For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16
Find the love of God here.
Audio, Gospel of John Chapter 1 AV h t t p://w w wDOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=Ao4uaIjd3xs
MAYBE....... atheist's ancestors are apes, and the rest of us are from God!! Joking! ALL of us were made in the image of God, it's obvious that every amazing thing in the NATURAL world, OBVIOUSLY EXCLAIM the supreme majesty of our Creator GOD! God says that those who DENY this, are WITHOUT EXCUSE! GOD says, that the do not KNOW the TRUTH, because the truth is not WITHIN them, for they Love the Darkness, and ways apart from God. It's so sad, because genuinely KNOWING, Loving, and being Lo
@TheWayandWordofLife Wtf, your pathetic. GOD!!! Who is the God? Which story of creation do we follow? It brings more questions then answers when we imply "X!" X is God, and God is X, there is no difference. It is not a answer, and never will be.
Insanity. Why, why, why are you so obsessed with correlating ONE specific religious doctrine with the evolution of life? Why? What are you worried about? What do you fear? How is it possible to trap your mind so? Why one god? Why not 10? or 1000? Why do you believe the words of ONE specific archaic text? Why do you want to think you are so significant? Why? THEY'RE trying to make us think??? Gullible? The bible says??? What evidence is there that the bible is true? You're scared! Terrified!
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:10,11
Humans have ape blood types A, B, and O. Humans have the identical blood antigens as apes, and the identical rh factors...and humans share up to 96% of DNA with chimpanzees and bonobos...but we aren't related to apes??? Please!!!!
It's no surprise that creatures share a good portion of protein-coding genes. We all live on earth with biological bodies. It's the complexity and intelligent organisation of DNA that prove design.
These argument are laughable in in the light of what we know since DNA has been sequenced in human and ape forms. I'd have been amazed if they would have dared use them even 30 years ago!
@Tobytrim All evolutionists have is hot air on the mostly anonymous Internet. We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize. You can evolve from a chicken and win the prize or make cowardly remarks on websites until you ultimately die and become a creationists after it's too late. My last remark to you is something that everyone understands: CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK.
@BereanBeacon1 " We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize."
I take it that the full of your childish message means that you don't have a relevent response to the comment I made - Lol!!
Tell us more about this "real science" which you think rebutts the overwhelming consensus of the whole scientific community?
What have you got to show to add to the, hitherto, NOTHING which will make the hundreds of thousands peer review observations of evolution null and void?
The 98 percent only aplies to portions of our DNA that codes for proteins. When we compare the entire segments, including what was once considered to be Junk DNA but are now known to regulate gene expression, the differential can be 70 percent or less.
@Gods0n1 and once again you showed your ignorance. evolutionary explaination doesn't say we're monkeys.. you have monkeys and apes mixed up with eachother, of the latter though we most definently are apes. By the very defintion human beings have given to the word Ape, we fit that category.
@cabot2jville2010 homosapien means, wise, rational, thinking man. did u even watch this video? this is evidence against man being apes... apes cannot interbreed with apes nor is there fossil evidence showing transitions of ape to man. we dont have to force interpretation onto evidence... it speaks for itself. people are related to people and nothing more. distinct from the animal kingdom.
@Gods0n1 OMFG... APES isn't a species, yes homo sapien sapiens, us, is a very specific species. Apes encompasess the family we both belong to. Kingdom Phyllum Class Order Family Genus Species, learn your taxonomy and you'll understand evolution better. and actually yes the fossil record does too, go backward fromm an through homo erecuts, habilis, etc etc and they look more and more "ape" like as u look at it.
@cabot2jville2010 the fossil record shows no transitional fossils of apes transitioning into man. you cant have a single skull or one arm and a rib cage and use that to assume it transitioned from anything. and there should be thousands of bones recovered.. were are they? i understand taxonomy very well, thankyou.. but i understand genetics play a bigger role in the very thing you want to relate us with.
@Gods0n1 sorry but not every single animal that dies becomes fossilized..there's countless species of animals that have walked this earth that we'll never know existed because none of them ever fossilized or if they did they eroded away, or we just won't ever uncover them. and if god just created us in his image then that means he created us about 200,000 years ago. and bible stories dont come around until about 5000 years ago. continued
@cabot2jville2010 can u give proof of this>>? "he created us about 200,000 years ago. and bible stories dont come around until about 5000 years ago. continued"
@Gods0n1 no, im saying if YOU believe there's a god that just created human beings one day, then you'd have to believe that he created us 200,000 years ago cuz thats the agreed time that human beings as we know them first began to emerge as a seperate species. and bible stories are dated back to about 6000 years ago, which is why alot of christians think the earth is only 6000 years old, and with that, what was ur god doing for 194,000 years?
@cabot2jville2010 well i believe God created people fully formed. i dont think anyone knows the age of the earth, because the dates assumed to be agreed upon.. are calibrations of a dating method which you can make young or old. if christians believe the earth is 10 -6,000 years old. its because they are adding up genealogies. but the age of the earth is never given in the bible. btw. the earliest humans we have were discovered to be around 10,000 years ago.
@Gods0n1 so you'd have to believe that for 194,000 yeras after he created us he just sat back and then finally decided, NOW ill intervene. wtf was he doing all that time? and why wait millions of years. and there are thousands of bones, hell i'd throw in the number 10'000s of bones of animals we've uncovered describing the past life that walked this earth. In all honesty tho, i lost all respect in discussing this topic with u as soon as u mentioned that "the bible has the answers" and god
@cabot2jville2010 i ask the same thing about humanity.. they want us to believe humans have existed for thousands and thousands of years, but its only been in the past 1,000 years man has been on the moon, flew, created computers ect. what were humans doing all that time? this world would be so over populated if humans were around for over 50,0000 years.
@Gods0n1 if you knew anything about human population of the planet you'd know that the population only exploded recently, go look it up, its prety crazy how much the population of the earth has increased in just the past hundred years. and "past 1000 years we've been on the moon flew and created computers" try the last 100 years we've done that. if it wasn't for christianities war on science in the past 1000 years then maybe we'd have been flying alot earlier.
@cabot2jville2010 "it wasn't for christianities war on science in the past 1000 years then maybe we'd have been flying alot earlier". thats an ignorant statement. the very people that created the scientific method were religious people. "go look it up, its prety crazy how much the population of the earth has increased in just the past hundred years". that also causes suspension... if weve been around for over 200,000 years, why hasnt this world already over populated already?
@Gods0n1 because for 194,000 years the human race was living like any other animal, in the wild hunting for food, life expectancy would have been no greater than 30 years, and infant death rates would be huge, just as they have been for the few thousands years too. you really need to understand how birth rates for humans occured once medicinal science improved in the last 100 years boosting the life expectancy AND lowering infant death rates.
Respond to this video... "scientific repression by the catholic church throughout the dark ages and medieval europe held back our technological gains by alot. so yah, take a 0 off that past 1000 years and you'll be spot on." thats correct. but your painting a picture that scientists were not religous.. when science was invented by religious ppl in the first place. the very first sciencetists created science because they wanted to know more about God and how he created things.
@Gods0n1 modern science itself doesnt start until around galileo's time, of which the catholic church was gonna kill for saying the earth was NOT the center of the universe, which it obviously isn't. Astrology, Alchemy, etc those aren't real science but yes were practiced by religious scientists. and yes galileo, newton, etc they were all religious. but the Cath church was a huge hold on science, not individual belief but the church itself, not the spirtuality but the organised religion
@cabot2jville2010 okay... but im a Christian. catholics were persecuting and killing Christians... it was called the dark ages. i could care less about the catholic religion or any religion that oppresses people. because weither it be religion or atheism, you can always find extreemists in them.
@Gods0n1 um, the dark ages?? christians of the dark ages WERE catholics, there was no such thing as protestanism which i'm assuming you are. babtism methodist one of those denominations. catholics and protestants are ALL christians, its jsut that protestants look at themselves as more "christian" than catholics, which in a sense they are. but the dark ages chrisitans WERE catholics, there were no catholics attacking christians, that'd be christians attacking christians
@cabot2jville2010 you dont know your history. the Christians were persecuted by the catholics. Christianity was around when Christ walked the earth; so how do u figure catholics and Christians were the same thing?, the dark ages was a religious war due to the idea that orthodox Christians repudiated the ways of the Catholic Church with its papal doctrines and hierarchy. if it was just one group of religious people fighting... then what were they fighting about??????
@Gods0n1 the catholic church was not formed UNTIL the roman emprie excepted christianity, before then the christians were persecuted by the ROMANS not the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, . you're mixing up the church with the roman government itself. someone doesn't understand terminology. and they were called Eastern Orthodox Catholics. all were encompasing in catholics. they fought over how christianity should be taught they were both christian for gods sakes..
@cabot2jville2010 Wrong. The catholic religion is not Christian. Catholics think salvation is a result of good works; the pope kisses the Koran, does freemason handshakes, believes in evolution, has feasts with other non-christian religious groups, is considered infallible; Catholics often put Mary, a vessel to give birth to the Son of Man Jesus, as the mother of God!; They worship saints (when in fact ALL believers are saints); They are idolaters; make carved idols of Jesus; and much more.
@joroma77 Catholics were the first christians. Your church broke away from the catholics.
Catholics think salvation is good works, follow the ten commandments. [stop lying like you do]
Mary is the mother of God dummy. They pray to Mary and the Saints to reach Jesus, just like you pray to Jesus to reach God. they don't worship idols dummy.
@cabot2jville2010 there is a good book called "rare earth" that logically makes the argument that the earth IS the center of the universe.. you should check it out.
but again.. if catholics put a hold on science. how does that tie in with Christianity? catholics accept evolution.. that doesnt mean all religious people do.
@Gods0n1 the earth revolves around the sun, sun revolves around the center of the milkyway galaxy..bam earth is not center of the universe...unless the universe spins around with the earth...
@cabot2jville2010 I haven't viewed the universe with a telescope but I'm curious if you have done so. First I want direct evidence that galaxies exist (they probably do, I just want first hand experience), then I would like to know with what method they determine that earth is within a galaxy. It's one thing to hear or read something and another to observe it directly. Given the indisputable fact that the moon landing photos were faked, it would take a lot of faith for me to believe NASA.
@Gods0n1 scientific repression by the catholic church throughout the dark ages and medieval europe held back our technological gains by alot. so yah, take a 0 off that past 1000 years and you'll be spot on. and if u ask "what were humans doing all that time" why don't u read up on ancient civilizations, then you'll know what we were doing.
@Gods0n1 and sad world and pretty arrogant of you to just assume human beings are distinct from the animal kingdom. the only thing that pulled us away from our more primeval instincts of hunting was the development of tools and clothes, then the agricultural revolution that allowed for civilizations to form
@cabot2jville2010 the thing that pulled us away from the animal kingdom is that God created us in His image. and we were created to rule over animals. the bible has all the anwsers already there. Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
haha, hilarious. we are 98.5% similar to "the apes", like ape is a dirty, dirty word. Dude, take a look in a mirror, your no perfect transcendent being made in anyone's image.
ahhhh who cares! no one knows anything..just stfu with your theories everything is 50/50 from god to your sexuality...just enjoy life is all im saying...i just saw a mf squirrel get eaten by fox while he was stocking his pantry all the while two other squirrels were getting their boogie on...it was on animal planet
@ThatOneQuestion Sorry - I concede: Evolutionists have proven themselves to be the better liars.....Piltdown, Lucy, Neanderthal, fossil record, millions and millions of years and on and on.......ad nauseum.
@hiyosilver100 Oh right, because the world is 6000 years old, got ya. Why do you say that, anyway? Ohh thats right-your Magic Man told you through a book.
Yeah-that totally beats out anything science can demonstrate. HA!!
Neither Lucy and Neanderthal fossils are fake, the fossil record is demonstrable (you can go to a museum and look at them) so I'm not sure how that is fabricated. Do you have any evidence that these are fake? If so, I would highly recommend you get it published as you will probably win a noble prize (or let me do it).
@theviolator23 Do your homework. They certainly are. Those and many others. Proven and admitted to time and again. *I* don't need to provide evidence they are fakes. It's been done. Museum exhibits are made to sell tickets and to foster the lie of evolution of species. Find some videos on Chuck Missler, Kent Hovind and others (my channel has some) for the opposing viewpoint.
They are not. Do a google search on it, that's all it takes. They were neither "prove" nor "admitted" to be fake. If they were somehow only creationists heard about it (find me an objective source showing that these are falsities). I am quite familiar with Kent. He is a lying, tax-evading fraud with absolutely no understanding of any field of science (not biology, physics, geology etc.) There are hundreds of videos proving the scientific impossibilities of his statements.
In my family tree there is, but you are closer related to myxomucota. Promoting a film with that amount of errors and false claims are slimy indeed. Ever thought of learning the science you try to debunk? We got the fossils, the retro viruses (if u know w it is), embyology etc etc. You got an old story book, with cruel bedtime stories. We winn!
Isn't what happens to people in Hell for eternity worse than what happened to Jesus over the course of a weekend? How is there any kind of justice/balance in that outlook?
I guess it doesn't since Jesus was just an ape like everyone else anyway.
See now, if Xtians said Jesus was sent to hell, so that we could live in Heaven, that might be more convincing, but he wasn't. He was there a few days at most.
the guy speak about expression of genes that are more different in chimp vs humans.
Yes. of course. Biologists can see that just looking at the chimp. but different different chemical equilibrium and reactions (which leads to different proteins expression) are the consequences of the few differences in dna, it's contradict nothing (as all the pseudo arguments before...), the mystery in biology is how exactly the consequences follow up (lots of reactions), not IF it's consequences
"We share exactly the same DNA because we live in the same environment, so evolution cannot be real and it must habe been God". If we share DNA because of our similar environments it means that our DNA changed to fit that environment, not designed to fit it. As another comment below says we share 75% with worms. Does that mean 75% of our habitat is the same as worms'?
@Leehofooks If 50% is the same, for two totally unrelated species, then having 97% the same with something similar means zip... Remember we share 75% with WORMS!!! (though I have been told it is more than 75%!!)
Simple fact to consider: the technology and science that is used to determine our relatedness to other organisms is the EXACT same technology and science that is used in a court of law, often called "DNA evidence" and the exact same as that used to determine paternity. Go figure.
Prosecutor: "The DNA evidence from the accused exactly matches that on the murder weapon"
Defender: "OBJECTION! The DNA could come from a monkey if modern science is to be believed! This is an unreliable methodology based on evolutionist pseudo-science. It could even come from the handgun itself! Was your grandad a handgun? No - I don't think so. "
For an alledged geneticist and microbiologist, Anderson knows dick all about genetics. The genome is NOT a "long piece" of anything. A genome is the ENTIRE genetic makeup of an organism. ALL the DNA, not a piece of it. What an idiot. How the hell did he get a PhD. You know I called Kansas State and they don't have a single doctoral dissertaion by anyone named Kevin Anderson. Funny that.
We share EVERY defining characteristic of Hominidae, the "great apes". Humans are apes, biological fact. Just like a wolf is a canine or a tiger is a feline. HUMANS ARE APES BY DEFINITION. End of story
How can these people use scientific information and try to analyze it in a pseudo-scientific way and, finally, conclude that the explanation for all those data is that somebody created us and apes at the same time (well, not the same day)?. What a kind of mental damage may conduce to such a stupid behaviour?
How can these people use scientific information and try to analyze it in a pseudo-scientific way and, finally, conclude that the explanation for all those data is that somebody created us and apes at the same time (well, not the same day)?. What a kind of mental damage may conduce to such a stupid behaviour?
A way to identify those that share common ancestry is by genetic accidents that happened in the past (example: damage caused by a retrovirus infection), resulting in completely disfunctional pieces of DNA.
We share with the chimpanzees several dozens of such accidents. The probability of a different species having the same accidents creating exactly the same consequences is as small as 1 in a number larger than all the atoms in the universe.
Is creationism or evolution really worth fighting over when ultimately we all die? It's ignorance on both parts. None of us will see the beginning and all of us will see the end.
Learning Creationism is like flushing your brain down the toilet. It's a lazy concept, not to mention unscientific and completely AGAINST all evidence from all fields of science.
I wish these scientists would just open a Bible. Human beings were created completely separate from animals, and we were made out of dust [Genesis 2:7]!
It is obvious that if monkeys have a genome, human beings can't have one.
Trust me you will not like a world without Christianity. Keep that mind set and you will have that life one day for all eternity. The Bible is vicious, that's because it speaks of a world given over to Lucifer by the choice he deceived Adam and Eve into taking. But it is not the world that God has waiting for those who choose Him. Satan deceives people into thinking life is better without God. God gives free will to all mankind and you only have two options, God or Satan. Choose wisely.
Satan? oh please. Next you'll be telling me that Harry Potter is real too. I choose neither because neither exist. If i had to choose, I'd choose Satan, God is a arrogant cunt - he would be if he were more than fiction, anyway.
God was the one who set up the ridiculous entrapment of Adam & Eve. Lucifer told Eve the truth. Actually, Lucifer didn't do anything wrong in the story - for a snake, who could have crushed, bit or spat venom at her, he was very nice. He told her that God was lying - and he was. God was the biggest dickhead in that story by a long way.
When only a VERY small section of genome was examined why, or how can Evolutionists claim such a thing. And why choose chimps? Well it's pretty obvious they come the closest to resembling humans. So it makes sense that they would come close geneticly, but the genome is NOT completely maped. And a small difference can be a big difference.
I don't think there would be any monkeys if we evolved from them, any that didn't evolve would've become extinct. Competition elimination?? Think people!!
We don't evolve from the current apes, we share a common ancestor. As they evolved, branched out and diversified, so did we. We actually did, sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly, eliminate our closest competitors in evolution (Neanderthal, Erectus). The current apes have not stood still in evolution since our split either, and take up a vastly different niche than we do. So there is no real competition. I study evolutionary psychology and human origins archaeology, just begun the latter.
Why isn't there any transitional chimps, etc.? Diversity just doesn't prove or explain why there is no transitional fossils to support Evolution. If it was proven beyond any doubt then there would be no argument. It just seems to me that there would be some record or memory by our fathers, fathers, fathers that would've been recorded, look at all the pitagraphs, why wouldn't they? They recorded everything else.
But there are. There are so many fossils in between our lineages (and even more offshoots) that have been accurately dated by potassium-argon dating and other methods, that there really, really is no doubt on evolution, let alone human evolution. There are links - creationists, with all respect, just don't want to see them. Of course, the search is still very much ongoing.
There has been some proven false, yrs after being put fourth as truth and in some places they have left them on display without making that clear. Why??? And why would I take anything at face value from those that support evolution so strongly, when they seem willing to lie than admit their wrong about anything??? Biology is science, evolution is fiction. Please think outside the box. Get the opinons of biology scienctists on both sides or no sides. Question everything.
Look up Chauvet and Lascaux and many more cave paintings if you want to see some really ancient pictographs - the former 32.000 years old. The reason why we may not recognise art of older homos as such is because they may have been made on transient materials (wood, etc.) that leave little to no trace. That and art requires superb cognition - this developed rather late in our evolution.
O.K., now how old is the oldest ancient civilization? A false date? I was just asking something that seemed to not fit. I wasn't sure about the exact dates. It just doesn't make sense that some of the ancient civilizations were able to do such complicated mathematical calculations to build, or for a calendar that's lasted longer than them. But cave men only had instincts for millions of yrs.? Really I want to know, they should've thought about it and you should be able to find it. Right?
A false date does not prove the entire mechanism of evolution is wrong. Evolution has actually been visible in the laboratory! Yes, a single celled organism evolved a trait that none of its predecessors had right out of the blue. Google it. Scientists do question everything - and the scientist that could disprove or effectively criticise the theory of evolution would get fame beyond belief. It's a testament to that theory that nobody could even dent it. You're certainly welcome to try!
Bacteria and viruses can change doesn't mean it's an evolutionary mutation. What about single cells that live their whole life as a single cell? Just how far and how did it change? Did it reproduce? Did it show a new character trait? You sure it's not just a mutation for mutation sake (like birth defects)? Your studying archeology right? Well......at least you said theory of evolution. I'm just thinking and asking
?HOW? in comparing the facts and assertions. That's what truth seekers do.
There is no real difference between bad mutations that you could call defects at birth and 'good' mutations. It's all random. And indeed, for every one organism that gets born with a beneficial mutation, there are numerous more with 'bad' mutations. An organism with a bad mutation likely wouldn't have much reproductive success and hence wouldn't be seen. I like your eagerness to learn, but before we continue this you should really read up on the basics of evolution. Trust me, it's interesting!
The question about records of memory I do not fully understand. Do not forget that evolution (although visible on 'lesser organisms in laboratories' in the lab) is a process spanning (hundreds of) thousands, even millions of years. The earliest human writing are about 5000 years old, the earliest 'cities' 10.000. A person usually cannot check back their family tree much further back than 800 A.D. - let alone 6 million years!
I said pictagrapghs (pictures) by cave men. Millions of years, and we didn't try to communicate anything creative.? Until just 5,000 yrs. ago??? When such advance ancient cilvilizations (Mayan?) exisisted? Oh and there are some pretty complicated well thought out pitagraphs then writings, mathmatics, and astrology. How long, after the first cave drawings, writings, to present has it been??? Do you really believe it took millions of yrs. before ONE Ape man made an attempt at drawing. ?????
There are no transitional chimps because they were alive at the same time as early homo specimens--we are closely related to Chimps and Bonobos, even sharing some blood types (how do apes have human blood types A,B,and O and identical antigens?). We are NOT descended from Chimps...btw, any fossil not of a living species today IS transitional, except for the Burgess Shale spcimens that predate vertebrates~lots of them died out with no descendents...do the science!!!
"any fossil not of a living species today IS transitional" This is not possible. There are fossils found in cretacous rock that can be identified as species living today. There is no transitional fossils of them. And there should still be some transitional species of some animal if evolution is continueous.
Where does it say evolution is continuous? An animal will evolve in response to environmental pressures; some animals have not evolved in ages(the Nautilus and most sharks,for example)~there was no environmental pressure for them to do so...there is now, thanks to human efforts to exterminate many of them...can they evolve more rapid reproduction, or learn to avoid humans? Fairly unlikely,I'm afraid...that is asking too much of nature...as far as transitionals are concerned, time is the ...
critical variable...finding transitional fossils of very old organisms is not easy...for mammals it is relatively easy , more difficult for reptiles,more difficult than that for amphibians, fish, and insects and REALLY hard for organisms without hard shells or body parts, such as for the earliest organisms, although more than 100 forms of cyanobacteria have been found dating back almost 4 billion years (U of New South Wales vid,plus many others). Evolution is neither continuous or regular...
I got that evolution is continuous from an evolutionist. I wish you guys would make up your mind. If evolution was right it should've been proven a long time ago, but oh well, we evolutionists don't care we just need more time. Times up and we've had enough of the tap dance.
If you were under the impression that evolution as a process is continuous, that was given to you in error...it has the potential to be continuous, but only in response to environmental stimuli (i.e. natural selection)--it is not a perpetual process...
Still shouldn't there be some transitional creatures, some where? You can't find them in fossils, or that is, it's debatiable. I would also like to know how did evolution scienctists determine the dates of the rock layers?
Evolution biologists don't date rock, geologists do...there are a variety of methods,depending upon the rough age estimate. Carbon isotopes aren't much use beyond 500,000 years or so, but uranium isotope dating is very accurate indeed to very long in the past (half life of U-238 is 4.5 billion years and has a constant rate of decay).As far as fossils are concerned, there are quite a few presimians and quite a number of prosimians (think lemurs,tarsiers,etc)...
The earliest of these (so far) is Shoshonius cooperi, a predecessor of modern Tarsiers found in southeast Asia today...there is also Catopithecus from Egypt, both dating from about 50 million years ago...both clearly primates,thus distant precursers of apes and humans...when we get nearer to about 10 million years ago, the lineages are well established with monkeys, prosimians, apes, and Great Apes predecessors already divergent, but chimpanzee fossils were not found until 2005, and dated...
dated to about 545,000 years ago; it is felt that the environment favored by chimps and bonobos is particularly difficult for fossilization as jungles have many mechanisms for destroying potential fossils-->they are very poor sources of any fossils at all. DNA suggests that chimps are at least 5-6 million years old, but that has been very frustrating for paleoscience as mentioned. Humans are much more adaptive and prehuman fossils much easier to find as a result...
The argument presented by saying that the DNA in chimpanzees are similar to humans because of the fact we need to survive in a similar way makes absolutely no sense. If this statement was true then all animals would have exactly the same percentage of similar DNA since we all breath the same air, drink the same water and eat the same food. What I would like to know is where does this idiot think the 1.5% comes from.
Human Chromosome #2 fusion point, deactivated centromere matching Bonobo Chromosome #13, along with telomere duplication.
Pseudogenes in the exact same chromosomal location, shared ONLY by primates, with the exact same mutation that stopped it from functioning as a protein coding gene.
Endogenous Retroviral imprints perfectly, in each and every case, exactly matching a phylogenetic tree.
Anyone who thinks this doesn't prove anything is a moron.
There are so many fouls in this I don't know where to start. We do have a pretty good fossil record. The non-coding DNA is not affected by selection so all mutations pile up.
So what are your evidence for creation eccept your old book? Just alot of missunderstandings mixed up with ancient myth. Pure BS!
This video talks all about chimps, and yet the picture we stare at for almost 15 minutes is an oragutan. This is the only thing you'll learn from this video.
What a remarkably hollow analysis. Apparently the makers of this video want you to ask: how can you REALLY be sure that humans and chimps are related because of their genetic similarity? That's like asking how can you REALLY be certain of the paternity of a child based on genetic testing...duh!
@Gilbertus1986 So what the heck is your point? I listened to the times you cited, and i still don't know what your point is. By the way, when comparing human and chimpanzee genomes, there is very little doubt about which regions are syntenic because they are so similar. There are a bunch of very small rearrangements and one major one. So what?
@Gilbertus1986 Watch the video again if you don't understand the concept... THEY are the ones doing the testing, and are presenting the results as follows.
what SHIT ! the ID clowns are like the afrocentricts and ufo nuts they no most people do not no much about human origins so they use big words and take things out of context they lie and KNOW THIS!
The institute of creation research? Sounds legit!
TempleOfSin 5 days ago
hello RH factor in blood?! only apes have and some humans and the ones that do are no less human than the ones that don't have it in their blood.
LionGoddess1 2 weeks ago
i stopped at 00:25
EmptyUrMind 3 months ago
Comment removed
spaghetti335 5 months ago
no, we are related to jewish God ... -.-
slutypet 6 months ago
Thanks, my speakers just got degraded in value because they had to process bullshit.
Anonymadashell 6 months ago
@Anonymadashell Thank you.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16
Find the love of God here.
Audio, Gospel of John Chapter 1 AV h t t p://w w wDOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=Ao4uaIjd3xs
BereanBeacon1 6 months ago
WE ARE APES! Thumbs this truth up. <-- <--
Even if creationism is true (which i dont believe), then we would still be apes.
Yahweigh 6 months ago 6
This is so bullshit...
chavis9056 6 months ago
facepalm!
speerdali 7 months ago
MAYBE....... atheist's ancestors are apes, and the rest of us are from God!! Joking! ALL of us were made in the image of God, it's obvious that every amazing thing in the NATURAL world, OBVIOUSLY EXCLAIM the supreme majesty of our Creator GOD! God says that those who DENY this, are WITHOUT EXCUSE! GOD says, that the do not KNOW the TRUTH, because the truth is not WITHIN them, for they Love the Darkness, and ways apart from God. It's so sad, because genuinely KNOWING, Loving, and being Lo
TheWayandWordofLife 8 months ago
@TheWayandWordofLife Wtf, your pathetic. GOD!!! Who is the God? Which story of creation do we follow? It brings more questions then answers when we imply "X!" X is God, and God is X, there is no difference. It is not a answer, and never will be.
treasuredroperX 7 months ago
For about the 8th damn time, we're not related to apes - WE ARE APES!
NorthForkFisherman 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NorthForkFisherman LOL, A merry heart maketh a cheerful countenance: but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken. Proverbs 15:13
BereanBeacon1 9 months ago
Birds eat the same food, drink the same water, they are dinosaurs, not like us.
gregrutz 9 months ago
FAIL!!!
DrSpooglemon 10 months ago
Insanity. Why, why, why are you so obsessed with correlating ONE specific religious doctrine with the evolution of life? Why? What are you worried about? What do you fear? How is it possible to trap your mind so? Why one god? Why not 10? or 1000? Why do you believe the words of ONE specific archaic text? Why do you want to think you are so significant? Why? THEY'RE trying to make us think??? Gullible? The bible says??? What evidence is there that the bible is true? You're scared! Terrified!
tonowicz1 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tonowicz1 Your time is near.
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:10,11
BereanBeacon1 10 months ago
@tonowicz1 No ...there is such a thing as the importance of truth.
jiminiflix 9 months ago
Humans have ape blood types A, B, and O. Humans have the identical blood antigens as apes, and the identical rh factors...and humans share up to 96% of DNA with chimpanzees and bonobos...but we aren't related to apes??? Please!!!!
Aarbutusfigeroa 1 year ago
@Aarbutusfigeroa Videos, The Chimp-Human 1% Difference: A Useful Lie, 2007 and Repeat DNA Function Negates Classic Evolutionary Argument
BereanBeacon1 1 year ago
It's no surprise that creatures share a good portion of protein-coding genes. We all live on earth with biological bodies. It's the complexity and intelligent organisation of DNA that prove design.
joroma77 1 year ago
Bovine manure.
Don't the guys doing this program know it's a sin for Christians to lie?
ostbagen 1 year ago
=facepalm=
SlinkShady 1 year ago
How old is this presentation??/
These argument are laughable in in the light of what we know since DNA has been sequenced in human and ape forms. I'd have been amazed if they would have dared use them even 30 years ago!
Tobytrim 1 year ago
@Tobytrim All evolutionists have is hot air on the mostly anonymous Internet. We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize. You can evolve from a chicken and win the prize or make cowardly remarks on websites until you ultimately die and become a creationists after it's too late. My last remark to you is something that everyone understands: CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK.
BereanBeacon1 1 year ago
@BereanBeacon1 " We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize."
I take it that the full of your childish message means that you don't have a relevent response to the comment I made - Lol!!
Tell us more about this "real science" which you think rebutts the overwhelming consensus of the whole scientific community?
What have you got to show to add to the, hitherto, NOTHING which will make the hundreds of thousands peer review observations of evolution null and void?
Tobytrim 1 year ago
Saying that we are related to apes is like saying a Doberman is related to a dog! We aren't related to apes, we ARE apes.
christo930 1 year ago
0:00 - 0:12. That was the only bit with anything factual.
MrJamesonStyles 1 year ago
The 98 percent only aplies to portions of our DNA that codes for proteins. When we compare the entire segments, including what was once considered to be Junk DNA but are now known to regulate gene expression, the differential can be 70 percent or less.
benthemiester 1 year ago
to the creationists, i say let them. i get it all the time... evolutionists try to prove to me that they are monkeys... so i just let them.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 u're so willfully ignorant, its sad
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 no... whats said is people trying to prove to me they are monkeys.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 and once again you showed your ignorance. evolutionary explaination doesn't say we're monkeys.. you have monkeys and apes mixed up with eachother, of the latter though we most definently are apes. By the very defintion human beings have given to the word Ape, we fit that category.
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 homosapien means, wise, rational, thinking man. did u even watch this video? this is evidence against man being apes... apes cannot interbreed with apes nor is there fossil evidence showing transitions of ape to man. we dont have to force interpretation onto evidence... it speaks for itself. people are related to people and nothing more. distinct from the animal kingdom.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 OMFG... APES isn't a species, yes homo sapien sapiens, us, is a very specific species. Apes encompasess the family we both belong to. Kingdom Phyllum Class Order Family Genus Species, learn your taxonomy and you'll understand evolution better. and actually yes the fossil record does too, go backward fromm an through homo erecuts, habilis, etc etc and they look more and more "ape" like as u look at it.
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 the fossil record shows no transitional fossils of apes transitioning into man. you cant have a single skull or one arm and a rib cage and use that to assume it transitioned from anything. and there should be thousands of bones recovered.. were are they? i understand taxonomy very well, thankyou.. but i understand genetics play a bigger role in the very thing you want to relate us with.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 sorry but not every single animal that dies becomes fossilized..there's countless species of animals that have walked this earth that we'll never know existed because none of them ever fossilized or if they did they eroded away, or we just won't ever uncover them. and if god just created us in his image then that means he created us about 200,000 years ago. and bible stories dont come around until about 5000 years ago. continued
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 can u give proof of this>>? "he created us about 200,000 years ago. and bible stories dont come around until about 5000 years ago. continued"
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 no, im saying if YOU believe there's a god that just created human beings one day, then you'd have to believe that he created us 200,000 years ago cuz thats the agreed time that human beings as we know them first began to emerge as a seperate species. and bible stories are dated back to about 6000 years ago, which is why alot of christians think the earth is only 6000 years old, and with that, what was ur god doing for 194,000 years?
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 well i believe God created people fully formed. i dont think anyone knows the age of the earth, because the dates assumed to be agreed upon.. are calibrations of a dating method which you can make young or old. if christians believe the earth is 10 -6,000 years old. its because they are adding up genealogies. but the age of the earth is never given in the bible. btw. the earliest humans we have were discovered to be around 10,000 years ago.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 so you'd have to believe that for 194,000 yeras after he created us he just sat back and then finally decided, NOW ill intervene. wtf was he doing all that time? and why wait millions of years. and there are thousands of bones, hell i'd throw in the number 10'000s of bones of animals we've uncovered describing the past life that walked this earth. In all honesty tho, i lost all respect in discussing this topic with u as soon as u mentioned that "the bible has the answers" and god
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 i ask the same thing about humanity.. they want us to believe humans have existed for thousands and thousands of years, but its only been in the past 1,000 years man has been on the moon, flew, created computers ect. what were humans doing all that time? this world would be so over populated if humans were around for over 50,0000 years.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 if you knew anything about human population of the planet you'd know that the population only exploded recently, go look it up, its prety crazy how much the population of the earth has increased in just the past hundred years. and "past 1000 years we've been on the moon flew and created computers" try the last 100 years we've done that. if it wasn't for christianities war on science in the past 1000 years then maybe we'd have been flying alot earlier.
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cabot2jville2010 "it wasn't for christianities war on science in the past 1000 years then maybe we'd have been flying alot earlier". thats an ignorant statement. the very people that created the scientific method were religious people. "go look it up, its prety crazy how much the population of the earth has increased in just the past hundred years". that also causes suspension... if weve been around for over 200,000 years, why hasnt this world already over populated already?
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 because for 194,000 years the human race was living like any other animal, in the wild hunting for food, life expectancy would have been no greater than 30 years, and infant death rates would be huge, just as they have been for the few thousands years too. you really need to understand how birth rates for humans occured once medicinal science improved in the last 100 years boosting the life expectancy AND lowering infant death rates.
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 i mean you might as well ask why wolves or deer or bears or lions haven't over populated this planet
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Respond to this video... "scientific repression by the catholic church throughout the dark ages and medieval europe held back our technological gains by alot. so yah, take a 0 off that past 1000 years and you'll be spot on." thats correct. but your painting a picture that scientists were not religous.. when science was invented by religious ppl in the first place. the very first sciencetists created science because they wanted to know more about God and how he created things.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 modern science itself doesnt start until around galileo's time, of which the catholic church was gonna kill for saying the earth was NOT the center of the universe, which it obviously isn't. Astrology, Alchemy, etc those aren't real science but yes were practiced by religious scientists. and yes galileo, newton, etc they were all religious. but the Cath church was a huge hold on science, not individual belief but the church itself, not the spirtuality but the organised religion
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 okay... but im a Christian. catholics were persecuting and killing Christians... it was called the dark ages. i could care less about the catholic religion or any religion that oppresses people. because weither it be religion or atheism, you can always find extreemists in them.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 um, the dark ages?? christians of the dark ages WERE catholics, there was no such thing as protestanism which i'm assuming you are. babtism methodist one of those denominations. catholics and protestants are ALL christians, its jsut that protestants look at themselves as more "christian" than catholics, which in a sense they are. but the dark ages chrisitans WERE catholics, there were no catholics attacking christians, that'd be christians attacking christians
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 you dont know your history. the Christians were persecuted by the catholics. Christianity was around when Christ walked the earth; so how do u figure catholics and Christians were the same thing?, the dark ages was a religious war due to the idea that orthodox Christians repudiated the ways of the Catholic Church with its papal doctrines and hierarchy. if it was just one group of religious people fighting... then what were they fighting about??????
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 the catholic church was not formed UNTIL the roman emprie excepted christianity, before then the christians were persecuted by the ROMANS not the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, . you're mixing up the church with the roman government itself. someone doesn't understand terminology. and they were called Eastern Orthodox Catholics. all were encompasing in catholics. they fought over how christianity should be taught they were both christian for gods sakes..
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 Wrong. The catholic religion is not Christian. Catholics think salvation is a result of good works; the pope kisses the Koran, does freemason handshakes, believes in evolution, has feasts with other non-christian religious groups, is considered infallible; Catholics often put Mary, a vessel to give birth to the Son of Man Jesus, as the mother of God!; They worship saints (when in fact ALL believers are saints); They are idolaters; make carved idols of Jesus; and much more.
joroma77 1 year ago
@joroma77 Catholics were the first christians. Your church broke away from the catholics.
Catholics think salvation is good works, follow the ten commandments. [stop lying like you do]
Mary is the mother of God dummy. They pray to Mary and the Saints to reach Jesus, just like you pray to Jesus to reach God. they don't worship idols dummy.
what ever religion you trust lies to you.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 there is a good book called "rare earth" that logically makes the argument that the earth IS the center of the universe.. you should check it out.
but again.. if catholics put a hold on science. how does that tie in with Christianity? catholics accept evolution.. that doesnt mean all religious people do.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 the earth revolves around the sun, sun revolves around the center of the milkyway galaxy..bam earth is not center of the universe...unless the universe spins around with the earth...
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 I haven't viewed the universe with a telescope but I'm curious if you have done so. First I want direct evidence that galaxies exist (they probably do, I just want first hand experience), then I would like to know with what method they determine that earth is within a galaxy. It's one thing to hear or read something and another to observe it directly. Given the indisputable fact that the moon landing photos were faked, it would take a lot of faith for me to believe NASA.
joroma77 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 scientific repression by the catholic church throughout the dark ages and medieval europe held back our technological gains by alot. so yah, take a 0 off that past 1000 years and you'll be spot on. and if u ask "what were humans doing all that time" why don't u read up on ancient civilizations, then you'll know what we were doing.
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@Gods0n1 and sad world and pretty arrogant of you to just assume human beings are distinct from the animal kingdom. the only thing that pulled us away from our more primeval instincts of hunting was the development of tools and clothes, then the agricultural revolution that allowed for civilizations to form
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
@cabot2jville2010 the thing that pulled us away from the animal kingdom is that God created us in His image. and we were created to rule over animals. the bible has all the anwsers already there. Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
Comment removed
cabot2jville2010 1 year ago
haha, hilarious. we are 98.5% similar to "the apes", like ape is a dirty, dirty word. Dude, take a look in a mirror, your no perfect transcendent being made in anyone's image.
bansee100 1 year ago
BereanBeacon, do you know what chromosomes are?
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago
Why in the world would anyone take advice on science from a filthy potato sucking irishmen?
justinsgil185 1 year ago
ahhhh who cares! no one knows anything..just stfu with your theories everything is 50/50 from god to your sexuality...just enjoy life is all im saying...i just saw a mf squirrel get eaten by fox while he was stocking his pantry all the while two other squirrels were getting their boogie on...it was on animal planet
M4GIT666 1 year ago
Creationism brainwashing, again and again. Have a life man. Even better: have a biology course !
korg502006 1 year ago
Really?
SunshinePhD 1 year ago
Evolution - the greatest lie!
hiyosilver100 1 year ago
@hiyosilver100 Creationists - best liars and bullshitters.
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago
@ThatOneQuestion Sorry - I concede: Evolutionists have proven themselves to be the better liars.....Piltdown, Lucy, Neanderthal, fossil record, millions and millions of years and on and on.......ad nauseum.
hiyosilver100 1 year ago
@hiyosilver100 Oh right, because the world is 6000 years old, got ya. Why do you say that, anyway? Ohh thats right-your Magic Man told you through a book.
Yeah-that totally beats out anything science can demonstrate. HA!!
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago
@hiyosilver100 You forgot comparative anatomy, embryology, genetics, comparative biochemistry, observe speciation, and on and on and on...
BTW We didn't evolve from Neanderthals, there were a different kind of human.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@hiyosilver100
Neither Lucy and Neanderthal fossils are fake, the fossil record is demonstrable (you can go to a museum and look at them) so I'm not sure how that is fabricated. Do you have any evidence that these are fake? If so, I would highly recommend you get it published as you will probably win a noble prize (or let me do it).
theviolator23 1 year ago
@theviolator23 Do your homework. They certainly are. Those and many others. Proven and admitted to time and again. *I* don't need to provide evidence they are fakes. It's been done. Museum exhibits are made to sell tickets and to foster the lie of evolution of species. Find some videos on Chuck Missler, Kent Hovind and others (my channel has some) for the opposing viewpoint.
hiyosilver100 1 year ago
@hiyosilver100
They are not. Do a google search on it, that's all it takes. They were neither "prove" nor "admitted" to be fake. If they were somehow only creationists heard about it (find me an objective source showing that these are falsities). I am quite familiar with Kent. He is a lying, tax-evading fraud with absolutely no understanding of any field of science (not biology, physics, geology etc.) There are hundreds of videos proving the scientific impossibilities of his statements.
theviolator23 1 year ago
@hiyosilver100 What part of evolution don't you understand? What lie?
gregrutz 1 year ago
Our similarities enforce a common designer? Did jelly fish have a different designer?
SidewaysGts 1 year ago
Humans ARE apes. There is no way to deny it.
MrColuber 1 year ago
In my family tree there is, but you are closer related to myxomucota. Promoting a film with that amount of errors and false claims are slimy indeed. Ever thought of learning the science you try to debunk? We got the fossils, the retro viruses (if u know w it is), embyology etc etc. You got an old story book, with cruel bedtime stories. We winn!
andvil01 1 year ago
Hey dumb assees, when a person creates someting they utalizes their own styles and tecniques, like painters, hairstylists, engineers, musicians, etc.
Now If God created us dont you think their would be similarities in all animals,
jurnagin 1 year ago
All extant apes, including homo sapiens, share a common ancestor.
You are spreading lies.
jamespiperca 1 year ago
Chimps eat the same food as us? Yeah they're also 9 feet tall, live underwater and spend all day square dancing.
Do you want to claim anything else that can be disproven just by, I don't know, LOOKING at the subject?
Oh wait, it's The Institution For Creation Research. So yeah I guess they do.
ProfessorEGadd 1 year ago
Isn't what happens to people in Hell for eternity worse than what happened to Jesus over the course of a weekend? How is there any kind of justice/balance in that outlook?
I guess it doesn't since Jesus was just an ape like everyone else anyway.
See now, if Xtians said Jesus was sent to hell, so that we could live in Heaven, that might be more convincing, but he wasn't. He was there a few days at most.
themanamp 1 year ago
yess we are
Mrepik159 1 year ago
at about 7:30
the guy speak about expression of genes that are more different in chimp vs humans.
Yes. of course. Biologists can see that just looking at the chimp. but different different chemical equilibrium and reactions (which leads to different proteins expression) are the consequences of the few differences in dna, it's contradict nothing (as all the pseudo arguments before...), the mystery in biology is how exactly the consequences follow up (lots of reactions), not IF it's consequences
Lioobayoyo 1 year ago
answer about the so called "lack" of transitionnal fossils at 4:00 :
/watch?v=O4GdZOlPrX8
i can't finish watching this stupid video, i have to stop each minute to facepalm and comment.
Lioobayoyo 1 year ago
t oanswer on at about 3:00 and after :
one of the many very good reasons why biologists are sure that we and the chimp share a common ancestor : /watch?v=dK3O6KYPmEw
...
the whole conference about a trial against intelligent design being taught in schools (Dover's Trial) : /watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg
Lioobayoyo 1 year ago
This is nonsense.
wearealltubes 1 year ago
This is nonsense.
wearealltubes 1 year ago
How did scientiits come up with the number? By comparing the genome, or at least a significant portion of it.
Yes, genome - not garden gnome.
jazzx251 1 year ago
Chimps are closer to humans than they are to gorrilas.
We are closer to chimps than a horse is to a zebra.
gregrutz 1 year ago
No, we are not related to apes, we still are apes. Remember dogs make dogs, apes make apes.
gregrutz 1 year ago
I hate when creationists make shows, they are so fucking bias.
peronkop 1 year ago
"We share exactly the same DNA because we live in the same environment, so evolution cannot be real and it must habe been God". If we share DNA because of our similar environments it means that our DNA changed to fit that environment, not designed to fit it. As another comment below says we share 75% with worms. Does that mean 75% of our habitat is the same as worms'?
666satanification666 1 year ago
@666satanification666
You are using logic, creationists don't understand logic.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz Ah yes, my mistake. Silly me.
666satanification666 1 year ago
We share 75% DNA with worms and 50% DNA with Bananas...lol
Bananas are our "half-brother"... ha ha ha We could have evolved from bananas...
Gilbertus1986 1 year ago
@Gilbertus1986 No, but we do share a common ancestor with bananas.
Leehofooks 1 year ago
@Leehofooks If 50% is the same, for two totally unrelated species, then having 97% the same with something similar means zip... Remember we share 75% with WORMS!!! (though I have been told it is more than 75%!!)
Gilbertus1986 1 year ago
@Gilbertus1986 Maybe you don't understand the concept of common descent... There is no such thing as "totally unrelated species."
Leehofooks 1 year ago
Damn these people can't possibly be more idiotic...
MakoSharkX 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EVOLUTION: THE GREATEST WONDER.
lizazoon 2 years ago
yeeeeesss
TribalPVP 2 years ago
Simple fact to consider: the technology and science that is used to determine our relatedness to other organisms is the EXACT same technology and science that is used in a court of law, often called "DNA evidence" and the exact same as that used to determine paternity. Go figure.
SanRafaelSwell 2 years ago
@SanRafaelSwell
CREATIONIST COURTROOM
Prosecutor: "The DNA evidence from the accused exactly matches that on the murder weapon"
Defender: "OBJECTION! The DNA could come from a monkey if modern science is to be believed! This is an unreliable methodology based on evolutionist pseudo-science. It could even come from the handgun itself! Was your grandad a handgun? No - I don't think so. "
Judge: "Sustained. Case dismissed." [BANG!]
jazzx251 1 year ago
For an alledged geneticist and microbiologist, Anderson knows dick all about genetics. The genome is NOT a "long piece" of anything. A genome is the ENTIRE genetic makeup of an organism. ALL the DNA, not a piece of it. What an idiot. How the hell did he get a PhD. You know I called Kansas State and they don't have a single doctoral dissertaion by anyone named Kevin Anderson. Funny that.
SanRafaelSwell 2 years ago
We share EVERY defining characteristic of Hominidae, the "great apes". Humans are apes, biological fact. Just like a wolf is a canine or a tiger is a feline. HUMANS ARE APES BY DEFINITION. End of story
SanRafaelSwell 2 years ago
Answer to the title of the video:
Yes.
KoutetsuTenshin 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How can these people use scientific information and try to analyze it in a pseudo-scientific way and, finally, conclude that the explanation for all those data is that somebody created us and apes at the same time (well, not the same day)?. What a kind of mental damage may conduce to such a stupid behaviour?
lunayrosazul 2 years ago
How can these people use scientific information and try to analyze it in a pseudo-scientific way and, finally, conclude that the explanation for all those data is that somebody created us and apes at the same time (well, not the same day)?. What a kind of mental damage may conduce to such a stupid behaviour?
lunayrosazul 2 years ago 2
This video is just a lie, nothing else.
A way to identify those that share common ancestry is by genetic accidents that happened in the past (example: damage caused by a retrovirus infection), resulting in completely disfunctional pieces of DNA.
We share with the chimpanzees several dozens of such accidents. The probability of a different species having the same accidents creating exactly the same consequences is as small as 1 in a number larger than all the atoms in the universe.
fernbap 2 years ago
Is creationism or evolution really worth fighting over when ultimately we all die? It's ignorance on both parts. None of us will see the beginning and all of us will see the end.
TheAmazingRandall 2 years ago
Learning Creationism is like flushing your brain down the toilet. It's a lazy concept, not to mention unscientific and completely AGAINST all evidence from all fields of science.
mfunke 2 years ago
That was... interesting.
I don't believe either theory is completely true. But that's just me.
VictorsChick4ever 2 years ago
I wish these scientists would just open a Bible. Human beings were created completely separate from animals, and we were made out of dust [Genesis 2:7]!
It is obvious that if monkeys have a genome, human beings can't have one.
thallassocracy 2 years ago
Yeah sure, mate. God created us, and leprechauns live in the forest with the imps and pixies. Do you think that Harry Potter is real too?
The Bible is a vicious, vile book. The sooner Christianity is gone the better. It is utter primitive nonsense!
moodini99 2 years ago
Trust me you will not like a world without Christianity. Keep that mind set and you will have that life one day for all eternity. The Bible is vicious, that's because it speaks of a world given over to Lucifer by the choice he deceived Adam and Eve into taking. But it is not the world that God has waiting for those who choose Him. Satan deceives people into thinking life is better without God. God gives free will to all mankind and you only have two options, God or Satan. Choose wisely.
bozykatz 2 years ago
Satan? oh please. Next you'll be telling me that Harry Potter is real too. I choose neither because neither exist. If i had to choose, I'd choose Satan, God is a arrogant cunt - he would be if he were more than fiction, anyway.
moodini99 2 years ago
@bozykatz
God was the one who set up the ridiculous entrapment of Adam & Eve. Lucifer told Eve the truth. Actually, Lucifer didn't do anything wrong in the story - for a snake, who could have crushed, bit or spat venom at her, he was very nice. He told her that God was lying - and he was. God was the biggest dickhead in that story by a long way.
jazzx251 1 year ago
When only a VERY small section of genome was examined why, or how can Evolutionists claim such a thing. And why choose chimps? Well it's pretty obvious they come the closest to resembling humans. So it makes sense that they would come close geneticly, but the genome is NOT completely maped. And a small difference can be a big difference.
I don't think there would be any monkeys if we evolved from them, any that didn't evolve would've become extinct. Competition elimination?? Think people!!
vbirdieb 2 years ago
We don't evolve from the current apes, we share a common ancestor. As they evolved, branched out and diversified, so did we. We actually did, sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly, eliminate our closest competitors in evolution (Neanderthal, Erectus). The current apes have not stood still in evolution since our split either, and take up a vastly different niche than we do. So there is no real competition. I study evolutionary psychology and human origins archaeology, just begun the latter.
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
Actually, as far as I know we did not directly compete with the homo erectus. My apologies, wasn't thinking clearly.
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
Why isn't there any transitional chimps, etc.? Diversity just doesn't prove or explain why there is no transitional fossils to support Evolution. If it was proven beyond any doubt then there would be no argument. It just seems to me that there would be some record or memory by our fathers, fathers, fathers that would've been recorded, look at all the pitagraphs, why wouldn't they? They recorded everything else.
vbirdieb 2 years ago
But there are. There are so many fossils in between our lineages (and even more offshoots) that have been accurately dated by potassium-argon dating and other methods, that there really, really is no doubt on evolution, let alone human evolution. There are links - creationists, with all respect, just don't want to see them. Of course, the search is still very much ongoing.
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
There has been some proven false, yrs after being put fourth as truth and in some places they have left them on display without making that clear. Why??? And why would I take anything at face value from those that support evolution so strongly, when they seem willing to lie than admit their wrong about anything??? Biology is science, evolution is fiction. Please think outside the box. Get the opinons of biology scienctists on both sides or no sides. Question everything.
vbirdieb 2 years ago
Look up Chauvet and Lascaux and many more cave paintings if you want to see some really ancient pictographs - the former 32.000 years old. The reason why we may not recognise art of older homos as such is because they may have been made on transient materials (wood, etc.) that leave little to no trace. That and art requires superb cognition - this developed rather late in our evolution.
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
O.K., now how old is the oldest ancient civilization? A false date? I was just asking something that seemed to not fit. I wasn't sure about the exact dates. It just doesn't make sense that some of the ancient civilizations were able to do such complicated mathematical calculations to build, or for a calendar that's lasted longer than them. But cave men only had instincts for millions of yrs.? Really I want to know, they should've thought about it and you should be able to find it. Right?
vbirdieb 2 years ago
A false date does not prove the entire mechanism of evolution is wrong. Evolution has actually been visible in the laboratory! Yes, a single celled organism evolved a trait that none of its predecessors had right out of the blue. Google it. Scientists do question everything - and the scientist that could disprove or effectively criticise the theory of evolution would get fame beyond belief. It's a testament to that theory that nobody could even dent it. You're certainly welcome to try!
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
Bacteria and viruses can change doesn't mean it's an evolutionary mutation. What about single cells that live their whole life as a single cell? Just how far and how did it change? Did it reproduce? Did it show a new character trait? You sure it's not just a mutation for mutation sake (like birth defects)? Your studying archeology right? Well......at least you said theory of evolution. I'm just thinking and asking
?HOW? in comparing the facts and assertions. That's what truth seekers do.
vbirdieb 2 years ago
There is no real difference between bad mutations that you could call defects at birth and 'good' mutations. It's all random. And indeed, for every one organism that gets born with a beneficial mutation, there are numerous more with 'bad' mutations. An organism with a bad mutation likely wouldn't have much reproductive success and hence wouldn't be seen. I like your eagerness to learn, but before we continue this you should really read up on the basics of evolution. Trust me, it's interesting!
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
The question about records of memory I do not fully understand. Do not forget that evolution (although visible on 'lesser organisms in laboratories' in the lab) is a process spanning (hundreds of) thousands, even millions of years. The earliest human writing are about 5000 years old, the earliest 'cities' 10.000. A person usually cannot check back their family tree much further back than 800 A.D. - let alone 6 million years!
PsyPavlov 2 years ago
I said pictagrapghs (pictures) by cave men. Millions of years, and we didn't try to communicate anything creative.? Until just 5,000 yrs. ago??? When such advance ancient cilvilizations (Mayan?) exisisted? Oh and there are some pretty complicated well thought out pitagraphs then writings, mathmatics, and astrology. How long, after the first cave drawings, writings, to present has it been??? Do you really believe it took millions of yrs. before ONE Ape man made an attempt at drawing. ?????
vbirdieb 2 years ago
There are no transitional chimps because they were alive at the same time as early homo specimens--we are closely related to Chimps and Bonobos, even sharing some blood types (how do apes have human blood types A,B,and O and identical antigens?). We are NOT descended from Chimps...btw, any fossil not of a living species today IS transitional, except for the Burgess Shale spcimens that predate vertebrates~lots of them died out with no descendents...do the science!!!
pontecanis 2 years ago
"any fossil not of a living species today IS transitional" This is not possible. There are fossils found in cretacous rock that can be identified as species living today. There is no transitional fossils of them. And there should still be some transitional species of some animal if evolution is continueous.
vbirdieb 2 years ago
Where does it say evolution is continuous? An animal will evolve in response to environmental pressures; some animals have not evolved in ages(the Nautilus and most sharks,for example)~there was no environmental pressure for them to do so...there is now, thanks to human efforts to exterminate many of them...can they evolve more rapid reproduction, or learn to avoid humans? Fairly unlikely,I'm afraid...that is asking too much of nature...as far as transitionals are concerned, time is the ...
pontecanis 2 years ago
critical variable...finding transitional fossils of very old organisms is not easy...for mammals it is relatively easy , more difficult for reptiles,more difficult than that for amphibians, fish, and insects and REALLY hard for organisms without hard shells or body parts, such as for the earliest organisms, although more than 100 forms of cyanobacteria have been found dating back almost 4 billion years (U of New South Wales vid,plus many others). Evolution is neither continuous or regular...
pontecanis 2 years ago
I got that evolution is continuous from an evolutionist. I wish you guys would make up your mind. If evolution was right it should've been proven a long time ago, but oh well, we evolutionists don't care we just need more time. Times up and we've had enough of the tap dance.
vbirdieb 2 years ago
If you were under the impression that evolution as a process is continuous, that was given to you in error...it has the potential to be continuous, but only in response to environmental stimuli (i.e. natural selection)--it is not a perpetual process...
pontecanis 2 years ago
Still shouldn't there be some transitional creatures, some where? You can't find them in fossils, or that is, it's debatiable. I would also like to know how did evolution scienctists determine the dates of the rock layers?
vbirdieb 2 years ago
Evolution biologists don't date rock, geologists do...there are a variety of methods,depending upon the rough age estimate. Carbon isotopes aren't much use beyond 500,000 years or so, but uranium isotope dating is very accurate indeed to very long in the past (half life of U-238 is 4.5 billion years and has a constant rate of decay).As far as fossils are concerned, there are quite a few presimians and quite a number of prosimians (think lemurs,tarsiers,etc)...
pontecanis 2 years ago
The earliest of these (so far) is Shoshonius cooperi, a predecessor of modern Tarsiers found in southeast Asia today...there is also Catopithecus from Egypt, both dating from about 50 million years ago...both clearly primates,thus distant precursers of apes and humans...when we get nearer to about 10 million years ago, the lineages are well established with monkeys, prosimians, apes, and Great Apes predecessors already divergent, but chimpanzee fossils were not found until 2005, and dated...
pontecanis 2 years ago
dated to about 545,000 years ago; it is felt that the environment favored by chimps and bonobos is particularly difficult for fossilization as jungles have many mechanisms for destroying potential fossils-->they are very poor sources of any fossils at all. DNA suggests that chimps are at least 5-6 million years old, but that has been very frustrating for paleoscience as mentioned. Humans are much more adaptive and prehuman fossils much easier to find as a result...
pontecanis 2 years ago
Sources-->MSNBC, New Scientist, National Geographic, the Free Library, and Science Daily-->simian fossils, chimp fossils...many vids on youtoob also.
pontecanis 2 years ago
Wow, lots of info. I'll be busy for awhile, checking it out. I do want to send you a video playlist. I'll get back to you later after I check it out.
vbirdieb 2 years ago
hmpfh no one says that we are related to apes..... We ARE apes.
Synist3Twist 2 years ago
The argument presented by saying that the DNA in chimpanzees are similar to humans because of the fact we need to survive in a similar way makes absolutely no sense. If this statement was true then all animals would have exactly the same percentage of similar DNA since we all breath the same air, drink the same water and eat the same food. What I would like to know is where does this idiot think the 1.5% comes from.
darrenc182 2 years ago
98% doesn't matter..
Human Chromosome #2 fusion point, deactivated centromere matching Bonobo Chromosome #13, along with telomere duplication.
Pseudogenes in the exact same chromosomal location, shared ONLY by primates, with the exact same mutation that stopped it from functioning as a protein coding gene.
Endogenous Retroviral imprints perfectly, in each and every case, exactly matching a phylogenetic tree.
Anyone who thinks this doesn't prove anything is a moron.
troyboulay 2 years ago
People ARE apes!!!!!!!!!!!!!
holymoose69 2 years ago 16
@holymoose69 And Monkeys!!!
norcofreerider604 1 year ago
@norcofreerider604 Wrong.
holymoose69 1 year ago
@holymoose69 watch?v=4A-dMqEbSk8
norcofreerider604 1 year ago
@holymoose69 People ACT like "apes" even though they were created from "agape"
researchologist 1 year ago
@researchologist pardon?
holymoose69 1 year ago
'Don't go bananas, just stay tuned'. Ouch
robotwookie 2 years ago
You fools haven't done your homework properly.
There are so many fouls in this I don't know where to start. We do have a pretty good fossil record. The non-coding DNA is not affected by selection so all mutations pile up.
So what are your evidence for creation eccept your old book? Just alot of missunderstandings mixed up with ancient myth. Pure BS!
andvil01 2 years ago 3
This video talks all about chimps, and yet the picture we stare at for almost 15 minutes is an oragutan. This is the only thing you'll learn from this video.
theycallmerooster 2 years ago
now i know we come from apes because the guys that made this video are as smart as apes
akalestos1983 2 years ago 3
Strictly speaking, we are apes
DKMBismarck 2 years ago 3
What a remarkably hollow analysis. Apparently the makers of this video want you to ask: how can you REALLY be sure that humans and chimps are related because of their genetic similarity? That's like asking how can you REALLY be certain of the paternity of a child based on genetic testing...duh!
Daubentonia76 2 years ago 10
@Daubentonia76 No its that the DNA replicated is because the same processes happen within the cells...
DNA contain 3 billion bases just 5% difference is 150000000 bases difference...
Watch 8.40 9.37
Gilbertus1986 1 year ago
@Gilbertus1986 So what the heck is your point? I listened to the times you cited, and i still don't know what your point is. By the way, when comparing human and chimpanzee genomes, there is very little doubt about which regions are syntenic because they are so similar. There are a bunch of very small rearrangements and one major one. So what?
Daubentonia76 1 year ago
@Gilbertus1986 Watch the video again if you don't understand the concept... THEY are the ones doing the testing, and are presenting the results as follows.
Gilbertus1986 1 year ago
what SHIT ! the ID clowns are like the afrocentricts and ufo nuts they no most people do not no much about human origins so they use big words and take things out of context they lie and KNOW THIS!
WEDGE DOCUMENT!
nezahualcoyotl85 3 years ago
so god is a women?
becuase all things come from and start out as female and the male sex in some life is bypasst men have nipples
but wait a momment the bible lol says that god is a man after all were did jesus come from? i smell a contridiction!
nezahualcoyotl85 3 years ago