If I didn't have a compas or a map I would use the stars, sun, wind currents as well as a bird. From Boston the jet stream blows in the same direction the bird flew.
Seems that some refer to suffering as a Gift from God. But if you assert there from God then you do accept some concept of God for that moment.However sufferign in a way is caused by man rebelling against God, which ironically takes place in the very athiest sentence that people say God causes suffering.Suffering results as the creation was cursed when man chose to disobey God and then was seperated. But can now be reconciled through christ.so actually suffering fits with what the bible teaches
@1brandwag But why does God (at least the Old Testament one) need to be so intolerant and vengeful? What parent would cast out their children and inflict evil and suffering on them for their FIRST mistake? Why should anybody give allegiance to a being (of any nature) who threatens eternal damnation and torment should they refuse? Simply so we can be redeemed and thus eternally grateful for being released from suffering by the very one who instigated that suffering in the first place?
@terrabun It's the same God Jesus also spoke of punishment for those who rebel against God.Firstly if you take into account the sovereignty of God and acknowledge who he is we can realize that he is our judge and not us his.Secondly it is not a mere mistake,but rebelion,adam and eve themselve probally were saved in their repentance after,but as with most parent interested in their children punishment occured as was laid out.However redemption was always offered to those who had faith.
@terrabun The fruit is rebelion as God's simple instruction was disobeyed and eating the fruit also represented listening to the enemy Satan,and a will of man to be like God, so rebellion has to be punished,as the very created order and God sovereignty was challenged.redemption doesn't not need to be offered by a soveriegn God,but was as he is a merciful God.The answer is theological as your question also was,sorry I used to replies couldn't fit it all into one.I understand this is difficult.
@1brandwag Ok, I accept your argument on original sin (even though I disagree on the implications). But then how about Abraham, ordered to murder his own child to prove his faith? How can any good person possibly reconcile that with a God who claims to be loving, merciful and kind? To me it is simply reprehensible and plain evil (in the non-theological sense). To me Christianity would be a far stronger faith if it abandoned the Old Testament and the bloody, vengeful God it describes.
@terrabunthank you for being open to my answer on original sin. We can what defenies evil in a non-theological standard?But i'll assume we both believe human sacrifice is wrong for the sake of argument.OT does condemn human sacrifice in the law of moses as an important point.Abraham i guess was tested on his faith and in the context of the event it was never in God's plan to actaully have him sacrifice his son,as God provided the lamb,we need OT to know who Jesus is as well,e.g.Prophyses
On a final note these spaces are quite short and much more can be written on this subject.one ministry called gotquestion, which you can find at gotquestion com. Are always more than happy to answer theological problems such as these if it is not in their article base already,have a look at their site if you interest.Also on my youtube page my site is linked which has list of christian apologetics sites which can be of great help.hope that helps,sincerely brandwag
@1brandwag Thanks for the respectful answers, glad this sort of thing can be discussed even on youtube without people always resorting to insults and mud flinging. Have many Christian friends although I am more a scientific rationalist, but regardless of beliefs what always matters most is respect for our fellow humans, something too many people forget sadly in their quest to be proved 'right' :)
Yes just look at the wonderfull gifts god has saw fit to lavash on us! AIDS, CANCER, MALARIA, CISTIC FIBROSIS, SMALLPOX, PLAGUE, etc, etc. Let us praise him.
Creation moments? Did God perfectly create all those animals that went extinct as well? Obviously didn't make enough back up survival techniques for the dinosaurs or the other 99% of organisms that have ever existed on Earth and died out.
i dont get it. so theyre saying that a bird's sense of navigation is so complex and precise that god must have created it. is that really what theyre saying?
Just as usual, religious fanatic who misinterpret what the Bible says, and keep making up silly interpretations of it, such as our "6,000 year old planet". When will they realize that what's written in the Bible is metaphoric, and it's ESSENCE is what matters: be a good person, don't lie, don't kill, etc...
If there were a god, we would all be very aware of the fact. Looking for him on grilled cheese sandwiches and in the flight of a bird would not be necessary. Sorry kids, but there's no easter bunny either. Read the book of Joshua, I mean really read it. It's not long. If that god exists, he totally sucks and you better hope he never shows up, because you aren't Israeli. He only likes Israelite! Maybe try Horus. ROFLMAO
God is indeed GREAT!! He created many things, like AIDS and HIV. He created the flu, the small-pox and he even created cancer for us to enjoy! There are the many biting insects and fungus. He created they human eye, which is so intricate and perfect, that half of the human race needs glasses. Old age is another creation I love, it allows humans to lose their dignity before they wither away and die. Did I forget to mention famine and pestilence? How about evil, he created that too. God is GREAT!
God is indeed great. You, however, don't know the one true God. He created everything to be good and very good. The fall of man brought the diseases, biting insects etc. into this world. Before sin entered this world there was no death; now there is death.
The fall of man! That is very interesting. Heidi, I will try to reason with you using your own logic. God knows everything... God always was... God knew that man would fall BEFORE he created him. Therefore, your 'perfect' God created an imperfect human, knowing he would fail, knowing he would then punish him forever. Do you not see the flaw in that logic? How could a perfect, all knowing being, possibly create such a flawed creature as man? If God were perfect, he would have created perfection!!
You are correct!! God DID know that man would fall before he created him; that's why he also made a plan for redemption!! So you see - God did make a perfect human. He also gave that human a free will. Man used that free will and the fall began.
It is impossible for religious "free will" and an omniscient being to co-exist. If god knows everything, then he knows the outcome of every decision, prior to it being made. If the outcome of any decision is known or predetermined, prior to the decision of the person making it, then there was no choice or free will at all. Free will can only exist where the outcome is not known, predestined or predetermined. Besides, holding a gun (hell) to my head and forcing me to decide is NOT free will.
It's certainly not impossible to have free will and omniscient to co-exist. Whether God knows the outcome or not we are still given a choice. That choice is OUR decision. God does not predetermine our decision. I might also add that there is no gun to your head. We all will live eternally and where we spend it is also our decision. You really need to understand God better before you make claims like you do. :-) )
However, no matter what you think of God, he loves you and wants you to spend eternity with him. Hopefully, you will make the right choice before it's too late. :-
Heidi is right--God formed man knowing that man would be redeemed. You're right as well--God knew we would fall and not all of us will overcome. But there is no flaw in God's logic. God's intention is to build the Church, the Body of Christ... Any craftsman needs material in order to build something. When a carpenter forms a table he uses the best part of the tree and discards the rest. Man is God's material for the Body of Christ, and the men who choose Him will be part of that finished work.
ya, because these birds could not have evolved to gain these characteristics over the years. look at studies of the finch, in two generations there beak has evolved into a smaller form. now that is extremely fast evolution that darwin missed when studding the finch.
Yes dumbass, air exists. It has been scientifically proven so. Evolution is real, and that's how it happened. That too has been scientifically proven. Which means you are living a lie by believing in any religion. "CHRISTIANS HAVE BIG DEGREES AND MORE EDUCATION AND ALSO HAVE COMMON SENSE" Obviously not u. What are you 5 years old or something? Can you make a coherent sentence? Cut the omnipotent umbilical cord and join us in the scientific age and get out of the dark ages. TRY REALITY!!
It's slightly amusing to me that you question his ability to form coherent sentences when you yourself struggle to write out words correctly.
There comes a certain stage in everyone's life where we cease to be dependent children and begin to make our own independent decisions. While some Christians may have accepted their faith blindly as a child, eventually we take that decision into our own hands and consciously choose to follow God. The Lord praises the faith of children.
I am VERY amused that you R trying to defend an imaginary being. Your decision was forced on U from the time u were born. U were predisposed to believe the lie that is religion. The fact that u chose to believe a fairy tale doesn't mean it's true. There is no god so there are no praises. If u have faith in an imaginary being then you need some serious mental help. Keep your useless praises and bible quotes to yourself because logic and science are the only language that rational people listen 2.
Insulting people proves nothing. I suspect you have never truly experienced God; religion may be "fear mongering bullshit." I agree with that. However, the truth my Bible speaks about is not a matter of right vs. wrong, submit to man's authority, fear God, be "religious." The God of the Bible is *love,* and the matter of the gospel is *life.* Religion is a matter of right vs wrong, doctrine and religious government. God calls us to partake of His life, and to live according to His Spirit. Amen!
I have experienced the fallacy that is religion, that's why I choose to believe in REALITY. It's only an insult if u r dumb enough to believe in any religion. If u r that dumb, then u deserve to be insulted. The bible speaks no truth because it is a work of FICTION. You will find the writing of the flying spaghetti monster just as compelling. Religion is about money, greed and fear mongering.
religion is not a matter of right vs. wrong. If it is then how does your all caring god let little alter boys get raped by priests? Isn't that wrong? Shouldn't the priests know it? Doctrine is irrelevant and religious government is something that should NEVER exist. If u choose to live ur life according to a fairy tale and believe that an omnipotent jewish zombie told u to do so then that's your delusion. Stop trying to push ur craziness on rational people.
Can't we have a discussion without silly, childish insults? Religion is filled with man's imperfection, but that doesn't make God imperfect. Terrible things such as that happen within religion because of man. Religious government wasn't God's intention. In the Kingdom Age the believers who are well-trained to express God's authority will rule with Him on the Earth. Now we should live through the Spirit according to HIS word, not MAN's word. Many religious institutions chose to follow man's word.
As far as science and the modern world, in which I do in fact live -- evolution is an observable fact. Evolutionary theory, which is man's way of explaining the observation of evolution, is only our current "best stab" at explaining the appearance of life (without God). The science of the evolutionary theory makes far more inferences than belief in creation and our Lord. Belief in the Truth of the Word requires one inference--truth--and contradicts nothing that we observe in the natural world.
are you a moron or something? No wait you must be an idiot. PSSSST dumbass...there is no god. There never was and there never will be. Just because u were told a fairy tale and u believe it, doesn't make it true. If u were born in another country and never heard of the christian god, u would know nothing about him. U would be praising some different fairy tale. Religion is fear mongering bullshit that idiots like u just soak up and regurgitate blindly. Stupid fucking lemming.
UH NO. evolution is a proven scientific fact. Get ur head out of ur fake gods ass and drag yourself into the modern age. Stop believing in 14th century fairy tales about omnipotent jewish zombies and embrace reality. I know it's hard because this fake religion BS has been crammed down your throat since you were born but try and understand. The bible is fiction A book about a make believe god to try and explain the things that primitive man did not understand at the time. Now we have science.
Birds having the ability to navigate is evidence for birds having the ability to navigate. How can you make a logical conclusion: "Birds migrate and use internal navigation tools...therefore there is an undetectable, invisible God who is outside of space and time". There is no evidence that leads to such an obtuse conclusion. However, archaeopteryx is evidence for evolution.
Niether came first. The ancestors of birds were laying eggs long before they appeared as flying reptiles. the egg has been evolving in shape and form along with the parents. The human egg is very primitive by comparison, but it is still an egg.
'It's amazing that the bird has so many methods of navigation...I'm just too simple minded to do any form of fucking research to find out how it really happened so...I'll just say some all powerful invisible man in the sky created it. '
If your a evolutionist then fine is your a creationist then fine ! I know God lives and Im living in his creation and I love it ! God made man and gave us life ! To say beauty was nothing but a Simple mistake then your fooling yourself !
Evolution is religion. It bypass observation through scientific investigation. When they ask to provide the evidence of origin of life of how they evolved they will only answered it with nonsense assumption. no single scientist can prove evolution, in their mind maybe. In that way evolutionists believes in superstition. At least GOD explains "a little" of HIS creation.
you are beyond help. everything in your post is just utterly and patently false but there you go claiming black is white because your invisible friend says so.
quick question- there are 250,000 papers in the primary scientific research literature on evolutionary biology, paleontology, genetics, molecular biology, micro biology, immunology...
Evolution can be seen in bacteria all the time, speciation events have been observed both in nature and in labs. There are copious amounts of genetic evidence to support evolution. Transitional fossils are discovered frequently. I was just reading in one of my nature magazines about a new fossil in the evolution of whales (I don't recall what it was named and I don't have time to search through all of my nature magazines).
Furthermore, evolution is seen every time bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics. Every year a new strain of influenza emerges. That is the reason annual flu shots are suggested by the CDC. And do not say that this is only "microevolution". Evolution is evolution. There is no micro and macro. If someone can walk a foot they can walk a mile.
Yes they are, they are changing into antibiotic-resistant bacteria, as opposed to non-antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
"they are still bacteria- always were - always will be!!"
If they became anything other than bacteria this would disprove evolution.....do you know what evolution IS????
If you are looking for large changes then it is necessary to look at genetic evidence. Large changes will not be observed in a single lifespan, or even several.
There will be variation within a kind but they will not evolve into anything other than what they are; cats will still be cats dogs still dogs etc....
Genetic experiments on fruit flies showed that after thousands of generations they were still fruit flies.
"Genetic experiments on fruit flies showed that after thousands of generations they were still fruit flies."
Precisely, and this is good. Because if a fruit fly gave birth to anything other than a fruit fly this would disprove the modern theory of evolution. But the funny thing is that you are implying that this is a bad thing for evolution, which is why I had asked you if you knew what evolution IS.
Could you please provide me with the exact definition of 'kind'? It would save me a lot of trouble searching for it.
"Tell me...what do you mean by evolution???"
Evolution = change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. Which is what we observe. What you are looking for is what creationists typically refer to as "macroevolution", for which there is much evidence between genetics and fossils.
When you say change in the inherited traits do you mean they inherit all together different traits than they had before? Such as amphibians to reptiles to birds kind of thing??
Kind refers to animals that can freely interbreed and produce fertile offspring.
"When you say change in the inherited traits do you mean they inherit all together different traits than they had before?"
This can be the case however it is not always necessary. Essentially what evolution is is a change in the allelic frequencies in a population. Let's say there is a population of leaf insects that are mostly yellow, but there is variation within the population between greenish yellow and brownish yellow. If this population were place in an environment (cont...)
which consisted mainly of bright green foliage with brown trunks, then those individuals in the population which were greener than the others would be selected for if they remained in the leaves because they would be harder for predators to find, and those which were more brown would be selected for if they remained on the trunks because predators would not be able to see them as easily as the yellow ones. This scenario would cause a divergence of a population by evolution.
This is beginning to frustrate me. You continue to say, "yeah, but they're stil [insert name here]. I am aware that they are still leaf insects. That does not mean that evolution has not taken place. Evolution is change in allelic frequencies over time. This is what happened in my example scenario. Evolution happened. If the leaf insect population changed into elephants this would utterly DISPROVE evolution.
"this sort of observable variation is due to re-arrangement of existing alleles, or degenerative changes."
In my example, it was an exaggeration of a preexisting allele. Somewhere back in these comments someone mentioned nylonase bacteria to you. The evolution of nylonase in these bacteria was not simply a reshuffling of alleles, and it certainly wasn't degenerative. Nylon was a substance that bacteria had never come into contact with before, so it could not be a preexisting allele.
If you like I can list a few of the sources of evidence for evolution above the species level. I could also send you a list of a few of the more notable transitional fossils. n__n
I'm sorry if I'm frustrating you but I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from. You are the only person on here who hasn't resorted to name calling and such. Thank you for that!! ;-)
I believe that it's important to distinguish the difference between evolution and Evolutionary Theory. Evolution is an observation: allele frequencies change over time. The Theory takes the observation of evolution and composes a well thought-out theory as to how life as a whole may have evolved. Don't pick a fight with evolution; you'll lose! Evolutionary Theory, on the other hand, is based largely on loosely supported inferences. Here is where our Creator plays His role. ;-)
Once again, if you want evolution of what creationists call "macro" evolution, you will need to look at the evidence from the fields of molecular biology, genetics, biophysics, biochemistry, and paleontology.
"Such as amphibians to reptiles to birds kind of thing??"
Evidence for this can be found in molecular biology, genetics, biophysics, biochemistry, and paleontology.
"Kind refers to animals that can freely interbreed and produce fertile offspring."
Then why don't you just use the term 'species'? According to your definition they are exactly the same thing. And speciation events have been observed many many times. DonExodus just made a video today about this topic. Check it out. : )
definition of superstition: a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like.
Sounds like religion?
If you had a terrible illness, or say, a broken arm, you'd probably choose doctor over priest.
god explains very little of how things work (including medicine/evolution). that is what science does, science changes NAIVE RELIGION AND IT'S PEOPLE ARE RELUCTANT TO ADAPT.
He created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. Therefore because He created all things that means that He used scientific means to do it. So.....all science that is used today is obviously functioning science. ;-)
yes, yes but the point is: INTELLIGENT DESIGN DOESNT WORK AS A THEOREY, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE clearly visible EVIDENCE -there may be a god, but one that says evolution didnt happen is wrong. if it told you the world was flat, you would probably be here saying it is, despite all we know about it. your gods word is written by humans, despite the possibilty that a god actually told them to write them
His word was written down by men of God. He told them what to write. They were writing about things they knew nothing about...such as "It is he that sitteth upon the the circle of the earth." They didn't know that the earth was round. Another example..."The earth...is turned as clay to the seal" They didn't know the earth rotated on it's axis. Creation works as a theory; we can tell that through observation of cells, plants, animals etc. There is no evidence of evolution, no fossils and so on.
'because god said so' is pathetic. it is not something we, as humans can go and test, like science. your word of god is not open to new breakthroughs, and you are listening to a doctrine thousands of years old. its just as rediculous as jehovas witnesses who wont take blood transfusions. ADAPT OR LOSE!
So you see...it's a belief of the origin of life. Your faith is in a slime bog mine is in the power of God. I'm not listening to doctrine thousands of years old. God's word is as relevant today as it was one hundred years ago and so on.
The thing is it's you that will have to adapt or lose. You lose out on an eternity of life for an eternity of death. That is such a tragedy. :-(
"They were writing about things they knew nothing about...such as "It is he that sitteth upon the the circle of the earth." They didn't know that the earth was round."
exactly, this shows that they thought the earth was flat. Or were you unaware that the Earth is in fact not a circle (which is flat and two-dimensional) but a sphere?
"There is no evidence of evolution, no fossils and so on."
THis is simply false. You apparently have no knowledge of the evidence in support of evolution.
Isaiah 40:22 refers to the circle of the earth, or in the Italian translation, globo. The Hebrew is khûg (חוּג) = sphericity or roundness. Even if the translation circle is adhered to, think about Neil Armstrong in space—to him, the spherical earth would have appeared circular regardless of which direction he viewed it.
We have to admit, the Evolutionists are right: we don't know enough to convience others of our position. We need to take the time to be fully researched on the subject. I don't think we will be mocked any less but atleast we will have more to stand on. So for now, I say the Evolutionists have won this debate because we were unprepared with evidence of God, Creation, and divine design. Next time, let's be ready.
or you could just accept reality and see that EV is an accurate and powerful description of the diversity of life- millions of christians including some of the leading researchers in EV have no problem reconciling reality with faith. what's your problem? why start with the notion that one of the crowning achievements of human endevour is wrong- even though, as you admit, you know next to nothing about it.
That was almost nice. Thank you. And again, I do believe evolution is very real but I also believe God created the Universe and He chose to use evolution in His Creation. Science takes second place to my faith in God. Period.
You do well to believe God created everything. Think about it though. If God created what needed to happen for the 'big bang' and the evolutionary methods, that 'god' is wasteful, cruel ( death reigns in evolution ), and retarded. This is not the God of the Bible, that is for sure. Read Genesis, there are no billions, or even millions of years there. God is able to keep his Word true and keep it for us. Get a KJV and read it. "The first day". "The second day". etc.
I never meant to convey that I agree with "evolution" on that scale. I now realize I have been using evolution in an inaccurate way. Because my Christian science teachers have skimmed over evolution, I did not realize until a recent disscussion (as in two days ago) and research that evolution is a bit different than I thought it was. And I guess by using that term I was trying to relate to both sides and find some common ground.
You completely have missed my point. I see it is pointless for me to have this discussion with you (and McMonster65) so I'm not going to waste my time anymore. I will do some more research on both what you believe and what I do so I can stand up better in a discussion. I hope you realize how horidly rude you have been and feel sorry for it. You're apology is automatically accepted if that happens. If not, that's fine. Have a nice life.
Cool video. Migrating birds are amazing when you think about them! How about ATP synthase? Now that's a mind blower! I love nano-machines. I wonder where they came from? Hmm.
Habakkuk - I agree with you about the nano-machines! They obviously reveal the existence of a Designer. In Darwin's day, they thought the cell was "simple" - no more complex than a blob of protoplasm. Even though we now know that the cell and its components are incredibly complex, I think that we're still only scratching the surface. And with each new discovery, evolution becomes even less defensible.
As much as I love intelligent discussion...this arguement is starting to look more and more like a script for a five year old arguement with "You're a liar"-"No, you're a liar" and disguised with intellectual vocabulary and phrasing. Can we please continue as adults?
I totally agree with Sunnylaughter's comments about this discussion. However, I only dropped out of the discussion after being called "a liar, an ignorant fool, and a dishonest religious fanatic." I did no name-calling of my own. I didn't need to. I feel that evolutionists go on rampages because evolution is the only thing that enables them to deny the existence of God as Creator, Sustainer and - most of all - Judge.
Thank you for your support. It's hard to stay standing without the support of others. But I have seen it from both sides. Neither, of course, is justified in that immature behavoir.
Our God is a full of Wisdom.... this is one of his wise creation, which cannot be Xplained by or Understood by man's knowledge.... Our God is an awesome God..... Thnx CM for this wonderful video...... :-)
That's too bad, McMonster. Go ahead and deride the Bible if you want. But someday you'll see not only that the Bible is accurate on all things - even science - but that it revealed the path to eternal life. This is not a game of who can outwit whom on YouTube, McMonster. I urge you to read the Bible one more time and ask yourself why so many of the world's greatest scientists throughout history have believed it to be the Word of God.
many of the world's greatest scientists throughout history have believed it to be the Word of God.
and yet so few today....could it be because bats aren't birds, rabbits don't chew their cud and other howlers from the book of "god". millions have made great contributions who believe in the divine relvelation of the koran- abdus salaam eg. yet you would regard their holy book as I regard the bible. antiquated nonsense from a long time ago. of some historical interest- no more
Get your head out of the sand, McMonster - there are thousands of Bible-believing scientists alive today. And by the way, you're using the modern-day definition of cud chewing to "prove" that the Bible is in error. Rabbits practice what is called "refection", a process that looks like the rabbit is chewing its cud. And bats are included in the list of birds because they all fly. These are very old charges against the Bible. Can't you think of any "Bible mistakes" on your own?
so my head is in the sand? good one! there are indeed lots of bible believing scientists- can you name any who regularly publish research in the life sciences other than Behe who reject evolution? give it a try. regulary publishing peer reviewed research in the life sciences and reject EV.
if you want to see a good religious scientist look up ken miller here. you might learn something. then again you might not be capable.
You're too funny, McMonster! How do you expect me to find articles critical of evolution in peer-reviewed science publications that are pro-Darwin and REFUSE TO PUBLISH those articles? It's the same thing as if I were moderating the comments here and banned you from commenting right after I asked you a question. It would APPEAR to everyone that you had no answer. Your arguments are amazingly underwhelming.
you should therfore have no trouble in listing a dozen or so papers containting sound science submitted to research journals in science and rejected for no sustainable reason. I'll not hold my breath.
pro darwin. you poor fool. EV would now be unrecognisable to darwin- but dream on....if you can't keep up.
I specifically asked for active researchers in life science. baumgarner is an electrical engineer turned genesis flood "geologist". do you have a friend who could explain why electrical engineering is not a life science, I don't have the patience.
If evolution was true there would be quadrillions of transitional fossils all over the place, like fishes incrementally becoming amphibians, but after 150 years since Darwin's theory there's nothing. That's why they made a big deal about Tiktaalik. A tv narrator once said the lungfish was "on it's way to becoming a land animal". Does that mean otters are becoming seals and seals are turning into whales? Are flying squirrels going to be like bats? It's unscientific.
Honestly, I do not see how this proves creation and disproves evolution. Even as a creationist, you cannot completely reject the idea of evolution. It is real but that also does not disprove creation. God has used them both. And that is the key. He created everything and is still developing it. But really, how can you say it all started with carbon or something like that. I find it much easier and more reliable to have faith in a supreme being than an element that I use to write with.
God didn't use evolution. If you read the Scriptures in Genesis it will tell you that he created everything living to reproduce after their own 'kind'. He didn't create an animal to change into other animals.
not necessarily other animals but they do develop. i mean even in just the generations of this century. human offspring is taller and developing earlier. just because it cant explain the entire thing does not mean it is not true.
There are always going to be different developments in the generations but that isn't evolution. The people who are taller or shorter or whatever are still people. There is variation in the 'kind'
but that is still evolution. development. becoming more complex and advanced. it is very small but it is still there. not enough to prove darwinism and disprove creation by any means, but it is there. though i do highly agree with you that creation is primary.
define "kind". tell us why, given that the study of taxonomy has provided a clear useful and largely unambiguous terminology do you choose not to use it. is "kind" more or less specific than species? genus? family? do you have the slightest knowledge of ANY biology?
you are 100% wrong about the name- actually bestowed on me with great affection by some musician friends in Spain.
re. "kinds". I asked where these fit in the standard scheme of taxonomy. you can't answer. don't feel bad though. there is no answer- it doesn't mean anything.
taxonomy is a difficult topic which has been studied for centuries in an attempt to classify living things. you can't really expect to supplant it with one word translated from a pile of bronze age folklore.
You are so pathetic---the word for 'kind' is the translation from Hebrew. It has nothing to do with 'man's' attempt at classifying living things today.
not even close. I asked a simple question and you can't answer. who's pathetic? If you say the earth is orbits a giant thronungulator maintained by a voodudium acting on a bleebie. I can ask what you mean and if you can't relate what you say to known terminology I am entitled to conclude that talk of bleebies and thronungulators is menaingless tripe.
your talk of kinds is meaningless tripe.
if you are going to get snotty about the manner of my comments you might try to work on yours!
All things do reproduce after their kind. And despite evolutionists strong faith in evolution, they cannot offer one established scientific fact to explain how one kind of creature might eventually make a completely different kind!
if you could just have a wee go at answering my question that would be nice.
is "kind" more or less general than species? genus? are poodles and kelpies the same kind? dogs and wolves? the bible says bats are birds. are they the same "kind"?
"And despite evolutionists strong faith.." the term is BIOLOGIST and it requires NO faith.
"one established scientific fact to explain how one kind of creature might eventually make a completely different kind"
fact DON'T explain- the ARE explained, by theories. the theory of EV is as yet the best available explanaition of the fact that evolution occurs. that you don't begin to understand it is irrelevant...but rather sad.
Is it really neccessary to insult someone's level of knowledge? It is very inappropriate for an adult conversation and it does not make you seem anymore credible. Please stop acting like a jerk or I'll have to stop defending evolutionists in anyway because of simply you =].
when people choose not to learn but insist on pontificating falsehoods- "there are no transitional fossils""all mutations are bad""there is no evidence for macroEV"....I think it fair to point out the nonsense. in science it is possilbe to be just plain wrong and when it is the result of parroting known falsehoods in the absence of doing any actual work you get no respect from me.
why does one "side" in this debate do all the work? where are the creationist labs? journals? experiments? results?
I am not asking for respect as a scientist or just a well researched person. I only ask for respect as a person, which I haven't recieved on here. I do not spend hours of my precious time researching because I already know the truth. But I do not choose to not learn. It is just not my priority. I am very open to it in school. And apparenly you have not been thouroughly reading my responses.I NEVER said any of that.
I do agree that evolution is a very real scientific phenomenon and there is tons of evidence.I simply do not believe it to the full extent. You know what, you are right. I do not have enough information to continue in this discussion. My strong opinion in this matter isn't enough to participate.
"I do not spend hours of my precious time researching because I already know the truth"
no disrepect intended but right there is the perfect argument against fundamentalism. you don't KNOW the truth. you have a bunch of beliefs to which you cling in the total absence of any evidence to sustain them.
how the hell would you know what I know about anything you presumtious fool! I ws raised as a christial went to christian schools from age 4 to age 17- read that awful book cover to cover more than once.
I asked you a simple set of questions to see if you could attach any scientific meaning to the term. the answer, after silence and now ill mannered bile from you, is clearly NO it's is utterly meaningless.
BTW you cannot be 'raised' a Christian you either are one or you're not. You obviously are not a Christian.
You don't seem to understand the answers that I'm giving you which are biblical therefore I presume that you know nothing about the Bible and science. God does know about science;He created the universe after all!! ;-)
Also, I haven't been silent; I have answered your questions, you just don't like the answers. :-(
BTW you cannot be 'raised' a Christian you either are one or you're not.
are you really SO stupid, pompous and conceited as to misunderstand a simple sentence. what an utterly ghastly individual this awful belief system has made of you- ignorant arrogant and proud of it.
are you really SO stupid, pompous and conceited as to misunderstand a simple sentence. what an utterly ghastly individual this awful belief system has made of you- ignorant arrogant and proud of it.
utter rubbish. I'll ask AGAIN. are kelpies and poodles the same "kind"? dogs and wolves? dogs and cats? are nylonase bacteria the same "kind" as the parent population? are viruses a "kind"? is "kind" more or less general than species? genus? order?
utter rubbish. I'll ask AGAIN. are kelpies and poodles the same "kind"? dogs and wolves? dogs and cats? are nylonase bacteria the same "kind" as the parent population? are viruses a "kind"? is "kind" more or less general than species? genus? order?
What the Bible means by 'created kinds' is not necessarily identical with what biologists classify as a 'species'. Species is a group of very similar organisms that interbreed freely in nature, whereas the Biblical 'kind' means a group of similar...
organisms that are all descended from a single group of originally created animals and may refer to a species, a genus, or a family. Members of the same 'kind' are biologically capable of producing fertile offspring.
dear god, you are one confused individual. kind may refer to species genus or family. these are radically different- you might as well say it refers to emus, banjos and santa.
Soooo it "is not necessarily identical with what biologists classify as a "species"" but you then say it "may refer to a species"
so which is it? you might as well toss a coin since you are clueless either way.
you ignorant clown. prior to my present career I was doing research in the science faculty of a major UK universtity. Hard to think how one could work in mathematics and know nothing about science.
you don't know what I know and what I don't and you make an embarassing fool of yourself every time you pretend otherwise.
my interest in what the bible says about science is probably as great as yours in the bhagavad gita- almost none. where we differ is that you have no interest in what SCIENCE as to say about science.
yes, as I've said, read it cover to cover. I was asking a straigtforward question which your ill mannered fellow cult member can't begin to answer.
"kind" is utterly meaningless here. the verse in genesis might as well say animals reproduce after their own "bleebie"- then christians could at least pointlessly dribble about your own meaningless word and we can have "kind" back.
knowledge v. 'read it' is not the same. you must STUDY it from the proper perspective. and for one, KIND is clearly definde as being able "to reproduce." If the *** can 'get together and have kids' they are the same type of creature. can a male dog and a female cat get together and have 'pitties' or 'kuppies'? no. they cannot reproduce, so they are not the samae "kind." even a child can understand this.
so "kind" means can reproduce? tigers and lions can reproduce so they are the same kind. I asked if dogs and wolves are the same kind? horses and zebras can reproduce- are they the same kind?
"even a child can understand this"- more children can spot a grown adult heplessly clinging to meaningless bronze age nonsense when they can't deal with reality.
cfmmrjeff- what patrionising rubbish from someone whose morals allow them to knowingly spread lies about a scientist whose work you can't be bothered to read.
That is the first true thing I've seen from an evolutionists side so far. Just because you can't explain everything doesn't mean something isn't true. Why then, couldn't Creation by Design be true? Creation by design ideas have been around for literally thousands of years in EVERY tribe of people.
What makes the scientific community think that they must be right on evolution, when they have been PROVEN WRONG on so many issues over time.
For instance, the scientific community in the past has come out with some radically WRONG ideas on medicine. Like the idea of "useless"human organs left over from evolution. That idea alone has lead to useless deaths.
Yet that's only one example. Historically, there are thousands of examples of "bad science" because of evolution type ideas. It doesn't take a lot of research to find them. I really do think it's important that people also look at history when they talk about science.
interesting video and very informative
alexasmithy 6 days ago
some really good stuff here
shoppittsburghnow 1 week ago
you have some great stuff here
smuggecko 1 week ago
@c0ldhead
lmao, ignorance from people like you still surprises me
iCommenter66 4 months ago
well.... that was retarded
dkbuss 5 months ago
If I didn't have a compas or a map I would use the stars, sun, wind currents as well as a bird. From Boston the jet stream blows in the same direction the bird flew.
baxtar1963 5 months ago
I love format these videos use---fact, fact, fact, goddidit, get our religious tracks here
finderfinder100 7 months ago
dasboschitt
hiks45 8 months ago
I didnt think creationist BS could get any more ridiculous.... well i guess i was wrong.
Wrahns 10 months ago 3
Putting "amazing" in front of anything makes it undeniable proof of God. SPREAD THE WORD, PREACH THE GOSPEL. Insjallaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
lebannerfan65 1 year ago
So god cares about the details of the tiniest birds, therefor he cares even more about the details of our very lives and how we live them?
That doesn't make any sense at all.
cadman2300 1 year ago
Seems that some refer to suffering as a Gift from God. But if you assert there from God then you do accept some concept of God for that moment.However sufferign in a way is caused by man rebelling against God, which ironically takes place in the very athiest sentence that people say God causes suffering.Suffering results as the creation was cursed when man chose to disobey God and then was seperated. But can now be reconciled through christ.so actually suffering fits with what the bible teaches
1brandwag 1 year ago
@1brandwag But why does God (at least the Old Testament one) need to be so intolerant and vengeful? What parent would cast out their children and inflict evil and suffering on them for their FIRST mistake? Why should anybody give allegiance to a being (of any nature) who threatens eternal damnation and torment should they refuse? Simply so we can be redeemed and thus eternally grateful for being released from suffering by the very one who instigated that suffering in the first place?
terrabun 2 months ago
@terrabun It's the same God Jesus also spoke of punishment for those who rebel against God.Firstly if you take into account the sovereignty of God and acknowledge who he is we can realize that he is our judge and not us his.Secondly it is not a mere mistake,but rebelion,adam and eve themselve probally were saved in their repentance after,but as with most parent interested in their children punishment occured as was laid out.However redemption was always offered to those who had faith.
1brandwag 2 months ago
@terrabun The fruit is rebelion as God's simple instruction was disobeyed and eating the fruit also represented listening to the enemy Satan,and a will of man to be like God, so rebellion has to be punished,as the very created order and God sovereignty was challenged.redemption doesn't not need to be offered by a soveriegn God,but was as he is a merciful God.The answer is theological as your question also was,sorry I used to replies couldn't fit it all into one.I understand this is difficult.
1brandwag 2 months ago
@1brandwag Ok, I accept your argument on original sin (even though I disagree on the implications). But then how about Abraham, ordered to murder his own child to prove his faith? How can any good person possibly reconcile that with a God who claims to be loving, merciful and kind? To me it is simply reprehensible and plain evil (in the non-theological sense). To me Christianity would be a far stronger faith if it abandoned the Old Testament and the bloody, vengeful God it describes.
terrabun 2 months ago
@terrabunthank you for being open to my answer on original sin. We can what defenies evil in a non-theological standard?But i'll assume we both believe human sacrifice is wrong for the sake of argument.OT does condemn human sacrifice in the law of moses as an important point.Abraham i guess was tested on his faith and in the context of the event it was never in God's plan to actaully have him sacrifice his son,as God provided the lamb,we need OT to know who Jesus is as well,e.g.Prophyses
1brandwag 2 months ago
On a final note these spaces are quite short and much more can be written on this subject.one ministry called gotquestion, which you can find at gotquestion com. Are always more than happy to answer theological problems such as these if it is not in their article base already,have a look at their site if you interest.Also on my youtube page my site is linked which has list of christian apologetics sites which can be of great help.hope that helps,sincerely brandwag
1brandwag 2 months ago
@1brandwag Thanks for the respectful answers, glad this sort of thing can be discussed even on youtube without people always resorting to insults and mud flinging. Have many Christian friends although I am more a scientific rationalist, but regardless of beliefs what always matters most is respect for our fellow humans, something too many people forget sadly in their quest to be proved 'right' :)
terrabun 2 months ago
Yes just look at the wonderfull gifts god has saw fit to lavash on us! AIDS, CANCER, MALARIA, CISTIC FIBROSIS, SMALLPOX, PLAGUE, etc, etc. Let us praise him.
bardot777 1 year ago
Creation moments? Did God perfectly create all those animals that went extinct as well? Obviously didn't make enough back up survival techniques for the dinosaurs or the other 99% of organisms that have ever existed on Earth and died out.
pezzamange 1 year ago
I'm assuming this video was a joke, otherwise I just lost a little hope in humanity.
luv4drums1 1 year ago
i dont get it. so theyre saying that a bird's sense of navigation is so complex and precise that god must have created it. is that really what theyre saying?
MoNTYandTIMMoN 1 year ago
i loved this!! helped me with my school project. shut up with the rude comments.
1995ligia 1 year ago
@1995ligia Helped you how? To show that evolution best explains our current understanding of Species diversity?
Comments aren't all rude, most are in fact truthful, this isn't science... sigh... Mere speculation.
hutchings000 1 year ago
Just as usual, religious fanatic who misinterpret what the Bible says, and keep making up silly interpretations of it, such as our "6,000 year old planet". When will they realize that what's written in the Bible is metaphoric, and it's ESSENCE is what matters: be a good person, don't lie, don't kill, etc...
aradofir 1 year ago
Haha, what a joke.
FirmW2 1 year ago
hehehe oh this is so deliciously stupid.
If the navigation system of birds was designed by a "perfect" being, why would it need backup? Seriously.
How exactly are impacted molars, cancer and tonsils in humans testament to a perfect and purposeful creation?
Clearly, belief in a purposeful creator is quite silly.
Finkeren 1 year ago
HAHA! This is hilarious.
iratebsc 2 years ago
If there were a god, we would all be very aware of the fact. Looking for him on grilled cheese sandwiches and in the flight of a bird would not be necessary. Sorry kids, but there's no easter bunny either. Read the book of Joshua, I mean really read it. It's not long. If that god exists, he totally sucks and you better hope he never shows up, because you aren't Israeli. He only likes Israelite! Maybe try Horus. ROFLMAO
UTubeHooper 2 years ago
Haha wow... how in the world did this get 4 stars?
apestaartje321 2 years ago
God is indeed GREAT!! He created many things, like AIDS and HIV. He created the flu, the small-pox and he even created cancer for us to enjoy! There are the many biting insects and fungus. He created they human eye, which is so intricate and perfect, that half of the human race needs glasses. Old age is another creation I love, it allows humans to lose their dignity before they wither away and die. Did I forget to mention famine and pestilence? How about evil, he created that too. God is GREAT!
UTubeHooper 2 years ago
Don't forget about Brittny Spears...he gave us that too!
420ALI3N 2 years ago
God is indeed great. You, however, don't know the one true God. He created everything to be good and very good. The fall of man brought the diseases, biting insects etc. into this world. Before sin entered this world there was no death; now there is death.
heidilisbeth 2 years ago
The fall of man! That is very interesting. Heidi, I will try to reason with you using your own logic. God knows everything... God always was... God knew that man would fall BEFORE he created him. Therefore, your 'perfect' God created an imperfect human, knowing he would fail, knowing he would then punish him forever. Do you not see the flaw in that logic? How could a perfect, all knowing being, possibly create such a flawed creature as man? If God were perfect, he would have created perfection!!
UTubeHooper 2 years ago
You are correct!! God DID know that man would fall before he created him; that's why he also made a plan for redemption!! So you see - God did make a perfect human. He also gave that human a free will. Man used that free will and the fall began.
heidilisbeth 2 years ago
It is impossible for religious "free will" and an omniscient being to co-exist. If god knows everything, then he knows the outcome of every decision, prior to it being made. If the outcome of any decision is known or predetermined, prior to the decision of the person making it, then there was no choice or free will at all. Free will can only exist where the outcome is not known, predestined or predetermined. Besides, holding a gun (hell) to my head and forcing me to decide is NOT free will.
UTubeHooper 2 years ago
It's certainly not impossible to have free will and omniscient to co-exist. Whether God knows the outcome or not we are still given a choice. That choice is OUR decision. God does not predetermine our decision. I might also add that there is no gun to your head. We all will live eternally and where we spend it is also our decision. You really need to understand God better before you make claims like you do. :-) )
heidilisbeth 2 years ago
However, no matter what you think of God, he loves you and wants you to spend eternity with him. Hopefully, you will make the right choice before it's too late. :-
heidilisbeth 2 years ago
Heidi is right--God formed man knowing that man would be redeemed. You're right as well--God knew we would fall and not all of us will overcome. But there is no flaw in God's logic. God's intention is to build the Church, the Body of Christ... Any craftsman needs material in order to build something. When a carpenter forms a table he uses the best part of the tree and discards the rest. Man is God's material for the Body of Christ, and the men who choose Him will be part of that finished work.
Nimfalas 2 years ago
ya, because these birds could not have evolved to gain these characteristics over the years. look at studies of the finch, in two generations there beak has evolved into a smaller form. now that is extremely fast evolution that darwin missed when studding the finch.
alex95187 2 years ago
Yes dumbass, air exists. It has been scientifically proven so. Evolution is real, and that's how it happened. That too has been scientifically proven. Which means you are living a lie by believing in any religion. "CHRISTIANS HAVE BIG DEGREES AND MORE EDUCATION AND ALSO HAVE COMMON SENSE" Obviously not u. What are you 5 years old or something? Can you make a coherent sentence? Cut the omnipotent umbilical cord and join us in the scientific age and get out of the dark ages. TRY REALITY!!
420ALI3N 2 years ago
It's slightly amusing to me that you question his ability to form coherent sentences when you yourself struggle to write out words correctly.
There comes a certain stage in everyone's life where we cease to be dependent children and begin to make our own independent decisions. While some Christians may have accepted their faith blindly as a child, eventually we take that decision into our own hands and consciously choose to follow God. The Lord praises the faith of children.
Nimfalas 2 years ago
I am VERY amused that you R trying to defend an imaginary being. Your decision was forced on U from the time u were born. U were predisposed to believe the lie that is religion. The fact that u chose to believe a fairy tale doesn't mean it's true. There is no god so there are no praises. If u have faith in an imaginary being then you need some serious mental help. Keep your useless praises and bible quotes to yourself because logic and science are the only language that rational people listen 2.
420ALI3N 2 years ago
Insulting people proves nothing. I suspect you have never truly experienced God; religion may be "fear mongering bullshit." I agree with that. However, the truth my Bible speaks about is not a matter of right vs. wrong, submit to man's authority, fear God, be "religious." The God of the Bible is *love,* and the matter of the gospel is *life.* Religion is a matter of right vs wrong, doctrine and religious government. God calls us to partake of His life, and to live according to His Spirit. Amen!
Nimfalas 2 years ago
I have experienced the fallacy that is religion, that's why I choose to believe in REALITY. It's only an insult if u r dumb enough to believe in any religion. If u r that dumb, then u deserve to be insulted. The bible speaks no truth because it is a work of FICTION. You will find the writing of the flying spaghetti monster just as compelling. Religion is about money, greed and fear mongering.
420ALI3N 2 years ago
religion is not a matter of right vs. wrong. If it is then how does your all caring god let little alter boys get raped by priests? Isn't that wrong? Shouldn't the priests know it? Doctrine is irrelevant and religious government is something that should NEVER exist. If u choose to live ur life according to a fairy tale and believe that an omnipotent jewish zombie told u to do so then that's your delusion. Stop trying to push ur craziness on rational people.
420ALI3N 2 years ago
Can't we have a discussion without silly, childish insults? Religion is filled with man's imperfection, but that doesn't make God imperfect. Terrible things such as that happen within religion because of man. Religious government wasn't God's intention. In the Kingdom Age the believers who are well-trained to express God's authority will rule with Him on the Earth. Now we should live through the Spirit according to HIS word, not MAN's word. Many religious institutions chose to follow man's word.
Nimfalas 2 years ago
As far as science and the modern world, in which I do in fact live -- evolution is an observable fact. Evolutionary theory, which is man's way of explaining the observation of evolution, is only our current "best stab" at explaining the appearance of life (without God). The science of the evolutionary theory makes far more inferences than belief in creation and our Lord. Belief in the Truth of the Word requires one inference--truth--and contradicts nothing that we observe in the natural world.
Nimfalas 2 years ago
are you a moron or something? No wait you must be an idiot. PSSSST dumbass...there is no god. There never was and there never will be. Just because u were told a fairy tale and u believe it, doesn't make it true. If u were born in another country and never heard of the christian god, u would know nothing about him. U would be praising some different fairy tale. Religion is fear mongering bullshit that idiots like u just soak up and regurgitate blindly. Stupid fucking lemming.
420ALI3N 2 years ago
UH NO. evolution is a proven scientific fact. Get ur head out of ur fake gods ass and drag yourself into the modern age. Stop believing in 14th century fairy tales about omnipotent jewish zombies and embrace reality. I know it's hard because this fake religion BS has been crammed down your throat since you were born but try and understand. The bible is fiction A book about a make believe god to try and explain the things that primitive man did not understand at the time. Now we have science.
420ALI3N 2 years ago
Birds having the ability to navigate is evidence for birds having the ability to navigate. How can you make a logical conclusion: "Birds migrate and use internal navigation tools...therefore there is an undetectable, invisible God who is outside of space and time". There is no evidence that leads to such an obtuse conclusion. However, archaeopteryx is evidence for evolution.
CHAS1422 2 years ago
... you and I both know this is brain washing solidification material
keysle 2 years ago
yeah... Chicken and Eggs, which one came first???
meka4996 2 years ago
Niether came first. The ancestors of birds were laying eggs long before they appeared as flying reptiles. the egg has been evolving in shape and form along with the parents. The human egg is very primitive by comparison, but it is still an egg.
CHAS1422 2 years ago
lol, birds can fly home so god, great argument.
nakedapedude 2 years ago
i love it
joomana22 2 years ago
what do Creationist think of the Archeopteryx?
do they think it is a bird or some sort of transition between Dinosaurs and birds
zandone45 2 years ago
Creator? HA! what a load of BS.
'It's amazing that the bird has so many methods of navigation...I'm just too simple minded to do any form of fucking research to find out how it really happened so...I'll just say some all powerful invisible man in the sky created it. '
Oh yaaaaaaa, that'll shut 'em up...
420ALI3N 2 years ago
Isn't evolution wonderful.
gregrutz 2 years ago 25
subhanallah!!
edzryxq 2 years ago
If your a evolutionist then fine is your a creationist then fine ! I know God lives and Im living in his creation and I love it ! God made man and gave us life ! To say beauty was nothing but a Simple mistake then your fooling yourself !
llDefecTedll 2 years ago
Yea, you have a gross oversimplification of Evolution. Whether you blindly follow faith or just have an intellectual retardation, I pity you.
BrellK 2 years ago
Evolution is religion. It bypass observation through scientific investigation. When they ask to provide the evidence of origin of life of how they evolved they will only answered it with nonsense assumption. no single scientist can prove evolution, in their mind maybe. In that way evolutionists believes in superstition. At least GOD explains "a little" of HIS creation.
movie2go4 3 years ago
you are beyond help. everything in your post is just utterly and patently false but there you go claiming black is white because your invisible friend says so.
quick question- there are 250,000 papers in the primary scientific research literature on evolutionary biology, paleontology, genetics, molecular biology, micro biology, immunology...
how many have you read?
McMonster65 3 years ago
movie2go4,
evolution is, by definition, NOT religious in nature. Evolution can, and is every day, observed, and it is supported by a huge amount of evidence.
Evolution does not deal with the origin of life, that is abiogenesis and it is not based on assumption.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
Tell me where evolution is observed everyday!!
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
Evolution can be seen in bacteria all the time, speciation events have been observed both in nature and in labs. There are copious amounts of genetic evidence to support evolution. Transitional fossils are discovered frequently. I was just reading in one of my nature magazines about a new fossil in the evolution of whales (I don't recall what it was named and I don't have time to search through all of my nature magazines).
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
Furthermore, evolution is seen every time bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics. Every year a new strain of influenza emerges. That is the reason annual flu shots are suggested by the CDC. And do not say that this is only "microevolution". Evolution is evolution. There is no micro and macro. If someone can walk a foot they can walk a mile.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
Just like you said, 'every time bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics.'
As you can see they are still bacteria- always were - always will be!! ;-)
They are not changing into anything else.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
"They are not changing into anything else."
Yes they are, they are changing into antibiotic-resistant bacteria, as opposed to non-antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
"they are still bacteria- always were - always will be!!"
If they became anything other than bacteria this would disprove evolution.....do you know what evolution IS????
If you are looking for large changes then it is necessary to look at genetic evidence. Large changes will not be observed in a single lifespan, or even several.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
There will be variation within a kind but they will not evolve into anything other than what they are; cats will still be cats dogs still dogs etc....
Genetic experiments on fruit flies showed that after thousands of generations they were still fruit flies.
'...do you know what evolution IS????'
Tell me...what do you mean by evolution???
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
"Genetic experiments on fruit flies showed that after thousands of generations they were still fruit flies."
Precisely, and this is good. Because if a fruit fly gave birth to anything other than a fruit fly this would disprove the modern theory of evolution. But the funny thing is that you are implying that this is a bad thing for evolution, which is why I had asked you if you knew what evolution IS.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
"There will be variation within a kind"
Could you please provide me with the exact definition of 'kind'? It would save me a lot of trouble searching for it.
"Tell me...what do you mean by evolution???"
Evolution = change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. Which is what we observe. What you are looking for is what creationists typically refer to as "macroevolution", for which there is much evidence between genetics and fossils.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
When you say change in the inherited traits do you mean they inherit all together different traits than they had before? Such as amphibians to reptiles to birds kind of thing??
Kind refers to animals that can freely interbreed and produce fertile offspring.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
"When you say change in the inherited traits do you mean they inherit all together different traits than they had before?"
This can be the case however it is not always necessary. Essentially what evolution is is a change in the allelic frequencies in a population. Let's say there is a population of leaf insects that are mostly yellow, but there is variation within the population between greenish yellow and brownish yellow. If this population were place in an environment (cont...)
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
(cont...)
which consisted mainly of bright green foliage with brown trunks, then those individuals in the population which were greener than the others would be selected for if they remained in the leaves because they would be harder for predators to find, and those which were more brown would be selected for if they remained on the trunks because predators would not be able to see them as easily as the yellow ones. This scenario would cause a divergence of a population by evolution.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
However, they are still leaf insects the only thing thats happened is that the relative numbers of each have gone up and down.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
"However, they are still leaf insects"
This is beginning to frustrate me. You continue to say, "yeah, but they're stil [insert name here]. I am aware that they are still leaf insects. That does not mean that evolution has not taken place. Evolution is change in allelic frequencies over time. This is what happened in my example scenario. Evolution happened. If the leaf insect population changed into elephants this would utterly DISPROVE evolution.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
From what I understand this sort of observable variation is due to re-arrangement of existing alleles, or degenerative changes.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
"this sort of observable variation is due to re-arrangement of existing alleles, or degenerative changes."
In my example, it was an exaggeration of a preexisting allele. Somewhere back in these comments someone mentioned nylonase bacteria to you. The evolution of nylonase in these bacteria was not simply a reshuffling of alleles, and it certainly wasn't degenerative. Nylon was a substance that bacteria had never come into contact with before, so it could not be a preexisting allele.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
If you like I can list a few of the sources of evidence for evolution above the species level. I could also send you a list of a few of the more notable transitional fossils. n__n
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
I'm sorry if I'm frustrating you but I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from. You are the only person on here who hasn't resorted to name calling and such. Thank you for that!! ;-)
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
Heidilisbeth -
I believe that it's important to distinguish the difference between evolution and Evolutionary Theory. Evolution is an observation: allele frequencies change over time. The Theory takes the observation of evolution and composes a well thought-out theory as to how life as a whole may have evolved. Don't pick a fight with evolution; you'll lose! Evolutionary Theory, on the other hand, is based largely on loosely supported inferences. Here is where our Creator plays His role. ;-)
Nimfalas 2 years ago
Once again, if you want evolution of what creationists call "macro" evolution, you will need to look at the evidence from the fields of molecular biology, genetics, biophysics, biochemistry, and paleontology.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
"Such as amphibians to reptiles to birds kind of thing??"
Evidence for this can be found in molecular biology, genetics, biophysics, biochemistry, and paleontology.
"Kind refers to animals that can freely interbreed and produce fertile offspring."
Then why don't you just use the term 'species'? According to your definition they are exactly the same thing. And speciation events have been observed many many times. DonExodus just made a video today about this topic. Check it out. : )
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
definition of superstition: a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like.
Sounds like religion?
If you had a terrible illness, or say, a broken arm, you'd probably choose doctor over priest.
god explains very little of how things work (including medicine/evolution). that is what science does, science changes NAIVE RELIGION AND IT'S PEOPLE ARE RELUCTANT TO ADAPT.
chorbster 3 years ago
wow... untill the huge cap of lack of evidence to support creator :P
offc. Creationsist can go places like this and delude themself to comfort.. untill they meet the next "evolutionist"
C0ldhead 3 years ago 2
They get the science almost right, then twist it to fit "scripture".
LOSERS!
RomanGrundle 3 years ago
god does not explain to us science, nor science to us god
chorbster 3 years ago
God created science and therefore explains a lot of scientific information to us through his word.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
If what you say is true, then tell me which of gods words explain to us anything of functioning scientific purpose?
chorbster 3 years ago
He created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. Therefore because He created all things that means that He used scientific means to do it. So.....all science that is used today is obviously functioning science. ;-)
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
yes, yes but the point is: INTELLIGENT DESIGN DOESNT WORK AS A THEOREY, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE clearly visible EVIDENCE -there may be a god, but one that says evolution didnt happen is wrong. if it told you the world was flat, you would probably be here saying it is, despite all we know about it. your gods word is written by humans, despite the possibilty that a god actually told them to write them
chorbster 3 years ago
His word was written down by men of God. He told them what to write. They were writing about things they knew nothing about...such as "It is he that sitteth upon the the circle of the earth." They didn't know that the earth was round. Another example..."The earth...is turned as clay to the seal" They didn't know the earth rotated on it's axis. Creation works as a theory; we can tell that through observation of cells, plants, animals etc. There is no evidence of evolution, no fossils and so on.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
'because god said so' is pathetic. it is not something we, as humans can go and test, like science. your word of god is not open to new breakthroughs, and you are listening to a doctrine thousands of years old. its just as rediculous as jehovas witnesses who wont take blood transfusions. ADAPT OR LOSE!
chorbster 3 years ago
So you see...it's a belief of the origin of life. Your faith is in a slime bog mine is in the power of God. I'm not listening to doctrine thousands of years old. God's word is as relevant today as it was one hundred years ago and so on.
The thing is it's you that will have to adapt or lose. You lose out on an eternity of life for an eternity of death. That is such a tragedy. :-(
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
"They were writing about things they knew nothing about...such as "It is he that sitteth upon the the circle of the earth." They didn't know that the earth was round."
exactly, this shows that they thought the earth was flat. Or were you unaware that the Earth is in fact not a circle (which is flat and two-dimensional) but a sphere?
"There is no evidence of evolution, no fossils and so on."
THis is simply false. You apparently have no knowledge of the evidence in support of evolution.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
Isaiah 40:22 refers to the circle of the earth, or in the Italian translation, globo. The Hebrew is khûg (חוּג) = sphericity or roundness. Even if the translation circle is adhered to, think about Neil Armstrong in space—to him, the spherical earth would have appeared circular regardless of which direction he viewed it.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
There are many other verses in the bible which imply a flat Earth. I can send them to you if you want. They just won't fit in these 500 letter boxes.
ScientiaVeritasEtLux 3 years ago
To all Creationists:
We have to admit, the Evolutionists are right: we don't know enough to convience others of our position. We need to take the time to be fully researched on the subject. I don't think we will be mocked any less but atleast we will have more to stand on. So for now, I say the Evolutionists have won this debate because we were unprepared with evidence of God, Creation, and divine design. Next time, let's be ready.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
Next time, let's be ready
or you could just accept reality and see that EV is an accurate and powerful description of the diversity of life- millions of christians including some of the leading researchers in EV have no problem reconciling reality with faith. what's your problem? why start with the notion that one of the crowning achievements of human endevour is wrong- even though, as you admit, you know next to nothing about it.
McMonster65 3 years ago 2
That was almost nice. Thank you. And again, I do believe evolution is very real but I also believe God created the Universe and He chose to use evolution in His Creation. Science takes second place to my faith in God. Period.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
You do well to believe God created everything. Think about it though. If God created what needed to happen for the 'big bang' and the evolutionary methods, that 'god' is wasteful, cruel ( death reigns in evolution ), and retarded. This is not the God of the Bible, that is for sure. Read Genesis, there are no billions, or even millions of years there. God is able to keep his Word true and keep it for us. Get a KJV and read it. "The first day". "The second day". etc.
Vorspiel 3 years ago
I never meant to convey that I agree with "evolution" on that scale. I now realize I have been using evolution in an inaccurate way. Because my Christian science teachers have skimmed over evolution, I did not realize until a recent disscussion (as in two days ago) and research that evolution is a bit different than I thought it was. And I guess by using that term I was trying to relate to both sides and find some common ground.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
It didn't work and I was wrong to be a fence rider. Compromise is my weakness.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
Compromise is not a good thing. We have to stand for what is right!!! ;-)
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
Yes I completely agree. And it's a weakness I am working on.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
beautiful.
chorbster 3 years ago
tellnet:
You completely have missed my point. I see it is pointless for me to have this discussion with you (and McMonster65) so I'm not going to waste my time anymore. I will do some more research on both what you believe and what I do so I can stand up better in a discussion. I hope you realize how horidly rude you have been and feel sorry for it. You're apology is automatically accepted if that happens. If not, that's fine. Have a nice life.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
Cool video. Migrating birds are amazing when you think about them! How about ATP synthase? Now that's a mind blower! I love nano-machines. I wonder where they came from? Hmm.
Habakkuk87 3 years ago
Habakkuk - I agree with you about the nano-machines! They obviously reveal the existence of a Designer. In Darwin's day, they thought the cell was "simple" - no more complex than a blob of protoplasm. Even though we now know that the cell and its components are incredibly complex, I think that we're still only scratching the surface. And with each new discovery, evolution becomes even less defensible.
SteveJS113 3 years ago
As much as I love intelligent discussion...this arguement is starting to look more and more like a script for a five year old arguement with "You're a liar"-"No, you're a liar" and disguised with intellectual vocabulary and phrasing. Can we please continue as adults?
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
I totally agree with Sunnylaughter's comments about this discussion. However, I only dropped out of the discussion after being called "a liar, an ignorant fool, and a dishonest religious fanatic." I did no name-calling of my own. I didn't need to. I feel that evolutionists go on rampages because evolution is the only thing that enables them to deny the existence of God as Creator, Sustainer and - most of all - Judge.
SteveJS113 3 years ago
Thank you for your support. It's hard to stay standing without the support of others. But I have seen it from both sides. Neither, of course, is justified in that immature behavoir.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago 2
Anyone who believes in Evolution is simply uneducated and needs to search for "Evolution Handbook" and read it.
spoiledpups 3 years ago
Anyone who believes in Evolution is simply uneducated and needs to search for "Evolution Handbook" and read it.
spoiledpups 3 years ago
That's a great book, I just got it!! ;-)
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
Our God is a full of Wisdom.... this is one of his wise creation, which cannot be Xplained by or Understood by man's knowledge.... Our God is an awesome God..... Thnx CM for this wonderful video...... :-)
JeanPrince 3 years ago 2
Another terrific video Moment! Thank God for CMI!
funhistory 3 years ago 2
That's too bad, McMonster. Go ahead and deride the Bible if you want. But someday you'll see not only that the Bible is accurate on all things - even science - but that it revealed the path to eternal life. This is not a game of who can outwit whom on YouTube, McMonster. I urge you to read the Bible one more time and ask yourself why so many of the world's greatest scientists throughout history have believed it to be the Word of God.
SteveJS113 3 years ago 3
many of the world's greatest scientists throughout history have believed it to be the Word of God.
and yet so few today....could it be because bats aren't birds, rabbits don't chew their cud and other howlers from the book of "god". millions have made great contributions who believe in the divine relvelation of the koran- abdus salaam eg. yet you would regard their holy book as I regard the bible. antiquated nonsense from a long time ago. of some historical interest- no more
McMonster65 3 years ago
Get your head out of the sand, McMonster - there are thousands of Bible-believing scientists alive today. And by the way, you're using the modern-day definition of cud chewing to "prove" that the Bible is in error. Rabbits practice what is called "refection", a process that looks like the rabbit is chewing its cud. And bats are included in the list of birds because they all fly. These are very old charges against the Bible. Can't you think of any "Bible mistakes" on your own?
SteveJS113 3 years ago 2
so my head is in the sand? good one! there are indeed lots of bible believing scientists- can you name any who regularly publish research in the life sciences other than Behe who reject evolution? give it a try. regulary publishing peer reviewed research in the life sciences and reject EV.
if you want to see a good religious scientist look up ken miller here. you might learn something. then again you might not be capable.
McMonster65 3 years ago
You're too funny, McMonster! How do you expect me to find articles critical of evolution in peer-reviewed science publications that are pro-Darwin and REFUSE TO PUBLISH those articles? It's the same thing as if I were moderating the comments here and banned you from commenting right after I asked you a question. It would APPEAR to everyone that you had no answer. Your arguments are amazingly underwhelming.
SteveJS113 3 years ago 5
pathetic. creation science has as good a publication record as phrenology and for the same reason. it's utter bollocks.
McMonster65 3 years ago
you should therfore have no trouble in listing a dozen or so papers containting sound science submitted to research journals in science and rejected for no sustainable reason. I'll not hold my breath.
pro darwin. you poor fool. EV would now be unrecognisable to darwin- but dream on....if you can't keep up.
McMonster65 3 years ago
Here are some names for you: Dr John Baumgardner, Dr Ian Macreadie, Dr Danny Faulkner, Dr Walter Vieth.....
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
list their peer reviewed publications on creaion science.
McMonster65 3 years ago
I specifically asked for active researchers in life science. baumgarner is an electrical engineer turned genesis flood "geologist". do you have a friend who could explain why electrical engineering is not a life science, I don't have the patience.
McMonster65 3 years ago
faulkner is an astonomer- not a life science though it might become one. his personal page has a link to his research......the link is dead.
McMonster65 3 years ago
And bats are included in the list of birds because they all fly.
and whales are included as fish because they look like fish? and pi is three because it looks like three? and....
you stick to your folklore and I'll stick to the science.
McMonster65 3 years ago
If evolution was true there would be quadrillions of transitional fossils all over the place, like fishes incrementally becoming amphibians, but after 150 years since Darwin's theory there's nothing. That's why they made a big deal about Tiktaalik. A tv narrator once said the lungfish was "on it's way to becoming a land animal". Does that mean otters are becoming seals and seals are turning into whales? Are flying squirrels going to be like bats? It's unscientific.
mjazzguitar 3 years ago 3
Honestly, I do not see how this proves creation and disproves evolution. Even as a creationist, you cannot completely reject the idea of evolution. It is real but that also does not disprove creation. God has used them both. And that is the key. He created everything and is still developing it. But really, how can you say it all started with carbon or something like that. I find it much easier and more reliable to have faith in a supreme being than an element that I use to write with.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
God didn't use evolution. If you read the Scriptures in Genesis it will tell you that he created everything living to reproduce after their own 'kind'. He didn't create an animal to change into other animals.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
not necessarily other animals but they do develop. i mean even in just the generations of this century. human offspring is taller and developing earlier. just because it cant explain the entire thing does not mean it is not true.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
There are always going to be different developments in the generations but that isn't evolution. The people who are taller or shorter or whatever are still people. There is variation in the 'kind'
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
but that is still evolution. development. becoming more complex and advanced. it is very small but it is still there. not enough to prove darwinism and disprove creation by any means, but it is there. though i do highly agree with you that creation is primary.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
define "kind". tell us why, given that the study of taxonomy has provided a clear useful and largely unambiguous terminology do you choose not to use it. is "kind" more or less specific than species? genus? family? do you have the slightest knowledge of ANY biology?
McMonster65 3 years ago
You are a hostile person your name seems to fit you...it's so sad.
'Kind' is the type of animal and it's offspring. There is variation within a kind.
Yes, I do have knowledge of biology. ;-)
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
you are 100% wrong about the name- actually bestowed on me with great affection by some musician friends in Spain.
re. "kinds". I asked where these fit in the standard scheme of taxonomy. you can't answer. don't feel bad though. there is no answer- it doesn't mean anything.
taxonomy is a difficult topic which has been studied for centuries in an attempt to classify living things. you can't really expect to supplant it with one word translated from a pile of bronze age folklore.
McMonster65 3 years ago
You are so pathetic---the word for 'kind' is the translation from Hebrew. It has nothing to do with 'man's' attempt at classifying living things today.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
not even close. I asked a simple question and you can't answer. who's pathetic? If you say the earth is orbits a giant thronungulator maintained by a voodudium acting on a bleebie. I can ask what you mean and if you can't relate what you say to known terminology I am entitled to conclude that talk of bleebies and thronungulators is menaingless tripe.
your talk of kinds is meaningless tripe.
if you are going to get snotty about the manner of my comments you might try to work on yours!
McMonster65 3 years ago
All things do reproduce after their kind. And despite evolutionists strong faith in evolution, they cannot offer one established scientific fact to explain how one kind of creature might eventually make a completely different kind!
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
if you could just have a wee go at answering my question that would be nice.
is "kind" more or less general than species? genus? are poodles and kelpies the same kind? dogs and wolves? the bible says bats are birds. are they the same "kind"?
McMonster65 3 years ago
"All things do reproduce after their kind"
meaningless
"And despite evolutionists strong faith.." the term is BIOLOGIST and it requires NO faith.
"one established scientific fact to explain how one kind of creature might eventually make a completely different kind"
fact DON'T explain- the ARE explained, by theories. the theory of EV is as yet the best available explanaition of the fact that evolution occurs. that you don't begin to understand it is irrelevant...but rather sad.
McMonster65 3 years ago
Is it really neccessary to insult someone's level of knowledge? It is very inappropriate for an adult conversation and it does not make you seem anymore credible. Please stop acting like a jerk or I'll have to stop defending evolutionists in anyway because of simply you =].
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago 3
when people choose not to learn but insist on pontificating falsehoods- "there are no transitional fossils""all mutations are bad""there is no evidence for macroEV"....I think it fair to point out the nonsense. in science it is possilbe to be just plain wrong and when it is the result of parroting known falsehoods in the absence of doing any actual work you get no respect from me.
why does one "side" in this debate do all the work? where are the creationist labs? journals? experiments? results?
McMonster65 3 years ago
I am not asking for respect as a scientist or just a well researched person. I only ask for respect as a person, which I haven't recieved on here. I do not spend hours of my precious time researching because I already know the truth. But I do not choose to not learn. It is just not my priority. I am very open to it in school. And apparenly you have not been thouroughly reading my responses.I NEVER said any of that.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
I do agree that evolution is a very real scientific phenomenon and there is tons of evidence.I simply do not believe it to the full extent. You know what, you are right. I do not have enough information to continue in this discussion. My strong opinion in this matter isn't enough to participate.
sunnylaughter101 3 years ago
"I do not spend hours of my precious time researching because I already know the truth"
no disrepect intended but right there is the perfect argument against fundamentalism. you don't KNOW the truth. you have a bunch of beliefs to which you cling in the total absence of any evidence to sustain them.
no one claims that something came from nothing.
McMonster65 3 years ago
Do you have the slightest knowledge of the BIBLE, and of its definition of KIND?
cfmmrjeff 3 years ago
cfmmrjeff, no, he hasn't the slightest idea about anything in the Bible. ;-)
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
how the hell would you know what I know about anything you presumtious fool! I ws raised as a christial went to christian schools from age 4 to age 17- read that awful book cover to cover more than once.
I asked you a simple set of questions to see if you could attach any scientific meaning to the term. the answer, after silence and now ill mannered bile from you, is clearly NO it's is utterly meaningless.
you need to work on your manners btw.
McMonster65 3 years ago
BTW you cannot be 'raised' a Christian you either are one or you're not. You obviously are not a Christian.
You don't seem to understand the answers that I'm giving you which are biblical therefore I presume that you know nothing about the Bible and science. God does know about science;He created the universe after all!! ;-)
Also, I haven't been silent; I have answered your questions, you just don't like the answers. :-(
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
BTW you cannot be 'raised' a Christian you either are one or you're not.
are you really SO stupid, pompous and conceited as to misunderstand a simple sentence. what an utterly ghastly individual this awful belief system has made of you- ignorant arrogant and proud of it.
eeeuch!
McMonster65 3 years ago
are you really SO stupid, pompous and conceited as to misunderstand a simple sentence. what an utterly ghastly individual this awful belief system has made of you- ignorant arrogant and proud of it.
To what belief system are you referring?
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
I have answered your questions
utter rubbish. I'll ask AGAIN. are kelpies and poodles the same "kind"? dogs and wolves? dogs and cats? are nylonase bacteria the same "kind" as the parent population? are viruses a "kind"? is "kind" more or less general than species? genus? order?
you've answered NONE of these and nor can you.
McMonster65 3 years ago
utter rubbish. I'll ask AGAIN. are kelpies and poodles the same "kind"? dogs and wolves? dogs and cats? are nylonase bacteria the same "kind" as the parent population? are viruses a "kind"? is "kind" more or less general than species? genus? order?
What the Bible means by 'created kinds' is not necessarily identical with what biologists classify as a 'species'. Species is a group of very similar organisms that interbreed freely in nature, whereas the Biblical 'kind' means a group of similar...
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
organisms that are all descended from a single group of originally created animals and may refer to a species, a genus, or a family. Members of the same 'kind' are biologically capable of producing fertile offspring.
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
dear god, you are one confused individual. kind may refer to species genus or family. these are radically different- you might as well say it refers to emus, banjos and santa.
Soooo it "is not necessarily identical with what biologists classify as a "species"" but you then say it "may refer to a species"
so which is it? you might as well toss a coin since you are clueless either way.
McMonster65 3 years ago
you know nothing about the Bible and science
you ignorant clown. prior to my present career I was doing research in the science faculty of a major UK universtity. Hard to think how one could work in mathematics and know nothing about science.
what a repugnant fool you are.
McMonster65 3 years ago
You know nothing about what the Bible says about science; does that not hurt your ego as much??
heidilisbeth 3 years ago
you don't know what I know and what I don't and you make an embarassing fool of yourself every time you pretend otherwise.
my interest in what the bible says about science is probably as great as yours in the bhagavad gita- almost none. where we differ is that you have no interest in what SCIENCE as to say about science.
McMonster65 3 years ago
Do you have the slightest knowledge of the BIBLE
yes, as I've said, read it cover to cover. I was asking a straigtforward question which your ill mannered fellow cult member can't begin to answer.
"kind" is utterly meaningless here. the verse in genesis might as well say animals reproduce after their own "bleebie"- then christians could at least pointlessly dribble about your own meaningless word and we can have "kind" back.
McMonster65 3 years ago
knowledge v. 'read it' is not the same. you must STUDY it from the proper perspective. and for one, KIND is clearly definde as being able "to reproduce." If the *** can 'get together and have kids' they are the same type of creature. can a male dog and a female cat get together and have 'pitties' or 'kuppies'? no. they cannot reproduce, so they are not the samae "kind." even a child can understand this.
cfmmrjeff 3 years ago
spare me the patronising lectures thanks.
so "kind" means can reproduce? tigers and lions can reproduce so they are the same kind. I asked if dogs and wolves are the same kind? horses and zebras can reproduce- are they the same kind?
"even a child can understand this"- more children can spot a grown adult heplessly clinging to meaningless bronze age nonsense when they can't deal with reality.
McMonster65 3 years ago
cfmmrjeff- what patrionising rubbish from someone whose morals allow them to knowingly spread lies about a scientist whose work you can't be bothered to read.
what a vile, degenrate ignoramus you are!
McMonster65 3 years ago
That is the first true thing I've seen from an evolutionists side so far. Just because you can't explain everything doesn't mean something isn't true. Why then, couldn't Creation by Design be true? Creation by design ideas have been around for literally thousands of years in EVERY tribe of people.
What makes the scientific community think that they must be right on evolution, when they have been PROVEN WRONG on so many issues over time.
mncarlson5 3 years ago 4
For instance, the scientific community in the past has come out with some radically WRONG ideas on medicine. Like the idea of "useless"human organs left over from evolution. That idea alone has lead to useless deaths.
Yet that's only one example. Historically, there are thousands of examples of "bad science" because of evolution type ideas. It doesn't take a lot of research to find them. I really do think it's important that people also look at history when they talk about science.
mncarlson5 3 years ago
are thousands of examples of "bad science" because of evolution type ideas. It doesn't take a lot of research to find them.
give us a laugh then- list say, 6.
McMonster65 3 years ago