John i have a lot of respect for you man, i more or less do a similar thing to this, locally, and the number of people that attack, and get rude is amazing to me just on a local level, and it's hard to to convince people that we actually have good points and a good case, when they always accept the strategically formed sentences that are full of imagination and fuzzy fairytale words that are in the "science" books over the hard facts that we find and present, keep it up GOD BLESS!!!
No, he is not a Scientist. He has a degree in Chemisty [just like me] He has never had a job as a scientist. He does not understand Biology or Geology.
We all know god plated dinosaurs seed on earth that's why there are dinosaurs bones...and how Noah just forgot to put the dinosaurs on the boat...but had more then 8.7 million species on there...I have no facts to back it up but,I have I lap coat on,:D
This guy seems like such a humble and intelligent person...This is a great video..and he has a dinosaur on his tie..terrible Lizard a creationists..Evolutionists lose again..everything they know now rests on the backs of great Creationists scientists of the past..haha..evolution what a hoax..KFD haha that was funny..Shotgun..Dr.Walt Brown proves the Hydroplate theory!Dino's ate blueberry's and cat's ate watermelons..cool..God is perfect, areyou? Oh yeah you think you are..ok..23:38 u r brnwshed
@doobersmanster I wish I could give you 100 thumbs up for your comment. A lot of people on here are just flat out ignorant and rotten. They pick on the guy for his lab coat and stuff but say nothing about all of the great info he shares that further confirms the bible's history. John seems very intelligent and has a great personality and sense of humor. I like this guy & wish he had more vids.
This guy seems like such a humble and intelligent person...This is a great video..and he has a dinosaur on his tie..terrible Lizard a creationists..Evolutionists lose again..everything they know now rests on the backs of great Creationists scientists of the past..haha..evolution what a hoax..KFD haha that was funny..Shotgun..Dr.Walt Brown proves the Hydroplate theory!Dino's ate blueberry's and cat's ate watermelons..cool..God is perfect, areyou? Oh yeah you think you are..ok..23:38 u r brnwshed
This guy seems like such a humble and intelligent person...This is a great video..and he has a dinosaur on his tie..terrible Lizard a creationists..Evolutionists lose again..everything they know now rests on the backs of great Creationists scientists of the past..haha..evolution what a hoax..KFD haha that was funny..Shotgun..Dr.Walt Brown proves the Hydroplate theory!Dino's ate blueberry's and cat's ate watermelons..cool..God is perfect, areyou? Oh yeah you think you are..ok..23:38 u r brnwshed
Some think that when the fallen angels messed around with people, they also messed around with animals. Could dinosuars be a result of that messing around?
Plesiosuars aren't considered dinosaurs. The major feature that really distinguishes them from other reptiles is the position of their limbs. True "dinosaurs"
No John you are not a Scientist. You have never had a job as a Scientist. You don't think like someone who has studied Science. Are you sure you studied Chemistry?
Insects were larger because the atmosphere was a much higher percent oxygen. Insects have passive respiration which relies on diffusion. The higher oxygen content allowed them to grow larger, as more oxygen would be able to diffuse through a thicker body. This has been shown in laboratory tests today. The mammals were different species, now extinct. Just more evidence for evolution, extinction and speciation. This guy is an idiot.
IF there is no creator how did everything get into it's place? Where did the materials come from? Who organized it? Surely we didnt just happen? Another question I have for all of you nay sayers. The first living organism surfaces.. what does it eat? something had to live first right? Wouldn't it have starved?
@woobstoob Have you not been through high school biology the earliest life was a bacteria probably using photosynthesis or a similar process to produce food there are many modern bacteria that use these process not to mention the grass in your lawn and the tree in your yard.
Wow, people think he's a scientist. A "creation" scientist". He studies "creationism". Found any evidence yet buddy? Observed the "mechanism" for "creationism" yet? Or have you "tested" for the "existence" of God?
Really?
Cause we've observed evolution in everyway. It is a fact that evolution occurs. But you keep looking. I think it's great they allow special people to be active in society.
if dinosaurs existed before the flood, why did noah dis obey god when he said take two of every animal? also, if the world wide flood did happen, why are there still fresh water fish? wouldnt the salination of the worlds water supply have killed them?
15 ¶ Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
"Eat grass like an ox?" Sauropod dinosaurs, such as Brachiosaurus were totally incapable of eating grass like an ox. They feed on vegetation by ripping it off with their teeth and swallowing it, which was then "chewed" by having gastroliths to aid in digestion) grind up the vegetation through peristalic movement. This was a method totally unlike the rumination of oxen.
16 ¶ Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
"Navel" a physical structure where an umbilical cord would have been attached when he was in his mother's uterus. Dinosaurs, as egg-laying animals, did not have umbilical cords, and therefore did not have navels.
17 ¶ HE MOVETH HIS TAIL LIKE A CEDAR: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
It does Not say that his tail is the size of a cedar but rather moveth like a cedar. Moreover, the "tail" is a euphemism for male genitalia. Support for this is based on the meaning of the Hebrew word "move" which means "extend" and on the second part of verse 17 describing the sinew around its "stones" (the Vulgate uses the word "testiculorum")
Cicero confirms that ancients used to refer to the penis as the "tail". This interpretation is lent further credence by the fact that discussion of this organ is followed by a description of the beast's "stones" which the Targums equate with the testicles.
The comparison of the "tail" with a tree was metaphorical and that it was intended to convey the impressive dimensions of this appendage. In accordance with these interpretations, this passage is rendered by translator Stephen Mitchell to read, "Behold now the Beast" His penis stiffens like a pine; his testicles bulge with vigor."
21 ¶ He lieth under the lotus-trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
The NASB renders the passage as: "Under the lotus plants he lies down, the willow (reeds) of the brook surround him." As Greg Neyman notes, "it is difficult to imagine the Argentinosaurus, (a large Sauropod) at 100 feet long, and height of 40 feet when standing (sitting , probably 20 feet tall), resting under the short limbs of a lotus plant, nor would he be able to take cover in reeds only a few feet tall.
Didn't the world assume that left-handed people were evil some 300 years ago? Or even some 50 years ago in Catholic countries, where left-handed children were forced to write with their right hand.
No silly, the dinosaurs weren't on the ark because they were bad time-keepers and their arms were too short for watches. Don't you people know anything?
Mommy, when I grow up can I buy a white coat and pretend to be intelligent? You sure can Timmy, you sure can.
have u ever heard of a guy by the name of CARL SAGAN???? why dont argue with his works, creationists? bring it on. the guy is dead and could bring up a greater argument than this prick.
I think you have know idea what you are talking about. let me make it short for you. first evolutionists believe that we came from dust particles and with millions of years "evolved." speciations only comes about when that organism has the same DNA information. A monkey can't grow fins can it?
"first evolutionists believe that we came from dust particles and with millions of years "evolved.""
Nope... ironic you state that. Considering that creationists believe that Adam was made of dust from the Earth, that the Earth was without form and made apparently from nothing, and that a woman was made of a rib.
Oh, and by the way... the DNA molecule isn't holding information inside it's chemicals, it's a molecule. Not a computer. And nothing in biology says a monkey should grow fins.
Well Mr. Scientist, if were any such thing, you would know that your very existence is undeniable proof that the earth and Cosmos is billions of years old.
Saying fake fossils and such are evidence against evolution is kinda funny. At least the scientists discover the fakes and disprove em asap, Unlike the creationists who havent even discovered that the bible is not the word of god...
Is this video along with his others satirical? Because if it isn't, I feel sorry for this man.
No chemist would regard amber as a crystalline object, because it isn't crystal. And as for the supposed "proof" that we discovered the blood cells of dinosaurs, that has also been proven to be false.
They never were blood cells to begin with.
This guy is an embarassment to the scientific community. What a nutter.
So what does this imply? It implies that matter has always existed--there is no need for a creator.
Creationists, theists, and supernaturalists should cease being so incomprehensibly dishonest with themselves [intellectually].
God, as well as any given religion is solely based on blind assumption without any coherent proof or tangible evidence; believing in it is the delusionment of the mind.
Dale Neumann, 47, of Wausau, Wis. chose prayer to save his child. He was convicted in the March 23, 2008, death of his daughter, Madeline, from undiagnosed diabetes. Prosecutors contended he should have rushed the girl to a hospital because she couldn't walk, talk, eat or drink. Instead, Madeline died on the floor of the family's rural Weston home as people surrounded her and prayed. Someone called 911 when she stopped breathing.
Jesus died because he had poor political connections in a time when political connections were the difference between life and death. Three days later he was STILL dead because he was human. Maybe they, (the Disciples) went to the wrong tomb, maybe somebody stole the corpse but JESUS lived as a Jewish MAN...and died as many Jews did at the hands of the ruling party; which was ROME. There is no great mystery
Exactly. Jesus was a great guy. We should listen to his teachings because they were pretty remarkable. But Jesus is not God. He was simply a man. I belive in a higher being of some kind. But I also realize that all organized religion is a bunch of bullshit. By the way, EVOLUTION IS A FACT. Grow up and deal with it.
I'm a Christian. I believe in God's creative act. I also believe in evolution.
I don't understand why there's a conflict. The Bible isn't a science book, it's a metaphorical poetic work, and to deny this is to destroy its meaning and value. Intelligent design is absurd.
@qabala Even the greatest proponents of evolution do not call it a fact. It has ever been observed and furthermore there is not a shred of actual evidence that it ever took place. I know this comment was done over a year, but I could not help notice your statement. I find it interesting that some are hell bent in believing that man is only an animal from an ape-like creature. Then when our children act accordingly we are surprised by there behavior.
Actually, the greatest proponets of evolution know that it is BOTH a fact and a theory.
The fact that populations evolve has been witnessed several time in nature and in the lab.
The theory itself is supported by tremendous amounts of evidence. It is the ONLY explanation for the variety of life that makes any testable and repeatable predictions.
Evolution, in no way, makes the claim that humans are ONLY animals.
Perhaps you should actually know what you're refuting.
@qabala Firstly, let us define microevolution, which you are apparently describing, which is not evolution at all, but simply variety within the DNA of species. Macroevolution, in which species allege to have evolved into other species. Macroevolution has never been observed. Please do the research or ask any evolutionist professor. There are no transitional links that have ever been found. Evolution does claim humans evolve from animals which evolve ultimately from primordial slime?
The flavobacterium developed the ability to injest nylon (a substance that has only existed for a little over 50 years) by a series of mutations that resulted in new genetic information. It was not merely variety within the species since the information had not existed previously.
Italian wall lizards, released in Crotia, developed cecal valves after on 50 years. They did no have them previously.
There is no such thing as an "evolutionist" professor.
@qabala The flavobacterium is a good example of adaptation, aka micro evolution, same as people with black skin. Macro evolution would mean that the flavobacterium would indeed become something other than flavobacterium...but thats impossible , and thats why it has never happened. Your ignorance is very good entertainment. keep posting please.
The population was speciated from other flavobacteria. That, by definition, is MACROevolution.
Your ignorance of what evolution actually states is astonishing. Evolution does not claim that a flavobacterium would ever become or give birth to anything other than a flavobacterium.
Evolution only predicts that species diversify within their clades.
It would help if you actually knew what you were refuting.
Macro and Micro evolution ARE THE SAME BLOODY THING. I'm utterly sick of you Fundys even mentioning the terms. If you had a basic knowledge of biology you would realize that since DNA -> RNA -> Protein, any change in the genotype will change the phenotype.
You will NEVER hear the words "macro-evolution" or "micro-evolution" spoken at university for this reason, even mentioning them instantly tells everyone that you don't understand the topic at all.
Both the flavobacterium, and the italian wall lizard defy your definition of microevolution as they are new information, not merely variety, but of course your definition isn't the scientific one.
Macroevolution does not claim that species evolve into other species. It is mere a change in alleles beyond the speciation level. Speciation is not a change in species it is a diversification. Two populations of the same species becoming genetically isolated. It's well-documented.
If you assert that no transitional "link" has ever been found, then you are either willfully ignorant of the myriad examples, or you are a conspiracy theorist.
Evolutionary theory, more accurately described, claims that humans and all animals share a common ancestor somewhere along the lines. Whether or not that ancestor was primordial slime is your speculation. There is nothing in the above which asserts that humans are merely animals.
How can you deny this? If men are not evolved from animals then from where else? By the way, have you noticed that primates supposedly on the lower evolutionary scale, are still around while so called species of men are no longer? Do the reasearch about brilliant scientists like Behe who were staunch evolutionists but after studying the complexities of DNA strands in a single cell have concluded that macroevolution is impossible. coelacanth alleged to have been extinct millions of
Years ago was discovered in the Amazon with not one physical change from the fossils. Even Darwin predicted if his theory is true, many transitional fossils will be discovered after his lifetime. Still none are found. By the way when you say it is a theory and a fact that is a self contradicting statement. A statement is a scientific guess based on reasonable evidence. A fact is a proven statement,a statement that is true; a reality.
1st, the discovery of a living coelacanth does not refute evolution in any way. If a species has no environmental pressure to change, it doesn't have to.
2nd, The two specimens which have been found alive are not like any species found in the fossil record. They aren't even from the same cladistic family.
3rd, They were found in South Africa and Indonesia. The Amazon is nowhere near either place.
You must've had to really try to be as wrong about the coelecanth as you are.
There are thousands of transitional fossils. It's funny how little reading creationists do.
A theory is not a "scientific guess". A theory must make observable, testable, and repeatable predictions. For example - Evolution predicted EXACTLY where tiktaalik (a transitional fossil) would be discovered.
You have clearly shown that you have no understanding of evolution and no understanding of what a theory is.
Lower evolutionary scale? There is no such thing. Only your elitism.
Non-human apes are evolved to their environment. Their ancestors had no need for any gain in intelligence, so their living descendants still don't have it.
Michael Behes ass was handed to him in court when he tried to propose irreducible complexity. Ken miller refuted every example he presented by demonstrating exactly how complex structures develop from simpler ones. The transcript is public domain.
@qabala macro evolution has never been proven, even amongst evolutionists. The only thing that has been proven is micro evolution, aka adaptation(such as survival of the fittest). Nice try though....haha
Actually, there have been several speciation events documented. That's all that's required for MACROevolution. So yes, it has been proven through repeatable, predictable, methods.
Adaptation?... Hmmm... That is exactly how random mutation and natural selection work.
I don't expect you to have an answer to this but, what is the actual barrier that you feel prevents a species from diverging into more specific clades? Is there a biological block? A physical block? What prevents it?
@dragoon414 One day a donkey and a horse had some fun, they had a baby, but unfortunately their species had diverged a wee bit too far so the mule that they created was unable to have children of its own. This is an illustration of how what you are calling 'micro evolution' ends up becoming 'macro evolution'. The horse and the donkey are related enough to breed but not close enough to produce breeding offspring. They sit at the borderline of a micro-macro transition.
@qabala 1st go and read the difference between macro/micro evolution then read what you wrote...you are 100% ignorant because you are using the word "evolution" as if there is only 1 kind of evolution...please try to debate that lol
Macro and Micro evolution ARE THE SAME BLOODY THING. I'm utterly sick of you Fundys even mentioning the terms. If you had a basic knowledge of biology you would realize that since DNA -> RNA -> Protein, any change in the genotype will change the phenotype.
You will NEVER hear the words "macro-evolution" or "micro-evolution" spoken at university for this reason, even mentioning them instantly tells everyone that you don't understand the topic at all.
And I'm not surprised to see that you didn't have an answer to my question.
You conclude that there is a limitation to how much a species can vary, but you can't cite any mechanism to prevent it. It must be something at the genetic level, but you have no idea what this imaginary mechanism is, nor could you be bothered to look it up because that would require actually reading.
And yes, speciation, by definition, is an example of MACROevolution.
You need to learn what macro and micro evolution actually are.
Micro evolution and adaptation are not at all the same. Micro evolution is evolution below the species level. Macro evolution is evolution at or above the species level. Speciation events are witnessed all the time.
You obviously don't know what the 2nd law of thermodynamics is.
Your use of it is so wrong it is impossible to begin refuting it.
Like dragoon414, you can't cite a mechanism preventing macro evolution.
@qabala there has never been any macro evolution witnessed, dumbass you cant even list 1 source of evidence, your done son. If 2 species are able to breed the offspring will become a mule, this is old news, did you even pass 1st grade? Doesn't look like it. Name one time when 2 species are able to breed and the offsprine is not a mule? The single celled organisms are more complex than anything man will ever be able to design , let alone completly comprehend, this is because god is awesome.
Italian Wall lizards in Croatia evolving cecal valves.
Nylonase evolving in flavobacteria as well as pseudomensis and E Coli.
Chlorella Vulgaris becoming multicellular
All three are observed instances of macro evolution and I can name many more.
Lions and Tigers are two separate species, but have NEVER produced mules. Speciated animals becoming incompatible genetically is predicted by evolutionary theory.
Your personal attacks speak volumes about your scholarship.
@dragoon414 this is an argument from ignorance: i don't understand how single celled organisms work, so it must be god! god certainly ISN'T the default, and further, we started learning about single celled organisms some 330 years ago, and have long sense understand them to very high degree. please don't respond, if you do at all, with a rebuttal claiming that i'm going to hell, or that i'm ignorant, or that i said YOU were ignorant. Please google "argumentum ad ignorantiam"
@dragoon414 Evolution is when 1 species splits into 2 species that don't interbreed. You IDiots always get it backwards. Some species are still close enough to produce sterile offspring.
@THEVETERAN7 Micro evolution and Macro evolution are one and the same process... Living things divert entropy into their surrounding environment by converting other animals, plants and things into a part of themselves. This process is generally known as 'eating' or ingestion and the energy is converted by our digestive system into usable energy to fuel our metabolism. Life simply avoids entropy for a limited amount of time (we all die) by refuelling and replacing our entropy affected parts.
@TheFreshestTV a theory is a rational explanation of FACTS. We can witness yearly entirely different bacteria and viruses. FACTS-- and the fossil record shows biologically similar traits, CONSISTENTLY, are found geologically close locations! So the THEORY is a rational explanation of these FACTS, and we can RATIONALIZE that based on this the LOCATION INFLUENCED TRAITS. Its a small part of evolution, but a good explanation of why the word "theory" is thrown around, and what it means.
@qabala SO PEOPLE KNOW a theory is a rational explanation of FACTS. We can witness yearly entirely different bacteria and viruses. FACTS-- and the fossil record shows biologically similar traits, CONSISTENTLY, are found geologically close locations! So the THEORY is a rational explanation of these FACTS, and we can RATIONALIZE that based on this the LOCATION INFLUENCED TRAITS. Its a small part of evolution, but a good explanation of why the word "theory" is thrown around, and what it means.
The world is round. It is older than (6) six thousand years. Dinosaurs and man did NOT occupy the earth at the same time. There is nothing "intelligent" about the concept of Intelligent Design.
I wonder if all these creationists ever wonder why it is that this so called Creator; needs the accolades, and penitence, of a genuflecting human. After all; this Creator made something as vast, and magnificent as the Milky Way Galaxy. Now why would any being who could do that give a rats ass for the love and affection of a lowly miserable human??? I may be alone in my thinking, but may be people retain their belief in a god to just hedge their bets in times of sorrow and crisis.
So dino's could live up to about 900 years old. As he claims the world is only about 6000 years old, that'll mean that the egyptians lived together with dinosaurs. Yet there aren't any hieroglyphs picturing dino's. The egyptian empire started around 3100 B.C. That's around the same period as the 1st generation of Dino's would have died.
That just doesnt make sense!
How can these creationists believe what they are saying if they use arguments that conflict to one each other?
i have have TONS of evidence given by non-biased scientists. U have the bible given by bible thumpers. hmmm i think my point my have a bit more validity MORON.
i have never seen a single piece of evidence that supports creation that is not easily disproved by simple observation and testing. So all u have to fall back on is the bible. nice try buddy, but ur pseudo-arguements dont work on anyone with an iq above 90.
Wow dude, you sure know how to talk the talk, but when it comes down to it, your as athletically able as stephen hawking's, you go as far as making messages friend lock, so much for having a code of discipline.
You have to much pride, your bible says something about that.
hey dude what happened, it pains me to see a student of tae kwon do to be so arrogant as to shun communication this way, are you not taught about integrity respect and honor, or you just in it because you like to fight.
Yes some do. Ignorant on purpose. THAT should be a mortal sin, if there was such a thing. And he bears false witness so he is going to his imaginary hell.
wtf is this serious ? whats the point with the baloon needle thing ? i try to listen but this is damn funny. this guy tries to look serious but looks damn stupid and funny with the white coat and that quilt in background.
dude u make all religious people look stupid.
religion does not exclude the evolution theory and vice versa.
Why do you watch these videos, if there is not a single doubt in your mind that you are wrong. Ignorance is not tolerable when observing the opinions of someone's beliefs. It is better to be open-minded, and atleast debate on the subject, instead of ultimately deciding that you are correct. I believe what the Bible tells me, and all this man is trying to do, is help you get closer to God. so, why wouldnt you? He is doing what the Lord has asked him to do. Now, its your turn.
Go find a book on basic nuclear physics. Then you will understand how aging and carbon dating works. If you think scientist just put a date on how old things are you are retarded, its all about nuclear composition and half-life.
the t-rex was a scavenger it did not eat plants if you look at the brain cavity of t-rex the occipital lobe is small yet its temporal lobe was masive witch means it could smell fleash but not see its brain looks almust like a vultures brain
He does know he can't see us, right? This is like Dora the Explorer for morons.
dorsk188 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
He lost me at magician.....
firedoom 3 weeks ago
Scientist my ass, yeah right & I'm the king of Siam. Fucking retard
Dinosaurs - Yes
Intelligent design - Only in your misguided mind
ACCSESS247 2 months ago
This is better than Monty Python . . .
NGC104 3 months ago in playlist More videos from truthmakesfree
John i have a lot of respect for you man, i more or less do a similar thing to this, locally, and the number of people that attack, and get rude is amazing to me just on a local level, and it's hard to to convince people that we actually have good points and a good case, when they always accept the strategically formed sentences that are full of imagination and fuzzy fairytale words that are in the "science" books over the hard facts that we find and present, keep it up GOD BLESS!!!
RookiesProduction 3 months ago in playlist More videos from truthmakesfree
No, he is not a Scientist. He has a degree in Chemisty [just like me] He has never had a job as a scientist. He does not understand Biology or Geology.
gregrutz 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He was an auto technician for 10 years.
Hes never been a "chemist", whatever that's supposed to mean...
odinata 3 months ago
No you are not a scientist, You have never had a job as a scientist. Having a degree in chemisty is nothing, I have one of those.
gregrutz 4 months ago
too all of the naysayers, of you who has a doctorate degree in biology/chemistry/physics and so forth?
Falcondick69 4 months ago
Okay, he lost me as soon as he started to pretend that he could see people raise their hands.
Unless he actually believes that he can see the people watching... Hey! Maybe he's just insane!
putzthewondersloth 4 months ago
We all know god plated dinosaurs seed on earth that's why there are dinosaurs bones...and how Noah just forgot to put the dinosaurs on the boat...but had more then 8.7 million species on there...I have no facts to back it up but,I have I lap coat on,:D
the559jls 5 months ago
This guy seems like such a humble and intelligent person...This is a great video..and he has a dinosaur on his tie..terrible Lizard a creationists..Evolutionists lose again..everything they know now rests on the backs of great Creationists scientists of the past..haha..evolution what a hoax..KFD haha that was funny..Shotgun..Dr.Walt Brown proves the Hydroplate theory!Dino's ate blueberry's and cat's ate watermelons..cool..God is perfect, areyou? Oh yeah you think you are..ok..23:38 u r brnwshed
doobersmanster 5 months ago
@doobersmanster I wish I could give you 100 thumbs up for your comment. A lot of people on here are just flat out ignorant and rotten. They pick on the guy for his lab coat and stuff but say nothing about all of the great info he shares that further confirms the bible's history. John seems very intelligent and has a great personality and sense of humor. I like this guy & wish he had more vids.
whatnamesnottakenyet 4 months ago in playlist dr pendelton
@whatnamesnottakenyet I agree with you. He does seem like such a nice person and his info is facinating.
doobersmanster 4 months ago
@doobersmanster His info is not facinating, it's bullshit.
Hornadayfan 4 months ago
@Hornadayfan I like it.
doobersmanster 4 months ago
@doobersmanster Do you really believe the crap this guy is saying. LOL Read a science book to find out why he is being stupid.
gregrutz 4 months ago 2
This guy seems like such a humble and intelligent person...This is a great video..and he has a dinosaur on his tie..terrible Lizard a creationists..Evolutionists lose again..everything they know now rests on the backs of great Creationists scientists of the past..haha..evolution what a hoax..KFD haha that was funny..Shotgun..Dr.Walt Brown proves the Hydroplate theory!Dino's ate blueberry's and cat's ate watermelons..cool..God is perfect, areyou? Oh yeah you think you are..ok..23:38 u r brnwshed
doobersmanster 5 months ago
This guy seems like such a humble and intelligent person...This is a great video..and he has a dinosaur on his tie..terrible Lizard a creationists..Evolutionists lose again..everything they know now rests on the backs of great Creationists scientists of the past..haha..evolution what a hoax..KFD haha that was funny..Shotgun..Dr.Walt Brown proves the Hydroplate theory!Dino's ate blueberry's and cat's ate watermelons..cool..God is perfect, areyou? Oh yeah you think you are..ok..23:38 u r brnwshed
doobersmanster 5 months ago
Earth was surrounded by water - held in place by what - not boiling into space why.
If this cretin ever learnt any science, he soon forgot his 101.
The Lion had a supplemented diet - it would not have survived in the wild!
"All based on one fossil" yep! that's called evidence.
"All based on bronze aged stories of iron age myths" yep! that's called delusional.
Huttate1 7 months ago
Cats need to have plant matter in their diet in order to properly digest their food. This is why house cats nipple at house plants.
misspinkpunkykat 7 months ago
Not all reptiles come from eggs.
misspinkpunkykat 7 months ago
Some think that when the fallen angels messed around with people, they also messed around with animals. Could dinosuars be a result of that messing around?
misspinkpunkykat 7 months ago
Plesiosuars aren't considered dinosaurs. The major feature that really distinguishes them from other reptiles is the position of their limbs. True "dinosaurs"
had a posture that was fully erect.
misspinkpunkykat 7 months ago
this is retarded.
PomonaPunkRock 7 months ago
No John you are not a Scientist. You have never had a job as a Scientist. You don't think like someone who has studied Science. Are you sure you studied Chemistry?
gregrutz 8 months ago
This dude doesn't know his left from his right. I'm just sayin'.
TheTerranEffect 9 months ago
its funny those t rex forarms are capable of pulling and lifting 400lbs each
Bleakillusion 9 months ago
what the fuck does the ballon have to do with anything?
3fingerroll 10 months ago
"How many people have figured out that I'm asking so many questions in order to divert your attention away from my lack of knowledge and proof?"
"All of you..shit."
TwistedPoliticians 10 months ago
"Camp Bells" ROFL
Gordaton 11 months ago
Plesiosaurs are not dinosaurs, they are plesiosaurs. Learn what a dinosaur is before you try to pretend you understand palaeontology.
Aspongeinmauve 11 months ago
Dinosaurs aren't extinct, birds are dinosaurs. You lose christfags. EVOLUTION FUCK YEAH!
Aspongeinmauve 11 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I cant stop laughing at the melon eating t-rex and Tofu the Lion
garadan 1 year ago
I cant stop laughing at the melon eating t-rex and Tofu the Lion
garadan 1 year ago
Hello, I am scientist?!!!
Matismatt 1 year ago
lol at the idiot who said there are 2 kinds of evolution "macro/micro" then says 1 sentence later, there is only 1 kind of evolution
dragoon414 1 year ago
Intelligent design is false, because Creationists are the best example of "bad design".
gupsphoo 1 year ago
Is there anyone who actually believes this?
I voted for good!
This is really good fun!
Mesdriver 1 year ago
Oh jesus now he's trying to understand dentitions. He just said he was a good scientist. Hahahaha. What an idiot
jakeo102 1 year ago
Insects were larger because the atmosphere was a much higher percent oxygen. Insects have passive respiration which relies on diffusion. The higher oxygen content allowed them to grow larger, as more oxygen would be able to diffuse through a thicker body. This has been shown in laboratory tests today. The mammals were different species, now extinct. Just more evidence for evolution, extinction and speciation. This guy is an idiot.
jakeo102 1 year ago
How many believe this guy is a real chemist? Dude, you are not a chemist if your job is mixing water and coke syrup at the local mcdonalds, alright?
ScrewAttackChina 1 year ago
These videos are exploding with irony. And ignorance of course.
straube819 1 year ago
IF there is no creator how did everything get into it's place? Where did the materials come from? Who organized it? Surely we didnt just happen? Another question I have for all of you nay sayers. The first living organism surfaces.. what does it eat? something had to live first right? Wouldn't it have starved?
woobstoob 1 year ago
@woobstoob Have you not been through high school biology the earliest life was a bacteria probably using photosynthesis or a similar process to produce food there are many modern bacteria that use these process not to mention the grass in your lawn and the tree in your yard.
revenicemandec2x 1 year ago
@woobstoob the first organisms simply fed off of organic matter which predated them such as lipids and nucleotides.
ItsJustME8921 1 year ago
wearing a labcoat dosent make you a scientist no more than shoving feathers up your butt makes you a duck...
acewizhyde 1 year ago
Thunderfoot, please expose this creatard!
TheEruditepolymath 1 year ago
Thank you for uploading these videos.
monitor301 1 year ago
Comment removed
monitor301 1 year ago
Dam ass "Creation Scientist".
God created you to make a clown of your self in You tube and make us laugh, that's what God did my friend.
mobinmahmoudi 1 year ago
Wow, people think he's a scientist. A "creation" scientist". He studies "creationism". Found any evidence yet buddy? Observed the "mechanism" for "creationism" yet? Or have you "tested" for the "existence" of God?
Really?
Cause we've observed evolution in everyway. It is a fact that evolution occurs. But you keep looking. I think it's great they allow special people to be active in society.
donkeyfieldmouse 1 year ago
if dinosaurs existed before the flood, why did noah dis obey god when he said take two of every animal? also, if the world wide flood did happen, why are there still fresh water fish? wouldnt the salination of the worlds water supply have killed them?
jasoncomplicated 1 year ago
I just love at :30 he says who has a right hand? Then he rasies his left. Funny as hell especially from a scientist!!!!!!!!
fasteddie847 1 year ago
@fasteddie847 JAJAAJJAJAAJAJ!!!!!!!!
PutoProzak 1 year ago
LOL at 13:30
..."here I have in the studio a *genuine* plastic dinosaur egg"
rindoni 1 year ago
15 ¶ Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
"Eat grass like an ox?" Sauropod dinosaurs, such as Brachiosaurus were totally incapable of eating grass like an ox. They feed on vegetation by ripping it off with their teeth and swallowing it, which was then "chewed" by having gastroliths to aid in digestion) grind up the vegetation through peristalic movement. This was a method totally unlike the rumination of oxen.
TheANTONIUSCORNELIUS 1 year ago
16 ¶ Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
"Navel" a physical structure where an umbilical cord would have been attached when he was in his mother's uterus. Dinosaurs, as egg-laying animals, did not have umbilical cords, and therefore did not have navels.
TheANTONIUSCORNELIUS 1 year ago
17 ¶ HE MOVETH HIS TAIL LIKE A CEDAR: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
It does Not say that his tail is the size of a cedar but rather moveth like a cedar. Moreover, the "tail" is a euphemism for male genitalia. Support for this is based on the meaning of the Hebrew word "move" which means "extend" and on the second part of verse 17 describing the sinew around its "stones" (the Vulgate uses the word "testiculorum")
TheANTONIUSCORNELIUS 1 year ago
Cicero confirms that ancients used to refer to the penis as the "tail". This interpretation is lent further credence by the fact that discussion of this organ is followed by a description of the beast's "stones" which the Targums equate with the testicles.
TheANTONIUSCORNELIUS 1 year ago
The comparison of the "tail" with a tree was metaphorical and that it was intended to convey the impressive dimensions of this appendage. In accordance with these interpretations, this passage is rendered by translator Stephen Mitchell to read, "Behold now the Beast" His penis stiffens like a pine; his testicles bulge with vigor."
TheANTONIUSCORNELIUS 1 year ago
21 ¶ He lieth under the lotus-trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
The NASB renders the passage as: "Under the lotus plants he lies down, the willow (reeds) of the brook surround him." As Greg Neyman notes, "it is difficult to imagine the Argentinosaurus, (a large Sauropod) at 100 feet long, and height of 40 feet when standing (sitting , probably 20 feet tall), resting under the short limbs of a lotus plant, nor would he be able to take cover in reeds only a few feet tall.
TheANTONIUSCORNELIUS 1 year ago
Didn't the world assume that left-handed people were evil some 300 years ago? Or even some 50 years ago in Catholic countries, where left-handed children were forced to write with their right hand.
No silly, the dinosaurs weren't on the ark because they were bad time-keepers and their arms were too short for watches. Don't you people know anything?
Mommy, when I grow up can I buy a white coat and pretend to be intelligent? You sure can Timmy, you sure can.
axesswordsandbows 1 year ago
Dinosaurs have been found all over the world because of EVOLUTION!!!!!!!! DUMBASS!!
OttoVonGoenne 1 year ago
have u ever heard of a guy by the name of CARL SAGAN???? why dont argue with his works, creationists? bring it on. the guy is dead and could bring up a greater argument than this prick.
OttoVonGoenne 1 year ago
"here we have a GENUINE...plastic dinosaur egg"
...wat?
Crusher8000 1 year ago
10:30: "here's a dinosaur claw and here's a fossilized... um.. uh.. well, that other thing of dinosaurs." LOL this guy is a tool
m00ph00 2 years ago
@qabala
I think you have know idea what you are talking about. let me make it short for you. first evolutionists believe that we came from dust particles and with millions of years "evolved." speciations only comes about when that organism has the same DNA information. A monkey can't grow fins can it?
mehmkh 2 years ago
"first evolutionists believe that we came from dust particles and with millions of years "evolved.""
Nope... ironic you state that. Considering that creationists believe that Adam was made of dust from the Earth, that the Earth was without form and made apparently from nothing, and that a woman was made of a rib.
Oh, and by the way... the DNA molecule isn't holding information inside it's chemicals, it's a molecule. Not a computer. And nothing in biology says a monkey should grow fins.
sonic8005 2 years ago
@mehmkh
Evolution does not even address the origin of life. It only addresses its' variety.
If you believe otherwise, you prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you have no idea what evolution ACTUALLY CLAIMS.
You confirm that suspicion by not even knowing what "speciation" is and claiming a monkey should be able to grow fins.
BTW
This 2 minute video will make you better understood.
watch?v=AYHm6xgoH8s
I saw "@qabala", at the top of your post. You must be "doing it wrong" intentionally.
qabala 2 years ago
how does a chemist have propr credentials to talk about any of this?
galahuth 2 years ago
Take the lab coat off, you're NOT a scientist. You're a moron, and an intellectual criminal.
sevven1 2 years ago
This guy is batshit crazy, wow.
1stLtDavis 2 years ago
Wow, this guy is actually proposing that T. Rex didn't eat meat?
Fucking unbelievable. I mean seriously fucking unbelievable. I didn't realize this kind of stupidity was even possible.
Cocteau120 2 years ago
Well Mr. Scientist, if were any such thing, you would know that your very existence is undeniable proof that the earth and Cosmos is billions of years old.
RebelGuy95 2 years ago
Evolution has already been disproved.
hawklanzs 2 years ago
@hawklanzs
Really?
When?
By whom?
Which journal was this published in?
qabala 2 years ago
Yeah!
Yep!
All The While!
GOD!
hawklanzs 2 years ago
Oh good! A series of non-sequitors!
I should have known it was too much to expect a you to actually supoort an assertion!
qabala 2 years ago
isn't it great? We can all throw God aside! Wow! Powerful stuff science!
hawklanzs 2 years ago
E=MC²
ChristianContreras17 2 years ago
Wow I love this guy. Think he would have non evolutionary anal sex with me?
JamesSpeaksTruf 2 years ago 4
Wouldn't doubt it a second.
ubermons 2 years ago
Comment removed
JamesSpeaksTruf 2 years ago
At 09:25 he says diplodocus wrong and plesiosaurus wasnt a dinosaur but a marine reptile, not a dinosaur.
SporeFanCreator 2 years ago
Saying fake fossils and such are evidence against evolution is kinda funny. At least the scientists discover the fakes and disprove em asap, Unlike the creationists who havent even discovered that the bible is not the word of god...
Turinnn1 2 years ago
Is this video along with his others satirical? Because if it isn't, I feel sorry for this man.
No chemist would regard amber as a crystalline object, because it isn't crystal. And as for the supposed "proof" that we discovered the blood cells of dinosaurs, that has also been proven to be false.
They never were blood cells to begin with.
This guy is an embarassment to the scientific community. What a nutter.
TheNinjaBoy7 2 years ago 2
I'll provide it simple for you:
Matter cannot be created, nor destroyed.
So what does this imply? It implies that matter has always existed--there is no need for a creator.
Creationists, theists, and supernaturalists should cease being so incomprehensibly dishonest with themselves [intellectually].
God, as well as any given religion is solely based on blind assumption without any coherent proof or tangible evidence; believing in it is the delusionment of the mind.
Get a grip.
TheNinjaBoy7 2 years ago
Dale Neumann, 47, of Wausau, Wis. chose prayer to save his child. He was convicted in the March 23, 2008, death of his daughter, Madeline, from undiagnosed diabetes. Prosecutors contended he should have rushed the girl to a hospital because she couldn't walk, talk, eat or drink. Instead, Madeline died on the floor of the family's rural Weston home as people surrounded her and prayed. Someone called 911 when she stopped breathing.
This is the 21st century,
CALL A DOCTOR. SAVE A LIFE!
NuckinFutzGirl 2 years ago
a genuine plastic dinosaur egg LOL
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 years ago
Jesus died because he had poor political connections in a time when political connections were the difference between life and death. Three days later he was STILL dead because he was human. Maybe they, (the Disciples) went to the wrong tomb, maybe somebody stole the corpse but JESUS lived as a Jewish MAN...and died as many Jews did at the hands of the ruling party; which was ROME. There is no great mystery
WhyRyouStupid 2 years ago
Exactly. Jesus was a great guy. We should listen to his teachings because they were pretty remarkable. But Jesus is not God. He was simply a man. I belive in a higher being of some kind. But I also realize that all organized religion is a bunch of bullshit. By the way, EVOLUTION IS A FACT. Grow up and deal with it.
EnglandFife 2 years ago
evolution is NOT a fact
JohnnyTesla23 2 years ago
Evolution IS a fact.
There is no debate, even amongst creationists that evolution occurs.
The theory of evolution, is an umbrella term for several theories on the mechanisms that drive evolution and the lineages it has produced.
The part you probably disagree with is the theory of common descent which is more thoroughly tested than the theory of gravity or atomic theory.
It is worth your time to actually know what you are refuting.
qabala 2 years ago 11
I'm a Christian. I believe in God's creative act. I also believe in evolution.
I don't understand why there's a conflict. The Bible isn't a science book, it's a metaphorical poetic work, and to deny this is to destroy its meaning and value. Intelligent design is absurd.
Cocteau120 2 years ago
@qabala Even the greatest proponents of evolution do not call it a fact. It has ever been observed and furthermore there is not a shred of actual evidence that it ever took place. I know this comment was done over a year, but I could not help notice your statement. I find it interesting that some are hell bent in believing that man is only an animal from an ape-like creature. Then when our children act accordingly we are surprised by there behavior.
pierrebrseven 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
Actually, the greatest proponets of evolution know that it is BOTH a fact and a theory.
The fact that populations evolve has been witnessed several time in nature and in the lab.
The theory itself is supported by tremendous amounts of evidence. It is the ONLY explanation for the variety of life that makes any testable and repeatable predictions.
Evolution, in no way, makes the claim that humans are ONLY animals.
Perhaps you should actually know what you're refuting.
qabala 1 year ago
@qabala Firstly, let us define microevolution, which you are apparently describing, which is not evolution at all, but simply variety within the DNA of species. Macroevolution, in which species allege to have evolved into other species. Macroevolution has never been observed. Please do the research or ask any evolutionist professor. There are no transitional links that have ever been found. Evolution does claim humans evolve from animals which evolve ultimately from primordial slime?
pierrebrseven 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
The flavobacterium developed the ability to injest nylon (a substance that has only existed for a little over 50 years) by a series of mutations that resulted in new genetic information. It was not merely variety within the species since the information had not existed previously.
Italian wall lizards, released in Crotia, developed cecal valves after on 50 years. They did no have them previously.
There is no such thing as an "evolutionist" professor.
qabala 1 year ago
@qabala The flavobacterium is a good example of adaptation, aka micro evolution, same as people with black skin. Macro evolution would mean that the flavobacterium would indeed become something other than flavobacterium...but thats impossible , and thats why it has never happened. Your ignorance is very good entertainment. keep posting please.
dragoon414 1 year ago
@dragoon414
The population was speciated from other flavobacteria. That, by definition, is MACROevolution.
Your ignorance of what evolution actually states is astonishing. Evolution does not claim that a flavobacterium would ever become or give birth to anything other than a flavobacterium.
Evolution only predicts that species diversify within their clades.
It would help if you actually knew what you were refuting.
qabala 1 year ago
@dragoon414
Macro and Micro evolution ARE THE SAME BLOODY THING. I'm utterly sick of you Fundys even mentioning the terms. If you had a basic knowledge of biology you would realize that since DNA -> RNA -> Protein, any change in the genotype will change the phenotype.
You will NEVER hear the words "macro-evolution" or "micro-evolution" spoken at university for this reason, even mentioning them instantly tells everyone that you don't understand the topic at all.
karlkarlkarl1234 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
Both the flavobacterium, and the italian wall lizard defy your definition of microevolution as they are new information, not merely variety, but of course your definition isn't the scientific one.
Macroevolution does not claim that species evolve into other species. It is mere a change in alleles beyond the speciation level. Speciation is not a change in species it is a diversification. Two populations of the same species becoming genetically isolated. It's well-documented.
qabala 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
If you assert that no transitional "link" has ever been found, then you are either willfully ignorant of the myriad examples, or you are a conspiracy theorist.
Evolutionary theory, more accurately described, claims that humans and all animals share a common ancestor somewhere along the lines. Whether or not that ancestor was primordial slime is your speculation. There is nothing in the above which asserts that humans are merely animals.
qabala 1 year ago
How can you deny this? If men are not evolved from animals then from where else? By the way, have you noticed that primates supposedly on the lower evolutionary scale, are still around while so called species of men are no longer? Do the reasearch about brilliant scientists like Behe who were staunch evolutionists but after studying the complexities of DNA strands in a single cell have concluded that macroevolution is impossible. coelacanth alleged to have been extinct millions of
pierrebrseven 1 year ago
Years ago was discovered in the Amazon with not one physical change from the fossils. Even Darwin predicted if his theory is true, many transitional fossils will be discovered after his lifetime. Still none are found. By the way when you say it is a theory and a fact that is a self contradicting statement. A statement is a scientific guess based on reasonable evidence. A fact is a proven statement,a statement that is true; a reality.
pierrebrseven 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
1st, the discovery of a living coelacanth does not refute evolution in any way. If a species has no environmental pressure to change, it doesn't have to.
2nd, The two specimens which have been found alive are not like any species found in the fossil record. They aren't even from the same cladistic family.
3rd, They were found in South Africa and Indonesia. The Amazon is nowhere near either place.
You must've had to really try to be as wrong about the coelecanth as you are.
qabala 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
There are thousands of transitional fossils. It's funny how little reading creationists do.
A theory is not a "scientific guess". A theory must make observable, testable, and repeatable predictions. For example - Evolution predicted EXACTLY where tiktaalik (a transitional fossil) would be discovered.
You have clearly shown that you have no understanding of evolution and no understanding of what a theory is.
It helps to know what you're talking about.
qabala 1 year ago
@pierrebrseven
Lower evolutionary scale? There is no such thing. Only your elitism.
Non-human apes are evolved to their environment. Their ancestors had no need for any gain in intelligence, so their living descendants still don't have it.
Michael Behes ass was handed to him in court when he tried to propose irreducible complexity. Ken miller refuted every example he presented by demonstrating exactly how complex structures develop from simpler ones. The transcript is public domain.
qabala 1 year ago
@qabala macro evolution has never been proven, even amongst evolutionists. The only thing that has been proven is micro evolution, aka adaptation(such as survival of the fittest). Nice try though....haha
dragoon414 1 year ago
@dragoon414
Actually, there have been several speciation events documented. That's all that's required for MACROevolution. So yes, it has been proven through repeatable, predictable, methods.
Adaptation?... Hmmm... That is exactly how random mutation and natural selection work.
I don't expect you to have an answer to this but, what is the actual barrier that you feel prevents a species from diverging into more specific clades? Is there a biological block? A physical block? What prevents it?
qabala 1 year ago
@dragoon414 One day a donkey and a horse had some fun, they had a baby, but unfortunately their species had diverged a wee bit too far so the mule that they created was unable to have children of its own. This is an illustration of how what you are calling 'micro evolution' ends up becoming 'macro evolution'. The horse and the donkey are related enough to breed but not close enough to produce breeding offspring. They sit at the borderline of a micro-macro transition.
alangnixon 8 months ago
@qabala 1st go and read the difference between macro/micro evolution then read what you wrote...you are 100% ignorant because you are using the word "evolution" as if there is only 1 kind of evolution...please try to debate that lol
dragoon414 1 year ago
@dragoon414 MACRO evolution is evolution at or above the species level, whereas MICROevolution is evolution below the species level.
If you have any other definitions, you are not using the scientific definitions.
And yes, there is only one kind of evolution.
qabala 1 year ago
@qabala
Macro and Micro evolution ARE THE SAME BLOODY THING. I'm utterly sick of you Fundys even mentioning the terms. If you had a basic knowledge of biology you would realize that since DNA -> RNA -> Protein, any change in the genotype will change the phenotype.
You will NEVER hear the words "macro-evolution" or "micro-evolution" spoken at university for this reason, even mentioning them instantly tells everyone that you don't understand the topic at all.
karlkarlkarl1234 1 year ago
@karlkarlkarl1234
I think you meant to direct your comment at dragoon14.
He's the one making the claim that macro and micro are two different processes.
qabala 1 year ago
@qabala
Oh sorry dude, thanks.
karlkarlkarl1234 1 year ago
@karlkarlkarl1234 EXACTLY!
jknengr796 11 months ago
@dragoon414
And I'm not surprised to see that you didn't have an answer to my question.
You conclude that there is a limitation to how much a species can vary, but you can't cite any mechanism to prevent it. It must be something at the genetic level, but you have no idea what this imaginary mechanism is, nor could you be bothered to look it up because that would require actually reading.
And yes, speciation, by definition, is an example of MACROevolution.
qabala 1 year ago
@qabala
Micro evolution , or adaptation is fact so you are correct there. Macro evolution has never been witnessed.
Also it's amazing how many "evolutionists" forget about the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Ever hear of Entropy kids?
THEVETERAN7 9 months ago
@THEVETERAN7
You need to learn what macro and micro evolution actually are.
Micro evolution and adaptation are not at all the same. Micro evolution is evolution below the species level. Macro evolution is evolution at or above the species level. Speciation events are witnessed all the time.
You obviously don't know what the 2nd law of thermodynamics is.
Your use of it is so wrong it is impossible to begin refuting it.
Like dragoon414, you can't cite a mechanism preventing macro evolution.
qabala 9 months ago
@qabala there has never been any macro evolution witnessed, dumbass you cant even list 1 source of evidence, your done son. If 2 species are able to breed the offspring will become a mule, this is old news, did you even pass 1st grade? Doesn't look like it. Name one time when 2 species are able to breed and the offsprine is not a mule? The single celled organisms are more complex than anything man will ever be able to design , let alone completly comprehend, this is because god is awesome.
dragoon414 8 months ago
@dragoon414
Italian Wall lizards in Croatia evolving cecal valves.
Nylonase evolving in flavobacteria as well as pseudomensis and E Coli.
Chlorella Vulgaris becoming multicellular
All three are observed instances of macro evolution and I can name many more.
Lions and Tigers are two separate species, but have NEVER produced mules. Speciated animals becoming incompatible genetically is predicted by evolutionary theory.
Your personal attacks speak volumes about your scholarship.
qabala 8 months ago
@dragoon414 this is an argument from ignorance: i don't understand how single celled organisms work, so it must be god! god certainly ISN'T the default, and further, we started learning about single celled organisms some 330 years ago, and have long sense understand them to very high degree. please don't respond, if you do at all, with a rebuttal claiming that i'm going to hell, or that i'm ignorant, or that i said YOU were ignorant. Please google "argumentum ad ignorantiam"
miretchin 8 months ago
@dragoon414 Evolution is when 1 species splits into 2 species that don't interbreed. You IDiots always get it backwards. Some species are still close enough to produce sterile offspring.
gregrutz 8 months ago
@THEVETERAN7 Micro evolution and Macro evolution are one and the same process... Living things divert entropy into their surrounding environment by converting other animals, plants and things into a part of themselves. This process is generally known as 'eating' or ingestion and the energy is converted by our digestive system into usable energy to fuel our metabolism. Life simply avoids entropy for a limited amount of time (we all die) by refuelling and replacing our entropy affected parts.
alangnixon 8 months ago
@qabala why is it that then that it is called the theory of evolution?
TheFreshestTV 9 months ago
@TheFreshestTV
Because it is a fact that organisms evolve, while it's also possible to make predictive theories based on that fact.
Kind of like the fact that gravitation is a law, while gravity, itself, is a theory.
I am willing to bet that your next response will require me to refer you to the scientific definition of "theory".
qabala 9 months ago
@TheFreshestTV a theory is a rational explanation of FACTS. We can witness yearly entirely different bacteria and viruses. FACTS-- and the fossil record shows biologically similar traits, CONSISTENTLY, are found geologically close locations! So the THEORY is a rational explanation of these FACTS, and we can RATIONALIZE that based on this the LOCATION INFLUENCED TRAITS. Its a small part of evolution, but a good explanation of why the word "theory" is thrown around, and what it means.
miretchin 8 months ago
@qabala SO PEOPLE KNOW a theory is a rational explanation of FACTS. We can witness yearly entirely different bacteria and viruses. FACTS-- and the fossil record shows biologically similar traits, CONSISTENTLY, are found geologically close locations! So the THEORY is a rational explanation of these FACTS, and we can RATIONALIZE that based on this the LOCATION INFLUENCED TRAITS. Its a small part of evolution, but a good explanation of why the word "theory" is thrown around, and what it means.
miretchin 8 months ago
@qabala used caps to emphasis, not to "shout or anything"
miretchin 8 months ago
@JohnnyTesla23
Wow!
Even creationists know that allele frequencies change over time.
How much denial are YOU in?
qabala 2 years ago
lol i think your in denile, in fact willingly ignorant
JohnnyTesla23 2 years ago
@JohnnyTesla23
Again, EVEN OTHER CREATIONISTS acknowledge that allele changes and speciations occur.
They have to.
Why?
Because the above has been observed, recorded, and is undeniable.
Yet here YOU are pretending that evolution is not a fact.
You are either in denial, or you cannot differentiate between the observed fact of evolution and the theories based on it.
I'm hoping for the latter, but I suspect the former is true.
If you swallowed this vid, it is YOU who is willingly ignorant.
qabala 2 years ago
I agree. Mr Pendleton is so ignorant he doesn't know how ignorant he is.
mathexpressions 2 years ago
The world is round. It is older than (6) six thousand years. Dinosaurs and man did NOT occupy the earth at the same time. There is nothing "intelligent" about the concept of Intelligent Design.
WhyRyouStupid 2 years ago
I wonder if all these creationists ever wonder why it is that this so called Creator; needs the accolades, and penitence, of a genuflecting human. After all; this Creator made something as vast, and magnificent as the Milky Way Galaxy. Now why would any being who could do that give a rats ass for the love and affection of a lowly miserable human??? I may be alone in my thinking, but may be people retain their belief in a god to just hedge their bets in times of sorrow and crisis.
H9S9O9U9I9X9Z9 2 years ago
So dino's could live up to about 900 years old. As he claims the world is only about 6000 years old, that'll mean that the egyptians lived together with dinosaurs. Yet there aren't any hieroglyphs picturing dino's. The egyptian empire started around 3100 B.C. That's around the same period as the 1st generation of Dino's would have died.
That just doesnt make sense!
How can these creationists believe what they are saying if they use arguments that conflict to one each other?
K03nS 2 years ago
Wearing a lab coat doesn't assure people that you are a real scientist
sequential32 2 years ago 8
@sequential32
unfortunately for some people it does
rindoni 1 year ago
Supporting creation is supporting ignorance
fserranoag 2 years ago
"How many of you have a right hand?"
(raises LEFT hand)
What a moron....
How many stupid mother f*ckers actually believe this crap? Raise your right hand...
Your "other" right hand!!!
slycotto66 2 years ago 3
lmao
Drathrul 2 years ago
Comment removed
777parkourIXOYE 2 years ago
oh yeah, ur really going to prove the validity of ur point, religion, by quoting from your religious text. Honestly, grow up.
charbroiledmonk1033 2 years ago
lol grow up ouch man you good i think you should do the same going on creation tube vids and saying shit real growing up
777parkourIXOYE 2 years ago
i have have TONS of evidence given by non-biased scientists. U have the bible given by bible thumpers. hmmm i think my point my have a bit more validity MORON.
charbroiledmonk1033 2 years ago 2
read my bio im an evolutionist debater i have ton and tons of ones as well i do it as a hobbie
777parkourIXOYE 2 years ago
i have never seen a single piece of evidence that supports creation that is not easily disproved by simple observation and testing. So all u have to fall back on is the bible. nice try buddy, but ur pseudo-arguements dont work on anyone with an iq above 90.
charbroiledmonk1033 2 years ago
Comment removed
777parkourIXOYE 2 years ago
oh rly? name one, just one piece of evidence, that proves creation and disproves evolution. Try me.
charbroiledmonk1033 2 years ago 3
Yeah, creationism has so much evidence it's taught in schools... oh wait it isn't.
THADI0US 2 years ago
you said you are a debater yet you act so immature, what is wrong?
THADI0US 2 years ago
Hey 777parkourIXOYE, so what's going on?
THADI0US 2 years ago
Wow dude, you sure know how to talk the talk, but when it comes down to it, your as athletically able as stephen hawking's, you go as far as making messages friend lock, so much for having a code of discipline.
You have to much pride, your bible says something about that.
THADI0US 2 years ago
hey dude what happened, it pains me to see a student of tae kwon do to be so arrogant as to shun communication this way, are you not taught about integrity respect and honor, or you just in it because you like to fight.
THADI0US 2 years ago
lol i doubt ur an actual scientist
charbroiledmonk1033 2 years ago
Stupidityboarding!
Fanden2 2 years ago
first of all: this guy's grammar is terrible
second: there is a ridiculous number of incorrect facts in this "scientific lecture"
third: PEOPLE ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS SHIT?!?!?
EdgarAllenPopozao 2 years ago
Yes some do. Ignorant on purpose. THAT should be a mortal sin, if there was such a thing. And he bears false witness so he is going to his imaginary hell.
This guy is a retarded ignorant moron!
Vogter2100 2 years ago
yes they do and they should be ashamed...
asphixa 2 years ago
I dont have a right hand NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! At least im not retarded like this guy
ItsJustME8921 2 years ago
Yep, retard is the best way to describe this pudwanker
bamasblldogs 2 years ago
wtf is this serious ? whats the point with the baloon needle thing ? i try to listen but this is damn funny. this guy tries to look serious but looks damn stupid and funny with the white coat and that quilt in background.
dude u make all religious people look stupid.
religion does not exclude the evolution theory and vice versa.
wurstwasserr 2 years ago
Why do you watch these videos, if there is not a single doubt in your mind that you are wrong. Ignorance is not tolerable when observing the opinions of someone's beliefs. It is better to be open-minded, and atleast debate on the subject, instead of ultimately deciding that you are correct. I believe what the Bible tells me, and all this man is trying to do, is help you get closer to God. so, why wouldnt you? He is doing what the Lord has asked him to do. Now, its your turn.
UnitedTemplars 2 years ago
Go find a book on basic nuclear physics. Then you will understand how aging and carbon dating works. If you think scientist just put a date on how old things are you are retarded, its all about nuclear composition and half-life.
sufficentDrift 2 years ago
Comment removed
megamanst101 2 years ago
"do you know how sad that is?"
Hahahahah.... thanks.. THAT comment almost made me pee myself.
Vogter2100 2 years ago
This is so repulsive.
Djeezes 2 years ago 2
Proselytising disguised as science.
Philos2006 2 years ago
the t-rex was a scavenger it did not eat plants if you look at the brain cavity of t-rex the occipital lobe is small yet its temporal lobe was masive witch means it could smell fleash but not see its brain looks almust like a vultures brain
GeoWing2 2 years ago 4
I think that those who think that dinosaurs came from the devil are not more stupid than those who believe that men and dinosaurs lived together.
hunchbacked 2 years ago 3
from the devil is stupid that they lived togeather its proved stop dening it.
EVEMASTER99 2 years ago
"from the devil is stupid that they lived togeather its proved stop dening it. "
Sure, it's proven for those who massacre grammar like you.
hunchbacked 2 years ago