Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (876)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • That "Dr" is a retard! There is NO evidence that "God" exists.

  • in all of the claims hovind makes, the idea that we are animals and we will act like animals if we know this is absurd.

    The fact that we were animals and have now learned to manipulate the world around us and understand the world around us should be great inspiration to appreciate everything and everyone else and be respectful of everyone else.

    Humility.

  • "if you told me they all had a common ancestor then id believe that" but evolution is false dogs only have dogs. wolves only have wolves... so the common ancestor was a cyotewolfdog?

  • @ltrman55 the ancestor was a wolf. the others are MUTANTS! no really. speciation is a wide branching bush of naturally selected traits on the original genes creating new histories for new trajectories through time.

    if you have more questions, i would be glad to answer.

  • Comment removed

  • This guy reminds me of a used car salesman. Lots of double talk and no evidence. Jail is the perfect place for him

  • If we can no longer teach evolution because it's a belief system, not science, we can no longer teach history (can't prove the civil war happened) economics (all about predicting the future and you certainly can't prove the future) meteorology (PUH-LEEZE those weather guys are always gettin' it wrong) can't teach biology, that's just theory too. Can't teach languages 'cause languages evolve and since we can't teach evolution, we can't teach languages. Guess we'll all be dumb like this guy.

  • this video is bullshit btw, staged

  • 6:25 ... if we shouldn't teach theories to students, then this means we should quit teaching people about gravity. this is because it is based only the general theory of relativity and we don't actually have an proven explanation for it. (the source of gravity is still unknown)

  • Kids that are taught creation still act like animals! Dumbass!

  • Comment removed

  • Everyone has their own beliefs, their perception of the world, and it isn't always logical to have debates unless the two opposing sides are prepared to change, However people will be stubborn and refuse from both sides of the equation, even if a person told the truth its up to its to the people percieving the truth rather they accept or deny.

  • It's irronic that the name of the video is Kent Hovid gets owned by an Evolutionist yet the very begining of the video for a few mintues shows an Evloutionist that say how he taught for years the Marco- Evolutionary theory and then he states how he wants to teach creation. If you teach lies to people, they don't believe the truth if they believe you, if you teach the truth, people will believe the truth.

  • So... How much did Hovind pay this man to make this statement?

  • @Jinxerz010792 nothing science points to creationism just being more logical.

  • Uh, no it doesn't?

    Logic doesn't find creationism logical, let alone any branch of science.

    Besides, it's not a dichotomy. Even if evolution weren't true (which it is, if you can't accept 2.8 million independant, peer reviewed papers on the subject, then that's your problem, not the rest of the world's) that doesn't automatically mean that creationism is right. You still have to provide evidence it happened. Which doesn't exist.

  • @Jinxerz010792 wtf are you talking about no branch of science finds creationism logical are you serious. What about thermodynamics, a few of einstein's laws, and that's just to name a few.

  • Those aren't branches of science. Physics is a branch of Science, under which everything you just listed falls. And by thermodynamics, I assume you're referring to the second law, which you clearly misunderstand, if you're still trying to use it to prove that creationism is logical.

    I'd challenge you firstly to state what the other laws of thermodynamics are, if you really think they're relevant to this discussion and/or grasp what they mean, and secondly, (ct'd)

  • I'd like you to state why exactly it is you believe Thermodynamics has any bearing on how life appeared on Earth.

  • @MaaNonu123 - Creationism is a pathetic and unworthy excuse for a hypothesis. Explain the validity of creationism and I will debunk it.

  • How was Dr. Hovind debunked? Did I miss something?

  • We must be able to see all sides to an argument to have a full picture or we blind ourselves to the possibilities. The search for truth is ever on going .

  • Hovind is repulsively ignorant.

    A professional liar.

  • hovind is just as narrow minded as the hole in a needle

  • @EGMAG Incorrect. if most of the population believes in evolution, then to believe creationism is to think outside the box

  • @godswordistruth34

    Look. I DO believe in God. I don't believe in talking snakes, Jonah's fishtale, Lot's salty wife, 6 days creation, Adams rib, Egypt plagues, Noah's ark, well you know all those other numerous supernatural fairy tails that make God appear horrible and lousy; you know the rest of those impossible script stories, don't you?

  • Am I the only one who has never seen an ape with a mohawk? Or heard of a dog robbing a bank? Or an opossum raping a woman? How, exactly, are these things humans acting like animals?

  • How stupid... I wonder were they hired the guy who speaks at the beginning.. lol.

  • funny how he negates evolution with the term "religion" lmao. creationists still attribute the unknown to god. how weak

  • @xamot27 You still don't get it do you. Ever think that you have blinders on and not willing to seek truth? People are waking up from this "theory" and realizing that this whole sham is full of lies. You have a soul and a spirit that will live forever my friend, no matter if you believe it or not. You just have to decide if God is going to pay your sin debt, or you pay for it yourself. He's not willing that any (you) perish, but for all to come to repentance. It's a free gift.

    Truth

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight People are waking up from this "theory" and realizing that this whole sham is full of lies.

    Actually the support for evolution constantly rises, and the support for creationism or religion for that matter is sinking. You people really need to stop making up facts as you go along, its dishonest and goes against the core principles of your scam pardon religion.

  • @MrRichardQED Hahaha! Oh man, you don't even realize what you're saying. Evan when proof is right before your eyes, you still reject truth and believe mans lies. Pity.

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight Hahaha! Oh man, you don't even realize what you're saying. Evan when proof is right before your eyes, you still reject truth and believe mans lies. Pity.

    Oh the irony ! You wallow in ignorance happy like a pig in the mud. I do very well realize what i am saying. I know that you follow fraudsters, who are in this for the money. You wouldnt recognize evidence if it hit you in the face ^^ You have the audacity to talk about proof, when you don´t-->

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight even have anything that counts as real evidence. I know its hard when you are born without a sense for logic to understand science, but you could at least try, instead of run behind every fraudster who justifies your fairytales.

    Explain one thing to me : if evolution is wrong, how could it make this many precise predictions ? I am talking about real, exact predictions here, not about your laughable prophecies, that can be interpreted any way you like.

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight Science has given us more knowledge in 300 years then we achieved in the 300.000 years before. You little hypocrite constantly use all the perks it gave us, yet you treat it like shit, just to come running again when you need it. THAT IS PATHETIC AND DISHONEST, ROTTEN TO THE VERY CORE ! You don´t like science, call it lies ? Fine then stop using it, can´t have it both ways. But you know whats even more pathetic ? You are not a real christian either !

  • @MrRichardQED I cannot even understand what you just wrote, let alone what you're talking about. I don't even think you have any idea of what you're talking about. You say that the search for absolute truth is "pathetic", "dishonest" and "rotten to the very core". See what I'm saying? All of the atheists that comment are full of hatefulness towards Christians. That's fine, but just remember that Jesus also paid your sin debt in full and He is not willing that any perish.

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight I cannot even understand what you just wrote, let alone what you're talking about.

    Yea sorry for using words that are longer then 4 letters, and sentences with more then 5 words, i know people like you do have trouble as soon as i try that ^^

    "You say that the search for absolute truth is"

    And again you lie like all creationists. Where have i said that? Show me the quote ! I have said that the lies of the fraudsters you follow are all that, and thats true.

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight correct predictions about nature long before they where discovered ? Those where precise predictions, that could not be interpreted in more then one way, not like those wannabe predictions in the bible that you can just bend any way you want to make them fit anything anything you like.

    Jesus would be ashamed of hypocrites like you, who run to science with everything they need, but then constantly attack it, and who cannot even uphold the 10 commandments.

  • @MrRichardQED , Ignorance can be fixed, but stupid is forever. Gods Word is written in plain English: 6 days of Creation and about 6,000 years of human existence. Now.....if this is a problem for you and your "theory", that's your problem. All this talk about being a hypocrite makes no sense. I'm "attacking" lies that you people hide behind. (i.e. "billions of years, vestigial organs, ect) That's not hypocritical. All I hear from you is that I'm not a Christian. Very dumb analogy.

  • Comment removed

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight 6 days of Creation and about 6,000 years of human existence.

    Where in the bible is said anything about 6000 years ? Thats what crazy creationists interpret into the text, it never says anything about 6000 years !

    You hear from that you are not a christian because you are not a christian. btw all you do is judging, and then you are pissed because others judge you back ? Did i mention already you are a hypocrite ?

  • @MrRichardQED Uphold the Ten Commandments??? Just who do you think you are. You're deluded, a scoffer and believe that we came from literally nothing 4.6 years ago. How dare you judge anybody. You need to take a real long look at yourself.

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight I am not the one here who needs to take a look at himself, i do practice what i preach, you don´t ! btw what has the theory of evolution to do with where the earth or the universe came from ? You might wanna take a look at what it actually says before making more stupid comments like that ^^

    Gods word is written in plain english ? BWAHAHAHAHAHA since when was the bible written in english you moron ? Wow you take stupidity to a whole new level !

  • @MrRichardQED Knowing this first that there shall come in the last days scoffers walking after their own lust and saying, where is His (Jesus) promised coming? For since the Fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were from since the beginning of the creation. For this, they are willingly ignorant (dumb on purpose). That by the Word of God the Heavens were of old (evolution) and the earth standing out of the water and in the water. Whereby the world that then was overflowed

  • @MrRichardQED Knowing this first that there shall come in the last days scoffers walking after their own lust and saying, where is His (Jesus) promised coming? For since the Fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were from since the beginning of the creation. For this, they are willingly ignorant (dumb on purpose). That by the Word of God the Heavens were of old (evolution) and the earth standing out of the water and in the water. Whereby the world that then was overflowed

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight I am still waiting for a hovind video for me to debunk! What are you scared of ? If he is the genius you believe he is I shouldnt be able to debunk his video,but if he is the fraudster i claim he is then i will be able to turn the video into shreds.

    You are also totally ignoring my arguments,which is the very definition of :"For this, they are willingly ignorant (dumb on purpose)"You are ignoring the truth and follow a false prophet despite being warned!

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight btw : how did you get the idea that the king james bible is the only correct version ? How does that make sense ? It was written roughly 1600 years after the birth of jesus ! How could they know things others did not know ? Wouldnt it make more sense to follow scripture told by people who actually knew jesus, like the gospel of maria magdalena ? Instead you follow an interpretation of a king,who had agendas beside his faith for this interpretation!

  • @xamot27 yes but we admit it lol

  • @xamot27 and you attribute it to big bangs with no cause or reasonable timeperiods. how imbecilic

  • what a fricken moron hovind is!!!!!

  • 105 atheists still are not convicted of their sin.

  • @soccerwhos11 Wow!! you really got me. One word sentences really show your lack of intelligence. Try and put at least three words together next time, that would be a better start.

  • Kent Hovind is SO extremely unaware of nearly every issue he raises as he attempts to promote creationism.

    But the most absurd thing is that he "doesn't think the 'religion of evolution' should be taught in schools with his tax dollars", . . . .but then wants creationism taught?? What a moron. *facepalm*

    Then he preaches religion in a scientific debate [of which his "evidence" is either a gross misinterpretation or HIS misunderstanding of evolutionary theory].

  • Complete, total domination by the creationist.

  • Spare me your fucking evolutionists shit. There has not been any evidence of one animal changing in to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ANIMAL! I've seen the documentation for the bacteria argument and to no surprise it's still a bacteria! It doesn't prove shit; so they're adaptable, adaptability isn't evolution, slight variations in fossils of the same species isn't evolution. Nowhere will you find dead or alive the process of one completely different creature changing into something totally different!!

  • @lividmachine So basically you want to see a monkey giving birth to a human, or a fish giving birth to a reptile. Let me know if you see one, cuz that would be proof AGAINST evolution theory, not for it.

  • @lividmachine To fix your ignorance, I suggest you study chromosome no 2. Or is deoxyribonucleic acid bullshit too? DNA if it is too hard for you.

  • macro evolution has never been observed. evolution is a dying theory. evidence against it is with held from the public by the evolutionist scientist and atheist. you atheist can stand that your religion of evolution is based on lies.

  • Comment removed

  • @animefan2k9 There is no fundamental difference between so-called "micro" and "macro" evolution. Both entail change within species that leads to new species that leads to even newer species. As a result, we observe speciation to such a degree that interbreeding becomes impossible. Hence the "micro"-evolutionary changes accumulate to such a degree that more dramatic morphological and biological branching occurs, resulting in dramatically disparate life-forms.

  • @animefan2k9 Dude, I hope you and you delusional folkes will finally get it...Atheist have no God, no religion, they just don't believe in those things. We don't make a religion out of Evolution, that's science and i'll let scientists argue for that, personally, I'm not one of them...

    But I find it way more logical than Creationism, though... :)

  • @animefan2k9 macro evolution has never been observed. evolution is a dying theory.

    Everything you say here is based on lies. You should stop getting your info from known fraudsters and liars.

    Macro evolution (the forming of new species) has been observed often. Google "observed speciation"

    The support for evolution is on the rise, its opponents become less and less.

    There is no evidence withheld.

    Evolution is science, not a religion.

  • Another fake , misleading "Hovind" production just like his son .This is why people do not trust religionists & their childish & desperate proaganda ploys . This kid is no doctor /phd and this entire talk is a put on . Cheap display of lying tactics and ultra confused human beings .,

  • wrong title. evolution religion vs real science

  • @animefan2k9 real science = evidence and fact, something convicted fraud kent hovind knows nothing about

  • @youbetzler yet evolution has not been seen in all these years

  • @animefan2k9 We actually have seen evolution in several different ways in the past 100 years or so. The Ring Species Theory (part of Evolutionary Theory) in the Ensatina salamanders, the evolution of bacteria and viruses to become resistant to antibiotics, and even in our own bodies, vestigial organs like the Appendix and Wisdom Teeth, how the Great Apes evolved out of creating uricase and is the cause uric acid problems, and several other useless and vestigial muscles and bones in our bodies.

  • @elsnaibs Name one vestigial organ or muscle in our bodies......Note: The appendix, nor our wisdom teeth are vestigial.

  • @Ezekielthirtyeight The Appendix and Wisdom teeth have no purpose to humans now, therefore, they are vestigial. (both used to have purpose) There is a Wikipedia page listing many vestigial organs, muscles and systems, no longer serving any purpose. Another example is the Coccyx, which is the remnant of a tail, that we all have for about 4 weeks during early stages of development. Muscles that move our ears are vestigial, since we lost the ability to precisely track sound like other mammals can.

  • @elsnaibs the appendix is part of your immune system. what you listed sound more like devolution. wiki is not always accurate.

  • @animefan2k9 Devolution is the process of a species reverting backwards to a previous and earlier form of themselves. The Appendix, while part of the immune system, serves no specific purpose within that system, which is why patients that have their appendix removed can recover with zero side effects, as we do not need it. The same cannot be said for vital organs, like the liver, kidneys, or any other organ that actually has a purpose. We evolved past the point of needing a mammalian caecum.

  • @elsnaibs /watch?v=Do7u1AyV2xI

  • @animefan2k9 Many vestigial structures can evolve a new use or hold a small percentage of their original use, but to such a lesser degree that it is no longer a vital structure. Just like other vestigial structures, you can remove it with no adverse side effects. The best that that video/links provide for your argument is that there is no "known" use for the appendix, so it's arrogant to call it vestigial. However, it's really more that + the removal without adverse effects that completes it.

  • @elsnaibs there is no evidence in what you posted.

  • @animefan2k9 There is so much evidence for it that it's staggering. It's considered common knowledge in the medical community, both professional and educational. I just finished a series of classes, including Introduction to Human Anatomy & Physiology and Advanced Human Anatomy and Physiology as part of my program, and every single thing I have said is backed up in all of my course and lab work. Facts don't care what you believe, they are simply true.

  • @elsnaibs then what you was taught was lies. not every thing in texts books is true.

  • @animefan2k9 Says the person who believes things based on faith, not evidence.

    Side note: Guess who doesn't have an appendix or wisdom teeth anymore?

    <------------

    Your homework is to look up the chemical uricase, and try and figure out why we used to have it, still have the gene to create it, yet our system doesn't make it anymore. Bonus question, what other animals can create uricase, but don't?

  • @elsnaibs i see you don't want to see or hear the truth. i'm not the one that has blind faith. you blindly believe want ever the evolution preachers tells you. you have no love for the truth in you. you post are filled with hate and refusal to challenge what you been brainwashed into believing.

  • @animefan2k9 I don't blindly believe what they tell me, I am my own example of the appendix and wisdom teeth being vestigial because they have both been removed from my body, and not only have I had no adverse effects, I didn't die from appendicitis and my jaw wasn't damaged from my wisdom teeth. I am BETTER OFF without those vestigial systems.

    You don't have any truth to tell, you have wild fantasy from men who had little knowledge of nature and the imperfect human body.

  • @animefan2k9 you blindly believe want ever the evolution preachers tells you.

    No, we have seen evidence, so its NOT blind faith. Have you personally seen evidence for your religion ? I highly doubt it, so you are the blind believer.

    btw don´t you find it ironic that you support religion, yet try to to deny evolution by claiming it to be a religion ?

  • @animefan2k9 as my good man elsnaibs has pointed out we have seen evolution you just choose to pretend that it doesn't exist because it negates your little fairy tale.

    I can probably presume you're expecting some drastic evolutionary change. You say "in all these years" like 2 centuries is a long time on the evolutionary scale. 200 years isn't long enough for significant evolutionary changes to occur, a scale of 200,000 years would be better even 2 million.

  • @animefan2k9 but of course if you understood that you'd see how over the past 2 million years we can witness the evolution of animals by comparing fossils of ancestors to their descendants.

  • Kent Hovind Rocks!!!

  • @casshyr-Well there is 2 was to come around this argument A.) My real argument is it shouldn't be in school. Christianity isn't taught in school because it is what you would say scientifically... it is a "theory".. The "Theory of creationism"... People argue that things built because "things" like wood and made of other "things" like atoms this has to mean that evolution happened... On a hypothetical scenario if there is a supreme being don't you think the whole world would be extremely complex?

  • I wonder if Dr. Waggoner ever said approach it with an open mind after he realized Hovind was moonbat crazy.

  • What starts with A and rhymes with TP? Love that Dr. Waggoner!

  • Dr. Waggoner is the most hilarious, awesome, witty biology instructor who has ever lived....EVER. I would like to know where he is teaching these days. I took his class at UCA. At the beginning of the first day he sat in with the students and clammered on about the five minute rule and how he wasn't going to wait on a "late professor". He made random comments about how he heard the instructor for the class was a halfwit and such then when the bell rang got up an taught...it was glorious:)

  • One Young-Earth Creationist says to another "Which is closer - the Moon or Mexico"? The other points at the Moon and replies "The Moon - Duh! You can't see Mexico from here".

  • However I can respect someone saying there is no proof of what they believe but however they believe it out of faith not due to proof. if that is your argument on evolution then i would respect you simply don't believe in God.

  • @Jerzboy08 "if that is your argument on evolution" => evolution theory, as the name itself already states, is a scientific theory, not a fact. So of course there is no evidence to prove evolution theory like proving 1+1=2. If we can, there wont' be any creationists left. But we do have plenty of INDIRECT evidence from all sides, whether it's genetics, fossils, radiometric dating, phenotypic observation, characteristics of genomic variants...they all point to the same conclusion.

  • @epicprogrammer - so before I even touch your statement you saying "FACT" which we ALL know the definition for is

    FACT - A thing that is indisputably the case

    here is a fact "the grass is green in my yard"

    I dont believe anyone will argue that this is true if your statement is FACT why in general do people argue that it is not only untrue but is a complete lie. Your saying that creationism is made of of.

    FOOLISH,STUPID,ARROGANT, IDIOTS who KNOW what they believe is wrong and chose to believe it

  • @doinworksonnnnn - I can hit you in the head with a branch can you hit me in the head with an evolution? your comment was very ignorant it is based on saying something you believe to be a product of evolution and using the creationism word itself as support for creation as i did with evolution. Unless you are going to argue that creationism believers don't think God created trees.

  • what is funny is that people on both sides must embrace their ignorance, the only true fact is that we do not KNOW shit. but by far there is way more evidence that evolution is fact than there is that creation is fact... you have a bible, evolution has many many tests. creation shows nothing for the exsistance of massive beasts that used to run the worlds surface. yet you only write them off like they didnt even exsist. i can hit you in the face with a dino bone can you hit me back with creation

  • hope that he was fired

  • Comment removed

  • Wrong. Before you try to disprove scientific theory, learn what it actually says. What can it hurt?

  • I wonder how much hovind paid this guy?

  • Freedom to believe is one of my strong beliefs. As you teach me, it is up to me what I believe. I find it odd for someone to try to make me believe as they do. I believe in live and let live. From the moment you are born, people want you to believe as they do. One last thought I like to joke with the Jehovah Witnesses when they visit me "what did the aliens say to each other when they landed on earth? God must have wanted us to find this beautiful planet!"

  • DOCTOR Hovind? That's funny.

  • @csmcmillion Darwin studied theology.

  • @CaribbeanSkies Did he begin his Masters or PhD thesis with "Hi - I'm Charles Darwin"?

  • @csmcmillion Indeed, as long as he uses that title, I can use the title Professor Sex Guru, it is equally valid. Only mine was a little harder to get

  • @TheKitch2 I stick with the title of Amateur Gynecologist myself.

  • @csmcmillion No pun intended XD

  • @csmcmillion "In response to these needs, shortly after finishing his Ph.D. in religious education, he began a full-time ministry of presenting the foundational truth of creation and the utter fallacy of evolution with a mission of strengthening the faith of believers and winning the lost to Christ." - from drdino.com

    He got a PhD. in religious education.

  • @DeoVindiceDixie > and the utter fallacy of evolution

    A statement that puts you in the same league as Hovind when it comes to scientific literacy. Namely, none.

    > He got a PhD. in religious education.

    Yet he (falsely) claims to be a scientist.

    There is a whole series here on YouTube showing just how qwhacky and ignorant Hovind is:

    watch?v=PDkbIORWS5I

  • @csmcmillion He considers himself a scientist because he taught science. And teaches his belief in science (aka Creationism). He uses science to disprove evolutionists.

  • @DeoVindiceDixie "He uses science to disprove evolutionists."

    WADR, if you honestly believe evolution has been falsified, you are woefully misinformed and (probably) uneducated in science. I suggest you get at least a modicum of education in science and then take a look at the evidence. Even the Catholic Church, which held mankind back for a thousand years, understands that evolution is factual.

    Cheers

  • @csmcmillion it is not factual! MY GOODNESS, there is a reason why evolution is called a theory!

  • @MrProblem1997 I understand your point, but at some point a scientific theory can _reasonably_ be said to be factual. Certain key aspects of Evolution, are factual in that they are consistently experimentally observed. These include random mutations, selection and speciation. The rest is just a matter of time-scale.

  • @csmcmillion None of those points prove evolution at all. Random mutations are never beneficial. Natural selection SELECTS not CREATES, and speciation is just how we organize plants and animals. Science supports the creationist theory more with evidence of a flood and all the symbiotic relationships meaning they were created at the same time. Evolution has a lot of holes, so many that its nothing more than a fairy tale for adults. Not everything you read in a textbook is true.

  • @CombatAthletix1 "Not everything you read in a 3,000 year old book of mythology and Jewish law is true."

    ^ Corrected ^

  • @csmcmillion Show me evidence where non-life can produce life and then maybe you could have a theory, but until then, evolution is just a fairytale. The Bible is the unfallable word of God that has never been corrected since its creation because its never been proven untrue therefore, it is true.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @CombatAthletix1 silly creationists. Evolution never even mentions the creation of life. Evolution says that simple organisms become more complex over time. This belief just happens to contradict your idea that "God created ... every living creature that moveth" in one day. (Because my family is religious I am familiar with your argument that a "god" day is different from our days, etc, but it still contradicts evolution, which has MUCH more evidence than a book and a few old testimonies).

  • @epicprogrammer Evolution tries to explain the origin of life, that's why it was created. The only reason people believe in evolution is because the alternative is simply incredible.

  • @CombatAthletix1 you don't "believe" in evolution. It is FACT. We have even seen examples of evolution by natural selection in people's own lifetimes as below:

    "darwin's moths" 2nd result:

    "Its extraordinary transformation is always held up as the perfect demonstration of Darwin's theory of evolution."

    Evolution by natural selection is fact. I don't know what you think evolution is, and for the record it does not even mention the origin of life. It just says species get more complex over time.

  • @CombatAthletix1 My goodness. Evolution by Natural Selection says NOTHING about the origins of life. It's a theory of Biology, not Biochemistry! Google "abiogenesis".

  • @CombatAthletix1 "because its never been proven untrue therefore, it is true"

    Oh, my. You might want to Google "Argument from Ignorance".

  • @CombatAthletix1 'Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" (where "ignorance" stands for: "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false... This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false."'

  • @CombatAthletix1 'Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" (where "ignorance" stands for: "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false... This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false."'

  • @CombatAthletix1 This is so ironic. Someone who believes the BIBLE to be 100% true deems TEXTBOOKS fairytales for adults and says "not everything you read in a TEXTBOOK is true". Open your eyes.

  • @epicprogrammer It is ironic isn't it. The ones who think they see clearly are actually the ones who are blinded by the lies that they read in textbooks about evolution and millions of years. Its sad but, it was predicted that this is the way it would be. It is Impossible to help with people who refuse to listen. Why do you think so many people debate this. Are we all crazy? Or maybe the Christians are right after all?

  • @CombatAthletix1 > Random mutations are never beneficial

    Wrong. Google "Examples of Beneficial Mutations and Natural Selection" for starters. There are many more in the scientific literature, but those are technical articles.

  • @MrProblem1997 In this context, would you say that Electromagnetic Theory or Quantum Electrodynamics (at this point) can not reasonably be said to be factual?

  • @csmcmillion No it is not factual it is an idea.

  • @MrProblem1997 Again, certain key aspects of it _are_ factual in that they are consistently experimentally observed. ""Evolution is both fact and theory" is a statement that appears in numerous publications on biological evolution... That all forms of life on Earth are related by common descent with modification is one of the most reliable facts in the biological sciences."

    I suggest you Google "Evolution as fact AND theory" to learn more.

  • @MrProblem1997 csmcmillion is correct - Evolution is BOTH a fact and a theory. Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a _fact_. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less certain of the exact _mechanism_ of evolution; there are several theories of the mechanism of evolution.

  • would be interesting to see how science, has "seen" and re-created the "evolution" process. How one Kind of anything has changed into another "Kind" of anything. It would also be very helpful if the "theory" (which means "idea" in simple terms) of evolution, can 1. bring ANY transitional fossils. 2. Bring any evidence that is not refuted, debunked or even falsified to fit the theory. 3. explain how matter came into existence out of nothing.

  • @Russcatgoldy "bring ANY transitional fossils" => we have tons. Look up "list of transitional fossils" on wiki. And no, those evidence have not been debunked. If Kent Hovind says they are debunked, it doesn't make it true. You need to find me a PEER-REVIEWED article that shows the evidence is debunked. Just because some creationist says so don't' make it true.

  • @Russcatgoldy "explain how matter came into existence out of nothing." => this has nothing to do with evolution, but in science, this area is still not known, hence active area of research. So correct response would be "we don't know". It is intellectually dishonest to say "since science can't give me an answer, this means God did it". You can only say "God did it" when you first offer scientific proof for God, and then you need to show proof for God actually doing it.

  • @Russcatgoldy ok here we go

    1 yes start digging in digsites and you prob find a fossle of that kind becouse all fosels are transitional forms of life were also still evolving so even we are transitional lifeforms. 2 well then there is no evidens left not even the story of creation becouse thats also falsified over the many years to fit the throery.but wel if you do the evolution test again even you will find it will be true. 3 this is realy hard to explain but i will try to in the next post

  • @imborgoss wel how did matter come to existanse before the big bang there was no time. time came to existance wich activated the energy and energy forms into matter becouse of E=MC2 this is how matter came to be wat created time to exist we dont know wat we do know is it couldn be created becouse you need time to create it so it juist came to be this proves the fact god couldnt make the univers becouse there was no time for him to exist in before the univers so he cant create it

  • @Russcatgoldy Your ignorance is stunning.

    > "theory" (which means "idea" in simple terms)

    False. A scientific theory is an entire framework.

    > Bring any evidence that is not refuted, debunked or even falsified to fit the theory.

    Accomplished - many, many times.

    > explain how matter came into existence out of nothing

    WTF does that have to do with Evolution, which is a theory of BIOLOGY?

    Did you take even basic high-school science?

  • the mans a complete prat

  • I bet he's run into some animals in the showers..yes I hope this lying piece of shit is the victim of prison rape

  • What a fucking hypocrite, him and his entire congregation of creationist scientist are trying to mix THEIR religion into real science. Evolution is not a religion, it is a theory to explain the diversity of species and is quite supported by the vast majority of the scientific community.

  • @ContextofSalad58 The definition of religion: religion- "A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe." The definition of belief: "A principle, proposition, idea, etc, accepted as true." So, if evolution an idea? Do you accept it as true? Does evolution concern the cause of the universe? SO BY THE VERY DEFINITION, EVOLUTION IS A RELIGION. And don't drop the F-bomb, all that does is shows that you're desperate to make a point but can't back it up by logic.

  • @jamesandrewjohnson evolution is a belief, a belief based on EVIDENCE, an explanation using factual evidence and not based on any religious texts, completely religiously objective. Evolution does not concern the cause of the universe, it' concerns the diversity of life. People only believe it to be true because there is evidence, evolution is part of science, plus there are no deities. Sounds like a scientific theory rather than a religion. No F-bombs as you wished sir.

  • @ContextofSalad58 Well I see your point, but if you watched all ten videos then it should be dead obvious that there is significantly more evidence for intelligent design than evolution. It's just shocking how much fact there is to back it up, and how much falsehood and shaky logic is used to uphold evolution, and yet it is still believed to be even considered as a possibility.

  • @jamesandrewjohnson watch some other debate videos, kent hovind's "facts" about science are highly inaccurate, you must realize kent hovind does not know real science. So creationism as a theory is backed up by false logic, and the other guy isn't a very good public speaker and is rather nervous in advocating evolution. Watch Kent Hovinds debate with Eugenie Scott, it's more of a fair debate.

  • @jamesandrewjohnson I think it is more accurate to say the theory of evolution is a scientific theory best used to explain the fact, its not really a belief as a belief is more of an opinion its more accurate to say one understands and acknowledges the evidence supporting the theory of evolution. a religious concept or belief, is not science at all.