18. Investigation of the creationists’ growing influence shows that the arguments between creationism and evolution go well beyond intellectual debate. If we are not careful, the values that are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from creationist fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council of Europe’s parliamentarians to react before it is too late.
@DragonLance79 If you're interested in truth & how we've not only been scammed about America's economy & by most politicians, but also in the discussion about evolution/creation, please watch Ben Stein's movie "Expelled" ( explains how top biologists have been increasingly fired/failed if they mention they are Creationists. Actually, observation & experimentation support design & an Intelligence more far than they support evolution. An example. DNA = information-always from Intelligence
The Council of Europe has highlighted the importance of teaching about culture and religion. In the name of freedom of expression and individual belief, creationist ideas, as any other theological position, could possibly be presented as an addition to cultural and religious education, but they cannot claim scientific respectability.
Amygdalin (hydrogen cyanide, benzaldahyde & glucose). Amygdalin, as rendered and refined from the pips contained within apricot stones, is known as Laetrile. Amygdalin (vitamin B17) destroys errant trophoblastic/placental/malignant growth. One should not allow the healing process to run rampant in the first place. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
The anti-christ is already here, it is the Vatican the Divining Serpent. It has been here since 538 AD ruled with an iron fist for 1260 years, these guys are behind the UN, EU they make the geo political decisions. In 1929 Mussolini reinstated the Vatican and ever since this Beast have caused many great men to wonder after them. Look at out the Truth will set you free!
For NfnitE... Pascal, one of the most brilliant scientists of all time, basically said theres more than enough evidence to believe (he became a believer based on the prophesies) or not believe (if you dont want to believe). For anyone who is interested for the proof, check out the articles on our website, and/or watch our videos. For the overwhelming scientific evidence for Intelligent Design and creation use our website links under science. our website address is posted on our videos.
Nonsense.? Would you care to elaborate on that, or do you truly prefer to casually wave off all the previous points that have been made in one trifling literal gesture? As to your multiple accusations of me twisting words with no clear explanations as to why you think so, or as to how I have done so, I now take that as an insult. I have only pointed out some of the considerations that one should bear in mind on the subject, which the speakers in this video intentionally steer away from.
If, for whatever reason, it would make you feel better, I could continue by pointing out some similarly modern issues in subjects other than politics in relation to religion. Maybe even in the realms of hard science, to perhaps ease your concerns of evenhandedness, to help you see how an objective mind functions. However, that was not the point of the post, which you seemingly are not willing/able to digest, or at least are clearly not willing to acknowledge.
Dr. Sanford continues "Everything about the true distribution of mutations argues against their possible role in forward evolution" (p.25) "Degeneration is the precise antithesis of evolutionary theory. Therefore the reality of Genetic Entropy is positively fatal to Darwinism". (p.196)
I dont recall ever hearing in these videos that that this group does not advocate creation being taught in public schools, and Im pretty sure I would have picked up on it if it was said. What I take this to mean; however, is that you are attempting to pass off intelligent design as a scientific theory. If you are, you are wrong. Scientific principles within the field of abiogenesis do not state that any of the theories within the field are fact. They, like all scientific theories, propose
the best possible explanations for natural phenomena given the observable data. While some arguments within intelligent design adhere to scientific reasoning principle, the conclusive inference of a supernatural force as an input to the natural system is wholly unscientific, and thusly makes intelligent design unscientific. This has been done for the specific purpose of transforming a religious principle into a more scientific seeming principle to allow the teaching of creationism in the
public school system, which has been evidenced greatly in the past. One quick example: the attempted integration of creationist text books into the public school system after a very simple editing job where the word creationism was replaced by the term intelligent design and creationist ideologies were similarly reworded using scientific terminology. No one is saying that these ideas cannot be discussed, simply that they are unscientific; and therefore, should not be taught in public
schools as any sort of a scientific explanation. The inference of a supernatural force as a causality is religious, no matter how it is dressed up. Not all scientists are expert theorists, and many of the scientists who have enhanced our understanding of natural phenomena also held (and many who are alive today still hold) firm beliefs which they thought (think) to be backed up by scientific methodology.
Genetic Entropy & The Mystery of the Genome. It is a brilliant expose of macro-evolution. The book speaks to the genetic evidence that the human genome is deteriorating and that it has always been deteriorating. He states:"If only one mutation out of a million really unambiguously creates new information ...the literature should be overflowing with reports of this... I am still not convinced there is a single...mutation which unambiguously "created" information"
For macro-evolution (from goo to you) to be true science there needs to be a way to go from non-life (chemicals) to life. All science speaks to the opposite. Secondly, there needs to be a mechanism for change to occur between species. Dr. John Sanford has been a genetics professor at Cornell University for over 25 years. He was co-inventor of the renowned "Gene Gun" and holds over 25 patents and had published over 70 peer reviewed scientific publications. Published in 2005 is his book:
2nd continuation to Infiniti: What we do advocate for is free discussion about "theories" like macro-evolution, and the possible errors within these theories. Dr. David Berlinski expresses this eloquently in the film "Dr. Berlinski Speaks", as does a separate film "Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed". Free expression of ideas is no threat to a free Republic if there is freedom of the "press'. Dictatorships like Communism, and the Roman Catholic Church, continue to be threats.
Continuing to Nfiniticomplx: A free republic has nothing to fear from free discussion of ideas. You "forget"? that our Declaration of Independence makes the existence of creation foundational "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." We at Truth seekers also don't advocate for "creation" being taught in Public School.
Response to NfinitEcomplx: You either misunderstand easily or "twist" our words to suit your agenda. "Creationists" - Newton, Faraday, boyle, Maxwell, etc - gave Western civilization "science". If Jesus is "The truth" and our creator, He presents no harm. We believe He is The Truth. Yes, false religios teaching - ie: Roman Catholicism, Islam, etc. brings harm. So has macro-evolution -ie: Hitler (Aryanism), Stalin, Mao (no God) = millions dead. All dictatorships vs. free speech = great harm.
I did not misunderstand, nor did I twist any words. My agenda here is the same as what these people claim to seek: truth. You misunderstand the points I made and put words into my mouth by inferring that I claimed that no scientists hold biblical beliefs. I did no such thing, and the fact that you attribute such views to anyone who makes a valid argument against these sorts of statements in videos promoting intentional misrepresentations simply puts you in the same boat as these speakers.
Newton, Faraday, Boyle, and Maxwell are but a few of the great thinkers all throughout history who happened to hold biblical beliefs. However, if you intend to attribute such beliefs as being necessary to the formulation of scientific principal or advance of scientific reasoning or methodology, that would be fallacy. In any case, I do not care to argue who holds what religious beliefs, as that is, in my opinion, a spiritual matter for the individual to come to terms with, and was never a
part of any of my points to begin with, in regard to these videos. I do not argue that people have never attempted to use scientific reasoning to justify horrific ideals, actions, or practices, and once again, you either misunderstand or intentionally twist what I pointed out. I was arguing against the rhetorical question in the video: Well, how in the world can creationism be a threat to human rights? The ability to suggest that no possible threat whatsoever can come from ideologies must
be rooted in nothing other than complete, and most likely willful, ignorance. Your foil of people misusing scientific principles in ideologies for the same purpose simply furthers the point I was making. I was not arguing against creationism as an ideology, I was arguing that there is in FACT an obvious avenue within the ideology for these sorts of threats when people attempt to bring these ideas into matters of systemization.
of the people pushing for religious ideals to be taught in public schools happen to be Christians. The reaction would the same if it were another religious group pushing for the same thing. There is a constant theme of misconception throughout the talk, and if these people earnestly wish to seek out truth, they should stop making these sorts of videos and more fully contemplate their own impressions of the world and such subjects before presenting themselves as experts. It is truly disgusting.
I get so irritated when I expose myself to media like this. When intelligent people intentionally mix political and religious ideology to redirect focus from the real focal points of any arguments which may exist and to misrepresent what factual information there actually is on either side; no matter if they are well-intentioned, it is completely exasperating. Creationism can be a major threat to human rights in the same way religion and politics have hampered and intervened in science and
other methods of truth seeking so many times in the past. Creationism, when applied to politics, can also threaten the rights of people who have differing religious views. It was the political powers and ideologies that the Catholic Church had in Europe which hampered the public realizations that the Earth is not flat. It was the same power which hampered the realization that the Earth is not the center of the solar system. Many other truths have been repressed in similar fashion.
These powers are also responsible for the fact that many scientists are apprehensive in talking about their religious affiliations and ideologies or certain scientific concepts (depending on who they are surrounded by), for fear of reprisal from their associates within both science and religion on such spiritual matters. To ignore this and act as though there is no justifiable concern is wholly irresponsible and immediately sets up a premise of dubious motivation for the entire presentation.
The separation of Church and State, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion were implemented for good reason. While certainly not perfect by any stretch of the imagination (what system is?), the application of these concepts is for the hopes of free discourse and enhancement of quality of life for all citizens. It is absolutely true that it is because of these concepts that religious topics cannot be discussed in public schools outside of their historical context, something which
I wish were not true. It saddens me that people are not able to talk about spiritual matters in an open manner in the forum of the public school system. But it has become clear over the years that, at least in the present state of things, this is not possible to do in an even fashion; and so, these things are regulated to forums outside of public education, where authorities on such subjects are able to speak freely to their respective audiences. These speakers prove that creationism as a
whole, and especially when applied to politics, is a threat to other religions through their many condemnations of other religious practices. In the second video of the series, when they are talking about perceived threats, Brandon Church refers to the Christian bible they have with them and says (implying all bibles) it is "...the only book that is considered such a threat" in the situation. This is flat out misleading because it is not the Bible that is the threat. It is simply that most
Maybe if people like these stopped victimizing themselves, they might learn to see past their own perceived misgivings to the reality and truth of the world around them, more fully appreciate those things which the Bible has to offer, and find more of the truths which they claim to seek.
The quiet is:
18. Investigation of the creationists’ growing influence shows that the arguments between creationism and evolution go well beyond intellectual debate. If we are not careful, the values that are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from creationist fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council of Europe’s parliamentarians to react before it is too late.
DragonLance79 6 months ago
@DragonLance79 If you're interested in truth & how we've not only been scammed about America's economy & by most politicians, but also in the discussion about evolution/creation, please watch Ben Stein's movie "Expelled" ( explains how top biologists have been increasingly fired/failed if they mention they are Creationists. Actually, observation & experimentation support design & an Intelligence more far than they support evolution. An example. DNA = information-always from Intelligence
moabedom 6 months ago
The Council of Europe has highlighted the importance of teaching about culture and religion. In the name of freedom of expression and individual belief, creationist ideas, as any other theological position, could possibly be presented as an addition to cultural and religious education, but they cannot claim scientific respectability.
from Resolution 1580
DragonLance79 6 months ago
Amygdalin (hydrogen cyanide, benzaldahyde & glucose). Amygdalin, as rendered and refined from the pips contained within apricot stones, is known as Laetrile. Amygdalin (vitamin B17) destroys errant trophoblastic/placental/malignant growth. One should not allow the healing process to run rampant in the first place. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
TransUnicorn 1 year ago
Only christians are sinful.
Fuglebolle 1 year ago
The anti-christ is already here, it is the Vatican the Divining Serpent. It has been here since 538 AD ruled with an iron fist for 1260 years, these guys are behind the UN, EU they make the geo political decisions. In 1929 Mussolini reinstated the Vatican and ever since this Beast have caused many great men to wonder after them. Look at out the Truth will set you free!
Mekelsior 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
excellent work!
1888junkteam 2 years ago
For NfnitE... Pascal, one of the most brilliant scientists of all time, basically said theres more than enough evidence to believe (he became a believer based on the prophesies) or not believe (if you dont want to believe). For anyone who is interested for the proof, check out the articles on our website, and/or watch our videos. For the overwhelming scientific evidence for Intelligent Design and creation use our website links under science. our website address is posted on our videos.
moabedom 3 years ago
Nonsense. Anyone with an objective mind can follow the thread and see who is twisting words here.
moabedom 3 years ago
Nonsense.? Would you care to elaborate on that, or do you truly prefer to casually wave off all the previous points that have been made in one trifling literal gesture? As to your multiple accusations of me twisting words with no clear explanations as to why you think so, or as to how I have done so, I now take that as an insult. I have only pointed out some of the considerations that one should bear in mind on the subject, which the speakers in this video intentionally steer away from.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
If, for whatever reason, it would make you feel better, I could continue by pointing out some similarly modern issues in subjects other than politics in relation to religion. Maybe even in the realms of hard science, to perhaps ease your concerns of evenhandedness, to help you see how an objective mind functions. However, that was not the point of the post, which you seemingly are not willing/able to digest, or at least are clearly not willing to acknowledge.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
Dr. Sanford continues "Everything about the true distribution of mutations argues against their possible role in forward evolution" (p.25) "Degeneration is the precise antithesis of evolutionary theory. Therefore the reality of Genetic Entropy is positively fatal to Darwinism". (p.196)
moabedom 3 years ago
I dont recall ever hearing in these videos that that this group does not advocate creation being taught in public schools, and Im pretty sure I would have picked up on it if it was said. What I take this to mean; however, is that you are attempting to pass off intelligent design as a scientific theory. If you are, you are wrong. Scientific principles within the field of abiogenesis do not state that any of the theories within the field are fact. They, like all scientific theories, propose
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
the best possible explanations for natural phenomena given the observable data. While some arguments within intelligent design adhere to scientific reasoning principle, the conclusive inference of a supernatural force as an input to the natural system is wholly unscientific, and thusly makes intelligent design unscientific. This has been done for the specific purpose of transforming a religious principle into a more scientific seeming principle to allow the teaching of creationism in the
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
public school system, which has been evidenced greatly in the past. One quick example: the attempted integration of creationist text books into the public school system after a very simple editing job where the word creationism was replaced by the term intelligent design and creationist ideologies were similarly reworded using scientific terminology. No one is saying that these ideas cannot be discussed, simply that they are unscientific; and therefore, should not be taught in public
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
schools as any sort of a scientific explanation. The inference of a supernatural force as a causality is religious, no matter how it is dressed up. Not all scientists are expert theorists, and many of the scientists who have enhanced our understanding of natural phenomena also held (and many who are alive today still hold) firm beliefs which they thought (think) to be backed up by scientific methodology.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
Genetic Entropy & The Mystery of the Genome. It is a brilliant expose of macro-evolution. The book speaks to the genetic evidence that the human genome is deteriorating and that it has always been deteriorating. He states:"If only one mutation out of a million really unambiguously creates new information ...the literature should be overflowing with reports of this... I am still not convinced there is a single...mutation which unambiguously "created" information"
moabedom 3 years ago
For macro-evolution (from goo to you) to be true science there needs to be a way to go from non-life (chemicals) to life. All science speaks to the opposite. Secondly, there needs to be a mechanism for change to occur between species. Dr. John Sanford has been a genetics professor at Cornell University for over 25 years. He was co-inventor of the renowned "Gene Gun" and holds over 25 patents and had published over 70 peer reviewed scientific publications. Published in 2005 is his book:
moabedom 3 years ago
2nd continuation to Infiniti: What we do advocate for is free discussion about "theories" like macro-evolution, and the possible errors within these theories. Dr. David Berlinski expresses this eloquently in the film "Dr. Berlinski Speaks", as does a separate film "Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed". Free expression of ideas is no threat to a free Republic if there is freedom of the "press'. Dictatorships like Communism, and the Roman Catholic Church, continue to be threats.
moabedom 3 years ago
Continuing to Nfiniticomplx: A free republic has nothing to fear from free discussion of ideas. You "forget"? that our Declaration of Independence makes the existence of creation foundational "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." We at Truth seekers also don't advocate for "creation" being taught in Public School.
moabedom 3 years ago
Response to NfinitEcomplx: You either misunderstand easily or "twist" our words to suit your agenda. "Creationists" - Newton, Faraday, boyle, Maxwell, etc - gave Western civilization "science". If Jesus is "The truth" and our creator, He presents no harm. We believe He is The Truth. Yes, false religios teaching - ie: Roman Catholicism, Islam, etc. brings harm. So has macro-evolution -ie: Hitler (Aryanism), Stalin, Mao (no God) = millions dead. All dictatorships vs. free speech = great harm.
moabedom 3 years ago
I did not misunderstand, nor did I twist any words. My agenda here is the same as what these people claim to seek: truth. You misunderstand the points I made and put words into my mouth by inferring that I claimed that no scientists hold biblical beliefs. I did no such thing, and the fact that you attribute such views to anyone who makes a valid argument against these sorts of statements in videos promoting intentional misrepresentations simply puts you in the same boat as these speakers.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
Newton, Faraday, Boyle, and Maxwell are but a few of the great thinkers all throughout history who happened to hold biblical beliefs. However, if you intend to attribute such beliefs as being necessary to the formulation of scientific principal or advance of scientific reasoning or methodology, that would be fallacy. In any case, I do not care to argue who holds what religious beliefs, as that is, in my opinion, a spiritual matter for the individual to come to terms with, and was never a
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
part of any of my points to begin with, in regard to these videos. I do not argue that people have never attempted to use scientific reasoning to justify horrific ideals, actions, or practices, and once again, you either misunderstand or intentionally twist what I pointed out. I was arguing against the rhetorical question in the video: Well, how in the world can creationism be a threat to human rights? The ability to suggest that no possible threat whatsoever can come from ideologies must
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
be rooted in nothing other than complete, and most likely willful, ignorance. Your foil of people misusing scientific principles in ideologies for the same purpose simply furthers the point I was making. I was not arguing against creationism as an ideology, I was arguing that there is in FACT an obvious avenue within the ideology for these sorts of threats when people attempt to bring these ideas into matters of systemization.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
of the people pushing for religious ideals to be taught in public schools happen to be Christians. The reaction would the same if it were another religious group pushing for the same thing. There is a constant theme of misconception throughout the talk, and if these people earnestly wish to seek out truth, they should stop making these sorts of videos and more fully contemplate their own impressions of the world and such subjects before presenting themselves as experts. It is truly disgusting.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
Sorry for the discontinuity and length of the post. This should be just before my last post. Again, sorry for the rant, but it really aggrivates me.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
I get so irritated when I expose myself to media like this. When intelligent people intentionally mix political and religious ideology to redirect focus from the real focal points of any arguments which may exist and to misrepresent what factual information there actually is on either side; no matter if they are well-intentioned, it is completely exasperating. Creationism can be a major threat to human rights in the same way religion and politics have hampered and intervened in science and
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
other methods of truth seeking so many times in the past. Creationism, when applied to politics, can also threaten the rights of people who have differing religious views. It was the political powers and ideologies that the Catholic Church had in Europe which hampered the public realizations that the Earth is not flat. It was the same power which hampered the realization that the Earth is not the center of the solar system. Many other truths have been repressed in similar fashion.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
These powers are also responsible for the fact that many scientists are apprehensive in talking about their religious affiliations and ideologies or certain scientific concepts (depending on who they are surrounded by), for fear of reprisal from their associates within both science and religion on such spiritual matters. To ignore this and act as though there is no justifiable concern is wholly irresponsible and immediately sets up a premise of dubious motivation for the entire presentation.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
The separation of Church and State, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion were implemented for good reason. While certainly not perfect by any stretch of the imagination (what system is?), the application of these concepts is for the hopes of free discourse and enhancement of quality of life for all citizens. It is absolutely true that it is because of these concepts that religious topics cannot be discussed in public schools outside of their historical context, something which
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
I wish were not true. It saddens me that people are not able to talk about spiritual matters in an open manner in the forum of the public school system. But it has become clear over the years that, at least in the present state of things, this is not possible to do in an even fashion; and so, these things are regulated to forums outside of public education, where authorities on such subjects are able to speak freely to their respective audiences. These speakers prove that creationism as a
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
whole, and especially when applied to politics, is a threat to other religions through their many condemnations of other religious practices. In the second video of the series, when they are talking about perceived threats, Brandon Church refers to the Christian bible they have with them and says (implying all bibles) it is "...the only book that is considered such a threat" in the situation. This is flat out misleading because it is not the Bible that is the threat. It is simply that most
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago
Maybe if people like these stopped victimizing themselves, they might learn to see past their own perceived misgivings to the reality and truth of the world around them, more fully appreciate those things which the Bible has to offer, and find more of the truths which they claim to seek.
NfnitEcomplx 3 years ago