not necessarily fallacious
ScholarVisual 1 week ago
@ScholarVisual There's no proof of one, I personally believe in the existence of one because the universe seems very lonely if there's nothing after this life but this is on faith alone, not science.
Jefferyxu45 1 week ago
@ScholarVisual Yeeaaaaah, it kinda is. An assumption that something is true requires positive evidence. There is no positive evidence for ANY God or Gods. Therefore, to assume that they exist is a fallacy.
SelectHawk 3 days ago
@SelectHawk Well if I assert human characteristics to this creator of the universe it could be fallacious. If I were to say this Being loves us and answers prayers without providing evidence then it could be called illogical. But to make the assumption that a systematic structure like dna was created by something is quite rational. Especially since we have only seen systematic structures made by an intellgent agents. Like humans.
ScholarVisual 3 days ago
10,000 years old
T_T
How can we see the light from stars that take more than 10,000 years to reach us.
Silly creationists.
zoidberg96913 1 week ago
@zoidberg96913 HOW CAN THE LITE TAKE MOAR THAN 10000 YEARS TO REACH US, IM NOT EVEN 25, THEREFORE TIS IMPUSSIBLE FOR IT TO REACH MEH. IT MOUST BE JEEBUS WHICH MAEKS THE LIGTE TRAVOL FATSER COS ALL SCEINTISDS R BE WOOKING FOR SETAN!!!!! GOD BLESS ALL EXCEPT FOR ADEIST FAGUTS WHU R GOIN TO BRUN IN HELL!!!.
Jefferyxu45 1 week ago
Why don't we invite the creator to explain what he did? Oh hell, there is no creator... (and therefore no hell).
NickE2 2 weeks ago 5
This reminds me of how the media cuts up Ron Paul,or cuts him out.Anybody can cut up ANY worldview with a little snap and a different paradigm(George Carlin made a living at it). Try actually watch"A Case for the Creator" or "Startling Proof" or just listen to "Why the Bible"on utube by Ravi Zacharias and pray that the Maker would reveal Himself to you.Then throw yourself at His mercy for being such a prideful little idiot,and start loving people with the love and mercy He has offered you.Peace.
brentjones4831 3 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
I like how you throw an ad hominem in there at the end. This was just an elaborately disguised excuse for you to vent some of your anger.
And by the way, God's "love and mercy" is bullshit according to anyone who believes in Hell. You would be able to see that if you weren't so biased.
someonenobodycares 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Fuck off Brent.
"Tellnet" is the name of my computer company.
Currently we are hiring.
Do not apply.
tellnet 3 weeks ago
@tellnet Over there in Ireland!Cool.Here in Austin the software
guys r still hanging in there,at least til our economic bubbleblows
out.Can't print trillions out of thin air,police the world in undeclared wars,and strap down the working class with the illegal taxes imposed w/o some heavy duty blowback.Our firearm sales are at an all time high as the country prepares for either Obama or Romney(they have the same employer).So the motto is"dig in--reach out".That's why we reach out!Later,boss!
brentjones4831 3 weeks ago
@tellnet ....O.o Can I apply?
b33p3rz 3 weeks ago
@b33p3rz
yes
tellnet 3 weeks ago
Great vid. Well though out and clearly explained along with prime examples. Its funny that the religious comments are the opposite. "Wait until you meet Jesus" or "God will judge you." Even if you're a crazy creationist, there is something to be learned from this vid (like why creationism is so absurd).
Ape1nope 1 month ago
All roads lead to the judgement seat of Jesus Christ. You will get your chance to explain this to your Creator the second you take your last breath of air. See where your little gods are then.
brentjones4831 1 month ago
@brentjones4831 And you know that all roads lead to the judgement seat of Jesus how? What is your evidence to support this assertion?
thybigballs 1 month ago
@thybigballs Because i used to be just like the guys doing this video.Thought i knew it all.Then it dawned on me that i was a liar,a thief, a lust-filled slut like every other man on this planet that hated God by the way i lived my life.While in a state of clarity i cried out to this God that i denied my whole life that if He was real and there was a real Person that was all God that really died so i wouldn't have to,then yes,i would follow Him.My heart change is the evidence.
brentjones4831 1 month ago
@brentjones4831
so you are one of those moronic uneducated bible thumpers...
You don't have any evidence for God. you moron. Pray to whatever fairy you want to.
Fuck off from this video, your religious buy bull induced shit are useless here.
transtlantic 1 month ago
@transtlantic I've watched the demons that run your life go screaming out of others at the name of Jesus Christ.You hate your Judge,but the things in your mind hate Him more. Love,joy,peace...not in that place where you feed your emptiness..your dark passions..nothing you have is worth the love and power i have as the Holy Spirit of the Most High God covers us that are His. Your lies can finally die as you embrace the Truth of Jesus.Sucking face with satan is just weak. We'll pray.
brentjones4831 1 month ago
@brentjones4831
you really are fucked up....
I seriously don't give a shit about your buy bull induced shit.
Your preaching is useless here.
Have a good year, you moron.
transtlantic 1 month ago
@transtlantic What is "buy bull induced s---"? Is name calling and bad grammer what your sinsoaked demon brain reduced you to? My preaching is useless,you are right. BUT,if you read the book of Matthew..say chapters 5 through 7 the actual Creator God gives a GUNFIRE sermon you will never forget! Or just start with John 3:16-John 3:21 to see why you are in bondage. At least then you would know Who you are up against.He made you,He owns your soul,and He loves you..but you must choose
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
bad grammer? damn... you are dumb like heck...
"Bible" - "Buy Bull shit" it's word play.
"demon brain"? sorry I don't believe in fairies.
I also don't like to read the fiction book you call the "Bible", it's full of death, rape, murder, mutilation, blood magic crap, ridiculous myths and a story of a certain zombie jesus.
Why don't you put aside your circular reasoning and start showing evidence for the fairy that you call "God"?
or you can always fuck off.
transtlantic 4 weeks ago
@transtlantic You didn't do your homework.And grammar matters but a little if at all. With your beloved president signing the NDAA,we will probably end up in the same detention center anyway here before long,and we can have long talks about the risen Lord Jesus Christ and all His majesty...then the Holy Spirit can work a miracle in your heart,too,just like He does in so many others.Then the lame fantasy of growin up out of a rok will melt away under the love of the God that made u!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
lolol no wonder you are an uneducated roof contractor, you didn't even notice that I am not american. But then again... you probably don't even know what the world looks like beyond your state. LOLOLOL
Zombie jesus stories again? LOLOL
you really are fucked up. Hey, you uneducated dumb shit, do you have any evidence for the fairy that you name "God"?
transtlantic 4 weeks ago
@transtlantic Basic Instuctions Before Leaving Earth,BIBLE. That's more like it.Yes,i work for a living.It's how we roll in Texas. I missed the "translantic" hint.We can't all be from Texas.That's why so many people are so upset and mad at the God they don't believe in..because they aren't here in Texas.And don't worry,the authorities will get you,too,wherever you are.Rascally carbon footprints tend to make us ALL enemies of the state(thanks to evil-lutionist"thinking").God REIGNS!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
amazing... you keep writing Buy Bull induced shit and assuming that i care... Do you even believe that I read all of your post? lolol
"in texas"? do you think I give a shit about that? You are JUST from texas, it's obvious that the world for you is very, very small. LOL
God doesn't exist, you uneducated fuck.
Fuck off and stop bothering educated people. Go clean the roofs and stop preaching the story of the zombie jesus.
transtlantic 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
They should have mislaid the keys when they locked you up.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Your batting a thousand with that sweet little channel of yours,too. We as humans are all locked up by the rebellion against the Creator God. Jesus was crucified so that we could escape the punishment we deserve if we would turn from our rebellion and turn to Jesus Christ and be born into the family of God.That's between you and Him.May the Lord grant you wisdom and a revelation of His mercy before you check out of this life! No sin is worth what it costs to keep.Pray today!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
See a psychiatrist.
And go back on the drugs - you might hallucinate less.
And, I am curious...
Were you born dumb, or are you a typical product of American education ??
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet A design needs a designer.A map needs a mind to make the map. 3.5 BILLION bits of information in your DNA double helix that seperates you from every other human on this earth.And that evolved. The whole idea is idiotic,as Darwin himself recognized as he wrote about the complex mechanics of the human eye and the impossibilty of chance random mutations forming it.Even a non-Texan could figure that one out.Macroevolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups and even you.Pray to Jesus!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
"A design needs a designer" is WELL WORN OUT CREATIONIST GARBAGE.
Get an education.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Stunning reply! Tell that to the Toyota manufacturer,or to your little fashion show DESIGNERS...it's not a creationist arguement,just a fact. The sun is hot,the moon controls the tides,you need air,the Lord Jesus Christ is your Maker and Judge..you know...facts.Truth hurts,but then it sets ya' free!We'll put you on our prayer list for wisdom and that your god(you),will bow to the Creator God(Jesus)before it's too late! Read Provebs 1 through 3 to get a clue!Take care!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
What gobshites like you do not appreciate is the FACT that DNA is NOT DESIGNED !
Get a fucking education or check back into prison and stop annoying sensible, sane and rational people ...
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Your atheist cult bullshit preaching a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation of exquisitely designed, programmed and engineered species supported by a myth borrowed to ancient paganism is not even bad science fiction. How can your atheist cult account for the honeybees forming a fantastic kingdom of insects with an incredible social structure and skills?
alexthasy 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Darwinian atheist theologian Rev Richard Dawkins preaching on designoids is pure nonsense. '‘Designoid objects look designed, so much so that some people – probably, alas, most people – think that they are designed. These people are wrong. . . the true explanation – Darwinian natural selection – is very different.’'
alexthasy 4 weeks ago
@alexthasy
Alex, it is wonderful to see that you have kept your arse well polished - the glint, the sparkle on the shite thou speakest is marvellous to behove.
It must give you great joy to know that you come second only to the great Brent below in the proliferation of Gobshitery.
You must be really pleased with yourself - to attain such a horrendous level of appalling ignorance must have taken years of training.
.
Now, is there anything else you would like to add ?
.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet What's a "gobshite"?You sound like you were in prison by the way you talk.I used to be profane and hot tempered because of my denial of my Creator God.During my time in prison i got to hang out with really smart people like you who were coorporate thieves and whatnot,that found out that Jesus is alive and well.Boy,did they change!Traded misery for joy,selfishness for charity...amazing when at the bottom how much sense it makes to finally look up!May Jesus shine on you,too!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
Brent, here in Ireland, an individual who displays an appalling level of intellectual bereftitude, and who insists upon publicly announcing their shortfalls, is commonly referred to as a Gobshite. Giving due consideration to your consistent efforts, and persistent presentations, it is with the greatest of pleasure that we are now in a position to award you with the lifetime achievement of being one of the greatest gobshites it has ever been our honour to encounter.
Well done.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Awesome!Thanks for the word of the day!Here in Texas we have a word for people who have words like that,but Jesus took that word from my vocabulary...the words expose the heart,and that's why i'm concerned with yours.i don't laugh at you,i laugh with you because i used to be just like you and would rip"those gobshites a new one"if they came into my space.Buncha' retards,huh?Totally got that paradigm.It was fun while it lasted.But the seeds of Christ those planted i thank God4!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Not what i wrote,but that's how deceivers play and i understand that.You have no standard for morality except for yourself. i looked up to no-one in the pen,just Jesus Christ. There were some smart guys in there that had lost their way and did dumb things.You are not above that,obviously. Talk about delusional. The only perfection to be found is the God you deny(dark hates the Light),and you will be meeting him soon enough.Better on this side than the other side.Pray for light!
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
Wrong.
Try reading your own words below.
.
Anything else you would like to add ?
.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet yep.You too,will be clicking on more than a half cylinder when your eyes have been opened by recognizing your need,to finally be freed by the Christ out of the prison of doubt...and now you know where to turn!God bless Ireland.Jesus reigns.
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
You are hilarious.
.
Anything more to add ?
.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet not this second,gotta get back to work.Read Psalm chapter 19 and Isaiah chapter 40.That will get you started at least.The number 1 selling book of all times is full of incredible insights that even superhuman minds like yours have drawn from for centuries!Actually,it's a library of 66 books written by 40 different authors,so you can even set aside the who made what arguement and just have a Matthew chapter 5 kind of day,knowing that you are one of those Jesus came to save!Later
brentjones4831 4 weeks ago
@brentjones4831
If you think I am going to waste any more of my time with a gobshite like you, then you are sadly mistaken - you were an aside, an amusment - while I did some repairs.
Go take your gibberish elsewhere.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet Hey! Check out youtube"Joe Rogan--What is reality"--he hates religion,too,i think, and drops the "f"bomb along with blaspheming God's name,so that kinda sucks,BUT from an artistic point of view i think you will dig it on how this guy just is amazed at the complex nature of the world we live in without getting into the "why" so much. Well put together..make sure you got your speakers on,the sound score is great,too!Peace to ya',Mr.Tellnet(what does that mean?).
brentjones4831 3 weeks ago
@brentjones4831 YA I AGREA WIT MY CHIRSTIEN BRUDER HARE, HE TELK VARY GOODISH. Excuse my english because I'm a stupid ass Creationist.
Jefferyxu45 1 week ago
@Jefferyxu45 Time+matter+chance=all order in the universe. Brilliant.Jesus said of the false prophets"you will know them by there fruits."....the same applies here...the Christ followers aren't threatened by the delusions of denying the Creator,He told us you would be out in numbers near the end,and here it is..and there you are!Wow!Read Romans the first chapter..it's kind of graphic,but you can handle it.We all need the Savior to get out of this alive.There is no dead atheists,man.
brentjones4831 1 week ago
@brentjones4831 The problem I have with you guys is that you ignore all the other religions of the world. Who is to say which Deity is the correct one to believe? Since everyone claims their figure is omnipotent, if you do not tolerate, it essentially becomes a question of which heresy you wish to commit. Fundementalists like you obviously do not tolerate.
Jefferyxu45 4 days ago
@Jefferyxu45 EVERY RELIGION claims to be right.They all may be WRONG,but they can't all be right.The law of non-contradiction(A cannot = non A) is right on target.So just let the Word of God(the one with 63,000 crossreferences within it's cover and is verified by 25,000 real artifacts)speak to you..God used Isaiah to give us His resume in Isaiah chapter 40.Read it for yourself.TRUTH is exclusive.You know that.Jesus,not me,claimed to be THE Truth and THE Way.i believe Him.
brentjones4831 4 days ago
@tellnet If we call it creation it apperas we need a creator, but if we refer to it as nature does that mean we need a naturist?
gamesbok 2 weeks ago
@gamesbok
Call it anything you like.
Pre-existence is an unknown.
Sane, sensible and rational beings, such as self, have a very special way of explaining this.
We say:
"I do not know"
The truth is irrefutably correct - always.
tellnet 2 weeks ago
@brentjones4831 Why is it that religious people lie so much?
gamesbok 2 weeks ago
@transtlantic Oh! And Happy New Year!My wife and i got in early to avoid the drunk drivers..they were already out in full force here in Austin! Take care,and may the Lord bless you with Himself! Talk about fireworks! Peace
brentjones4831 1 month ago
@thybigballs IF your really sincere goto "Just stop and think" on youtube.It's about 15 minutes that really gets to the heart of the issue and gives the reasons that saved a wretch like me....and you,if you realize you aren't this God you so want to deny. My wife and i will be praying for you,Thybigballs! It's in Christ that we love you...Brent and Laura Ps."are you a good person" is 6 minutes that sums it up,too(youtube)..check it out.
brentjones4831 1 month ago
I think we can agree that religion is based off of spirituality, is it not? If that is the case, you cannot use logic/scientific reasoning to argue religion, because neither of those base off of spirituality. It's like trying to use math to solve a spelling error, aka incorrect.
SwornByOath 1 month ago in playlist Creationist Bullshit
This has been flagged as spam show
@SwornByOath Umm, no. Religion is not 'based' on spirituality, religion claims that something called spirituality exists in the first pace. If you think to can claim something exists, and then use the alleged existence of that thing to support your original claim that the thing exists in the first place, then you have fallen deep into the fallacy of circular reasoning....
AgeOfScience 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgeOfScience ...Also, logic and science correspond to what we call 'reality'. Thats the name we give to everything that exists as far as our interactions and observations can tell. If you want to posit that something exists 'beyond' our observable and interactive reality, then how could you ever know what that something is? Calling it 'spiritual' does nothing to solve this problem and the sheer variety of opinions on the subject is very telling. Spiritual = failed hypothesis.
AgeOfScience 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SwornByOath Carnegie conversion to Darwin was very religious. Religiosity is part of our humanity "I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear," Carnegie wrote. "Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better' became my motto, my true source of comfort."
alexthasy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This video is pretty good, but I think one thing that is lacking is the second step. You give examples of bad scholarship, and play some clips that seem to use bad scholarship, but don't always manage to SHOW how that clip is bad scholarship. I agree with you, which is why I think that your spins on these clips make 100% sense, but to convince those who don't agree with you as much, I feel like a short few lines after each clip are necessary.
UseTimeOne 1 month ago
Comment removed
UseTimeOne 1 month ago
current CO2 levels are at 390 ppm and rising. it wont be long before antarctica begins to thaw as fast as greenland currently is, which btw is rising out of the sea at a rate of 1 inch per year. when antarctica thaws enough it too will rise out of the sea. it is connected to every tectonic plate around the world and will crack the earths crust. this isnt doomsday bull, this is science, and quite likely the worse threat facing mankind. other than superstitious beliefs left over from the stoneage.
vengencefrom1979 1 month ago
btw, did you know that moses was a plagirist and stole the ten commandments from egypts religion to start with? compare with ancient egyptian scrolls.
vengencefrom1979 1 month ago
I thought the universe began to exist 'after' the big bang.
shashankthepurifier 1 month ago
@shashankthepurifier got a real good pic of the red shift on my page.
vengencefrom1979 1 month ago
Science for the win!
soulinite 1 month ago in playlist More videos from ExtantDodo
7:35 Best part haha
TheDobligator 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
Comment removed
fatcat2939 1 month ago
Comment removed
fatcat2939 1 month ago
Comment removed
fatcat2939 1 month ago
Creationists seem paranoid of other people disagreeing with them. Listen, if you have to change other peoples minds than I think you have a problem. If evolution is false than why do you feel the need to vote down walking with caveman? Why do you watch the flintstones as if it was a documentary? Why build a creationist mesuem? If you have any questions, fire away. Ever since I was a kid who loved dinosaurs I've been answering them all.
Rainfish14 1 month ago
@Rainfish14 Well, I agree. But what can you do.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
Comment removed
fatcat2939 1 month ago
@fatcat2939 Remind people that however they may feel about it Evolution is true. People need to understand that whether they like or not dinosaurs did roam the earth and we did evolve from animals. We need to kick creationism and Intelligent Dessign out of the classroom forever! We need to tell children that they came from primates and not from adam and eve. We need to help others see how silly the whole story of creation is and then creationists will die even faster than it is.
Rainfish14 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rainfish14 It is rather those believing in a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation that would be paranoid towards unbelievers in their cult. You are forgetting about your own cathedrals where the relics of Saint Lucy mother ape of humanity and those supporting the fairy tale of land mammals said to have been evolved into whales. The only purpose of Darwinism is to rationalize atheism and the finality of death
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy
Still Zombiing around spouting shite Alex ?
Keep up the good woork.
You are the epitomy of religious ignorance.
A fine specimen indeed.
tellnet 4 weeks ago
@tellnet I was impressed with Carnegie religious conversion to Darwin. Your Darwinian atheistic shit is overwhelming "I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear," Carnegie wrote. "Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better' became my motto, my true source of comfort."
alexthasy 3 weeks ago
@alexthasy
The Looney Tunics are out early.
Full moon not due till the 8th.
tellnet 3 weeks ago
@tellnet It is just that your godless cult preaching a witchcraft evolutionary creation inspired Harry Potter. Darwin must be laughing his ass in hell
alexthasy 3 weeks ago
@alexthasy "It is just that your godless cult preac..." Strawman argument
FAIL
ozowen 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As I have pointed out many times (and am again) absolute certainty is unattainable
We can be virtually certain that our understanding falls short of absolute.
We can be virtually certain of the validity of a proposition that has overwhelming support, as to render denial ridiculous.
This whole discussion is not really about evolution. It is about the perceived need of absolute certainty in the biblical account.
The bible is clearly not perfect.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is it just me, or is theism totally pissed off with humanity.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
It needs to be understood, as I have pointed out many times, that absolute certainty is unattainable
.
We can be virtually certain that our understanding falls short of perfection.
We can be virtually certain of the validity of a proposition that has overwhelming support, as to render denial ridiculous.
This whole discussion is not really about evolution. It seems to be about the belief of some, that the bible is literally word for word, perfect.
The bible is clearly not perfect.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
Well done raptor, you beat them at their own game.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
@fatcat2939 Thank you. As frustrating as it has been to deal with those 2, I just couldn't give up when I knew, to the very fibre of my soul, that they were wrong. Both in how they approached the subject and with the information that they claimed to have. In this country we fight every day to prevent religious doctrine being taught in all but courses on comparative religions. Religious doctrine doesn't belong in our science classes, just as science should stay out of church.
raptorcat61 1 month ago
@raptorcat61 Now Darwinists are fighting to have their cult to be the only one taught in the school system. It is working. I saw a little primary school girl thanking God for her ape ancestry. I guess she is of the theist sect of Darwin. Natural selection who was called GAIA or the goddess of mother earth in Greek mythology looks great vested as a law of science.
alexthasy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexiademented
why would i believe in your religious creationism if you can't explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory?
Why can't you explain Breeding without using evolution theory?
You are full of stories, but no real explanations, tell us...who caused 9/11?
transtlantic 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexthasy
You blieve in a god with NO CAUSE to its existence created every thing FROM NOTHING this is special pleading there fore requires faith. I'd also want to see peer reviewd material for your creationism.
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@alexthasy Your clearly mad as a brush.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
@fatcat2939 Of course, who would not believe that land mammals magically altered organs and limbs and atheistically + orderly evolved into whales upon crossing 10 million years and numerous species. Darwinist priests have pieces old fossils together to support the voodoo fairy tale. Enjoy you delusion.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy Lol.... ok you got me
fatcat2939 1 month ago
@fatcat2939 You are only answering to your calling of believing in a Darwinian evolutionary creation
alexthasy 1 month ago
Faith is fine, but it is for the most part faith. Our understanding is limited, true.
fatcat2939 1 month ago
@raptorcat61 Funny how they find insects in amber dated at 10s of millions of years and wow no change. Seems like the only things trapped in amber are the same things that evolution gave up on. Amazing coincidence. Still looking for that evolutionary sequence that is more than an ancient bear, ambelocetus(sp?) and a whale. Just a few thousand intermeds OK. Signing off now but will follow up on sequence if you can provide it for me. Enjoyed talking.
chrissalt100 1 month ago
@chrissalt100 Alligators and crocodiles are relatively unchanged, too. Doesn't mean anything other than they have adapted to their environment and their environment has not significantly changed; hasn't required further adaptation. Man hasn't made any outwardly observable changes in the past few thousand years, yet they have found that western man has DNA that matches cro-magnon mixed in with our own. That is DNA that is not found in native Africans. Science wins.
raptorcat61 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Well, its been pointed out, as I'm sure we have all heard before, that absolute certainty is unattainable.
We can be virtually certain that our understanding falls short of perfection.
We can be virtually certain of the validity of a proposition that has overwhelming support, as to render denial ridiculous.
Just to be sure to be sure to be sure.
fatcat2939 2 months ago
Well, its been pointed out, as I'm sure we have all heard before, that absolute certainty is unattainable.
We can be virtually certain that our understanding falls short of perfection.
We can be virtually certain of the validity of a proposition that has overwhelming support, as to render denial ridiculous.
Just to be sure to be sure
fatcat2939 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Well, its been pointed out, as I'm sure we have all heard before, that absolute certainty is unattainable.
We can be virtually certain that our understanding falls short of perfection.
We can be virtually certain of the validity of a proposition that has overwhelming support, as to render denial ridiculous.
fatcat2939 2 months ago
Comment removed
fatcat2939 2 months ago
What is reasonably certain? answers please.
fatcat2939 2 months ago
Lets be reasonable. No one can claim with absolute certainty that there is not an initial creator/creators.
Claims that the bible is absolutely correct is a problem a problem though.
It is very difficult to mesh the biblical claims with what is known to be reasonably certain.
fatcat2939 2 months ago
@fatcat2939 You are right Mr Fatcat, but evolutionists can never accept that or their whole world view crashes. We Christians know that they Bible is accurate in all matters related to doctrine and the facts it contains. I don't get you last point. If you are talking about the creation account there is abundant evidence to support a young earth and the creation of organic life. Evolutionists cannot even begin to describe the evolution of long chain polymers, so it all falls down from there
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 Sorry to hear that Chris.
fatcat2939 2 months ago
Comment removed
fatcat2939 2 months ago
Comment removed
fatcat2939 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 No earthquake proof buildings is not science, it is invention and discovery and good design. True science is empirical. You don't even seem to grasp the fundamentals of the scientific method. Science as we know it only began in the about the 13th Century. Read Stark. True science relies on being able to test someting for falsity. You can't do that with evolution because you are not there. Extrapolation from assumed conditions is all that is possible.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 Really? So the air foil is also not science? it uses the same process of trial and error and test/retest. They had a need and experimented with solutions; that sounds a lot like science at its very rudimentary form. You really do not understand real science, do you? It took science to understand the principles of pressures and forces and how they act of things. It is science to do math, for without math, very little actual science would exist, not even medicine.
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 The practice of empirical science began in the west. The airfoil was only developed into proper flight in the west. The Scientists that made the breakthroughs were Christians. The Wright Bros were Christians. All of the examples you give were about observations in THE PRESENT. Evolution relies on making assumptions about the past from the present . That is not empiricism. No, I understand science well, but you cannot conceed my point without discrediting evolution.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« assumptions about the past from the present »
No it doesn't. It relies on observations in the present to derive conclusions about the past. The same happens in physics or any other branch of science: we draw conclusions about things we cannot observe directly from things that we do observe directly. We directly observe evolution happening; we have even directly observed instances of speciation. There is no reason to think these things cannot have happened in the past as well.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor Assumptions about the past...you just change the words (observations in the present). They must still rely on assumptions about the past (e.g. carbon or nucleic decay and the rate of sedimentary deposition) in order to draw their conclusions. This is not empirical science which relies on observation about things in the present. Non of the science that put men on the moon or advanced medicine relied on 'evolutionary science' .
chrissalt100 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« Assumptions about the past. »
No: conclusions, inferences from present observations.
« you just change the words »
You may not be all to familiar with the English language. The words "assumption" and "conclusion" have entirely different meanings.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor
"You may not be all to familiar with the English language. The words "assumption" and "conclusion" have entirely different meanings."
Well said, XG. You have pointed out one of the most often used lies of creationists; the willful misuse and intentional misrepresentation/changing of the meanings of words in our language in a vain attempt to support an unsupportable argument. Also known as BEARING FALSE WITNESS. Shame on the creationists that resort to that.
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 Actually, the evidence of it CAN AND IS tested all over the world almost every day.
And yes, real science has the standard of being EMPIRICALLY tested, repeatedly, for truth or falsification. That is the first thing you've gotten right. How often is creationism examined, reexamined and tested by the scientific method to prove or disprove it? How often do Creationist "scientists" test it and get the same results?
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 I've been saying this from the start. You can't apply true empirical science to the past, therefore evolution is not a proven theory. It remains a falsifiable hypothesis.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 Actually, in the case of evolution, geology and other measurable examinations of the natural world, including measuring the speed of light and the movement of stars, there can be and is empirical measurement. Your argument from incredulity is no argument at all, simply a demonstration of your true level of scientific illiteracy.
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 You can measure the speed of light in the present, but not in the past, although there are theoretical models that suggest it was different in the past, but nothing definite, other than to say that evolutionists can't know things were the same in the past as the present. In evolution and geology you can only extrapolate from the present to imagine what happened in the past. That is not empiricism. Creationists acknowledge that but evolutionists refuse to bec they can't
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« You can measure the speed of light in the present, but not in the past »
This is false. Using observations of distant celestial objects, we can calculate the speed of light at a distance, and thus in the past.
It is also irrelevant, as we can arrive at reasonable inferences based on present observations that natural constants like the speed of light have not significantly varied since inflation.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor What I was getting at is that some research has been done that indicates the speed of light may have been different in the past - something you acknowledge. The inflation you speak of takes me to the 'big bang'. This implies a beginning. Given the 1st law of thermodynamics creationists argue that intelligence was needed to create the particularity since you cannot get something from nothing. Believing an explosion created order from chaos without design takes huge faith.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« some research has been done that indicates the speed of light may have been different in the past »
1. Provide references to papers published in scientific journals.
2. I've read some papers that seem to suggest it may have. The variations they speak of measure less than one percent over 13 billion years. Wowie.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor Reference: Google - Has the Speed of Light Decayed? Gerald A. Aardsma, Ph.D. The conclusion is that the older data is too imprecise to have any confidence in any major change, but that is not to say new information might yet 'come to light' (pun). My point is that you cannot assume things were the same in the past, but evolutionists make that assumption on just about everything. So, it is not fact but unproven theory. It is fraudulent to claim otherwise, but they do it.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« This implies a beginning »
So you're saying that:
Premise: there was a beginning.
Conclusion: there must have been a god.
... !?
« 1st law of thermodynamics creationists argue that intelligence was needed »
Again: ...!?
Do you people even know what the world "logic" means!?
Look, if you can't be bothered to get your lazy-ass brain into gear to think about the shit you're writing down before pushing the 'send' button, then I can't be bothered with you anymore. Go play outside, kid.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor Atheism will never be able to answer to the exquisiteness of the designing, programming and engineering of the species. It is simple logic. No reason and 0% probability for anything to end up as a peacock or any other species upon going through an atheistic evolution. It is hard work, a waste of time and an exercise in futility to try proving that an evolutionary creation is even possible.
alexthasy 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexthasy
Fakse dichotomy! Another Logical Fallacy by Mr Illogical himself!
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy Exactly. I've quoted Patterson and Gould, gurus of the evolution movement who say there are no reliable intermediary chains. We have the impossibility of forming replicating life at the cell level, the fine tuning of the universe, the evidence of catastrophism in the world's geology, human artifacts found in rocks supposed to be 10s of millions of years old...it just goes on and on but blind evolutionists cannot bear to face the demise of their cherished faith
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@alexthasy
« Atheism will never be able to answer »
Vanish, idiot boy.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor You will one day fully understand the level of asininity of a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation and the occult nature of the myth of natural selection your pope Darwin borrowed to Greek paganism.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy
« You will one day »
Nobody cares. I said *VANISH*, fundie kid.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor I am not causing you any prejudice by not sharing your faith in a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary evolution. You remind me of myself as a kid and a Roman Catholic feeling sorry for those lost for not sharing my faith and being lost. It is just that I am trying to get what I am losing for not believing in Darwin and an atheistic evolutionary creation. I am doing a good job and having a good life.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor In fact a guy like William Lane Craig argues cogently in relation to 'in the beginning'. He has a doctorate in the related science and points to the fine tuning of the universe following the creation event (the big bang) to prove the cosmos and the earth has to be the product of design. This lazy-ass brain has weighed up the evidence on both sides over 25 years and found evolution seriously wanting. So if the best you can do is ad hominem attacks perhaps it is you who is lazy
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« Creationists acknowledge that »
That is a humorous statement. Where rational people at least base their conclusions about the past on observations, creationists reject the notion that present observations can teach us anything useful about the past, thereby stating that there is no way for them to assert *anything* about the past -
But then they turn around and ignore what they've just said to claim that the bible must be true anyway.
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor This is a complete misrepresentation. We argue you can draw inferences about the past but don't call it empirical science and don't enthrone it by insisting it is fact and cannot be disputed. Believe it by faith by all means, point to your evidence but don't insist it is true to the exclusion of all other explanations. From there don't go on to discriminate against those who prefer an alternative. It is this totalitarian aspect creationists object to.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor This is another bad misrepresentation. Rational people accept they cannot be sure of the past based on observations in the present, but evolutionists accept with blind faith that what they assume about the past is fact rather then supposition. Creationists admit that they can't prove as a fact that the cosmos was created. All we say is that the evidence points to it. If evolutionists were honest they would do the same. But you won't bec your world view fails if you do.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 Where do you get extrapolation from ASSUMED conditions? We have the evidence of what the Earth's environment was, going back to when it first cooled. That is from climatology and geology. I suppose that you don't believe in tectonic shift either, even though CURRENT measurements prove it. These are exact sciences, unlike saying "God did it", which is a big assumption and a leap of faith, not a testing of evidence.
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 Oh dear, there is none so blind... you have just proved my point. I studied geology. Evolutionists and creationists make assumptions about the past from the geology before us, but that does not make it emprically proven. We say the evidence points to flood geology happening quickly. Evolutionists say it was slow and gradual. In the end neither can say with certainty what happened in the past, yet evolutionists fraudulently say they can. I studied plate tectonics in the 70s.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« We say the evidence points to flood geology happening quickly »
Which it manifestly doesn't. Any interpretation of the geological record that ***takes into account*** what we observe of geological and geophysical processes in ***the present*** will conclude that certain geological formations must have formed over deep time. Any view that proposes rapid formation must exclude such evidence.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor This is illogical - evolutionists rely on assumptions about geological activity in the past. Observations in the present, such as events around the Mt St Helen's eruption proved that stratification happens really quickly (from river flooding). We have dinosaurs buried so fast they are half way through giving birth. We have found very rapid switches in polarity captured in rock that evolutionists said happened over millions of yrs. In fact they can happen in days.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« evolutionists rely on assumptions about geological activity in the past. »
1. "Evolutionists"?
2. No; scientists rely on present observations to form reasonable *conclusions* about past geological activity and conditions.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor Correct they form conclusions, they do not prove it as a fact through empiricism as evolutionist fraudulently claim. They have to extrapolate from the present to assume what happened in the past. Creationists do the same and reach different conclusions. But evolutionists don't want to acknowledge this so they just mock young earth geology because their world view cannot allow any other theory to exist. It is all about bias not empirical science.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« Correct they form conclusions, they do not prove it as a fact »
You are confused about the purpose of science. The purpose of science is not to produce facts. The purpose of science is to *take* facts, and *explain* them. The purpose of science, in other words, is to produce theories for facts. Theories constitute our understanding of facts.
The alternative the biblical literalist offers us is to simply accept any old bullshit without ever being able to determine its accuracy.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor A classic evolutionists circular argument. First you must identify the 'facts' . That requires relying on events which you have never actually seen, so they are not really facts, but items given to interpretation. Having called them facts you then 'explain' these facts according to the same assumptions you have about them - assumptions prejudiced by a pre-existent evolutionary world view. Creationists are more honest. We admit our designer prejudice.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« Observations in the present, such as events around the Mt St Helen's eruption proved that stratification happens really quickly »
Except that the layering formed in such instances is nothing like the layering we find in other geological formations. Which is exactly why geologists, some 200 years ago now, were forced to reconsider their estimates of the age of the Earth. Or did you not think they'd examined the differences between such formations by now, boy?
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor Wrong. A river damned by the eruption burst through and created a mini grand canyon in hours, with stratification the same as rocks deemed to be old. Evolutionists would have said it took millions of years. Geologists were not forced to do anything. Lyell proclaimed an old earth because he wanted to disprove Christianity, so he rewrote geology. He had a great impact on Darwin, whose grandfather had produced a book in the 18th C called zoonomia in which he proposed evolution.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« A river damned by the eruption burst through and created a mini grand canyon in hours, with stratification the same as rocks deemed to be old. »
No, it didn't. The stratification formed in such rapid events is easily distinguished from the stratification in ancient formations like the Grand Canyon, by any geologist with a modicum of training and without the determination to establish biblical inerrancy.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor (2) Come on, give me the references or basis for your claim re stratification. You have abused me for not providing a reference and called me a lazy-ass (a simple google transaction would have done it - as I provided). So where is your 'ass' now?. How was the layering different?? Prove your point, I'm open to learning something here. If you can't my point stands re fast geological events, not slow and gradual as you evos assume.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor I'm open to be educated on this point. What do you mean the layering was different?
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« We have found very rapid switches in polarity captured in rock that evolutionists said happened over millions of yrs »
Interesting! Reference?
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor This comes from work done by scientists on lava flows which I read years ago in a creationist technical journal which I no longer have. The researches found rapid, multiple changes in polarity and contrasted it with evolutionary assumptions that they took millions of years to happen. Given lava flows happen quickly, the changes would have happened very fast. This shows you can't assume the past is the same as the present.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor No they don't exclude such evidence at all. It is taken into account and weighed against the creationist perspective to produce a counter conclusion from the available evidence. In either the evolutionist or creationist case it is about drawing conclusions from evidence, but it is not empirical science which must be done in the present under falsifiable conditions. creationists accept this but evolutionists claim only one set of conclusions is possible.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« No they don't exclude such evidence at all »
Yes, they do. For instance, they maintain that recently formed rock is dated old because they forgot to take into account the fact that they were measuring xenoliths in stead of igneous rock. Such evidence is filtered out through their biblical glasses.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@XGralgrathor No they don't ignore xenoliths. As I understand it radiometric dating methods make assumptions about the absence of radiogenic argon and are therefore unreliable. Human artifacts have been pulled from rocks dated at 10s of millions of years. Carbon dating also has a fatal flaw.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@XGralgrathor Here is a quote for you Mr Gralgrathor, from the guru of evolution himself - Gould ‘The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and “fully formed.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
« Here is a quote for you »
You know that quote mining in this fashion is a form of lying, right?
You know as well as everybody else that Gould does *not* support your position, and that using his words as if to suggest he does is simply dishonest.
Because you know this, you might have bothered to look up what Gould actually meant when he used those words. But you didn't. Because you're lazy. And that's why I'm done with you.
XGralgrathor 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 Actually, geology has no bearing on evolution. Two different fields. If you have studied geology, as you claim, then you would know that. So your statement makes you a liar.
Flood geology? what does that have to do with evolution? Nothing. Geology is geology Evolution is evolution. Only a true scientific illiterate would think that the two are interchangeable.
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 What! evolution relies on the fossil record found in rocks they say are dated at millions of years. The world is covered in sedimentary rocks - laid down by water, proving it has played a dominant role in rock formation, so you are dead wrong! The same rock formations span continents proving continental drift happened very rapidly, not over billions of years. Sea shells are found on Everest . Water based catastrophism has clearly been dominant.
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 Rubbish. Evolutionists use geology all the time to support their assumptions about the time needed to evolve life. Fossils found in rocks are used to justify evolutionary beliefs. Flood geology has everything to do with it because it points to the accuracy of the biblical account - which you, of course, reject. Their are flood legends across the world - incomprehensible unless Man witnssed a catastrophic flood event. Couple that to the geological record and voila!
chrissalt100 2 months ago
@chrissalt100 They only use geology to help with the era dating process of fossils. The fine tuning of those dates are done through one or more of the current dozen different dating processes, of which carbon dating is but 1, but NOT THE ONLY one. Of course an honestly educated person would know all of that and not try to confuse the issue as you have so poorly done.
raptorcat61 2 months ago
@raptorcat61 Nonsense, geology is used (abused) to justify evolutionary dogma. There is no such thing as fine tuning of dates because the dating methods rely on uniformitarian assumptions. There i