I've avidly studied paleontology and biology, both in and out of the classroom and laboratory, and this is the conclusion I have arrived at: the evidence supporting macroevolution by natural selection is dubious at best. The biggest hurdle for Darwinists to clear is the refusal of alleles to fuse together, which allows for mutations to reverse themselves after ten generations or so. I have yet to hear an explanation.
@loqutor I'm a little confused by your statement. Alleles recombine every single generation in humans in a process called Chromosomal Crossover. Look it up on Wikipedia. On top of that, the evidence for macroevolution is plentiful to extreme degrees. Protein families, endemic retroviral DNA, persistent domains, etc proves, beyond a doubt, that macro-evolution has occurred. And that's without even starting on things like fossils. No such thing as an honest creationist, alas.
@loqutor Well, you lied about the evidence, so I can hardly call you honest. The part that confused me was the 'refusal of alleles to fuse together' since alleles of the same chromosome come apart and fuse together once in every single meiosis in a process called chromosomal crossover (wikipedia it). So every single point you made in the post I replied to is directly and provably untrue. So either you are ignorant or you are decietful. (Ignorant is not that bad a thing, it's fixable.)
@SentientSapient What I meant by alleles fusing is certain genetic traits combining within one specimen. Look at Gregor Mendel's work. Two brown-eyed parents can produce a blue-eyed child. Mutation is a random process, and it does not take cues from natural selection.
@loqutor Genetic traits combine in all specimen. That's why we have sexual reproduction, after all. It combines the genes of two surviving (and breeding) individuals with a considerable element of chance involved (50% on each allel even before genetic recombination). Exactly what Mendel's work displayed, even if it is.. rather outdated by now, since these days we know about things like gene dominance.
@SentientSapient That's not at all what I meant. I meant that just because a certain trait is manifested in one specimen does not mean it will be manifested in its offspring. And traits that don't manifest themselves for a few generations do not disappear from that genetic code.
@loqutor The chance that a positive mutation is expressed in one of a successful breeding pair's offspring is dramatically higher if one of the parents has that positive mutation than if neither have it, no? Especially if it's a genetically-dominant mutation. So your point that it doesn't neccesarily manifest is no argument against evolution. In fact, the argument you give here is more an argument for evolution than against it, since a dormant trait can spread too.
@loqutor Mutations don't take cues from natural selection, yes, they are random.. but mutations being non-random is not what is claimed in the Theory of Evolution, is it? Imagine this situation: A puppy is stillborn because of a negative mutation. Do you think the stillborn puppy has a higher chance of reproducing than a puppy with a mutation that improves it's ability to smell prey?
@loqutor Try it again. Sofar every argument you've given me against evolution is easy enough to disprove (like the allels not fusing, which happens all the time), nonsense (random mutations having to take cues from natural selection rather than natural selection acting as a filter).. or not an argument against evolution at all (why would nonexpression of a trait affect evolution?).
You know what I always find hard to believe about evolution? Is that it had to FAIL so MANY times before it got it RIGHT and GOD gets it right the very FIRST time! If I believed in evolution...I'd feel miserable, because I'd have to believe in something that doesn't believe in ME! Evolution doesn't care about our achievements and under this belief you'd have to expect that the future shall forget you, when God doesn't. So why then do people find evo so right when it gives nothing back?
Darkened and ghastly our demons shall fly. Flittering of the macabre under a cold moon. Decadent worship of black magic and sorcery. God is in the womb of the devil's dungeon. You can see your god writhing in agony. Necrosis is festering in his face. Venomous pins sticking in the skin. The poison prepared by our demons. God will be drawn and quartered. His skull will be chained to your head. We fold the life-less body to fit it in a casket. We shall then cross out the crucifix.
@RobertBaral365 Hahah!, satan lost when God Jesus was crucified!, hahaha, your pathetic master satan is a looser and a bad one at that, hes to weak an pansy to go after God himself so he chases us, what a pansy na di have seen a demon, they are as weak and cowardly as their pitiful master!.
Evolution is a load of old donkey poo. A big lie, not proper science, and is inpart religous, just no one will admit it. Micro happens, Macro doesn't and never will, look at the fruit fly experiment, apparently severel millions of years worth of generations in a lab. What was made? Billions of knackered FLY's
Macro evolution is just the collection of multiple happenings of micro evolution. How can they not coexist? If there is a certain range of genetic difference within dogs, then anything within that range is a dog. Natural selection can cause organisms to propagate the genes of a succesful breed of dog in a habitat. But for some reason that same force cant move out the genetic range of what a dog is, to the point where its just barely not a dog. Cmon, thats ridiculous.
When have you ever seen different hair coloring change a dog into a cat, or a dog into any other animal that is not a dog? Never? Because it doesn't happen.
You say bacteria is evolving all the time. Really? What did it start as? Bacteria? And what is it now? Bacteria. That's evolution for you.
By that logic, every time you get a vaccine, you've just jumped up the evolutionary track. The more vaccines, the more evolved. Ridiculous.
The big jump to mammals was made by mammal-like reptiles. They were still scaled and whatnot, but the addition of hair and warm blood blurred the line. Speciation isnt a flashbang event. A animal goes from "almost a (something)", to "just barely a (something)". Anything that evolved away from doghood would still be pretty dog-like. Bacteria arent going to change into non-bacteria anytime soon. "Bacteria" is a wide range of organisms. Its like saying "Plants evolve? Well they're still plants."
I couldn't agree with you more. Evolutionist will never admit it takes more faith to believe in evolution than God. I just cant buy the idea that the eye, ear, etc... all developed on their own. It's ridiculous, especially when they claim everything we have now came from something the size of a period on a page exploded into what we have today. Can you imagine a period exploding and creating the Library of Congress?
how do "Evolutionists" need more faith to believe in evolution than God?
#1: People who believe in evolution can also believe in God.
#2: It is & has been witnessed, observed, and recorded. (The development of the eye throuh natural means..(1 example includes the mollusk).
#3: there are 2 meanings of evolution, 1 broad and 1 biological. The broad is "change over time". Biological is "an organism changing to better suit it's enviornment" -- both not only easy to believe, but logical as well.
As I said you'll never admit that you believe evolution on faith. No-one denies that Microevolution happens. Even the Bible says " after their kind" Wolves and Dogs are still Canines. Macro evolution has never been observed only speculated and called evidence. You think becuase Micro is true that Macro must be true , well thats taking a leap of faith, it has not been observed and cannot be observed therefore takes faith to believe in it.
so what you are saying is you do believe in evolution, just not "macroevolution", well that's getting a little better :)
Yes,both Wolves and Dogs are both Canines, yet due to selective breeding (UNnatural selection), they now do not have the ability to breed fertile young anymore, thus changing the SPECIES.
Please give me your specific definition of macroevolution so I don't assume anything (because I can think of 2-3 right off the top of my head).
The reason why people think Macro is possible is because genetic mutations create the same fertile offspring until the species has changed (hence the definition). Saying it takes a leap of faith, sure- even if it did take a leap of faith, saying that "an in-measurable supreme being that no one can ever falsify because of it's own definition in the human mind make stuff just appear (oh, and that Adam came from dirt and Eve from his rib" does take more faith than that
@MadScience Exactly Dr Hovind says the same thing, macro evolution is a lie, and they jailed him for it, i would still like to see an evolutionist answer half of what he talked about and provided evidnce for, and not just go off on a mumble spree like those clowns did sitting behind him.
@MadScience Im sorry, but even with that in mind Macro is still umprovable and we see no evidence of it in the fossil record, biology has proven random generation impoissible, over 100 scientists have failed to also prove it so i think its safe to say its not gonna happen.
You need more faith to believe in evolution then ID im afraid.
@Bobalithmiss1 Yes, but no body has ever proved it, it remains speculative assumption!, and thats not science, thats simply human opinion, nothing more, FAITH!.
@MadScience Its ludicris!, no one can prove any of that!, Dawkins himself has admitted it!, no body knows, he said, he then went on to claim that maybe aliens bought life here to evolve after creating it, he went on, i could just see Steins face as he was imagining doing a shovelling action(your digging a hole dawkins) , and dawkins was making less logical sense then he'd ever made!.
uh... comparing something with the processing power of a cray supercomputer does not make it look impressive. a pentium 4 chip is hundreds of times faster/more powerful than the fastest computer cray made.
"Verlch, the reports of eyewitnesses are fruadulent. Watch the movie. Then get back." Oh poor kid. Christ is mentioned outside the Bible as well. The apostles suffered terrible torture and death, never once disavowing what they had witnessed. This does not happen with people who 1) did not see what they said they have and 2) were not so moved and convicted by it that they would suffer horrible before denying it. YOu have much to learn.
So, that is why man has never created or destroyed an atom? Interesting, but you claim it created itself. How?
I love the one about how Oxygen first formed on the earth after all the Lava. Let's hear that, about how Oxygen came to exist on the planet and create itself.
You want proof that Jesus rose from the dead? Well, all 11 of the loyal disciples died premature deaths, dirt poor, and practically with the cloths on their backs.
It is documented that Jesus died in Jerusalem, and it is documented that they placed powerful men to guard the tomb.
Then the discipled witnessed the resurrection. So much so, that early Christians were willing to allow themselves to be eaten by Lions, rather than deny Christ. It takes more faith to believe in evolution.
So, if you don't think this is a self created universe, how did things create themselves, ultimately somewhere in your theory of faith did things have to create themselves.
"all 11 of the loyal disciples died premature deaths, dirt poor, and practically with the cloths on their backs."
Muslims blow themselves up for allah and yet that doesn't islam any more true or right, people's conviction to die for what they believe in proves nothing. Also note that we do not have any original manuscripts of what the disciples wrote. In fact the gospels are full of copyist errors, read Misquoting Jesus.
It was never documented that Jesus lived by anyone other than people after the fact. This was the most documented time in history and yet Jesus didn't make it to the history books.
They also pray 5 times a day to a black stone. You remember what God said, not to worship the creation, rather the creator. The also used to pray to 256 gods, then they become monolithic, and choose the Moon Allah.
evolution = fairy tale...from a galaxy far far FAR away. SOOO far ur brain turns off when you hear billions of years. Its all IMAGINATION, i cannot believe ppl cannot see throught that... you all must be reterded to deny our Lord Jesus Christ, our 1 and only God...all the other religions, get the right God, not your made up god.
What in the hell makes you and your religion superior to all the other religions billions of people on the planet practice? You eggocentric,bible thumping, ignorant asshole. I am so tired of you people shoving your bullshit bible on me. How can you not believe in evolution? God damn you scare me. Your idiotic creationist theories have no place in schools, and religion has no place in government. Fuck you.
The God of Abrham is the true God of the world and universe. Christians, Jews and Islamics have the same "root" to the God of Abrham. But its not about God anymore, because we have all sinned, and Jesus said that the only way to get to heaven is through him. So the Jews and Islamics need to realize that the only way to get saved is by faith in Jesus Christ. Please don't be angry at me because Im right. I know it ticks off ppl when I tell them that this is the only way, well the truth hurts.
I often hear Evolutionists tell me evolution is not relevant to Origins of Life, yet they don't have a relevant explanation for it!(some use Big Bang) O.K. If we are evolved, where did our ancestors come from? and what about the ones before that? and so on...? It IS therefore logical for Evolution and life origins to co-exist in both Evolution and Creation. You need a strong foundation for a strong argument
Just because scientists fail to provide an evolutionary explanation for the eye isn't proof of anything. That is the nature of science - until it passes scientific scrutiny they will say it is unexplained. That is what give science its credibility.
There is an evolutionary explaination for the eye, for eyes in general actually, "The Eye and Evolution" is obsolete, and the writer was very wrong. Regardless, the human eye is not well evolved, in fact the faults in the eye are often indicators of it's evolution.
The human eye is extremely limited in the precision with which it can perceive objects in detail, in a sense we're all nearsighted because we can't make out fine details on objects at a distance. The eyes of most species can't even receive light properly, most species has to compensate, for us our brain has to compensate as images are received upside down. There are even people who's brains may occasionally fail to do this in, particularly amongst agoraphobics.
I'd like to note that I could write pages on the topic, but comments here are limited to 500 characters. I would also like to note that Darwin's Black Box is purposefully misleading, for example, Darwin's comment on the eye was purposefully left incomplete because right after the statement most apologist are familiar with he lays out in great detail how and why the eye seems to have evolved. His information has been recompiled with more recent information in the book Climbing Mount Improbable.
There were eye witnesses in the apostles who all died for what they saw and believed in. There were over 300 old testament prophecies written 1000s of years BC.
The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the OT prophecies happened BC. The bible is the most translated book in human history, and copied into 3,000 different languages.
There were people of that time that wanted to crush Christianity. If Paul falsely claimed eyewitnesses of I Corinthians 15 it would only provide proof against his writings when the eyewitness couldn't be located. "Paul was absolutely convinced of the resurrection; and this proves that it was widely believed not many years after the death of Jesus" Jospeh McCabe, noted atheist.
There is a WW war on Christianity at this very moment. The elite didn't create Christianity. If they did they certainly wouldn't look at it with such malice and disdain!
hhahaha, the person that thinks that something sooooo complex happened by random accident is delusional!
Lets see them clear a space and wait 10 million years for a camera to form, thats what evolution is saying.
85Aheadstix 5 months ago
I've avidly studied paleontology and biology, both in and out of the classroom and laboratory, and this is the conclusion I have arrived at: the evidence supporting macroevolution by natural selection is dubious at best. The biggest hurdle for Darwinists to clear is the refusal of alleles to fuse together, which allows for mutations to reverse themselves after ten generations or so. I have yet to hear an explanation.
loqutor 2 years ago
@loqutor I'm a little confused by your statement. Alleles recombine every single generation in humans in a process called Chromosomal Crossover. Look it up on Wikipedia. On top of that, the evidence for macroevolution is plentiful to extreme degrees. Protein families, endemic retroviral DNA, persistent domains, etc proves, beyond a doubt, that macro-evolution has occurred. And that's without even starting on things like fossils. No such thing as an honest creationist, alas.
SentientSapient 1 year ago
@SentientSapient If you don't fully grasp the meaning of what I'm saying, then don't call me dishonest.
loqutor 1 year ago
@loqutor Well, you lied about the evidence, so I can hardly call you honest. The part that confused me was the 'refusal of alleles to fuse together' since alleles of the same chromosome come apart and fuse together once in every single meiosis in a process called chromosomal crossover (wikipedia it). So every single point you made in the post I replied to is directly and provably untrue. So either you are ignorant or you are decietful. (Ignorant is not that bad a thing, it's fixable.)
SentientSapient 1 year ago
@SentientSapient What I meant by alleles fusing is certain genetic traits combining within one specimen. Look at Gregor Mendel's work. Two brown-eyed parents can produce a blue-eyed child. Mutation is a random process, and it does not take cues from natural selection.
loqutor 1 year ago
@loqutor Genetic traits combine in all specimen. That's why we have sexual reproduction, after all. It combines the genes of two surviving (and breeding) individuals with a considerable element of chance involved (50% on each allel even before genetic recombination). Exactly what Mendel's work displayed, even if it is.. rather outdated by now, since these days we know about things like gene dominance.
SentientSapient 1 year ago
@SentientSapient That's not at all what I meant. I meant that just because a certain trait is manifested in one specimen does not mean it will be manifested in its offspring. And traits that don't manifest themselves for a few generations do not disappear from that genetic code.
loqutor 1 year ago
@loqutor The chance that a positive mutation is expressed in one of a successful breeding pair's offspring is dramatically higher if one of the parents has that positive mutation than if neither have it, no? Especially if it's a genetically-dominant mutation. So your point that it doesn't neccesarily manifest is no argument against evolution. In fact, the argument you give here is more an argument for evolution than against it, since a dormant trait can spread too.
SentientSapient 1 year ago
@loqutor Mutations don't take cues from natural selection, yes, they are random.. but mutations being non-random is not what is claimed in the Theory of Evolution, is it? Imagine this situation: A puppy is stillborn because of a negative mutation. Do you think the stillborn puppy has a higher chance of reproducing than a puppy with a mutation that improves it's ability to smell prey?
SentientSapient 1 year ago
@loqutor PS: Two brown-eyed parents can produce a blue-eyed child if both parents are heterozygous brown/blue. This has nothing to do with mutation.
SentientSapient 1 year ago
@SentientSapient Yes, I know that. I have run out of ways to spell out what I'm saying for you, and it's obvious that you're not grasping it.
loqutor 1 year ago
@loqutor Try it again. Sofar every argument you've given me against evolution is easy enough to disprove (like the allels not fusing, which happens all the time), nonsense (random mutations having to take cues from natural selection rather than natural selection acting as a filter).. or not an argument against evolution at all (why would nonexpression of a trait affect evolution?).
SentientSapient 1 year ago
You know what I always find hard to believe about evolution? Is that it had to FAIL so MANY times before it got it RIGHT and GOD gets it right the very FIRST time! If I believed in evolution...I'd feel miserable, because I'd have to believe in something that doesn't believe in ME! Evolution doesn't care about our achievements and under this belief you'd have to expect that the future shall forget you, when God doesn't. So why then do people find evo so right when it gives nothing back?
Deity1 2 years ago
@Deity1 retarted religious dumbfuck.
Humberto4790 1 year ago
RobertBaral365 2 years ago
@RobertBaral365 Hahah!, satan lost when God Jesus was crucified!, hahaha, your pathetic master satan is a looser and a bad one at that, hes to weak an pansy to go after God himself so he chases us, what a pansy na di have seen a demon, they are as weak and cowardly as their pitiful master!.
Aheadstix85 1 year ago
Evolution is a load of old donkey poo. A big lie, not proper science, and is inpart religous, just no one will admit it. Micro happens, Macro doesn't and never will, look at the fruit fly experiment, apparently severel millions of years worth of generations in a lab. What was made? Billions of knackered FLY's
sparkshot 3 years ago
Macro evolution is just the collection of multiple happenings of micro evolution. How can they not coexist? If there is a certain range of genetic difference within dogs, then anything within that range is a dog. Natural selection can cause organisms to propagate the genes of a succesful breed of dog in a habitat. But for some reason that same force cant move out the genetic range of what a dog is, to the point where its just barely not a dog. Cmon, thats ridiculous.
ShrapnelSong 3 years ago
When have you ever seen different hair coloring change a dog into a cat, or a dog into any other animal that is not a dog? Never? Because it doesn't happen.
You say bacteria is evolving all the time. Really? What did it start as? Bacteria? And what is it now? Bacteria. That's evolution for you.
By that logic, every time you get a vaccine, you've just jumped up the evolutionary track. The more vaccines, the more evolved. Ridiculous.
Neraph 3 years ago
The big jump to mammals was made by mammal-like reptiles. They were still scaled and whatnot, but the addition of hair and warm blood blurred the line. Speciation isnt a flashbang event. A animal goes from "almost a (something)", to "just barely a (something)". Anything that evolved away from doghood would still be pretty dog-like. Bacteria arent going to change into non-bacteria anytime soon. "Bacteria" is a wide range of organisms. Its like saying "Plants evolve? Well they're still plants."
ShrapnelSong 3 years ago
@Neraph Hey thats a good one!, how the hell do evolutionists and atheists ignore this blatant fact!!.
Aheadstix85 1 year ago
@sparkshot stupid religious fuck.
Humberto4790 1 year ago
@Humberto4790 - Stupid religious fuck?
*Yawn*
sparkshot 1 year ago
Excellent video! One must be willingly ignorant to believe the eye was not designed and somehow evolved by itself.
fellowservant34 3 years ago
I couldn't agree with you more. Evolutionist will never admit it takes more faith to believe in evolution than God. I just cant buy the idea that the eye, ear, etc... all developed on their own. It's ridiculous, especially when they claim everything we have now came from something the size of a period on a page exploded into what we have today. Can you imagine a period exploding and creating the Library of Congress?
MadScience 3 years ago
how do "Evolutionists" need more faith to believe in evolution than God?
#1: People who believe in evolution can also believe in God.
#2: It is & has been witnessed, observed, and recorded. (The development of the eye throuh natural means..(1 example includes the mollusk).
#3: there are 2 meanings of evolution, 1 broad and 1 biological. The broad is "change over time". Biological is "an organism changing to better suit it's enviornment" -- both not only easy to believe, but logical as well.
Bobalithmiss1 3 years ago
As I said you'll never admit that you believe evolution on faith. No-one denies that Microevolution happens. Even the Bible says " after their kind" Wolves and Dogs are still Canines. Macro evolution has never been observed only speculated and called evidence. You think becuase Micro is true that Macro must be true , well thats taking a leap of faith, it has not been observed and cannot be observed therefore takes faith to believe in it.
MadScience 3 years ago
so what you are saying is you do believe in evolution, just not "macroevolution", well that's getting a little better :)
Yes,both Wolves and Dogs are both Canines, yet due to selective breeding (UNnatural selection), they now do not have the ability to breed fertile young anymore, thus changing the SPECIES.
Please give me your specific definition of macroevolution so I don't assume anything (because I can think of 2-3 right off the top of my head).
(continuing the 2nd part after this)
Bobalithmiss1 3 years ago
(part 2) - Hello again lol
The reason why people think Macro is possible is because genetic mutations create the same fertile offspring until the species has changed (hence the definition). Saying it takes a leap of faith, sure- even if it did take a leap of faith, saying that "an in-measurable supreme being that no one can ever falsify because of it's own definition in the human mind make stuff just appear (oh, and that Adam came from dirt and Eve from his rib" does take more faith than that
Bobalithmiss1 3 years ago
@MadScience Exactly Dr Hovind says the same thing, macro evolution is a lie, and they jailed him for it, i would still like to see an evolutionist answer half of what he talked about and provided evidnce for, and not just go off on a mumble spree like those clowns did sitting behind him.
Aheadstix85 1 year ago
@Aheadstix85 religious dumbfuck.
Humberto4790 1 year ago
@MadScience hey tard why dont u let people rate ur videos lol scared to see how shitty ur videos are rated?
ventura433 10 months ago
@MadScience What evidence is there that one creature can change into something completely different over time and by pure chance?!?!?, NONE!.
No creature can do it today, so why did it even happen??.
85Aheadstix 9 months ago
@MadScience Im sorry, but even with that in mind Macro is still umprovable and we see no evidence of it in the fossil record, biology has proven random generation impoissible, over 100 scientists have failed to also prove it so i think its safe to say its not gonna happen.
You need more faith to believe in evolution then ID im afraid.
85Aheadstix 5 months ago
To believe in evolution you need to be willfully ignorant of the:
A) Lack of evidence to support it
B) Wealth of evidence for creation.
Neraph 3 years ago
A) What lack? There is geological and biologic support + genetic support
Ba) What is "creation"?
Bb) What is the evidence of "creation"?
Bobalithmiss1 3 years ago
@Bobalithmiss1 Yes, but no body has ever proved it, it remains speculative assumption!, and thats not science, thats simply human opinion, nothing more, FAITH!.
85Aheadstix 9 months ago
@MadScience a are clearly a dumbass
ventura433 10 months ago
@MadScience Its ludicris!, no one can prove any of that!, Dawkins himself has admitted it!, no body knows, he said, he then went on to claim that maybe aliens bought life here to evolve after creating it, he went on, i could just see Steins face as he was imagining doing a shovelling action(your digging a hole dawkins) , and dawkins was making less logical sense then he'd ever made!.
85Aheadstix 9 months ago
Zeigest was obviously created by Gnostic and their anti Christian sect.
Verlch 3 years ago
uh... comparing something with the processing power of a cray supercomputer does not make it look impressive. a pentium 4 chip is hundreds of times faster/more powerful than the fastest computer cray made.
kingcrimson234 3 years ago
Since the eye seems to be worthless to you why dont you poke out yours and let a Pentium 4 chip do your seeing for you.
MadScience 3 years ago
One of my most favorite scientists today.
AmI2Hvy4ya 3 years ago
"Verlch, the reports of eyewitnesses are fruadulent. Watch the movie. Then get back." Oh poor kid. Christ is mentioned outside the Bible as well. The apostles suffered terrible torture and death, never once disavowing what they had witnessed. This does not happen with people who 1) did not see what they said they have and 2) were not so moved and convicted by it that they would suffer horrible before denying it. YOu have much to learn.
NephilimFree 4 years ago
Where is christ mentioned outside the Bible pertaining to him raising from the dead.
erchdvd 4 years ago
Josephus, and others.
Where are the eye witnesses that saw atoms create themselves via evolution.
Verlch 3 years ago
"Josephus, and others"
Wrote about the existance of Jesus, not that he rose from the dead.
"Where are the eye witnesses that saw atoms create themselves via evolution."
Atoms do not evolve, as for matter and energy it just changes form, it cannot be created or destroyed.
erchdvd 3 years ago
So, that is why man has never created or destroyed an atom? Interesting, but you claim it created itself. How?
I love the one about how Oxygen first formed on the earth after all the Lava. Let's hear that, about how Oxygen came to exist on the planet and create itself.
Verlch 3 years ago
"you claim it created itself. How?"
No, I said it changes forms.
"Let's hear that, about how Oxygen came to exist on the planet and create itself."
No, oxygen which doesn't need to be capitalized comes from algae and other plant forms.
erchdvd 3 years ago
Ok, but on an oxygen non existent earth, that couldn't support life, how would algae and other plant forms take root and produce Oxygen?
Verlch 3 years ago
You want proof that Jesus rose from the dead? Well, all 11 of the loyal disciples died premature deaths, dirt poor, and practically with the cloths on their backs.
It is documented that Jesus died in Jerusalem, and it is documented that they placed powerful men to guard the tomb.
Then the discipled witnessed the resurrection. So much so, that early Christians were willing to allow themselves to be eaten by Lions, rather than deny Christ. It takes more faith to believe in evolution.
Verlch 3 years ago
In fact early Christians would "turn themselves in" for being Christians, to be eaten by the lions, for what they had heard, and some had seen.
They saw, and heard about the Miracles, they heard about the Thunder, and the Lightening, and God's Thunder on cruxificiton day.
Don't be fooled the the Occultic Doctrine of Evolution. Even they, don't believe in what they preach.
Verlch 3 years ago
"They saw, and heard about the Miracles, they heard about the Thunder, and the Lightening, and God's Thunder on cruxificiton day."
People do stupid things accourding to faith.
"They saw, and heard about the Miracles, they heard about the Thunder"
Yet they didn't put pen to paper after they saw these miracles.
"Don't be fooled the the Occultic Doctrine of Evolution. Even they, don't believe in what they preach."
Evolution has the evidence behind it and you still have faith.
erchdvd 3 years ago
So, if you don't think this is a self created universe, how did things create themselves, ultimately somewhere in your theory of faith did things have to create themselves.
Verlch 3 years ago
"all 11 of the loyal disciples died premature deaths, dirt poor, and practically with the cloths on their backs."
Muslims blow themselves up for allah and yet that doesn't islam any more true or right, people's conviction to die for what they believe in proves nothing. Also note that we do not have any original manuscripts of what the disciples wrote. In fact the gospels are full of copyist errors, read Misquoting Jesus.
erchdvd 3 years ago
"It is documented that Jesus died in Jerusalem"
It was never documented that Jesus lived by anyone other than people after the fact. This was the most documented time in history and yet Jesus didn't make it to the history books.
erchdvd 3 years ago
They also pray 5 times a day to a black stone. You remember what God said, not to worship the creation, rather the creator. The also used to pray to 256 gods, then they become monolithic, and choose the Moon Allah.
Verlch 3 years ago
In this world of confusion it is good to listen to believers!
Verlch 4 years ago
evolution = fairy tale...from a galaxy far far FAR away. SOOO far ur brain turns off when you hear billions of years. Its all IMAGINATION, i cannot believe ppl cannot see throught that... you all must be reterded to deny our Lord Jesus Christ, our 1 and only God...all the other religions, get the right God, not your made up god.
teodor1010 4 years ago
What in the hell makes you and your religion superior to all the other religions billions of people on the planet practice? You eggocentric,bible thumping, ignorant asshole. I am so tired of you people shoving your bullshit bible on me. How can you not believe in evolution? God damn you scare me. Your idiotic creationist theories have no place in schools, and religion has no place in government. Fuck you.
briankofke 4 years ago
The God of Abrham is the true God of the world and universe. Christians, Jews and Islamics have the same "root" to the God of Abrham. But its not about God anymore, because we have all sinned, and Jesus said that the only way to get to heaven is through him. So the Jews and Islamics need to realize that the only way to get saved is by faith in Jesus Christ. Please don't be angry at me because Im right. I know it ticks off ppl when I tell them that this is the only way, well the truth hurts.
teodor1010 4 years ago
I often hear Evolutionists tell me evolution is not relevant to Origins of Life, yet they don't have a relevant explanation for it!(some use Big Bang) O.K. If we are evolved, where did our ancestors come from? and what about the ones before that? and so on...? It IS therefore logical for Evolution and life origins to co-exist in both Evolution and Creation. You need a strong foundation for a strong argument
theguyfromaustralia 5 years ago
Just because scientists fail to provide an evolutionary explanation for the eye isn't proof of anything. That is the nature of science - until it passes scientific scrutiny they will say it is unexplained. That is what give science its credibility.
dtutube 5 years ago
yet creationists are considered stupid for believing something they cannot physically prove.
lkarac727 5 years ago
There is an evolutionary explaination for the eye, for eyes in general actually, "The Eye and Evolution" is obsolete, and the writer was very wrong. Regardless, the human eye is not well evolved, in fact the faults in the eye are often indicators of it's evolution.
Atheistx82 5 years ago
come on...read darwin's black box...by Behe
jsponaugle 5 years ago
list the faults
banktizzle 5 years ago
errrrrr yah
darpachief 4 years ago
The human eye is extremely limited in the precision with which it can perceive objects in detail, in a sense we're all nearsighted because we can't make out fine details on objects at a distance. The eyes of most species can't even receive light properly, most species has to compensate, for us our brain has to compensate as images are received upside down. There are even people who's brains may occasionally fail to do this in, particularly amongst agoraphobics.
GentleAtheist 4 years ago
I'd like to note that I could write pages on the topic, but comments here are limited to 500 characters. I would also like to note that Darwin's Black Box is purposefully misleading, for example, Darwin's comment on the eye was purposefully left incomplete because right after the statement most apologist are familiar with he lays out in great detail how and why the eye seems to have evolved. His information has been recompiled with more recent information in the book Climbing Mount Improbable.
GentleAtheist 4 years ago
Explain oxygen coming from nothing.
Watch the privileged planet. There is a 1/trillionth of a percent that we were not created by design!
Verlch 4 years ago
Aliens brother, Aliens!
Damn Ver, you know I get all queezy around this religion stuff.... ;)
luckyvet 4 years ago
Sorry. You know me!!
Sorry man, as far as I see it, time is short, I've got two messages to get out, and both of them I can't keep my mouth shut!!! lol...
Verlch 4 years ago
If you believe in Jesus, then watch "Zeitgeist - The Movie: Religion (Part 1 of 3)" and let me know if you still believe.
paftmont 4 years ago
Of course I believe in Jesus.
There were eye witnesses in the apostles who all died for what they saw and believed in. There were over 300 old testament prophecies written 1000s of years BC.
The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the OT prophecies happened BC. The bible is the most translated book in human history, and copied into 3,000 different languages.
Verlch 4 years ago
Verlch, the reports of eyewitnesses are fruadulent. Watch the movie. Then get back.
paftmont 4 years ago
There were people of that time that wanted to crush Christianity. If Paul falsely claimed eyewitnesses of I Corinthians 15 it would only provide proof against his writings when the eyewitness couldn't be located. "Paul was absolutely convinced of the resurrection; and this proves that it was widely believed not many years after the death of Jesus" Jospeh McCabe, noted atheist.
amosclan 4 years ago
Zeitgeist lost cred with me when one of my friends said that is was almost as good as "Loose Change."
amosclan 4 years ago
There is a WW war on Christianity at this very moment. The elite didn't create Christianity. If they did they certainly wouldn't look at it with such malice and disdain!
Verlch 4 years ago
Wait until we all get to heaven if you want to see perfection!
Verlch 4 years ago
Limited precision? Are you kidding me? The human eye is more precise than any computer we have today.
Enayze 3 years ago