Life is not theory or mathematical equation it is more of common sense. It is combination of chemistry and physics, creation has nothing to do with existence of life form. I'm ready to give you all the answers you are looking for you will be amazed how truly life form evolves. And I'm only amateur scientist I put 32 years of my life into it. check my channel out you will find out how far I'm ahead of other with my knowledge.
Evolution is observable (we have observed speciation in nature and in the lab). Evolution is falsifiable, if you found a primate skeleton next to a dinosaur skeleton it would disprove evolution. Its is repeatable, we've repeatedly tested and observed spciation in the lab and in nature. Therefore it is science. In fact, dozens of scientific field depend on evolution being a fact.
@jib1000 I'm sorry but they have found a fossilized dinosaur footprint with a human footprint inside it. go google it.
Also speciation is change within in a kind...Nothing else ..You cannot give me one example of one kind changing into another. Cling to your scientism because evolution is pure religion. There are many scientists with the same PHDs but different conclusions. Don't waste your breath on me I will never change, you can have your futile atheism that only leads to death and despair.
@mockerofscoffers I've been there. Its in Glenrose Tx and its not a human foot print, it just looks like one. Scientists have proven that its erosion, and nothing more.
Speciation is a new species arising from an old one. Thats how evolution works. If dogs gave birth to cats that would DISPROVE evolution. I guess you just don't understand biology huh? Evolution doesn't cause one species to give birth to one in a totally different genus or family. Try getting an education.
@jib1000 ..Awww.. the typical evo head response..."We don't understand biology and evolution" Your presupposing arrogance is both predictable and typical. No harmonies in the atheist camp just the same boring tune. S. J Gould ..could not get passed the problems of gradualism so created the THEORY of punctuated equilibrium.... you guys create myth after myth and then try and say it is fact. You can't prove something so you claim we dont understand it. give me ONE example of macro evolution.
@mockerofscoffers Evolution has been proven true. The fact that you can't understand it doesn't make it false. Macro evolution examples? How about you go read a book? The fossil record is littered with examples. The evolution of whales, horses, humans, reptiles and birds is EXTREMELY well documented.
@jib1000 yeah because our brains that design things didn't need a designer, it just evolved through blind process for no reason all from one microscopic cell billions of years ago. Just like eyes, sex , complex language and the list goes...all from one biddy little microscopic cell for no reason. Sorry dude you say God can't exist but you are willing to believe in other things that are IMPOSSIBLE.
@mockerofscoffers First of all evolution isn't a blind process, and it isn't just chance.
How can it be impossible if its proven to be true and its the ONLY explanation that fits the facts? Godunit isn't science, and there is zero evidence to support it.
God is just the lazy answer to questions. Try getting yourself an education and get back to me.
@jib1000 Not a blind process really? QUICK you had better run and tell Richard Dawkins he may need to rewrite his book "The BLIND watchmaker"..hang on wait are you gonna say Dawkins needs to educate himself. He boldly claims this in many of his books. Dude give up, you want your cake and eat it as well.
Which is it? Why did you start this banter again? have we not been down this road previously? You just keep trippin up.
@mockerofscoffers You're the idiot that started babbling nonsense again.
When you say that evolution is a blind process you're trying to imply that its all chance and accident. This is clearly not the case. Evolution is driven in the direction of improved survivability. That is clearly not blind.
When Dawkins talks about the blind watchmaker he is simply referring to the fact that evolution has no goal. It isn't trying to get somewhere, or to "design" something.
@jib1000 .....Your a foolish man that will find out the truth when it is to late....have your last say if you wish but it will be wasted for I will not reply to your comment it will be deleted before it is read, I pity you.
@mockerofscoffers Thats ok i forgot what you posted last so now i can have the last word anyway. Nanny-nanny boo-boo. You're clearly a child, you hear something you don't like and you throw a temper tantrum.
@mockerofscoffers Also the only reason he uses that phrase is because its part of an idiotic religious straw man argument about how you can't smash a watch and put it in a bag and shake it up and get a watch again. This (at least for ignorant creationists) "proves" that evolution can't exist.
@flightkiller09 THe Bible doesn't have medicine..hmmm it doesn't have lawn mowers or trains either, or monkeys wearing hats with little bells in them either.
@mockerofscoffers It would be a MUST for the Bible (Oh God's Word) to have Some Understanding of the human body! It has no mention of Bacteria or Germs (I guess their Knew nothing about these things.) As a matter of fact the Bible has no Science at all. If it was up to you, we'd be still riding on Donkeys.
Evolution is not science either. It's a religion. Just look at how hostile people like Eugenie Scott and Richard Dawkins are. They refuse to hold a calm discussion without name-calling, etc..
@slumlord72 How is evolution a religion? There is no faith involved, only facts. Evolution is based on OBSERVED FACTS, not on wild speculations like religions. Just because rational people are pissed off at the willful ignorance and lying of religious people doesn't make it a religion. I get mad in traffic, that doesn't make driving a religion.
@jib1000 Observed facts..lol you wouldn't know true science from a fable.
Rational..ha ha... "Professing to be wise they became fools"
You don't want there to be a God so evolution is the only game in town for the evo head.
You believe in fabled beneficial mutations for the diversity of life right? So all this information in the coded language known as DNA just arose naturally huh? Explain to me the origin of DNA.......the atheists nightmare.
@mockerofscoffers I do understand. Its clear from your posts and from your denial of facts that you do not. The origin of DNA? Since when is that the atheists nightmare? I thought that was the banana. Anyway DNA formation happened rather early in the evolution story. It arose from RNA. In fact for a long period all life on earth was RNA based. Its called the RNA world hypothesis. Try reading a book about something before you just regurgitate what your ignorant religious cronies tell you is true.
@jib1000 NO it's clear you do not understand, the chance of DNA forming through natural processes is IMPOSSIBLE, scientists do not know how RNA or DNA formed on a supposed primordial earth. It is pure metaphysical speculation. If they cannot answer it how can you. Exactly! you just demonstrated your epic failure to do so.Get back to me when you have a primary source from any scientific journal that clearly demostrates the origin of DNA or RNA. You will find science somehow skips around that part
There are dozens of scientific papers on that subject.
The chance of DNA forming through natural processes is obviously 100% since it exists in the universe. No scientists believe that its impossible. TRY READING A BOOK.
@jib1000 DNA is the most complex information storage system known to man a teaspoon of DNA would hold the information for every life form ever and then fill the pages of every book ever written..and you think blind nature did it..lol. Show me ONE book that gives the origin PROOF of DNA..there is none. your response is try reading a book...I have. DNA is coded information for the diversity of life we observe. DNA is the language of God the creator.
@jib1000 .and you have read them?......then quote me the part about DNAs origin out of anyone that can be demonstrated using real science, not some professors calculated guess, that is not science it is pure speculation. I know science is 100% stumped on this question, you think its through 100% natural proccess , so demonstrate that then.....what's that you can't?
It exists because God made it...and if you want to get into who made God..we can do that.
@mockerofscoffers I have read several papers on the RNA world hypothesis. All you need to do is read them. They're very easy to find on the net or in a library. It is science, its called abiogenesis. Which is NOT evolution. Evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of life, just the arrival of all modern species from a common ancestor. I guess all the scientists studying abiogenesis aren't studying science? The fact that you don't even know the difference just proves your ignorance.
@jib1000 ..Oh dear skipping to the abiogenesis THEORY now, next thing you are going to to tell me is that Urey MIller experiment proves abiogenesis aren't you? You call abiogenesis science..when it is not ...it is an idea that secular science dreamt up. Like Hitler said " The bigger the lie the more people are likely to believe it." Maybe you should learn the scientific method again and get it through your skull that it always needs to be applicable, to call something science.
@mockerofscoffers Explain to me how it isn't science. Of course the scientific method is used in the study of abiogenesis. Just because there isn't conclusive evidence proving abiogenesis doesn't mean there won't be one day. Thats beside the point we were talking about evolution and your proof that it is false has to do with abiogenesis. Stay on topic here.
If you're going to quote hitler (a christian) or nazis (christians) don't use quotes about big lies (religion).
@jib1000 gee your a funny guy...you may notice that you were the first one to bring abiogenesis into this not me....so yeah it would be nice if YOU would stick to topic. As for your evidence for the origin of DNA or RNA you have produced nudda! What you say does this have to do with evolution? EVERYTHING because DNA is the code for life and is specific for the life we observe.
Tell me would you like God to be real in your view" Or no so you don't have any accountability for how you live?
@mockerofscoffers Its funny you should say that. The origin of RNA or DNA is EXACTLY what abiogenesis is. You brought that up. You don't even know what evolution is and yet you're trying to argue about it.
Of course i don't want god to be real. I like privacy and freedom. God is an evil dictator. No ration sane person would want god to be real. I live up to my morals which is way more impressive than using some immoral teachings from 2000 years ago. The god of the bible is an immoral jerk.
@jib1000 ..Dude your lack of real understanding for Christian theology is glaringly obvious.
There is no point to this conversation as your ignorance of true science confounds me.
Take care and don't get put in a zoo as monkeys do. Just remember as we are slowly but surely lead into a one world monetary system starting with the collapse of the US dollar and earthquakes and disasters increase , the Bible predicted all of this, this is just the start of it all for you and me.
@mockerofscoffers Actually i'm sure i know more about christianity than you do. You're right about there not being a point in talking to me about this issue. You know nothing of science. You don't even know the definition of evolution, how it works, or anything about the mountain of proof that supports the fact. You're clearly delusional and if you believe in the bible why don't you just do anything and everything you want? Nothing in the bible teaches you morals, or healthy ways to live.
@slumlord72 Evolution is not science either. It's a religion? And your evidence of this is how hostile people like Eugenie Scott and Richard Dawkins are? Wow, You are a moron.
ID'ers have to attack the cosmology AND evolution simultaneously. You can't have a god who just drops by the planet one day and sticks some life on it, you need a god that made whole shebang from the tiniest subatomic particle to the hugest galaxy. That's why they conflate the two; it isn't confusion, it's necessity.
Ok fat man, here's my theory: what we call the sphinx is a natural formation. So while you may argue (from ignorance) that someone carved it, all that shows is your lack of imagination regarding how it could come about by natural processes. And, even though I have no idea what natural processes could possibly create something like the sphinx, we have to go with my theory until the end of time because to do otherwise would be to embrace an argument from ignorance, and we can't do that. Right.
@kkkaldav That's not a theory, that's a wild speculation.
If your comparing it to I.D then you must realize that neither I.D/creationism or your stupid sphinx claim are theories.
A more accurate comparison is: I believe that the flying spaghetti monster holds us to the ground with his noodley appendages, lets pretend that this is a theory and teach it alongside gravity AND PUT A DISCLAIMER that discredits gravity so that my concept may appear more plausible.
@explosivoification You don't know what you're talking about. You don't understand my example. You don't understand it in either it's purpose or it's details. The point was about the merits of the 'argument from ignorance' stock response to doubts about evolution. The point being that it shows that stock response to be a pretty poor one.
@Blockygraphics Two German merchant ships have sailed through the once impassable North East Passage after global warming and melting ice opened a route from South Korea along Russia's Arctic coast to Siberia. London Daily Telegraph, September 2009.,
the truth is no one knows how the world was created and if you think you know you are just arogant. im not saying your wrong im just saying there is no scientific PROOF for any scientific or creationic theory. THEY ARE JUST THEORIES NO PROOF when you prove it send me a message then ill belive you cuz idk what to believ, like i said NO PROOF
the truth is no one knows how the world was created and if you think you know you are just arogant. im not saying your wrong im just saying there is no scientific PROOF for any scientific or creationic theory. THEY ARE JUST THEORIES NO PROOF when you prove it send me a message then ill belive you cuz idk what to believ, like i said NO PROOF
@explosivoification Do accept that there is no God, blindly? If not, then you must have evidence to support you acceptance, right? Otherwise, you are accepting something blindly when you should reject it due to lack of evidence.
@locoyo386 I merely reject the claim that god exists due to lack off evidence, I do not assert that there is no god, just that there is no reason to think that there is. I do however assert that the Christian god is not real.
@explosivoification "I merely reject the claim that god exists due to lack off evidence"
With that statement I can gather you are not completely closed to the belief that God exists, just merely that you do no believe God exist simpy because you have no evidence of God's existence. This is why you clasify yourself as agnostic.
"just that there is no reason to think that there is"
For you they might not be, how ever would there be a reason to reject God if you do come across any evidence?
@locoyo386 I'm an agnostic atheist, as in I don't believe in a god but I don't know for certain that there is no god.
"would there be a reason to reject God if you do come across any evidence?" I assume that you mean evidence that it doesn't exist, then yes, if it's solid evidence and not just an argument that seems pretty airtight.
@explosivoification Also note that just because you have no reason to belive it, itself is no reason for other to stop believing it.
"I do however assert that the Christian god is not real."
Are you sure that it is an assertion that God is not real, instead of that there might be some inconsitencies on how the Christian God is potrayed? If not, what do you offer as incoclusive proof that the Christian God or any other for that matter God, is not real.
@locoyo386 I am only referring to the god Christians,Jews and Muslims worship, not all gods.
From my perspective the Christian god only exists within the story told about him, so the inconsitencies on how the Christian God is potrayed is exactly what I am referring to.
If a god exists that isn't like the christian god, then it isn't the christian god eg. if a god came by with a limited amount of power, knowlege and wasn't constantly interfering with humanity, it wouldn't be the christian god.
@explosivoification "From my perspective the Christian god only exists within the story told about him, so the inconsitencies on how the Christian God is potrayed is exactly what I am referring to."
If God did exist, would those inconsistencies negate his existence?
ID is simply god of the gaps. We don know therefore it is god or 'ID'. Evolutionary theory explains so much of what we see so well. Not to mention genetic evidence is showing the how. We have come a long way since Darwin so the IDiots need to stop portraying evolution as solely according to Darwin.
0:35-0:48 is wrong to this entity you talk about does not exists in ID. ID does not presume the idea of a God it only states that darwin has'nt got the whole picture. You are talking about a gopd that can interfere with (current) "reality", that is a biblical God sir. This has nothing to do with ID. Conclusion: you are misquoting ID again, It is not your fault because ID is getting al wronged all the time as a silly Idea. ID is wronged by the current establishment of darwinism, that is the truth
0:24 to 0:32 is your first mistake. You quote how the media have marked ID, as something stupid and silly or as you say: "The complexity of life and the universe can only be explained by a designer"
This is utterly wrong. The very fundamental definition of ID is very commonly misquoted. Let me give you the true definition as proposed by the discovery instutition in Seattle (the founders of ID). ID=A minimal scientific commitment in detecting intelligent causation
@dex1391 They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; '2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. (page 64)
@dex1391 • 'After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science.
@dex1391 I didn't say it. Judge John E. Jones, devout Lutherian, Bush appointed, conservative did, Kitzmuller V. Dover Area School Board, 2005, after the best asrguement ID could present.
@dex1391 You are the first person I have ever encountered who thought Jones was an activist because his record is strictly conservative, but then again you think many strange things. Get back to me when you have an arguement, and be prepared to argue science.
@dex1391 He was praised by Tom Ridge, former Pennsylvania Governor and former head of the Department of Homeland Security, who said that "I can't imagine a better judge presiding over such an emotionally charged issue... he has an inquisitive mind, a penetrating intellect and an incredible sense of humor."[1
@dex1391 "Creationism puts on no mask.It is what it is. It pretends nothing.If you want to believe something else... go for it.It makes no difference to me. "
You can have beliefs if that's what makes you tick. I will stick to scientific fact thanks.
@dex1391 They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; '2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. (page 64)
There is always the question of what you believe. Everything explained by science has to have a cause and since anything has to be the reason for the big bang and it´s impossible to find it, you can´t clear that up with science. The big bang itself is unscientific because you can´t orove it. Evolution doesn´t exclude intelligent design. It´s possible that God made creatures that have the ability to change in order to adapt new circumstances.
However, it in no way disproves God as any christian can argue that God could have easily started off the process as the first cause, and then let events like evolution take place, creationists are foolish, but you dont have to be a creationist to believe in God
I hope one day all christians can help the cause of science, they have no need to combat one another, unless it breaches human rights or summut..
Very clear and correct. I think though that the self organising of matter into environments and conditions suitable for life and the self building and organising of the tree of life are very similar and related mathematically in that positive feedback of a critical system and death of invalid or unsustainable life/matter etc should be a warning to creationists with ideas that don't stack up! as all things follow the same process including ideas. Chaos is required to create inteligence. QED
your %100 right, ID is not science, in any shape or form. as soon as god is brought into the picture, science leaves the picture. I think ID was just like you said an argument from ignorance from the people who just cant realize that god and science do not mix. it's god or science, and im really hoping that more people will start choosing the latter of the two
alot of americans are atheists, we are just outspoken by the crazy asses in power. hopefully when my generation is in power we can turn this fucken shit around.
Great video. "True" ID'ers base the belief on a shallow and simplistic extrapolation of strictly HUMAN concepts to the creation of the universe. We create, therefore we were created. ID proponents will not admit that this is the foundation of their position. Instead they cite things like irreducible complexity which has been debunked many times over. They're also ignorant to how biological systems can fail/make errors ending in mutations yet constantly talk up the "intelligence" of the creator
Do you believe in the law of conservation of mass? where Matter cannot be created or destroyed but simply changes state?
If you do then you would agree that it is known that babies are created in the womb of a mother and born into the world rather then just "existing" into the world correct?
Then how can it be said that the universe ultimately just existed? If matter cannot be created then how was the universe created...
what the kinda argument is this ... Babies are created out of allrdy made materia not nothing.. Its one of those things you can't compress intoo "simple minded logic" ..
But yet somehow God just appears...for no fucking reason..he was just bored and said .."you know what devil? Lets play a game Ill make these people and the universe to exist..and we will see between the both us who is more popular...are you ready, Hold my beer"
That's like asking, whats beyond the Universe, and Beyond that, and beyond that.
To be honest Human knowledge will eventually reach a physical limit of exploration and enter the realm of speculation where it will remain for the rest of time. Were not equipped to answer every question that pops up therefore you cannot disregard any possibilities because they seem foolish. Doing so voids the possibilities for discoveries thought impossible,
if Humans EVER get out of our solar system im sure they will be baffled about how the laws they think work will more than likely change to a drastic point though impossible.
...So obviously something that has the power to create this matter influenced what we now call the universe. Saying that that is not probable or possible sounds just as foolish to others that agree about Intelligent design. As for that the ultimate and most important question science will never be able to give an answer as to where all matter came from.
Uh, no. We have no idea what influenced what we call the universe, and merely suggesting a hypothesis of an intelligent designer does not make it valid or relevant. Based on everything we know, an intelligent designer IS improbable. That makes him only possible. But there is nothing inherently of value in a "possibility." Almost anything is possible. You can't just take the leap to those things being likely, or even probable. God is a good example
I see some people here are not to receptive to your vido i am sorry for that. I think you have put forth effort and I thank you for that even if i am not of any religion and consuming just information to make an informative solution to the already postive solution made. some people can be mean and evil because the disagree, i cannot understand why they can not just listen to knowlege. thats been the problem all along i think what do you think. thanks again for your vido michelle
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You know you atheist people crack me up. You think you are all superior, well let me tell you something, if you are so smart, why not solve the economic crisis? Why not? If there is no God, where is the good coming from? WHERE??? Do something!!! SOLVE SOLVE SOLVE LOL but you can't.
No, I only hold that kind of arrogance in arguing about issues when I think I am right.
So I don't get how atheists are uniquely elitest. Christians have there own elitism that God has is favor of you and evilution is so such a religion!
As far as the economic crisis goes you are talking bull crap. How can atheists solve the problem when they aren't even every elected as politicians and are the minority in business? I don't think all atheists are smart either.
For Uchihaltachi: It amazes me again and again that Christians always think that logical people think they are "superior". If the logical people's thinking and behavior appears to you as so much more superior, then whey don't you try to use them as role models? The same thing happens in stores: You buy a shampoo and it says "European style". Why don't they make higher quality shampoos in the USA then? Or the bread for example: European bread. Why not make bread here without sugar or sweetener?
Intelligent design is the most laughable theory I've ever heard, especially the way the bible puts it. FOr all you creationists out there, I have the following to say to you: evolution, natural selection, and SCIENCE.
intelligent design is NOT a theory, and this is why: it's not based on scientific observations and is such a wild guess! Evolution was tested by the man himself, and married with genetics, scientists have scanned the origin in the DNA, the DNA changes overtime! I disagree that the bible makes specific claims about the universe, they're not specific, "in the beginning, god created the heavens and the earth" does it say when, and does it say how? no.
You are wrong there. If religion were to keep its proclamations outside the realm that science addresses then you would be correct but they do not. The Bible makes specific claims as to the creation of the universe and how all the animals and plant life got here. If the christians were willing to give that up as just a bunch of fairy tales then we would not even be having this argument.
Accept the fact that God exists! He gave you the answer. Remember Einstein said that the Universe is just there? But then what about the big bang theory? The big bang theory disproves einstein's and thus God EXISTS! God MUST exist.
"The big bang theory disproves einstein's and thus God EXISTS!"
Non sequitur, The universe had a beginning in time, but you cannot prove what must or could have happened before time since there is no time to talk about. The big bang proves that the universe is finite and had t=0, but it doesn't prove that it ontological didn't exist before that time.
Ever read that energy is indestructible ?!? ..you can't destroy energy it had too be beffore big bang just compressed. And what about matter . Well I think we will soon know what happened.
Evolution? Pfft, evolution is the biggest secular atheistic naturalistic fraud that has ever entered science. Of course it is the only scientific theory because science cannot comment on divine origin so atheists seized the opportunity to have the monopoly on truth through science in order to have a wagon to promote their atheistic ideologies and stick a knife through religion. We know why you love evolution so much.
But guess what your delusions you gave to believers hasn't stopped religion.
a set of explanations for a natural phenomenon that have been proven by data and accepted by scientists as fact until data is found that disproves the theory.
@atheistliberty intelligent design is not science ur absolutely right. there is no way we could test, observe or demonstrate a deity. i say this, because origin itself is not science. abiogenesis is a study of origin of biological information. there has never been a study on how dna could of constructed naturally stright from nucleotides and chromosome.likewise, how proteins could of self assembled stright from amino acids.
intellegent design is a fair therory it incorporates many things including the big bang and evelotion but it can not include natural selection, also ID does not have to include a christian god it can be aliens it really doesnt matter but the problems is that it is the closest scientific theory to the bibles acount for creatian, you can be an Atheist and belive in ID but most people do not understand that part,ID simply links the begining(the Big Bang)with human existence(evalotion)to a designer
Just because it attempts to legitimize itself by "including the big bang and evelotion(sic)" it is not a theory. However, you are also gravely misinformed as to what the ID proponents want to teach in our schools. I suggest you take a look at the case of "Of Pandas and People". The "Intelligent" design "textbook" that a school board in Dover Kansas tried to force into the science class room. ID is simply repacked creationism.
the only one "misinformed" of ID is you although Christians want ID taught in schools because it is the closest scientific theory to what they belive it is not the fault of ID scientists(such as Stephen C. Meyer) for the reilgous attention they should not have to pay because of it. although neo-Darwinist sceintists(such as Dawkins) want to riddicule ID because it could support religous ideology, it does not make it right, there are many holes in Darwinism that can be explained by ID and visversa
Meyer has been thoroughly discredited and his "science" can't even get published unless he cheats. Sorry but if Meyer is the only scientist you can refer to you are on very shaky ground.
It is not a scientific theory because it does not explain anything about this supposed intelligent agent. The whole thing is an argument from ignorance. "I am too stupid to figure out how the bacterial flagellum actually evolved so it must have been created by in intelligent agent". Don't be absurd.
@atheistliberty dna replication and protein synthesis is complementary natural process, much like photosynthesis and cellular respiration. we really have a chicken and egg problem with abiogenesis in a sense that which one came firs, dna to synthesize protein or protein to replicate dna. im not saying a deity is involed in any way, im just saying we don't know. origin is not observed and could not be tested. it is not science.
@benben423 okay. How does ID explain...well anything? Can you give me an example on which ID has been tested and shown to improve our knowledge? What new treatments has ID inspired? What is the mechanism of ID? HOw might one falsify it if it is a theory?
This is both an oversimplification of the purpose of science and a mischaracterization of what ID is. Let's suppose for a moment that the wider scientific community were to take ID seriously. The first questions that would need to be addressed is HOW god guides evolution. What mechanism he uses. One crucial bit of evidence for the theory would be an observed deviation from physical laws that cannot be explained by other means. ID is not science because it's proponents refuse to do this work.
And what a "coincidence" that Buddhists (who don't believe in a creator, thus practically being atheists) are considered to be the most peaceful religious people. Also very interesting to see that they go along very well with modern science. Eminently respectable people like the Dalai Lama are even able to fit spiritual ideas with top-notch scientific research, e.g. quantum physics. I'm not a Buddhist, but Buddhism has a striking advantage over monotheistic religions - it can adapt to progress.
It is true that some Buddhist sects, perhaps the most prominent, I do not know, are as you describe. There are others, however, that are militaristic and dogmatic to the point of rivaling the Muslims and the Christians. I think they are a minority opinion today but in the past they have held considerable sway in China and Japan.
Even so, I can respect those Buddhists of which you speak, to a point. There is still the problem of there being no direct evidence that their religion is true.
I hate when creationists respond to evolutionists by saying "So you think everything came from nowhere?"
First of all, that isn't even a valid response to the theory of evolution. Evolution explains the complexity of life. The theory of evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of the universe.
Even so, the big bang theory does not attempt to explain the origin of the universe. Most people with common sense realize that there must have been something before the big bang.
That's what they don't understand about the universe. They think there must be a "time-based origin". But it's only because they don't understand Einstein and cannot imagine that also spacetime is not absolute. They think that it all had a beginning. Some Eastern religions like Buddhism are much more intellectually and spiritually developped in this perspective. They know that this doesn't make any sense, thus describing life not with start and end point, but rather with a neverending circle.
I'm too inclined to assume that most probably there was no "beginning" as you say. Thanks to Einstein and successors, we know it is not mandatory. And also it would make more sense, as it doesn't end up in: "What was before the beginning? And what was before the beginning of the beginning? and so on..."
We would simply look at a self-contained universe.
Life is not theory or mathematical equation it is more of common sense. It is combination of chemistry and physics, creation has nothing to do with existence of life form. I'm ready to give you all the answers you are looking for you will be amazed how truly life form evolves. And I'm only amateur scientist I put 32 years of my life into it. check my channel out you will find out how far I'm ahead of other with my knowledge.
Levon9404 5 months ago
Intelligent Design is no more than a philosophical argument, it is NOT a scientific theory as it can't be proven scientifically.
cmdrkoenig67 6 months ago
I think a canine in your neighborhood may disagree
LopatoBeats 8 months ago
Evolution is not observable, falsifiable,testable or repeatable, therefore it fails as science.
Therefore you fail.
mockerofscoffers 10 months ago
@mockerofscoffers LOL
Evolution is observable (we have observed speciation in nature and in the lab). Evolution is falsifiable, if you found a primate skeleton next to a dinosaur skeleton it would disprove evolution. Its is repeatable, we've repeatedly tested and observed spciation in the lab and in nature. Therefore it is science. In fact, dozens of scientific field depend on evolution being a fact.
In conclusion you in fact have failed.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 I'm sorry but they have found a fossilized dinosaur footprint with a human footprint inside it. go google it.
Also speciation is change within in a kind...Nothing else ..You cannot give me one example of one kind changing into another. Cling to your scientism because evolution is pure religion. There are many scientists with the same PHDs but different conclusions. Don't waste your breath on me I will never change, you can have your futile atheism that only leads to death and despair.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers I've been there. Its in Glenrose Tx and its not a human foot print, it just looks like one. Scientists have proven that its erosion, and nothing more.
Speciation is a new species arising from an old one. Thats how evolution works. If dogs gave birth to cats that would DISPROVE evolution. I guess you just don't understand biology huh? Evolution doesn't cause one species to give birth to one in a totally different genus or family. Try getting an education.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 ..Awww.. the typical evo head response..."We don't understand biology and evolution" Your presupposing arrogance is both predictable and typical. No harmonies in the atheist camp just the same boring tune. S. J Gould ..could not get passed the problems of gradualism so created the THEORY of punctuated equilibrium.... you guys create myth after myth and then try and say it is fact. You can't prove something so you claim we dont understand it. give me ONE example of macro evolution.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers Evolution has been proven true. The fact that you can't understand it doesn't make it false. Macro evolution examples? How about you go read a book? The fossil record is littered with examples. The evolution of whales, horses, humans, reptiles and birds is EXTREMELY well documented.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 yeah because our brains that design things didn't need a designer, it just evolved through blind process for no reason all from one microscopic cell billions of years ago. Just like eyes, sex , complex language and the list goes...all from one biddy little microscopic cell for no reason. Sorry dude you say God can't exist but you are willing to believe in other things that are IMPOSSIBLE.
I
mockerofscoffers 5 months ago
@mockerofscoffers First of all evolution isn't a blind process, and it isn't just chance.
How can it be impossible if its proven to be true and its the ONLY explanation that fits the facts? Godunit isn't science, and there is zero evidence to support it.
God is just the lazy answer to questions. Try getting yourself an education and get back to me.
jib1000 5 months ago
@jib1000 Not a blind process really? QUICK you had better run and tell Richard Dawkins he may need to rewrite his book "The BLIND watchmaker"..hang on wait are you gonna say Dawkins needs to educate himself. He boldly claims this in many of his books. Dude give up, you want your cake and eat it as well.
Which is it? Why did you start this banter again? have we not been down this road previously? You just keep trippin up.
mockerofscoffers 5 months ago
@mockerofscoffers You're the idiot that started babbling nonsense again.
When you say that evolution is a blind process you're trying to imply that its all chance and accident. This is clearly not the case. Evolution is driven in the direction of improved survivability. That is clearly not blind.
When Dawkins talks about the blind watchmaker he is simply referring to the fact that evolution has no goal. It isn't trying to get somewhere, or to "design" something.
jib1000 5 months ago
@jib1000 .....Your a foolish man that will find out the truth when it is to late....have your last say if you wish but it will be wasted for I will not reply to your comment it will be deleted before it is read, I pity you.
mockerofscoffers 5 months ago
@mockerofscoffers Thats ok i forgot what you posted last so now i can have the last word anyway. Nanny-nanny boo-boo. You're clearly a child, you hear something you don't like and you throw a temper tantrum.
Nice.
jib1000 5 months ago
@mockerofscoffers Also the only reason he uses that phrase is because its part of an idiotic religious straw man argument about how you can't smash a watch and put it in a bag and shake it up and get a watch again. This (at least for ignorant creationists) "proves" that evolution can't exist.
Try reading a book.
jib1000 5 months ago
@mockerofscoffers I believe in the minds of Scientists--not yours. Your computer is a Product of SCIENCE!
Vaccines against diseases comes from Science!
The bible (the word of God) does not even have MEDICINE!
Science is NEVER about Faith!
flightkiller09 5 months ago
@flightkiller09 THe Bible doesn't have medicine..hmmm it doesn't have lawn mowers or trains either, or monkeys wearing hats with little bells in them either.
mockerofscoffers 5 months ago
@mockerofscoffers It would be a MUST for the Bible (Oh God's Word) to have Some Understanding of the human body! It has no mention of Bacteria or Germs (I guess their Knew nothing about these things.) As a matter of fact the Bible has no Science at all. If it was up to you, we'd be still riding on Donkeys.
flightkiller09 5 months ago
Evolution is not science either. It's a religion. Just look at how hostile people like Eugenie Scott and Richard Dawkins are. They refuse to hold a calm discussion without name-calling, etc..
Kinda reminds me of fanatical Muslims.
slumlord72 10 months ago
@slumlord72 How is evolution a religion? There is no faith involved, only facts. Evolution is based on OBSERVED FACTS, not on wild speculations like religions. Just because rational people are pissed off at the willful ignorance and lying of religious people doesn't make it a religion. I get mad in traffic, that doesn't make driving a religion.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 Observed facts..lol you wouldn't know true science from a fable.
Rational..ha ha... "Professing to be wise they became fools"
You don't want there to be a God so evolution is the only game in town for the evo head.
You believe in fabled beneficial mutations for the diversity of life right? So all this information in the coded language known as DNA just arose naturally huh? Explain to me the origin of DNA.......the atheists nightmare.
let me guess, I don't understand? NO.. YOU DON'T!
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers I do understand. Its clear from your posts and from your denial of facts that you do not. The origin of DNA? Since when is that the atheists nightmare? I thought that was the banana. Anyway DNA formation happened rather early in the evolution story. It arose from RNA. In fact for a long period all life on earth was RNA based. Its called the RNA world hypothesis. Try reading a book about something before you just regurgitate what your ignorant religious cronies tell you is true.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 NO it's clear you do not understand, the chance of DNA forming through natural processes is IMPOSSIBLE, scientists do not know how RNA or DNA formed on a supposed primordial earth. It is pure metaphysical speculation. If they cannot answer it how can you. Exactly! you just demonstrated your epic failure to do so.Get back to me when you have a primary source from any scientific journal that clearly demostrates the origin of DNA or RNA. You will find science somehow skips around that part
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers RNA WORLD HYPOTHESIS.
There are dozens of scientific papers on that subject.
The chance of DNA forming through natural processes is obviously 100% since it exists in the universe. No scientists believe that its impossible. TRY READING A BOOK.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 DNA is the most complex information storage system known to man a teaspoon of DNA would hold the information for every life form ever and then fill the pages of every book ever written..and you think blind nature did it..lol. Show me ONE book that gives the origin PROOF of DNA..there is none. your response is try reading a book...I have. DNA is coded information for the diversity of life we observe. DNA is the language of God the creator.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@jib1000 .and you have read them?......then quote me the part about DNAs origin out of anyone that can be demonstrated using real science, not some professors calculated guess, that is not science it is pure speculation. I know science is 100% stumped on this question, you think its through 100% natural proccess , so demonstrate that then.....what's that you can't?
It exists because God made it...and if you want to get into who made God..we can do that.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers I have read several papers on the RNA world hypothesis. All you need to do is read them. They're very easy to find on the net or in a library. It is science, its called abiogenesis. Which is NOT evolution. Evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of life, just the arrival of all modern species from a common ancestor. I guess all the scientists studying abiogenesis aren't studying science? The fact that you don't even know the difference just proves your ignorance.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 ..Oh dear skipping to the abiogenesis THEORY now, next thing you are going to to tell me is that Urey MIller experiment proves abiogenesis aren't you? You call abiogenesis science..when it is not ...it is an idea that secular science dreamt up. Like Hitler said " The bigger the lie the more people are likely to believe it." Maybe you should learn the scientific method again and get it through your skull that it always needs to be applicable, to call something science.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers Explain to me how it isn't science. Of course the scientific method is used in the study of abiogenesis. Just because there isn't conclusive evidence proving abiogenesis doesn't mean there won't be one day. Thats beside the point we were talking about evolution and your proof that it is false has to do with abiogenesis. Stay on topic here.
If you're going to quote hitler (a christian) or nazis (christians) don't use quotes about big lies (religion).
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 gee your a funny guy...you may notice that you were the first one to bring abiogenesis into this not me....so yeah it would be nice if YOU would stick to topic. As for your evidence for the origin of DNA or RNA you have produced nudda! What you say does this have to do with evolution? EVERYTHING because DNA is the code for life and is specific for the life we observe.
Tell me would you like God to be real in your view" Or no so you don't have any accountability for how you live?
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers Its funny you should say that. The origin of RNA or DNA is EXACTLY what abiogenesis is. You brought that up. You don't even know what evolution is and yet you're trying to argue about it.
Of course i don't want god to be real. I like privacy and freedom. God is an evil dictator. No ration sane person would want god to be real. I live up to my morals which is way more impressive than using some immoral teachings from 2000 years ago. The god of the bible is an immoral jerk.
jib1000 7 months ago
@jib1000 ..Dude your lack of real understanding for Christian theology is glaringly obvious.
There is no point to this conversation as your ignorance of true science confounds me.
Take care and don't get put in a zoo as monkeys do. Just remember as we are slowly but surely lead into a one world monetary system starting with the collapse of the US dollar and earthquakes and disasters increase , the Bible predicted all of this, this is just the start of it all for you and me.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers Actually i'm sure i know more about christianity than you do. You're right about there not being a point in talking to me about this issue. You know nothing of science. You don't even know the definition of evolution, how it works, or anything about the mountain of proof that supports the fact. You're clearly delusional and if you believe in the bible why don't you just do anything and everything you want? Nothing in the bible teaches you morals, or healthy ways to live.
jib1000 7 months ago
@mockerofscoffers The Bible can be read in such a way that people could say it predicts the future...However, it does nothing of the sort.
cmdrkoenig67 3 months ago
@slumlord72 I agree evolution is faith based but they will never admit it. But will call speculative theories fact.
mockerofscoffers 7 months ago
@slumlord72 Evolution is not science either. It's a religion? And your evidence of this is how hostile people like Eugenie Scott and Richard Dawkins are? Wow, You are a moron.
SuperMrAtheist 4 months ago
@SuperMrAtheist Evolution isn't a Religion, it's an observed phenomenon that works through Natural Selection among other things.
SteamyshotofFUN 4 months ago
@SuperMrAtheist Sorry about my last comment, didn't read yours right.
SteamyshotofFUN 4 months ago
@SuperMrAtheist You obviously have no idea what the definition of a religion is.
cmdrkoenig67 3 months ago in playlist Liked
This has been flagged as spam show
@cmdrkoenig67 neither do you.
SuperMrAtheist 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
so what you think?
TrueLandCommunity 1 year ago
ID'ers have to attack the cosmology AND evolution simultaneously. You can't have a god who just drops by the planet one day and sticks some life on it, you need a god that made whole shebang from the tiniest subatomic particle to the hugest galaxy. That's why they conflate the two; it isn't confusion, it's necessity.
colourmegone 1 year ago
Ok fat man, here's my theory: what we call the sphinx is a natural formation. So while you may argue (from ignorance) that someone carved it, all that shows is your lack of imagination regarding how it could come about by natural processes. And, even though I have no idea what natural processes could possibly create something like the sphinx, we have to go with my theory until the end of time because to do otherwise would be to embrace an argument from ignorance, and we can't do that. Right.
kkkaldav 1 year ago
@kkkaldav That's not a theory, that's a wild speculation.
If your comparing it to I.D then you must realize that neither I.D/creationism or your stupid sphinx claim are theories.
A more accurate comparison is: I believe that the flying spaghetti monster holds us to the ground with his noodley appendages, lets pretend that this is a theory and teach it alongside gravity AND PUT A DISCLAIMER that discredits gravity so that my concept may appear more plausible.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification You don't know what you're talking about. You don't understand my example. You don't understand it in either it's purpose or it's details. The point was about the merits of the 'argument from ignorance' stock response to doubts about evolution. The point being that it shows that stock response to be a pretty poor one.
kkkaldav 1 year ago
I think you need to change the title of this to say "Intelligent Design is not intelligent"
If it were intelligent, there would be no genetic deformities, species hybridization ... and Owls would not have better eyes than humans!!
arp76 1 year ago
@Blockygraphics Two German merchant ships have sailed through the once impassable North East Passage after global warming and melting ice opened a route from South Korea along Russia's Arctic coast to Siberia. London Daily Telegraph, September 2009.,
gamesbok 1 year ago
Comment removed
gerontodon 1 year ago
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7
Then you have made your choice.
locoyo386 1 year ago
the truth is no one knows how the world was created and if you think you know you are just arogant. im not saying your wrong im just saying there is no scientific PROOF for any scientific or creationic theory. THEY ARE JUST THEORIES NO PROOF when you prove it send me a message then ill belive you cuz idk what to believ, like i said NO PROOF
mdscownz 1 year ago
the truth is no one knows how the world was created and if you think you know you are just arogant. im not saying your wrong im just saying there is no scientific PROOF for any scientific or creationic theory. THEY ARE JUST THEORIES NO PROOF when you prove it send me a message then ill belive you cuz idk what to believ, like i said NO PROOF
mdscownz 1 year ago
God exists, accept it or ignore it, it's your choice.
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 i will ignore it, just like santa.
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
@locoyo386 That's not really the choice though is it.
I'm sure what you meant was: "I believe that god exists, accept it blindly or reject it due to lack of evidence."
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification Do accept that there is no God, blindly? If not, then you must have evidence to support you acceptance, right? Otherwise, you are accepting something blindly when you should reject it due to lack of evidence.
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 I merely reject the claim that god exists due to lack off evidence, I do not assert that there is no god, just that there is no reason to think that there is. I do however assert that the Christian god is not real.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification "I merely reject the claim that god exists due to lack off evidence"
With that statement I can gather you are not completely closed to the belief that God exists, just merely that you do no believe God exist simpy because you have no evidence of God's existence. This is why you clasify yourself as agnostic.
"just that there is no reason to think that there is"
For you they might not be, how ever would there be a reason to reject God if you do come across any evidence?
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 I'm an agnostic atheist, as in I don't believe in a god but I don't know for certain that there is no god.
"would there be a reason to reject God if you do come across any evidence?" I assume that you mean evidence that it doesn't exist, then yes, if it's solid evidence and not just an argument that seems pretty airtight.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification What could possibly be evidence for the none existence of God?
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 Are you talking about the Christian god or are you just asking the same question over and over?
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification OK, let me take this a different route.
"I am only referring to the god Christians,Jews and Muslims worship, not all gods."
Are there any other God's?
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 Yes, people have been creating gods since humanity itself, so yeah there are other gods besides that one.
Yahweh is a god that no man May see face to face and live, who meets people face to face and they live.
He is omnipotent and omniscient.
He sleeps and never sleeps.
He loves animal sacrifices and he doesn't like them.
He's omnipotent and Lost in a wrestling match against Jacob.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification "people have been creating gods since humanity itself"
OK, let's look at it another way. Let me start with a complex question;
What is reposnsible for everything in exitence to come into existence?
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 Noone really knows.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification Also note that just because you have no reason to belive it, itself is no reason for other to stop believing it.
"I do however assert that the Christian god is not real."
Are you sure that it is an assertion that God is not real, instead of that there might be some inconsitencies on how the Christian God is potrayed? If not, what do you offer as incoclusive proof that the Christian God or any other for that matter God, is not real.
locoyo386 1 year ago
@locoyo386 I am only referring to the god Christians,Jews and Muslims worship, not all gods.
From my perspective the Christian god only exists within the story told about him, so the inconsitencies on how the Christian God is potrayed is exactly what I am referring to.
If a god exists that isn't like the christian god, then it isn't the christian god eg. if a god came by with a limited amount of power, knowlege and wasn't constantly interfering with humanity, it wouldn't be the christian god.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification "From my perspective the Christian god only exists within the story told about him, so the inconsitencies on how the Christian God is potrayed is exactly what I am referring to."
If God did exist, would those inconsistencies negate his existence?
locoyo386 1 year ago
ID is simply god of the gaps. We don know therefore it is god or 'ID'. Evolutionary theory explains so much of what we see so well. Not to mention genetic evidence is showing the how. We have come a long way since Darwin so the IDiots need to stop portraying evolution as solely according to Darwin.
Ramshobraja 1 year ago
0:35-0:48 is wrong to this entity you talk about does not exists in ID. ID does not presume the idea of a God it only states that darwin has'nt got the whole picture. You are talking about a gopd that can interfere with (current) "reality", that is a biblical God sir. This has nothing to do with ID. Conclusion: you are misquoting ID again, It is not your fault because ID is getting al wronged all the time as a silly Idea. ID is wronged by the current establishment of darwinism, that is the truth
Fangornmmc 1 year ago
0:24 to 0:32 is your first mistake. You quote how the media have marked ID, as something stupid and silly or as you say: "The complexity of life and the universe can only be explained by a designer"
This is utterly wrong. The very fundamental definition of ID is very commonly misquoted. Let me give you the true definition as proposed by the discovery instutition in Seattle (the founders of ID). ID=A minimal scientific commitment in detecting intelligent causation
Fangornmmc 1 year ago
watch my valentines video! ^_^
juntaon 1 year ago
This guy doesn't seem to understand that Intelligent Design is NOT creationism.
dex1391 1 year ago
@dex1391 They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; '2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. (page 64)
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok
LOL... you have no idea what ID is... It has nothing to do with the supernatural... It doesn't even have to do with God.... You've been lied to.
dex1391 1 year ago
@dex1391 • 'After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok
How can you say that when you don't even know what ID is?
dex1391 1 year ago
@dex1391 I didn't say it. Judge John E. Jones, devout Lutherian, Bush appointed, conservative did, Kitzmuller V. Dover Area School Board, 2005, after the best asrguement ID could present.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok
LOL I know about the activist judge in the Dover case... lol nice try though.
dex1391 1 year ago
@dex1391 You are the first person I have ever encountered who thought Jones was an activist because his record is strictly conservative, but then again you think many strange things. Get back to me when you have an arguement, and be prepared to argue science.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok
You really need to look at his record again. The man is anything but conservative. He had several activist decisions...
dex1391 1 year ago
@dex1391 I didn't think you'd be prepared to argue science.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok
LOL... facts are facts... you can't twist them to suit your own needs...
dex1391 1 year ago
@dex1391 The fact is that ID got it's ass kicked, because it's not science.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@dex1391 He was praised by Tom Ridge, former Pennsylvania Governor and former head of the Department of Homeland Security, who said that "I can't imagine a better judge presiding over such an emotionally charged issue... he has an inquisitive mind, a penetrating intellect and an incredible sense of humor."[1
Tom Ridge said this about an 'activist'?
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok
lol you may want to check out the other activist cases that this idiot decided
dex1391 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dex1391 I didn't think you'd be prepared to argue science.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@dex1391 Actually the entire reason creationism put on a science mask and pretended to be a theory is because of a supernatural being.
It also skips any reasonable steps and jumps to a creature capable of making everything.
It doesn't even touch on how this creator could do it they just assume it has supernatural powers because the concept is derived from genesis.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification
Creationism puts on no mask.
It is what it is. It pretends nothing.
If you want to believe something else... go for it.
It makes no difference to me.
dex1391 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dex1391 "Creationism puts on no mask.It is what it is. It pretends nothing.If you want to believe something else... go for it.It makes no difference to me. "
You can have beliefs if that's what makes you tick. I will stick to scientific fact thanks.
glebe9 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dex1391 They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; '2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. (page 64)
gamesbok 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dex1391 "This guy doesn't seem to understand that Intelligent Design is NOT creationism."
Type 'Robin Ince Creationism' in the youtube searchbar. He sums it up perfectly.
glebe9 1 year ago
Science can´t explain how the world started.
There is always the question of what you believe. Everything explained by science has to have a cause and since anything has to be the reason for the big bang and it´s impossible to find it, you can´t clear that up with science. The big bang itself is unscientific because you can´t orove it. Evolution doesn´t exclude intelligent design. It´s possible that God made creatures that have the ability to change in order to adapt new circumstances.
heythinkaboutit 1 year ago
I have a bad humored joke on my page with I.D. in it....
comment my new vid!
juntaon 2 years ago
My "take-home" from this video: incredulity does not equal proof. Soooooooo . . . . keep learning. Like a good scientist!
rmcdaniel423 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you from asking the questions." - Frater Ravus
5 stars. Good presentation, well summarized.
pokerslut530 2 years ago
I agree that Evolution took place
However, it in no way disproves God as any christian can argue that God could have easily started off the process as the first cause, and then let events like evolution take place, creationists are foolish, but you dont have to be a creationist to believe in God
I hope one day all christians can help the cause of science, they have no need to combat one another, unless it breaches human rights or summut..
turdpolish704 2 years ago
Very clear and correct. I think though that the self organising of matter into environments and conditions suitable for life and the self building and organising of the tree of life are very similar and related mathematically in that positive feedback of a critical system and death of invalid or unsustainable life/matter etc should be a warning to creationists with ideas that don't stack up! as all things follow the same process including ideas. Chaos is required to create inteligence. QED
dotwithavision 2 years ago
Nice video. You really nailed the ID viewpoint. 5/5.
farnium 2 years ago
your %100 right, ID is not science, in any shape or form. as soon as god is brought into the picture, science leaves the picture. I think ID was just like you said an argument from ignorance from the people who just cant realize that god and science do not mix. it's god or science, and im really hoping that more people will start choosing the latter of the two
erikrules257 2 years ago
the god delusion by richard dawkins
you freaky americans have problems...
Patriol666 2 years ago
alot of americans are atheists, we are just outspoken by the crazy asses in power. hopefully when my generation is in power we can turn this fucken shit around.
MeestaKeefGirly 2 years ago 2
Great video. "True" ID'ers base the belief on a shallow and simplistic extrapolation of strictly HUMAN concepts to the creation of the universe. We create, therefore we were created. ID proponents will not admit that this is the foundation of their position. Instead they cite things like irreducible complexity which has been debunked many times over. They're also ignorant to how biological systems can fail/make errors ending in mutations yet constantly talk up the "intelligence" of the creator
GatorHighlights2 2 years ago 4
Ok, ill put it in Scientific terms then for you.
Do you believe in the law of conservation of mass? where Matter cannot be created or destroyed but simply changes state?
If you do then you would agree that it is known that babies are created in the womb of a mother and born into the world rather then just "existing" into the world correct?
Then how can it be said that the universe ultimately just existed? If matter cannot be created then how was the universe created...
Fonzie8819 2 years ago
what the kinda argument is this ... Babies are created out of allrdy made materia not nothing.. Its one of those things you can't compress intoo "simple minded logic" ..
resistanceunion 2 years ago
saying god made it dsn't solve anything ... People said that over whole human history and they only stoped the proogress.
resistanceunion 2 years ago 2
What you mean is, "It is one of those things evolution will never have an answer for.
rplende 2 years ago
right babies come from eggs in the woman, which are made of cells that multiply whhich creates growth. they dont just appear.
residentevil5rules 2 years ago
But yet somehow God just appears...for no fucking reason..he was just bored and said .."you know what devil? Lets play a game Ill make these people and the universe to exist..and we will see between the both us who is more popular...are you ready, Hold my beer"
whattha187 2 years ago
perhaps evolution, but a better question for you.... how was god created?
residentevil5rules 2 years ago
That's like asking, whats beyond the Universe, and Beyond that, and beyond that.
To be honest Human knowledge will eventually reach a physical limit of exploration and enter the realm of speculation where it will remain for the rest of time. Were not equipped to answer every question that pops up therefore you cannot disregard any possibilities because they seem foolish. Doing so voids the possibilities for discoveries thought impossible,
Fonzie8819 2 years ago
if Humans EVER get out of our solar system im sure they will be baffled about how the laws they think work will more than likely change to a drastic point though impossible.
Fonzie8819 2 years ago
...So obviously something that has the power to create this matter influenced what we now call the universe. Saying that that is not probable or possible sounds just as foolish to others that agree about Intelligent design. As for that the ultimate and most important question science will never be able to give an answer as to where all matter came from.
Fonzie8819 2 years ago
Uh, no. We have no idea what influenced what we call the universe, and merely suggesting a hypothesis of an intelligent designer does not make it valid or relevant. Based on everything we know, an intelligent designer IS improbable. That makes him only possible. But there is nothing inherently of value in a "possibility." Almost anything is possible. You can't just take the leap to those things being likely, or even probable. God is a good example
GatorHighlights2 2 years ago 4
Cool vid bro and to your dog...
Woof!, snarl -- GROWL...
woof
TheRedneckAtheist 2 years ago
I see some people here are not to receptive to your vido i am sorry for that. I think you have put forth effort and I thank you for that even if i am not of any religion and consuming just information to make an informative solution to the already postive solution made. some people can be mean and evil because the disagree, i cannot understand why they can not just listen to knowlege. thats been the problem all along i think what do you think. thanks again for your vido michelle
cujojila01 2 years ago
If God is God, then he could create-no problem at all. True it does require faith.
Evolution is based on a materialist interpretation of reality. The dead god theory.
americanpolitic1 2 years ago
I love dogs. Can you show your dog in your next video?
nicolatwo 2 years ago
Nice video. Fuck your dog
shurterb 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Tampons cause toxic-shock syndrome. I urge you to use sanitary napkins instead. If you must use tampons, change them every hour on "heavy" days.
procommenter 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You know you atheist people crack me up. You think you are all superior, well let me tell you something, if you are so smart, why not solve the economic crisis? Why not? If there is no God, where is the good coming from? WHERE??? Do something!!! SOLVE SOLVE SOLVE LOL but you can't.
UchihaItachi8989 3 years ago
huh?
YOU are the one that cracks ME up.
Thank you!
Kaimosae 3 years ago
Yes, cause this video is all about the ecconomic crisis.
ZombieToaster 3 years ago
"You think you are all superior"
No, I only hold that kind of arrogance in arguing about issues when I think I am right.
So I don't get how atheists are uniquely elitest. Christians have there own elitism that God has is favor of you and evilution is so such a religion!
As far as the economic crisis goes you are talking bull crap. How can atheists solve the problem when they aren't even every elected as politicians and are the minority in business? I don't think all atheists are smart either.
LotusGreenX 3 years ago 2
For Uchihaltachi: It amazes me again and again that Christians always think that logical people think they are "superior". If the logical people's thinking and behavior appears to you as so much more superior, then whey don't you try to use them as role models? The same thing happens in stores: You buy a shampoo and it says "European style". Why don't they make higher quality shampoos in the USA then? Or the bread for example: European bread. Why not make bread here without sugar or sweetener?
nicolatwo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
falsifaction is impossible. no theory can be tested in a vacuum. thus, scientists create their own truth which may or may not represent the world.
mohamedbongfish 3 years ago
Intelligent design is the most laughable theory I've ever heard, especially the way the bible puts it. FOr all you creationists out there, I have the following to say to you: evolution, natural selection, and SCIENCE.
obamamaniac42 3 years ago
intelligent design is NOT a theory, and this is why: it's not based on scientific observations and is such a wild guess! Evolution was tested by the man himself, and married with genetics, scientists have scanned the origin in the DNA, the DNA changes overtime! I disagree that the bible makes specific claims about the universe, they're not specific, "in the beginning, god created the heavens and the earth" does it say when, and does it say how? no.
nnasby63 3 years ago 3
intelligent design isnt a theory u flippin idiot of course its NOT SCIENCE because its religious belief
science and religion dont contradict each other because they deal with two totally different things
either you beleive it or you dont
dafunker00 3 years ago
You are wrong there. If religion were to keep its proclamations outside the realm that science addresses then you would be correct but they do not. The Bible makes specific claims as to the creation of the universe and how all the animals and plant life got here. If the christians were willing to give that up as just a bunch of fairy tales then we would not even be having this argument.
atheistliberty 3 years ago 3
Accept the fact that God exists! He gave you the answer. Remember Einstein said that the Universe is just there? But then what about the big bang theory? The big bang theory disproves einstein's and thus God EXISTS! God MUST exist.
UchihaItachi8989 3 years ago
"The big bang theory disproves einstein's and thus God EXISTS!"
Non sequitur, The universe had a beginning in time, but you cannot prove what must or could have happened before time since there is no time to talk about. The big bang proves that the universe is finite and had t=0, but it doesn't prove that it ontological didn't exist before that time.
LotusGreenX 3 years ago
God exists outside of the universe!
UchihaItachi8989 3 years ago
"God exists outside of the universe!"
Where is that? You mean he exists in a space outside of space? Oh that makes perfect sense.
NOT!
LotusGreenX 3 years ago 4
The universe was created out of nothing! So God is outside the universe! BIG BANG THEORY PROVES GOD EXISTS!
UchihaItachi8989 3 years ago
"The universe was created out of nothing!"
God was created out of nothing and is composed of nothing. That makes 100% more sense then thinking the universe is all there is :P
LotusGreenX 3 years ago 3
BIg Bang wsn't made out of nothing dumb ass
resistanceunion 3 years ago
Ok if the big bang was made of something. How did that something come to be? faggot baddie?
Fonzie8819 2 years ago
Ever read that energy is indestructible ?!? ..you can't destroy energy it had too be beffore big bang just compressed. And what about matter . Well I think we will soon know what happened.
resistanceunion 2 years ago
It wasnt created out of nothing.
RaidenTheAlmighty 2 years ago
Evolution? Pfft, evolution is the biggest secular atheistic naturalistic fraud that has ever entered science. Of course it is the only scientific theory because science cannot comment on divine origin so atheists seized the opportunity to have the monopoly on truth through science in order to have a wagon to promote their atheistic ideologies and stick a knife through religion. We know why you love evolution so much.
But guess what your delusions you gave to believers hasn't stopped religion.
LotusGreenX 3 years ago
A theory in scientific terms means:
a set of explanations for a natural phenomenon that have been proven by data and accepted by scientists as fact until data is found that disproves the theory.
This means logic just won't cut it.
GodForb1ds 3 years ago
@atheistliberty intelligent design is not science ur absolutely right. there is no way we could test, observe or demonstrate a deity. i say this, because origin itself is not science. abiogenesis is a study of origin of biological information. there has never been a study on how dna could of constructed naturally stright from nucleotides and chromosome.likewise, how proteins could of self assembled stright from amino acids.
kissntellen 1 year ago
intellegent design is a fair therory it incorporates many things including the big bang and evelotion but it can not include natural selection, also ID does not have to include a christian god it can be aliens it really doesnt matter but the problems is that it is the closest scientific theory to the bibles acount for creatian, you can be an Atheist and belive in ID but most people do not understand that part,ID simply links the begining(the Big Bang)with human existence(evalotion)to a designer
benben423 3 years ago
Just because it attempts to legitimize itself by "including the big bang and evelotion(sic)" it is not a theory. However, you are also gravely misinformed as to what the ID proponents want to teach in our schools. I suggest you take a look at the case of "Of Pandas and People". The "Intelligent" design "textbook" that a school board in Dover Kansas tried to force into the science class room. ID is simply repacked creationism.
atheistliberty 3 years ago 3
the only one "misinformed" of ID is you although Christians want ID taught in schools because it is the closest scientific theory to what they belive it is not the fault of ID scientists(such as Stephen C. Meyer) for the reilgous attention they should not have to pay because of it. although neo-Darwinist sceintists(such as Dawkins) want to riddicule ID because it could support religous ideology, it does not make it right, there are many holes in Darwinism that can be explained by ID and visversa
benben423 3 years ago
Meyer has been thoroughly discredited and his "science" can't even get published unless he cheats. Sorry but if Meyer is the only scientist you can refer to you are on very shaky ground.
It is not a scientific theory because it does not explain anything about this supposed intelligent agent. The whole thing is an argument from ignorance. "I am too stupid to figure out how the bacterial flagellum actually evolved so it must have been created by in intelligent agent". Don't be absurd.
atheistliberty 3 years ago 3
@atheistliberty dna replication and protein synthesis is complementary natural process, much like photosynthesis and cellular respiration. we really have a chicken and egg problem with abiogenesis in a sense that which one came firs, dna to synthesize protein or protein to replicate dna. im not saying a deity is involed in any way, im just saying we don't know. origin is not observed and could not be tested. it is not science.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@atheistliberty im not afriad to say i don't know, i only wished i could say the same for bible freaks and egotistical atheist.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen Most atheists admit that they don't know a lot of things, what religion are you.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification im not religious
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen So your an atheist.
explosivoification 1 year ago
@explosivoification im an agnostic atheist. somethings we should be skeptical about certain kinds of science.
kissntellen 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kissntellen Most atheists admit that they don't know a lot of things, what religion are you?
explosivoification 1 year ago
@benben423 okay. How does ID explain...well anything? Can you give me an example on which ID has been tested and shown to improve our knowledge? What new treatments has ID inspired? What is the mechanism of ID? HOw might one falsify it if it is a theory?
GallusSapien 1 year ago
Science is a search for causes, ID is a cause, therefore ID is a science. That was a simple but swift refutation.
OblivionMon 3 years ago
This is both an oversimplification of the purpose of science and a mischaracterization of what ID is. Let's suppose for a moment that the wider scientific community were to take ID seriously. The first questions that would need to be addressed is HOW god guides evolution. What mechanism he uses. One crucial bit of evidence for the theory would be an observed deviation from physical laws that cannot be explained by other means. ID is not science because it's proponents refuse to do this work.
atheistliberty 3 years ago
Was that Darwins Rotweiller I heard in the background :-)
DarkAngel182 3 years ago
Great video. You make sense. Very smart.
KeratinizingSquamous 3 years ago
did he shoot the dog barking?
falotnek 3 years ago
Dude, that's my puppy. I try to keep him from barking but he is very protective of us and my other dog.
atheistliberty 3 years ago
And what a "coincidence" that Buddhists (who don't believe in a creator, thus practically being atheists) are considered to be the most peaceful religious people. Also very interesting to see that they go along very well with modern science. Eminently respectable people like the Dalai Lama are even able to fit spiritual ideas with top-notch scientific research, e.g. quantum physics. I'm not a Buddhist, but Buddhism has a striking advantage over monotheistic religions - it can adapt to progress.
Dorfkanal 3 years ago
It is true that some Buddhist sects, perhaps the most prominent, I do not know, are as you describe. There are others, however, that are militaristic and dogmatic to the point of rivaling the Muslims and the Christians. I think they are a minority opinion today but in the past they have held considerable sway in China and Japan.
Even so, I can respect those Buddhists of which you speak, to a point. There is still the problem of there being no direct evidence that their religion is true.
atheistliberty 3 years ago
I support your statement to the fullest.
Dorfkanal 3 years ago
I hate when creationists respond to evolutionists by saying "So you think everything came from nowhere?"
First of all, that isn't even a valid response to the theory of evolution. Evolution explains the complexity of life. The theory of evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of the universe.
Even so, the big bang theory does not attempt to explain the origin of the universe. Most people with common sense realize that there must have been something before the big bang.
pnoozi 3 years ago 5
I'd like to know the theory of who designed the designer. And, if there WAS one, who designed THAT designer.
And on and on.
t4705mb6 3 years ago
That's what they don't understand about the universe. They think there must be a "time-based origin". But it's only because they don't understand Einstein and cannot imagine that also spacetime is not absolute. They think that it all had a beginning. Some Eastern religions like Buddhism are much more intellectually and spiritually developped in this perspective. They know that this doesn't make any sense, thus describing life not with start and end point, but rather with a neverending circle.
Dorfkanal 3 years ago
Even with 3 degrees I had a very difficult time understanding string theory.
I have read everything from Hawkings many times over & have a basic grasp.
I think Einstein & Sagan hit on a very important point when they reminded us that we are limited by our senses. (IE: the world used to be "flat".)
I am inclined to believe that space & time are relative, neither a "reality".
I believe in endless multiverses &, as yet, uncounted dimensions & that there was no "begining".
t4705mb6 3 years ago
I'm too inclined to assume that most probably there was no "beginning" as you say. Thanks to Einstein and successors, we know it is not mandatory. And also it would make more sense, as it doesn't end up in: "What was before the beginning? And what was before the beginning of the beginning? and so on..."
We would simply look at a self-contained universe.
Dorfkanal 3 years ago