There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
This is outdated information...Neaderthal and Cro-Magnom interbred and europeans and others actually started somewhere in what is now called the middle east....black africans do not have Neadnerthal DNA in them..so the out of Africa thing is also outdated. What's next our closed kin is bigfoot?
You have no clue what is going on. It's hilarious, though it's sad. Do you mind if I take a picture of your comments and put them on Memebase? They're just so goofy. I am guessing that you've not done much reading on evolution from biologists. Of course not, they'd just be brainwashing you. XD
No, but I'm not the same person as my mother. And my mother is different than her parents, who are different than the parents before her.
So, give it a lot of time and give the earth's plates a while to shift and for a variety of other environmental changes to happen and over time you get this process where a group of animals starts gaining a variety of characteristics from each generation.
I don't know what magical force you think exists that resists this process.
Here's the problem with convincing creationist: the more information you throw at them, the more bullshit they make up to say that it didn't happen. Like, you can spend 10 years of your life devoting yourself to a study of the genetic propagation of hominids, but a creationist will think that they have the ability to disprove your work in 10 seconds.
hey hey hey.... wait a minute. they said we evolved from fish, to monkeys, to humans, if that's so then why did'nt the cycle continue for each species? why did'nt all the fish evolve into land animals. why did'nt all the monkeys evolve into humans? come on scientists you've got alot of explaining to do. i think fish, and monkeys should be extinct if it was all evolution
This is misleading title and does not prove evolution. Neanderthal variation falls outside human mtDNA variation, meaning humans did not evolve from neanderthals which is now a fact, but then you speculate that there was a split somewhere from an unknown common ancestor using a rate equation based on how much mtDNA mutate which is still questionable resulting in so many split dates.
where in any acient litrature or carving or wall paintings frescos whatever did.does it say our ancester beLIEved the world was flat?...you will find no source to any where ,the flat earth was a christian theory for demonisation purposes to make older tribes peoples look stupid ,even though everything they looked at in the heavens/sky was round ,the ancient egyptions(5000b.c.) could calculate pye,but they thought the world was flat ,,,no chance,so when did people think the world was flat
and how does Mt DNA in neanderthals prove evolution? after all if neatherthals would have had the same genes than humans, you will still use it as evidance for evolution. in other words any other resoult would have also been ´´prove´´ for evoluton
Moral of story? Cain, a descendent of Adam and Eve, marked by God, pretty much tells the story of what Scientists falsely claim to be Neanderthal, an early ancestor or link before Homo Sapien.
Neanderthal made pottery, jewelry, drew art on caves, buried their dead, made musical instruments, clothing out of hides, weapons (spears), etc,
Now, just imagine that all of Cain’s descendants are destroyed by the flood leaving only true Homo Sapien descendants of Noah. The strata (Sediment) would allow people at a later date to wonder what happened to the Neanderthals. Also, there would be some evidence of mixing. Then, the small layer of strata separating the two would be very small.
Come on now.The only ones that feel that way are the racists ones.It's quite evident.I made a video with the top Chinese scientist admitting.The top germans science team admitted.Which science teams argues differently? Where are they saying man came from.Don't say the middle east.Because that's part of original Africa also
Hitler wanted a race of blonde hair blue eyes.. Islam always said blonde hair blue eyes came from devils.. Those Israelis trace their nation through the mother. Because if they ran it through the father it would lead back to Neanderthals. Their mother traces all the way back into Africa. They knew this
The Asians also.They all look different from one another and the science world knows this but that categories every as one "humans".They are not of the original man.Their a hybrid.. Even their own science and books are saying this now.. Discover magazine front cover of may 2011..says " Your are not human". At the bottom it says your new identity. But they have known this for a long time.
Yeah... I was just trying to narrow it down.. Actually there's alot more to it according to the scriptures.. The world makes up scientific names for these things.. For instance "mankind".. A kind of man.. There's was more than just 1 type of Neanderthal. That's why the Russians look different from the Irish .. The Irish different from the Italians.
people thousands of years ago were not as ignorant as scientist would like you to think. Not all thought the Earth was flat and they could distinguish between man made object and natural things. I believe in micro evolution but not macro. There is no evidence that one type of creature evolves into another. I believe in God as a master creator as well. And one thing I like remind atheist is scientist have a understanding of how things work, but no idea WHY.
@Ryder1981 What do you think the millions of scientist are working on? If religion would stop dragging the sciences,societies ,archeology,politics and financial stability back 1000 yrs we would know alot more.
Enjoy your beliefs but don't hurt others doing so,as Catholics and muslims constantly do.
@goldensassenach and that's another one of my points against atheist. We just don't see the world the same way and I'm not going to waste my life trying to get them to see it. There is a how to everything and science can explain them but I do believe there is bias towards what answers they want to believe. And because of that, I believe their research is flawed. Mainly because theories are based upon someone's opinion based on their experience.
@Ryder1981 I think there's actually a bias towards what you want to believe! Science simply doesnt work that way. Hypothesis are tested until a theory emerges, opinions have nothing to do with it.
@juda8054 don't take this too harshly but if you think a theory is fact then you need to go back to school or do you believe in psychic abilities? Theories are a prediction of events based on a system of logic by an individual (his opinion) as he see evaluates the information and accepted by science when others in that field agree with his opinion. Then over time a theory may or may NOT be proven to be LAW. And science has many more theories than laws my friend.
@juda8054 Accepted to be true but not yet proven to be true. It's accepted because of a shared opinion by people you only trust because they have a degree. Do not have faith in man, because we are so easily corrupted. Anyone who puts their faith in science can just as easily be manipulated as someone of religious belief.
@Ryder1981 Ive heard this cop out before.You confuse science with faith(religion). Science is based on objective observation but faith is not objective it doesn't have to be. Your assumption that i follow opinion of people with degrees blindly is amusing because that's exactly what people of faith do with ancient biblical legends.
@Ryder1981 Unfortunately just because you say so isn't going to cut it. You would have to test to prove. I don't like to paint with such a broad brush but most people of faith are so narrow minded. I hope you continue to study this subject.Try reading a call to sanity by Jason Scott Yeldell hopefully it could help you start using your reasoning instead of your faith and get to the actual truth no matter how unpleasant it is for you.
@juda8054 Laws are true and theories can be true if enough people agree they are true. What part of this do you not see is a contradiction. It's a twist of the truth to favor a view point. And then people like you completely follow without question. This is an example of the US school system that trains you to accept someone else view and regurgitate it at command rather than using both sides of your brain questioning why would someone make a rule that can be so easily corrupted.
@Ryder1981 Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis." That makes its true meaning in science even more confusing to the general public.
I guess this guy should have waited a couple of years before posting this crap.Because Neanderthals are the Europeans ancestry according to the science journal may 10 2010 report. But not the ancestry of those from Africa.Lol then in December it says that ALL Europeans originate from a Neanderthal male and a human female. Article"Neanderthal Romeo and human Juliet"
@jusamessenger I see your point, however data is useful. The mitochodrial genome (which is limited in size) suggested no relation. So the scientific community tentatively accepted that data until the more recent investigations. It doesn't mean their conclusions were crap, That's just how science works: data allows conclusions to be drawn, but then new data can lead to contrary conclusions.
The basis of May 2010 theory does not nullify the conclusion of this video. The May 2010 report shows NM nuclear DNA has both distinctive Eurasian human DNA plus about 2 million base pairs of chimp-like non-human DNA.
Further research shows a specific match between Eurasian X-chromosome and NM. This would not be the result of 1 to 4 percent NM. This would be the result of a sequence of hybrids of Eurasian human males with non-human females. NM was 15-16ths human, 1-16th ape.
@jusamessenger scientists don't always agree. Some argue about the species status of the red wolf (hybrid/species) and some don't think modern man originated in Africa at all (multiregional hypothesis).
Your right..People have been altering DNA for many years.. Dogs for example. All these different breeds ? Many of these dogs are man made.. Shar pei.. Some dogs have web feet some dogs are made with hair instead of fur.. When did they start doing this?the science world hasn't been completely honest. And most atheist don't research and use logic.they have tunnel vision
I don't have a prob with evolution as a theory but they need to check their facts. There is stuff in the bible that people could not have known back then. The Israelites knew how to prevent the spread of disease before knowledge of germs existed. They knew the earth was round and hangs on nothing. The idea that everyone was ignorant back then is based on a desire to discredit anything outside of their own personal agenda remit
i had a question about sex determination from fossils: are samples from ancient fossils usually preserved enough for a simple barr body test to work ? how are cells/subcelular structures from fossiles processed , or does only the more rigid DNA only survive?
that's not possible, how did men and women become men and women at the same time? i mean how did they evolve to be ready to be woman and man with compatible dna? and worse, now scientists are talking about only a woman that generated all the humans beings, so that proves the impossibility of evolution.
only the explanation of God's creation is possible.God created the world, the universe, the humans, all things.
@alexrj2 She did not generate all things, and she certainly didn't do it alone. Science only suggests that she is a common ancestor of all human beings.
@alexrj2 Actually with a lot of evidence. The amount of physical evidence is enough to fill the bed of a truck. The amount of evidence achieved by studies is limitless. But the amount of evidence that God created the world. . .fits between a book cover. . .wow.
@alexrj2 I believe you mean a book of imagination written centuries ago. And many of evolution based on scientific proof that is updated daily. But by all means, keep living in your fantasy world.
@alexrj2 Yes, it is already too late for people believing in lies. As I can tell from you, there's no teaching them anything. So keep believing your lies. Science may be wrong from time to time, but at least it has proof to represent its ideas. And when Jesus gets here, let me know. I can't wait to have my party.
@Farle4971 yes, i will believe in Jesus for ever, im not silly Jesus is real, i prefer to believe in the real
than in a lie create by the devil and followed by humans called evolution, called science. you prefer to believe in an absurd it's your choice but time is running out and the truth wil be soon revealed and will be too late to people that dont come to Jesus, the true one, not the one invented by humans as the science. also, if you die you will be in hell and you will see your deception.
@alexrj2 I see humans everyday, but I sure haven't seen God yet. Absurd. . .not quite, with the whole PROOF thing you know? But that's cool. Whatever. God made you blind I see. But I evolved to have brain cells, and I also have the ability to think on my own instead of reading silly fictional books. If I do end up in your magical hell, hey, look on the bright side, at least there's no ignorant Christians.
@Farle4971 no. you are not thinking by your own, you are a slave of a system that's a lie, you believe in a lie with no prove. i believe in God, God is present in my life, His word is solid and many prophecies are coming to pass. What He says happens to those who decided to follow Him. Your brain is blocked and manipulated by the devil that make you a puppet to believe in lies as evolution and stay far from the truth.
@alexrj2 Bahahahahahah. That's hilarious. YOU are a slave to an IGNORANT religious cult that attempts to force its stupid beliefs down people's throats. If you would take one second away from your storybook, you'd realize that your belief is illogical and has no proof whatsoever. There's no one (including magical beings used by the Christian church to manipulate it's followers) in my brain except myself, and I use that self to think logically and use reason and evidence to support my theories.
@Farle4971 you saying that there's no God doesnt mean that He doesnt exist, "Only a fool says in his heart there is no God" Psalms 14:1. Only by this video we see that evolution is a lie, only to form the bases to the mitochondria is the more than you win in the lotery with the numbers that you have dreamt with, and imagine that multiplied by the other infinite human bodies structures, not talking about the nature etc. you prefer to believe in a lie, man made invention with no possibility.
@alexrj2 said the ignoramus who chooses to quote his fairytale storybook (whose man-made stories have no logical possibility) without any proof whatsoever. You saying that God exists doesn't make him exist. Goodbye.
@alexrj2 Absurd. . .with proof. Alright then. Lol. Get some help, preferably from a human. There's not such thing as eternity. But you won't know that, because when you die, you die. The end. But if you insist that I go to make-believe fire land, that's cool. I like it warm, plus, the Christians won't be there. Sounds like heaven to me :) Oh wait. . .
All one need do is look above, and notice a never ending infinite universe. Should we ever find an ending to it (a finite universe), one must also ask, what is on the other side of that ending? To suggest that Life does not continue after the physical body dies off, and we do not have an "invisible eternal soul" without proof is merely an unbelievers opinion, not scientific fact. Til then, nothing can be argued whether it does or it doesn't.
@Farle4971 Speaking of the "Invisible Eternal Soul", if in fact it does exist, We know it must be comprised of "Energy" and "Thought". Scientific evidence of "Invisible" energy is found in the Tau Neutrino (3 types), which travels at or near the speed of light, passes through large distances of matter unaffected and interact with with other particles. Then we have Dark Matter and Antimatter, also evidence of the Invisible, but scientists know it exists, i.e. Higgs boson (aka The God Particle).
@Farle4971 i dont need help YOU need help... from Jesus, no human can help you to scape from the sufferings of the eternity. NO you cant prove that there's no life after death.
@alexrj2 if you think about this rationally, then the explanation of God's creation holds no truth as there are NO facts/proof to support this idea. If you ask me, i'll take science and evolution for what it's worth, since it is supported by facts - all scientist do is conjecture about how we became from artifacts that have been found. And if you wanna believe there is a God, than by all means do; but if you think that he has spoken to man, you are seriously mistaken!
@alexrj2 no it isn't when you are scientifically minded, its not really a soup, it was tide pools around the earth, where molecules were assembled by chemistry until one by accident formed that was able to make crude copies of itself and thus started life on earth, Th reason why I say you sound illogical, is because there can be no god, because, before the big bang, time did not exist, so a creator god could not exist.
@alexrj2 actually there is proof, one the fossil record on earth, and it can best tested, to understand how time could not exist, all you need to know is a black hole, because inside a black hole, it doesn't exist, there is proof for these all throughout the cosmos, where as there is absolutely no proof for Intelligent design or biblical creationism.
@alexrj2 okay, if that were true, it wouldn't be possible to see the Andromeda Galaxy or other galaxies in our local group, the Andromeda galaxy is 2.5 million light years away,a light year is how far light travels in one year at 186,000 mps, so when we look at Andromeda, our eyes are seeing it as it looked 2.5 million years ago, the Hubble space telescope shows galaxies that are over 13 billion light years away, so these facts debunk a less then 10,000 year old earth
i heard them (history channel scientist or something) ssay we couldnt breed with neanderthals, but thats ridiculous... you cant tell me neanderthals were up there painting hunting scenes and making fish hooks, and they were some kind of animal, we couldnt breed with..
@Seekmosttoprophesy There is no evidence that Noahs flood occurred. If you want to point out that there are flood stories in nearly every other culture, well the Mesopotamian one predates the biblical one. So I geuss the epic of Gilgamesh should reflect the true religion then!
@NightHawkBomber001 No, you have no way of proving any other account is more accurate or any other account came first because the biblical accounts from before the flood were copied and recopied.
The biblical record has records from before the flood that no one else has.
@Seekmosttoprophesy I’m sorry It seems you missed out on this crucial piece of information. The Epic of Gilgamesh is recognized as the first known piece of literature in the world. It was written in Mesopotamia. Thats where Abraham came from. Its reasonable to assume that he adapted the stories to fit his “experiance” with God. The stories he told became an oral history, and they were not written down until moses’ time.
@Seekmosttoprophesy "The biblical record has records from before the flood that no one else has.” - Actually the bible tells stories of the “Before the flood” other religions and myths say this as well. In fact the Epic of Gilgamesh has a little to say too.
@Seekmosttoprophesy “” f the biblical accounts from before the flood were copied and recopied.” - I’m suppressed you don’t know the history of your bible well at all. Abraham (and all who followed) passed the creation account and other stories on via oral history. Moses started an inactive to write them down (the Torah).
@Seekmosttoprophesy The new testament is where the copies of copies come in. The bible was separated into different books that were freely circulated and copied. There were other books like the Book of Enoch, apocalypse of peter, shepherd of hermas, Gospel of marry, etc that were treated as holy God breathed books. It was not until 325 when the roman emperor constantine gathered the christian leaders to choose the books to include in the bible that they were united.
3:23 1000 differences out of 1600? 1000/1600=x/100% => x=62.5% so similarity between us and chimps is 100-62.5=37.5% and not 98% or 95% as it was said. I can't get it! can someone explain please... (I'm not a creationist and I will never be :D bible is immoral bullshit)
No creationist will accept this as evidence. You need to have literally lined up, every single skull from the millions of humans or earlier hominids to show creationists the gradual evolution. If you are missing a single skull of any of the millions and millions then its a broken link and the creationist will point you to the creation museum where you can study how god concept did it.
@Seekmosttoprophesy Your invisible, dangerous, misogynistic, homophobic, racist, war mongering, rapist, hater of humanity god concept, pretend maker will its self have a maker and that maker will be explained away by science like Dorothy unveiled the man behind the curtain in The Wizard of Oz. So shallow was this attempt at intelligence on your part that with any hope at all your god concept will make bone cancer inside your bones and you will ride the pinnacle of exquisite agony to the end :)
@699backstab You are not sayiing anything. God is nothing like what you describe. You are making things up to convince yourself. God cannot say anything less than absolute perfection and truth. Homosexuality is extremely detrimental to us. If something is good, everyone should do it a lot. If something is not good, no one should do it at all.
Glad to see that they have finally said that Adam and Eve were Neanderthals out of Africa and that Noah didn't put two of each dinosaur species on the ark.
@MegajasmineR No, they just found out that not everyone is related to Africans and there are now older finds that they conveniently found that is older than the Africans and they are virtually identical to us.
I just love these old atheist , psudeo-science videos. It just so clearly shows how wrong the entire arrogant science community has been. All of the peer reviewed citations and journals, all of the nested heirarcy, all of those ape like pictures we have seen of neanderthals, all of the scientific "proof" that has to be changed in the school books.The problem with science is that it has been hijacked by the atheiest religion.
ALL science disciplines MUST use the THEORY of evolution timeline.
As is discussed below, the conclusions in this video are wrong. The same group from Max Planck Genetics in Leipzig recently (May 2010) completed the Neadertal genome, and on its basis hypothesize that most of Homo sap (those who traveled to Europe or Asia) now have 2-5% Neadertal genes. This is a great example of how science overthrows theory with new evidence, and how devastating that can be to creationists who unskeptically grasped the earlier results, only to sink with it now.
A note: on the basis of this new data, it is possible to support that Neandertal was not wiped out or even extinct, but rather simply merged into Homo. It doesn't even require that Neandertal be our same species; it could well be the hybrid that the creationists believe all those "early human fossils" were is actually (nearly) all of us. How delicious! Made in the very image of god. The only purebreds are the sub-Saharan Africans. Shweeeet!
(2) Neanderthal nuclear DNA is close to Eurasian human DNA.
A person need not be real bright to conclude that Neanderthals were the product of bestiality of human males with Eurasian DNA and non-human females, probably Heidelberg, which were also hybrids.
@Mdebacle: Why, how graceful of you, Mdebacle. Bestiality! Human, non-human, including, of course, heidelberg in your role as the non-human hybrid beast. And filthy, dirty, immoral ancestors they were. You're ancestors too, of course, unless you happened to be pure sub-Saharan African yourself. Does that give you the warm fuzzy feeling you're reaching for?
A news flash, Mdebacle: they are/were Homo. All of them. Maybe one of those beasts was named Sarah. Seems appropriate to me.
As the sceptics at The Economist (May 8) pointed out, the only way for your scenario to work would be if African human females mated with Neanderthal males, as opposed to the somewhat more normal process of dominant males (humans) mating with Neanderthal females.
Human mtDNA comes from mitochondrial Eve (aka Eve). Neanderthals didn't have it.
@Mdebacle: It only goes to show that the Economists writers and you as well need more science. For any given group of animals, there is an mEve. It's mDNA is in every member of the group. So there is a sapiens mEve, and a neandertal mEve. There is also an mEve for the mixed group, whose mDNA is either sapiens or neandertal (she is a member of one or the other). It appears that, by a coin flip, she was sapiens. All other matings are possible but for that one requirement.
In addition to that, I also noticed your little "more normal process of dominant human males", leaving, of course, the abnormal Neandertal males to address those sub-dominant females. It would appear that you have a noted tendency to chauvinism, for humans at least, and for males as a sideline. All the more delicious for your Neandertal side.
@Mdebacle: Wrongo, chap. An mEve is the latest common ancestor of a given group along the exclusively female line. The mEve of you, your siblings and their progeny is your mother; toss in your 1st cousins and it's your grandmother. Your mDNA is her mDNA plus accumulated mutations. Sapiens has an mEve, the set of all live equus equus has an mEve, and indeed you plus all living horses have an mEve which was neither horse nor human, but was likely a mammal. You don't get to define the term. ...
... But don't take my word for it; look it up. For a given set of individuals, there can be but one. She is certainly not the only female ancestor, just the one on the female line.
It really hurts when you accept a scientific principle, not on the evidence, but just because it supports your biblical fairy tale, then to have it turn around and bite you on the fundament, doesn't it?
You, unless you have exclusively sub-Sahara African blood, have genes from Homo neandertalensis. True as taxes.
(1) Human males are the perpetrators of bestiality..
(2) Among hybrids, the females are more fertile than males.
(3) Eurasion humans do not have Neanderthal mtDNA.
Therefore rationality tells us the first Neanderthals were result of human males and non-human females. Then human males and Neanderthals re-bred to produce more human- like Neanderthals. Then this unholy mess was exterminated and fossilized (Guess what event).
@Mdebacle: I have doubts that the men or women 25kyrs would have seen it as bestiality; that's a rather sophisticated concept. Perhaps just neighborliness. But, of course, you've got your morality glasses on and are assuming that "Rampant evil before the flood" rumor, aren't you?
Your second is ridiculous. What in the world do you mean by fertile, how are females more so, and what does being hybrids have to do with that?
As for the third, I've already told you what was required for that.
... Regardless of all that, the fact is that a goodly proportion of mankind alive today has both sapiens and neandertal genes, including me and probably you. Are Neandertals a human kind or not? Are we not hybrid human/neandertal? Is this hybridization possible between kinds, according to the Bible? If so, what does it say for kinds that hybridization can occur, and that it can be stable and permanent, as it is with us? What are the rules? Could they be (gasp!) evolution?
If Neanderthals were 95 % human and 5% ape, were barrel-chested with super-human strength, probably sounded like a psychiatric ward, that was the tip off of bestiality.
Male hybrids like cattle-bison, ocecats, mules have low/no fertility. This is why most, if not all , human/hominid mating was done by human male. Can't say 100 %, but it would have kept Neanderthal mtDNA going until the Big Kahuna.
Make a list of extermination, fossilization events,Then see top of list
We are trying to discuss evidence of evolution not old books written and altered by unknown men.If anyone wants a preacher they will ask.thx
But wasn't the 2010 report based on mtdna? And has anyone else read an article about mtdna being non native to humans and in theory it may be from an ancient viral infection/adaptation? I read it last yr and can't find it anywhere now.
@goldensassenach: Dr. Lynn Margulis is the biologist who originated the idea that certain organelles in the cell are actually symbiotic prokaryotes: the mitochondria in animals, chloroplasts in plants and others. Her theory has become rather well established. Just search for: Margulis, symbiote, mitochondria, chloroplast, look them up in wiki and follow the references.
The mtDNA report on Neandertals was 5 years ago; the one this year was based on their nuclear DNA.
So, were you going to discuss the COMPLETE Neanderthal Genome, where they recently found that Neanderthal DNA, between 1-4 percent, exist in the DNA of ALL peoples except those in sub-Saharan Africa?
@branwhitcomb So the results from May 2010 clearly refute the conclusions in this video.
(Check out the link in the description for excellent videos from the scientists who conducted this study.)
The 2010 results utilizes a draft of the entire 3 billion base pair nuclear genome, while the 2008 paper referenced in this video draws conclusions based on the mitochondrial genome which is only about 15,000 base pairs long. So, I think the conclusions from this video are clearly wrong!
first of all the bible never said the earth was flat, it said it was round Isaiah 40:22. in history only two church leaders said the earth was flat, one was a known heritic the other was an obscure monk no one knows about, everyone else believed the earth was round based on not only scripture but well established greek reasoning which was highly accurate. That the church persecuted galileo and other scientists is a myth of 19th century origin, lets see what other tosh i'll find in this video
"Isaiah 40:22: It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in"
@ndjarnag I don't believe there was a word for sphere in the original hebrew, so sure circle would suffice why shouldn't it? how else would you describe a sphere without using the word sphere or ball?
@ibuchanan82: Yeah: Duwr = globe, ball. Besides, contemporary Jewish cosmology sees Earth as a convex surface with a raised, mountainous edge where the sky is attached. The six references to chuwg in the Bible are definitely to plane circles (as in the rainbow, or a compass, an instrument to draw a circle).
Sorry. Where one might buy the use of 3 for pi ("just a folksy kinda inaccuarcy") this one has no excuse.
@ndjarnag Revelation 7:1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Job 38:13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
Daniel 4:11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH.
Excellent and clear explanation... so THAT'S how God created the heavens and the Earth! Hmmm, "Adam" and "Eve" are parables for the first hominids... duh on me.
''Most people living outside Africa can trace up to 4% of their DNA to a Neanderthal origin, a consequence of interbreeding between the two groups after the great migration from the contintent.''
@hellohal3 what is most intresting about this is that it contridicts the theory of us out compeating them and also violence between our two species maby we did atcherly live together peacefully with them at some point :)
Think of Neanderthals as humans that died in the flood and that is the reason we are directly related to none of them because they all died in the flood.
you'll take giant leaps in logic to hold onto your religious beliefs huh? so, it's the neanderthals who god killed in the flood? so i guess noah was a neandethal too if he existed during the same time period? if he wasn't, then he and the others who were on the ark were the first full humans? are u ignoring the fact that this find further proves evolution, which in turn disproves adam and eve, which seriously harms the bibles credibility and every other story in it?
@itzahazylife You are assuming far too much. Neanderthals are humans too. They are just not as closely related to us for the simple reason that they died in the flood. It actually helps to prove what the Bible says. Noah did live much longer than we do for the simple reason that he was born before the world was destroyed by the flood.
"...they died in the flood. It actually helps to prove what the Bible says".
At first you creationists were funny to me, now your laziness is pissing me off. Read a book besides the fucking bible! Theres more evidence to conlcude Neaderthals died due to cold weather conditions across Europe, not a fucking flood. Their fossils were found under no condition that would indicate a flood. Youre lazy & full of shit!
@Seekmosttoprophesy: You know, that's the danger for you hide-bound it's-in-the-Bible-and-that's-good-enough-for-me types: you see something in science that you think agrees with you and it's golden; you apply no effort to trying to see if it is true or not, unlike your pseudo-approach to the science that doesn't agree with you. Too bad this particular hypothesis got refuted by later evidence. heh, heh - they're your ancestors, too.
@puncheex I have always said that Neanderthal were human even before the DNA test. You are the ones who were saying that humans originated in Africa and this DNA test proves otherwise.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: OK, fine. I'll guarantee you that other Christians do not (see Mdebacle above), but that's, of course, not your problem. Neandertal man is formally known as Homo neandertalensis, man from the Neander (River in Germany). He is Homo, man, the same genus as us, Homo sapiens. He is, AFAIK, our 1st cousin on a species level. And now he is even part of us, merged back in. All Homo did come from Africa, according to DNA analysis; that doesn't eliminate evolving elsewhere, tho.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Ummmmm, except that you have Neandertal DNA in you (unless you and all your ancestors hail from South Africa. Sorry, you can't wash them out. It's likely that they simply melted into Homo sapiens, and can now be counted among most of mankinds ancestors.
@puncheex What ever happened to the idea that human life originated in Africa??? One little DNA test showing that Africans are not related to neanderthal and it all went out the window just like that. Noah is from before the flood when Neanderthals were still living. Noah's three sons each had wives not related to Noah. So there is no problem at all with what my position has always been. I have always said that neanderthal were humans.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: It did, as far as we can tell, but man can move around (you may have noticed). Homo habilis evolved from Australopithecus, the first ancestor designated man. From him, in Africa, evolved H. rudolphensis, H ergaster and H erectus. Erectus was the first to travel, to the near east and then east to China, Java, and Flores. In the near east, he branched into H heidelburgensis, which evolved into H neandertal. Back in Africa, erectus evolved into H sapiens,....
... who followed erectus out of Africa. In the Near east he apparently interbred with Neandertal, and then branched into Europe, Australia and Asia and thence into N & S America.
That is a very rough outline of my understanding of the current state of early anthropology; it could be wrong in details. You can find out more; search on "Spencer Wells" and watch his videos. Nothing has "gone out the window", this was all understood, but for that near east merge, before last May.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: All I'm saying is that Homo originated in Africa. I guess I would agree Neandertal himself is not. Mt dad is Taxan; I was born in Colorado, so I am not Texan, even though my genes were inherited from someone who was. So?
@puncheex You are not getting it. They just made a big deal saying that humans came from Africa. Now they find out that there are humans that did not come from Africa.
@puncheex Your assumptions have no basis. Apes have different DNA than we do. You assume that it turned into what our DNA is but that is your assumption, not fact. Every fossil of every life form was buried by the flood that buried all life on earth that was not in the Ark.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Wrong. I start with the observed fact that there are Endogenous RetroViruses (ERVs) in our DNA unique to man, ERVs in chimp DNA unique to chimps, and some that are in common with both of our DNAs. That leads me to the conclusion that chimps and humans have a common ancestor. That is a logical deduction based on fact, assuming only that I am correct about what ERVs are and how they get into DNA. Show me where that is wrong.
... You, on the other hand, make a bald assertion about an ark which is not backed up by any evidence; where are you assumptions? Do you assume, for example, that a Bible story must be true? Do you make assumptions about why fish should have died in this flood? Elephants high up while small lizards, and fish are low? Assumptions about where the water came from and where it went? Assumptions about the energy required?
@puncheex Evolution is based on many more assumptions than the flood. The flood is an historical account complete with the genealogies of the surviving people and before the flood. The account says water came up from under ground (and from above) and the continents were all compressed and the mountains were pushed up (after the flood). Everything had its place. You would not expect all creatures to be living together and the more intelligent ones would have sought higher ground. No assumptions.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Relying on one single source for your history, geology and paleontology, written by bronze age herdsman does not seem to me to be very good forensics. Doesn't make any difference what the accouterments are, when there is only the one source for them as well. As science, "Everything had it's place" leaves a lot to be desired. I don't know what you use for a dictionary, but it seems to me you state two assumptions and then say "No assumptions". What do you call them?
@puncheex The Bible is a collection of many writings. Genesis alone is made of many writings. Actual historical writings is better than assumptions any day and there are over 200 surviving accounts of the same flood with the same details of bad people, one family, a large boat, many animals and birds released to see if it was safe outside.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Historical writings are weak evidence compared to physical evidence. Consider von Daniken's Chariots of the Gods. Here you have some modest circumstantial evidence combined with a plethora of historical writings (including the Bible) which all point to the fact that our gods are actually space aliens. Is that the way you really want to go?
@puncheex The physical fossil evidence is the evidence of the flood. The Bible says the space invaders were destroyed by the flood. Now, which way do you go? One bang did not make the machine parts inside of us to work. The universe did not evolve itself billions of times to get the machine parts inside of you to work.
@Seekmosttoprophesy: "Which way do I go"? Where the evidence indicates; what did you suspect? I don't believe in a creator any more than I do von Daniken's gods. Big bang? The evidence is there. Why could it not have "make the machine parts inside us work"? You find a omnipotent god easier to believe? Have fun with it.
This has been flagged as spam show
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This is outdated information...Neaderthal and Cro-Magnom interbred and europeans and others actually started somewhere in what is now called the middle east....black africans do not have Neadnerthal DNA in them..so the out of Africa thing is also outdated. What's next our closed kin is bigfoot?
spareaxe 2 weeks ago
@disquisition73
Hahaha.
Hahaha....
Wow...
Really?
Wow...
You have no clue what is going on. It's hilarious, though it's sad. Do you mind if I take a picture of your comments and put them on Memebase? They're just so goofy. I am guessing that you've not done much reading on evolution from biologists. Of course not, they'd just be brainwashing you. XD
hellomate639 4 weeks ago
@disquisition73
No, but I'm not the same person as my mother. And my mother is different than her parents, who are different than the parents before her.
So, give it a lot of time and give the earth's plates a while to shift and for a variety of other environmental changes to happen and over time you get this process where a group of animals starts gaining a variety of characteristics from each generation.
I don't know what magical force you think exists that resists this process.
hellomate639 4 weeks ago
Here's the problem with convincing creationist: the more information you throw at them, the more bullshit they make up to say that it didn't happen. Like, you can spend 10 years of your life devoting yourself to a study of the genetic propagation of hominids, but a creationist will think that they have the ability to disprove your work in 10 seconds.
It's fucking barbaric.
hellomate639 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hey hey hey.... wait a minute. they said we evolved from fish, to monkeys, to humans, if that's so then why did'nt the cycle continue for each species? why did'nt all the fish evolve into land animals. why did'nt all the monkeys evolve into humans? come on scientists you've got alot of explaining to do. i think fish, and monkeys should be extinct if it was all evolution
hearteyhonkii 2 months ago
@BangZzYoSpeakers look at bereanbeacon channel and you will find out all those explanations for your doubts .
alexrj2 5 months ago
This is misleading title and does not prove evolution. Neanderthal variation falls outside human mtDNA variation, meaning humans did not evolve from neanderthals which is now a fact, but then you speculate that there was a split somewhere from an unknown common ancestor using a rate equation based on how much mtDNA mutate which is still questionable resulting in so many split dates.
daogdaog 5 months ago
why not? what do you know about the physics laws? relativity man.
as you have talked about science, we are 7 billions, make the calcul
of the generations to see if it's possible an earth with more than
6000 years.
alexrj2 6 months ago
where in any acient litrature or carving or wall paintings frescos whatever did.does it say our ancester beLIEved the world was flat?...you will find no source to any where ,the flat earth was a christian theory for demonisation purposes to make older tribes peoples look stupid ,even though everything they looked at in the heavens/sky was round ,the ancient egyptions(5000b.c.) could calculate pye,but they thought the world was flat ,,,no chance,so when did people think the world was flat
reksub10 7 months ago
and how does Mt DNA in neanderthals prove evolution? after all if neatherthals would have had the same genes than humans, you will still use it as evidance for evolution. in other words any other resoult would have also been ´´prove´´ for evoluton
Answerquestions1 8 months ago
Moral of story? Cain, a descendent of Adam and Eve, marked by God, pretty much tells the story of what Scientists falsely claim to be Neanderthal, an early ancestor or link before Homo Sapien.
Neanderthal made pottery, jewelry, drew art on caves, buried their dead, made musical instruments, clothing out of hides, weapons (spears), etc,
Acecool444 8 months ago
Now, just imagine that all of Cain’s descendants are destroyed by the flood leaving only true Homo Sapien descendants of Noah. The strata (Sediment) would allow people at a later date to wonder what happened to the Neanderthals. Also, there would be some evidence of mixing. Then, the small layer of strata separating the two would be very small.
Acecool444 8 months ago
Neanderthal: Slight Genetic DNA change from Homo Sapien
CAIN: Physically Cursed "and whoever finds me will kill me." (Gen 4:13),
Marked by God that nobody would kill Cain (Gen 4:15), Abnormal Heightened Physical Strength and Intelligence to sustain safe livelihood.
Neanderthal: Lone Hunter, Forager
CAIN: You will be a restless wanderer" (Gen 4:10)
Neanderthal: Bred out or extinction through flood.
Cain: Conceived "Enoch" by his wife for starters, Gen 6: Noah and Flood explain flash burial...
Acecool444 8 months ago
"you prefer to believe in a lie, man made invention with no possibility."
quoted for great irony
mikfoz1969 8 months ago
@ zoo
Come on now.The only ones that feel that way are the racists ones.It's quite evident.I made a video with the top Chinese scientist admitting.The top germans science team admitted.Which science teams argues differently? Where are they saying man came from.Don't say the middle east.Because that's part of original Africa also
jusamessenger 9 months ago
Hitler wanted a race of blonde hair blue eyes.. Islam always said blonde hair blue eyes came from devils.. Those Israelis trace their nation through the mother. Because if they ran it through the father it would lead back to Neanderthals. Their mother traces all the way back into Africa. They knew this
jusamessenger 9 months ago
@ shaven
The Asians also.They all look different from one another and the science world knows this but that categories every as one "humans".They are not of the original man.Their a hybrid.. Even their own science and books are saying this now.. Discover magazine front cover of may 2011..says " Your are not human". At the bottom it says your new identity. But they have known this for a long time.
jusamessenger 9 months ago
@ shaven
Yeah... I was just trying to narrow it down.. Actually there's alot more to it according to the scriptures.. The world makes up scientific names for these things.. For instance "mankind".. A kind of man.. There's was more than just 1 type of Neanderthal. That's why the Russians look different from the Irish .. The Irish different from the Italians.
jusamessenger 9 months ago
people thousands of years ago were not as ignorant as scientist would like you to think. Not all thought the Earth was flat and they could distinguish between man made object and natural things. I believe in micro evolution but not macro. There is no evidence that one type of creature evolves into another. I believe in God as a master creator as well. And one thing I like remind atheist is scientist have a understanding of how things work, but no idea WHY.
Ryder1981 10 months ago
@Ryder1981 What do you think the millions of scientist are working on? If religion would stop dragging the sciences,societies ,archeology,politics and financial stability back 1000 yrs we would know alot more.
Enjoy your beliefs but don't hurt others doing so,as Catholics and muslims constantly do.
goldensassenach 9 months ago
@goldensassenach and that's another one of my points against atheist. We just don't see the world the same way and I'm not going to waste my life trying to get them to see it. There is a how to everything and science can explain them but I do believe there is bias towards what answers they want to believe. And because of that, I believe their research is flawed. Mainly because theories are based upon someone's opinion based on their experience.
Ryder1981 9 months ago
@Ryder1981 I think there's actually a bias towards what you want to believe! Science simply doesnt work that way. Hypothesis are tested until a theory emerges, opinions have nothing to do with it.
juda8054 9 months ago
@juda8054 don't take this too harshly but if you think a theory is fact then you need to go back to school or do you believe in psychic abilities? Theories are a prediction of events based on a system of logic by an individual (his opinion) as he see evaluates the information and accepted by science when others in that field agree with his opinion. Then over time a theory may or may NOT be proven to be LAW. And science has many more theories than laws my friend.
Ryder1981 9 months ago
@Ryder1981 psychic abilities?Of course not. Anyway, In science a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true.
juda8054 9 months ago
@juda8054 Accepted to be true but not yet proven to be true. It's accepted because of a shared opinion by people you only trust because they have a degree. Do not have faith in man, because we are so easily corrupted. Anyone who puts their faith in science can just as easily be manipulated as someone of religious belief.
Ryder1981 9 months ago
@Ryder1981 Ive heard this cop out before.You confuse science with faith(religion). Science is based on objective observation but faith is not objective it doesn't have to be. Your assumption that i follow opinion of people with degrees blindly is amusing because that's exactly what people of faith do with ancient biblical legends.
juda8054 9 months ago
@juda8054 Okay, I'll make it into a theory. Then you'll have no choice but to believe it. LOL
Ryder1981 9 months ago
@Ryder1981 Unfortunately just because you say so isn't going to cut it. You would have to test to prove. I don't like to paint with such a broad brush but most people of faith are so narrow minded. I hope you continue to study this subject.Try reading a call to sanity by Jason Scott Yeldell hopefully it could help you start using your reasoning instead of your faith and get to the actual truth no matter how unpleasant it is for you.
juda8054 9 months ago
@Ryder1981 In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole.
juda8054 9 months ago
@juda8054 Laws are true and theories can be true if enough people agree they are true. What part of this do you not see is a contradiction. It's a twist of the truth to favor a view point. And then people like you completely follow without question. This is an example of the US school system that trains you to accept someone else view and regurgitate it at command rather than using both sides of your brain questioning why would someone make a rule that can be so easily corrupted.
Ryder1981 9 months ago
@Ryder1981 Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis." That makes its true meaning in science even more confusing to the general public.
juda8054 9 months ago
I guess this guy should have waited a couple of years before posting this crap.Because Neanderthals are the Europeans ancestry according to the science journal may 10 2010 report. But not the ancestry of those from Africa.Lol then in December it says that ALL Europeans originate from a Neanderthal male and a human female. Article"Neanderthal Romeo and human Juliet"
jusamessenger 10 months ago
@jusamessenger I see your point, however data is useful. The mitochodrial genome (which is limited in size) suggested no relation. So the scientific community tentatively accepted that data until the more recent investigations. It doesn't mean their conclusions were crap, That's just how science works: data allows conclusions to be drawn, but then new data can lead to contrary conclusions.
ndjarnag 10 months ago
@ndjarnag
The basis of May 2010 theory does not nullify the conclusion of this video. The May 2010 report shows NM nuclear DNA has both distinctive Eurasian human DNA plus about 2 million base pairs of chimp-like non-human DNA.
Further research shows a specific match between Eurasian X-chromosome and NM. This would not be the result of 1 to 4 percent NM. This would be the result of a sequence of hybrids of Eurasian human males with non-human females. NM was 15-16ths human, 1-16th ape.
Mdebacle 3 months ago
@jusamessenger not just europeans all non africans
Shavenhamster 9 months ago
@jusamessenger scientists don't always agree. Some argue about the species status of the red wolf (hybrid/species) and some don't think modern man originated in Africa at all (multiregional hypothesis).
zoolassie 9 months ago
@2002
Your right..People have been altering DNA for many years.. Dogs for example. All these different breeds ? Many of these dogs are man made.. Shar pei.. Some dogs have web feet some dogs are made with hair instead of fur.. When did they start doing this?the science world hasn't been completely honest. And most atheist don't research and use logic.they have tunnel vision
jusamessenger 10 months ago
I don't have a prob with evolution as a theory but they need to check their facts. There is stuff in the bible that people could not have known back then. The Israelites knew how to prevent the spread of disease before knowledge of germs existed. They knew the earth was round and hangs on nothing. The idea that everyone was ignorant back then is based on a desire to discredit anything outside of their own personal agenda remit
2002ibiza 11 months ago
lol "neandertall"
ErockWErock 11 months ago
Cryptozoology novel about two boys who find something strange on the beach one night see video book trailer
dltanner99 11 months ago
i had a question about sex determination from fossils: are samples from ancient fossils usually preserved enough for a simple barr body test to work ? how are cells/subcelular structures from fossiles processed , or does only the more rigid DNA only survive?
echafaud 1 year ago
great video , cheers
echafaud 1 year ago
that's not possible, how did men and women become men and women at the same time? i mean how did they evolve to be ready to be woman and man with compatible dna? and worse, now scientists are talking about only a woman that generated all the humans beings, so that proves the impossibility of evolution.
only the explanation of God's creation is possible.God created the world, the universe, the humans, all things.
alexrj2 1 year ago
@alexrj2 oh dear.
ndjarnag 1 year ago 11
@alexrj2 She did not generate all things, and she certainly didn't do it alone. Science only suggests that she is a common ancestor of all human beings.
Farle4971 1 year ago
@Farle4971 with no evidence?
alexrj2 1 year ago
@alexrj2 Actually with a lot of evidence. The amount of physical evidence is enough to fill the bed of a truck. The amount of evidence achieved by studies is limitless. But the amount of evidence that God created the world. . .fits between a book cover. . .wow.
Farle4971 10 months ago
@Farle4971 not at all. one book with truth and many of evolution with lies.
alexrj2 10 months ago
@alexrj2 I believe you mean a book of imagination written centuries ago. And many of evolution based on scientific proof that is updated daily. But by all means, keep living in your fantasy world.
Farle4971 9 months ago
@Farle4971 inspired by God. people prefer to believe in a lie like evolution. science lies too.
of course i will continue to keep living my true world. God's word make free...Jesus is arriving very soon
glory for some, shame for others. it will be too late for people believing in lies.
alexrj2 9 months ago
@alexrj2 Yes, it is already too late for people believing in lies. As I can tell from you, there's no teaching them anything. So keep believing your lies. Science may be wrong from time to time, but at least it has proof to represent its ideas. And when Jesus gets here, let me know. I can't wait to have my party.
Farle4971 9 months ago
@Farle4971 yes, i will believe in Jesus for ever, im not silly Jesus is real, i prefer to believe in the real
than in a lie create by the devil and followed by humans called evolution, called science. you prefer to believe in an absurd it's your choice but time is running out and the truth wil be soon revealed and will be too late to people that dont come to Jesus, the true one, not the one invented by humans as the science. also, if you die you will be in hell and you will see your deception.
alexrj2 9 months ago
@alexrj2 I see humans everyday, but I sure haven't seen God yet. Absurd. . .not quite, with the whole PROOF thing you know? But that's cool. Whatever. God made you blind I see. But I evolved to have brain cells, and I also have the ability to think on my own instead of reading silly fictional books. If I do end up in your magical hell, hey, look on the bright side, at least there's no ignorant Christians.
Farle4971 9 months ago
@Farle4971 no. you are not thinking by your own, you are a slave of a system that's a lie, you believe in a lie with no prove. i believe in God, God is present in my life, His word is solid and many prophecies are coming to pass. What He says happens to those who decided to follow Him. Your brain is blocked and manipulated by the devil that make you a puppet to believe in lies as evolution and stay far from the truth.
alexrj2 9 months ago
@alexrj2 Bahahahahahah. That's hilarious. YOU are a slave to an IGNORANT religious cult that attempts to force its stupid beliefs down people's throats. If you would take one second away from your storybook, you'd realize that your belief is illogical and has no proof whatsoever. There's no one (including magical beings used by the Christian church to manipulate it's followers) in my brain except myself, and I use that self to think logically and use reason and evidence to support my theories.
Farle4971 9 months ago
@Farle4971 you saying that there's no God doesnt mean that He doesnt exist, "Only a fool says in his heart there is no God" Psalms 14:1. Only by this video we see that evolution is a lie, only to form the bases to the mitochondria is the more than you win in the lotery with the numbers that you have dreamt with, and imagine that multiplied by the other infinite human bodies structures, not talking about the nature etc. you prefer to believe in a lie, man made invention with no possibility.
alexrj2 9 months ago
@alexrj2 said the ignoramus who chooses to quote his fairytale storybook (whose man-made stories have no logical possibility) without any proof whatsoever. You saying that God exists doesn't make him exist. Goodbye.
Farle4971 8 months ago
@Farle4971 No; you prefer to believe in a completely absurd, so enjoy to be deceived and then to pass the eternity in hell.
alexrj2 8 months ago
@alexrj2 Absurd. . .with proof. Alright then. Lol. Get some help, preferably from a human. There's not such thing as eternity. But you won't know that, because when you die, you die. The end. But if you insist that I go to make-believe fire land, that's cool. I like it warm, plus, the Christians won't be there. Sounds like heaven to me :) Oh wait. . .
Farle4971 8 months ago
@Farle4971 "There's not such thing as eternity."
All one need do is look above, and notice a never ending infinite universe. Should we ever find an ending to it (a finite universe), one must also ask, what is on the other side of that ending? To suggest that Life does not continue after the physical body dies off, and we do not have an "invisible eternal soul" without proof is merely an unbelievers opinion, not scientific fact. Til then, nothing can be argued whether it does or it doesn't.
Acecool444 8 months ago
@Farle4971 Speaking of the "Invisible Eternal Soul", if in fact it does exist, We know it must be comprised of "Energy" and "Thought". Scientific evidence of "Invisible" energy is found in the Tau Neutrino (3 types), which travels at or near the speed of light, passes through large distances of matter unaffected and interact with with other particles. Then we have Dark Matter and Antimatter, also evidence of the Invisible, but scientists know it exists, i.e. Higgs boson (aka The God Particle).
Acecool444 8 months ago
@Acecool444 LOL full of SO much fail and ignorance its not funny
iliveon 8 months ago
@Farle4971 i dont need help YOU need help... from Jesus, no human can help you to scape from the sufferings of the eternity. NO you cant prove that there's no life after death.
alexrj2 8 months ago
@alexrj2 if you think about this rationally, then the explanation of God's creation holds no truth as there are NO facts/proof to support this idea. If you ask me, i'll take science and evolution for what it's worth, since it is supported by facts - all scientist do is conjecture about how we became from artifacts that have been found. And if you wanna believe there is a God, than by all means do; but if you think that he has spoken to man, you are seriously mistaken!
fsaari1985 11 months ago
@alexrj2 stay in school, thats all i can say
mhr88 10 months ago
@alexrj2 may god (figure of speech don't get too exited) open your soul to the truth.
Sammys09 7 months ago
@Sammys09 the truth make free and the truth is Jesus.
alexrj2 7 months ago
@alexrj2 no sorry I believe in what I have prove for.
Sammys09 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sammys09 prove? evolution has no proof at all.
alexrj2 7 months ago
@alexrj2 whos jesus and if hes mid eastern why has he a spanish middle age name?
reksub10 7 months ago
@alexrj2 you sound completely illogical.
Akirameerkat 6 months ago
@Akirameerkat illogical is to think that man comes from one soup that started to make living beings..
alexrj2 6 months ago
@alexrj2 no it isn't when you are scientifically minded, its not really a soup, it was tide pools around the earth, where molecules were assembled by chemistry until one by accident formed that was able to make crude copies of itself and thus started life on earth, Th reason why I say you sound illogical, is because there can be no god, because, before the big bang, time did not exist, so a creator god could not exist.
Akirameerkat 6 months ago
@Akirameerkat No, that's false, you have a model and a false model. no prove at all.
alexrj2 6 months ago
@alexrj2 actually there is proof, one the fossil record on earth, and it can best tested, to understand how time could not exist, all you need to know is a black hole, because inside a black hole, it doesn't exist, there is proof for these all throughout the cosmos, where as there is absolutely no proof for Intelligent design or biblical creationism.
Akirameerkat 6 months ago
@alexrj2 also, tell me, how old you think our little planet and the Universe is ?
Akirameerkat 6 months ago
@Akirameerkat no more than 10000 years.
alexrj2 6 months ago
Comment removed
Akirameerkat 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexrj2 okay, if that were true, it wouldn't be possible to see the Andromeda Galaxy or other galaxies in our local group, the Andromeda galaxy is 2.5 million light years away,a light year is how far light travels in one year at 186,000 mps, so when we look at Andromeda, our eyes are seeing it as it looked 2.5 million years ago, the Hubble space telescope shows galaxies that are over 13 billion light years away, so these facts debunk a less then 10,000 year old earth
Akirameerkat 6 months ago
No body thought the world was flat thats just a myth
sirgazz 1 year ago
@sirgazz All you have to do is to watch a ship go over the horizon or see the earth's very round shadow on the moon.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
i heard them (history channel scientist or something) ssay we couldnt breed with neanderthals, but thats ridiculous... you cant tell me neanderthals were up there painting hunting scenes and making fish hooks, and they were some kind of animal, we couldnt breed with..
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
@longfootbuddy Neanderthal DNA is virtually identical to ours.
They were the ones that did not listen to Noah.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy There is no evidence that Noahs flood occurred. If you want to point out that there are flood stories in nearly every other culture, well the Mesopotamian one predates the biblical one. So I geuss the epic of Gilgamesh should reflect the true religion then!
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@NightHawkBomber001 No, you have no way of proving any other account is more accurate or any other account came first because the biblical accounts from before the flood were copied and recopied.
The biblical record has records from before the flood that no one else has.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy I’m sorry It seems you missed out on this crucial piece of information. The Epic of Gilgamesh is recognized as the first known piece of literature in the world. It was written in Mesopotamia. Thats where Abraham came from. Its reasonable to assume that he adapted the stories to fit his “experiance” with God. The stories he told became an oral history, and they were not written down until moses’ time.
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy "The biblical record has records from before the flood that no one else has.” - Actually the bible tells stories of the “Before the flood” other religions and myths say this as well. In fact the Epic of Gilgamesh has a little to say too.
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy “” f the biblical accounts from before the flood were copied and recopied.” - I’m suppressed you don’t know the history of your bible well at all. Abraham (and all who followed) passed the creation account and other stories on via oral history. Moses started an inactive to write them down (the Torah).
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy The new testament is where the copies of copies come in. The bible was separated into different books that were freely circulated and copied. There were other books like the Book of Enoch, apocalypse of peter, shepherd of hermas, Gospel of marry, etc that were treated as holy God breathed books. It was not until 325 when the roman emperor constantine gathered the christian leaders to choose the books to include in the bible that they were united.
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
3:23 1000 differences out of 1600? 1000/1600=x/100% => x=62.5% so similarity between us and chimps is 100-62.5=37.5% and not 98% or 95% as it was said. I can't get it! can someone explain please... (I'm not a creationist and I will never be :D bible is immoral bullshit)
insanewarlock666 1 year ago
@insanewarlock666 They found out that the controlling parts of the DNA are very different than that of the apes.
Something has to be different because the result is different.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
No creationist will accept this as evidence. You need to have literally lined up, every single skull from the millions of humans or earlier hominids to show creationists the gradual evolution. If you are missing a single skull of any of the millions and millions then its a broken link and the creationist will point you to the creation museum where you can study how god concept did it.
699backstab 1 year ago
@699backstab No, just show me a function that does not have a maker.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy Your invisible, dangerous, misogynistic, homophobic, racist, war mongering, rapist, hater of humanity god concept, pretend maker will its self have a maker and that maker will be explained away by science like Dorothy unveiled the man behind the curtain in The Wizard of Oz. So shallow was this attempt at intelligence on your part that with any hope at all your god concept will make bone cancer inside your bones and you will ride the pinnacle of exquisite agony to the end :)
699backstab 1 year ago
@699backstab You are not sayiing anything. God is nothing like what you describe. You are making things up to convince yourself. God cannot say anything less than absolute perfection and truth. Homosexuality is extremely detrimental to us. If something is good, everyone should do it a lot. If something is not good, no one should do it at all.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy Your second sentence is exactly 4 words too long.
699backstab 1 year ago
Glad to see that they have finally said that Adam and Eve were Neanderthals out of Africa and that Noah didn't put two of each dinosaur species on the ark.
MegajasmineR 1 year ago
@MegajasmineR No, they just found out that not everyone is related to Africans and there are now older finds that they conveniently found that is older than the Africans and they are virtually identical to us.
I could have told you that.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
I just love these old atheist , psudeo-science videos. It just so clearly shows how wrong the entire arrogant science community has been. All of the peer reviewed citations and journals, all of the nested heirarcy, all of those ape like pictures we have seen of neanderthals, all of the scientific "proof" that has to be changed in the school books.The problem with science is that it has been hijacked by the atheiest religion.
ALL science disciplines MUST use the THEORY of evolution timeline.
n2h2o2 1 year ago
id blow your big jew nose if i was you. then people would be able to understand you
stuflikethis 1 year ago
nice fucking lisp guy, sounds like you got the retard genome
hades222 1 year ago
@hades222 HAhaHAhaHAha!
OmegaLeviathon 1 year ago
@hades222 Yea.... I only EVER listen to people who speak perfectly also - Anyone who can't speak correctly are blaspheming heathens.....
The lisp - It trumps education every time... (If you are a religious moron, that is)
Rafterman123 1 year ago
As is discussed below, the conclusions in this video are wrong. The same group from Max Planck Genetics in Leipzig recently (May 2010) completed the Neadertal genome, and on its basis hypothesize that most of Homo sap (those who traveled to Europe or Asia) now have 2-5% Neadertal genes. This is a great example of how science overthrows theory with new evidence, and how devastating that can be to creationists who unskeptically grasped the earlier results, only to sink with it now.
puncheex 1 year ago
A note: on the basis of this new data, it is possible to support that Neandertal was not wiped out or even extinct, but rather simply merged into Homo. It doesn't even require that Neandertal be our same species; it could well be the hybrid that the creationists believe all those "early human fossils" were is actually (nearly) all of us. How delicious! Made in the very image of god. The only purebreds are the sub-Saharan Africans. Shweeeet!
puncheex 1 year ago
Now we know two things:
(1) Neanderthal mtDNA is non-human.
(2) Neanderthal nuclear DNA is close to Eurasian human DNA.
A person need not be real bright to conclude that Neanderthals were the product of bestiality of human males with Eurasian DNA and non-human females, probably Heidelberg, which were also hybrids.
Mdebacle 1 year ago
@Mdebacle: Why, how graceful of you, Mdebacle. Bestiality! Human, non-human, including, of course, heidelberg in your role as the non-human hybrid beast. And filthy, dirty, immoral ancestors they were. You're ancestors too, of course, unless you happened to be pure sub-Saharan African yourself. Does that give you the warm fuzzy feeling you're reaching for?
A news flash, Mdebacle: they are/were Homo. All of them. Maybe one of those beasts was named Sarah. Seems appropriate to me.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex
As the sceptics at The Economist (May 8) pointed out, the only way for your scenario to work would be if African human females mated with Neanderthal males, as opposed to the somewhat more normal process of dominant males (humans) mating with Neanderthal females.
Human mtDNA comes from mitochondrial Eve (aka Eve). Neanderthals didn't have it.
That is why we have no steenking Neanderthal DNA.
Mdebacle 1 year ago
@Mdebacle: It only goes to show that the Economists writers and you as well need more science. For any given group of animals, there is an mEve. It's mDNA is in every member of the group. So there is a sapiens mEve, and a neandertal mEve. There is also an mEve for the mixed group, whose mDNA is either sapiens or neandertal (she is a member of one or the other). It appears that, by a coin flip, she was sapiens. All other matings are possible but for that one requirement.
puncheex 1 year ago
In addition to that, I also noticed your little "more normal process of dominant human males", leaving, of course, the abnormal Neandertal males to address those sub-dominant females. It would appear that you have a noted tendency to chauvinism, for humans at least, and for males as a sideline. All the more delicious for your Neandertal side.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex [for any group..there is an mEve]
for a species, yes.
for hybrids there would have been two mEves, and no reason why one should disappear.
There should also logically be more chimp-like nuclear DNA in Neanderthal.
If it could be shown that Eurasian humans have some chimp-Neanderthal DNA (in comparison to Africans) then you would really have something.
Mdebacle 1 year ago
@Mdebacle: Wrongo, chap. An mEve is the latest common ancestor of a given group along the exclusively female line. The mEve of you, your siblings and their progeny is your mother; toss in your 1st cousins and it's your grandmother. Your mDNA is her mDNA plus accumulated mutations. Sapiens has an mEve, the set of all live equus equus has an mEve, and indeed you plus all living horses have an mEve which was neither horse nor human, but was likely a mammal. You don't get to define the term. ...
puncheex 1 year ago
... But don't take my word for it; look it up. For a given set of individuals, there can be but one. She is certainly not the only female ancestor, just the one on the female line.
It really hurts when you accept a scientific principle, not on the evidence, but just because it supports your biblical fairy tale, then to have it turn around and bite you on the fundament, doesn't it?
You, unless you have exclusively sub-Sahara African blood, have genes from Homo neandertalensis. True as taxes.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex
Observable reality tells us:
(1) Human males are the perpetrators of bestiality..
(2) Among hybrids, the females are more fertile than males.
(3) Eurasion humans do not have Neanderthal mtDNA.
Therefore rationality tells us the first Neanderthals were result of human males and non-human females. Then human males and Neanderthals re-bred to produce more human- like Neanderthals. Then this unholy mess was exterminated and fossilized (Guess what event).
Mdebacle 1 year ago
@Mdebacle: I have doubts that the men or women 25kyrs would have seen it as bestiality; that's a rather sophisticated concept. Perhaps just neighborliness. But, of course, you've got your morality glasses on and are assuming that "Rampant evil before the flood" rumor, aren't you?
Your second is ridiculous. What in the world do you mean by fertile, how are females more so, and what does being hybrids have to do with that?
As for the third, I've already told you what was required for that.
puncheex 1 year ago
... Regardless of all that, the fact is that a goodly proportion of mankind alive today has both sapiens and neandertal genes, including me and probably you. Are Neandertals a human kind or not? Are we not hybrid human/neandertal? Is this hybridization possible between kinds, according to the Bible? If so, what does it say for kinds that hybridization can occur, and that it can be stable and permanent, as it is with us? What are the rules? Could they be (gasp!) evolution?
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex
If Neanderthals were 95 % human and 5% ape, were barrel-chested with super-human strength, probably sounded like a psychiatric ward, that was the tip off of bestiality.
Male hybrids like cattle-bison, ocecats, mules have low/no fertility. This is why most, if not all , human/hominid mating was done by human male. Can't say 100 %, but it would have kept Neanderthal mtDNA going until the Big Kahuna.
Make a list of extermination, fossilization events,Then see top of list
Mdebacle 1 year ago
Go away bible thumpers.
We are trying to discuss evidence of evolution not old books written and altered by unknown men.If anyone wants a preacher they will ask.thx
But wasn't the 2010 report based on mtdna? And has anyone else read an article about mtdna being non native to humans and in theory it may be from an ancient viral infection/adaptation? I read it last yr and can't find it anywhere now.
goldensassenach 1 year ago
@goldensassenach: Dr. Lynn Margulis is the biologist who originated the idea that certain organelles in the cell are actually symbiotic prokaryotes: the mitochondria in animals, chloroplasts in plants and others. Her theory has become rather well established. Just search for: Margulis, symbiote, mitochondria, chloroplast, look them up in wiki and follow the references.
The mtDNA report on Neandertals was 5 years ago; the one this year was based on their nuclear DNA.
puncheex 1 year ago
Evolution is absurd. Thinking people know it is false.
darkfur35 1 year ago
@darkfur35: You misspelled that. It's "thumping".
puncheex 1 year ago
So, were you going to discuss the COMPLETE Neanderthal Genome, where they recently found that Neanderthal DNA, between 1-4 percent, exist in the DNA of ALL peoples except those in sub-Saharan Africa?
branwhitcomb 1 year ago
@branwhitcomb So the results from May 2010 clearly refute the conclusions in this video.
(Check out the link in the description for excellent videos from the scientists who conducted this study.)
The 2010 results utilizes a draft of the entire 3 billion base pair nuclear genome, while the 2008 paper referenced in this video draws conclusions based on the mitochondrial genome which is only about 15,000 base pairs long. So, I think the conclusions from this video are clearly wrong!
ndjarnag 1 year ago
first of all the bible never said the earth was flat, it said it was round Isaiah 40:22. in history only two church leaders said the earth was flat, one was a known heritic the other was an obscure monk no one knows about, everyone else believed the earth was round based on not only scripture but well established greek reasoning which was highly accurate. That the church persecuted galileo and other scientists is a myth of 19th century origin, lets see what other tosh i'll find in this video
ibuchanan82 1 year ago
@ibuchanan82
"Isaiah 40:22: It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in"
circle = sphere???
ndjarnag 1 year ago 2
@ndjarnag I don't believe there was a word for sphere in the original hebrew, so sure circle would suffice why shouldn't it? how else would you describe a sphere without using the word sphere or ball?
ibuchanan82 1 year ago
@ibuchanan82: Yeah: Duwr = globe, ball. Besides, contemporary Jewish cosmology sees Earth as a convex surface with a raised, mountainous edge where the sky is attached. The six references to chuwg in the Bible are definitely to plane circles (as in the rainbow, or a compass, an instrument to draw a circle).
Sorry. Where one might buy the use of 3 for pi ("just a folksy kinda inaccuarcy") this one has no excuse.
puncheex 1 year ago
@ndjarnag Revelation 7:1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Job 38:13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
Daniel 4:11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH.
YngvildWarrior 1 year ago
@ndjarnag lol
myco578 11 months ago
@ndjarnag Yes in Aramaic-hebrow language the circle and sphere are synonymous
eshoo8000 11 months ago
@ibuchanan82 ur lying
BadLilNinja 1 year ago
Excellent and clear explanation... so THAT'S how God created the heavens and the Earth! Hmmm, "Adam" and "Eve" are parables for the first hominids... duh on me.
bakajoe100 1 year ago
your video needs updating
''Most people living outside Africa can trace up to 4% of their DNA to a Neanderthal origin, a consequence of interbreeding between the two groups after the great migration from the contintent.''
found this in the paper last week google it :D
hellohal3 1 year ago
@hellohal3 what is most intresting about this is that it contridicts the theory of us out compeating them and also violence between our two species maby we did atcherly live together peacefully with them at some point :)
hellohal3 1 year ago
@hellohal3: Yeah. Just google for Svante Pääbo; he was the project leader in both cases.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex cheers mate i am really intrested in this sort of thing and will do if i remember when i have the time.
hellohal3 1 year ago
guess what buddy we are 2- 5 percent neanderthal jackass
dillon822 1 year ago
Think of Neanderthals as humans that died in the flood and that is the reason we are directly related to none of them because they all died in the flood.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy
you'll take giant leaps in logic to hold onto your religious beliefs huh? so, it's the neanderthals who god killed in the flood? so i guess noah was a neandethal too if he existed during the same time period? if he wasn't, then he and the others who were on the ark were the first full humans? are u ignoring the fact that this find further proves evolution, which in turn disproves adam and eve, which seriously harms the bibles credibility and every other story in it?
itzahazylife 1 year ago
@itzahazylife You are assuming far too much. Neanderthals are humans too. They are just not as closely related to us for the simple reason that they died in the flood. It actually helps to prove what the Bible says. Noah did live much longer than we do for the simple reason that he was born before the world was destroyed by the flood.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy
"...they died in the flood. It actually helps to prove what the Bible says".
At first you creationists were funny to me, now your laziness is pissing me off. Read a book besides the fucking bible! Theres more evidence to conlcude Neaderthals died due to cold weather conditions across Europe, not a fucking flood. Their fossils were found under no condition that would indicate a flood. Youre lazy & full of shit!
Key2daUnderground 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: You know, that's the danger for you hide-bound it's-in-the-Bible-and-that's-good-enough-for-me types: you see something in science that you think agrees with you and it's golden; you apply no effort to trying to see if it is true or not, unlike your pseudo-approach to the science that doesn't agree with you. Too bad this particular hypothesis got refuted by later evidence. heh, heh - they're your ancestors, too.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex I have always said that Neanderthal were human even before the DNA test. You are the ones who were saying that humans originated in Africa and this DNA test proves otherwise.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: OK, fine. I'll guarantee you that other Christians do not (see Mdebacle above), but that's, of course, not your problem. Neandertal man is formally known as Homo neandertalensis, man from the Neander (River in Germany). He is Homo, man, the same genus as us, Homo sapiens. He is, AFAIK, our 1st cousin on a species level. And now he is even part of us, merged back in. All Homo did come from Africa, according to DNA analysis; that doesn't eliminate evolving elsewhere, tho.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex Neanderthal should be related to Africans (according to you) and he is not. The location has nothing to do with anything.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Ummmmm, except that you have Neandertal DNA in you (unless you and all your ancestors hail from South Africa. Sorry, you can't wash them out. It's likely that they simply melted into Homo sapiens, and can now be counted among most of mankinds ancestors.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex What ever happened to the idea that human life originated in Africa??? One little DNA test showing that Africans are not related to neanderthal and it all went out the window just like that. Noah is from before the flood when Neanderthals were still living. Noah's three sons each had wives not related to Noah. So there is no problem at all with what my position has always been. I have always said that neanderthal were humans.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: It did, as far as we can tell, but man can move around (you may have noticed). Homo habilis evolved from Australopithecus, the first ancestor designated man. From him, in Africa, evolved H. rudolphensis, H ergaster and H erectus. Erectus was the first to travel, to the near east and then east to China, Java, and Flores. In the near east, he branched into H heidelburgensis, which evolved into H neandertal. Back in Africa, erectus evolved into H sapiens,....
puncheex 1 year ago
... who followed erectus out of Africa. In the Near east he apparently interbred with Neandertal, and then branched into Europe, Australia and Asia and thence into N & S America.
That is a very rough outline of my understanding of the current state of early anthropology; it could be wrong in details. You can find out more; search on "Spencer Wells" and watch his videos. Nothing has "gone out the window", this was all understood, but for that near east merge, before last May.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex If everyone is African, Neanderthal should be African too but he is not.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: All I'm saying is that Homo originated in Africa. I guess I would agree Neandertal himself is not. Mt dad is Taxan; I was born in Colorado, so I am not Texan, even though my genes were inherited from someone who was. So?
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex You are not getting it. They just made a big deal saying that humans came from Africa. Now they find out that there are humans that did not come from Africa.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@puncheex Your assumptions have no basis. Apes have different DNA than we do. You assume that it turned into what our DNA is but that is your assumption, not fact. Every fossil of every life form was buried by the flood that buried all life on earth that was not in the Ark.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Wrong. I start with the observed fact that there are Endogenous RetroViruses (ERVs) in our DNA unique to man, ERVs in chimp DNA unique to chimps, and some that are in common with both of our DNAs. That leads me to the conclusion that chimps and humans have a common ancestor. That is a logical deduction based on fact, assuming only that I am correct about what ERVs are and how they get into DNA. Show me where that is wrong.
puncheex 1 year ago
... You, on the other hand, make a bald assertion about an ark which is not backed up by any evidence; where are you assumptions? Do you assume, for example, that a Bible story must be true? Do you make assumptions about why fish should have died in this flood? Elephants high up while small lizards, and fish are low? Assumptions about where the water came from and where it went? Assumptions about the energy required?
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex Evolution is based on many more assumptions than the flood. The flood is an historical account complete with the genealogies of the surviving people and before the flood. The account says water came up from under ground (and from above) and the continents were all compressed and the mountains were pushed up (after the flood). Everything had its place. You would not expect all creatures to be living together and the more intelligent ones would have sought higher ground. No assumptions.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Relying on one single source for your history, geology and paleontology, written by bronze age herdsman does not seem to me to be very good forensics. Doesn't make any difference what the accouterments are, when there is only the one source for them as well. As science, "Everything had it's place" leaves a lot to be desired. I don't know what you use for a dictionary, but it seems to me you state two assumptions and then say "No assumptions". What do you call them?
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex The Bible is a collection of many writings. Genesis alone is made of many writings. Actual historical writings is better than assumptions any day and there are over 200 surviving accounts of the same flood with the same details of bad people, one family, a large boat, many animals and birds released to see if it was safe outside.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: Historical writings are weak evidence compared to physical evidence. Consider von Daniken's Chariots of the Gods. Here you have some modest circumstantial evidence combined with a plethora of historical writings (including the Bible) which all point to the fact that our gods are actually space aliens. Is that the way you really want to go?
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex The physical fossil evidence is the evidence of the flood. The Bible says the space invaders were destroyed by the flood. Now, which way do you go? One bang did not make the machine parts inside of us to work. The universe did not evolve itself billions of times to get the machine parts inside of you to work.
Seekmosttoprophesy 1 year ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy: "Which way do I go"? Where the evidence indicates; what did you suspect? I don't believe in a creator any more than I do von Daniken's gods. Big bang? The evidence is there. Why could it not have "make the machine parts inside us work"? You find a omnipotent god easier to believe? Have fun with it.
puncheex 1 year ago