They think with time a non-living thing can start to live, a non aware being can start to aware,Information (like DNA) can be formed without intellegence,
social behaviour and techniques of animals and insects are in the genes ! an the best is this stuff : /watch?v=dOyc98tV5kA did? evolved wings ! and the ability to fly !
throug random mutations and naturel selection, needless to speak about the evolution of plantes ...
In the first place the argument is specious. Darwin never said that oine species becomes another. He said that species evolve into new forms. Not that they becone different species. He was inartful in his description of the idea. But he was correct in the ideation. The original species branches out to become many forme. It does not exclude the possibility of interbranch fertility. Horse meet donkey. Produce mule. You could mate a human and an orangutan and get a viable offspring. Look it up.
Using dogs as an example was a very bad idea. They are practically PROOF of transitional forms and speciation. All dogs belong to the same subspecies of the gray wolf (canis lupis familiaris). By the definition of species, every dog you find in a home should be able to breed with a gray wolf found in the wild. This will work in 95% of cases. Now try it with a chihuahua. You WILL NOT get FERTILE offspring. They are too genetically different. By the definition of species, they are separate.
@TheDeadDudeWalking This is the “big dog-little dog” issue: a Great Dane and a “teacup Chihuahua” will not breed. But if the separation process is reversed, subsequent progeny could reproduce, since there has been no DNA change in this process to prevent it. As little dog progeny get bigger and big dog progeny get smaller, eventually breeding will again be possible. Speciation outside the species has not really occurred, because no DNA change has occurred that would produce new characteristics.
@thewayofthemaster let me get this right, you're saying if the great dane and the chihuahua populations were separated, they would eventually be able to breed with each other again. That's wrong, the opposite should happen. If what your saying is that if you let the chihuahuas and great danes breed with other dogs before breeding with each other, then you're right, they should breed, but they are no longer chihuahuas/ great danes and you missed the point of what I was saying.
Why does this "Atheist" get to speak for all Atheist? He doesn't seem to actually understand "Darwinism" or Evolution as us normal people call it. Does no one remember when Kirk Cameron agreed with the banana man? Fossil evidence is icing on the cake just because not all billion stages can be found doesn't make the other 1000's that were wrong. You gave Evolution 100 years to find proof we have given Religion 2000 and evolution still has more evidence.
There is no such thing as "missing links". Scientists don't look for them. "Missing link" is a term coined by those who deny evolution. Darwin was wrong about many things but only because he lived during a time when the proper tools were lacked for research and also because there wasn't the sophisticated scientific community surrounding that would be available today. He was busy inventing an idea, not making the hundreds of thousands of discoveries that illustrate natural selection.
Is it possible that before the techtonic plates seperated and the earth only had 1 land mass... that we all beleived in what we called angels? Or dragons" and formed a beleif upon that? Then over the bajillions of years as the plates seperated and made continents, the religious views... like the game of telephone... started getting it more and more wrong because of the way people perceived an ancient story?
The examples he quotes as adaptation (micro-evolution) are a result of human intervention and not nature, ergo, not evolution. I can track down a fat numpty in the street and bribe him to say something I want with something that looks like an ice cream. For me, the desparation of those trying to keep their faith is the final nail in the coffin of religion.
In 1837, a Creationist reported that during a pig's fetal development, part of the incipient jawbone detaches and becomes the little bones of the middle ear. After Evolution was discovered, it was predicted that there would be a transitional fossil, of a reptile with a spare jaw joint right near its ear. A whole series of such fossils has since been found - the cynodont therapsids.
There are two kinds of whales: those with teeth, and those that strain microscopic food out of seawater with baleen. It was predicted that a transitional whale must have once existed, which had both teeth and baleen. Such a fossil has since been found.
@ahhninjadragon A whale became a different looking whale? That's a different definition of evolution than what we are talkiong about. No species change. It's simply variation within species and not disputed among Creationists.
@thewayofthemaster The only difference is time is a cat a dog.The dogs ancestry back to animal called Miacis(not a dog)Next was an animal called Cynodictis After a few more intermediate stages moved on to the extremely doglike animal called Tomarctus.The family that includes the true dog and its close relatives stemmed directly from TomarctusMembers of the genus Canis which includes the dog,wolf,and jackal developed into their present form about a million years ago during the Pleistocene epoch..
@thewayofthemaster Miacis is not a dog but like a dog but also like a cat(cats are not dogs)but with afew evolutionary changes over a few million years two animals come in to being cat and dog they are very similar but differnt and getting "more differnt"and the more time the more differnt.but they still have the genetic memory of all its stages and that can be trace back to the cambrian era.also from Miacis fox Coyote wolf etc they are not dogs.
@thewayofthemaster Miacis is the link between cats and dogs and we can go back earlier if you want a broader speciation the earlier the less like a dog or cat we get and the more splits in the tree.
@chrisparsons15 This argument is so fallacious. They are all still dogs, whales, birds and so on. Do plants interbreed with other plants? They are still plants. You guys are so blind!!
@thewayofthemaster No, toothed whales are not "just different looking whales" from baleen whales. They are entirely different suborders of whale. A blue whale is a different species of whale than a sperm whale.
There is enormous amounts of evidence that prove speciation does occur. Macro evolution has been scientifically proven beyond reasonable doubt so please stop spreading misinformation.
@thewayofthemaster Never the less these two types of whales are different species of whales. I know that creationists imagine that evolution is saying that two completely different species, can become one another seemingly by magic but thats not the case and would actually disprove evolution. Kirk keeps mentioning that there hasn't been a crocoduck found, well good... because that would disprove evolution as well. He should really get educated about what he's arguing about...
The theory of Common Descent predicts that the species alive today can be organized into one single family tree.species we would group with dogs, and there are - such as wolves and coyotes. So we are not surprised when dogs and foxes turn out to share some peculiar features of the middle ear. This group - the Family Canidae - can be grouped with the bears, raccoons and weasels, because their ears have some similarities to those of dogs.
Evolution has nothing to do with god if there is one or not.Why do people try to prove god by disproving evolution?
Where does micro-evolution end? if great danes and chiwawas were seperated for a million years They would not be the same species at this time great danes and chiwawas are barely the same species( the offspring can't survive in most cases) so the fact is in a few generations they will be a differnt species. transitional forms what about a chicken (winged to not winged)?
That was the stupidest thing I've heard since the kalam crap.
Evolution= Facts
Creation= Lie to fit another lie.
it's not rocket science its common sense.
"Evolution.Creation both = truth".so your saying they are the same oh but they are different so your "creation"is right WTF If thats the kind of reasoning you have Im not surprised you believe in magic and invisible people looking at you all the time(sounds like paranoia to me).
All evolution is micro-evolution. It doesn't happen bim-bam-thank-you-ma'am, presto-chango, a heavy-metal tune emerges from a religious hymn.
Cameron misunderstands what evolution is, and misrepresents what Darwin supposedly predicted. Could the Wright brothers have envisioned moon landings? Regardless of how many fossils are found, there will never be a perfect intermediary record, as some forms may be very short-lived with few individuals before progressing further. Simple misdirection.
There's no such thing as "Darwinism." If I drew a cartoon of a man walking from the left to the right, do you think you could tell the difference between an individual cel of the man and the very next cel?
Micro-evolution is not TOTALLY different from macro-evolution. One is just the smaller version of the other. When enough micro-evolution occurs, THAT is macro-evolution. When enough microevolution occurs you DO get a new species but it takes a long time.
the 'transitional forms' aren't actually necessary for proof of the theory, thats what experimentation is for. Even saying that, they have been found. We have the transitional stages from fish to amphibian, then to lizards, from lizards to mammals and lizards to birds, from primitive mammals to primates, and thousands of other 'missing' links between species. please don't cheapen a beautiful theory with your misunderstandings.
@TheBlitMaster Hawking and his presuppositions. You'll fall for anything won't you? And now you're getting irrational, volitional and hateful with your responses. Figures since on your channel you admit to and I quote "I am a 17 year old who merely wants to show what little knowledge he has to the world." Makes sense now. Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. He's waiting for you to turn your life over to Him and experience the TRUTH. Praying for you,buddy!
@fakeiddrums "And now you're getting irrational, volitional and hateful with your responses." You're metaphorically threatening me with eternal damnation in a fiery pit where the flesh will roast from my bones as I suffer in agonizing pain forever and ever until the end of time unless I do exactly as I say and you're calling me violent and hateful? All I said was that my God was stronger, smarter, and cooler than yours, and could kick your God's scrawny ass.
@TheBlitMaster There is only one God. The God of Jacob, Issac & Abraham. Same God that sent Christ to die for us all. Any other god is a false god. Wait a minute. Now i see where you're coming from. Doesn't your channel say and I quote.... "I am a 17 year old who merely wants to show what little knowledge he has to the world." Well there you have it. That is the first step in coming to terms with that same God I mentioned above. Getting rid of your pride. Understanding you need Christ.Prayin4ya!
@fakeiddrums "There is only one God". The God of Blitty, Einstein, Lincoln, Jefferson, and everyone else whom was cool and smart. Same God that can create entire universes perfectly in a Planck time. Any other god is false, especially the ones that got nailed to a stick. Doesn't your channel say and I quote "".
You can't beat me with your fake ass drums, I'm the master of photon generation through a series of computational data, used to display images on everyone's computer screens.
@TheBlitMaster Don't remember seeing that on my channel,little man. It's been real, Blit. Take care of yourself and keep up your hateful, bitter ways. Your sins will find you out.
You can't beleive in Micro and think Macro isn't possible...
If I have 1, and I add another 1 to that 1... I get 2...
Reptile to Mammal is like 1 to 1,000,000.
The reason why people agree with Micro, is because we have been doing it as evidence towards evolution.
We bred dogs from wolves.
We added 1 to 1, every day for years to get in the hundreds or thousands... but suddenly they make up a rule, where it can't keep going...unless it's micro...adding more 1s will eventually get to millions!
@TheBlitMaster Yes, Reptile to Mammal never really happened, as it was amphibian that led to mammal, but was more so meant to be example, but yes, it was wrong, and the details can matter when trying to prove a point.
Everything is a transitional form, because we're always changing. Every fossil ever found is a transitional fossil. You can't find a fossil that's not.
What the guy at the end says is reasonable. He heard the guy say there were no transition fossils. This made him question Darwinism, because darwinism predicts them. He said he would investigate it, which is the right thing to do. When he does, he'll discover that we've found countless transition species, and will go back to believing evolution!
Scientific research has shown that the more intelligent you are the more likely you are to be atheist/agnostic. This video does however highlight that there are dumb people on both sides of the argument.
I agree with what he says, but his terminology is incorrect. "Species" is much too narrow of a term to describe a whole assortment of related animals. Creationists have coined terms which better describe the broad, over-arching groups of animals. Rather than referring to the "dog species," a more accurate word description is the "dog kind," "dog baramin," or "dog holobaramin." Besides his unintentionally faulty terminology, I agree with Kirk.
@LexutheDragonLily Exactly my point. Coming back to life is not a sacrifice. Jesus loses nothing by dying on the cross. The very fact that he came back to life means it was NOT a sacrifice and therefore has no meaning whatsoever. It wasn't even a spectacular miracle. Had he been dead for 50 years and suddenly woke up, at least that would be amazing. But to be a sacrifice (a trade for your sins) Jesus has to LOSE something. He lost nothing by doing what he did. No one should be impressed.
@politicoochie09 I see your point, but I think that whether you're dead for 3 days or fifty years and come back to life it's still amazing. The whole point of coming back to life was to show that he was God and he was a miracle worker. The difference between Christianity and other religions was that our Messiah died and rose again. If it was fifty years later, it wouldn't have the same effect. Also, he didn't just die on a cross, he was beaten and then had to carry his cross.
@LexutheDragonLily No, it's not amazing. It's magical. And still NOT a sacrifice. A death of 3 days can be faked, but not 50 years. And here's something... someone told me that "God can't die." Is that what you believe too? Because if God can't die, Jesus, if he was God, didn't really die. And the trade off of death for your sins is a sham. If Jesus DID die, then he wasn't really God, and believing in him as God is also a sham. So, which is it?
@politicoochie09 Jesus was God, but he was also human. He died and then rose again, how many people do you know could do that? And fifty years can be faked. But that's not the point. He rose again with a gash in his side and holes in his wrists. How many people can fake that?
@LexutheDragonLily No, there is not a single shred of evidence pointing to anything you just said. First of all, the very existence of Jesus is questionable. From that questionable beginning you then have every single story about his alleged life written over half a century after he died. And from that, you have ALL of the stories contradicting themselves in ways that cannot under any circumstances be resolved. Stacking fairy tale on top of fairy tale on top of fairy tale doesn't help your case.
@politicoochie09 In his Annals, written around 116 AD, Roman historian and senator Tacitus refers to Christ's crucifixion by Pontius Pilate and mentions the fact that Christians lived in Rome. Historians consider this to be a reliable history. There are others. It's an historical fact that Nero persecuted Christians. Of whom were these Christians disciples if not Jesus? You believe in 2011 that men can tell you what happened billions of years ago, so what's a half century by comparison?
@luvmusic09 To begin with, there are different types of proof. Science looks at tangible things like the fossil record -- something you can touch, something you can calculate. Christians and theists alike use what people said -- not something you can touch, not tangible evidence. They refer to old books with contradicting statements from various people, some of whom may not even be who they say they are. BIG difference. 50 years vs 50 billion years boils down to what you have in your hand.
@politicoochie09 When you look at a fossil deposit, you can't tell if the remains lived together, died together or were just buried together. Not being there to witness what really happened can bring one to a false conclusion. We don't have all the evidence. Consider Nebraska man. Someone found a tooth, and a history was constructed around it. On the basis of one tooth, which turned out to be that of a wild American pig, a wife and family were also manufactured. Evo takes faith too.
@luvmusic09 No, evolution doesn't take "faith". It just takes more information and more thought. You obviously don't even know the definition of faith, yet you seem to rely on it constantly. Let me help you: Faith is belief without evidence. It's hollow. It's impractical. It's dangerous. It's stupid. Don't you look both ways before crossing the street? Or do you just have faith that no cars are coming? Evolution theories invite new evidence and can change. Religions shun evidence and light.
@politicoochie09 Are you not using faith if you believe that intelligence, purpose, intention, desire and so forth came about through natural selection and mutations? Where's your proof?
@luvmusic09 Again, you're just going around in circles, chasing your tail. Again, YOU are bringing up evolution. Remember that. Natural selection and mutations are tangible. IF the scientific community comes up with better proof for how humans came about, they will alter their ideas accordingly. Science welcomes the light of new evidence, whereas, religion shuns the light of new evidence and rigidly sticks to it's silly ideas in spite of the evidence. This has been true from the beginning.
@politicoochie09 Yes, the ever present insults. If I'm going around in circles, what are you doing? I posted nothing about how humans came about, I mentioned intelligence, purpose, intention, desire and so forth not human origins. Until and unless it can be proven, to my satisfaction, that the created order is not proof of God's existence, I'm not changing my mind.
@luvmusic09 It wasn't stated as an insult. It was just truth. And I'm not here to make you change your mind. A delusional state is extremely difficult to come out of. I'm quite sure you'll die with your delusion in tact. Most do. But I don't think you lack the intelligence to approach things logically, but it can't be done with a starting point of delusion, which is where you are now. Even I am willing to accept the possibility of a creator, but I'm quite logically certain it's not Yahweh/Jesus.
@politicoochie09 Bottom line, we both believe the other has been inoculated with mind numbing poison. You think I believe in fairy tales and magic, same here as regards your belief system. Later.
@politicoochie09 Christ's death may not be a sacrifice in your world, but it's the only sacrifice qualified to save a man from eternal damnation. "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the *** suffering of death*** crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death, for everyone." Heb. 2:9 Jesus, had a human body, but He also had a divine nature and a human nature, yet without sin.
@luvmusic09 Again, none of what you say has any evidence to back it up: Things like "qualified sacrifice" is very subjective. "Lower than the angels" is ridiculous because you can't even define what an angel is. They are just as conveniently invisible as everything else in the Bible. "Glory and honor", and "divine nature" are all hobgoblins of your little mind.
@politicoochie09 Being cruelly beaten, blasphemed, enduring false witness against Himself, being abandoned and betrayed by His friends, nailed to a cross for hours, bearing the sins of the world, none of which He was guilty, being separated from His Father, a first, tasting the sting of death, etc. His was a sacrifice acceptable to God, and as a result His people have gained life eternal. You'd best develop some humility when you broach this subject. You don't know what you're talking about.
@luvmusic09 All of the horrible things you attribute to Jesus at his death are not proven either, and even if he was executed in that fashion, it still proves nothing and does not make him a god. Lots of other people have died MORE cruelly than your Jesus and all it means it that they died cruelly, nothing more. Same applies to Jesus. Your method of death doesn't prove anything, doesn't "wash away" anything, and doesn't make you, or Jesus, any more special than anyone else that has ever died.
@politicoochie09 I believe the eyewitness accounts in what I believe to be God's Holy Word, as well as accounts by people such as Tacitus. It's settled for me. You make some very bold assertions you have no way of proving to be true. You have faith that what you postulate about Jesus is so, but that is not the same thing as proof. Not only the manner of death, but the efficacy of His death are deciding factors for those of us who believe. Why are you here evangelizing for atheism & evolution?
@luvmusic09 No, you're wrong again. I'm not making any bold assertions. You and your fellow Christians make bold assertions: miracles, resurrections, virgin births, god turning into man, etc., etc. It is up to YOU and your ilk to show proof of your bold claims. It's not up to me to disprove them. Otherwise, I could say "I'm Jesus Christ," and you'd want me to prove my bold claim, right? The one making the assertion has to prove it, while everyone else listens. I'm listening....
@politicoochie09 The created order is proof of God's existence. It's a general revelation. My definition of faith comes from the Bible which is my starting point. Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb. 11:1 I hold the definition on faith as man renders it up to the light of Scripture's definition, not the other way around. So you have a get out of jail free card. You can try to prove that my beliefs contain a logical contradiction.
@luvmusic09 No, the created order is NOT a proof of God's existence. The order of the Universe is not even proof of a creator of any kind, and even a heuristic approach to the possibility of a creator puts your own god very low on the list. Heb. 11:1 is non-sense. By definition you can't use faith and evidence together in a sentence and make them correlate to one another in a positive way. They are opposites. Faith requires no evidence. Evidence requires no faith. Your starting point is bogus.
@politicoochie09 "virgin births" I find it funny that they even believe that because the original Hebrew scripture just said Mary was a woman old enough to be married. I honestly don't know why people actually believe what was either a bad translation, or a dishonest misrepresentation by someone trying to make Jesus sound better.
@luvmusic09 I'm not "evangelizing" for atheism and evolution. First of all you need to buy a dictionary. Atheism does not require a belief in evolution. Atheism is the absence of belief in a deity. That's all. You don't have to be a scientist to assert that. You don't have to know a single thing about evolution at all. Plus, the definition of "evangelize" is to convert or seek to convert someone to Christianity, so you're using the word incorrectly.
@politicoochie09 Yes, but an evangelist is a zealous advocate of something according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary. That something does not have to be Christianity. I used the word evangelizing, in your case, as an analogy of what Christians do. I never posted that atheism requires a belief in evolution, and I know what atheism means.
@luvmusic09 Please bear in mind, that during this entire discussion, it was YOU that brought up evolution, not me. You mention it, I respond, then you accuse me of "evangelizing" about it. Christians seem to use this tactic a lot, I've discovered recently. Circular reasoning and arguing off-topic is the cornerstone of Christian logic, is that it?
@luvmusic09 Nope. You try again. You said first: "You believe in 2011 that men can tell you what happened billions of years ago,..." so again, YOU brought up evolution, not me.
@luvmusic09 The problem for the atheist is that while it is logically possible that the universe is eternal, it does not seem to be actually possible. For all the scientific and philosophical evidence (SURGE– Second Law of Thermodynamics, Universe is expanding, Radiation Afterglow, Great galaxy seeds, Einstein’s GR–radioactive decay, and the Kalam Cosmological Argument) tells us the universe cannot be eternal. Check out the book "I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheists". Then bring it.
@fakeiddrums who said the universe was eternal? i thought this video was about the argument against evolution., all good scientists believe in entropy, seeing as it's observable..
Some things are complicated so it must be magic... that's the entire religious argument, that's what it comes down to. No evidence, no consistent logical structure... just a lack of understanding of science and logic, and a preference for magic.
@Ryakki I don't believe in magic. I believe in God's Word and that Jesus Christ lived, died on the cross for everyone and rose again the 3rd day. There's nothing magical about it when it comes down to an omnipotent Creator. It's not about religion, it's about a relationship.No evidence? Do you really think space, time and matter came from nothing? And a one-celled amoeba to us? That doesn't sound logical to me.We can't know everything because we're finite.God is infinite. Open up your heart man
You believe in a book written by sheep herders in the bronze age, whose stories internally contradict themselves endlessly in ways that are impossible to rationalize out of in any intellectually honest fashion, let alone try to rationalize away it's utter and complete disagreement with modern observation of the Earth and the universe, and scientific discovery.
And no matter how much we don't know, what questions we still have... it doesn't make magic any more plausible.
@Ryakki The Bible was written by the inspiration of GOD through Kings,military leaders,peasants,philosophers,fishermen,tax collectors,poets,musicians,statesmen,scholars, and yes,shepherds over the course of 1500 yrs. 40 different authors to be exact. Written in the wilderness,dungeons,palaces, on hillsides during war, peace,joy,despair,conviction. On 3 continents(Asia, Africa,Europe) in 3 languages(Hebrew,Aramaic,Greek) yet in all these differences there is perfect unity,and NO contradictions!!
So things like the Earth being flat, and Jesus being born during the reign of King Herod, who died 4 BCE, during a census which happened, from Roman records, no earlier than 6 CE (10 years later) in which no one had to travel, different gospels listing different home towns, different people visiting him, different places of birth (was it an inn or a house?), and all those and others just on the first event in Jesus life.
That's just the contradictions of one event. Some of them.
@Ryakki Earth being flat?What scripture is that?Yes, Herod died in 4 BC(recorded by Josephus,Antiquities xvii 6.5 who also wrote of Christ Antiquities xviii63f)but our present calender is off in its calculation by about 6 yrsThis would place Christ birth at 6/5 BC.Augustus Caesar sent the decree outEveryone had to travel to their original birthplaceThe fact that Jesus was found in a house(Matt.2:11) indicates the family moved out of the stable into a rented house in Bethlehem.Fulfilling Micah5:2
Many times the Earth is suggested as being flat, I like the clay under the seal one the best, I suppose.
None of those rationalizations are very convincing, the gospels differ wildly not only with historical and observational fact, but with each other. The internal inconsistencies, as well as the disagreements with observable reality, history, and science start in Genesis and never stop.
@Ryakki Like I said, where in scripture is the earth referred to as being flat? And the Gospels? You can take your present day newscasts and not every station is going to say the exact same thing.The facts are there but the accounts will differ because their are different points of view.It is history.A beautifully written one.Romans1:22 Professing themselves(unbelievers,atheists,etc.) to be wise,they became fools.I ask you to check out the site clarifying christianity creation/evolution. Truth.
@Ryakki Ryakki, do you really think we're here to just live and die and that's it?Search your heart.Creation is all around you.The truth is that we all are sinners.God gave us free-will to accept or reject His plan of salvation.We can go on and on about who's right and who's wrong but there is ONE absolute truth to it all.I didn't start living until I realized I needed a Savior.I don't know ya but I do care for ya.And whether you like it or not,I'll be praying for ya.Eternity is a long time.
@fakeiddrums "do you really think we're here to just live and die and that's it?" No he doesn't, he thinks he has one life, and that's why it's important to live it well. "Search your heart." If he cut his heart out to try and find something he would most certainly die : }. "Eternity is a long time." Yes it is, why would anyone want to live that long.
How warm and fuzzy something makes you does not contribute to its' truth value.
All evidence and observation points to us having one life to live, one life to make the most out of. I choose to spend mine gathering knowledge, learning about the universe in all of its' glory.
To spend that one life in thrall to primitive fairy tales, blocking out all knowledge and deep understanding of reality... it just... seems like such a fantastic and useless waste.
@Ryakki Since you are open to spending time gathering knowledge and learning about the universe how about exploring clarifyingchristianity website creation vs. evolution link. unless of course you are willing to block out some knowledge and a deeper understanding of reality.
I've read the bible. It has major contradictions within itself starting in genesis, research of it shows the world to be 6,000 years old, it states the world is flat, and the god talked about in it is a petty cruel sadist.
It's one of thousands of other similar ancient books that does not remotely fit with reality or have any evidence of any kind validating it, and 99% of those exactly like it we now call myth.
I could see its' obvious falseness when I was 5. I've moved on.
@Ryakki Ok.Where in the Bible is the world flat?Isaiah 40:22 says He sits above the circle of the earth.Job26:10 says He drew a circular horizon on the face of the waters,at the boundary of light and darkness.Adam-Abraham=2000yrs.Abraham-Christ=2000yrs.Christ-present=2000yrs.That's 6000yrs.God is a just and loving God.2Peter 3:9-The Lord is not willing that any should perish.God has a desire for the salvation of all who are willing to trust in Him! Doesn't sound like a petty cruel sadist to me.
@fakeiddrums A circle is 2D, therefore being a flat shape. Seriously, how do you creationists even pass 3rd grade. Oh wait, the Discovery Institute got Pre-slightly-less-retarded Bush to sign "No Child Left Behind". Look where that got us, Great Depression MKII, half the world is smarter than us, everyone laughs at our nations stupidity, the average Religious American is ignorant of his/her Religion, Religious Americans don't even know their own countries history .... Do you want me to go on?
@Ryakki Let's compare copies of the original Manuscripts of some "ancient books". Illiad-643 Tacitus-20 Caesar(Gallic Wars)-10 Old & New Testament combined--25,203. Some archeological findings; human headed bull from Nineveh,coin of procurator Pontius Pilate,Picture of King Jehu on a stone,Clay prism that mentions Hezekiah as King of Judah,coin of Herod,coin of Herod's temple with ark of covenant inside. That's reality. That's some evidence.Still prayin' for you,Ryakki.
@fakeiddrums You are forgetting one small detail friendo. The people who actually wrote the bible's scripture, were members of the Greek/Roman empire and stole the scriptures and myths from other cultures. Let's not forget that the first person to make a bible from the scripture thought Old Testament God was a different God than New Testament God due to how tremendously different OTG acted compared to NTG. Oh and all that "evidence" you found, most is either forged by creationists or obvious.
@TheBlitMaster Circular horizon on the face of the waters. Can't grasp that can you? Go on if you wanna it's just like you to wanna get irrational,volitional and downright hateful. God has been the same forever. We're the ones that sin. He is Holy. We're depraved. OT God planned for His Son, Jesus, to come and redeem us.OT God is the same as NT God. Period. But I expect you to be volitional about it with a hint of hatred.
@faker "Circular horizon on the face of the waters. Can't grasp that can you?" So, the bible says, the moon and sun didn't show their reflections in the water until the book of Job? You still fled from Isaiah 40 calling the earth a flat circle. "God has been the same forever." So God still wants you to beat your disobedient children to death? You're God is the one that sins. My God is Holy. You're depraved of a basic education. But I expect your next response to be equally stupid and uncreative.
@TheBlitMaster Is your holy god proud of you for calling me stupid and uncreative? wouldn't make him holy if he was. Isaiah 40 says nothing of a flat circle. the word "flat" is never seen in the Bible.'' So, the bible says, the moon and sun didn't show their reflections in the water until the book of Job? " The Bible doesn't say that either.
@fakeiddrums Marcion of Sinope, search Formation of The Modern Bible, it's a 3 parter. You could also read some public domain history books as well. Go to iTunes U and get some history and religion playlists from there.
@fakeiddrums Don't you go stealing my verse. Get your own. Romans 1:22 applies to people who claim Gnosticism, atheists and scientists are agnostic on anything that isn't demonstrably true, however you claim Gnostic wisdom of creationism and the age of the cosmos/earth, and you are shown to be a fool because of it. Oh and Genesis 6:6 refers to God being upset with his creation, I asked YHWH what he meant and he told me he was referring to creationists.
@TheBlitMaster What about Romans 1:20? "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen,being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God-head(divine nature); so that they(man) are without excuse" That is God's verse but you can borrow it if you like! I think your verses are Romans 1:24,25. And oh yeah, I asked God if I was a fool for accepting Jesus Christ as my Savior and He told me. . . . . No.
Romans 1 "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles." It only applies to believers. I talked to god again, he said while you weren't a fool for accepting Jesus, you are a fool for accepting creationism.
I like it when someone who doesnt believe in God will second guess him/herself to at least think that there might be a Creator.... keep researching my friends and you WILL find the truth. God is true and not fairytale. Jus keep seeking the truth.God bless.
@elibeth121 I am shocked to find out that Pope John Paul signed an official church document which if you key it in on the webl gives you the details, that he believed evolution not a theory but a fact. I am a christian, former cath. and after surfing this utube, how evident it is that we are in that threshold of the endtime prophecy. I go on Islamic debates, see Bart Erhman, atheists, satanists, what a generation is erupting in front of God's eyes. This is the generation Christ spoke of
im resonding to this idiot politicoochie09 you don't know what your tlking about God loves you more than you could ever imagine Jesus died for you and you don't even appreciate it!
Have you ever noticed that "highly intelligent" people curse a lot? I'm just sayin. If their lives are so great, where's the evidence :)
I get it. God loves me and I love Him. Thank you Jesus! I so love you! (keep on guys. not too long til you'll hear "Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. Matthew 25)
The way of the master is still going strong. Brian Sapient is now more concerned about the Philly Eagles and Kelly is too busy planning her next porn shoot. Long live God, and pray for the souls of all who defy him.
Anyone who changes their mind about something after hearing Kirk Cameron speak, based on something Kirk said, doesn't have much of a mind to begin with.
Why do the atheists look so angry? They look so on-edge! But the creation guy looks so calm and confident. Where is the proof for macro-evolution? Hmmm.... I just do not honestly understand why the atheists look so bothered. Do they doubt their own theory? Is it no more than an opinion? Look, I'm not messing w/ anyone's right to have an opinion. I just want to know why there's this jaded angry look on their faces?
you make a little change every generation, and we've seen, like he said, mini horses etc, except we've changed horses THAT much in only a few hundred years... WHAT WOULD 4 BILLION YEARS OF EVOLUTION DO!?!?!
@Deadropswhat christians have is GODs word and logical explanation of mankinds origin, what darwinism has is millions of holes in his evolution theory, that pertains to how mankind came into existance. its obvious to me that there has to be a starting point, darwinism doesnt have a starting point at all it just claims that man evolved from animals but it doesnt tell us where those animals came from.
The dog comes from a wolf so out of the wolf comes hundreds of diffrent dogs in such a small period of time and i dought that a chihuahua can mate with a wolf. THERE proof of spieces evolving in to other forms evolution has showen its self millions of ways in nature all you have to do is open your eyes and research a little
Every fossil ever found has fit perfectly to the theory of evolution and been exactly what scientist should have expected to find. The kind of fossils Kirk Cameron claims should have found don't fit the theory of evolution at all. He is purposedly missunderstanding and missrepresenting the theory to fool the people who don't yet really know or understand it.
@fjsmacapil The dog comes from a wolf so out of the wolf comes hundreds of diffrent dogs in such a small period of time and i dought that a chihuahua can mate with a wolf. THERE proof of spieces evolving in to other forms evolution has showen its self millions of ways in nature all you have to do is open your eyes and research a little
You mean the one where you came from a pile of dirt which was molded into your great great (ect) grandfather who had sex with a rib woman whose children were forced to do tons and tons of incest which somehow didn't actually deform the human race but spread into more and more families?
The best part is where you think the big bang is an explosion, or maybe where you think a rock has anything to do with evolution, LOL
THERE IS NO MISSING LINKS BECAUSE EVOLUTION MIGHT GIVE YOU THICK SOLES FOR YOUR PAWS. BUT TO HAVE A REAL NEW SPECIES YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GENETIC MISTAKE. THIS MISTAKE BEING BETTER THAN IT'S PRIOR ENTITY, WITHIN A THOUSAND YEARS MAN BECAME THE TOP SURVIVOR.
STOP LOOKING AND HIT THE MECHANICS OF LIFE.
GIANFRANCO FRONZI. [ THE GOOD MISTAKE]. GOOGLE IT.
@reofthesamez "The truth is that the physical world is just your dream and you are not physical"
that's not entirely true... what is meant by that is that we are not our physical bodies... it does not mean that our physical bodies are a dream and not real. it means our essence is spiritual, not physical... it means we are of a substance more eternal than the physical... physical is temporal, but real... spirit is eternal and real. evolution is both physical and spiritual
evolution is real... Darwinism just lacks the full understanding... there is no possible way that this world or universe is only 6000 years old... that, even when I was a bible-thumper, is absolutely ridiculous.
Religion and Evolution are both wrong. The truth is that the physical world is just your dream and you are not physical. That has been taught throughout the millenia by mystics who were rejected and persecuted by religious authorities. Modern Physics has begun to confirm this view (Observer Effect, the discovery that Awareness is not a product of the human brain via Double Slit Experiment etc). We all need to wake up, the dream has gotten out of control....
@Moreofthesamez I know what that experiement is. It doesn't prove that the world isn't real. Trust me, I know a decent amount about Quantum Mechanics. I know that the world is absolutely nothing like what we percieve it to be, however the world is still real.
And I know that we can't prove that the world is real, but we live such that it actually is. We can't prove that our perceptions are accurate but they are accurate to the world we live in, regardless of whether this world is "real"
A donkey is not a horse, if a donkey breeds with a horse the result would be an infertile mule. That is how you separate the species.
olwerXL 14 hours ago
Ardipithecus ramidus kirk Ardipithecus ramidus
TheDrewManXD 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
They think with time a non-living thing can start to live, a non aware being can start to aware,Information (like DNA) can be formed without intellegence,
social behaviour and techniques of animals and insects are in the genes ! an the best is this stuff : /watch?v=dOyc98tV5kA did? evolved wings ! and the ability to fly !
throug random mutations and naturel selection, needless to speak about the evolution of plantes ...
YamiYami17 1 week ago
In the first place the argument is specious. Darwin never said that oine species becomes another. He said that species evolve into new forms. Not that they becone different species. He was inartful in his description of the idea. But he was correct in the ideation. The original species branches out to become many forme. It does not exclude the possibility of interbranch fertility. Horse meet donkey. Produce mule. You could mate a human and an orangutan and get a viable offspring. Look it up.
theunbubba 1 week ago
Just another Christian posing as an Atheist for this little YT channel.
LosAngelesFresh1 1 week ago
Using dogs as an example was a very bad idea. They are practically PROOF of transitional forms and speciation. All dogs belong to the same subspecies of the gray wolf (canis lupis familiaris). By the definition of species, every dog you find in a home should be able to breed with a gray wolf found in the wild. This will work in 95% of cases. Now try it with a chihuahua. You WILL NOT get FERTILE offspring. They are too genetically different. By the definition of species, they are separate.
TheDeadDudeWalking 2 weeks ago 6
@TheDeadDudeWalking This is the “big dog-little dog” issue: a Great Dane and a “teacup Chihuahua” will not breed. But if the separation process is reversed, subsequent progeny could reproduce, since there has been no DNA change in this process to prevent it. As little dog progeny get bigger and big dog progeny get smaller, eventually breeding will again be possible. Speciation outside the species has not really occurred, because no DNA change has occurred that would produce new characteristics.
thewayofthemaster 2 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster let me get this right, you're saying if the great dane and the chihuahua populations were separated, they would eventually be able to breed with each other again. That's wrong, the opposite should happen. If what your saying is that if you let the chihuahuas and great danes breed with other dogs before breeding with each other, then you're right, they should breed, but they are no longer chihuahuas/ great danes and you missed the point of what I was saying.
TheDeadDudeWalking 1 week ago
Why would anyone believe Cameron? He's an idiot.
glennheston 2 weeks ago
Not even Kirk Cameron believes Kirk Cameron.
Sinnessa 2 weeks ago 4
Why does this "Atheist" get to speak for all Atheist? He doesn't seem to actually understand "Darwinism" or Evolution as us normal people call it. Does no one remember when Kirk Cameron agreed with the banana man? Fossil evidence is icing on the cake just because not all billion stages can be found doesn't make the other 1000's that were wrong. You gave Evolution 100 years to find proof we have given Religion 2000 and evolution still has more evidence.
JusBenLawyered 2 weeks ago
This atheist must have had a terrible understanding of evolution if what Kirk Cameron said has changed his mind about it...
flackz16 2 weeks ago 10
@flackz16
Yeah, especially when atheist opponents have blew Kirk Cameron's accusation away in the debate.
unorthodoxtrotsky 1 week ago
Donkeys are horses, huh? What has Kirk Cameron been doing since Growing Pains? I feel like I can firmly rule out legitimate acting jobs and college.
Snakepliskinist 3 weeks ago
There is no such thing as "missing links". Scientists don't look for them. "Missing link" is a term coined by those who deny evolution. Darwin was wrong about many things but only because he lived during a time when the proper tools were lacked for research and also because there wasn't the sophisticated scientific community surrounding that would be available today. He was busy inventing an idea, not making the hundreds of thousands of discoveries that illustrate natural selection.
RikTikkety 3 weeks ago
Is it possible that before the techtonic plates seperated and the earth only had 1 land mass... that we all beleived in what we called angels? Or dragons" and formed a beleif upon that? Then over the bajillions of years as the plates seperated and made continents, the religious views... like the game of telephone... started getting it more and more wrong because of the way people perceived an ancient story?
Bobbo63 3 weeks ago
@Bobbo63 Are you stupid?
lasse123123 3 weeks ago
@lasse123123 it was a question based upon facts. im not stupid.. you furgot to capitalize your "r".
Bobbo63 2 weeks ago
@Bobbo63 People are so small minded that they worry about capitalizing an r...lol...Atheist = smallminds...
RunColorado100 2 weeks ago
@RunColorado100 im glad you understand internet sarcasm.
Bobbo63 2 weeks ago
The examples he quotes as adaptation (micro-evolution) are a result of human intervention and not nature, ergo, not evolution. I can track down a fat numpty in the street and bribe him to say something I want with something that looks like an ice cream. For me, the desparation of those trying to keep their faith is the final nail in the coffin of religion.
Bollockmetwotimes 1 month ago
In 1837, a Creationist reported that during a pig's fetal development, part of the incipient jawbone detaches and becomes the little bones of the middle ear. After Evolution was discovered, it was predicted that there would be a transitional fossil, of a reptile with a spare jaw joint right near its ear. A whole series of such fossils has since been found - the cynodont therapsids.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
There are two kinds of whales: those with teeth, and those that strain microscopic food out of seawater with baleen. It was predicted that a transitional whale must have once existed, which had both teeth and baleen. Such a fossil has since been found.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon A whale became a different looking whale? That's a different definition of evolution than what we are talkiong about. No species change. It's simply variation within species and not disputed among Creationists.
thewayofthemaster 3 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster The only difference is time is a cat a dog.The dogs ancestry back to animal called Miacis(not a dog)Next was an animal called Cynodictis After a few more intermediate stages moved on to the extremely doglike animal called Tomarctus.The family that includes the true dog and its close relatives stemmed directly from TomarctusMembers of the genus Canis which includes the dog,wolf,and jackal developed into their present form about a million years ago during the Pleistocene epoch..
ahhninjadragon 3 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster Miacis is not a dog but like a dog but also like a cat(cats are not dogs)but with afew evolutionary changes over a few million years two animals come in to being cat and dog they are very similar but differnt and getting "more differnt"and the more time the more differnt.but they still have the genetic memory of all its stages and that can be trace back to the cambrian era.also from Miacis fox Coyote wolf etc they are not dogs.
ahhninjadragon 3 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster Miacis is the link between cats and dogs and we can go back earlier if you want a broader speciation the earlier the less like a dog or cat we get and the more splits in the tree.
ahhninjadragon 3 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster Can a Killer Whale mate with a Blue Whale? If not, they are different species.
chrisparsons15 3 weeks ago
@chrisparsons15 This argument is so fallacious. They are all still dogs, whales, birds and so on. Do plants interbreed with other plants? They are still plants. You guys are so blind!!
XjmedX 3 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster No, toothed whales are not "just different looking whales" from baleen whales. They are entirely different suborders of whale. A blue whale is a different species of whale than a sperm whale.
There is enormous amounts of evidence that prove speciation does occur. Macro evolution has been scientifically proven beyond reasonable doubt so please stop spreading misinformation.
letsgocaps8 2 weeks ago
@thewayofthemaster Never the less these two types of whales are different species of whales. I know that creationists imagine that evolution is saying that two completely different species, can become one another seemingly by magic but thats not the case and would actually disprove evolution. Kirk keeps mentioning that there hasn't been a crocoduck found, well good... because that would disprove evolution as well. He should really get educated about what he's arguing about...
Pandasareourfuture 2 weeks ago
The theory of Common Descent predicts that the species alive today can be organized into one single family tree.species we would group with dogs, and there are - such as wolves and coyotes. So we are not surprised when dogs and foxes turn out to share some peculiar features of the middle ear. This group - the Family Canidae - can be grouped with the bears, raccoons and weasels, because their ears have some similarities to those of dogs.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
Evolution has nothing to do with god if there is one or not.Why do people try to prove god by disproving evolution?
Where does micro-evolution end? if great danes and chiwawas were seperated for a million years They would not be the same species at this time great danes and chiwawas are barely the same species( the offspring can't survive in most cases) so the fact is in a few generations they will be a differnt species. transitional forms what about a chicken (winged to not winged)?
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon Logical thinking we did evolve or not ( aka created ) if
evolution.cration = truth
and evolution is deffirent from truth
=> creation is truth !
it's not rocket science !
YamiYami17 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YamiYami17
evolution.creation = truth
and creation is deffirent from truth
=> evolution is truth !
it's not rocket science !
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YamiYami17
That was the stupidest thing I've heard since the kalam crap.
Evolution= Facts
Creation= Lie to fit another lie.
it's not rocket science its common sense.
"Evolution.Creation both = truth".so your saying they are the same oh but they are different so your "creation"is right WTF If thats the kind of reasoning you have Im not surprised you believe in magic and invisible people looking at you all the time(sounds like paranoia to me).
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
All evolution is micro-evolution. It doesn't happen bim-bam-thank-you-ma'am, presto-chango, a heavy-metal tune emerges from a religious hymn.
Cameron misunderstands what evolution is, and misrepresents what Darwin supposedly predicted. Could the Wright brothers have envisioned moon landings? Regardless of how many fossils are found, there will never be a perfect intermediary record, as some forms may be very short-lived with few individuals before progressing further. Simple misdirection.
saglek 1 month ago
The guy being interviewed is an idiot, but it is sad that Kirk Cameron can make even the mentally deficient doubt the whole of "science".
hailbopp 1 month ago
There's no such thing as "Darwinism." If I drew a cartoon of a man walking from the left to the right, do you think you could tell the difference between an individual cel of the man and the very next cel?
RadarKat73080 1 month ago
Micro-evolution is not TOTALLY different from macro-evolution. One is just the smaller version of the other. When enough micro-evolution occurs, THAT is macro-evolution. When enough microevolution occurs you DO get a new species but it takes a long time.
SandBarAndYou 1 month ago
the 'transitional forms' aren't actually necessary for proof of the theory, thats what experimentation is for. Even saying that, they have been found. We have the transitional stages from fish to amphibian, then to lizards, from lizards to mammals and lizards to birds, from primitive mammals to primates, and thousands of other 'missing' links between species. please don't cheapen a beautiful theory with your misunderstandings.
littleirish1000 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster Hawking and his presuppositions. You'll fall for anything won't you? And now you're getting irrational, volitional and hateful with your responses. Figures since on your channel you admit to and I quote "I am a 17 year old who merely wants to show what little knowledge he has to the world." Makes sense now. Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. He's waiting for you to turn your life over to Him and experience the TRUTH. Praying for you,buddy!
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums "And now you're getting irrational, volitional and hateful with your responses." You're metaphorically threatening me with eternal damnation in a fiery pit where the flesh will roast from my bones as I suffer in agonizing pain forever and ever until the end of time unless I do exactly as I say and you're calling me violent and hateful? All I said was that my God was stronger, smarter, and cooler than yours, and could kick your God's scrawny ass.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster There is only one God. The God of Jacob, Issac & Abraham. Same God that sent Christ to die for us all. Any other god is a false god. Wait a minute. Now i see where you're coming from. Doesn't your channel say and I quote.... "I am a 17 year old who merely wants to show what little knowledge he has to the world." Well there you have it. That is the first step in coming to terms with that same God I mentioned above. Getting rid of your pride. Understanding you need Christ.Prayin4ya!
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums "There is only one God". The God of Blitty, Einstein, Lincoln, Jefferson, and everyone else whom was cool and smart. Same God that can create entire universes perfectly in a Planck time. Any other god is false, especially the ones that got nailed to a stick. Doesn't your channel say and I quote "".
You can't beat me with your fake ass drums, I'm the master of photon generation through a series of computational data, used to display images on everyone's computer screens.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster Don't remember seeing that on my channel,little man. It's been real, Blit. Take care of yourself and keep up your hateful, bitter ways. Your sins will find you out.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums "" is on your channel very clearly.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster fakeid was my old band. we covered sublime,bob marley long beach dub all-stars
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster p.s. I'll be praying for you.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
You can't beleive in Micro and think Macro isn't possible...
If I have 1, and I add another 1 to that 1... I get 2...
Reptile to Mammal is like 1 to 1,000,000.
The reason why people agree with Micro, is because we have been doing it as evidence towards evolution.
We bred dogs from wolves.
We added 1 to 1, every day for years to get in the hundreds or thousands... but suddenly they make up a rule, where it can't keep going...unless it's micro...adding more 1s will eventually get to millions!
eivarden 1 month ago
@eivarden Amphibian to Mammal. We didn't come from dragons despite how awesome it would be. More so giant turtles.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster Yes, Reptile to Mammal never really happened, as it was amphibian that led to mammal, but was more so meant to be example, but yes, it was wrong, and the details can matter when trying to prove a point.
eivarden 1 month ago
Everything is a transitional form, because we're always changing. Every fossil ever found is a transitional fossil. You can't find a fossil that's not.
Ryakki 1 month ago
What the guy at the end says is reasonable. He heard the guy say there were no transition fossils. This made him question Darwinism, because darwinism predicts them. He said he would investigate it, which is the right thing to do. When he does, he'll discover that we've found countless transition species, and will go back to believing evolution!
XZohar123 1 month ago
micro evolution, an acceptable form of evolution? I am literally laughing out loud.
,
TheRedwizzards 1 month ago
Scientific research has shown that the more intelligent you are the more likely you are to be atheist/agnostic. This video does however highlight that there are dumb people on both sides of the argument.
brumfed10 1 month ago
arguing with a creationist is no different than arguing with a bacteria...
WoollyMammoth16 1 month ago
@WoollyMammoth16 Yes, it is! Bacteria don't make stupid comments in the middle of an argument but creationists do!
immortalperser 1 month ago
I agree with what he says, but his terminology is incorrect. "Species" is much too narrow of a term to describe a whole assortment of related animals. Creationists have coined terms which better describe the broad, over-arching groups of animals. Rather than referring to the "dog species," a more accurate word description is the "dog kind," "dog baramin," or "dog holobaramin." Besides his unintentionally faulty terminology, I agree with Kirk.
jahchild1904 2 months ago
Dammit, it won't let me thumbs down this video!
kevih87 2 months ago
If a donkey and a zebra are both horses, then why can't a human be a monkey?
Netrom07 2 months ago
@Netrom07 Because the genetics are different. We have different DNA and therefore different species. You should take a genetics course.
LexutheDragonLily 2 months ago
@politicoochie09 The sacrifice wasn't him coming back to life. It was dying on a cross for our sins. Would four days change your mind?
LexutheDragonLily 2 months ago
@LexutheDragonLily Exactly my point. Coming back to life is not a sacrifice. Jesus loses nothing by dying on the cross. The very fact that he came back to life means it was NOT a sacrifice and therefore has no meaning whatsoever. It wasn't even a spectacular miracle. Had he been dead for 50 years and suddenly woke up, at least that would be amazing. But to be a sacrifice (a trade for your sins) Jesus has to LOSE something. He lost nothing by doing what he did. No one should be impressed.
politicoochie09 2 months ago
@politicoochie09 I see your point, but I think that whether you're dead for 3 days or fifty years and come back to life it's still amazing. The whole point of coming back to life was to show that he was God and he was a miracle worker. The difference between Christianity and other religions was that our Messiah died and rose again. If it was fifty years later, it wouldn't have the same effect. Also, he didn't just die on a cross, he was beaten and then had to carry his cross.
LexutheDragonLily 2 months ago
@LexutheDragonLily No, it's not amazing. It's magical. And still NOT a sacrifice. A death of 3 days can be faked, but not 50 years. And here's something... someone told me that "God can't die." Is that what you believe too? Because if God can't die, Jesus, if he was God, didn't really die. And the trade off of death for your sins is a sham. If Jesus DID die, then he wasn't really God, and believing in him as God is also a sham. So, which is it?
politicoochie09 2 months ago
@politicoochie09 Jesus was God, but he was also human. He died and then rose again, how many people do you know could do that? And fifty years can be faked. But that's not the point. He rose again with a gash in his side and holes in his wrists. How many people can fake that?
LexutheDragonLily 2 months ago
@LexutheDragonLily No, there is not a single shred of evidence pointing to anything you just said. First of all, the very existence of Jesus is questionable. From that questionable beginning you then have every single story about his alleged life written over half a century after he died. And from that, you have ALL of the stories contradicting themselves in ways that cannot under any circumstances be resolved. Stacking fairy tale on top of fairy tale on top of fairy tale doesn't help your case.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 In his Annals, written around 116 AD, Roman historian and senator Tacitus refers to Christ's crucifixion by Pontius Pilate and mentions the fact that Christians lived in Rome. Historians consider this to be a reliable history. There are others. It's an historical fact that Nero persecuted Christians. Of whom were these Christians disciples if not Jesus? You believe in 2011 that men can tell you what happened billions of years ago, so what's a half century by comparison?
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 To begin with, there are different types of proof. Science looks at tangible things like the fossil record -- something you can touch, something you can calculate. Christians and theists alike use what people said -- not something you can touch, not tangible evidence. They refer to old books with contradicting statements from various people, some of whom may not even be who they say they are. BIG difference. 50 years vs 50 billion years boils down to what you have in your hand.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 When you look at a fossil deposit, you can't tell if the remains lived together, died together or were just buried together. Not being there to witness what really happened can bring one to a false conclusion. We don't have all the evidence. Consider Nebraska man. Someone found a tooth, and a history was constructed around it. On the basis of one tooth, which turned out to be that of a wild American pig, a wife and family were also manufactured. Evo takes faith too.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 No, evolution doesn't take "faith". It just takes more information and more thought. You obviously don't even know the definition of faith, yet you seem to rely on it constantly. Let me help you: Faith is belief without evidence. It's hollow. It's impractical. It's dangerous. It's stupid. Don't you look both ways before crossing the street? Or do you just have faith that no cars are coming? Evolution theories invite new evidence and can change. Religions shun evidence and light.
politicoochie09 1 month ago 9
@politicoochie09 Are you not using faith if you believe that intelligence, purpose, intention, desire and so forth came about through natural selection and mutations? Where's your proof?
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 Again, you're just going around in circles, chasing your tail. Again, YOU are bringing up evolution. Remember that. Natural selection and mutations are tangible. IF the scientific community comes up with better proof for how humans came about, they will alter their ideas accordingly. Science welcomes the light of new evidence, whereas, religion shuns the light of new evidence and rigidly sticks to it's silly ideas in spite of the evidence. This has been true from the beginning.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Yes, the ever present insults. If I'm going around in circles, what are you doing? I posted nothing about how humans came about, I mentioned intelligence, purpose, intention, desire and so forth not human origins. Until and unless it can be proven, to my satisfaction, that the created order is not proof of God's existence, I'm not changing my mind.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 It wasn't stated as an insult. It was just truth. And I'm not here to make you change your mind. A delusional state is extremely difficult to come out of. I'm quite sure you'll die with your delusion in tact. Most do. But I don't think you lack the intelligence to approach things logically, but it can't be done with a starting point of delusion, which is where you are now. Even I am willing to accept the possibility of a creator, but I'm quite logically certain it's not Yahweh/Jesus.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Bottom line, we both believe the other has been inoculated with mind numbing poison. You think I believe in fairy tales and magic, same here as regards your belief system. Later.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@LexutheDragonLily And you know this how?
MagisterPridgen 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Christ's death may not be a sacrifice in your world, but it's the only sacrifice qualified to save a man from eternal damnation. "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the *** suffering of death*** crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death, for everyone." Heb. 2:9 Jesus, had a human body, but He also had a divine nature and a human nature, yet without sin.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 Again, none of what you say has any evidence to back it up: Things like "qualified sacrifice" is very subjective. "Lower than the angels" is ridiculous because you can't even define what an angel is. They are just as conveniently invisible as everything else in the Bible. "Glory and honor", and "divine nature" are all hobgoblins of your little mind.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Being cruelly beaten, blasphemed, enduring false witness against Himself, being abandoned and betrayed by His friends, nailed to a cross for hours, bearing the sins of the world, none of which He was guilty, being separated from His Father, a first, tasting the sting of death, etc. His was a sacrifice acceptable to God, and as a result His people have gained life eternal. You'd best develop some humility when you broach this subject. You don't know what you're talking about.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 All of the horrible things you attribute to Jesus at his death are not proven either, and even if he was executed in that fashion, it still proves nothing and does not make him a god. Lots of other people have died MORE cruelly than your Jesus and all it means it that they died cruelly, nothing more. Same applies to Jesus. Your method of death doesn't prove anything, doesn't "wash away" anything, and doesn't make you, or Jesus, any more special than anyone else that has ever died.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 I believe the eyewitness accounts in what I believe to be God's Holy Word, as well as accounts by people such as Tacitus. It's settled for me. You make some very bold assertions you have no way of proving to be true. You have faith that what you postulate about Jesus is so, but that is not the same thing as proof. Not only the manner of death, but the efficacy of His death are deciding factors for those of us who believe. Why are you here evangelizing for atheism & evolution?
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 No, you're wrong again. I'm not making any bold assertions. You and your fellow Christians make bold assertions: miracles, resurrections, virgin births, god turning into man, etc., etc. It is up to YOU and your ilk to show proof of your bold claims. It's not up to me to disprove them. Otherwise, I could say "I'm Jesus Christ," and you'd want me to prove my bold claim, right? The one making the assertion has to prove it, while everyone else listens. I'm listening....
politicoochie09 1 month ago 10
@politicoochie09 The created order is proof of God's existence. It's a general revelation. My definition of faith comes from the Bible which is my starting point. Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb. 11:1 I hold the definition on faith as man renders it up to the light of Scripture's definition, not the other way around. So you have a get out of jail free card. You can try to prove that my beliefs contain a logical contradiction.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 No, the created order is NOT a proof of God's existence. The order of the Universe is not even proof of a creator of any kind, and even a heuristic approach to the possibility of a creator puts your own god very low on the list. Heb. 11:1 is non-sense. By definition you can't use faith and evidence together in a sentence and make them correlate to one another in a positive way. They are opposites. Faith requires no evidence. Evidence requires no faith. Your starting point is bogus.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 "virgin births" I find it funny that they even believe that because the original Hebrew scripture just said Mary was a woman old enough to be married. I honestly don't know why people actually believe what was either a bad translation, or a dishonest misrepresentation by someone trying to make Jesus sound better.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 I'm not "evangelizing" for atheism and evolution. First of all you need to buy a dictionary. Atheism does not require a belief in evolution. Atheism is the absence of belief in a deity. That's all. You don't have to be a scientist to assert that. You don't have to know a single thing about evolution at all. Plus, the definition of "evangelize" is to convert or seek to convert someone to Christianity, so you're using the word incorrectly.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Yes, but an evangelist is a zealous advocate of something according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary. That something does not have to be Christianity. I used the word evangelizing, in your case, as an analogy of what Christians do. I never posted that atheism requires a belief in evolution, and I know what atheism means.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 Please bear in mind, that during this entire discussion, it was YOU that brought up evolution, not me. You mention it, I respond, then you accuse me of "evangelizing" about it. Christians seem to use this tactic a lot, I've discovered recently. Circular reasoning and arguing off-topic is the cornerstone of Christian logic, is that it?
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Really, you brought up the fossil record. See below.
"To begin with, there are different types of proof. Science looks at tangible things like the fossil record --"
Try again.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 Nope. You try again. You said first: "You believe in 2011 that men can tell you what happened billions of years ago,..." so again, YOU brought up evolution, not me.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@politicoochie09 Yes, but cosmological evolution, so called.
luvmusic09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 Your splitting hairs by calling what you said, "cosmological evolution". Fossil records go back billions of years as well.
politicoochie09 1 month ago
@luvmusic09 The problem for the atheist is that while it is logically possible that the universe is eternal, it does not seem to be actually possible. For all the scientific and philosophical evidence (SURGE– Second Law of Thermodynamics, Universe is expanding, Radiation Afterglow, Great galaxy seeds, Einstein’s GR–radioactive decay, and the Kalam Cosmological Argument) tells us the universe cannot be eternal. Check out the book "I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheists". Then bring it.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums who said the universe was eternal? i thought this video was about the argument against evolution., all good scientists believe in entropy, seeing as it's observable..
TheRedwizzards 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
Some things are complicated so it must be magic... that's the entire religious argument, that's what it comes down to. No evidence, no consistent logical structure... just a lack of understanding of science and logic, and a preference for magic.
It's not convincing to any rational person.
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki I don't believe in magic. I believe in God's Word and that Jesus Christ lived, died on the cross for everyone and rose again the 3rd day. There's nothing magical about it when it comes down to an omnipotent Creator. It's not about religion, it's about a relationship.No evidence? Do you really think space, time and matter came from nothing? And a one-celled amoeba to us? That doesn't sound logical to me.We can't know everything because we're finite.God is infinite. Open up your heart man
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
You believe in a book written by sheep herders in the bronze age, whose stories internally contradict themselves endlessly in ways that are impossible to rationalize out of in any intellectually honest fashion, let alone try to rationalize away it's utter and complete disagreement with modern observation of the Earth and the universe, and scientific discovery.
And no matter how much we don't know, what questions we still have... it doesn't make magic any more plausible.
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki The Bible was written by the inspiration of GOD through Kings,military leaders,peasants,philosophers,fishermen,tax collectors,poets,musicians,statesmen,scholars, and yes,shepherds over the course of 1500 yrs. 40 different authors to be exact. Written in the wilderness,dungeons,palaces, on hillsides during war, peace,joy,despair,conviction. On 3 continents(Asia, Africa,Europe) in 3 languages(Hebrew,Aramaic,Greek) yet in all these differences there is perfect unity,and NO contradictions!!
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
So things like the Earth being flat, and Jesus being born during the reign of King Herod, who died 4 BCE, during a census which happened, from Roman records, no earlier than 6 CE (10 years later) in which no one had to travel, different gospels listing different home towns, different people visiting him, different places of birth (was it an inn or a house?), and all those and others just on the first event in Jesus life.
That's just the contradictions of one event. Some of them.
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki Earth being flat?What scripture is that?Yes, Herod died in 4 BC(recorded by Josephus,Antiquities xvii 6.5 who also wrote of Christ Antiquities xviii63f)but our present calender is off in its calculation by about 6 yrsThis would place Christ birth at 6/5 BC.Augustus Caesar sent the decree outEveryone had to travel to their original birthplaceThe fact that Jesus was found in a house(Matt.2:11) indicates the family moved out of the stable into a rented house in Bethlehem.Fulfilling Micah5:2
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
Many times the Earth is suggested as being flat, I like the clay under the seal one the best, I suppose.
None of those rationalizations are very convincing, the gospels differ wildly not only with historical and observational fact, but with each other. The internal inconsistencies, as well as the disagreements with observable reality, history, and science start in Genesis and never stop.
It's a story. A terribly written one.
Ignorance may be bliss, but truth has value too.
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki Like I said, where in scripture is the earth referred to as being flat? And the Gospels? You can take your present day newscasts and not every station is going to say the exact same thing.The facts are there but the accounts will differ because their are different points of view.It is history.A beautifully written one.Romans1:22 Professing themselves(unbelievers,atheists,etc.) to be wise,they became fools.I ask you to check out the site clarifying christianity creation/evolution. Truth.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
Unsubstantiated fairy tales that disagree strongly with reality are your truth... that's... so sad... the real world is so incredible...
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki Ryakki, do you really think we're here to just live and die and that's it?Search your heart.Creation is all around you.The truth is that we all are sinners.God gave us free-will to accept or reject His plan of salvation.We can go on and on about who's right and who's wrong but there is ONE absolute truth to it all.I didn't start living until I realized I needed a Savior.I don't know ya but I do care for ya.And whether you like it or not,I'll be praying for ya.Eternity is a long time.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums "do you really think we're here to just live and die and that's it?" No he doesn't, he thinks he has one life, and that's why it's important to live it well. "Search your heart." If he cut his heart out to try and find something he would most certainly die : }. "Eternity is a long time." Yes it is, why would anyone want to live that long.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
How warm and fuzzy something makes you does not contribute to its' truth value.
All evidence and observation points to us having one life to live, one life to make the most out of. I choose to spend mine gathering knowledge, learning about the universe in all of its' glory.
To spend that one life in thrall to primitive fairy tales, blocking out all knowledge and deep understanding of reality... it just... seems like such a fantastic and useless waste.
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki Since you are open to spending time gathering knowledge and learning about the universe how about exploring clarifyingchristianity website creation vs. evolution link. unless of course you are willing to block out some knowledge and a deeper understanding of reality.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
I've read the bible. It has major contradictions within itself starting in genesis, research of it shows the world to be 6,000 years old, it states the world is flat, and the god talked about in it is a petty cruel sadist.
It's one of thousands of other similar ancient books that does not remotely fit with reality or have any evidence of any kind validating it, and 99% of those exactly like it we now call myth.
I could see its' obvious falseness when I was 5. I've moved on.
Ryakki 1 month ago
@Ryakki Ok.Where in the Bible is the world flat?Isaiah 40:22 says He sits above the circle of the earth.Job26:10 says He drew a circular horizon on the face of the waters,at the boundary of light and darkness.Adam-Abraham=2000yrs.Abraham-Christ=2000yrs.Christ-present=2000yrs.That's 6000yrs.God is a just and loving God.2Peter 3:9-The Lord is not willing that any should perish.God has a desire for the salvation of all who are willing to trust in Him! Doesn't sound like a petty cruel sadist to me.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums A circle is 2D, therefore being a flat shape. Seriously, how do you creationists even pass 3rd grade. Oh wait, the Discovery Institute got Pre-slightly-less-retarded Bush to sign "No Child Left Behind". Look where that got us, Great Depression MKII, half the world is smarter than us, everyone laughs at our nations stupidity, the average Religious American is ignorant of his/her Religion, Religious Americans don't even know their own countries history .... Do you want me to go on?
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums
"The Lord is not willing that any should perish"
Let me save you from where I'll put you if you don't do exactly what I tell you to do. Sounds like a dictator lol
WitchHunter93 1 month ago
@Ryakki Let's compare copies of the original Manuscripts of some "ancient books". Illiad-643 Tacitus-20 Caesar(Gallic Wars)-10 Old & New Testament combined--25,203. Some archeological findings; human headed bull from Nineveh,coin of procurator Pontius Pilate,Picture of King Jehu on a stone,Clay prism that mentions Hezekiah as King of Judah,coin of Herod,coin of Herod's temple with ark of covenant inside. That's reality. That's some evidence.Still prayin' for you,Ryakki.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums You are forgetting one small detail friendo. The people who actually wrote the bible's scripture, were members of the Greek/Roman empire and stole the scriptures and myths from other cultures. Let's not forget that the first person to make a bible from the scripture thought Old Testament God was a different God than New Testament God due to how tremendously different OTG acted compared to NTG. Oh and all that "evidence" you found, most is either forged by creationists or obvious.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster Circular horizon on the face of the waters. Can't grasp that can you? Go on if you wanna it's just like you to wanna get irrational,volitional and downright hateful. God has been the same forever. We're the ones that sin. He is Holy. We're depraved. OT God planned for His Son, Jesus, to come and redeem us.OT God is the same as NT God. Period. But I expect you to be volitional about it with a hint of hatred.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@faker "Circular horizon on the face of the waters. Can't grasp that can you?" So, the bible says, the moon and sun didn't show their reflections in the water until the book of Job? You still fled from Isaiah 40 calling the earth a flat circle. "God has been the same forever." So God still wants you to beat your disobedient children to death? You're God is the one that sins. My God is Holy. You're depraved of a basic education. But I expect your next response to be equally stupid and uncreative.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheBlitMaster Is your holy god proud of you for calling me stupid and uncreative? wouldn't make him holy if he was. Isaiah 40 says nothing of a flat circle. the word "flat" is never seen in the Bible.'' So, the bible says, the moon and sun didn't show their reflections in the water until the book of Job? " The Bible doesn't say that either.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster Who was the first person to put the Bible together? And how do you know what he/she thought?
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums Marcion of Sinope, search Formation of The Modern Bible, it's a 3 parter. You could also read some public domain history books as well. Go to iTunes U and get some history and religion playlists from there.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster I'll check it out.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
@fakeiddrums Don't you go stealing my verse. Get your own. Romans 1:22 applies to people who claim Gnosticism, atheists and scientists are agnostic on anything that isn't demonstrably true, however you claim Gnostic wisdom of creationism and the age of the cosmos/earth, and you are shown to be a fool because of it. Oh and Genesis 6:6 refers to God being upset with his creation, I asked YHWH what he meant and he told me he was referring to creationists.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster What about Romans 1:20? "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen,being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God-head(divine nature); so that they(man) are without excuse" That is God's verse but you can borrow it if you like! I think your verses are Romans 1:24,25. And oh yeah, I asked God if I was a fool for accepting Jesus Christ as my Savior and He told me. . . . . No.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
Romans 1 "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles." It only applies to believers. I talked to god again, he said while you weren't a fool for accepting Jesus, you are a fool for accepting creationism.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster That's so odd that my GOD, the Creator of all things, would call me a fool for believing in creation.
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
Comment removed
fakeiddrums 1 month ago
Unfortunately people like Kirk will never transition into an intelligent human being.l
xxdiogenescynicxx 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xxdiogenescynicxx Unfortunately people like you will go to hell.
shpikieboy1 2 months ago
I like it when someone who doesnt believe in God will second guess him/herself to at least think that there might be a Creator.... keep researching my friends and you WILL find the truth. God is true and not fairytale. Jus keep seeking the truth.God bless.
sidgallegos 2 months ago
@sidgallegos :)
mattjoe952k9 2 months ago
way to go Kirk, way to represent the truth
elibeth121 2 months ago
@elibeth121 I am shocked to find out that Pope John Paul signed an official church document which if you key it in on the webl gives you the details, that he believed evolution not a theory but a fact. I am a christian, former cath. and after surfing this utube, how evident it is that we are in that threshold of the endtime prophecy. I go on Islamic debates, see Bart Erhman, atheists, satanists, what a generation is erupting in front of God's eyes. This is the generation Christ spoke of
TheLionessjudah 2 months ago
im resonding to this idiot politicoochie09 you don't know what your tlking about God loves you more than you could ever imagine Jesus died for you and you don't even appreciate it!
jesus4ever18 2 months ago
Have you ever noticed that "highly intelligent" people curse a lot? I'm just sayin. If their lives are so great, where's the evidence :)
I get it. God loves me and I love Him. Thank you Jesus! I so love you! (keep on guys. not too long til you'll hear "Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. Matthew 25)
Even so Lord Jesus, come quickly!
lovincustomerservice 2 months ago
Australopithecus. Go fuck yourself, moron.
jjjjjjjjjj2068 2 months ago
@ kirk - =D
BIGCYPHER90 2 months ago
The way of the master is still going strong. Brian Sapient is now more concerned about the Philly Eagles and Kelly is too busy planning her next porn shoot. Long live God, and pray for the souls of all who defy him.
jarvisda 2 months ago
Anyone who changes their mind about something after hearing Kirk Cameron speak, based on something Kirk said, doesn't have much of a mind to begin with.
ChipArgyle 2 months ago
Why do the atheists look so angry? They look so on-edge! But the creation guy looks so calm and confident. Where is the proof for macro-evolution? Hmmm.... I just do not honestly understand why the atheists look so bothered. Do they doubt their own theory? Is it no more than an opinion? Look, I'm not messing w/ anyone's right to have an opinion. I just want to know why there's this jaded angry look on their faces?
womanwonder10 2 months ago
They don't understand...
you make a little change every generation, and we've seen, like he said, mini horses etc, except we've changed horses THAT much in only a few hundred years... WHAT WOULD 4 BILLION YEARS OF EVOLUTION DO!?!?!
fuerer24 2 months ago
The fact that the guy at the end keeps saying darwinism reveals how little he knows about the subject.
haohyou12 2 months ago
Ok Kirk,we have a "few" fossils proving that we evolved,what christians have?
The Bible? lol
Deadrops 2 months ago
@Deadropswhat christians have is GODs word and logical explanation of mankinds origin, what darwinism has is millions of holes in his evolution theory, that pertains to how mankind came into existance. its obvious to me that there has to be a starting point, darwinism doesnt have a starting point at all it just claims that man evolved from animals but it doesnt tell us where those animals came from.
prime440 2 months ago
@prime440
You call creationism a "logical explanation of mankinds origin"???
Are you sane?It's not logical,it's just convenient,it's just logical to you!
Have you ever seen something come from nothing?
Just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean that is true.
Deadrops 2 months ago
@Deadrops and just what logical explanation would you preffer?or do you even have one /
prime440 2 months ago
@prime440 I prefer one that has evidences,can be demonstrated by science and is a non-fictional 2000 years old tale.
Deadrops 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Deadropsin other words you dont have one.
prime440 2 months ago
Comment removed
Deadrops 2 months ago
I guess he hopes that if he keeps saying "there is no transitional forms" over and over then they will go away.
fredmalone104 2 months ago
lol i feel really not welcome here just to be Christian,
and also know atheist science stuff.
SO I DON'T BELONG ANYWHERE!!!
WTF!!?
Hibofobi 2 months ago
The dog comes from a wolf so out of the wolf comes hundreds of diffrent dogs in such a small period of time and i dought that a chihuahua can mate with a wolf. THERE proof of spieces evolving in to other forms evolution has showen its self millions of ways in nature all you have to do is open your eyes and research a little
pana376 2 months ago
Every fossil ever found has fit perfectly to the theory of evolution and been exactly what scientist should have expected to find. The kind of fossils Kirk Cameron claims should have found don't fit the theory of evolution at all. He is purposedly missunderstanding and missrepresenting the theory to fool the people who don't yet really know or understand it.
Mornys 2 months ago
This is what big bang taught me:
put tons of TNT explosive inside Library of Congress to blow it up and expect everything to be in still in order..
This is what evolution taught me:
my great great great .... great (millions of great).. grandfather is a rock.
This is what the Bible taught me:
the universe and all that there is are created by God. . .
i go for the simplest and most rational explanation.
fjsmacapil 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fjsmacapil The dog comes from a wolf so out of the wolf comes hundreds of diffrent dogs in such a small period of time and i dought that a chihuahua can mate with a wolf. THERE proof of spieces evolving in to other forms evolution has showen its self millions of ways in nature all you have to do is open your eyes and research a little
pana376 2 months ago
@fjsmacapil
You mean the one where you came from a pile of dirt which was molded into your great great (ect) grandfather who had sex with a rib woman whose children were forced to do tons and tons of incest which somehow didn't actually deform the human race but spread into more and more families?
The best part is where you think the big bang is an explosion, or maybe where you think a rock has anything to do with evolution, LOL
WitchHunter93 2 months ago
THERE IS NO MISSING LINKS BECAUSE EVOLUTION MIGHT GIVE YOU THICK SOLES FOR YOUR PAWS. BUT TO HAVE A REAL NEW SPECIES YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GENETIC MISTAKE. THIS MISTAKE BEING BETTER THAN IT'S PRIOR ENTITY, WITHIN A THOUSAND YEARS MAN BECAME THE TOP SURVIVOR.
STOP LOOKING AND HIT THE MECHANICS OF LIFE.
GIANFRANCO FRONZI. [ THE GOOD MISTAKE]. GOOGLE IT.
9493760 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you want to see a transitional form you can take a look in the mirror.
VidarUlv 3 months ago
@reofthesamez "The truth is that the physical world is just your dream and you are not physical"
that's not entirely true... what is meant by that is that we are not our physical bodies... it does not mean that our physical bodies are a dream and not real. it means our essence is spiritual, not physical... it means we are of a substance more eternal than the physical... physical is temporal, but real... spirit is eternal and real. evolution is both physical and spiritual
Kreneep1052 3 months ago
evolution is real... Darwinism just lacks the full understanding... there is no possible way that this world or universe is only 6000 years old... that, even when I was a bible-thumper, is absolutely ridiculous.
Kreneep1052 3 months ago
If the world is not real then the double slit experiment is not real, if double slit experiment is not real then WTF are you talking about. :P
DonElysium 3 months ago 10
@DonElysium fail
TheBigPicture1 2 months ago
Religion and Evolution are both wrong. The truth is that the physical world is just your dream and you are not physical. That has been taught throughout the millenia by mystics who were rejected and persecuted by religious authorities. Modern Physics has begun to confirm this view (Observer Effect, the discovery that Awareness is not a product of the human brain via Double Slit Experiment etc). We all need to wake up, the dream has gotten out of control....
Moreofthesamez 3 months ago
I will never understand this creationist argument, where do they get their information from?
We have THOUSANDS of transitional forms.
We have witnessed in our lifetime many examples of living things evolving from one species to a brand new species.
We have DNA evidence
How is there still a debate here?
cm3007235 3 months ago
@cm3007235 Cite one?
Moreofthesamez 3 months ago
@Moreofthesamez wikipedia[dot]org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils
cm3007235 3 months ago
@cm3007235 Google "double slit experiment" = the world is not real, the joke is one you
Moreofthesamez 3 months ago
@Moreofthesamez I know what that experiement is. It doesn't prove that the world isn't real. Trust me, I know a decent amount about Quantum Mechanics. I know that the world is absolutely nothing like what we percieve it to be, however the world is still real.
And I know that we can't prove that the world is real, but we live such that it actually is. We can't prove that our perceptions are accurate but they are accurate to the world we live in, regardless of whether this world is "real"
cm3007235 3 months ago