@TheZooCrew I think you still don't get it that lies are "NO NO" for Christians. we are supposed to tell the truth in all things as Christ did. it's about time u realize Christians are bound by this commandment.
@swandike Lying is not a commandment, unless it's to give false testimony. Christians lie as often as anyone else. If you were actually bound by the bible you would be killing anyone who is not a christian. If you don't know what I'm talking about you haven't read the old testament.
@TheZooCrew "I was a devout Lutheran for 21 years of
my life, you fool.
Your insipid opinion is not empirical
evidence."
yeah right, "devout " lol. anyone can think that.
if u were devout, you would have known God.
if u knew God, then your rebellion is deliberate or u think you have done enough evil not to be forgiven. in anyway, I still doubt your "devout " word. but forgiveness is always available, no matter your rebellion.
You don't know God. I don't think anyone can. You just believe you do. Believing is far, far, FAR different than knowing.
This reaction is exactly what I expected. You're not someone who asks questions and looks for answers; you're someone who does what you're told and lives with it. Sorry.
@TheZooCrew "I don't think anyone can." This statement implies that you think that God exists. However, this cannot be true for the consistent evolutionist. Because an evolutionist's thinking is based on naturalism, he cannot in any real way uphold Genesis. He cannot uphold the Bible as being in any way inspired above other great pieces of literature. The Bible presents to man a Savior from sin. However, the consistent evolutionist has no use for a Savior, for he cannot accept...
"However, this cannot be true for the consistent evolutionist. "
Only if you're stuck in the false dichotomy where either the Judeo-Christian deity exists precisely as described in the Bible or there's no God at all. I don't share in this narrow-minded reality.
Nice fallacy of equivocation.
Sure seems like you're so indoctrinated that you can't imagine any deity besides the one in your head.
" He cannot uphold the Bible as being in any way inspired above other great pieces of literature."
This has nothing to do with evolution. None of your rant has anything to do with evolution. Evolution is a field of science; it's a study of observed phenomena. It's not a philosophy nor a religion.
I'm not surprised. All you've done is lie; why should you change?
@TheZooCrew ...the concept of a space-time "Fall;" it simply finds no place in his program. Man did not "Fall" in the Genesis meaning of the term. For the evolutionist man is on the upgrade. He began very low and is constantly climbing. So far from "falling" is he, that I have heard it said that if man ever "fell," he fell upward. Therefore, an evolutionist cannot uphold a "Fall" in space-time history because it is inconsistent with his doctrine.
There are a number of other problems with your pathetic diatribe.
" For the evolutionist man is on the upgrade."
Wrong. This is a Hovindism. Actually, most of Western humanity is merely in the genetic drift stage; there's not much selective pressure in first-world nations. Third-world nations are a bit of a different story, but still...evolution is not linear. There is no "upgrade."
@TheZooCrew I do not doubt that you were a devout Christian for 21 years, but your thinking has switched to the other side, the side that is far from the Judeo-Christian worldview.
Most things in the Bible are either impossible or just didn't happen. I can prove this beyond any reasonable doubt. You will lie about it, but that doesn't matter.
However, why does this suddenly preclude any other sort of deity from existing? It doesn't. Tell me, did you attend Jesus Camp or did you have a section of your brain removed? I can't think of any other reasons why you'd be unable to activate this thought process.
Later, he saw a man with long, stringy, dirty hair and an untrimmed beard. The customer went back and said to the barber: "Barbers do not exist." "Eh! I am here and a barber. I just worked on you!" "No!" the customer exclaimed. "If barbers existed, there would be no one with dirty long hair and untrimmed beards." "Barbers DO exist! That's what happens when people don't come to me." "Exactly!" said the customer. "That's the point!
A man went to a barbers. They talked about many things. On the subject of God, the barber said: "I don't believe God exists." "Why?" "You just have to look to realise that God doesn't exist. If God exists, would there be so many sick people? Abandoned children? If God existed, there would be no suffering or pain" The customer didn't respond because he didn't want to argue. The barber finished and he left.
There are limits to changes, yes It's true that insects become resistant to insecticides over time but It's still a INSECT! When you understand the complexity of life, there is a 0% chance of evolution being the product of life, let alone SpaceTime&Matter!
@TheZooCrew Go on, spit it out then. Enlighten me. But spare me the mumbo jumbo like "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away". Really, your inability to debate even the simplest questions demonstrates a lack of understanding. STOP MIXING Science & Evolution together as One. Coherent enough for you?
It's not my fault if you're so uneducated that you don't understand scientific terminology.
Of course insects will only come from insects. It's the same reason humans are still apes, Catarrhines, mammals, amniotes, vertebrates, and eukaryotes. It's impossible to outgrow one's heritage. Even if today's insects one day walk and talk like humans, they will still be classified as insects according to taxonomy.
@TheZooCrew Your welcome to believe what you like But making a connection is NOT the same as a FACT. You said: 'It's the same reason humans are still apes" You Sir have left the realm of Science, STOP MIXING Science & Evolution together as One!
Evolution is science. You can say it isn't all you want; that doesn't change reality. Everything I've said can be proven beyond any reasonable doubt through both genetics and the fossil record. That video provides an hour of what we KNOW (not merely "believe") about evolution.
Humans ARE apes. Your incoherent screaming doesn't change that.
@TheZooCrew It's a FACT that the DNA of humans and chimpanzees is 98% identical but when you start connecting dots, that when you leave the realm of science. Your fundamental assumptions are so far out it's no wonder you take the stance you do. Believe what you want but evolution only happened in imagination. Evolution does not CREATE anything new, it only works with the information that ALREADY there....
The fact of the matter is that you can't explain ERVs, atavisms, transitional forms, physiological, anatomical, and molecular vestiges, ontogeny and developmental biology, protein functional redundancy, convergent phenotypes, mobile genes, observed speciation, or any twin-nested hierarchy of phylogenetic clades WITHOUT evolution.
@TheZooCrew Your statement is laughable and your ignorance is truly astounding You find data that support the theory BUT there is TONS more data that disapproves thoes claims. You hit the hammer right on the nail(No pun intended); Such assumptions are entirely logical But that does not mean it's true.
@TheZooCrew Look up the data yourself;The whole point of science is to know. Word of advise, if your going to teach a theroy as a FACT, start from the beginning. Straw man of not, you have to start in the beginning.
@TheZooCrew Cop out? Your funny bro...The theory of evolution is not limited to biology, so please don't limit it to that scope. Also theories are constantly being refigured, and new research frequently renders old ideas outdated or incomplete. Evolution theory is no different :D And lets try to remember one thing, were talking about theory NOT FACT!
Still waiting for this so-called "data" that falsifies evolution...
Evolution is far different from what Darwin envisioned, but it's still evolution via natural selection. Again, you can't explain anything I listed below without evolution.
@TheZooCrew That is so crack up funny. Dawkins is right up on his sci-fi. What an idiot!!! Why does he have so many devoted followers? Good to see you guys still waving the flag of stupidity and ignorance. More power to you Good day sir.
@mtbee9 There are MANY gaps In the fossil records not to mention breeding limitations. Should I go on? What about punctuated equilibrium which directly opposes the Laws of Genetics! The big problem with natural selection Is that it ONLY works with Data that is already there, lacks the abilty to CREATE NEW LIFE FORMS. What about the alleged “Missing Links” between Man and Ape? What about the debunking of vestigial organs Or transitional forms. Big reason why its a THEORY, not FACT!
@CROBN "There are MANY gaps In the fossil record" Er - do you mean the fossil record does not have examples of all the species that have ever existed. Duh well of course not.
Does the record we do have show the gradual change over time from one form to another - YES it does!
"lacks the abilty to CREATE NEW LIFE FORMS" Nope sorry this has been shown how forms can change over time.
"debunking of vestigial organs Or transitional forms"
@mtbee9 It has been well established that intermediate forms do not exist. What does exist are typological forms, where the divisions of successive classes such as those between reptiles and mammals, between lemurs and monkeys, between mosses and ferns, are absolutely clear cut. What I mean by typological forms is that biological variations take place, but change is always circumscribed by the boundaries of the type (or kind). Whatever conclusion you wish to draw from the fossil...
@TheHistoryguy10 "between lemurs and monkeys" The evidence linking lemurs and monkeys is enormous. DNA and Morphology alone show a tremendous relationship as with all primates. The fossil record shows others species that share similarities between different living species. So it is fairly obvious that the species diverged from a common ancestor (or link if you prefer). Same with your other examples. Obviously not all intermediaries are fossilized but there are enough to show their relationship.
@mtbee9 It appears to me that you are describing "homology," where the structure between parts of different organisms have a likeness or similarity. One could think of the wing of a bat and the human arm having a certain likeness or similarity. However, comparative anatomy does not provide evidence for evolution in the way that evolution is conceived. One would need true intermediate forms that would demonstrate a true sequential step from one form to another.
""homology," where the structure between parts of different organisms have a likeness or similarity. "
That is not homology. Homology can only be said to present if common ancestry is established between the species in question. I've told you this before, but you continue to lie as if you were never corrected. Why? Why not actually try to learn something?
@TheZooCrew "I'm thinking Jesus Camp" I agree. It would be more interesting discussing things with these people if they had an alternative idea that matched the evidence but they don't. They cling to ancient stories and wishes of gods and then try and use their belief to say Evolution is wrong when it is supported by mountains of evidence. Most do not understand it or what 'evidence' is!
@TheHistoryguy10 "where the structure between parts of different organisms have a likeness or similarity" Yes that is true, which in turn is supported by the DNA structure.
As gradual change has been observed the only logical explanation is Evolution.
If you disagree please explain how the fossil record shows what it does? How did all the fossils appear gradually over 500 MY and change slightly from one fossil to the next.
Please provide your alternate explanation, with references.
@mtbee9 Thank you for providing a source that could be analyzed. However, the article talks about “molecular divergence dates” not “sequential intermediate forms” as I asked. Therefore, it does not provide evidence for intermediate forms in the sense of macro-evolution. The work of the two authors is only hypothetical estimations of how divergence may have taken place from a common ancestor. They base their work on paleontology and the “molecular clock” to form their estimations.
@mtbee9 The authors are honest, but they do not provide evidence of the “sequence of intermediate forms.” They admit that the molecular clock and the fossil record create problems. They write, “There are many potential pitfalls in the calibration of molecular clocks, including a poor fossil record.” This means that their estimations are not based on pure evidence from paleontology, that is, true sequential intermediate forms.
@mtbee9 They also state that the “molecular clock allows scientists to estimate the antiquity of a lineage and divergence dates using molecular data.” It is clear that the molecular clock can only be used to “estimate antiquity,” but it cannot provide definitive conclusions based on the actual course of events in natural history. You may think that their work provides evidence of links between the 13 different primates, but what the authors actually provide are estimated guesses of...
@mtbee9 ...what may have happened in the past. Also, the authors assume the truth of evolution and try to correlate all of their work to fit within the evolutionary framework. Therefore, I am still left looking for true “sequential intermediate forms” as expected in the macro-evolution framework. For the lack of sequential intermediate forms my source is Stephen J. Gould. In “Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin” he writes, “The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages...
@TheZooCrew You may call it quote mining, but I call it "what the man said." You do well to listen to what Gould is saying. As Louis Agassiz said a long time ago, "naturalists are chasing a phantom."
"You may call it quote mining, but I call it "what the man said." "
I'm not the one who decides whether it's quote-mining or not. It's quote-mining by definition. That's not at all what Gould meant and you'd know it if you actually read the entire thing. Of course, you probably actually know what Gould actually meant are are merely incapable of anything but lying.
@TheHistoryguy10 "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages..."
If you are expecting fossils of every intermediary of every species it won't happen because the fossil record will always be incomplete. If you don't understand that then you need to do some study on fossilization. Even so the number of intermediaries that have been found for a large variety of species shows without contradiction the gradual change that Evolution predicts.
@TheHistoryguy10 A question for you. Why is it that with all of the religious people out there who cannot accept the evidence that points to Evolution NOBODY has yet come up with any other explanation that fits the facts.
Sure you can claim gods did this or that, but there should be plenty of evidence out there of HOW your imaginary god created all the intermediary fossils, and created the DNA relationships linking them together. But nobody has an answer.
@mtbee9 ...between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been persistent and nagging for gradualistic accounts of evolution (p. 140).”
@TheHistoryguy10 "our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates" I don't know what point in time this quote refers to but it is not true today. With all the evidence we do have it is possible to 'construct' what the intermediaries could have looked like for many species. As zoo says look at Tiktaalik. It looked like we expected and it was found in sediments of the correct periods. The ability to predict outcomes is strong support for the Theory of Evolution.
@mtbee9 Therefore, I ask you, please provide the collections of sequential intermediate forms from the lemur to the monkey in the fossil record or living in nature. Sure, there are millions of fossils in museums around the world, but from what I have seen, they are all typological forms within a classification. However, I want to see that "sequential intermediate forms" have been discovered. A book, an article or an website will suffice the discovery of these things.
"from what I have seen, they are all typological forms within a classification."
That is meaningless. You clearly don't understand taxonomy, especially cladistic phylogeny. This is why you learn things before pretending to know things.
@TheHistoryguy10 "Michael E. Steiper a,b,* and Nathan M. Youngc aDepartment of Anthropology, Hunter College of the City University of New York" from the timetree of life.
Details the divergence of lemurs and chimpanzees at around 74MY ago.
Also from Lemur evolution:
"Lemurs are prosimian primates belonging to the suborder Strepsirrhini. Like other strepsirrhine primates, such as lorises, pottos, and galagos, they share ancestral (or plesiomorphic) traits with early primates."
@TheHistoryguy10 You can also look up ‘Primate Evolution’ and ‘lemur’ which covers in detail the interrelations between lemurs and other primates.
If you want details of the primate fossils there is a listing of 'Lemur Evolution' that gives details of the fossil record of lemurs.
All you have to do is look it up! No fossil record is complete but there are similar fossil records for horses and whales. Even the Dinosaurs show gradual change over their 200 MY reign. The evidence is all around you
@mtbee9 ...record, it provides no evidence whatsoever for believing that one type of organism was ever converted gradually into another through a series of intermediate forms. At the end of the day, the empirical pattern of existing nature conforms very well to the typological model. To refute the typological model, and validate evolutionary claims you would need millions (if not billions) of different species, all unambiguously intermediate in terms of their overall biology.
@CROBN You have chosen to believe the misrepresentations from creationists over real scientific information. You need to have a good long look at all the current evidence that supports Evolution. All of your arguments have been debunked many times. You are out of date or of course lying on purpose. Open your eyes to the reality.
@CROBN Well, we all know that all species of all animals in the universe strive to autoevolve. That is why the Data Integration Thought Entity exists; to spearhead autoevolution. Of all life that exists in the universe, humans are the only ones capable of it. Also, the world was created five years ago on Tanabata. Pigs fly when we can't see them and the tree in the yard is plotting your demise.
@CROBN Punctuated equilibrium doesn't go against law of genetics lmao. And of course it is a theory. It will always be a theory. A scientific theory is already as high as it will ever go. It does not get upgraded to a fact, nor does it become a law.
@TheZooCrewI'm sorry if YOU can't tell the difference between observational and guesswork and actually believes that evolution is proven. I’d like to think we have moved beyond all that crap and now live in ‘enlightened’ times, but I am afraid not. Even though we have put men on the moon and taken photos of the earth from space, there are still people that believe that everything came from nothing without a cause.
@CROBN "the difference between observational and guesswork and actually believes that evolution is proven" LOL
Good one. Yes observational = Science; Religion = Guesswork.
I have no problem with telling the difference!
Oh and Evolution is a well tried and tested theory that has met all challenges so far. Enough to be considered fact just like the theory of gravity. Care to falsify either one!
listen to what he says @27 "after enough time passes the populations will no longer be capable of mating at all, and a new species is said to formed" WHAT? you cant mate so how does a new species form? lol
Well, yes. When two populations start out as the same species and then after isolation can no longer mate, now you have two species where there used to be one. It's really simple.
so obviously u know there are doubts. and since its not a courtroom, let those doubts be. well done.
"Evolution explains how we got here,
not how life began. Different science."
it's all science isn't it? if you think evolution disproves the Bible then u missed the mark. wrong science. since the Bible explains the origin of life. and evolution doesn't, so they are 2 different arguments.
@ozowen if science is about proving beyond any doubt, then we seriously need to have proofs for Darwinism. there are tons of doubts that we are forced to ignore and accept as is. secondly, if scientists cannot explain the origin of life, that leaves us lost in time. same questions arise everytime evolution is talked about, how did we get here? if unsure about anything, you don't rule out any possibility. it's just common sense.
@ozowen "As for scientists, there is nothing at all
to be gained by searching for an ark in
a flood that simply never happened"
exactly, there is nothing to be gained to support Darwinism, which is being forced on every child in school, but it might disprove Darwinism if the Ark is found to be the Biblical Noah 's Ark. will it not be unfair to a generation that their governments decide what to research and what not to.
yes satanism is being practiced by governments,read about it.
@swandike Yeah, "Darwinism" is so naughty. Just cos evolution is the foundational theory of Biology and yields benefits in genetics, epidemiology, medicine, agriculture. Just cos that dreadful stuff about an ancient earth works for mineral exploration and YECS doesn't.
@ozowen there is only one Noah's Ark on mount Ararat in eastern Turkey. there cannot be any other. I havent been there myself but I cannot believe it fits the Biblical Ark and yet people just dismiss it. if it was a dinosaur fossil, the satanic governments will be all it trying to prove Darwinism. is it a threat to atheism to find the truth? why are the scientists not there? if creationism sounds magical, try explaining the origin of life with science, you need more than faith to believe it.
There are enough claims for the Ark to keep everyone happy. Not one is real so it's all a joke.
Satanic governments?
As for scientists, there is nothing at all to be gained by searching for an ark in a flood that simply never happened. 5 civilisations continued through the alleged time of the ark. They didn't get wet. (that's 5 we know of).
There is no flood layer.
Why search? As for abiogenesis- it makes no difference to evolution at all. Evolution still happens
@thisprophecy it is so surprising they managed to have so much support and tax payers money to fund such a blatant lie, Darwinism. the governments are not even interested in the discovery of Noah's ark in eastern Turkey. so many archeological discoveries of the Bible, like mt Sinai in Saudi Arabia, goes unnoticed. so unbelievable. even if it is a hoax, let's prove that it is. no mention of it in any textbook.
@swandike if you believe tax money has anything to do with the subject, you have a long way to go. the real question for you is how a country can continue to function on 14 trillion dollars worth of debt. remember the borrower is always subservient to the lender... the grand hoax (including the monopolization of the educational system) has be perpetrated on all of us. clue: their babylonian/egyptian religious symbol is samck dab on the back of your dollar bill...
@swandike "the governments are not even interested in the discovery of Noah's ark in eastern Turkey"
Which one? There have been a number of findings of Noah's Ark in East Turkey. It appears in so many places and keeps on turning out to be a fake. It has however fostered an industry in that part of the world ripping of creationist suckers- I guess that's a good thing- apparently everyone is happy that way.
@TheZooCrew to ignore archeology, to dismiss anthropological evidence as myth is failure to grasp the big picture. evidence, whether it is of physical or spiritual nature is still evidence. oh, how they beat the ludacrous assupmtion into you students of how science should have nothing to do with the spiritual. for plato did study in egypt of the occult mysteries under priests and and spoke of atlantis. yes, the science of social control has been practiced for millenia.
@thisprophecy "Darwinian evolution is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on mankind."
Yeah, darn that hoax for evolution being the foundational theory of Biology, drat it to bits for underpinning all modern medicine. Blast its hide for being essential to the entire field of genetics, sod it for being such a useful tool in agriculture, bugger it I say for all that it has contributed to epidemiology!
Sinosauropteryx prima. A dinosaur covered with primitive feathers, but structurally similar to unfeathered dinosaurs Ornitholestes and Compsognathus (Chen et al. 1998; Currie and Chen 2001).
@TheZooCrew you sound quite gullible. I could easily convince you to do anything. I have observed that from your argument with thehistoryguy10 . so you think I cannot make a similar video with email proofs if I hated creationism and anything that proofs it. honesty comes with having morals, which originated from religion. I could not trust any video from atheist unless I verify myself.
@TheZooCrew I could just make a video telling you that there are 4 moons around earth. will u believe it? you could try and send an email or visit them or perhaps fax or call them. verify for yourself. instead of getting all your facts from youtube
"you could try and send an email or visit them or perhaps fax or call them. verify for yourself."
This is exactly what DonExodus did, and he included screenshots of the emails he sent. Clearly you didn't even try to watch the video.
The very premise of that list is dishonest regardless of the names on it. Skepticism of ALL claims is good science. Skepticism does not translate to dissent. Creationists often misrepresent that list.
He's probably referring to the fact that many of the creationists from places like ICR or the discovery institute either have degree's from non-accredited universites (buy your degree online) or PhD's in irrelevant fields, like philosophy, law, business, or what have you.
The only two famous creation defenders that I know of with legitimize PhD's in a relevant field are Gish, and Behe, though Behe hardly counts since he doesn't argue against common descent
Gish doesn't really count because he lies his ass off when he should know better and this can be proven (hence "Gish Gallop"). Jonathan Wells is another one in this category.
@swandike If you believe that land mammals magically and atheistically altered organs and limbs while evolving into whales upon crossing millions of years and numerous species being led by the myth of natural selection you are no stranger to mythological beliefs. Shintoism and Greek mythology have similar approaches in their holy scriptures. It is its calling itself a science and claiming that science = everything ought to be explained atheistically that makes of Darwinism a unique religion
you cannot use "every " because not every scientist agree with evolution. there are loads if scientists out there who have serious doubts of evolution, abiogenesis.
@Helge129 Biologists get paid to lie about evolution, I will disprove it with logic reason and science for free. I love truth. Natural selection yes. Evolution no. Its not science, none of it is observed but imagined. It doesnt matter if the majority believe it. They are wrong. There is no such thing as an expert in evolution because it does not exists.
@Helge129 I would be happy to disprove evolution to you with logic and reason for free even if it takes all month. PM me. i will be happy to show you, how you are deluded greatly to believe in evolution. All belief systems come from ones paradigm on the origin of life. I am 100 percent certain that I am right, and i feel sorry for anyone who believes evolution, and will help them. I care
@marigolds44 "I am 100 percent certain that I am right," So you are arrogant. Evolution is proven to be accurate. You can not believe in evolution, you can only accept it. It's not a system of beliefs, By defintion.
@Helge129 I am 100 percent certain through observation of data that evolution is not true. Are you absolutely sure there are no absolutes. I believe in truth justice and the Aemerican Way. I prefer Aristotle over Plato. Crendtials are meaningless when ascer
taing truth. Atheist worship credentials they can't think independently. If you learned evolution at U of Michigan that just means the professors there either lied or are
@Helge129 So then you have faith. I am just as certain that evolution isn't true as I am 2+2=4. Certainty and arrogance have different meanings. I'm not arrogant at all. I pretty much have been humbled from a life of pain and dissapointment.
@marigolds44 You can not be humble and claim absolute certainty at the same time. Specially, you can't be humble and be certain that evolution is false.
Claiming absolute certainty that evolution is false does make you arrogant. You claim to be better than thousands, perhaps millions of scientists, that's not humble.
I don't have faith. I accept evolution because that's what the evidence says.
@ozowen basically this does not alter the fact that the Bible or the dead sea scrolls are the words of God. it does not justify believing that there is no God. this does not justify all the deliberate sins. it does justify atheism, nor the agnostic. there is a God. simple as that.
@ozowen I have a copy of the book of Enoch and it makes sense why it was excluded. the current books of the Bible gives all that u need to understand and serve God. Enoch's account does not alter anything, and it's even harder to understand.
that said, the dead sea scrolls prove that some bunch of people didn't invent Christianity after Jesus left, like some atheist claim. Jesus was prophesied to come. it's also found to be accurate with the Bible.
@swandike There are a number of versions of the Book of Enoch. But that isn't the only player. Further, there were a huge array of contenders for the New Testament as well.
@phantasmagorial maybe the evidence you found isn't evidence at all, maybe it's some people's desperate attempt to prove what does not exist. u need to ask for the origin of life. it will help. now considering their inability to provide it, u could piece it together, that it's all a lie.
@swandike You know what? You're totally right. Every biologist, geologist, paleontologist and what have you, has come together in a big conspiracy against Christianity, making up the fossil record and genetics and everything else we know as they go along. But they've been thwarted, because anyone who has read a 2000 year old book just knows it's not true with needing to see "evidence", cause the book has true science like virgin births and demonic talking snakes. Good job Sherlock!
@phantasmagorial There is no conspiracy against Christianity. Darwinism supporting itself with the myth of natural selection in order to explain the miracle of the creation of the species and rationalize its godlessness is just one more cult competing for a share of the religious market. Land mammals magically and orderly altering organs and limbs while evolving into whales has nothing to envy to Harry Potter or any other witchcraft stories
I know u are not theist but at least haven't you heard of the dead sea scrolls? do a little research before u give yourself away. these scrolls were even written before Jesus came. and contains prophecies of Jesus.
you can't just sit there and expect any truth from atheist videos. read wider.
TheZooCrew is right. The church did form the Bible. The election and selection of the canon was what the early church did. Some books were excluded, some included. The reasoning is clear enough and the Dead Sea Scrolls don't change this. They just authenticate the relative accuracy of a bunch of the Hebrew scriptures.
@ozowen THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO DARWIN AND HIS ATHEIST THEOLOGIANS PREACHING A DARWINIAN GENESIS SUPPORTED BY THE MYTH OF NATURAL SELECTION IS YOUR TRUTH.
@alexthasy YOU'RE A LIAR, A LIAR AND A LIAR. ny reason you thought using caps made your point clearer? It's just that illogical BS and lies aren't made clearer when you use caps alex. Not at all.
Why? My accusations against alex have to do with his making lies about me, many times.
Alex lies about many things, I just got tired of it, especially since he attempts to paint himself as being all out for God.
As for your posts, so far the only thing I object to is the wording that appears designed to make it look like a bad thing that those thought trends were happening. "Pushing God into the background" is also -dispensing with God of the gaps theology
@ozowen Well, I did not know that you guys were attacking each other. I thought that you were calling him a liar because of his thoughts on evolution. However, I do not think that poking people in the eye will help them accept your view. I may have a little chat with him behind the scenes to see if he will tone down his comments.
@TheHistoryguy10 I doubt alex actually believes a word of what he says. He certainly can't provide a shred of proof for any claim he ever makes.
I have had plenty of debates with creationists, most are civil. Some YECSers are outright abusive, but alex is different. He refuses to actually respond to posts- presents illogical nonsense and then demands it be treated not as a claim but as evidence.
Some folks think he is a POE. This is possible. Be told- he will lie to you as well.
@ozowen Well then why follow him around? Unless you like chat fights, I would not bother. I do understand that emotions can run high, but I just get over it, even if someone lies about what I have said. When someone sends an attack my way, I just ignore it and move on. There are plenty of other people you could chat with on youtube.
@TheHistoryguy10 If you want to grow in your faith, You should only share with those having your own belief in a Darwinian Shamanistic voodoo evolutionary creation. Otherwise you will start doubting Darwinian theologians like Dawkins who are preaching that species are designoids not intelligently designed in order to rationalize that they could be the result of an atheistic evolutionary process.
@ozowen You have no respect for those honouring an omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent creator God. I have seen you time after siding with atheists in blaspheming God and reviling those magnifying his name. You feel much better when fellowshiping with atheists as long as they are sharing your faith in your prophet Darwin and his rewriting of Genesis
@ozowen Go and kiss ass with your atheist brothers in Darwin and keep blaspheming God and reviling those honoring his name. Your father and their father is a liar and Darwin is his Satan's Prophet.
Why would you make comments like this one? Why are your comments so hostile constantly? Let me remind you what the Bible tells us to put on. Galatians 5:22-23 & 25 says, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit."
@alexthasy Gentleness should appear in our words as we approach others who hold a different view than us. Approaching people with spiteful words is not a good way to approach them.
@TheZooCrew If you are getting tired, then you do not have to watch or listen. No one is making you read my comments. There are plenty of other people you could chat with on youtube. I wish you the best.
Well, I thought you were merely an innocently deceived individual capable of independent thought; that you might alter your views once presented with evidence.
Instead, the only things separating you from other creationists are civility and literacy.
@TheZooCrew Here is a very real problem that you face, that evolutionary theory is a “view” without a lot of evidence, and is very dogmatic. You do not agree with this but I think it is worth looking into for you. Evolutionary theory has become more and more dogmatic as the decades have gone by. This is evidenced by the hostility that is directed towards the dissents from orthodoxy. Anything that is said to be evidence against it, is discharged...
"evolutionary theory is a “view” without a lot of evidence, and is very dogmatic."
/watch?v=uEP7Z55Z6nM
I could do this all day.
Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution. This is yet another straw man. You've been told this before, you're just dishonest.
Notice how you didn't present a single scientific argument against evolution. All you did was assert a vast, century-old perfect conspiracy without a shred of evidence. This makes you paranoid, nothing more.
@TheZooCrew Boy, you fit the profile I described in my previous post to a T. You said that I ignore the scientific method (unscientific), I lie or am dishonest, I have irrational beliefs, and you even said that I have symptoms of a mental illness. These are all the things a person says when another person dissents from evolutionary orthodoxy.
@TheZooCrew "Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution." Okay, let me ask you a question, where does abiogenesis end and evolution begin? Are you sure they are not connected at all?
LOL yet again not even an attempt to provide evidence for your god!
Thats because we both know there is none!
Now retard. As I told you before. Even if we didnt know anything and where as ignorant as you pretend to be or are.
DOESNT MEAN YOU GET CLAIM IT WAS YOUR PREFERED IMAGINARY MAGIC THING!
Also since nobody saw your god let alone do anything (since it doenst exist) you should follow your argument of unobserved, unlike evolution which is science.
@TheZooCrew I think you still don't get it that lies are "NO NO" for Christians. we are supposed to tell the truth in all things as Christ did. it's about time u realize Christians are bound by this commandment.
swandike 10 hours ago
@swandike Lying is not a commandment, unless it's to give false testimony. Christians lie as often as anyone else. If you were actually bound by the bible you would be killing anyone who is not a christian. If you don't know what I'm talking about you haven't read the old testament.
grahamgeons 9 hours ago
@TheZooCrew if I do what am told I will be atheist since that's all I heard at school, that big bang and evolution gave the origin of life.
I am at liberty to love or rebel God but I choose love, because He loved me first, and I have all the proof that He exists.
swandike 1 day ago
@swandike
Straw men, false dichotomies, and a blatant lie. The same old shit.
TheZooCrew 16 hours ago
@TheZooCrew "I was a devout Lutheran for 21 years of
my life, you fool.
Your insipid opinion is not empirical
evidence."
yeah right, "devout " lol. anyone can think that.
if u were devout, you would have known God.
if u knew God, then your rebellion is deliberate or u think you have done enough evil not to be forgiven. in anyway, I still doubt your "devout " word. but forgiveness is always available, no matter your rebellion.
swandike 1 day ago
@swandike
You don't know God. I don't think anyone can. You just believe you do. Believing is far, far, FAR different than knowing.
This reaction is exactly what I expected. You're not someone who asks questions and looks for answers; you're someone who does what you're told and lives with it. Sorry.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@TheZooCrew "I don't think anyone can." This statement implies that you think that God exists. However, this cannot be true for the consistent evolutionist. Because an evolutionist's thinking is based on naturalism, he cannot in any real way uphold Genesis. He cannot uphold the Bible as being in any way inspired above other great pieces of literature. The Bible presents to man a Savior from sin. However, the consistent evolutionist has no use for a Savior, for he cannot accept...
TheHistoryguy10 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10
"However, this cannot be true for the consistent evolutionist. "
Only if you're stuck in the false dichotomy where either the Judeo-Christian deity exists precisely as described in the Bible or there's no God at all. I don't share in this narrow-minded reality.
Nice fallacy of equivocation.
Sure seems like you're so indoctrinated that you can't imagine any deity besides the one in your head.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheHistoryguy10
" He cannot uphold the Bible as being in any way inspired above other great pieces of literature."
This has nothing to do with evolution. None of your rant has anything to do with evolution. Evolution is a field of science; it's a study of observed phenomena. It's not a philosophy nor a religion.
I'm not surprised. All you've done is lie; why should you change?
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@TheZooCrew ...the concept of a space-time "Fall;" it simply finds no place in his program. Man did not "Fall" in the Genesis meaning of the term. For the evolutionist man is on the upgrade. He began very low and is constantly climbing. So far from "falling" is he, that I have heard it said that if man ever "fell," he fell upward. Therefore, an evolutionist cannot uphold a "Fall" in space-time history because it is inconsistent with his doctrine.
TheHistoryguy10 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10
There are a number of other problems with your pathetic diatribe.
" For the evolutionist man is on the upgrade."
Wrong. This is a Hovindism. Actually, most of Western humanity is merely in the genetic drift stage; there's not much selective pressure in first-world nations. Third-world nations are a bit of a different story, but still...evolution is not linear. There is no "upgrade."
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@TheZooCrew I do not doubt that you were a devout Christian for 21 years, but your thinking has switched to the other side, the side that is far from the Judeo-Christian worldview.
TheHistoryguy10 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10
Most things in the Bible are either impossible or just didn't happen. I can prove this beyond any reasonable doubt. You will lie about it, but that doesn't matter.
However, why does this suddenly preclude any other sort of deity from existing? It doesn't. Tell me, did you attend Jesus Camp or did you have a section of your brain removed? I can't think of any other reasons why you'd be unable to activate this thought process.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@TheZooCrew
because you block your ears and shout la la laa la la...u will never experience the meaning of being a true Christian.
to you Christianity makes no sense.
swandike 1 day ago
@swandike
I was a devout Lutheran for 21 years of my life, you fool.
Your insipid opinion is not empirical evidence.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
swandike 1 day ago
@swandike
One problem...when you go to a barber, there's a definite indisputable thing that happens.
Turning to religion does nothing indisputable nor physical.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@swandike
In other words, your analogy fails miserably because barbers can be shown to exist. The supernatural cannot.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
swandike 1 day ago
@TheZooCrew although I don't condone using insults to win an argument, I can see u finally met someone who speaks your language (CROBN). lol
swandike 3 days ago
@swandike LOL That is actually really funny!
TheHistoryguy10 3 days ago
There are limits to changes, yes It's true that insects become resistant to insecticides over time but It's still a INSECT! When you understand the complexity of life, there is a 0% chance of evolution being the product of life, let alone SpaceTime&Matter!
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
It's difficult to get anything coherent out of that besides "I don't understand phylogeny."
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew Go on, spit it out then. Enlighten me. But spare me the mumbo jumbo like "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away". Really, your inability to debate even the simplest questions demonstrates a lack of understanding. STOP MIXING Science & Evolution together as One. Coherent enough for you?
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
You didn't ask a question.
/watch?v=uEP7Z55Z6nM
It's not my fault if you're so uneducated that you don't understand scientific terminology.
Of course insects will only come from insects. It's the same reason humans are still apes, Catarrhines, mammals, amniotes, vertebrates, and eukaryotes. It's impossible to outgrow one's heritage. Even if today's insects one day walk and talk like humans, they will still be classified as insects according to taxonomy.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew Your welcome to believe what you like But making a connection is NOT the same as a FACT. You said: 'It's the same reason humans are still apes" You Sir have left the realm of Science, STOP MIXING Science & Evolution together as One!
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
Evolution is science. You can say it isn't all you want; that doesn't change reality. Everything I've said can be proven beyond any reasonable doubt through both genetics and the fossil record. That video provides an hour of what we KNOW (not merely "believe") about evolution.
Humans ARE apes. Your incoherent screaming doesn't change that.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew It's a FACT that the DNA of humans and chimpanzees is 98% identical but when you start connecting dots, that when you leave the realm of science. Your fundamental assumptions are so far out it's no wonder you take the stance you do. Believe what you want but evolution only happened in imagination. Evolution does not CREATE anything new, it only works with the information that ALREADY there....
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
"when you start connecting dots, that when you leave the realm of science. "
Define "connecting dots." Plus, we can demonstrate that the dots ARE connected.
"Evolution does not CREATE anything new, it only works with the information that ALREADY there...."
Blatant lie. You will probably now attempt to give "information" an obscure definition so you can shift the goal posts all you want.
tinyurl . com / 5j5chg
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@CROBN
The fact of the matter is that you can't explain ERVs, atavisms, transitional forms, physiological, anatomical, and molecular vestiges, ontogeny and developmental biology, protein functional redundancy, convergent phenotypes, mobile genes, observed speciation, or any twin-nested hierarchy of phylogenetic clades WITHOUT evolution.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew Your statement is laughable and your ignorance is truly astounding You find data that support the theory BUT there is TONS more data that disapproves thoes claims. You hit the hammer right on the nail(No pun intended); Such assumptions are entirely logical But that does not mean it's true.
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
" there is TONS more data that disapproves thoes claims."
Name a single bit of data that falsifies evolution. You would win a Nobel Prize.
" there are still people that believe that everything came from nothing without a cause."
Not only is this a pathetic straw man of the Big Bang, it has nothing to do with evolution. You are full of misinformation.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew Look up the data yourself;The whole point of science is to know. Word of advise, if your going to teach a theroy as a FACT, start from the beginning. Straw man of not, you have to start in the beginning.
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN *theory
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
Nice cop out and non sequitur.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew Cop out? Your funny bro...The theory of evolution is not limited to biology, so please don't limit it to that scope. Also theories are constantly being refigured, and new research frequently renders old ideas outdated or incomplete. Evolution theory is no different :D And lets try to remember one thing, were talking about theory NOT FACT!
CROBN 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CROBN
"The theory of evolution is not limited to biology, so please don't limit it to that scope. "
Another blatant lie. You've been watching too much Kent Hovind.
" theories are constantly being refigured, and new research frequently renders old ideas outdated or incomplete."
Every scientific theory is incomplete. This doesn't mean they're inaccurate.
"were talking about theory NOT FACT!"
Don't any of you graduate high school? Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution explains the facts.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@CROBN
Still waiting for this so-called "data" that falsifies evolution...
Evolution is far different from what Darwin envisioned, but it's still evolution via natural selection. Again, you can't explain anything I listed below without evolution.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew That is so crack up funny. Dawkins is right up on his sci-fi. What an idiot!!! Why does he have so many devoted followers? Good to see you guys still waving the flag of stupidity and ignorance. More power to you Good day sir.
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
I love tantrums.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@TheZooCrew I love living contradiction.
CROBN 4 days ago
@CROBN
I like when this happens. When crazy, dishonest people start incoherently screaming, it's a good sign.
TheZooCrew 4 days ago
@CROBN "BUT there is TONS more data that disapproves thoes claims."
Actually no - assuming you are talking about disproving evolution. As zoo said you would win a nobel prize if you can do it.
Many have made this empty claim - ALL have failed.
mtbee9 3 days ago
@mtbee9 There are MANY gaps In the fossil records not to mention breeding limitations. Should I go on? What about punctuated equilibrium which directly opposes the Laws of Genetics! The big problem with natural selection Is that it ONLY works with Data that is already there, lacks the abilty to CREATE NEW LIFE FORMS. What about the alleged “Missing Links” between Man and Ape? What about the debunking of vestigial organs Or transitional forms. Big reason why its a THEORY, not FACT!
CROBN 3 days ago
@CROBN "There are MANY gaps In the fossil record" Er - do you mean the fossil record does not have examples of all the species that have ever existed. Duh well of course not.
Does the record we do have show the gradual change over time from one form to another - YES it does!
"lacks the abilty to CREATE NEW LIFE FORMS" Nope sorry this has been shown how forms can change over time.
"debunking of vestigial organs Or transitional forms"
Vestigial organs - well understood.
Transitional forms exist!
mtbee9 3 days ago
@mtbee9 It has been well established that intermediate forms do not exist. What does exist are typological forms, where the divisions of successive classes such as those between reptiles and mammals, between lemurs and monkeys, between mosses and ferns, are absolutely clear cut. What I mean by typological forms is that biological variations take place, but change is always circumscribed by the boundaries of the type (or kind). Whatever conclusion you wish to draw from the fossil...
TheHistoryguy10 2 days ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "between lemurs and monkeys" The evidence linking lemurs and monkeys is enormous. DNA and Morphology alone show a tremendous relationship as with all primates. The fossil record shows others species that share similarities between different living species. So it is fairly obvious that the species diverged from a common ancestor (or link if you prefer). Same with your other examples. Obviously not all intermediaries are fossilized but there are enough to show their relationship.
mtbee9 2 days ago
@mtbee9 It appears to me that you are describing "homology," where the structure between parts of different organisms have a likeness or similarity. One could think of the wing of a bat and the human arm having a certain likeness or similarity. However, comparative anatomy does not provide evidence for evolution in the way that evolution is conceived. One would need true intermediate forms that would demonstrate a true sequential step from one form to another.
TheHistoryguy10 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10
""homology," where the structure between parts of different organisms have a likeness or similarity. "
That is not homology. Homology can only be said to present if common ancestry is established between the species in question. I've told you this before, but you continue to lie as if you were never corrected. Why? Why not actually try to learn something?
I'm thinking Jesus Camp. That's why.
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@TheZooCrew "I'm thinking Jesus Camp" I agree. It would be more interesting discussing things with these people if they had an alternative idea that matched the evidence but they don't. They cling to ancient stories and wishes of gods and then try and use their belief to say Evolution is wrong when it is supported by mountains of evidence. Most do not understand it or what 'evidence' is!
mtbee9 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "where the structure between parts of different organisms have a likeness or similarity" Yes that is true, which in turn is supported by the DNA structure.
As gradual change has been observed the only logical explanation is Evolution.
If you disagree please explain how the fossil record shows what it does? How did all the fossils appear gradually over 500 MY and change slightly from one fossil to the next.
Please provide your alternate explanation, with references.
mtbee9 1 day ago
@mtbee9 Thank you for providing a source that could be analyzed. However, the article talks about “molecular divergence dates” not “sequential intermediate forms” as I asked. Therefore, it does not provide evidence for intermediate forms in the sense of macro-evolution. The work of the two authors is only hypothetical estimations of how divergence may have taken place from a common ancestor. They base their work on paleontology and the “molecular clock” to form their estimations.
TheHistoryguy10 13 hours ago
@mtbee9 The authors are honest, but they do not provide evidence of the “sequence of intermediate forms.” They admit that the molecular clock and the fossil record create problems. They write, “There are many potential pitfalls in the calibration of molecular clocks, including a poor fossil record.” This means that their estimations are not based on pure evidence from paleontology, that is, true sequential intermediate forms.
TheHistoryguy10 13 hours ago
@mtbee9 They also state that the “molecular clock allows scientists to estimate the antiquity of a lineage and divergence dates using molecular data.” It is clear that the molecular clock can only be used to “estimate antiquity,” but it cannot provide definitive conclusions based on the actual course of events in natural history. You may think that their work provides evidence of links between the 13 different primates, but what the authors actually provide are estimated guesses of...
TheHistoryguy10 13 hours ago
@mtbee9 ...what may have happened in the past. Also, the authors assume the truth of evolution and try to correlate all of their work to fit within the evolutionary framework. Therefore, I am still left looking for true “sequential intermediate forms” as expected in the macro-evolution framework. For the lack of sequential intermediate forms my source is Stephen J. Gould. In “Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin” he writes, “The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages...
TheHistoryguy10 13 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10
Nice job dishonestly quote-mining Gould.
tinyurl . com / 4uece
This is what happens when you get all of your information from admittedly dishonest people.
" I am still left looking for true “sequential intermediate forms” as expected in the macro-evolution framework."
Only because you ignore clear evidence when it's presented. mtbee is far from the only one here who has posted multiple examples.
How do you think they found Tiktaalik?
TheZooCrew 13 hours ago
@TheZooCrew You may call it quote mining, but I call it "what the man said." You do well to listen to what Gould is saying. As Louis Agassiz said a long time ago, "naturalists are chasing a phantom."
TheHistoryguy10 12 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10
"You may call it quote mining, but I call it "what the man said." "
I'm not the one who decides whether it's quote-mining or not. It's quote-mining by definition. That's not at all what Gould meant and you'd know it if you actually read the entire thing. Of course, you probably actually know what Gould actually meant are are merely incapable of anything but lying.
TheZooCrew 12 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10
Why do you lie so much?
TheZooCrew 12 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10
Why the hell does what Agassiz said matter whatsoever? No one, including Agassiz, has ever produced empirical evidence of the supernatural.
Again, why are you so dishonest? Doesn't the Bible admonish against it?
TheZooCrew 12 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages..."
If you are expecting fossils of every intermediary of every species it won't happen because the fossil record will always be incomplete. If you don't understand that then you need to do some study on fossilization. Even so the number of intermediaries that have been found for a large variety of species shows without contradiction the gradual change that Evolution predicts.
mtbee9 12 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10 A question for you. Why is it that with all of the religious people out there who cannot accept the evidence that points to Evolution NOBODY has yet come up with any other explanation that fits the facts.
Sure you can claim gods did this or that, but there should be plenty of evidence out there of HOW your imaginary god created all the intermediary fossils, and created the DNA relationships linking them together. But nobody has an answer.
Why do you think that is?
mtbee9 12 hours ago
@mtbee9 ...between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been persistent and nagging for gradualistic accounts of evolution (p. 140).”
TheHistoryguy10 13 hours ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates" I don't know what point in time this quote refers to but it is not true today. With all the evidence we do have it is possible to 'construct' what the intermediaries could have looked like for many species. As zoo says look at Tiktaalik. It looked like we expected and it was found in sediments of the correct periods. The ability to predict outcomes is strong support for the Theory of Evolution.
mtbee9 12 hours ago
@mtbee9 Therefore, I ask you, please provide the collections of sequential intermediate forms from the lemur to the monkey in the fossil record or living in nature. Sure, there are millions of fossils in museums around the world, but from what I have seen, they are all typological forms within a classification. However, I want to see that "sequential intermediate forms" have been discovered. A book, an article or an website will suffice the discovery of these things.
TheHistoryguy10 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10
"from what I have seen, they are all typological forms within a classification."
That is meaningless. You clearly don't understand taxonomy, especially cladistic phylogeny. This is why you learn things before pretending to know things.
tinyurl . com / 88qof
TheZooCrew 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10 "Michael E. Steiper a,b,* and Nathan M. Youngc aDepartment of Anthropology, Hunter College of the City University of New York" from the timetree of life.
Details the divergence of lemurs and chimpanzees at around 74MY ago.
Also from Lemur evolution:
"Lemurs are prosimian primates belonging to the suborder Strepsirrhini. Like other strepsirrhine primates, such as lorises, pottos, and galagos, they share ancestral (or plesiomorphic) traits with early primates."
mtbee9 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10 You can also look up ‘Primate Evolution’ and ‘lemur’ which covers in detail the interrelations between lemurs and other primates.
If you want details of the primate fossils there is a listing of 'Lemur Evolution' that gives details of the fossil record of lemurs.
All you have to do is look it up! No fossil record is complete but there are similar fossil records for horses and whales. Even the Dinosaurs show gradual change over their 200 MY reign. The evidence is all around you
mtbee9 1 day ago
@TheHistoryguy10 Dumb.
moronfifty 2 days ago
@mtbee9 ...record, it provides no evidence whatsoever for believing that one type of organism was ever converted gradually into another through a series of intermediate forms. At the end of the day, the empirical pattern of existing nature conforms very well to the typological model. To refute the typological model, and validate evolutionary claims you would need millions (if not billions) of different species, all unambiguously intermediate in terms of their overall biology.
TheHistoryguy10 2 days ago
@TheHistoryguy10
"At the end of the day, the empirical pattern of existing nature conforms very well to the typological model."
/watch?v=uEP7Z55Z6nM
You can keep pretending all the stuff in this video doesn't exist, but it just makes you a liar.
TheZooCrew 2 days ago
@mtbee9 However, this has not been produced by the fossil record or even by any living organism. You need to look into this very carefully.
TheHistoryguy10 2 days ago
@CROBN You have chosen to believe the misrepresentations from creationists over real scientific information. You need to have a good long look at all the current evidence that supports Evolution. All of your arguments have been debunked many times. You are out of date or of course lying on purpose. Open your eyes to the reality.
mtbee9 3 days ago
@CROBN Well, we all know that all species of all animals in the universe strive to autoevolve. That is why the Data Integration Thought Entity exists; to spearhead autoevolution. Of all life that exists in the universe, humans are the only ones capable of it. Also, the world was created five years ago on Tanabata. Pigs fly when we can't see them and the tree in the yard is plotting your demise.
Of course, it's just a theory.
CheezLordLol 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CROBN
"What about punctuated equilibrium which directly opposes the Laws of Genetics!"
You don't know what punctuated equilibrium is.
"The big problem with natural selection Is that it ONLY works with Data that is already there"
Good thing there's something called mutation. Why do you insist on lying?
"What about the alleged “Missing Links” between Man and Ape? "
Humans ARE apes.
"What about the debunking of vestigial organs Or transitional forms."
Does not exist.
TheZooCrew 3 days ago
@CROBN
Incoherent screaming isn't an argument. You're just typing empty words; you're not giving citations to demonstrable science.
TheZooCrew 3 days ago
@CROBN Punctuated equilibrium doesn't go against law of genetics lmao. And of course it is a theory. It will always be a theory. A scientific theory is already as high as it will ever go. It does not get upgraded to a fact, nor does it become a law.
Casshyr 2 days ago
@TheZooCrewI'm sorry if YOU can't tell the difference between observational and guesswork and actually believes that evolution is proven. I’d like to think we have moved beyond all that crap and now live in ‘enlightened’ times, but I am afraid not. Even though we have put men on the moon and taken photos of the earth from space, there are still people that believe that everything came from nothing without a cause.
CROBN 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CROBN "the difference between observational and guesswork and actually believes that evolution is proven" LOL
Good one. Yes observational = Science; Religion = Guesswork.
I have no problem with telling the difference!
Oh and Evolution is a well tried and tested theory that has met all challenges so far. Enough to be considered fact just like the theory of gravity. Care to falsify either one!
mtbee9 3 days ago
listen to what he says @27 "after enough time passes the populations will no longer be capable of mating at all, and a new species is said to formed" WHAT? you cant mate so how does a new species form? lol
1010000010011000 5 days ago
@1010000010011000
"you cant mate so how does a new species form?"
Well, yes. When two populations start out as the same species and then after isolation can no longer mate, now you have two species where there used to be one. It's really simple.
TheZooCrew 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheZooCrew does it mean the following statement applies to you?
"so u think God exists and you have answers to anything."
swandike 6 days ago
@TheZooCrew pardon the worst typo.
swandike 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew I was expecting an outburst whenever you lack answers. could u not answer questions without imsult and abuse?
just plain English language.
so u think God does not exist yet you don't have answers to anything. I won't what ignorant really mean when u tell people that they are.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike
"so u think God does not exist yet you don't have answers to anything."
Two blatant lies.
TheZooCrew 6 days ago
@swandike
"so u think God does not exist yet you don't have answers to anything."
Thats not true, but even if it was, you dont get to pretend it was your imaginary friend.
gorilla199uncensored 4 days ago
@TheHistoryguy10 very interesting questions.
digressing might be the only escape route.
swandike 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozowen "Science isn't about proving beyond
any doubt- that's a court room."
so obviously u know there are doubts. and since its not a courtroom, let those doubts be. well done.
"Evolution explains how we got here,
not how life began. Different science."
it's all science isn't it? if you think evolution disproves the Bible then u missed the mark. wrong science. since the Bible explains the origin of life. and evolution doesn't, so they are 2 different arguments.
swandike 1 week ago
@ozowen if science is about proving beyond any doubt, then we seriously need to have proofs for Darwinism. there are tons of doubts that we are forced to ignore and accept as is. secondly, if scientists cannot explain the origin of life, that leaves us lost in time. same questions arise everytime evolution is talked about, how did we get here? if unsure about anything, you don't rule out any possibility. it's just common sense.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike
Evolution explains how we got here, not how life began. Different science.
Science isn't about proving beyond any doubt- that's a court room.
ozowen 1 week ago
@ozowen "As for scientists, there is nothing at all
to be gained by searching for an ark in
a flood that simply never happened"
exactly, there is nothing to be gained to support Darwinism, which is being forced on every child in school, but it might disprove Darwinism if the Ark is found to be the Biblical Noah 's Ark. will it not be unfair to a generation that their governments decide what to research and what not to.
yes satanism is being practiced by governments,read about it.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike Yeah, "Darwinism" is so naughty. Just cos evolution is the foundational theory of Biology and yields benefits in genetics, epidemiology, medicine, agriculture. Just cos that dreadful stuff about an ancient earth works for mineral exploration and YECS doesn't.
It's a big fake innit?
ozowen 1 week ago
@ozowen there is only one Noah's Ark on mount Ararat in eastern Turkey. there cannot be any other. I havent been there myself but I cannot believe it fits the Biblical Ark and yet people just dismiss it. if it was a dinosaur fossil, the satanic governments will be all it trying to prove Darwinism. is it a threat to atheism to find the truth? why are the scientists not there? if creationism sounds magical, try explaining the origin of life with science, you need more than faith to believe it.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike
There are enough claims for the Ark to keep everyone happy. Not one is real so it's all a joke.
Satanic governments?
As for scientists, there is nothing at all to be gained by searching for an ark in a flood that simply never happened. 5 civilisations continued through the alleged time of the ark. They didn't get wet. (that's 5 we know of).
There is no flood layer.
Why search? As for abiogenesis- it makes no difference to evolution at all. Evolution still happens
ozowen 1 week ago
@thisprophecy it is so surprising they managed to have so much support and tax payers money to fund such a blatant lie, Darwinism. the governments are not even interested in the discovery of Noah's ark in eastern Turkey. so many archeological discoveries of the Bible, like mt Sinai in Saudi Arabia, goes unnoticed. so unbelievable. even if it is a hoax, let's prove that it is. no mention of it in any textbook.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike if you believe tax money has anything to do with the subject, you have a long way to go. the real question for you is how a country can continue to function on 14 trillion dollars worth of debt. remember the borrower is always subservient to the lender... the grand hoax (including the monopolization of the educational system) has be perpetrated on all of us. clue: their babylonian/egyptian religious symbol is samck dab on the back of your dollar bill...
thisprophecy 1 week ago
@swandike "the governments are not even interested in the discovery of Noah's ark in eastern Turkey"
Which one? There have been a number of findings of Noah's Ark in East Turkey. It appears in so many places and keeps on turning out to be a fake. It has however fostered an industry in that part of the world ripping of creationist suckers- I guess that's a good thing- apparently everyone is happy that way.
ozowen 1 week ago
Darwinian evolution is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on mankind.
thisprophecy 1 week ago
@thisprophecy
I love conspiracy theories without any evidence whatsoever, too.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew to ignore archeology, to dismiss anthropological evidence as myth is failure to grasp the big picture. evidence, whether it is of physical or spiritual nature is still evidence. oh, how they beat the ludacrous assupmtion into you students of how science should have nothing to do with the spiritual. for plato did study in egypt of the occult mysteries under priests and and spoke of atlantis. yes, the science of social control has been practiced for millenia.
thisprophecy 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thisprophecy "Darwinian evolution is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on mankind."
Yeah, darn that hoax for evolution being the foundational theory of Biology, drat it to bits for underpinning all modern medicine. Blast its hide for being essential to the entire field of genetics, sod it for being such a useful tool in agriculture, bugger it I say for all that it has contributed to epidemiology!
It's a huge fraud....... er.....
ozowen 1 week ago
How did abiogenesis happen and the first cell reproduce and not die off ????
If one cell was all that was left and it reproduced asexually isnt there a huge chance it could die off ???
LiveFreeOrDie1985 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sinosauropteryx prima. A dinosaur covered with primitive feathers, but structurally similar to unfeathered dinosaurs Ornitholestes and Compsognathus (Chen et al. 1998; Currie and Chen 2001).
benaberry 1 week ago
So much endless derp. Science vs ancient novel: who will win?!
phantasmagorial 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew you sound quite gullible. I could easily convince you to do anything. I have observed that from your argument with thehistoryguy10 . so you think I cannot make a similar video with email proofs if I hated creationism and anything that proofs it. honesty comes with having morals, which originated from religion. I could not trust any video from atheist unless I verify myself.
swandike 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swandike
"honesty comes with having morals, which originated from religion."
Nice try, Orwell. "Morals" come from biology, and I can prove it.
" I could easily convince you to do anything."
That's not even close to true.
"I could not trust any video from atheist unless I verify myself."
I was wondering when petty bigotry would come up.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew I could just make a video telling you that there are 4 moons around earth. will u believe it? you could try and send an email or visit them or perhaps fax or call them. verify for yourself. instead of getting all your facts from youtube
swandike 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swandike
"you could try and send an email or visit them or perhaps fax or call them. verify for yourself."
This is exactly what DonExodus did, and he included screenshots of the emails he sent. Clearly you didn't even try to watch the video.
The very premise of that list is dishonest regardless of the names on it. Skepticism of ALL claims is good science. Skepticism does not translate to dissent. Creationists often misrepresent that list.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@Craigmw45 check this website and tell me if they are creationists and worse of all have phony phDs. dissentfromdarwin*org
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike
/watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM
Yeah, everything about that "list" is dishonest.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@Helge129 phony phDs? huh?
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike "phony phDs? huh?"
He's probably referring to the fact that many of the creationists from places like ICR or the discovery institute either have degree's from non-accredited universites (buy your degree online) or PhD's in irrelevant fields, like philosophy, law, business, or what have you.
The only two famous creation defenders that I know of with legitimize PhD's in a relevant field are Gish, and Behe, though Behe hardly counts since he doesn't argue against common descent
Craigmw45 1 week ago
@Craigmw45
Gish doesn't really count because he lies his ass off when he should know better and this can be proven (hence "Gish Gallop"). Jonathan Wells is another one in this category.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@phantasmagorial "needing to see "evidence" , cause
the book has true science like virgin
births and demonic talking snakes."
which is more impossible to you as an atheist or whatever
1. creating the entire universe in 6 days
2. a talking snake and virgin birth.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike If you believe that land mammals magically and atheistically altered organs and limbs while evolving into whales upon crossing millions of years and numerous species being led by the myth of natural selection you are no stranger to mythological beliefs. Shintoism and Greek mythology have similar approaches in their holy scriptures. It is its calling itself a science and claiming that science = everything ought to be explained atheistically that makes of Darwinism a unique religion
alexthasy 1 week ago
@alexthasy Hi alex, gonna spray your untruth and lies about again? Well done you liar, you deceiver, you vile little speaker of wrong.
ozowen 1 week ago
@alexthasy magically and atheistically? those those are contradicting statements.
And who says only land mammals evolved?
You have a narrow perspective dude, very narrow.
Axiodox 1 week ago
@phantasmagorial "Every biologist, geologist,
paleontologist and what have you,
has come together in a big conspiracy
against Christianity, making up the
fossil record and genetics and
everything else we know as they go
along. "
you cannot use "every " because not every scientist agree with evolution. there are loads if scientists out there who have serious doubts of evolution, abiogenesis.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike Pretty much every biologist, exept those few creationists which phony PhDs, accept evolution.
Helge129 1 week ago
@Helge129 Biologists get paid to lie about evolution, I will disprove it with logic reason and science for free. I love truth. Natural selection yes. Evolution no. Its not science, none of it is observed but imagined. It doesnt matter if the majority believe it. They are wrong. There is no such thing as an expert in evolution because it does not exists.
marigolds44 1 week ago
@marigolds44 You are clearly delusional.
Helge129 1 week ago
@Helge129 I would be happy to disprove evolution to you with logic and reason for free even if it takes all month. PM me. i will be happy to show you, how you are deluded greatly to believe in evolution. All belief systems come from ones paradigm on the origin of life. I am 100 percent certain that I am right, and i feel sorry for anyone who believes evolution, and will help them. I care
marigolds44 1 week ago
@marigolds44 "I am 100 percent certain that I am right," So you are arrogant. Evolution is proven to be accurate. You can not believe in evolution, you can only accept it. It's not a system of beliefs, By defintion.
Helge129 1 week ago
@Helge129 I am 100 percent certain through observation of data that evolution is not true. Are you absolutely sure there are no absolutes. I believe in truth justice and the Aemerican Way. I prefer Aristotle over Plato. Crendtials are meaningless when ascer
taing truth. Atheist worship credentials they can't think independently. If you learned evolution at U of Michigan that just means the professors there either lied or are
fools.
marigolds44 1 week ago
@marigolds44 Saying that you are 100 percent certain makes you arrogant. Absolutes exist only in mathematics.
Helge129 1 week ago
@Helge129 So then you have faith. I am just as certain that evolution isn't true as I am 2+2=4. Certainty and arrogance have different meanings. I'm not arrogant at all. I pretty much have been humbled from a life of pain and dissapointment.
marigolds44 1 week ago
@marigolds44 You can not be humble and claim absolute certainty at the same time. Specially, you can't be humble and be certain that evolution is false.
Claiming absolute certainty that evolution is false does make you arrogant. You claim to be better than thousands, perhaps millions of scientists, that's not humble.
I don't have faith. I accept evolution because that's what the evidence says.
Helge129 1 week ago
@marigolds44
/watch?v=uEP7Z55Z6nM
You lose.
" I am 100 percent certain that I am right"
Already dishonest. No human can claim 100 percent certainty of ANYTHING. We can't perceive absolute truth.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew I am certain 100 percent. But I wont post on this page. I want to allow
you atheists your free expression. I would be happy to disprove evolution for anyone
through PM. I am very concerned for the evolutionist, because I am certain you are wrong
marigolds44 1 week ago
@marigolds44
No thanks. I'd rather not have the same 30-year-old straw men, logical fallacies, and blatant lies clogging up my inbox again.
Especially if the spelling and grammar are as poor as you've demonstrated.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@ozowen basically this does not alter the fact that the Bible or the dead sea scrolls are the words of God. it does not justify believing that there is no God. this does not justify all the deliberate sins. it does justify atheism, nor the agnostic. there is a God. simple as that.
swandike 1 week ago
@ozowen I have a copy of the book of Enoch and it makes sense why it was excluded. the current books of the Bible gives all that u need to understand and serve God. Enoch's account does not alter anything, and it's even harder to understand.
that said, the dead sea scrolls prove that some bunch of people didn't invent Christianity after Jesus left, like some atheist claim. Jesus was prophesied to come. it's also found to be accurate with the Bible.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike Believe it or not. Ozowen pretends to be a Christian
alexthasy 1 week ago
@alexthasy
Talking of pretending to be Christian alex, how's the ultra-lying going?
ozowen 1 week ago
@swandike There are a number of versions of the Book of Enoch. But that isn't the only player. Further, there were a huge array of contenders for the New Testament as well.
ozowen 1 week ago
@phantasmagorial maybe the evidence you found isn't evidence at all, maybe it's some people's desperate attempt to prove what does not exist. u need to ask for the origin of life. it will help. now considering their inability to provide it, u could piece it together, that it's all a lie.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike You know what? You're totally right. Every biologist, geologist, paleontologist and what have you, has come together in a big conspiracy against Christianity, making up the fossil record and genetics and everything else we know as they go along. But they've been thwarted, because anyone who has read a 2000 year old book just knows it's not true with needing to see "evidence", cause the book has true science like virgin births and demonic talking snakes. Good job Sherlock!
phantasmagorial 1 week ago
@phantasmagorial There is no conspiracy against Christianity. Darwinism supporting itself with the myth of natural selection in order to explain the miracle of the creation of the species and rationalize its godlessness is just one more cult competing for a share of the religious market. Land mammals magically and orderly altering organs and limbs while evolving into whales has nothing to envy to Harry Potter or any other witchcraft stories
alexthasy 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew "You DO realize the church formed the
Bible, right? It didn't fall out of the sky
or anything."
I know u are not theist but at least haven't you heard of the dead sea scrolls? do a little research before u give yourself away. these scrolls were even written before Jesus came. and contains prophecies of Jesus.
you can't just sit there and expect any truth from atheist videos. read wider.
swandike 1 week ago
@swandike
TheZooCrew is right. The church did form the Bible. The election and selection of the canon was what the early church did. Some books were excluded, some included. The reasoning is clear enough and the Dead Sea Scrolls don't change this. They just authenticate the relative accuracy of a bunch of the Hebrew scriptures.
ozowen 1 week ago
@ozowen THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO DARWIN AND HIS ATHEIST THEOLOGIANS PREACHING A DARWINIAN GENESIS SUPPORTED BY THE MYTH OF NATURAL SELECTION IS YOUR TRUTH.
alexthasy 1 week ago
@alexthasy YOU'RE A LIAR, A LIAR AND A LIAR. ny reason you thought using caps made your point clearer? It's just that illogical BS and lies aren't made clearer when you use caps alex. Not at all.
ozowen 1 week ago
@ozowen Read my comment to alexthasy and then call me a liar!
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
Why? My accusations against alex have to do with his making lies about me, many times.
Alex lies about many things, I just got tired of it, especially since he attempts to paint himself as being all out for God.
As for your posts, so far the only thing I object to is the wording that appears designed to make it look like a bad thing that those thought trends were happening. "Pushing God into the background" is also -dispensing with God of the gaps theology
ozowen 1 week ago
@ozowen Well, I did not know that you guys were attacking each other. I thought that you were calling him a liar because of his thoughts on evolution. However, I do not think that poking people in the eye will help them accept your view. I may have a little chat with him behind the scenes to see if he will tone down his comments.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10 I doubt alex actually believes a word of what he says. He certainly can't provide a shred of proof for any claim he ever makes.
I have had plenty of debates with creationists, most are civil. Some YECSers are outright abusive, but alex is different. He refuses to actually respond to posts- presents illogical nonsense and then demands it be treated not as a claim but as evidence.
Some folks think he is a POE. This is possible. Be told- he will lie to you as well.
ozowen 1 week ago
@ozowen Well then why follow him around? Unless you like chat fights, I would not bother. I do understand that emotions can run high, but I just get over it, even if someone lies about what I have said. When someone sends an attack my way, I just ignore it and move on. There are plenty of other people you could chat with on youtube.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10 If you want to grow in your faith, You should only share with those having your own belief in a Darwinian Shamanistic voodoo evolutionary creation. Otherwise you will start doubting Darwinian theologians like Dawkins who are preaching that species are designoids not intelligently designed in order to rationalize that they could be the result of an atheistic evolutionary process.
alexthasy 1 week ago
@ozowen Are you the guy in the videos that are on your channel?
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@ozowen You have no respect for those honouring an omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent creator God. I have seen you time after siding with atheists in blaspheming God and reviling those magnifying his name. You feel much better when fellowshiping with atheists as long as they are sharing your faith in your prophet Darwin and his rewriting of Genesis
alexthasy 1 week ago
@ozowen Go and kiss ass with your atheist brothers in Darwin and keep blaspheming God and reviling those honoring his name. Your father and their father is a liar and Darwin is his Satan's Prophet.
alexthasy 1 week ago
@alexthasy @alexthasy "Go and kiss ass with your atheist brothers in Darwin"
Why would you make comments like this one? Why are your comments so hostile constantly? Let me remind you what the Bible tells us to put on. Galatians 5:22-23 & 25 says, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit."
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@alexthasy Gentleness should appear in our words as we approach others who hold a different view than us. Approaching people with spiteful words is not a good way to approach them.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
You should probably be aware that most creationists are like alexthasy and swandike.
Also, your fallacy of equivocation (evolution is a "view" just like creationism) is getting tiresome.
/watch?v=uEP7Z55Z6nM
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew If you are getting tired, then you do not have to watch or listen. No one is making you read my comments. There are plenty of other people you could chat with on youtube. I wish you the best.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
I guess my initial thought that you might be an honest person was way off base.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew Okay, so what do you mean by that?
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
Well, I thought you were merely an innocently deceived individual capable of independent thought; that you might alter your views once presented with evidence.
Instead, the only things separating you from other creationists are civility and literacy.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew Listen, I have to go to bed for work tomorrow, but I will talk to you later.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew Here is a very real problem that you face, that evolutionary theory is a “view” without a lot of evidence, and is very dogmatic. You do not agree with this but I think it is worth looking into for you. Evolutionary theory has become more and more dogmatic as the decades have gone by. This is evidenced by the hostility that is directed towards the dissents from orthodoxy. Anything that is said to be evidence against it, is discharged...
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
"evolutionary theory is a “view” without a lot of evidence, and is very dogmatic."
/watch?v=uEP7Z55Z6nM
I could do this all day.
Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution. This is yet another straw man. You've been told this before, you're just dishonest.
Notice how you didn't present a single scientific argument against evolution. All you did was assert a vast, century-old perfect conspiracy without a shred of evidence. This makes you paranoid, nothing more.
TheZooCrew 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew Boy, you fit the profile I described in my previous post to a T. You said that I ignore the scientific method (unscientific), I lie or am dishonest, I have irrational beliefs, and you even said that I have symptoms of a mental illness. These are all the things a person says when another person dissents from evolutionary orthodoxy.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheZooCrew "Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution." Okay, let me ask you a question, where does abiogenesis end and evolution begin? Are you sure they are not connected at all?
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
ILL MAKE THIS SIMPLE FOR YOU AGAIN!
PROVIDE EVIDENCE
YOUR GOD EXISTS
IT DID IT!
LOL
Oh thats right you wont as even uyou know there isnt a tiny bit of evidence for it!
STOP PRETENDING IN THAT BASELESS CRAP!
gorilla199uncensored 1 week ago
@gorilla199uncensored Provide evidence that matter by itself did it or whatever else you think did it.
TheHistoryguy10 1 week ago
@TheHistoryguy10
LOL yet again not even an attempt to provide evidence for your god!
Thats because we both know there is none!
Now retard. As I told you before. Even if we didnt know anything and where as ignorant as you pretend to be or are.
DOESNT MEAN YOU GET CLAIM IT WAS YOUR PREFERED IMAGINARY MAGIC THING!
Also since nobody saw your god let alone do anything (since it doenst exist) you should follow your argument of unobserved, unlike evolution which is science.
gorilla199uncensored 1 week ago