ALSO- there ARE thousands of scientists who have signed a letter/ list which states that they NO LONGER support evolution, due to the latest scientific facts about the complexity and information/ intelligent source of DNA, and for MANY other new discoveries in cosmology, biology etc. One of the comments below- claims that 99% of scientists support evolution, is very wrong! Honesty is a rare quality! :(
@TheWayandWordofLife "there ARE thousands of scientists who have signed a letter/ list which states that they NO LONGER support evolution" => source please? And if you are referring to the "Dissent from Darwinism" list, it's not thousands, it's only hundreds (~800 last time i check), not even adding up to 1 thousand. If you compare that number against life scientists in the world, this makes up to less than 1% of the scientific community.
There are THOUSANDS of YouTube Science videos that present an overwhelming amount of EVIDENCE which do NOT fit the evolution model/ theory. People who honestly want to know EVERYTHING about the cosmos, Our earth, and ALL the facts about the natural world, WILL search out this knowledge. If not, then they are REFUSING to be openminded!
@gregrutz No they don't, neanderthal man and piltdown man or any of the other shit you assume are transitional fossils are not evidence, not to mention if evolution occurred then changes would be happening every minute meaning 99% of fossils would be transitional. Stop lying like every other evolutionist.
@gregrutz Why are you lying? I can send you the links disproving them? Dna? Are you an idiot? Dna, blood samples, protein shouldn't last over 10k years idiot. Don't lie and give me3 evolutionist bullshit, no the fossils we have are complete species you fucking idiot...i'll send you videos of evolutionists saying there are no transitional fossils, stop lying fucking idiot, there are no half bird half reptile fossils, no fossils determining how insects and every other species arose. You're a joke
@kingseho Every fossil we have is of a complete species ''you fucking IDiot''. Every species that ever lived was complete, just like today. 99% are extinct !
Scientists have over 20 different dinosaurs with feathers. The fossils had dinosaur teeth and feathers, just like Archeopteryx and Microraptor.
Red blood cells last less than a week, they did not find any in the 70 million year old fossil. Stop lying.
@gregrutz Feathers? Dinosaurs didn't have feathers, those are fucking birds, those are debunked idiot. Fossils had teeth? Are you fucking retarded....Lying about what? LMAO You're a fucking idiot, if you want to continue pm me since obviously you're too delusional and i need more space. Go get an education, there are no transitional fossils-game over, stop claiming that there are, your own priests said there's none.
@kingseho You are kind of fucked up. Birds don't have teeth they have beaks. Everything you think of as bird like dinosaurs had: feathers, hollow bones, warm blood, oval eggs in nests, 3 forward toes, etc. etc. etc.
@gregrutz No they didn't find transitional fossils, you're still alluding the evolutionists that actually have an education unlike you. Yet all fossils are of today's species right? Obviously darwin even stated there are none. You're an idiot, darwin also stated the complexity of the eye alone debunks his theory and also the fact that bees make beehives as well, your own god doubted his work and you're claiming differently, You're an idiot
@kingseho hey dorko, calm down... go out to your pick-up, go down to the gas station.. fill it up and then give thanks to Darwin and evolution for having helped the industrial paleontologists in finding the hydrocarbon deposits (you know... oil).. your stupid arguments are mute.. evolution is being applied in industry every day.. Hey.. you can still take a shot at that ungodly quantum mechanics.. now THAT is the devil at work...pretty un-christian if you ask me..
THANK YOU for such an AMAZING video series! Your words are a very powerful truth! I hope your message will reach thousands of people, and that your knowledge and truths will open their eyes and Heart to THE TRUTH!!! Our Creator is infinitely brilliant, and powerful, and ONLY wants what is GOOD for us. If everyone lived like God wants us to - other than some illnesses, there WOULD NOT BE SADNESS, SUFFERING, PAIN, HURTING BROKEN PEOPLE. There wouldn't be all the EVIL in life! It's HUMAN FREE W
Scientists who claim evolution is the only truth- should be required to SHOW HOW each and every animal and plant known, evolved from WHAT OTHER animal and plant! WE DESERVE REAL EVIDENCE- not a ridiculously simple drawing of a ' TREE' with a very inadequate number of animals on it! WE want to see EVIDENCE of how EVERY life form today, became what they are today! WHAT PLANTS are the ancestors of the giant poppy, or the Venus fly trap, etc.??? WHAT animals were the ANCESTORS of the giraffe, fla
EXACTLY! ALSO- there should be LITERALLY MILLIONS of TRANSITIONAL ANCESTOR fossils, such as; the ANCESTOR LINEAGE of the porcupine, giraffe, platypus, flamingo, hippo, grizzly bears, gazelle, echidna, kangaroo, toucan, peacock, buzzard, hummingbird, AND MILLIONS OF OTHER ANIMALS, PLANTS, ALL THE TREMENDOUS VARIETIES OF FISH, BIRDS, INSECTS, TREES, AND PLANTS........WHERE ARE ALL THEIR ANCESTRAL LINEAGES??? EVOLUTION is an EVIL LIE, that has put millions of people under it's spell of decept
DNA contains the most complex information known to man. The extreme complexity inside every cell, plus the brilliant information within DNA, equals INTELLIGENCE! INTELLIGENT INFORMATION, ALWAYS originates from an intelligent MIND!!! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR IT TO ORIGINATE FROM A MINDLESS, RANDOM, ENTITY! LIFE ORIGINATES FROM A DIVINE, INFINITELY POWERFUL, AND INTELLIGENT CREATOR- GOD! God exists whether they want Him to or NOT!! GOD IS SO MUCH HIGHER THAN ANYTHING WE CAN COMPREHEND, AND HIS
Also- Evolution is MINDLESS, BLIND and unable to plan, or have any form of thought, or awareness of what is necessary for even the most simple lifeforms, let alone animals with more advanced structures. This MINDLESS function- called evolution could never cause such a complex universe, solar system, and earth- which just happens to be extremely BEAUTIFUL TO OUR SENSES, in so many ways- the Majestic BEAUTY of mountains, rivers, the magical colors, shapes, and smell of flowers. It is more than ac
PERFECTLY SAID! I would LOVE for the experts to have to present a transitional form for every single insect, plant, mammal, fish, and reptile alive today. The LAME EXCUSE that their fossils didn't FORM, even though we have ancient fossils of living animals- just seems like utter LIES! Where is the porcupines ancestor ? Or the gazelle? Or at least show us how there came to be over 10,000 species of fish! They CAN'T do it- because they are ALL UNIQUE, they didn't come from one another- and neit
Evolution has been observed in real time, that is, as it happened - more than once. What does this mean? It means evolution is real, game over, this BS loses.
@Neeidea, there are no vestigial organs! Just because there are organs that can be removed and the person survives, doesn't make them vestigial! The apendix for instance is a part of the immune system!
Fossils have been found that debunk evolution and many of them have been discarded or modified and or placed incorrectly.
DNA has proven that we humans come from a common ancestor.
@miketonon it is not scientific assumption it is seen across the globe as a scientific theory and it is cleary stated in many science books that it is a theory
@miketonon it is not scientific assumption it is seen across the globe as a scientific theory and it is clearly stated in many science books that it is a theory
every single fossil is a transitional form we unfortunately do have some gaps in some places but a total lack of transitional fossils is wrong. and simply because we had not found these fossils does not mean that they do not exist. take the "giant's fossils" that you used to attempt to prove the existence of god about 25 bullshit videos after this one, those fossils were only discovered just under or over 100 years ago, does that mean before that they did not exist? think about what your saying
This is the biggest crock of blinded, blinkered, and self deluding shite I've seen in a couple of weeks.
HA HA HA!
This is sheer idiocy.
Why do we only get this clueless tosh from you yanks? Name me another well educated, first world country where this kind of junk isn't in the smallest of minorities?
What world are you living in? What rock have you been hiding under? 99% of the worlds scientists would find your statements way off track and evidence of ignorance beyound belief. Of course you write regularly for a comic strip . . . right? You are a good example of why most scientists wouldn't waste their time debating such issues that have been accepted as fact nearly 100 years ago! Shall I establish an educational fund to help you correct the error of your ways?
Well isnt all Science at its base an assumption that could be technically be proven wrong if sufficient evidence shows up. I my scienceclasses here in Europe, I have learned a great deal on why the theories never, tho sometimes fit to the practical experiment. But yes, it is an assuption and on that a prediction, which I have been told so far fits quite well, you should go talk to a college proffessor in Biology. But on that Science, yeah stuff is hard to know, if you dont like it, piss off.
I posted a video in response regarding transitional fossils which showed transition from dinosaur to bird. Maybe you should allow for that video response to go through.
you know what wefalldwnbutwegetbkup, part of me thinks you are a secret atheist purposely trying to sound stupid to make people who deny evolution look stupid... or you are just very uneducated and narrow minded.
dark the atheist adresses many of these claims on his video "the denial of facts is no evidence or truth". the person who made this video is neither honest nor does he have integrity. the information on this video is simply false.
I'm going to say this as proof that you don't read the comments but only read for buzz words: NO ATHEIST BELIEVES SOMETHING COMES FROM NOTHING, SO STOP SAYING THAT WE DO! YOU"RE MAKING STRAW MEN AND MISREPRESENTING OUR POSITION...you're going to make yet another vid saying "Atheist believes nothing exploded" -_-
You need to actually try listen to what we are saying so you can make a propore response. It's like we say something and you keep going as if we said nothing at all. I'm trying to help you here because you've been saying the same refuted garbage since last year and you still come back this year.
What your video proves beyond a doubt is that to worship an imaginary a-hole you need to think like sh*t. As I am following your lead I shall provide no evidence for my statement but I will gladly repeat it a few dozen times as though it where true. :)
The ignorance of evolution in this video is akin to me saying that the bible advocates killing every christian. Both are examples of extreme ignorance. Of course, i know the bible does not advocate killing every christian. You, however, spout so much bullshit that you don't know fact from fiction anymore. My advice would be to buy a fucking book other than the bible and read it. Preferably one about evolution so you dont looks so foolish. Jerry A. Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" is a good one.
So how does it feel to prove your own ignorance? Looking for links from plants to an animal confirms that you don't have a clue of what your talking about. Stop bringing evolution down to your level of fail. It's embarrassing the rest of the Christian community and your God.
You try and say that evolution is based on faith and that you do not believe it because of the lack of evidence. Yet you believe in an all-loving, all-powerful and all-knowing God with only the evidence of a corrupted 2000 year old book? Can you not see the stupidity? or the Irony?
This video hurts my head. Such blatant ignorance should have been purged by the information age, the age of the internet. With so much free, available information, how can someone still be this ignorant? There are literally MILLIONS of places online where you can find thousands of examples of transitional forms!
Oh boy. If dogs DID give birth to cats, this would DISPROVE the evolution theory. Many of your numbered points (which you took from a web site) have the same underlying mistakes. The main mistake being a very basic misunderstanding of what the evolutionary theory claims when it explains speciation (indeed, a basic misunderstanding of what a scientific theory even is).
In particular - your suggested "transitional forms" would DISPROVE evolution, not prove it. Read the theory.
For evolution to be true we all have to be transitional forms and instead of death and disfigurement genetic mutation for the most part has to improve the species. The evidence is overwhelming that we came from superior genetics and all imperfection is degradation not improvement or adaptation.
@TheInfinitehope you need to stop sitting on the fence and choose whom you shall follow, that video response you sent me was the best example i could offer someone for sitting on the fence.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp This type of behaviour is what makes Christians leave Christianity. 40% of all scientists believe in Christ and accept evolution.
This was never about Christianity vs Atheism, it was originally about creationism vs modern science. However, types like Hovind and you make the 40% ashamed to be Christian, and they leave Christianity, steadily, steadily. The Dawkinians are exploiting this fact.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Of course there is middle ground. Evolution is proven fact by the fossil record. Not only are there thousands of transitionals but even without these, life becomes increasingly more complex over time. Can YOU provide me with a definition of what you think is a fossil? The middle ground is that, as of yet, we do not know the cause of abiogenesis. This could be an evolutionary step or created by a god (no evidence). Either way, evolutiion is as much fact as gravity.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Apologies. My question to you is for you to provide me with YOUR definition of a "transitional" and not "fossil" as i mistakingly asked. Mind you i doubt by the lack of understanding on evolution displayed here whether you can provide a definition of a fossil either.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp well there is the steady state universe but theres also other gods. Anyways Darktheathiest made a poliet video response to you refuting you, he also left comments on your channel. I want to know what you cowardly blocked him after plagerising the entier content of the above video. Or you could just block me and show what a man you are.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Yes you moron but I'm arguing against an advocate for creationism, who stated either the Christian god is real or the big bang is true (false dichotomy anyone) If we're going to apply Occams razor to this then the steady state universe comes out on top ever time. (Oh and the evidence which defeated the notion of a steady state universe was red shift
Look up progressive creationism.there was never a consensus in church history as to whether the 6 days were literal.that was always open to interpretation.
Okay I was talking to someone who was a sixer earlier. I think we have our lines crossed, anyways the problem I was posing is if we disregard all blueshift and all that, apply occams razor to the results we end up with a universe which is more then likly steady state then a universe which is created. If we apply the evidence for a start of the universe then we end up if and old universe 13.75 Billionish, either way they are wrong.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost because you know matter exists. You dont know it began ergo occams razor goes for steady state instead of it was made by something which also then has to be explained.
Using occams razor,it would make sense to shave away a constant creation of the matter we see (steady state) than to shave away a single creation of all the matter we see.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost I just want to know if your going to dodge the question and refuse to answer. You see if I'm wasting my time on another creationist who likes to herring the conversation down pointless paths whilst dodging ever question with none sequiters I like to know up front. I find it saves time.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost . A phenomenon creationists like to either ignore or explain that god made objects in light in space really far away just to trick us. Whats that smell? Hrm... smells like ad hoc to me. So regardless please educate us on how the steady state universe is not viable, if we're both going to ignore red shift, for teh lulz.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp erm excuse me but what does evolution have to do with god? And who on earth said it was your god, and I thought we were debating physics not preaching. Regardless as a weak atheist I chose not to believe in a god until substantial evidence is portrayed (and no I dont mean god of the gaps) its the only way to keep proper scientific rigor.
I think goolympic22 is acting stupid. It's been 5 years now and I've been hearing the same "Nothing Exploded" crap. YECs have been convincing themselves that we actually believe nothing exploded. They know a magical sky daddy sounds ridiculous, so they make up something even more ridiculous (Nothing exploding and created everything) then say "Are you going to believe nothing exploded and created everything, or a magical sky daddy?"
Thats faith and you don't know?, you assuming and making assumptions!"
That's not even the point, the point is that we tell you what we believe since at least last year, yet you still say the same thing as if you're not listening. Stop lying about what we believe, stop making and knocking down straw men and at least try not to misrepresent our position.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp energy cannot be created nor destroyed. so where did the energy come from? it must have existed in a potential form or it would not exist now. it CANNOT be created even from an omnipotent creature. an omnipotent creature would simply be a creature with limitless energy, but the energy was already there. if god always existed than energy always existed. but energy always existed even if god does not exist.
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Where did god come from, you dingus? You can't dismiss one argument and then claim another is true based on the same flaws you pointed out in the one you just dismissed...
We don't know where matter, energy and space came from, but it's likely time was always there. Your just filling in the gaps in out knowledge with god, and in some cases, drawing over our knowledge with god. You also used the word assumptions twice...
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Why does space time matter and energy have to come from anywhere, why couldnt they of always existed in one form or the other? An answer would be nice.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost cite sources please, all penrose and hawking were doing in the 70's was working on black holes to quote hawkings a breif history of time 1965-1970 page 97 19-21 The work ttat roger penrose and I did between 1965 and 1970 showed that according to general relativity there must be a singularity of infinite density and spance time curvature withing a black hole.
@amarthishness "according to general relativity,there must be a singularity of infinite density"
No need to cite sources ... u just demonstrated it with this quote.a singularity of "infinite density" is a scientific term for no time,space or matter.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost actually no it isnt. It merly means were going 1/x now that x could be anywhere between 0 to infinity take this for example. The law for tension on a spring is F=KX now if F = 1N then 1/X=K which is infinity but does a spring have infinite tension in reality? The answer your looking for is no.
The fact of the matter is that general relativity proves that time,space,matter and energy began at the singularity.that IS the big bang.anyone who tells u otherwise is sugar coating the evidence.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost mate to be honest when we're debating the science I'd prefere to go with the general scientific agreement. Anyways once again I want you to cite sources which back up your argument. I've already cited ones which back up mine. And lastly no it dosnt all it proves is that there was a singulairty, which then expanded, thow in some herbs and pepper, leave to boil for 13 billion years and you have a universe. In fact heres one I made earlier.
@amarthishness Once again matter time space and energy were all contained within the singularity. If you want me to cite sources for that I will, but once again I want to know where -your- getting your information from.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost erm... what does that quote have to do with the origins of matter? And I asked you to cite your sources not throw out random quotes, tell me the paper he stated that in or link me to the interview. Furthermore I quoted hawkings showing that your agrument that penrose and hawkings were working on a theory showing the big bang created matter was entierly wrong (they were working on black hole singularaties).
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Furhtermore the formation of the universe did not violate the conservation of energy (eg matter comming from nothing) For example the gravitation energy of a feild is negative, therefore it is possible when all energy in the universe is totaled it comes to sum zero Guth 1997, 9-12,271-276; Tryon 1973
@CasperTheMeanieGhost *Sigh* And? So it requires a beggining so we're back at a big bang, back at a singularity. You've still failed to show where the supernatural element sneeks in. So please explain to me how we've gone from the universe started in a singularity to there may be a hypothetic multiverse which would of also needed to start as a singularity to therefore it was god. It is not a logical group of connections.
@amarthishness I never said there was a multiverse.i said they proved that even a multiverse requires a beginning of time.space,matter & energy.hence,Vilenkin`s comment.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost I'm about to resort to caps. Not something I do oftern. Yes the multiverse if it existed would require a beginning this does not mean space matter and time ect was created. It merly means it was contained inside a singularity, what was before this ( a misnomer if there ever was one) we do not know as we cannot yet track back that far and may never be able to. I've explained this multiple times.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Your peer revied article please? Not quote mined single lines, please do not tarnish Alexander Vilenkin's reputation any further.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost And let me guess, he said gawd did it? I havnt read it so please give me a synopsis. Or did he merly state the the universe was part of a singularity. Specifics please.
@amarthishness These 3 scientists are ATHEISTS.they are just being honest about the facts ... on account of materialism,u HAVE to believe everything came from nothing.
Btw,Guth is practically the father of inflationary theory.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost As I've said before I do not, I may believe it has always existed in one form or another. I do not have to believe they magically poofed into creation merly because your not willing to listen to the definition of a singualrity. Like this for example, a black hole is a singularity when matter is sucked into it under your definition it would cease to exist. This is plain not the case, it is contained inside it.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost and you've just shot yourself in the foot. 3 incredibly smart men, why would they acknowledge all matter magically poofed into existence and yet remain atheist?
@CasperTheMeanieGhost What does atheism have to do with any of this? And have you got a download for that book? Yes I know, I'm an imorral bastard but I cant seem to find one.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost to ta libraries. However I do have a couple questions if I may? If the universe is either self caused then so what? Where does god come in, or say our entire understanding of the universe is completly wrong. How does this make the god hypothesis any more likly? And finally did you nick this line of argument from dear old william lane craig?
@amarthishness To be blunt ... self creation is metaphysically retarted.
There is nothing inherently wrong with saying the universe is eternal because something has to be eternal.if it`s not the universe then it`s the cause of the universe.
Also,an eternal universe itself implies a God because an eternal universe implies an actual infinite amount of change which implies that a God-like being should have developed by now.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost your god like being development theory is so so wrong. It makse the assumption such a thing is possible, which it plainly isnt as it would be the very definition of a violation of the conservation of energy man.... And yes I'd agree a self caused universe is a retarded idea which I why I maintain matter and energy probably existed in some form or another, however we've already had this argument and I'm going to read your chapter and get back to you.
@amarthishness I do however wonder if your argument has been so conclusivly proved then why are we using CERN to help us get a better understaning of the origins of matter. Which is why I want to read this chapter to make sure its actually relevent.
@amarthishness It wouldn`t be a violation of conservation.
I`m saying that just as dead matter has ultimately produced the civilization we are experiencing today (on account of materialism),what`s to stop an ACTUAL infinite amount of time for matter to produce a God-like being? an eternal universe IMPLIES it.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost no it dosnt, a god in my mind would have to be omnipotent and omniscient at the very least. Omniscience is pratically impossible and omnipotence by its very nature is a violation. You dont get energy out of nothing. And yeah an ex nihilo event would be cool, but once again the consencus points at a singularity (which I'll grant you can change any day) I'm only reading this chapter as I have to put my own ideas to skeptcism as well.
@amarthishness I would go even further ... an eternal universe IMPLIES pantheism (or panentheism) on account of materialism.
If the mind results from a finite arrangement of matter then this would imply that an eternal universe (experiencing an ACTUAL infinite amount of change) would eventually produce a universal mind.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost once again you make the assumption such a thing is possible. You can have infinite change within set paramaters, which would not lead to a god. Your argument is fallacious and wrong. For example I can walk to my bathroom to my bedroom a billion billion times and I will never end up on the moon. Your agrument completly ignore natural laws.
@amarthishness U miss the point ... there is no link between walking in ur bathroom and ending up on the moon.there IS a link (on account of materialism) between a finite arrangement of matter and consciousness (or even life).
An eternal universe would have produced every potential configuration of the universe ad infinitum.
Aside from the fact that ur wrong in claiming the singularity isn`t ex nihilo,suppose i granted that for the sake of argument ... what do u do with entropy?
Energy existed from eternity past in a closed system (the singularity) yet we still have usable energy? how does that work?
@CasperTheMeanieGhost ... wow... seriously I have to draw this one out for you..? Okay you cannot have infinite change because any form of change would require energy. Eventually we are going to reach 0 K mate... was that one really that difficult to understand? And anyways I've stated my side of the argument, you've repetedly yelled at me to go read a book as far as I'm concerned this conversation is over.
@amarthishness U mean the material universe (on account of materialism) couldn`t have experienced an actual infinite amount of change? well then it`s not eternal.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost regardless I feel that this is all an exercise in pointlessness. Niether of us is going to convince each other. I want to go with the science you feel the need to prove your bible true. I've always wondered about that btw, why prove it, isnt faith better? Moreover you havnt adressed a single arguement made by me yet. All you've done is repeate that matter was made at the big bang. Repetedly. With no evidence.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost but regardless this is dealing with black hole singularities (the work of penrose and hawkings) and not the big bang. Care to tell me how your carrying those two over? (oh and its 2Am expect not to get another reply for about 20ish hours)
The singularity is an INFINITE point of density (that`s a scientific way of saying it was absolutely NOTHING!).
All these atheists saying the big bang isn`t ex nihilo are clueless.there is no cosmological theory TODAY (notice i said TODAY) that does not require a beginning of time,space,matter and energy.
@CasperTheMeanieGhost "The singularity is an INFINITE point of density (that`s a scientific way of saying it was absolutely NOTHING!)."
So when a black hole pulls an object into it's singularity, the object goes into nothing? If so then why can't it be reversed? If a singularity means nothing, I would like to see your source.
@Landofjello I`m not talking about blk holes but of the singularity of the big bang.THAT is nothing ... no time,space,matter OR energy.i`ll message u with the evidence.
" I`m not talking about blk holes but of the singularity of the big bang.THAT is nothing ... no time,space,matter OR energy.i`ll message u with the evidence."
All you did was copy and pasted a paragraph from "A Case for the Existence of God", and at best you don't even know what you were copy and pasting.
@Landofjello Read Alexander Vilenkin`s book "many worlds in one".
What part of "THERE IS NO ESCAPE;cosmologists have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning" don`t u understand?
Sure there are SOME scientists sugar coating the language but can u blame them? how do u tell someone with a str8 face that everything came from nothing?
Maximum RESPECT BRUH! No on can refute this. Man, we just gotta continue to spread the knowledge. Im working on my first offical video for my channel, but Im sooo nercous. But I will get it together.
They found the transitional fossils, game over.
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
Species that possess transitional features that are easy to see: Epidexipteryx hui, Protoavis, Protarchaeopteryx, Archeopteryx, Avimimus, Sinosauropteryx, Caudipteryx, Rahonavis, Shuvuuia, Sinornithosaurus, Beipiasaurus, Microraptor, Nomingia, Tiktaalik, Epidendrosaurus, Cryptovolans, Scansoriopteryx, Yixianosaurus, Dilong, Pedopenna, Jinfengopteryx, Sinocalliopteryx, Sinornis, Ambiortus, Hesperornis, Ichthyornis
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
Species that possess transitional features: Epidexipteryx hui, Protoavis, Protarchaeopteryx, Archeopteryx, Avimimus, Sinosauropteryx, Caudipteryx, Rahonavis, Shuvuuia, Sinornithosaurus, Beipiasaurus, Microraptor, Nomingia, Tiktaalik, Epidendrosaurus, Cryptovolans, Scansoriopteryx, Yixianosaurus, Dilong, Pedopenna, Jinfengopteryx, Sinocalliopteryx, Sinornis, Ambiortus, Hesperornis, Ichthyornis,Eosimias sinensis, Aegyptopithecus zeuxis, Proconsul africanus
gregrutz 3 months ago
There are also a lot of missing fossils in general.
Just have to point that out.
ToastyTheDragon 4 months ago
ALSO- there ARE thousands of scientists who have signed a letter/ list which states that they NO LONGER support evolution, due to the latest scientific facts about the complexity and information/ intelligent source of DNA, and for MANY other new discoveries in cosmology, biology etc. One of the comments below- claims that 99% of scientists support evolution, is very wrong! Honesty is a rare quality! :(
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
@TheWayandWordofLife "there ARE thousands of scientists who have signed a letter/ list which states that they NO LONGER support evolution" => source please? And if you are referring to the "Dissent from Darwinism" list, it's not thousands, it's only hundreds (~800 last time i check), not even adding up to 1 thousand. If you compare that number against life scientists in the world, this makes up to less than 1% of the scientific community.
Casshyr 4 months ago
There are THOUSANDS of YouTube Science videos that present an overwhelming amount of EVIDENCE which do NOT fit the evolution model/ theory. People who honestly want to know EVERYTHING about the cosmos, Our earth, and ALL the facts about the natural world, WILL search out this knowledge. If not, then they are REFUSING to be openminded!
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
@TheWayandWordofLife So what evidence would prove evolution to you? Nothing?!?
Then you are the closeminded one. They have the transitional fossils.
gregrutz 3 months ago
@gregrutz No they don't, neanderthal man and piltdown man or any of the other shit you assume are transitional fossils are not evidence, not to mention if evolution occurred then changes would be happening every minute meaning 99% of fossils would be transitional. Stop lying like every other evolutionist.
kingseho 2 weeks ago
@kingseho DNA proves Neanderthals were a different kind of human. 99% of the fossils are transitional, most of them are extinct. Get a clue.
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
@gregrutz Why are you lying? I can send you the links disproving them? Dna? Are you an idiot? Dna, blood samples, protein shouldn't last over 10k years idiot. Don't lie and give me3 evolutionist bullshit, no the fossils we have are complete species you fucking idiot...i'll send you videos of evolutionists saying there are no transitional fossils, stop lying fucking idiot, there are no half bird half reptile fossils, no fossils determining how insects and every other species arose. You're a joke
kingseho 2 weeks ago
@kingseho Every fossil we have is of a complete species ''you fucking IDiot''. Every species that ever lived was complete, just like today. 99% are extinct !
Scientists have over 20 different dinosaurs with feathers. The fossils had dinosaur teeth and feathers, just like Archeopteryx and Microraptor.
Red blood cells last less than a week, they did not find any in the 70 million year old fossil. Stop lying.
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
@gregrutz Feathers? Dinosaurs didn't have feathers, those are fucking birds, those are debunked idiot. Fossils had teeth? Are you fucking retarded....Lying about what? LMAO You're a fucking idiot, if you want to continue pm me since obviously you're too delusional and i need more space. Go get an education, there are no transitional fossils-game over, stop claiming that there are, your own priests said there's none.
kingseho 2 weeks ago
@kingseho You are kind of fucked up. Birds don't have teeth they have beaks. Everything you think of as bird like dinosaurs had: feathers, hollow bones, warm blood, oval eggs in nests, 3 forward toes, etc. etc. etc.
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
@kingseho ''if evolution occurred then changes would be happening every minute meaning 99% of fossils would be transitional''
Correct, they are. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct. That is what we are trying to explain dummy.
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
@gregrutz No they didn't find transitional fossils, you're still alluding the evolutionists that actually have an education unlike you. Yet all fossils are of today's species right? Obviously darwin even stated there are none. You're an idiot, darwin also stated the complexity of the eye alone debunks his theory and also the fact that bees make beehives as well, your own god doubted his work and you're claiming differently, You're an idiot
kingseho 2 weeks ago
@kingseho ''Yet all fossils are of today's species right? '' WRONG !
Most of the species that lived in the past are extinct. No dinosaurs, no trilobites, no Neanderthal Man, no sabertooth tigers.
gregrutz 2 weeks ago
@kingseho hey dorko, calm down... go out to your pick-up, go down to the gas station.. fill it up and then give thanks to Darwin and evolution for having helped the industrial paleontologists in finding the hydrocarbon deposits (you know... oil).. your stupid arguments are mute.. evolution is being applied in industry every day.. Hey.. you can still take a shot at that ungodly quantum mechanics.. now THAT is the devil at work...pretty un-christian if you ask me..
daNDayati 2 weeks ago
THANK YOU for such an AMAZING video series! Your words are a very powerful truth! I hope your message will reach thousands of people, and that your knowledge and truths will open their eyes and Heart to THE TRUTH!!! Our Creator is infinitely brilliant, and powerful, and ONLY wants what is GOOD for us. If everyone lived like God wants us to - other than some illnesses, there WOULD NOT BE SADNESS, SUFFERING, PAIN, HURTING BROKEN PEOPLE. There wouldn't be all the EVIL in life! It's HUMAN FREE W
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
Scientists who claim evolution is the only truth- should be required to SHOW HOW each and every animal and plant known, evolved from WHAT OTHER animal and plant! WE DESERVE REAL EVIDENCE- not a ridiculously simple drawing of a ' TREE' with a very inadequate number of animals on it! WE want to see EVIDENCE of how EVERY life form today, became what they are today! WHAT PLANTS are the ancestors of the giant poppy, or the Venus fly trap, etc.??? WHAT animals were the ANCESTORS of the giraffe, fla
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
@TheWayandWordofLife Look at the fossil record for the evidence you can't seem to find.
gregrutz 3 months ago
EXACTLY! ALSO- there should be LITERALLY MILLIONS of TRANSITIONAL ANCESTOR fossils, such as; the ANCESTOR LINEAGE of the porcupine, giraffe, platypus, flamingo, hippo, grizzly bears, gazelle, echidna, kangaroo, toucan, peacock, buzzard, hummingbird, AND MILLIONS OF OTHER ANIMALS, PLANTS, ALL THE TREMENDOUS VARIETIES OF FISH, BIRDS, INSECTS, TREES, AND PLANTS........WHERE ARE ALL THEIR ANCESTRAL LINEAGES??? EVOLUTION is an EVIL LIE, that has put millions of people under it's spell of decept
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
DNA contains the most complex information known to man. The extreme complexity inside every cell, plus the brilliant information within DNA, equals INTELLIGENCE! INTELLIGENT INFORMATION, ALWAYS originates from an intelligent MIND!!! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR IT TO ORIGINATE FROM A MINDLESS, RANDOM, ENTITY! LIFE ORIGINATES FROM A DIVINE, INFINITELY POWERFUL, AND INTELLIGENT CREATOR- GOD! God exists whether they want Him to or NOT!! GOD IS SO MUCH HIGHER THAN ANYTHING WE CAN COMPREHEND, AND HIS
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
Also- Evolution is MINDLESS, BLIND and unable to plan, or have any form of thought, or awareness of what is necessary for even the most simple lifeforms, let alone animals with more advanced structures. This MINDLESS function- called evolution could never cause such a complex universe, solar system, and earth- which just happens to be extremely BEAUTIFUL TO OUR SENSES, in so many ways- the Majestic BEAUTY of mountains, rivers, the magical colors, shapes, and smell of flowers. It is more than ac
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
Great Videos!!! What an excellent way to show the TRUTH ! God Bless You on Your Work!
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
PERFECTLY SAID! I would LOVE for the experts to have to present a transitional form for every single insect, plant, mammal, fish, and reptile alive today. The LAME EXCUSE that their fossils didn't FORM, even though we have ancient fossils of living animals- just seems like utter LIES! Where is the porcupines ancestor ? Or the gazelle? Or at least show us how there came to be over 10,000 species of fish! They CAN'T do it- because they are ALL UNIQUE, they didn't come from one another- and neit
TheWayandWordofLife 4 months ago
Evolution has been observed in real time, that is, as it happened - more than once. What does this mean? It means evolution is real, game over, this BS loses.
PaulKJHarris 6 months ago
Yup, and just think of all the people who don't know about this. :-\
Eye2EyeIIIV 7 months ago
this video is a strange mix of propaganda, humor, stupidity, and a funky beat!
squizill 7 months ago
This video was made with an incredible lack of information.
Brainwashed?
Sahrinzs 1 year ago
did you actually go to school? most uneducated piece of shit i have ever heard.
dez161 1 year ago
@dez161, BRAINWASHED!
miketonon 1 year ago
@JesusIsMyAnswer
No fact how about:
Vestigial organs
Fossils
DNA
Radio metric dating
Carbon dating
we have facts and what do you have a couple of books witten thousands of years ago
Neeidea 1 year ago
@Neeidea, there are no vestigial organs! Just because there are organs that can be removed and the person survives, doesn't make them vestigial! The apendix for instance is a part of the immune system!
Fossils have been found that debunk evolution and many of them have been discarded or modified and or placed incorrectly.
DNA has proven that we humans come from a common ancestor.
Radio metric and carbon dating isn't accurate.
It really is scientific assumtion.
miketonon 1 year ago
@miketonon it is not scientific assumption it is seen across the globe as a scientific theory and it is cleary stated in many science books that it is a theory
Neeidea 1 year ago
@miketonon it is not scientific assumption it is seen across the globe as a scientific theory and it is clearly stated in many science books that it is a theory
Neeidea 1 year ago
every single fossil is a transitional form we unfortunately do have some gaps in some places but a total lack of transitional fossils is wrong. and simply because we had not found these fossils does not mean that they do not exist. take the "giant's fossils" that you used to attempt to prove the existence of god about 25 bullshit videos after this one, those fossils were only discovered just under or over 100 years ago, does that mean before that they did not exist? think about what your saying
ouellette666 1 year ago 2
This is the biggest crock of blinded, blinkered, and self deluding shite I've seen in a couple of weeks.
HA HA HA!
This is sheer idiocy.
Why do we only get this clueless tosh from you yanks? Name me another well educated, first world country where this kind of junk isn't in the smallest of minorities?
At best disingenuous, at worst, dishonest.
Truly pathetic.
martiangrundy 1 year ago
What world are you living in? What rock have you been hiding under? 99% of the worlds scientists would find your statements way off track and evidence of ignorance beyound belief. Of course you write regularly for a comic strip . . . right? You are a good example of why most scientists wouldn't waste their time debating such issues that have been accepted as fact nearly 100 years ago! Shall I establish an educational fund to help you correct the error of your ways?
ktorch 1 year ago
@ktorch, you actually know that 99% of the worlds scientists feel that way??? MISLED!
miketonon 1 year ago
Well isnt all Science at its base an assumption that could be technically be proven wrong if sufficient evidence shows up. I my scienceclasses here in Europe, I have learned a great deal on why the theories never, tho sometimes fit to the practical experiment. But yes, it is an assuption and on that a prediction, which I have been told so far fits quite well, you should go talk to a college proffessor in Biology. But on that Science, yeah stuff is hard to know, if you dont like it, piss off.
ArgumaticShutgun 1 year ago
I posted a video in response regarding transitional fossils which showed transition from dinosaur to bird. Maybe you should allow for that video response to go through.
CASEwithscience 1 year ago
you know what wefalldwnbutwegetbkup, part of me thinks you are a secret atheist purposely trying to sound stupid to make people who deny evolution look stupid... or you are just very uneducated and narrow minded.
hellomoto170 1 year ago
Your not scientific fact
darkdestiny0002 1 year ago
watch?v=530rUHX5ZEg
You ripped this ENTIRE speech from a creationist website, with the intention of passing this off as your own words. You are UTTERLY dishonest.
But then again, what else could you expect from a creationist?
0ptikz 1 year ago
Mutations are mistakes that are inferior to the original code of life.
1965ace 1 year ago
Evolution is real, done.
xXHalfieXx 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You do realise saying there are no transitional fossils is like saying the moon is made out of cheese?
Sorry, but are you retarded? You can't just deny these things unless you like being called a stupid cunt...
Not to mention that the fossil record is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg of evidence.
XChillX42 1 year ago
Comment removed
XChillX42 1 year ago
dark the atheist adresses many of these claims on his video "the denial of facts is no evidence or truth". the person who made this video is neither honest nor does he have integrity. the information on this video is simply false.
greycloud24 1 year ago
You have to censor your video, otherwise you are overrun by good arguments ;).
Bad thing for you ;).
ManuuJackson 1 year ago
I'm going to say this as proof that you don't read the comments but only read for buzz words: NO ATHEIST BELIEVES SOMETHING COMES FROM NOTHING, SO STOP SAYING THAT WE DO! YOU"RE MAKING STRAW MEN AND MISREPRESENTING OUR POSITION...you're going to make yet another vid saying "Atheist believes nothing exploded" -_-
Landofjello 1 year ago
You need to actually try listen to what we are saying so you can make a propore response. It's like we say something and you keep going as if we said nothing at all. I'm trying to help you here because you've been saying the same refuted garbage since last year and you still come back this year.
Landofjello 1 year ago
i need some friends to help me with the facepalming because 2 hands is no where near enough.
atheistnarutofan 1 year ago
@atheistnarutofan *2 hands are
sorry for the mistake.
atheistnarutofan 1 year ago
What your video proves beyond a doubt is that to worship an imaginary a-hole you need to think like sh*t. As I am following your lead I shall provide no evidence for my statement but I will gladly repeat it a few dozen times as though it where true. :)
crossoldman 1 year ago
You just flat out ignore evidence. Talk about dishonest.
Tyrtamus 1 year ago
The ignorance of evolution in this video is akin to me saying that the bible advocates killing every christian. Both are examples of extreme ignorance. Of course, i know the bible does not advocate killing every christian. You, however, spout so much bullshit that you don't know fact from fiction anymore. My advice would be to buy a fucking book other than the bible and read it. Preferably one about evolution so you dont looks so foolish. Jerry A. Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" is a good one.
crackerkiller89 1 year ago
So how does it feel to prove your own ignorance? Looking for links from plants to an animal confirms that you don't have a clue of what your talking about. Stop bringing evolution down to your level of fail. It's embarrassing the rest of the Christian community and your God.
RC3 1 year ago
there are sooo many things wrong with this video that it is just not even worth going into... fail.
hellomoto170 1 year ago 7
Hahahahahahahaha. Drink stupid juice much?
"Links from plant to animal" ??????? WTF is this dumb ass talking about?
tricklessmagic 1 year ago
Fail.
EnervatedSociety 1 year ago
Read a book man. Seriously.
djzapz 1 year ago 2
You try and say that evolution is based on faith and that you do not believe it because of the lack of evidence. Yet you believe in an all-loving, all-powerful and all-knowing God with only the evidence of a corrupted 2000 year old book? Can you not see the stupidity? or the Irony?
tazot1234 1 year ago
This video hurts my head. Such blatant ignorance should have been purged by the information age, the age of the internet. With so much free, available information, how can someone still be this ignorant? There are literally MILLIONS of places online where you can find thousands of examples of transitional forms!
MyOverflow 1 year ago
In this video are being willfully ignorant or just lying?
watch?v=2SGB_PPZjdI&playnext_from=TL&videos=-qKfdUR2MKA
NYCAustinNYC 1 year ago
Oh boy. If dogs DID give birth to cats, this would DISPROVE the evolution theory. Many of your numbered points (which you took from a web site) have the same underlying mistakes. The main mistake being a very basic misunderstanding of what the evolutionary theory claims when it explains speciation (indeed, a basic misunderstanding of what a scientific theory even is).
In particular - your suggested "transitional forms" would DISPROVE evolution, not prove it. Read the theory.
skevosmavros 1 year ago
tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik tiktaalik
HDuyNguyen 1 year ago
Creationism is destroying Christianity; which is based primarily on the New Testament.
HDuyNguyen 1 year ago
@HDuyNguyen According to leading theologians, the Old Testament is a allegory.
HDuyNguyen 1 year ago
You are so stupid. Man. It hurts.
ourben 1 year ago
For evolution to be true we all have to be transitional forms and instead of death and disfigurement genetic mutation for the most part has to improve the species. The evidence is overwhelming that we came from superior genetics and all imperfection is degradation not improvement or adaptation.
1965ace 1 year ago
@1965ace We are transitional forms. Note that the 'crocoduck' is a creationist strawman.
HDuyNguyen 1 year ago
great video bro, keep making more
ShaunThomasHoy 1 year ago
good video bro; keep making more
ShaunThomasHoy 1 year ago
@TheInfinitehope you need to stop sitting on the fence and choose whom you shall follow, that video response you sent me was the best example i could offer someone for sitting on the fence.
It was either God?
Or the big bang and Evolution?
Their is no middle ground...
WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp
The logical fallacy of false dichotomy.
k87jury 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp This type of behaviour is what makes Christians leave Christianity. 40% of all scientists believe in Christ and accept evolution.
This was never about Christianity vs Atheism, it was originally about creationism vs modern science. However, types like Hovind and you make the 40% ashamed to be Christian, and they leave Christianity, steadily, steadily. The Dawkinians are exploiting this fact.
HDuyNguyen 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Course you can, You can believe in a deity and accept evolution or not accept it but also not believe in a deity.
DarkTheAtheist 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Of course there is middle ground. Evolution is proven fact by the fossil record. Not only are there thousands of transitionals but even without these, life becomes increasingly more complex over time. Can YOU provide me with a definition of what you think is a fossil? The middle ground is that, as of yet, we do not know the cause of abiogenesis. This could be an evolutionary step or created by a god (no evidence). Either way, evolutiion is as much fact as gravity.
pilgrimpater 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Apologies. My question to you is for you to provide me with YOUR definition of a "transitional" and not "fossil" as i mistakingly asked. Mind you i doubt by the lack of understanding on evolution displayed here whether you can provide a definition of a fossil either.
pilgrimpater 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp well there is the steady state universe but theres also other gods. Anyways Darktheathiest made a poliet video response to you refuting you, he also left comments on your channel. I want to know what you cowardly blocked him after plagerising the entier content of the above video. Or you could just block me and show what a man you are.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "there is the steady state universe"
HUH? ur kidding,right?
U might want to brush up on ur data.we`re in 2010.the steady state was shot down a while ago.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Yes you moron but I'm arguing against an advocate for creationism, who stated either the Christian god is real or the big bang is true (false dichotomy anyone) If we're going to apply Occams razor to this then the steady state universe comes out on top ever time. (Oh and the evidence which defeated the notion of a steady state universe was red shift
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Ur appealing to steady state as a viable option and ur calling me a moron?
Classic LOL!
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost *Facepalm* Did you even bother to read the comment? Once again how do you answer the problem of redshift?
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "Facepalm"
Wow ... that`s so original.
What makes u think i don`t accept red shift?
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost then how on earth (or rarther off it) can you possibly advocate a 6000 year old universe?
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness I don`t.
Look up progressive creationism.there was never a consensus in church history as to whether the 6 days were literal.that was always open to interpretation.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
Okay I was talking to someone who was a sixer earlier. I think we have our lines crossed, anyways the problem I was posing is if we disregard all blueshift and all that, apply occams razor to the results we end up with a universe which is more then likly steady state then a universe which is created. If we apply the evidence for a start of the universe then we end up if and old universe 13.75 Billionish, either way they are wrong.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "apply occams razor"
Actually,i think the opposite would be true.why theorize a constant self creation of matter (steady state) rather than a single creation of matter?
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost because you know matter exists. You dont know it began ergo occams razor goes for steady state instead of it was made by something which also then has to be explained.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "because you know matter exists"
And?
Using occams razor,it would make sense to shave away a constant creation of the matter we see (steady state) than to shave away a single creation of all the matter we see.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost I just want to know if your going to dodge the question and refuse to answer. You see if I'm wasting my time on another creationist who likes to herring the conversation down pointless paths whilst dodging ever question with none sequiters I like to know up front. I find it saves time.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost . A phenomenon creationists like to either ignore or explain that god made objects in light in space really far away just to trick us. Whats that smell? Hrm... smells like ad hoc to me. So regardless please educate us on how the steady state universe is not viable, if we're both going to ignore red shift, for teh lulz.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Educate ur self dweeb ... NOBODY takes steady state serious.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp erm excuse me but what does evolution have to do with god? And who on earth said it was your god, and I thought we were debating physics not preaching. Regardless as a weak atheist I chose not to believe in a god until substantial evidence is portrayed (and no I dont mean god of the gaps) its the only way to keep proper scientific rigor.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness ahh damn sorry ignore the previouse comment its late I'm tired and I'm messaging the wrong people.
amarthishness 1 year ago
I think goolympic22 is acting stupid. It's been 5 years now and I've been hearing the same "Nothing Exploded" crap. YECs have been convincing themselves that we actually believe nothing exploded. They know a magical sky daddy sounds ridiculous, so they make up something even more ridiculous (Nothing exploding and created everything) then say "Are you going to believe nothing exploded and created everything, or a magical sky daddy?"
Landofjello 1 year ago
@Landofjello 0+0 = ?
well then lol
WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp
The big bang isn't 0+0. It is all of space/time/matter/energy compressed into a singularity that began to expand.
k87jury 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@k87jury You just left science and step'd into fairytale land!
Thats faith and you don't know?, you assuming and making assumptions!
And where did space time matter and energy come from you dingus, Dass wright i remember your cuss words lol
WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp
1. No, it is a model based on every piece of evidence gathered and able to make predictions about cosmology that are shown to be right.
2. Not sure yet. Our understanding of the universe ends at 10^-43 seconds after the expansion began. The LHC should help remedy this problem.
3. This doesn't change the fact that we don't claim that "nothing" exploded. You have been told this. Yet you keep on saying this. Making you a lair.
3.
k87jury 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp " You just left science and step'd into fairytale land!
Thats faith and you don't know?, you assuming and making assumptions!"
That's not even the point, the point is that we tell you what we believe since at least last year, yet you still say the same thing as if you're not listening. Stop lying about what we believe, stop making and knocking down straw men and at least try not to misrepresent our position.
Landofjello 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp energy cannot be created nor destroyed. so where did the energy come from? it must have existed in a potential form or it would not exist now. it CANNOT be created even from an omnipotent creature. an omnipotent creature would simply be a creature with limitless energy, but the energy was already there. if god always existed than energy always existed. but energy always existed even if god does not exist.
greycloud24 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Where did god come from, you dingus? You can't dismiss one argument and then claim another is true based on the same flaws you pointed out in the one you just dismissed...
We don't know where matter, energy and space came from, but it's likely time was always there. Your just filling in the gaps in out knowledge with god, and in some cases, drawing over our knowledge with god. You also used the word assumptions twice...
XChillX42 1 year ago
@WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp Why does space time matter and energy have to come from anywhere, why couldnt they of always existed in one form or the other? An answer would be nice.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "why couldn`t they have always existed?"
It `s not a matter of whether it COULD or COULDN`T ... it DIDN`T.that`s the point.
Penrose and Hawking proved this in the 70`s and Bourde,Guth & Vilenkin proved even a multiverse requires a beginning.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost cite sources please, all penrose and hawking were doing in the 70's was working on black holes to quote hawkings a breif history of time 1965-1970 page 97 19-21 The work ttat roger penrose and I did between 1965 and 1970 showed that according to general relativity there must be a singularity of infinite density and spance time curvature withing a black hole.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness And yes I do have the book in front of me.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "according to general relativity,there must be a singularity of infinite density"
No need to cite sources ... u just demonstrated it with this quote.a singularity of "infinite density" is a scientific term for no time,space or matter.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost actually no it isnt. It merly means were going 1/x now that x could be anywhere between 0 to infinity take this for example. The law for tension on a spring is F=KX now if F = 1N then 1/X=K which is infinity but does a spring have infinite tension in reality? The answer your looking for is no.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "actually no it isnt"
Err .. actually yes it is.
The fact of the matter is that general relativity proves that time,space,matter and energy began at the singularity.that IS the big bang.anyone who tells u otherwise is sugar coating the evidence.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost mate to be honest when we're debating the science I'd prefere to go with the general scientific agreement. Anyways once again I want you to cite sources which back up your argument. I've already cited ones which back up mine. And lastly no it dosnt all it proves is that there was a singulairty, which then expanded, thow in some herbs and pepper, leave to boil for 13 billion years and you have a universe. In fact heres one I made earlier.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Once again matter time space and energy were all contained within the singularity. If you want me to cite sources for that I will, but once again I want to know where -your- getting your information from.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "i`ve already cited ones that back up mine"
U have? lol ... when did u cite a source saying the singularity IS NOT the origin of time,space & matter?
"Cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past eternal universe"
Alexander Vilenkin.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost erm... what does that quote have to do with the origins of matter? And I asked you to cite your sources not throw out random quotes, tell me the paper he stated that in or link me to the interview. Furthermore I quoted hawkings showing that your agrument that penrose and hawkings were working on a theory showing the big bang created matter was entierly wrong (they were working on black hole singularaties).
amarthishness 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Furhtermore the formation of the universe did not violate the conservation of energy (eg matter comming from nothing) For example the gravitation energy of a feild is negative, therefore it is possible when all energy in the universe is totaled it comes to sum zero Guth 1997, 9-12,271-276; Tryon 1973
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Ur quoting Guth 1997?
Try Guth in 2003 where he along with Arving Bourde & Alexander Vilenkin proved that even a multiverse requires a beginning.
Paper published in April 2003 Physical Review Letters entitled "inflationary spacetimes are incomplete in past directions".
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost *Sigh* And? So it requires a beggining so we're back at a big bang, back at a singularity. You've still failed to show where the supernatural element sneeks in. So please explain to me how we've gone from the universe started in a singularity to there may be a hypothetic multiverse which would of also needed to start as a singularity to therefore it was god. It is not a logical group of connections.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness I never said there was a multiverse.i said they proved that even a multiverse requires a beginning of time.space,matter & energy.hence,Vilenkin`s comment.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost I'm about to resort to caps. Not something I do oftern. Yes the multiverse if it existed would require a beginning this does not mean space matter and time ect was created. It merly means it was contained inside a singularity, what was before this ( a misnomer if there ever was one) we do not know as we cannot yet track back that far and may never be able to. I've explained this multiple times.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Ur WRONG.
The paper i just cited shows exactly that.
Also,Vilenkin himself demonstrates it in the chapter of his book i cited.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost *Arvind Bourde
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Your peer revied article please? Not quote mined single lines, please do not tarnish Alexander Vilenkin's reputation any further.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Tarnish his reputation? lol ... read his own book many worlds in one in the chapter entitled "did the universe have a beginning?"
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost And let me guess, he said gawd did it? I havnt read it so please give me a synopsis. Or did he merly state the the universe was part of a singularity. Specifics please.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness These 3 scientists are ATHEISTS.they are just being honest about the facts ... on account of materialism,u HAVE to believe everything came from nothing.
Btw,Guth is practically the father of inflationary theory.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost As I've said before I do not, I may believe it has always existed in one form or another. I do not have to believe they magically poofed into creation merly because your not willing to listen to the definition of a singualrity. Like this for example, a black hole is a singularity when matter is sucked into it under your definition it would cease to exist. This is plain not the case, it is contained inside it.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost and you've just shot yourself in the foot. 3 incredibly smart men, why would they acknowledge all matter magically poofed into existence and yet remain atheist?
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness You`ve never met an atheist who openly believed in self creation?
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost What does atheism have to do with any of this? And have you got a download for that book? Yes I know, I'm an imorral bastard but I cant seem to find one.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness No download i`m aware of mate.
U might have to cough up the cash at amazon books lol ;)
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost to ta libraries. However I do have a couple questions if I may? If the universe is either self caused then so what? Where does god come in, or say our entire understanding of the universe is completly wrong. How does this make the god hypothesis any more likly? And finally did you nick this line of argument from dear old william lane craig?
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness To be blunt ... self creation is metaphysically retarted.
There is nothing inherently wrong with saying the universe is eternal because something has to be eternal.if it`s not the universe then it`s the cause of the universe.
Also,an eternal universe itself implies a God because an eternal universe implies an actual infinite amount of change which implies that a God-like being should have developed by now.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost your god like being development theory is so so wrong. It makse the assumption such a thing is possible, which it plainly isnt as it would be the very definition of a violation of the conservation of energy man.... And yes I'd agree a self caused universe is a retarded idea which I why I maintain matter and energy probably existed in some form or another, however we've already had this argument and I'm going to read your chapter and get back to you.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness I do however wonder if your argument has been so conclusivly proved then why are we using CERN to help us get a better understaning of the origins of matter. Which is why I want to read this chapter to make sure its actually relevent.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness Just because the evidence points clearly to ex nihilo doesn`t mean we`re going to stop studying cosmology lol.
Btw,surely u can understand why atheists would love to falsify an ex nihilo event.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@amarthishness It wouldn`t be a violation of conservation.
I`m saying that just as dead matter has ultimately produced the civilization we are experiencing today (on account of materialism),what`s to stop an ACTUAL infinite amount of time for matter to produce a God-like being? an eternal universe IMPLIES it.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost no it dosnt, a god in my mind would have to be omnipotent and omniscient at the very least. Omniscience is pratically impossible and omnipotence by its very nature is a violation. You dont get energy out of nothing. And yeah an ex nihilo event would be cool, but once again the consencus points at a singularity (which I'll grant you can change any day) I'm only reading this chapter as I have to put my own ideas to skeptcism as well.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness I would go even further ... an eternal universe IMPLIES pantheism (or panentheism) on account of materialism.
If the mind results from a finite arrangement of matter then this would imply that an eternal universe (experiencing an ACTUAL infinite amount of change) would eventually produce a universal mind.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost once again you make the assumption such a thing is possible. You can have infinite change within set paramaters, which would not lead to a god. Your argument is fallacious and wrong. For example I can walk to my bathroom to my bedroom a billion billion times and I will never end up on the moon. Your agrument completly ignore natural laws.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness U miss the point ... there is no link between walking in ur bathroom and ending up on the moon.there IS a link (on account of materialism) between a finite arrangement of matter and consciousness (or even life).
An eternal universe would have produced every potential configuration of the universe ad infinitum.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost furhtermore your also ignoring heat death. But thats an argument for another time.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness "heat death"
Aside from the fact that ur wrong in claiming the singularity isn`t ex nihilo,suppose i granted that for the sake of argument ... what do u do with entropy?
Energy existed from eternity past in a closed system (the singularity) yet we still have usable energy? how does that work?
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost ... wow... seriously I have to draw this one out for you..? Okay you cannot have infinite change because any form of change would require energy. Eventually we are going to reach 0 K mate... was that one really that difficult to understand? And anyways I've stated my side of the argument, you've repetedly yelled at me to go read a book as far as I'm concerned this conversation is over.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@amarthishness U mean the material universe (on account of materialism) couldn`t have experienced an actual infinite amount of change? well then it`s not eternal.
Take care.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@amarthishness "dear old william lane craig?"
I don`t need WLC to tell me that self creation is absurd.that`s pretty self evident.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost regardless I feel that this is all an exercise in pointlessness. Niether of us is going to convince each other. I want to go with the science you feel the need to prove your bible true. I've always wondered about that btw, why prove it, isnt faith better? Moreover you havnt adressed a single arguement made by me yet. All you've done is repeate that matter was made at the big bang. Repetedly. With no evidence.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost but regardless this is dealing with black hole singularities (the work of penrose and hawkings) and not the big bang. Care to tell me how your carrying those two over? (oh and its 2Am expect not to get another reply for about 20ish hours)
amarthishness 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost Would it help if I whipped out some of penroses work as well? I do have road to reality on my other side.
amarthishness 1 year ago
@k87jury Do u know what a singularity even means?
The singularity is an INFINITE point of density (that`s a scientific way of saying it was absolutely NOTHING!).
All these atheists saying the big bang isn`t ex nihilo are clueless.there is no cosmological theory TODAY (notice i said TODAY) that does not require a beginning of time,space,matter and energy.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
LOL man you are still a good laugh.
refuckulate420 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost "The singularity is an INFINITE point of density (that`s a scientific way of saying it was absolutely NOTHING!)."
So when a black hole pulls an object into it's singularity, the object goes into nothing? If so then why can't it be reversed? If a singularity means nothing, I would like to see your source.
Landofjello 1 year ago
@Landofjello I`m not talking about blk holes but of the singularity of the big bang.THAT is nothing ... no time,space,matter OR energy.i`ll message u with the evidence.
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
@CasperTheMeanieGhost
" I`m not talking about blk holes but of the singularity of the big bang.THAT is nothing ... no time,space,matter OR energy.i`ll message u with the evidence."
All you did was copy and pasted a paragraph from "A Case for the Existence of God", and at best you don't even know what you were copy and pasting.
Landofjello 1 year ago
@Landofjello Read Alexander Vilenkin`s book "many worlds in one".
What part of "THERE IS NO ESCAPE;cosmologists have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning" don`t u understand?
Sure there are SOME scientists sugar coating the language but can u blame them? how do u tell someone with a str8 face that everything came from nothing?
CasperTheMeanieGhost 1 year ago
One word - facepalm.
Dragonich777 1 year ago
evolution is bunk!
fellowservant34 1 year ago
technically every fossil we find is a transitional form.
WashyBanjo 1 year ago
@WashyBanjo lol ok????
WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp 1 year ago
Maximum RESPECT BRUH! No on can refute this. Man, we just gotta continue to spread the knowledge. Im working on my first offical video for my channel, but Im sooo nercous. But I will get it together.
lmarr07 1 year ago
@lmarr07 *nervous
lmarr07 1 year ago
@lmarr07 send it my way dude.... the holy spirit will guide you x
WeFalDwnButWeGetBkUp 1 year ago