Hello to all my insane friends from the "hillsong-united All I Need Is You" video. Watch this video and learn what a false dichotomy is and how wrong your logic is.
The Bible is anti-god. We can easily forget this. It imposes shape and character onto an imagined deity and so people have a small conception of a deity. We don't know what god or gods, whatever that would be (also surely straying far from what our conception of what one would be), would be like. It is selfishness, laziness, ignorance, etc that makes people jump to conclusions are declare that "God" is some small minded being like their self that lives in the sky.
God created Adam and Eve and then they had two sons,Cain and Able.Cain killed Able and was forced to leave the Garden of Eden.When he left he took his wife with him.
Okay if Genesis is literally true,where did Cain's wife come from?I mean don't you think that God would make sure that the creation story would include Cain's wife?What,God didn't think it was important to mention that he created females for the sons of the first two people on Earth?
"Where do you think the universe came from? Duh..."
Obviously a self contradicting, logically impossible, all-powerful being caused the universe to pop into existence. And it directly follows that this being cares immensely about the affairs (especially sex lives) of a primate species on a tiny planet orbiting a relatively uninteresting star, one of hundreds of billions of stars in a galaxy, one of hundreds of billions of galaxies in the known universe. Duh...
Pottymouth intellectual?I cringe when I listen to a pseudo intellectual whose arguements are peppered with grade school obscenities He seems to think that making poopy jokes will entertain us.
There are indeed only 2 options and one of them is foolish. Don't be a government sheep. Think for yourself. Evolution is just a simple lie for the simpleminded.
Again you show your ignorance. Adding energy does not cause an increase in complexity. That would be like saying a roof of a house should improve with the sun beating down on it. Adding energy is destructive unless there is some type of active teleonomy. Let's take dead plant and a live plant and put them in the sun. The living plant grows because it can harness the light but the dead one withers, bakes and dries up. You are believing a lie. Stand up like a man and fight!
@thechessstick Your roof analogy fails because of your lack of perspective. Your human centered view sees "purpose" where there is none. What is more complex, the asphalt in the roof shingles or the chemicals to which it converts under bombardment of UV light and oxygen (hint : it's not the shingle). What's more complex, the chemicals in the plant or the petroleum and aromatic hydrocarbons to which it converts under pressure and heat. You assume that purpose IS complexity. It's not.
watch?v=wNpp-8_XeSo The Strange Case of Bradley Burroughs. The after death experience of a Christian man who was born blind. He gives an account of what he SAW. What more proof could a person need? Don't let these wicked, blasphemous tools of Satan who teach evolution and atheism keep you from going to Heaven.
but the point is that there is no evidence that god exists, only proof that the god of the bible does NOT exist. keep evolution in the classroom and keep superstition at church.
@robocong7420 You are totally evolutarded, aren't you? You a a victim of government indoctrination and you don't have a clue as to what happened to yourself. You have been filled with so much misinformation that not only are you not able to come to a correct conclusion, but you can't even think anymore. Where do you think the Universe came from? Duh...
Well where does the sun go at night? Who hides the sun behind his back at night preventing us from receiving daylight?? Since I don't know where the sun goes at night, the invisible man must hide it. That's the logic you're using. You're arguing from ignorance. I do not expect you to grasp what i just said to you.
I do not expect you to understand that simply because you don't know where the universe came from, does not mean the invisible man did it. Dont you agree children should be protected from perverted brain-rotting fairy tales such as the bible?
@robocong7420 What invisible man, moron? Now, Scientifically prove to me exactly how the Bible came into existence JUST to prove to yourself you are biblically ignorant.
Pretty much, it's on youtube called Atheist nightmare, he also came up with the crocoduck and has been on the receiving end of many an ass kicking in debates, RRS and thunderfoot.
Just search for the videos: Atheist Nightmare, Why do people laugh at creationists (briliant series), and rational response squad way of the master debate.
@robocong7420 unfortunately in a "free society" we have to let parents have the freedomt o rot their kids brains with tripe. HOWEVER, we can demand as a society that the child be educated toa certain degree and in certain topics since a Nation has the right to insist its populace be educated to a certain level (as fitting their particular abilities of course). In this capacity we can ensure children of all school ages can be scientifically literate so they can throw off the tripe themselves.
@thechessstick I like the way YEC can't prove evolution wrong so they keep moving the goal posts till they get to the beginning of the universe and say, ''Where do you think the Universe came from? ''
@thechessstick Um, actually, evolution is just about the best supported.. well, anything, ever. And with "supported", I'm talking about "peer-reviewed, objective and empirical evidence".
It is a theory, just like the theory of gravity, the highest pedestal a scientific "idea" (for a lack of a better term) can ever reach to.
@DisembowelMe Islam is much better supported by its peer reviews. Just go to Iran and check it out for yourself. Is this analogy within your understanding?
@thechessstick Yes, and you just keep reassuring your ignorance of science to the world, or at least ignorance of the meaning of the words "objective" and "empirical."
I genuinely hope I don't come off as condescending or something, but I suggest you read about science and how it works from an unbiased source. After all, it's thanks to science that the quality of life in the western world is as high as it is, and it always amazes me how people don't realize this, religious or not.
@thechessstick So your saying that Adam was wade from dirt, if that is not small minded I don't know what is. Evolution is a theory just like the theory of gravity.
Hey all of you evolutionists. Do you know what you are? You are government sheep. The government indoctrinated you and so you remain. You are just a bunch of government patsies. Can't think on your own and to cowardly too fight.
@thechessstick "Can't think on your own and to cowardly too fight."
THECHESSSTICK IS A FUCKING LYING COWARDLY PATHETIC GUTLESS LITTLE PIECE OF SHIT! This pathetic little gutless maggot, runs away like a five year old girl from imaginary monsters, as soon as you try debating him/her/it. You are such a fucking liar thechessstick and a complete and total hypocrite. Obviously you are spaming atheist videos all over the place with your hypocritical belligerent accusations, YOU'RE THE FUCKING COWARD.
@skepticoz Actaully those who believe in evolution are the government indoctrinated cowardly dolts who will not stand up like men. It is a good think that you have guys like George W. Bush and Barack Obama to tell you what to think.
Hey all of you evolutionists. Do you know what you are? You are government sheep. The government indoctrinated you and so you remain. You are just a bunch of government patsies. Can't think on your own and to cowardly too fight.
@thechessstick Hey fuckwad. You know what you are? A fucking gutless little coward and a pig ignorant troll. I have responded to you on another video, ready to contemplate the truth and debate honestly. You made some feeble bullshit comeback that I wiped the floor with. You have failed to respond since. It's no wonder though because you are a pathetic thumb sucking baby, who has shit your diaper over the threat of hell, so now you just spam your bullshit and ignore responses. !FUCKING COWARD!
That's the amazing Mimic Octopuss. Octopi are very clever animals as we know but this guy went above and beyond normal octopuss capabilities and can make itself look like other animals.
@NUTCASE71733 Thanks for that but I must correct you its not "octopi". Octopus is derived from Greek not Latin therefore octopodes is the correct plural
i wet myself laughing at "retarded monkey squirrel had butt sex with a frog horse sex dog and ave birth to a gay-looking pangolin" that is just comedy genius.
Francis Collins disagrees. He has said what we all know: At this point, even if we didn't have one fossil we could assert that evolution is true simply because of the genetic evidence. The fossil record is no longer necessary, since the genes of all organisms carry the evolutionary history of that organism.
What are you gonna argue now? That you know more about genetics than Francis Collins?
Or are you gonna say he is not a "real Christian"?
@godrulztheearth no it doesn't. You have asserted this now demonstrate it as we (scientists & freethinkers) have demonstrated that it was entirely possible that DNA came about by means of natural selection.
@MrReasonFTW, lots of things are possible but many things are very unlikely. think of the genetic code and it's entire process and then think of what genes create and the wonders that are observed with life on earth. it is not likely that genes evolved and then gave birds the ability to grow wings after mutations took place to the genetic code over and over again. or the octupus being able to shape shift AND mimic thousands of colors because of mutations. it looks like design to me.
@godrulztheearth it doesn't matter what it turned out like if the chance of organisms turning out as they are is 1/200000 then the chance of them turning out differently would also be 1/200000 and so forth we had equal chance of turning out as we are than something else
@godrulztheearth that is an argument from ignorance and one from personal incredulity all in one. "It llooks like design to me" therefore it is. I can't think of another way for this to happen therefore God did it
@MrReasonFTW, oh, cmon dude, did i just say "it looks like design" and thats it? explain to me how protien synthesis could have evolved its complex assembly line at the same time as DNA was evolving. or did DNA evolve for no particularly good reason and then at a later point in time the protien synthesis evolved to make some good use out of the genetic code? it proves design by every definition of what design is. tell me, how do you define the word "design" and what is it?
@godrulztheearth assuming you mean intelligent design then i would say it is the hypothesis that life came about spontaneously with all their distinctions intact (fins, wings, beaks) through the agency of an intelligent creator. And to answer your first point i don't know im not an evolutionary biologist but i trust that the same scientific method that has saved millions of lives and given us every shred of technology we have would have thrown evolution out of the window if it wasn't correct.
@MrReasonFTW, science is a great thing and will continue to benefit society but mainstream scientists reject I.D because they cant test the designer (god) and are looking at any theory that does not include a creator. peer pressure in mainstream science is also to blame for blackballing I.D proponants and forcing them to create their own branch of science that oposses the mainstream theory. it looks like propaganda to me with the way that I.D proponants are disrespectfully treated.
@godrulztheearth Science is about testing the observable material world and because you can't do that with I.D then it is not science. I.D is not a scientific theory, it has no right in the science class it should be kept to the R.E class (R.E is religious education as we call it in Britain im not sure what you would call it where your from). In response to the protien synthesis question i am not entirely sure that is part of evolution i think that is abiogenesis as life must be sustainable -->
@godrulztheearth Science is about testing the observable material world and because you can't do that with I.D then it is not science. I.D is not a scientific theory, it has no right in the science class it should be kept to the R.E class (R.E is religious education as we call it in Britain im not sure what you would call it where your from). In response to the protien synthesis question i am not entirely sure that is part of evolution i think that is a biogenesis as life must be sustainable -->
Wrong. Creation only applies to things that were created. There is no creator of life. It's ok to beleive in god, I'm christian myself, but there is a significant difference between a christian and a creationist. Creationism is fundamentalist extremism parading as science. It has been exposed as such, and will always be exposed as such. The only thing you guys do is try to expose holes in evolution without showing hard evidence to the contrary. That is dishonest, and a violation of morality.
@MrReasonFTW, it's more than genes that prove design. it's the process of converting the code into a protien (protien synthesis) that points to design. how does the process of DNA being transcripted to RNA and then sent to the ribosome which reads the code and then selects the correct amino acids to convert it into a protien that know exactly where to go in the body evolve? it's like saying that an assembly line at FORD evolved. it's very unlikely that that happened dont you think?
@godrulztheearth <--before it can "evolve" or become diverse, the theory of evolution explains the diversity of life and for it to become diverse it must first be sustainable. Just incase this point may be touched on "theory" in scientific terms means a hypothesis that is supported by significant evidence, or something like that. The normal use of the word theory is closer to the scientific word hypothesis.
@MrReasonFTW, i dont see the evidense to prove that evo created the diversity of life. all i see in the fossil record is stasis. this small creature called "guanlong" sopossedly evolved into the theropods like the t-rex. ther arte no transitional fossils between these creatures at all but the theropods lived in stasis for tens of millions of years and this is the example for all the extinct creatures we find in the fossil record. never a line of transitionals for any creature.
@jxvwp there are about 300 highly debatable transitional fossils from pakisetus evolving into a whale to archaeopteryx evolving into a bird. problem is is that there are billions of fossils from over 3 billion years of time and only 300 suspected transitionals? those are not very good odds as we should see at least 10% or more of these fossils as being transitionals. if there were only 1 billion fossils then at least 100 million should be transitional. but just 300 suspected transtionals? hm....
1st. Technically every single living life form is a transitional species. You are a transitional between your parents and you children.
2nd. The fossil record is far from complete. It is the exception not the rule that an animal gets fossilized. 99% of the planets lifeforms from any geologic era are completely unknown to us simply because it wasn't fossilized.
@godrulztheearth there are gaps but these gaps are not at all contrary to evolution they are just missing There are enough filled gaps to support the theory and as i explain before in the definition of theory, the fossil record is not the only evidence genetics and DNA support evolution. The lack of transitional forms is just an outright lie. Science is correct, WE HAVE THE FOSSILS, WE WIN.
You don't see the evidence because you don't want to see the evidence. You have been so brainwashed by creationists that you refuse to even look at your own viewpoint from an objective viewpoint. I have looked at creationism from a outside perspective and I find it to be an insult to me personally since I am a christian myself. Besides that creationism is religion disguising itself as science, which is why people around the world are against it. It inhibits and undermines science.
@NUTCASE71733, oh, but i do want to see the evidence and it all leads to intelligent design. you think i'm brainwashed? i think more objectively then any of you "freethinkers" who stare design in the face and still call it evolution. tell me, how did the magical octopus evolve the ability to shape shift AND mimic multi colored rock? your objective veiwpoint cant even come close to explaining how any of this happenes other than to just call it RM plus NS. not good enough.
And octopuss has a high deree of intelligence for a mullosk, and their skin contains chromataphores which allow it to change colo. The mimic octopuss takes it's intelligence further. I hardly call that evidence of a creator. If there WAS a creator there owuld be evidence. There is none to support the Christian myth of creation, or any religion's definition of creation. If there was we'd see rabbits in the permian rock layers, which we don't.
@NUTCASE71733 i dont debate when all life forms lived. i debate that they evolved from on creature into another one. why do these mullosks contain chromataphores in the ist place? luck of the draw with RM that luckily gives it the ability to instantly change colors and hide from predators? to me, that IS evidence of a creator because is shows INTENT. design displays intent and all life forms show intent in all ways. life as design would match up with websters definition of what design is
Wrong. Creation only applies to things that were created. There is no creator of life. It's ok to beleive in god, I'm christian myself, but there is a significant difference between a christian and a creationist. Creationism is fundamentalist extremism parading as science. It has been exposed as such, and will always be exposed as such. The only thing you guys do is try to expose holes in evolution without showing hard evidence to the contrary. That is dishonest, and a violation of morality.
@NUTCASE71733 you believe in god but he didnt create anything? what good is he then and what good is your belief in a god? i dont just expose the holes in evo, i expose the evidense for I.D. I explain that protien synthesis is a complicated assembly line that has all of the charectoristics of an intelligently made system. you are being dishonest, not me.
There is no evidence for intelligent design. It has been disproven twice in less than 20 years! In 1987, Creationism was found to be religion disguised as science in an effort to bypass the first ammendment's seperation clause which forbids state and church matters from interfeiring with one another. Creationism in turn undermines science with bronze-age mentality. The dishonest creationists disguise their "science" as ID soon after, and ID has been exposed in the 2005 Dover trial. Case closed.
@NUTCASE71733, case close? whatever. i have watch a few of those trials and they are a joke. i heard one judge say that she didnt want I.D taught because it would undermine evo and thus confuse the kiddies. too bad if it confuses the kids. its more important that we learn the truth even if it confuses people. lots of confusion over the big bang as well but no scientists is trying to shut up the other scientists for having different theories on the subject. debate is healthy and needed.
@godrulztheearth If you want ID taught in the classrom then they first have to establish it as a valid theory. That means passing through the peer review process and gaining support among the scientists within the appropriate field. This is what every other scientific theory including Evolution has done in order to be accepted. One what grounds do you claim the right for ID to skip this very important process?
@knuthoem85 I think they should absolutely teach I.D. in schools. It is a great example of pseudoscience. They could put I.D's claims up against an actual scientific theory and show people exactly why I.D. fails as science. Not only would this show people that I.D. "theory" fails as science, but they would get a better understanding of what real scientific theory entails... They would probably get a new respect for the theory of evolution.
@dangle66 Yes, that would actualle be the best solution. When I said teach I was refering to teaching it as a valid theory, but teaching about it and why its not a valid science (just like astrology) would be the best solution. I would also agree with teaching about religions so as to inform people what they really are and how many different religions there really are. I think that would help people take a more rational approach to it.
@dangle66 initially i thought great fucking point, i've never perceived it that way!
....then i realised, i've been banging my head against their wall for years anniliating their arguement/position, all for fucking nothing. i think your admirable goal is probably unachievable, and your strategy highly likely to backfire.
@godrulztheearth That goofy nonsense only flies on BereanBeacon videos godrulz.. folks are a little more educated over here. We have not only identified the ancient and ancestral genetics that you deny even exist we can now in fact re-activate them..
You are so far behind the curve as to be considered utterly irrelevant..
Is it just me or do most young earth creationists tend to look crazy? They look inbred or slightly retarded or something. I think there's a connection.
@SkeksisRule Ordinarily I would object to such statements; but to be perfectly honest, working entirely off from appearances, I do seem to have encountered an unusual number of YEC's whom force me to stop and question...
@GodofCider That's what I'm saying. I'm not just going for a baseless ad hominem attack, it's simply an observation. Ted Haggard, Kent Hovind, etc... they just have this common look about them. The wide blank stare, the deceitful grin, the emotionally unstable mannerisms.
@SkeksisRule As I said, ordinarily I would object, but given the uncanny number of YEC's that I have observed; akin to yourself...it does make one stop and think.
There is nothing in Genesis that says that plants where created before the Sun, that is an over simplification. The heavens (Space/Sky) and Earth (Rock/). The original hebrew the term "God" is more inline with the word (Elohyim "powers"). i.e. "Powers made seperate the land from the water". This is known as the "Mechanical Translation" of Genesis. Type it in Google and see for yourself.
Creationism is true, I have seen the light!!!!!!!!!!!!! How else can you explain the existence of YEC´s they are not related to any other species in the world and must therefore have been created. They can´t have evolved, gobshitish stupidity of zen proportions can´t have evolved unless evolution can go backwards. All praise the Lord
@3:03 you state that Genesis teaches light was produced before light producing objects. This is true. The early "hot universe" was filled with light and was too hot for stars to form. You state that Genesis claims that plants were created before light despite citing Gen 1:3-5 seconds before. Your other comments are equally misleading and ignorant.
@umkemesik I'm pretty sure that is meant as plants being created before the Sun. It can also get confusing since there are two different Genesis accounts. It doesn't really matter all that much whether we translate it as days or periods of time, It still doesn't mesh worth a damn with observable reality. I might even go as far as to say that the only thing that Genesis can teach us is about the people who told, wrote about, and believed in the stories. Personally, that's enough for me.
Jaguar Jones, I am a Catholic, but also a scientist (engineer technically). I do not believe in the YEC theory. I believe Genesis was mistranslated from the original Hebrew (i.e. 6 days is more like 6 units - or epochs). However, I take issues on your "facts".
i believe it is a subspecies of the Yeti. while not completely dissimilar to the Abominable Snowman, the Yeti and YEC are both found inhabiting areas in the Himalaya mountains where they live in small, close nit tribes. Here they remain secluded from conventional society to remain ignorant as to preserve their archaic, and irrational beliefs and traditions
@graphattic No no, the YEC evolved from an ancestral ape, then got scares by all the blinky lights and advanced medical care, and tried his damdest to evolve back into an ape, repeating over and over "and he was without clothing and knew no shame".
It is encouraging to see that such a debate is taken to the internet. However, I am discouraged in the manner it is being taken. Upon watching many videos about evolution, creation, or anything regarding abiogenisis, the comment section is riddled with hateful messages that are more counter productive then anything else.
If we with to continue this discussion couragously, then we must underpin the importance to be kinder to one another.
Sorry Justaddbacon, it's not that evolutionists are trying to be dicks, but honestly it's a bit frustrating that despite all these videos that put evolution in SIMPLE terms, we still get people who plug their ears. It's frustrating and downright insulting the way they portray evolution, so it's no wonder we get a little testy.
It's only a matter of time before someone blurts out "brainwashed fucktard douchebag." It's fun, you should try it sometime lol!
By overreating we offer the opposing arguement some material to judge us with. They'll simply label us as "people who swear" and once someone checks for themselves, lo and behold.
I realise it is fustrating to argue with someone who is knowingly dishonest. However, if we demonstrate the importance of knowledge and information, and make it less profitable to be dishonest with others, perhaps they too will eventually come to their senses.
The thing is, the vast majority of non-creationists do a pretty good job of not swearing. But with millions of people on YT, *somebody* is going to. Same or the creationists. That doesn't justify the label "people who swear" for either group.
Of course, that all assumes that swearing is actually an issue. :)
I think it's the Abdopus aculeatus. The other one at 7:36 seems to be the Amphioctopus marginatus. That's so weird to see, is swimming not good enough for them? :)
If by "think outside the box" you mean "pull shit out of their ass" then you're right. However pulling shit out of one's ass is of no benefit whatsoever in understanding our universe.
I cannot help but to think the opposite. When all of your answers revolve around "Because God...(such and such). Scientists provide abstract thought through proven means of Math and Science. While your answers to the unknown always refer you back to your one and only source. God. "God did it." "God wants it that way." "Cause God said so!" Seems to me, Christian thought is quite linear. If you truly wish to be abstract, you must go beyond Science, beyond God, and into the infinte.
Yes, outside into "INTELLECTUAL FREEZONE" where all sorts of supernatural/mythological figments of the imagination may fester!
Atheists do think outside the box, however we come back down to reality. There's no reason to believe in something without any empirical evidence going for it, and on some level you agree, unless you believe in EVERY SINGLE deity ever thought up and every single mythological creature.
I think you'd run into problems causing death long before one would even need to consider what the substance is. It might have escaped your notice, but humans don't ordinarily get over a few hundred pounds. Just cramming all of that mass into one's gut will have serious repercussions for one's poor little internal organs. :(
Yeah, like ashman said, you'd have more to worry about from trying to ingest more mass than your body is made of.
Even if you somehow managed a scooby doo and ate twice your body weight with no stomach rupture issues, you'd still be a long way off from having enough for the chemical to kill you. Essentially, a THC lethal dose is impossible, as opposed to, say, 10 grams of coke, or heroin.
I LOL'd on those sea creatures at 7:35 :)
DoubleM55 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Are you ready to die?
Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a woman with lust you have committed adultery with here in your heart. have u done that?
If God judge’s u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty? Heaven or Hell? Does this concern you?
Do u need a Savior from your sins? And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Jesus came, lived a sinless life, died (for our sins) and rose again on the third day.
needgod.com
standingontruth1 3 months ago
After the πth word hovind said, i immediately used my cranium to impress the shape of my face atop the surface of my desk.
Ebrainiac1 4 months ago in playlist More videos from JaguarJ0nes
Does Barnes and Noble carry the YEC Pwn3r's Manual?
fullmetalfan32 4 months ago
The Bible is to be understood in the Spirit of the Lord God and not by Atheists' explanation.
Airlightf 6 months ago
Religious people are like internet trolls; their answer for everything is pretty much waffling on like a politician to mask their "NO U" answer.
DeluxeSux 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeluxeSux And what is your answer for everything?
Airlightf 6 months ago
Gay looking Pangolin.
ButtaNToast 6 months ago in playlist How to PWN a YEC
"strange desert legends" lol that's exactly what all that religious bullshit is ha ha
fourtywpm 7 months ago
Hello to all my insane friends from the "hillsong-united All I Need Is You" video. Watch this video and learn what a false dichotomy is and how wrong your logic is.
RustyCyler 8 months ago
The Bible is anti-god. We can easily forget this. It imposes shape and character onto an imagined deity and so people have a small conception of a deity. We don't know what god or gods, whatever that would be (also surely straying far from what our conception of what one would be), would be like. It is selfishness, laziness, ignorance, etc that makes people jump to conclusions are declare that "God" is some small minded being like their self that lives in the sky.
hotpants69 9 months ago
God created Adam and Eve and then they had two sons,Cain and Able.Cain killed Able and was forced to leave the Garden of Eden.When he left he took his wife with him.
Okay if Genesis is literally true,where did Cain's wife come from?I mean don't you think that God would make sure that the creation story would include Cain's wife?What,God didn't think it was important to mention that he created females for the sons of the first two people on Earth?
johndgray1 9 months ago
JaguarJ0nes...I think I love you.
MeBeMat 9 months ago
You don't need evidence when you're a moron
thedeadcthulhu 10 months ago
Thumbs up if you think JaguarJ0nes should write a book on this =D
cruelzeppelin666 10 months ago 28
"Where do you think the universe came from? Duh..."
Obviously a self contradicting, logically impossible, all-powerful being caused the universe to pop into existence. And it directly follows that this being cares immensely about the affairs (especially sex lives) of a primate species on a tiny planet orbiting a relatively uninteresting star, one of hundreds of billions of stars in a galaxy, one of hundreds of billions of galaxies in the known universe. Duh...
KillerXCable 10 months ago
Pottymouth intellectual?I cringe when I listen to a pseudo intellectual whose arguements are peppered with grade school obscenities He seems to think that making poopy jokes will entertain us.
MrNewkingjames 11 months ago
There are indeed only 2 options and one of them is foolish. Don't be a government sheep. Think for yourself. Evolution is just a simple lie for the simpleminded.
thechessstick 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thechessstick ''Evolution is just a simple lie for the simpleminded''
Wrong, the people who go to school and study science are not the ''simpleminded' ones.
The brainwashed ones are home schooled and think we all come off a boat.
YEC get everything backwards.
gregrutz 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch?v=W3KxU63gcF4 <<< a video that disproves evolution on the most basic level
thechessstick 1 year ago
Again you show your ignorance. Adding energy does not cause an increase in complexity. That would be like saying a roof of a house should improve with the sun beating down on it. Adding energy is destructive unless there is some type of active teleonomy. Let's take dead plant and a live plant and put them in the sun. The living plant grows because it can harness the light but the dead one withers, bakes and dries up. You are believing a lie. Stand up like a man and fight!
thechessstick 1 year ago
@thechessstick Your roof analogy fails because of your lack of perspective. Your human centered view sees "purpose" where there is none. What is more complex, the asphalt in the roof shingles or the chemicals to which it converts under bombardment of UV light and oxygen (hint : it's not the shingle). What's more complex, the chemicals in the plant or the petroleum and aromatic hydrocarbons to which it converts under pressure and heat. You assume that purpose IS complexity. It's not.
MrMZaccone 11 months ago
watch?v=wNpp-8_XeSo The Strange Case of Bradley Burroughs. The after death experience of a Christian man who was born blind. He gives an account of what he SAW. What more proof could a person need? Don't let these wicked, blasphemous tools of Satan who teach evolution and atheism keep you from going to Heaven.
thechessstick 1 year ago
@thechessstick
but the point is that there is no evidence that god exists, only proof that the god of the bible does NOT exist. keep evolution in the classroom and keep superstition at church.
robocong7420 11 months ago
@robocong7420 You are totally evolutarded, aren't you? You a a victim of government indoctrination and you don't have a clue as to what happened to yourself. You have been filled with so much misinformation that not only are you not able to come to a correct conclusion, but you can't even think anymore. Where do you think the Universe came from? Duh...
thechessstick 11 months ago
@thechessstick
"where do you think the universe came from?"
Well where does the sun go at night? Who hides the sun behind his back at night preventing us from receiving daylight?? Since I don't know where the sun goes at night, the invisible man must hide it. That's the logic you're using. You're arguing from ignorance. I do not expect you to grasp what i just said to you.
robocong7420 11 months ago
@robocong7420 You are a simple one, aren't you?
thechessstick 11 months ago
@thechessstick
I do not expect you to understand that simply because you don't know where the universe came from, does not mean the invisible man did it. Dont you agree children should be protected from perverted brain-rotting fairy tales such as the bible?
robocong7420 10 months ago 14
@robocong7420 Children should not be taught lies or depravity.
thechessstick 10 months ago
@robocong7420 What invisible man, moron? Now, Scientifically prove to me exactly how the Bible came into existence JUST to prove to yourself you are biblically ignorant.
Airlightf 6 months ago
@Airlightf
Don't you agree the bible is arguably the most idiotic book ever written in mankind's history?
robocong7420 6 months ago
@robocong7420
Nah.
Nothing Created Everything: The Scientific Impossibility of Atheistic Evolution by Ray Comfort
Is a definite contender for that prize :P
WaltonSauce 6 months ago
@WaltonSauce
Ray Comfort? isnt he that guy who said bananas fit perfectly inside his intestine which proves god??
robocong7420 6 months ago
@robocong7420
Pretty much, it's on youtube called Atheist nightmare, he also came up with the crocoduck and has been on the receiving end of many an ass kicking in debates, RRS and thunderfoot.
Just search for the videos: Atheist Nightmare, Why do people laugh at creationists (briliant series), and rational response squad way of the master debate.
WaltonSauce 6 months ago
@WaltonSauce
yeah he's the one who said a banana fits perfectly in his intestine and massages his prostate at the same time the wonders of god yadda yadda
robocong7420 6 months ago
@robocong7420 unfortunately in a "free society" we have to let parents have the freedomt o rot their kids brains with tripe. HOWEVER, we can demand as a society that the child be educated toa certain degree and in certain topics since a Nation has the right to insist its populace be educated to a certain level (as fitting their particular abilities of course). In this capacity we can ensure children of all school ages can be scientifically literate so they can throw off the tripe themselves.
SciBishop 4 months ago
@SciBishop
i outgrew religion at age 8. even as a small child i could see religion was a scam
robocong7420 4 months ago
@thechessstick I like the way YEC can't prove evolution wrong so they keep moving the goal posts till they get to the beginning of the universe and say, ''Where do you think the Universe came from? ''
It has been here since the begining of time.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@gregrutz No need to disprove a fairy tale. It is fiction by definition. Evolution is just a little story made-up for little minds.
thechessstick 10 months ago
@thechessstick That is why it is studied in every major college in the country, because it's made up. LOL
gregrutz 10 months ago
@gregrutz Hey, I don't blame you. It beats work.
thechessstick 10 months ago
@thechessstick Um, actually, evolution is just about the best supported.. well, anything, ever. And with "supported", I'm talking about "peer-reviewed, objective and empirical evidence".
It is a theory, just like the theory of gravity, the highest pedestal a scientific "idea" (for a lack of a better term) can ever reach to.
DisembowelMe 9 months ago
@DisembowelMe Islam is much better supported by its peer reviews. Just go to Iran and check it out for yourself. Is this analogy within your understanding?
thechessstick 9 months ago
@thechessstick Yes, and you just keep reassuring your ignorance of science to the world, or at least ignorance of the meaning of the words "objective" and "empirical."
I genuinely hope I don't come off as condescending or something, but I suggest you read about science and how it works from an unbiased source. After all, it's thanks to science that the quality of life in the western world is as high as it is, and it always amazes me how people don't realize this, religious or not.
DisembowelMe 9 months ago
@thechessstick So your saying that Adam was wade from dirt, if that is not small minded I don't know what is. Evolution is a theory just like the theory of gravity.
sandcut1 6 months ago
@thechessstick lol, says the guy who is religiously indoctrinated...
helscreamer 9 months ago
j0nes, you do know the Duc-croc has been found.
nailo1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey all of you evolutionists. Do you know what you are? You are government sheep. The government indoctrinated you and so you remain. You are just a bunch of government patsies. Can't think on your own and to cowardly too fight.
thechessstick 1 year ago
@thechessstick "Can't think on your own and to cowardly too fight."
THECHESSSTICK IS A FUCKING LYING COWARDLY PATHETIC GUTLESS LITTLE PIECE OF SHIT! This pathetic little gutless maggot, runs away like a five year old girl from imaginary monsters, as soon as you try debating him/her/it. You are such a fucking liar thechessstick and a complete and total hypocrite. Obviously you are spaming atheist videos all over the place with your hypocritical belligerent accusations, YOU'RE THE FUCKING COWARD.
skepticoz 1 year ago
@skepticoz Actaully those who believe in evolution are the government indoctrinated cowardly dolts who will not stand up like men. It is a good think that you have guys like George W. Bush and Barack Obama to tell you what to think.
thechessstick 1 year ago
@thechessstick
Ha ha, where would we be without "Dubya" or "Oh-Bummer"?
TheSleepChamber 1 year ago
Hey all of you evolutionists. Do you know what you are? You are government sheep. The government indoctrinated you and so you remain. You are just a bunch of government patsies. Can't think on your own and to cowardly too fight.
thechessstick 1 year ago
@thechessstick Hey fuckwad. You know what you are? A fucking gutless little coward and a pig ignorant troll. I have responded to you on another video, ready to contemplate the truth and debate honestly. You made some feeble bullshit comeback that I wiped the floor with. You have failed to respond since. It's no wonder though because you are a pathetic thumb sucking baby, who has shit your diaper over the threat of hell, so now you just spam your bullshit and ignore responses. !FUCKING COWARD!
skepticoz 1 year ago
8:07 Anyone know what that is?
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@MrReasonFTW
That's the amazing Mimic Octopuss. Octopi are very clever animals as we know but this guy went above and beyond normal octopuss capabilities and can make itself look like other animals.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago
@NUTCASE71733 Thanks for that but I must correct you its not "octopi". Octopus is derived from Greek not Latin therefore octopodes is the correct plural
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
creation needs a creator is baulberdash. I couldn't put it better myself
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
i wet myself laughing at "retarded monkey squirrel had butt sex with a frog horse sex dog and ave birth to a gay-looking pangolin" that is just comedy genius.
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
There is a legal dose of THC?
theshredator 1 year ago
You're an extremely good writer. You should have a column somewhere.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
why even try to reason with insanaty.
N0g0dzN0masterz 1 year ago
Why have I not seen your videos previously? They are funny, yet informative. I approve! Jeg liker!
JonSchaffer57 1 year ago
Ha! "Balderdash!" He said Balderdash. I will begin using that word today.
amazinero 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Even as you mock his creation, Jesus loves you. Ask him into your heart and you will have God.
drewbloom34 1 year ago
LEAVE THE PANGOLINS ALONE!
tshred666 1 year ago
the author of the video makes sound points but his lame attempt at humor is annoying.
teeoh38 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't believe in crocoducks, but Kirk Cameron is a good example of a crocoshit.
TheDudeReborn 1 year ago
This video makes no sense. Thumbs down.
Does this guy know how to speak coherent proper english??
TruthfulChristian2 1 year ago
@TruthfulChristian2
He does. You're just a retard.
msaoichan 1 year ago
@TruthfulChristian2 he is speaking proper english can you think with proper reason? A believer are you hmmmm... not then.
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
DNA proves design.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth
No, it doesn't.
BohemianBlasphemy 1 year ago
@BohemianBlasphemy, yes, it does.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth
Francis Collins disagrees. He has said what we all know: At this point, even if we didn't have one fossil we could assert that evolution is true simply because of the genetic evidence. The fossil record is no longer necessary, since the genes of all organisms carry the evolutionary history of that organism.
What are you gonna argue now? That you know more about genetics than Francis Collins?
Or are you gonna say he is not a "real Christian"?
BohemianBlasphemy 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth no it doesn't. You have asserted this now demonstrate it as we (scientists & freethinkers) have demonstrated that it was entirely possible that DNA came about by means of natural selection.
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@MrReasonFTW, lots of things are possible but many things are very unlikely. think of the genetic code and it's entire process and then think of what genes create and the wonders that are observed with life on earth. it is not likely that genes evolved and then gave birds the ability to grow wings after mutations took place to the genetic code over and over again. or the octupus being able to shape shift AND mimic thousands of colors because of mutations. it looks like design to me.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth it doesn't matter what it turned out like if the chance of organisms turning out as they are is 1/200000 then the chance of them turning out differently would also be 1/200000 and so forth we had equal chance of turning out as we are than something else
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth that is an argument from ignorance and one from personal incredulity all in one. "It llooks like design to me" therefore it is. I can't think of another way for this to happen therefore God did it
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@MrReasonFTW, oh, cmon dude, did i just say "it looks like design" and thats it? explain to me how protien synthesis could have evolved its complex assembly line at the same time as DNA was evolving. or did DNA evolve for no particularly good reason and then at a later point in time the protien synthesis evolved to make some good use out of the genetic code? it proves design by every definition of what design is. tell me, how do you define the word "design" and what is it?
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth assuming you mean intelligent design then i would say it is the hypothesis that life came about spontaneously with all their distinctions intact (fins, wings, beaks) through the agency of an intelligent creator. And to answer your first point i don't know im not an evolutionary biologist but i trust that the same scientific method that has saved millions of lives and given us every shred of technology we have would have thrown evolution out of the window if it wasn't correct.
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@MrReasonFTW, science is a great thing and will continue to benefit society but mainstream scientists reject I.D because they cant test the designer (god) and are looking at any theory that does not include a creator. peer pressure in mainstream science is also to blame for blackballing I.D proponants and forcing them to create their own branch of science that oposses the mainstream theory. it looks like propaganda to me with the way that I.D proponants are disrespectfully treated.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth Science is about testing the observable material world and because you can't do that with I.D then it is not science. I.D is not a scientific theory, it has no right in the science class it should be kept to the R.E class (R.E is religious education as we call it in Britain im not sure what you would call it where your from). In response to the protien synthesis question i am not entirely sure that is part of evolution i think that is abiogenesis as life must be sustainable -->
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@godrulztheearth Science is about testing the observable material world and because you can't do that with I.D then it is not science. I.D is not a scientific theory, it has no right in the science class it should be kept to the R.E class (R.E is religious education as we call it in Britain im not sure what you would call it where your from). In response to the protien synthesis question i am not entirely sure that is part of evolution i think that is a biogenesis as life must be sustainable -->
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wrong. Creation only applies to things that were created. There is no creator of life. It's ok to beleive in god, I'm christian myself, but there is a significant difference between a christian and a creationist. Creationism is fundamentalist extremism parading as science. It has been exposed as such, and will always be exposed as such. The only thing you guys do is try to expose holes in evolution without showing hard evidence to the contrary. That is dishonest, and a violation of morality.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago
@MrReasonFTW, it's more than genes that prove design. it's the process of converting the code into a protien (protien synthesis) that points to design. how does the process of DNA being transcripted to RNA and then sent to the ribosome which reads the code and then selects the correct amino acids to convert it into a protien that know exactly where to go in the body evolve? it's like saying that an assembly line at FORD evolved. it's very unlikely that that happened dont you think?
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth <--before it can "evolve" or become diverse, the theory of evolution explains the diversity of life and for it to become diverse it must first be sustainable. Just incase this point may be touched on "theory" in scientific terms means a hypothesis that is supported by significant evidence, or something like that. The normal use of the word theory is closer to the scientific word hypothesis.
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@MrReasonFTW, i dont see the evidense to prove that evo created the diversity of life. all i see in the fossil record is stasis. this small creature called "guanlong" sopossedly evolved into the theropods like the t-rex. ther arte no transitional fossils between these creatures at all but the theropods lived in stasis for tens of millions of years and this is the example for all the extinct creatures we find in the fossil record. never a line of transitionals for any creature.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth
The fossil record is far from complete.
But if you want a list of "transitional-fossils" I'll gladly provide you a list.
Velociraptor (or any other Dromeosaurid)
Micro-raptor
Archaeopteryx
Modern Bird.
Remember this is only a few snapshots and there may be a lot more that I have forgotten.
jxvwp 1 year ago
@jxvwp there are about 300 highly debatable transitional fossils from pakisetus evolving into a whale to archaeopteryx evolving into a bird. problem is is that there are billions of fossils from over 3 billion years of time and only 300 suspected transitionals? those are not very good odds as we should see at least 10% or more of these fossils as being transitionals. if there were only 1 billion fossils then at least 100 million should be transitional. but just 300 suspected transtionals? hm....
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth
1st. Technically every single living life form is a transitional species. You are a transitional between your parents and you children.
2nd. The fossil record is far from complete. It is the exception not the rule that an animal gets fossilized. 99% of the planets lifeforms from any geologic era are completely unknown to us simply because it wasn't fossilized.
jxvwp 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth there are gaps but these gaps are not at all contrary to evolution they are just missing There are enough filled gaps to support the theory and as i explain before in the definition of theory, the fossil record is not the only evidence genetics and DNA support evolution. The lack of transitional forms is just an outright lie. Science is correct, WE HAVE THE FOSSILS, WE WIN.
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
You don't see the evidence because you don't want to see the evidence. You have been so brainwashed by creationists that you refuse to even look at your own viewpoint from an objective viewpoint. I have looked at creationism from a outside perspective and I find it to be an insult to me personally since I am a christian myself. Besides that creationism is religion disguising itself as science, which is why people around the world are against it. It inhibits and undermines science.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago
@NUTCASE71733, oh, but i do want to see the evidence and it all leads to intelligent design. you think i'm brainwashed? i think more objectively then any of you "freethinkers" who stare design in the face and still call it evolution. tell me, how did the magical octopus evolve the ability to shape shift AND mimic multi colored rock? your objective veiwpoint cant even come close to explaining how any of this happenes other than to just call it RM plus NS. not good enough.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@NUTCASE71733
And octopuss has a high deree of intelligence for a mullosk, and their skin contains chromataphores which allow it to change colo. The mimic octopuss takes it's intelligence further. I hardly call that evidence of a creator. If there WAS a creator there owuld be evidence. There is none to support the Christian myth of creation, or any religion's definition of creation. If there was we'd see rabbits in the permian rock layers, which we don't.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago
@NUTCASE71733 i dont debate when all life forms lived. i debate that they evolved from on creature into another one. why do these mullosks contain chromataphores in the ist place? luck of the draw with RM that luckily gives it the ability to instantly change colors and hide from predators? to me, that IS evidence of a creator because is shows INTENT. design displays intent and all life forms show intent in all ways. life as design would match up with websters definition of what design is
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
Wrong. Creation only applies to things that were created. There is no creator of life. It's ok to beleive in god, I'm christian myself, but there is a significant difference between a christian and a creationist. Creationism is fundamentalist extremism parading as science. It has been exposed as such, and will always be exposed as such. The only thing you guys do is try to expose holes in evolution without showing hard evidence to the contrary. That is dishonest, and a violation of morality.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago
@NUTCASE71733 you believe in god but he didnt create anything? what good is he then and what good is your belief in a god? i dont just expose the holes in evo, i expose the evidense for I.D. I explain that protien synthesis is a complicated assembly line that has all of the charectoristics of an intelligently made system. you are being dishonest, not me.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
There is no evidence for intelligent design. It has been disproven twice in less than 20 years! In 1987, Creationism was found to be religion disguised as science in an effort to bypass the first ammendment's seperation clause which forbids state and church matters from interfeiring with one another. Creationism in turn undermines science with bronze-age mentality. The dishonest creationists disguise their "science" as ID soon after, and ID has been exposed in the 2005 Dover trial. Case closed.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago
@NUTCASE71733, case close? whatever. i have watch a few of those trials and they are a joke. i heard one judge say that she didnt want I.D taught because it would undermine evo and thus confuse the kiddies. too bad if it confuses the kids. its more important that we learn the truth even if it confuses people. lots of confusion over the big bang as well but no scientists is trying to shut up the other scientists for having different theories on the subject. debate is healthy and needed.
godrulztheearth 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth If you want ID taught in the classrom then they first have to establish it as a valid theory. That means passing through the peer review process and gaining support among the scientists within the appropriate field. This is what every other scientific theory including Evolution has done in order to be accepted. One what grounds do you claim the right for ID to skip this very important process?
knuthoem85 1 year ago
@knuthoem85 I think they should absolutely teach I.D. in schools. It is a great example of pseudoscience. They could put I.D's claims up against an actual scientific theory and show people exactly why I.D. fails as science. Not only would this show people that I.D. "theory" fails as science, but they would get a better understanding of what real scientific theory entails... They would probably get a new respect for the theory of evolution.
dangle66 1 year ago
@dangle66 Yes, that would actualle be the best solution. When I said teach I was refering to teaching it as a valid theory, but teaching about it and why its not a valid science (just like astrology) would be the best solution. I would also agree with teaching about religions so as to inform people what they really are and how many different religions there really are. I think that would help people take a more rational approach to it.
knuthoem85 1 year ago
@dangle66 initially i thought great fucking point, i've never perceived it that way!
....then i realised, i've been banging my head against their wall for years anniliating their arguement/position, all for fucking nothing. i think your admirable goal is probably unachievable, and your strategy highly likely to backfire.
thethirdchimp 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth That goofy nonsense only flies on BereanBeacon videos godrulz.. folks are a little more educated over here. We have not only identified the ancient and ancestral genetics that you deny even exist we can now in fact re-activate them..
You are so far behind the curve as to be considered utterly irrelevant..
SofaKingLoaded 1 year ago
@godrulztheearth DNA proves evolution.
MsMommaRose 1 year ago
I love the fish and octopus at the end! :D awesome video sir :D
hutchings000 1 year ago
Is it just me or do most young earth creationists tend to look crazy? They look inbred or slightly retarded or something. I think there's a connection.
SkeksisRule 1 year ago
@SkeksisRule That´s the most outrageous thing I ever heard.......... and it´s kinda true ain´t it? Weird!!!!
yatter1 1 year ago
@SkeksisRule Ordinarily I would object to such statements; but to be perfectly honest, working entirely off from appearances, I do seem to have encountered an unusual number of YEC's whom force me to stop and question...
GodofCider 1 year ago
@GodofCider That's what I'm saying. I'm not just going for a baseless ad hominem attack, it's simply an observation. Ted Haggard, Kent Hovind, etc... they just have this common look about them. The wide blank stare, the deceitful grin, the emotionally unstable mannerisms.
SkeksisRule 1 year ago
@SkeksisRule As I said, ordinarily I would object, but given the uncanny number of YEC's that I have observed; akin to yourself...it does make one stop and think.
GodofCider 1 year ago
Nerds I don't get em.
lancair360mk2 1 year ago
@lancair360mk2
It's ok, being mentally retarded is fairly common. There are people you can hire that will look after you.
Moirera 1 year ago
There is nothing in Genesis that says that plants where created before the Sun, that is an over simplification. The heavens (Space/Sky) and Earth (Rock/). The original hebrew the term "God" is more inline with the word (Elohyim "powers"). i.e. "Powers made seperate the land from the water". This is known as the "Mechanical Translation" of Genesis. Type it in Google and see for yourself.
umkemesik 1 year ago
Creationism is true, I have seen the light!!!!!!!!!!!!! How else can you explain the existence of YEC´s they are not related to any other species in the world and must therefore have been created. They can´t have evolved, gobshitish stupidity of zen proportions can´t have evolved unless evolution can go backwards. All praise the Lord
yatter1 1 year ago
@3:03 you state that Genesis teaches light was produced before light producing objects. This is true. The early "hot universe" was filled with light and was too hot for stars to form. You state that Genesis claims that plants were created before light despite citing Gen 1:3-5 seconds before. Your other comments are equally misleading and ignorant.
umkemesik 1 year ago
@umkemesik I'm pretty sure that is meant as plants being created before the Sun. It can also get confusing since there are two different Genesis accounts. It doesn't really matter all that much whether we translate it as days or periods of time, It still doesn't mesh worth a damn with observable reality. I might even go as far as to say that the only thing that Genesis can teach us is about the people who told, wrote about, and believed in the stories. Personally, that's enough for me.
SamTay04 1 year ago
Jaguar Jones, I am a Catholic, but also a scientist (engineer technically). I do not believe in the YEC theory. I believe Genesis was mistranslated from the original Hebrew (i.e. 6 days is more like 6 units - or epochs). However, I take issues on your "facts".
umkemesik 1 year ago
You own! Will take time for all these sheeps to come around though :( Maybe in a 100 years science is considered a fact... sad
checkcall123 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I want to know this... What would be the outcome if a Crocoduck butt fucked Kirk Cameron?
gadget133 1 year ago
@gadget133
.....I don't know....something scary I imagine
Proudtobeacommie 1 year ago
Comment removed
gadget133 1 year ago
7:50 that fish has evolved fucking hands!
0_0 If only Darwin were alive to see that.
shorty962 1 year ago
holy crap, a running octopus. evolution FTW!
TheHomelessCripple 1 year ago
This is my new favorite video
TheHomelessCripple 1 year ago
Is the great YEC a relative to the Abominable Snowman? Or is it another species altogether? I guess I could hunt me some YECs for supper.
graphattic 1 year ago
i believe it is a subspecies of the Yeti. while not completely dissimilar to the Abominable Snowman, the Yeti and YEC are both found inhabiting areas in the Himalaya mountains where they live in small, close nit tribes. Here they remain secluded from conventional society to remain ignorant as to preserve their archaic, and irrational beliefs and traditions
TheHomelessCripple 1 year ago
Mostly enlightening biological Info trip. Much appreciated. I will take these notes down to my grate map of fictiono-zoology. THNX!
graphattic 1 year ago
@graphattic No no, the YEC evolved from an ancestral ape, then got scares by all the blinky lights and advanced medical care, and tried his damdest to evolve back into an ape, repeating over and over "and he was without clothing and knew no shame".
nothingUnrealExists 1 year ago
@nothingUnrealExists I knew it.... the YEC feels no shame.... what a mutation!
graphattic 1 year ago
LOL "ownership of the YEC can be..." I had an image of a YEC on a lead being taken for a walk (on all fours)
McPrfctday 2 years ago 4
LOL!
Voodoofreak35 2 years ago
It is encouraging to see that such a debate is taken to the internet. However, I am discouraged in the manner it is being taken. Upon watching many videos about evolution, creation, or anything regarding abiogenisis, the comment section is riddled with hateful messages that are more counter productive then anything else.
If we with to continue this discussion couragously, then we must underpin the importance to be kinder to one another.
Justaddbacon 2 years ago 3
Sorry Justaddbacon, it's not that evolutionists are trying to be dicks, but honestly it's a bit frustrating that despite all these videos that put evolution in SIMPLE terms, we still get people who plug their ears. It's frustrating and downright insulting the way they portray evolution, so it's no wonder we get a little testy.
It's only a matter of time before someone blurts out "brainwashed fucktard douchebag." It's fun, you should try it sometime lol!
brmadman4455 2 years ago 5
By overreating we offer the opposing arguement some material to judge us with. They'll simply label us as "people who swear" and once someone checks for themselves, lo and behold.
I realise it is fustrating to argue with someone who is knowingly dishonest. However, if we demonstrate the importance of knowledge and information, and make it less profitable to be dishonest with others, perhaps they too will eventually come to their senses.
However this can't just happen overnight.
Justaddbacon 2 years ago
@Justaddbacon
The thing is, the vast majority of non-creationists do a pretty good job of not swearing. But with millions of people on YT, *somebody* is going to. Same or the creationists. That doesn't justify the label "people who swear" for either group.
Of course, that all assumes that swearing is actually an issue. :)
jursamaj 2 years ago
SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!.....fuck nob
MrSamhines 2 years ago
What's the name of that zebra-striped thing at 8:02?
Omnywrench 2 years ago
I think it's the Abdopus aculeatus. The other one at 7:36 seems to be the Amphioctopus marginatus. That's so weird to see, is swimming not good enough for them? :)
klutterkicker 2 years ago
@Omnywrench a Khantosaurus
pubuman 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why do you use big words?
:/
I believe in god. You can't stop me.
TheoryReviewGuy 2 years ago
No one is trying to stop you. They're just explaining why it's illogical.
And big words allow you to say more with less words. Why don't you use big words?
leifey 2 years ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Typical athiest Rubbish! I'm not a YEC but I do beleive in God. Atleast YECs can think outside the box unlike science!
MrsVENOMFANGX 2 years ago
If by "think outside the box" you mean "pull shit out of their ass" then you're right. However pulling shit out of one's ass is of no benefit whatsoever in understanding our universe.
Tavereen 2 years ago 16
I cannot help but to think the opposite. When all of your answers revolve around "Because God...(such and such). Scientists provide abstract thought through proven means of Math and Science. While your answers to the unknown always refer you back to your one and only source. God. "God did it." "God wants it that way." "Cause God said so!" Seems to me, Christian thought is quite linear. If you truly wish to be abstract, you must go beyond Science, beyond God, and into the infinte.
Mozzle11 2 years ago
Yes, outside into "INTELLECTUAL FREEZONE" where all sorts of supernatural/mythological figments of the imagination may fester!
Atheists do think outside the box, however we come back down to reality. There's no reason to believe in something without any empirical evidence going for it, and on some level you agree, unless you believe in EVERY SINGLE deity ever thought up and every single mythological creature.
Bluedragon094 2 years ago 2
yeah the box that they wont think outside of is called reality
XavierDrake 2 years ago
lmao what a dick head thing to say.
Anything out of the scientific box by definition has no evidence and is therefor faith, fairy stories and/or bollox.
MonsterMozz 2 years ago
Creationists = Do not accept theories in which God didn't create the universe.
Creationists = Accept everything was made by God. The Bible, a written book, is their understanding of the world.
Science = Accepts ANYTHING WITH EVIDENCE.
Science = Humans explore, use their OWN inituative to find answers. Make their OWN theories based on PHYSICAL EVIDENCE NOT MADE BY MAN.
Who's in "the box" again?
akshaymusik 2 years ago
@akshaymusik Your mum? NO wait she's too fat to fit in it.. AAAAAAAAHAHAH!
pubuman 2 years ago
O....k then.
akshaymusik 2 years ago
@pubuman lolololol
checkcall123 1 year ago
Ok, look. This is perfectly reasonable argument to what you've just said. No attacks here, just looking for an answer.
How do you know YOU'RE not the one inside the box?
Think carefully before you answer. If you answer.
akshaymusik 2 years ago
7.57 - did that fish just throw up.... mud??
No, seriously, great video!
KamasutraButterfly 2 years ago
Awesome vid! =)
Kozzalols 2 years ago
Lovely.
Dry facts will always disprove YEC arguments, but it's so much better with a little humor thrown in.
I'm itching to talk to a YEC now.
pawnjp 2 years ago
YEC hmm...
I say upgrade them to Young Earth Creationist Halfwits!
AKA, YECH's
Shavarnarak 2 years ago 3
Ebolaworld FTW! :D
Perrine234 2 years ago
Wow. That is some of the more bizare sealife I have ever seen.
intelligentfalling 2 years ago
happy owning!
rakoon3434 2 years ago
Interesting
PrinceBishop3 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
boring and bitter
miks8 2 years ago
love it, keep up the good work!
feralfoxer 2 years ago
'and good old fashioned lying!' bahaha
ThMrksman 2 years ago 5
Brilliant video. I'm subscribing.
On another note, where did you find the videos of the animals at the end? I would love to find out more about them.
OutsideTheWorld2 2 years ago
Do you say a-nal-a-gee? or a-nal-a-jee?
debakle001 2 years ago
excellent
snarfeater 2 years ago
oooooh! loved this video
thegoochieguy 2 years ago
Hahahah, loved the reference to weed at about 2 minutes 17.
There is no lethal dose.
WeedGreenPowerRanger 2 years ago
Pretty sure if you ate 2^10^10pounds of THC you would die. Is that considered a lethal does?
debakle001 2 years ago
I think you'd run into problems causing death long before one would even need to consider what the substance is. It might have escaped your notice, but humans don't ordinarily get over a few hundred pounds. Just cramming all of that mass into one's gut will have serious repercussions for one's poor little internal organs. :(
ashman165 2 years ago
Yeah, like ashman said, you'd have more to worry about from trying to ingest more mass than your body is made of.
Even if you somehow managed a scooby doo and ate twice your body weight with no stomach rupture issues, you'd still be a long way off from having enough for the chemical to kill you. Essentially, a THC lethal dose is impossible, as opposed to, say, 10 grams of coke, or heroin.
WeedGreenPowerRanger 2 years ago