I was just posting on another video that fossils do not support the theory of evolution. This idea is based solely on the premise that since this bones look different from the animals we have today, they must be different species that existed in some distant past. Broccoli, Cabbage and Kale also look different, but they are still the same species. Fossilization of those three could be interpreted as different species.
@jbooks888 Your statement is a joke, go learn more about mutations. Mutations can be beneficial, harmful or both, if the mutation helps the organism survive then it gets passed on, if not then the organism becomes extinct. If mutations were only harmful, we wouldn't be here now would we?
@masteranimation2008 I get what evolution says - it makes sense to me - if some quirk happens to make the organism stronger then that organism is going to have a better chance of survival, therefore passing on the 'beneficial mutation.' What I have trouble with is accepting that the enormous complexity of life just 'happened.' If something looks like a duck and sounds like a duck - it's a duck! Even evolutionsists admit that life appears to have been designed.
@jbooks888 "What I have trouble with is accepting that the enormous complexity of life just 'happened.'"
It didn't "just" happen. It took a tremendously long time, compared to the kind of time spans that we are used to in everyday life. Using bronze-aged knowledge and what was "common sense" back then is not very helpful in 2012. Nowadays, we need to incorporate knowledge that humanity has discovered which is _not_ common sense, in relation to sizes, time scales, complexity, etc.
@masteranimation2008 Despite all claims from evos, there still is NO solid, concrete evidence to prove this theory (macro) so I don't feel compelled to believe it.
@jbooks888 I'm just going to go ahead and assume that you're a creationist retard and say the following... Here you are talking about how we have no evidence of this "Macro" evolution, yet there's the fossil record. You don't feel compelled to believe that evolution is now a fact, but you certainly feel compelled to believe everything you read in the bible which was written by ignorant humans on shrooms. How pathetic...
@masteranimation2008 Oh come on! Fossil record? REALLY??? Please, you're making me feel uncomfortable for your sake. Please don't embarrass yourself any further. Fossil record indeed... LOL
@jbooks888 Yes the fossil record. Archaeologists have uncovered many remains of ancient species long extinct. The order of which is determined by the layer of rock it was found in, dating the rock it was found in and carbon dating if carbon is present. Genetics does an excellent job in explaining how evolution works. Evolution has become a fact. So where's the evidence for your deity? You sound like a complete fool laughing at concrete scientific evidence and have nothing of your own.
@jbooks888 "sometimes the layer's 'age' is determined by what fossil is found in it!"
What's wrong with that?
If a particular species in one location is found by radiometric dating to have evolved say between 800 and 700 MYA and then someone finds a fossil of that species somewhere else can you not see that the reasonable assumption (until overturned by further evidence) would be that the layer where the new fossils were found was also between 700 and 800 MY old?
@jbooks888 You don't have to believe what I say, only christians force you to believe what they say. I'm here because of your ignorance on mutations... The age of the layer the fossil is found in is determined by Uranium-lead dating used on the igneous rock found in them. It's logical that you should've already learned this in school it's unfortunate that a 19 yr old has to explain it to you...
@masteranimation2008 It's a shame your school didn't teach you how to construct a sentence and use punctuation correctly. Honestly, that response should leave you hanging your head in shame.
@jbooks888 We are currently talking about science, not english. It's the fucking internet, not a job interview you fucking dumbshit. I fell asleep during english class because I simply don't give a fuck about sentance enhancers or whatever other bullshit they teach you there.
@masteranimation2008 'sentance' ? Well, apparently spelling is not your long suit either. Spelling and grammar are basic tools for everyone. The fact that you couldn't cope with learning them explains why you so readily accept evolution and it's associated false teachings. Perhaps you should stick to books that begin with 'Once upon a time...'
@jbooks888 "false teachings" That made me laugh so hard. You believe the bible is true don't you. I bet you didn't even watch this video, instead you just decided to troll like 5 year old.
@jbooks888 You're employing a red herring here to distract from the actual arguments. My suspicion is that you're very aware that you're distracting from the argument, because you don't have anything genuine to say about how this video might in any way be incorrect.
Don't attack what people say, attack how they say it, am I right? Good try, but extremely intellectually dishonest. What about the video inspires false teachings is what you should be concerned with here.
@jbooks888 Incidentally, I'm all ears if you have a valid criticism of this video. If you find spelling errors in the video, I have to tell you in advance I hardly see how it would in any way advance your creationism claim or undermine evolutionary theory.
This family album thing was stupid. Comparing that you look similar to your relatives but not exactly the same. That has nothing to do with animals evolving. That's just stupid. Evolutionary theory is full of lies and bullshit. I used to believe it, but when I researched on my own I realized how stupid I was. Some of my favorite bullshit is: Look we found a bone, now lets construct an entire animal based on this one bone and try to fit it into our theory wherever we want.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA? Are you laughing at me or what? I m wondering if your laughing at me because I don't believe Evolution or because of the favorite bullshit.
@Riftlol Thanks for clearing that up. I'll take it as you don't like my comment. Why I think it is stupid is because, obviously you will look different than your ancestors. That doesn't mean we know apes are our ancestors. What this says is, look at a photo album. If you find a picture of a banana or any organism we can logically conclude that we are ancestors because even though we look different, we know we are related. Stupid. Evolution, every organisms' common ancestor: Primordial Soup. HAHA
Couldn't agree more. I'm currently trying to fid out how humans got 23 pairs of chromosomes while our "ancestors" all have 24 pairs and all I get is abuse from evolutionists and I'm not religious.
@cambell1308 Yeah something I realized about Evolutionists. If you try to prove them wrong, all that they want to do is try to prove Creation wrong. That is not the point of the argument. Not agreeing with Creation doesn't mean Evolution is right. You could be a complete atheist to realize Evolution is not true.
@Eganflow1992 Couldn't agree more, well said. The problem is that both sides start out with what they call the answer and so any evidence that dose not support their point of view is just ignored. Peace.....
I am just looking for the truth.....I have not made a decision for myself yet....... What I find is science is slamming creationists and Creationists slamming evolutionists. Why does that have to enter in your video ? Are you really Bestofscience ? Creationists do the same and I wish it would all stop. It really does not help either side I do not know what to believe as this really skews my view of your video. Ya sorry but thats not science....
Science doesn't care about creationists. They are irrelevant to science. It's not science that's slamming them: it's us. People on Youtube with a bit of education and too much time. I don't know why exactly. Perhaps seeing how wilfully ignorant other people can be makes us feel a bit better about ourselves. I'm no psychoheadshrink or anything, but that might just be it.
@MrGralgrathor Replying to your emails.... I just have trouble with the process of evolution eg:mutations......Does science understands this yet?..adapting to an environment is not explained by natural selection but does explain the species that survived..... also your email about Creationism....... croca-duck??? .....I see now its a big fight in education in the US ....... it seems their points are directed at the shortcomings in science?. Evolution exists How is my Question?
« mutations......Does science understands this yet? »
Yes. Mutations are just one part of genetic variability in life (which produces reproductive variation), and they are well-understood. We understand how they occur (through chemistry) and what kind of effects they produce (though molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics). That's not to say that we know everything there is to know about mutations: not by a longshot. But we certainly know enough to get by.
« adapting to an environment is not explained by natural selection »
Yes it is. One could say that differential reproductive success is what causes adaptation, but perhaps it's more accurate to say that differential reproductive process *is* adaptation.
« it seems their points are directed at the shortcomings in science? »
Not exactly. The creationists/intelligent designers in the USA are *misrepresenting* science. Science may not be perfect, but the only alternative to science is to include all kinds of fantasies into our knowledge curriculum. Creationists/ID-ers try to hide this by spinning tales about science and creationism.
You can believe what's comfortable, or you can believe what's exciting. Or you can believe what's true - and there's the catch: how do you find out what's true? How do you test if a claim about reality is accurate?
Evolution doesn't disprove the existence in God. Have you ever thought that God created the universe and carried out his will by using evolution? Everything around us points to order and intelligence coming from greater intelligence. It is more rational to believe that God created everything and guided evolution to give us intelligence to know him, rather than a bunch gasses exploding, causing a universe that has our very specific living conditions making our whole lives meaningless accidents.
Do you believe that German Shepperd and bull dog are names for different types of the same species? If so, where is the proof between the transitions of different types of dogs?
The theory of evolution says there must be an intermediate form between two different species e.g. a mouse and a bear - a cat is bigger than the mouse, but smaller than the bear - a cat is an intermediate form! because cats exist, the theory of evolution is proven to be true when tested!..this proves everything came from nothing and God doesn't exist!
Good call - idiot creationists...good way of explaining it - piltdown man is also good hard evidence for evolution - thats an intermediate form between modern men and monkeys - these idiots always overlook the intermediate forms scientists have already found!
« piltdown man is also good hard evidence for evolution »
Ehr, no, it isn't. Piltdown Man is a good example for showing that the scientific method isn't perfect, and that it sometimes takes a while before it is able to learn from its mistakes. Unfortunately the Piltdown Man "fossil" was locked away and forgotten for nearly 40 years before researchers took it out again on a hunch and proved it was a forgery.
fossils are good evidence of a flood theory. things dont fossilize over millions of years... it has to be buried quickly and preserved before it decomposes.
every point this video makes is demonstrably false and, i believe, intentionally misleading. the truth is, and any honest and educated evolutionist will agree, that the fossil record, geologic column etc. poses MANY problems for the long age uniformitarian evolutionist. lack of transitional fossils is just one. but others include, no erosion between strata, polystrate tree fossils, constantly finding fossils in the 'wrong' place etc. Evolution = sinking ship
@DaFleegsta Perhaps. Or perhaps it is you who is misinformed. I'm not saying that evolution has been categorically disproven, or that an alternative, such as biblical creation has been proven, but the idea that evolution is effectively irrefutable is far from the truth. The reality is that the geologic column looks nothing like the theorised evolutionary tree of life that we are all familiar with. This is a myth.
@ferrel81 "The reality is that the geologic column looks nothing like the theorised evolutionary tree of life that we are all familiar with."
If that's true, then you'll have no problem writing a research paper and becoming the most important scientific figure in the 21st century. Best of luck! You're about 150 years behind current biology..
@ferrel81 Err.. "irrefutable" isn't the right word.. But evolution has perfectly valid and TONS of evidence for it to be considered scientific fact. There are no 'lack of transitional fossils'.. Not even the slightest.. There's an OVERWHELMING amount of transitional fossils that sync up perfectly with the known parts of the evolutionary tree. Also, evolution can be demonstrated on a bacterial level (faster reproduction cycles). We can actually see bacteria evolving to counter our antibiotics.
@DaFleegsta Antibiotic resistance is a classic example of a non-evolutionary process being used as evidence to support evolution. It's this kind of non-evidence that makes up the entirety of an evolutionist's argument. Basically what you believe in is life being created by a process that has never been observed or demonstrated to be possible, and this life developing into more advanced life by another process that has never been observed or demonstrated to be possible. Why do you believe this?
@ferrel81 What? I just told you, bacteria reproduces fast enough for us to observe it evolve. I accept evolution for the same reason I accept gravity; it's fact. Don't limit your ability to learn. Ignorance is not a good thing.
@DaFleegsta I understand your point, and it would be a valid one if antibiotic resistance was an evolutionary process, but it's not so your point is pointless. We have never actually observed evolution in action. Natural selection, yes. Speciation, yes. Variation within a species, yes. Evolution of the kind that is required to turn simple creatures into more complex ones, NO.
@ferrel81 Saying that you don't beleive in evolution because you can't see it before your very eyes, is like saying you don't beleive the holocost because you weren't there to witness it. Or you don't beleive that China exist because you've never been there before. Or you don't beleive that pluto has ever orbited the sun because nobody can live the full 248 years to witness a full orbit.
@DaFleegsta (2) ... continued... Antibiotic resistance is already present in the bacterial population. Selecting for something that is already present does not provide support for the information-gaining change required for evolution.
@ferrel81 What? No, bacteria can evolve into new species of bacteria never seen before. A species with the ability to survive antibiotics. The few of the old species that survived, pass on the survival contributing genes, which then over many reproduction cycles, creates a new species of bacteria resistant to antibiotics.
It seems like your issue is with complexity.. But I don't really understand why.. Complexity is acheived very gradually. There's overwhelming amounts of evidence to support it
@DaFleegsta I'm genuinely curious, could you give me an example of a real transitional fossil? I understand your argument about the bacteria, yet to be honest, it's not very convincing. Micro-evolution happens all the time, changes within the basic species. Yet they're all still bacteria.
@jasm707 I would like to say something here. First of: A dinosaur and a bird are both animals, right. I guess you would agree that the evolution of dinosaurs to birds would count as macroevolution, yes? Sea gulls and eagles are birds, but evolution from one species of bird to another would be macroevolution, yes? Than tell me, why is evolution of one species of bacteria to another not macroevolution? 'Bacteria' is an extremely large group of organisms, they're not all 1 species.
@jasm707 Since you mentioned you were actually curious, I thought I might help you. I've already explained to you that evolution from one bacterial species to another is not 'just' microevolution. You also asked about transitional fossils. Some pretty nice examples of transitional fossils are: Tiktaalik, a transitional fossil between bony fish and early amphibians; Ambulocetus, a beautiful transitional species in the chain leading from land mammals to whales; Archeopterix (dinosaur to bird).
@jasm707 If you really are genuinely interested in this stuff, you might like to visite the talkorigins website. It's a pretty good site about all sorts of things surrounding the creation vs. evolution "controversy" and it has lots of examples of species to species transitions and of observed instances of macroevolution, as well as explanations of basic concepts.
@jasm707 there is a big list of transitional fossils on the wiki page "List of transitional fossils". Go there, and read the actual scientific articles referenced in that page. That will give you a good start. And btw, we also have other evidence beside transitional fossil to support evolution, other Exs include: pseudogenes, ErV sites, homologs, computational simulation, ring species, radiometric dating, observed instances of macro-evolution...and so on
@Casshyr There's absolutely no way I can reply to all that you mentioned, being it's just a youtube comment. Yet I would say that I know radiometric dating has serious flaws in it, and also, could you expound a little on what you meant by observed instances? Regarding the original topic, It just seems to me that if evolution were indeed true, there would be a plethora, on a relative scale, of undisputed transitional fossils (many such as archaeoptreyx are quite controversial).
@jasm707 "of undisputed transitional fossils" => it is undisputed within over 95% of the scientific community. It is only disputed among creationists vs rest of mainstream scientists, which is like 5% vs 95% according to latest gallup poll. And fossils in nature are very hard to form, only under certain pressure, temperature...etc. So even if evolution is wrong, you will still expect fossil records to be spotty simply due to nature of how it's formed.
@jasm707 "observed instances" => london underground mosquitoes is one, there's a lot more, especially involving plants and single-celled organisms like yeast and E.coli. Just google "observed instances of macro-evolution" on Google, and you'll get a lot of links. The first few links should be able to point you to some actual scientific literatures.
@Casshyr Instead, the fossil record shows little in regards to transitional fossils, and many are "out of order" of the evolutionary timeline. There seems to be in the layers just nothing--nothing--nothing--then all of a sudden an explosion of fully formed, complex creatures. As a heads up, I really don't have time to get in a full fledged internet debate, because they can be endless and very time consuming, I have schoolwork that is much more pressing of a matter. : )
@jasm707 "he fossil record shows little in regards to transitional fossils, and many are "out of order" of the evolutionary timeline. There seems to be in the layers just nothing--nothing--nothing--then all of a sudden an explosion of fully formed, complex creature" => i understand you are busy, but i would like to hear where you get this statement form, because no scientific literature has ever mentioned how records are "out of order".
"Many fossils have been collected since 1859, tons of them, yet the impact they have had on our understanding of the relationships between living organisms is barely perceptible. ...In fact, I do not think it unfair to say that fossils, or at least the traditional interpretation of fossils, have clouded rather than clarified our attempts to reconstruct phylogeny." (Fortey, P. L., "Neontological Analysis Versus Palaeontological Stores," 1982, p. 120-121)
Piltdown man was said to be a fossil which proved man's evolution from apes. Books were written about him he was taken so seriously by Darwinists. For some 40yrs he was regarded as the missing link until it was proven to be a hoax. An orangutan's jaw stuck to a human skull. A total fraud fooled great Darwinist minds for so long, Darwinists books are full of similar falshoods. Still today, fossils that contradict Darwinist evolution are hidden away from public view... Darwinism = absolute FRAUD!
@Devilonsteroids One fraud, you seem to be lacking in facts regarding the abundance of the fraudulent record of Darwinism Evolutionary hoaxers. They cannot prove Evolution (one species of life evolving into another completely different form of life separate from it's kind) so to further their demonic immoral cause they create fraud, lies, distortions, bias, subterfuge, skullduggery and deceit. Atheist Evolutionists are just copying their masters personality straits, Satan the Devil.
@Jehovahourgod I see you criticizing others and telling them to think "objectively" not "subjectively" yet I see you chose the subjective path. You know who didn't? The EVOLUTIONISTS who discovered that it was a human skull with an orangutan's jaw. Franz Weidenreich brought it to light that this skull was a hoax.Yet he believed in evolution! He acted OBJECTIVELY and UNBIASED and even when presented with evidence against his belief he revealed it! Now it's your turn to do the same!
@SmallTownLee Your opinion, and I really don't care about your degenerated immoral opinion. Atheistic Evolutionism is totally subjectivity and leads to spiritual ruin and eternal ruin. You are just to brainwashed, cynical, arrogant and have a hard heart. Subsequently, the glorious good news of the Christ cannot penetrate through. A quote from Jesus Christ. If every human on the planet lived and acted the way Jesus Christ did (TRUE CHRISTIANITY) the world would be a paradise, FACT!
@Jehovahourgod No the information is factual and can be obtain from lots of other academic sources. I suppose you're going to start on about crocoducks and bananas next. fact don't change just because you don't want them to be facts.
@Ackers555 No the information is false, and material facts have proven that evolutionists, archeologists, have produced thousands of fraudulent fossils for notoriety, funding, and publicity. Others just grasp at straws to prove their Satanic teachings. You are the one who believes in evolution just to give you a reason to live your life in immorality. Subsequently, you desire your conscience to be desensitized by your beliefs, thereby allowing you to engage in loose conduct without judgment.
@Jehovahourgod Morality is evolved.. You don't need religion to be moral. A matter of fact, basing your morals from a completely IMMORAL 2000 yr old book written by primitive man that supports slavery, racism, genocide, rape, etc is incredibly immoral.
And evidence for evolution isn't artificially made by archeologists. Why the hell would you beleive such a conspiracy? That's rediculous.. The evidence isn't just in fossils, it's observable in DNA, anatomy, molecular biology, geology, etc.
@Jehovahourgod Let me explain morality for you real quick:
People with bad morals died off as a result (due to retaliation from people with GOOD morals), unable to reproduce and pass on the 'bad moral gene'. People with GOOD morals actually managed to survive long enough to reproduce (cooperative communities contribute to individual survival) and continue the 'good moral gene'. Moral evolution is very similar to physical evolution. It's natural selection; basic evolution.
@DaFleegsta Is that a quote from the BOOK OF DAFLEEGSTA according to you or are you just parroting what you hear from other misguided souls. Totally absurd convoluted logic which lacks all common sense.
@Jehovahourgod Actually, evil still existed further supports evolution. We are just able to keep our species alive, not necessarily thrive in perfection (unlike the claim that theists make, since god is perfect and everything is his intent).
And I'm not sure what quote you are refering to.. Everything I've said I have valid evidence to back up.
@Jehovahourgod We don't need a god to be our judgement. We have a fellow community for that. If I do bad, I go to jail. People retaliate to protect themselves. Knowing this, it further impacts my decision (in addition to natural moral instinct) to do good for others. Also, if I do good things to other people, good things are more likely to happen to me in return.
The fact that you have to get your morals from a guide instead of your own thinking process tells me that you are a dangerous person.
@DaFleegsta Atheists are the most dangerous people on the planet since they account for billions of deaths. Your an idiot and a fool. Sorry, but true.
@Jehovahourgod WAIT WHAT?? Atheists account for billions of deaths?? The fuck? Prove that please.
Last I checked, religion is partly responsible for 9/11, the holocost, people praying to get better instead of receiving actual medical treatment, not to mention the countless acts of murder, genocide, 'eternal damnation', rape, man slaughter, etc that is mentioned in the bible.
Next to maybe resources (not even sure about that), religion is undoubtedly the primary cause of violence and wars.
@DaFleegsta Go do your homework child because by your mundane statements you have not conducted the proper research. Counterfeit religions account for millions of deaths just as counterfeit Christianity. Jesus Christ stated to love your enemies as yourself and pray for those who persecute you. True Christians to not go to war and kill others of the human family. So don't pull the RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD cliche since they do not do the will of Jehovah God anyway. There is only one TRUE FAITH.
@Jehovahourgod Yeah, the bible says a lot of things that contradict itself. The point is that if you are able to pick and chose to the follow the good parts and ignore the bad parts, than you are using you OWN sense of morality to judge the bible. Why not skip the bible and use your own sense of morality alone?
And of course you think your specific faith is the true one despite the fact that all other religions of the world have the exact same amount of evidence (zero).
@DaFleegsta I have done my research. Nearly 45 years of Biblical research, religions of the world, Biology, Evolution, Science, history and astronomy. I have come to the conclusion that all religions of the world are evil and by their conduct actually are in link with the Devil. Counterfeit Christianity is no better. You fail to understand the true premise of the Bible because you are haughty and arrogant. Stop parroting Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens who just WANT YOUR MONEY.
@DaFleegsta I seem extremely ignorant and misinformed? Why, because I disagree with YOU? That does not make me ignorant nor misinformed. Sadly, it is you who is ignorant and misinformed because you follow blind guides of fellow human beings who die and are quickly forgotten. Example, Christopher Hitchens is dying of cancer and has faded from the pubic scene. He is already fading away from people's memories because he is out of sight out of mind. Stop worshiping sinful dying MAN!!!
@Jehovahourgod I don't base my beleifs based on the books and the people who claim them (unlike you, and many theists/creationists seem to do). I base my beleifs on scientific facts which are supported by tangible evidence. Based on past experiences, I may assume certain claims are true if claimed by someone who has a history of true claims. That's not faith, it's logical thinking. I accept the possibility I could be wrong, but accept the probability that I'm not (based on EVIDENCE).
@DaFleegsta Also, go on the internet and check for Atheist dictators and the deaths attributed to them. Do proper research before you open your mouth. Be slow about speaking and quick about hearing. Quote from the BIBLE.
@Jehovahourgod The amount of religious dictators and the deaths attributed to them FAR SURPASSES the atheist counter part. Also, it doesn't matter if a leader is atheist or theist when doing evil and causing death. What matters is whether or not they're doing evil and causing death BECAUSE of their atheism/theism.
@DaFleegsta Like I stated, if you can READ, do NOT give me the OLD CLICHE about FALSE RELIGIONS claiming GOD. They are no better than ATHEIST when it comes to exterminating people. Your logic is convoluted and spin. I reiterate, true CHRISTIANITY does not go to war and kill their fellow human FAMILY. Millions of true Christians do not go to war and will not enlist in the military. Which makes them morally superior to FALSE RELIGIONS / COUNTERFEIT CHRISTIANITY / ATHEISTS.
@Jehovahourgod Every other religion thinks that YOUR religion is a false religion. How do you know which one is truly the right one if they all have just as little evidence?
Here:
/watch?v=DAuFJKQh83Y
A first step to educating yourself.
Get out of this delluded mind set that your beleif is the right one. If you want to be a good person, just try to be a good person. You don't need a potentially harmful and unreliable dictatorship called religion to do so.
@DaFleegsta It is very simple. The second greatest commandment Jesus stated was to "LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." If TRUE Christians practiced this commandment, there would be no wars and mass extermination of their fellow human beings.True Christianity walks in the footsteps of Jesus Christ and imitates Jesus Christ in their lives. How can one be like Christ dropping bombs. Sadly, because of false religions and counterfeit Christianity atrocities, millions have lost their belief in a God.
@Jehovahourgod Why do you not feel capable of making moral decisions on your own? And just because the bible says some nice things, or some true things, doesn't mean everything in it is nice or true.
I have a question for you.. Based on your beleif system, is it universally wrong to kill somebody? AKA would you EVER do it?
@DaFleegsta Morality was created by Jehovah God and was given to human beings what we call a CONSCIENCE to distinguish right from wrong. It is a built in code implanted into the human spirit. Most human beings on this planet have seared their conscience to allow them to do the most evil and heinous crimes unimaginable. Has led to Evolutionary Atheism self-centered thinking, false religions, counterfeit Christianity and a immoral bankrupt world society.
You only beleive in your god because that book you worship says so. You have absolutely no valid reason to beleive in such rediculous claims. I've explained this to you over and over again, this is why I know you're ignorant. Don't feel bad, most theists are.
@DaFleegsta Your a lost soul of the land of the wicked. Your a fool and buffoon. Now go and masturbate while you watch some pornography. You are all alike. You hate Christianity because of the moral code, and you hate morality. You make moral laws convenient for yourself. That is why, most Atheists are Evolutionists, murderers, criminals, homosexuals, lesbians, pedophiles, thieves, fornicators, adulterers, drunkards. Christopher Hitchens a drunkard and chain smoker now dying of cancer.
@Jehovahourgod AKA I use logic and reasoning to determine fact from fiction where you on the other hand... don't.
Also, atheism has caused way more good than bad over history.. Where theism, has done quite the opposite.
Beleive what you want. You are simply an ignorant, misinformed, liar. I can't argue with ignorance, come back after you've done some research, are willing to acknowledge your arguments flaws, and stop making grossly innacurate assumptions.
@DaFleegsta Your logic is convoluted. You only parrot what other IMPERFECT MEN STATE. You don't even know your history. Go get a Master's Degree in history and than come back and talk to me. You do not have the slightest notion of Atheism history and the barbarism associated with it. Plain and simple, your an idiot, immature and need to grow up. Stop thinking like a child and think objectively, not SUBJECTIVE.
@Jehovahourgod I don't parrot anybody. I know you don't do this, but I actually think for myself. And it doesn't take a masters degree to realize how harmful religion is and how helpful science is. All you need is an internet connection and the will to learn.
And you are grossly misinformed. You are a perfect, living, breathing example of how harmful religion is to people. Religion has simply tricked you into being ignorant. You beleive what makes you feel good despite what evidence suggests.
@Jehovahourgod " Your a lost soul of the land of the wicked. Your a fool and buffoon. Now go and masturbate while you watch some pornography. You are all alike. You hate Christianity because of the moral code, and you hate morality." LOL SO YOU NEVER MASTURBATED BEFORE NEVER WATCHED PORNOGRAPHY YOU'RE SUCH A LIAR.
@DaFleegsta To kill a fellow human being of the human family is sinful. Sin is sin, regardless if it is murder, stealing, lying, fornicating, adultery, homosexuality, greediness, gluttony, drunkenness. All who PRACTICE such defilement's will not inherit the kingdom of God. So, to answer your question, would I kill another human being, NO! Don't play spin on the question by asking what if someone was trying to kill your family members etc....
@Jehovahourgod Its not a spin on the question, thats exactly the point. According to you, since the bible says you shouldn't, it is wrong to defend yourself. If you had to kill to prevent yourself or your loved ones from being killed, you wouldn't do it. THAT IS THE HARM RELIGION CAUSES. It butchers your morality, rationality, and therefor negatively impacts your own self.
You are living proof that religion is harmful (to the ignorant and weak-minded, anyway). I feel sorry for you, I really do.
@Jehovahourgod Every other religion thinks that YOUR religion is a false religion. How do you know which one is truly the right one if they all have just as little evidence?
Here:
/watch?v=DAuFJKQh83Y
A first step to educating yourself.
Get out of this delluded mind set that your beleif is the right one. If you want to be a good person, just try to be a good person. You don't need a potentially harmful and unreliable dictatorship called religion to do so.
hmm, since evo can not find any link between man & apes, why not try find a link between apes and its ancestor? man-ape is getting boring already. maybe evo can bring back excitement if evo can find ancestor of apes... but this time, no cheating please.
this is the dumbest excuse for lack of fossil evidence when this is the basis of darwin's theory. is the evo theory getting desperate? i love watching evo videos & i forgave when fossils were forged & presented as evidence but this is getting stupid already. ID is putting out better science research output in halo dating, astronomy, dna & stuff. is evo going to lose? no way, go evo!
"Neo-Darwinism is now acknowledged as being unable to explain anything more than trivial change, and in default of some other theory we have none...despite the hostility of the witness provided by the fossil record, despite the innumerable difficulties, and despite the lack of even a credible theory, Darwinian evolution theory survives.... Can there be any other area of science as intellectually barren that has so little to support it?"
"Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no: there is no way of answering the question. It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favored by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test."
So much for "Darwinian Evolution" being uh "science." FAIL.....
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible in nature (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). Besides, species couldn't have survived with vital tissues, organs, biological systems still evolving? I discuss Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA." Read Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
There's no evidence that humans evolved from some ape-like ancestor anymore than there's evidence that apes, along with lemurs and monkeys, evolved from some dog-like ancestor. All the bones used to support human evolution have been found to be either hoaxes, non-human, or human, but not both non-human and human. They can reconstruct these bones to look like whatever they want! Some of the bones were found miles apart. Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS.
@gmcjetpilot hi there. You said that science is observable - well evolution has been observed directly in the laboratory. Evolution is a fact. I am a Christian who accepts evolution. Even if we had no fossils at all, the DNA evidence alone for evolution is overwhelming. God bless
@gmcjetpilot Also, scientist have observed macro evolution and have made predictions based on evolutionary theory that have proven correct. Evolutionary theory is a stronger theory than gravitational theory. The best you can do with gravity is a crude mathematical model that roughly mimics what can be observed. Its quite apparent that you have little to no grasp on even the most elemental realities of science and the universe. Keep believing your fairy tale idiot.
"scientist have observed macro evolution ..predictions based ..proven correct"
OBSERVED MACRO EVOLUTION? EXAMPLE? They find things & go back and SEE evolution predicted it? What happens is BS! They FORCE it into a narrow paradigm & ignore things that contradict or make excuses (dishonestly). Gravity per Einstein general relativity is distortion in space time, tested, observed & MATH IS NOT CRUDE JACKASS! Don't dare conflate REAL science w/ evolution, useless grand bull shit.
This video is sad. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE IS ALMOST 100% AN ATHEISTIC GROUP... That has an ATHEIST agenda.
Then they go after Curt Cameron? ha ha.
Of course we have variations between generations and WITH IN SPECIES.... there is no proof and it's an extrapolation WELL BEYOND the observed, we changed from other species. Evolution is a stretch with out PROOF! There is no proof ALL LIFE CAME FROM POUND SCUM.... This video is so trite and trivial it really shows how weak evolution is.
@gmcjetpilot Physics does not ever consider the supernatural as a cause. What 'unseen forces' it does take into consideration - like dark energy and matter - it does so because there is observable proof for their existence. There is not one shred of evidence to suggest that there is a god or that anything supernatural exists. Evolution is a FACT. It happens. There are literal mountains of evidence to support the theory we use to explain the underlying mechanics of the FACT of evolution.
I'm 50, masters mechanical engineering and math? YOU? Straw man! I did not say "supernatural" liar. Let me guess you're a kid atheist, pro abortion & homosexuality and hate Christians? YAWN. You can't prove crap science by attacking "god" (you brought up). There's no mountain of evidence supporting evolution which, a smoke filled room full of assumptions, gaps, contradictions & subjective opinions. Science is observation, repeatable test, data. Evolution=RELIGION! Video=dishonest.
@luismartinez1091 I am going to have question your claiming to be a scientist. Evolutionary theory, while not perfect by any means, is our best explanation for how the facts came to be. Evolution is a fact like gravity is a fact - the underlying mechanics is where the theory comes in. You must be part of the crocoduck crowd. All species are transitional. Darwin's theory was not perfect to start with but it very close now. Nothing has ever been found that suggests this is not the correct path.
We can MEASURE gravty, test gravity and have math for gravity.... WE HAVE NONE OF THAT FOR Evolution.
EVOLUTION IS ALL WE HAVE? Not science or a good endorsement. Evolution is the BEST fit for the man made boundary condition that everything has a naturalistic explanation. Why does physics consider unseen forces, black holes, wormholes, other dimensions (string theory) and other universes other than this one we can't see? BECAUSE IT's math, observation, science!
this video makes no sense. This video is trying to explain complex genotype manifestations with phenotypical variations within a lineage of species...Kind of far fetched. I am a scientist but this evolution theory makes very little sense. It is imperative for there to be intermediate forms otherwise the theory of evolution is just hypothetical. Darwin specifies this in his book: the origin of species .
There are a lot of big "jumps" where the gaps are filled up with an overactive imagination. Each "off shoot" is missing a picture. Your superstitious beliefs are not supported by real science. Evolution is a disgrace to science.
why would i believe in your religious creationism, if you can't explain AB resistance or Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
@Tripockets On average more than 100 speciation events are observed and published every year, and that's been true for several decades. The one consistant feature of creationists is dishonesty.
WOW! Drawings! thank you for the scientific evidence supporting evolution. Also, thank you for refuting the scientific evidence against evolution. After all Kirk Cameron is definitely the premier scientist that refutes evolution. You got one thing right, you called it the evolutionary story. How about a mechanism that can create the genetic information needed to produce a novel organ, body plan, or system? Mutations fail, gene duplication fails, polyploidy fails. Make up a new story, EVO fails.
@Tripockets Germany has just been devistated by a new form of E. Coli, genetically different from all forms known before. Genetically different, so it's evolution.
On average around 100 speciation events are published every year in the scientific literature.
As the good Christian Theo Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution"
You know you're descended from an ape, the ERV evidence alone will show you that.
The family album analogy fails completely. It only supports micro-evolution which is an undeniable fact. Although you may not have any resemblance with your ancestors after many generations, all are still homo-sapiens.
I personally do not care that much about the issue of evolution, but there are actually many very solid objections to, at least the Darwinianism, yes the fossils show the change in phenotype, but do not show speciation events. Of course we don't have all records, but this fact by itself doesn't confirm speciation. Are there any fossils showing transition between a whale and a small bat?
@StopFear Whale and bat are different clades. Speciation events are commonly observed. There are not many objections to Darwinism, and none of them are solid.
They are commonly observed? Where? as to whale and bat being different, I realize that, I know enough about evolution theory and darwinism to know though, that they require intermediate forms, which would indicate something like the size of common ancestor, or the path of evolution that would show how whale became whale, or at what point the common ancestor split to create the creatures that lead to existence of a bat and a whale forms.
@StopFear Bullini, L and Nascetti, G, 1991, Speciation by Hybridization in phasmids and other insects, Canadian Journal of Zoology, Volume 68(8), pages 1747-1760.
Ramadevon, S and Deaken, M.A.B., 1991, The Gibbons speciation mechanism, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 145(4) pages 447-456.
Sharman, G.B., Close, R.L, Maynes, G.M., 1991, Chromosome evolution, phylogeny, and speciation of rock wallabies, Australian Journal of Zoology, Volume 37(2-4), pages 351-363
@StopFear Werth, C. R., and Windham, M.D., 1991, A model for divergent, allopatric, speciation of polyploid pteridophytes resulting from silencing of duplicate- gene expression, AM-Natural, Volume 137(4):515-526.
Spooner, D.M., Sytsma, K.J., Smith, J., A Molecular reexamination of diploid hybrid speciation of Solanum raphanifolium, Evolution, Volume 45, Number 3, pages 757-764.
@StopFear Arnold, M.L., Buckner, C.M., Robinson, J.J., 1991, Pollen-mediated introgression and hybrid speciation in Louisiana Irises, P-NAS-US, Volume 88, Number 4, pages 1398-1402.
Nevo, E., 1991, Evolutionary Theory and process of active speciation and adaptive radiation in subterranean mole rats, spalax-ehrenbergi superspecies, in Israel, Evolutionary Biology, Volume 25, pages 1-125.
There are about 100 papers witnessing speciation events ever year. These are a fraction from 1991.
This is a really really dumb and desperatly subjective analogy. If this is the story of evolution then snow white and the seven dwarfs must be true.
Pendu068 1 week ago
I was just posting on another video that fossils do not support the theory of evolution. This idea is based solely on the premise that since this bones look different from the animals we have today, they must be different species that existed in some distant past. Broccoli, Cabbage and Kale also look different, but they are still the same species. Fossilization of those three could be interpreted as different species.
SuperPoliceState 1 month ago
@SuperPoliceState not solely bones and not solely animals
SuperPoliceState 1 month ago
All this is irrelevant. Mutations only take away functionality in an organism - they do not advance a species. Evolution is crock of shit.
jbooks888 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
This has been flagged as spam show
@jbooks888
« Mutations only take away functionality in an organism »
Observably and demonstrably false. Next.
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
@jbooks888 Your statement is a joke, go learn more about mutations. Mutations can be beneficial, harmful or both, if the mutation helps the organism survive then it gets passed on, if not then the organism becomes extinct. If mutations were only harmful, we wouldn't be here now would we?
masteranimation2008 1 month ago
@masteranimation2008 I get what evolution says - it makes sense to me - if some quirk happens to make the organism stronger then that organism is going to have a better chance of survival, therefore passing on the 'beneficial mutation.' What I have trouble with is accepting that the enormous complexity of life just 'happened.' If something looks like a duck and sounds like a duck - it's a duck! Even evolutionsists admit that life appears to have been designed.
jbooks888 1 month ago
@jbooks888 Well no shit it's a duck! that makes no fucking sense and doesn't even belong in a mutation argument.
Wait a moment ago you said that mutations are always harmful and now you are accepting that they can be beneficial?
That complexity of life is the result of ~3.7 Billion years of evolution, not some deity designing shit.
masteranimation2008 1 month ago
@masteranimation2008 Hey, you believe what you want. I'm not a tyrant.
jbooks888 1 month ago
@jbooks888 "What I have trouble with is accepting that the enormous complexity of life just 'happened.'"
It didn't "just" happen. It took a tremendously long time, compared to the kind of time spans that we are used to in everyday life. Using bronze-aged knowledge and what was "common sense" back then is not very helpful in 2012. Nowadays, we need to incorporate knowledge that humanity has discovered which is _not_ common sense, in relation to sizes, time scales, complexity, etc.
0debug 2 weeks ago
@masteranimation2008 Despite all claims from evos, there still is NO solid, concrete evidence to prove this theory (macro) so I don't feel compelled to believe it.
jbooks888 1 month ago
@jbooks888 I'm just going to go ahead and assume that you're a creationist retard and say the following... Here you are talking about how we have no evidence of this "Macro" evolution, yet there's the fossil record. You don't feel compelled to believe that evolution is now a fact, but you certainly feel compelled to believe everything you read in the bible which was written by ignorant humans on shrooms. How pathetic...
masteranimation2008 1 month ago
@masteranimation2008 Oh come on! Fossil record? REALLY??? Please, you're making me feel uncomfortable for your sake. Please don't embarrass yourself any further. Fossil record indeed... LOL
jbooks888 1 month ago
@jbooks888 Yes the fossil record. Archaeologists have uncovered many remains of ancient species long extinct. The order of which is determined by the layer of rock it was found in, dating the rock it was found in and carbon dating if carbon is present. Genetics does an excellent job in explaining how evolution works. Evolution has become a fact. So where's the evidence for your deity? You sound like a complete fool laughing at concrete scientific evidence and have nothing of your own.
masteranimation2008 1 month ago
@masteranimation2008 Ha ha ha - and sometimes the layer's 'age' is determined by what fossil is found in it! LOL Ha ha.
jbooks888 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jbooks888 "sometimes the layer's 'age' is determined by what fossil is found in it!"
What's wrong with that?
If a particular species in one location is found by radiometric dating to have evolved say between 800 and 700 MYA and then someone finds a fossil of that species somewhere else can you not see that the reasonable assumption (until overturned by further evidence) would be that the layer where the new fossils were found was also between 700 and 800 MY old?
kandtell 3 weeks ago
@masteranimation2008 Why is it that when people don;t automatically believe what you say you 'atheists' start hurling insults?
jbooks888 1 month ago
@jbooks888 You don't have to believe what I say, only christians force you to believe what they say. I'm here because of your ignorance on mutations... The age of the layer the fossil is found in is determined by Uranium-lead dating used on the igneous rock found in them. It's logical that you should've already learned this in school it's unfortunate that a 19 yr old has to explain it to you...
masteranimation2008 4 weeks ago
@masteranimation2008 It's a shame your school didn't teach you how to construct a sentence and use punctuation correctly. Honestly, that response should leave you hanging your head in shame.
jbooks888 4 weeks ago
@jbooks888 We are currently talking about science, not english. It's the fucking internet, not a job interview you fucking dumbshit. I fell asleep during english class because I simply don't give a fuck about sentance enhancers or whatever other bullshit they teach you there.
masteranimation2008 4 weeks ago
@masteranimation2008 'sentance' ? Well, apparently spelling is not your long suit either. Spelling and grammar are basic tools for everyone. The fact that you couldn't cope with learning them explains why you so readily accept evolution and it's associated false teachings. Perhaps you should stick to books that begin with 'Once upon a time...'
jbooks888 4 weeks ago
@jbooks888 "false teachings" That made me laugh so hard. You believe the bible is true don't you. I bet you didn't even watch this video, instead you just decided to troll like 5 year old.
masteranimation2008 4 weeks ago
@jbooks888 You're employing a red herring here to distract from the actual arguments. My suspicion is that you're very aware that you're distracting from the argument, because you don't have anything genuine to say about how this video might in any way be incorrect.
Don't attack what people say, attack how they say it, am I right? Good try, but extremely intellectually dishonest. What about the video inspires false teachings is what you should be concerned with here.
Norwification 4 weeks ago
@jbooks888 Incidentally, I'm all ears if you have a valid criticism of this video. If you find spelling errors in the video, I have to tell you in advance I hardly see how it would in any way advance your creationism claim or undermine evolutionary theory.
Norwification 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
jessecamping 1 month ago
This family album thing was stupid. Comparing that you look similar to your relatives but not exactly the same. That has nothing to do with animals evolving. That's just stupid. Evolutionary theory is full of lies and bullshit. I used to believe it, but when I researched on my own I realized how stupid I was. Some of my favorite bullshit is: Look we found a bone, now lets construct an entire animal based on this one bone and try to fit it into our theory wherever we want.
Eganflow1992 1 month ago
Comment removed
Riftlol 1 month ago
@Riftlol Why did you remove your comment @Eganflow1992
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA? Are you laughing at me or what? I m wondering if your laughing at me because I don't believe Evolution or because of the favorite bullshit.
Eganflow1992 1 month ago
@Eganflow1992
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Riftlol 1 month ago
@Riftlol Thanks for clearing that up. I'll take it as you don't like my comment. Why I think it is stupid is because, obviously you will look different than your ancestors. That doesn't mean we know apes are our ancestors. What this says is, look at a photo album. If you find a picture of a banana or any organism we can logically conclude that we are ancestors because even though we look different, we know we are related. Stupid. Evolution, every organisms' common ancestor: Primordial Soup. HAHA
Eganflow1992 1 month ago
@Eganflow1992 Your ignorance amuses me...
masteranimation2008 1 month ago
@masteranimation2008 I understand what the video is trying to say, it is simply a bad analogy.
Eganflow1992 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Couldn't agree more. I'm currently trying to fid out how humans got 23 pairs of chromosomes while our "ancestors" all have 24 pairs and all I get is abuse from evolutionists and I'm not religious.
cambell1308 1 month ago
@cambell1308 Yeah something I realized about Evolutionists. If you try to prove them wrong, all that they want to do is try to prove Creation wrong. That is not the point of the argument. Not agreeing with Creation doesn't mean Evolution is right. You could be a complete atheist to realize Evolution is not true.
Eganflow1992 1 month ago
@Eganflow1992 Couldn't agree more, well said. The problem is that both sides start out with what they call the answer and so any evidence that dose not support their point of view is just ignored. Peace.....
cambell1308 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« I'm currently trying to fid out how humans got 23 pairs of chromosomes while our "ancestors" all have 24 pairs »
Did anyone explain about chromosome #2's extra centromeres and telomeric regions?
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
I am just looking for the truth.....I have not made a decision for myself yet....... What I find is science is slamming creationists and Creationists slamming evolutionists. Why does that have to enter in your video ? Are you really Bestofscience ? Creationists do the same and I wish it would all stop. It really does not help either side I do not know what to believe as this really skews my view of your video. Ya sorry but thats not science....
jessecamping 1 month ago
Comment removed
cambell1308 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« I find is science is slamming creationists »
Science doesn't care about creationists. They are irrelevant to science. It's not science that's slamming them: it's us. People on Youtube with a bit of education and too much time. I don't know why exactly. Perhaps seeing how wilfully ignorant other people can be makes us feel a bit better about ourselves. I'm no psychoheadshrink or anything, but that might just be it.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
« science is slamming creationists »
By the way, are you suggesting that this video is "slamming creationists" in any way?
I thought I was rather a neat, dry and impartial summary of the facts. I don't see any "slamming" in the video.
Perhaps you're referring to the comments below?
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrGralgrathor Replying to your emails.... I just have trouble with the process of evolution eg:mutations......Does science understands this yet?..adapting to an environment is not explained by natural selection but does explain the species that survived..... also your email about Creationism....... croca-duck??? .....I see now its a big fight in education in the US ....... it seems their points are directed at the shortcomings in science?. Evolution exists How is my Question?
jessecamping 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« mutations......Does science understands this yet? »
Yes. Mutations are just one part of genetic variability in life (which produces reproductive variation), and they are well-understood. We understand how they occur (through chemistry) and what kind of effects they produce (though molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics). That's not to say that we know everything there is to know about mutations: not by a longshot. But we certainly know enough to get by.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« adapting to an environment is not explained by natural selection »
Yes it is. One could say that differential reproductive success is what causes adaptation, but perhaps it's more accurate to say that differential reproductive process *is* adaptation.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« it seems their points are directed at the shortcomings in science? »
Not exactly. The creationists/intelligent designers in the USA are *misrepresenting* science. Science may not be perfect, but the only alternative to science is to include all kinds of fantasies into our knowledge curriculum. Creationists/ID-ers try to hide this by spinning tales about science and creationism.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« Evolution exists How is my Question? »
I'm not sure I understand the question. Could you rephrase?
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
« I do not know what to believe »
Well, there's some tough choices to make then...
You can believe what's comfortable, or you can believe what's exciting. Or you can believe what's true - and there's the catch: how do you find out what's true? How do you test if a claim about reality is accurate?
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« evolutionists »
... Saywhat?
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
Evolution doesn't disprove the existence in God. Have you ever thought that God created the universe and carried out his will by using evolution? Everything around us points to order and intelligence coming from greater intelligence. It is more rational to believe that God created everything and guided evolution to give us intelligence to know him, rather than a bunch gasses exploding, causing a universe that has our very specific living conditions making our whole lives meaningless accidents.
xVerdictsx 2 months ago
Do you believe that German Shepperd and bull dog are names for different types of the same species? If so, where is the proof between the transitions of different types of dogs?
hatemysis 2 months ago
The theory of evolution says there must be an intermediate form between two different species e.g. a mouse and a bear - a cat is bigger than the mouse, but smaller than the bear - a cat is an intermediate form! because cats exist, the theory of evolution is proven to be true when tested!..this proves everything came from nothing and God doesn't exist!
TREACLE97 2 months ago
@TREACLE97 Jokin?
Forserean 2 months ago
« a cat is an intermediate form! »
Ah. Troll. Bye now kid.
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
Good call - idiot creationists...good way of explaining it - piltdown man is also good hard evidence for evolution - thats an intermediate form between modern men and monkeys - these idiots always overlook the intermediate forms scientists have already found!
TREACLE97 2 months ago
@TREACLE97 Um are you serious? Piltdown man was proved a fraud. It was printed in the New York Times on November 21, 1953 google it....
cambell1308 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« piltdown man is also good hard evidence for evolution »
Ehr, no, it isn't. Piltdown Man is a good example for showing that the scientific method isn't perfect, and that it sometimes takes a while before it is able to learn from its mistakes. Unfortunately the Piltdown Man "fossil" was locked away and forgotten for nearly 40 years before researchers took it out again on a hunch and proved it was a forgery.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
crazy Kids Just No God but allah
Be a muslim !
M7trfLooL 3 months ago
i hate religion. This people are retarded, insane human beings.
system0system0 3 months ago
fossils are good evidence of a flood theory. things dont fossilize over millions of years... it has to be buried quickly and preserved before it decomposes.
Gods0n1 4 months ago
every point this video makes is demonstrably false and, i believe, intentionally misleading. the truth is, and any honest and educated evolutionist will agree, that the fossil record, geologic column etc. poses MANY problems for the long age uniformitarian evolutionist. lack of transitional fossils is just one. but others include, no erosion between strata, polystrate tree fossils, constantly finding fossils in the 'wrong' place etc. Evolution = sinking ship
ferrel81 4 months ago
@ferrel81 You are either misinformed, or a liar. Eitherway you're wrong.
DaFleegsta 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta Perhaps. Or perhaps it is you who is misinformed. I'm not saying that evolution has been categorically disproven, or that an alternative, such as biblical creation has been proven, but the idea that evolution is effectively irrefutable is far from the truth. The reality is that the geologic column looks nothing like the theorised evolutionary tree of life that we are all familiar with. This is a myth.
ferrel81 4 months ago
@ferrel81 "The reality is that the geologic column looks nothing like the theorised evolutionary tree of life that we are all familiar with."
If that's true, then you'll have no problem writing a research paper and becoming the most important scientific figure in the 21st century. Best of luck! You're about 150 years behind current biology..
drgoldteef 4 months ago in playlist More videos from Best0fScience
@ferrel81 "the idea that evolution is effectively irrefutable is far from the truth."
You couldn't be more wrong.
DaFleegsta 4 months ago
@ferrel81 Err.. "irrefutable" isn't the right word.. But evolution has perfectly valid and TONS of evidence for it to be considered scientific fact. There are no 'lack of transitional fossils'.. Not even the slightest.. There's an OVERWHELMING amount of transitional fossils that sync up perfectly with the known parts of the evolutionary tree. Also, evolution can be demonstrated on a bacterial level (faster reproduction cycles). We can actually see bacteria evolving to counter our antibiotics.
DaFleegsta 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta Antibiotic resistance is a classic example of a non-evolutionary process being used as evidence to support evolution. It's this kind of non-evidence that makes up the entirety of an evolutionist's argument. Basically what you believe in is life being created by a process that has never been observed or demonstrated to be possible, and this life developing into more advanced life by another process that has never been observed or demonstrated to be possible. Why do you believe this?
ferrel81 4 months ago
@ferrel81 What? I just told you, bacteria reproduces fast enough for us to observe it evolve. I accept evolution for the same reason I accept gravity; it's fact. Don't limit your ability to learn. Ignorance is not a good thing.
DaFleegsta 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta I understand your point, and it would be a valid one if antibiotic resistance was an evolutionary process, but it's not so your point is pointless. We have never actually observed evolution in action. Natural selection, yes. Speciation, yes. Variation within a species, yes. Evolution of the kind that is required to turn simple creatures into more complex ones, NO.
ferrel81 4 months ago
@ferrel81 Saying that you don't beleive in evolution because you can't see it before your very eyes, is like saying you don't beleive the holocost because you weren't there to witness it. Or you don't beleive that China exist because you've never been there before. Or you don't beleive that pluto has ever orbited the sun because nobody can live the full 248 years to witness a full orbit.
DaFleegsta 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta (2) ... continued... Antibiotic resistance is already present in the bacterial population. Selecting for something that is already present does not provide support for the information-gaining change required for evolution.
ferrel81 4 months ago
@ferrel81 What? No, bacteria can evolve into new species of bacteria never seen before. A species with the ability to survive antibiotics. The few of the old species that survived, pass on the survival contributing genes, which then over many reproduction cycles, creates a new species of bacteria resistant to antibiotics.
It seems like your issue is with complexity.. But I don't really understand why.. Complexity is acheived very gradually. There's overwhelming amounts of evidence to support it
DaFleegsta 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta I think the reality is that he is learning these false things from his fundamental religious community...
ThinkOneMoreTime 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta I'm genuinely curious, could you give me an example of a real transitional fossil? I understand your argument about the bacteria, yet to be honest, it's not very convincing. Micro-evolution happens all the time, changes within the basic species. Yet they're all still bacteria.
jasm707 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jasm707 Technically every fossil is a transitional fossil, but:
en.wikipedia . org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils
transitionalfossils . com
rationalwiki . org/wiki/List_of_transitional_forms
Here are some videos too:
/watch?v=O4GdZOlPrX8
/watch?v=JgyTVT3dqGY&feature=relmfu
You can find a lot more if you search for yourself, browse the web, visit a museum, take out a book from you're local library, etc.
DaFleegsta 3 months ago
@jasm707 I would like to say something here. First of: A dinosaur and a bird are both animals, right. I guess you would agree that the evolution of dinosaurs to birds would count as macroevolution, yes? Sea gulls and eagles are birds, but evolution from one species of bird to another would be macroevolution, yes? Than tell me, why is evolution of one species of bacteria to another not macroevolution? 'Bacteria' is an extremely large group of organisms, they're not all 1 species.
weelittledragon 3 months ago
@jasm707 Since you mentioned you were actually curious, I thought I might help you. I've already explained to you that evolution from one bacterial species to another is not 'just' microevolution. You also asked about transitional fossils. Some pretty nice examples of transitional fossils are: Tiktaalik, a transitional fossil between bony fish and early amphibians; Ambulocetus, a beautiful transitional species in the chain leading from land mammals to whales; Archeopterix (dinosaur to bird).
weelittledragon 3 months ago
@jasm707 If you really are genuinely interested in this stuff, you might like to visite the talkorigins website. It's a pretty good site about all sorts of things surrounding the creation vs. evolution "controversy" and it has lots of examples of species to species transitions and of observed instances of macroevolution, as well as explanations of basic concepts.
weelittledragon 3 months ago
@jasm707 there is a big list of transitional fossils on the wiki page "List of transitional fossils". Go there, and read the actual scientific articles referenced in that page. That will give you a good start. And btw, we also have other evidence beside transitional fossil to support evolution, other Exs include: pseudogenes, ErV sites, homologs, computational simulation, ring species, radiometric dating, observed instances of macro-evolution...and so on
Casshyr 2 months ago
@Casshyr There's absolutely no way I can reply to all that you mentioned, being it's just a youtube comment. Yet I would say that I know radiometric dating has serious flaws in it, and also, could you expound a little on what you meant by observed instances? Regarding the original topic, It just seems to me that if evolution were indeed true, there would be a plethora, on a relative scale, of undisputed transitional fossils (many such as archaeoptreyx are quite controversial).
jasm707 2 months ago
@jasm707 "of undisputed transitional fossils" => it is undisputed within over 95% of the scientific community. It is only disputed among creationists vs rest of mainstream scientists, which is like 5% vs 95% according to latest gallup poll. And fossils in nature are very hard to form, only under certain pressure, temperature...etc. So even if evolution is wrong, you will still expect fossil records to be spotty simply due to nature of how it's formed.
Casshyr 2 months ago
@jasm707 "observed instances" => london underground mosquitoes is one, there's a lot more, especially involving plants and single-celled organisms like yeast and E.coli. Just google "observed instances of macro-evolution" on Google, and you'll get a lot of links. The first few links should be able to point you to some actual scientific literatures.
Casshyr 2 months ago
@Casshyr Instead, the fossil record shows little in regards to transitional fossils, and many are "out of order" of the evolutionary timeline. There seems to be in the layers just nothing--nothing--nothing--then all of a sudden an explosion of fully formed, complex creatures. As a heads up, I really don't have time to get in a full fledged internet debate, because they can be endless and very time consuming, I have schoolwork that is much more pressing of a matter. : )
jasm707 2 months ago
@jasm707 "he fossil record shows little in regards to transitional fossils, and many are "out of order" of the evolutionary timeline. There seems to be in the layers just nothing--nothing--nothing--then all of a sudden an explosion of fully formed, complex creature" => i understand you are busy, but i would like to hear where you get this statement form, because no scientific literature has ever mentioned how records are "out of order".
Casshyr 2 months ago
Comment removed
ferrel81 4 months ago
"Many fossils have been collected since 1859, tons of them, yet the impact they have had on our understanding of the relationships between living organisms is barely perceptible. ...In fact, I do not think it unfair to say that fossils, or at least the traditional interpretation of fossils, have clouded rather than clarified our attempts to reconstruct phylogeny." (Fortey, P. L., "Neontological Analysis Versus Palaeontological Stores," 1982, p. 120-121)
raponte1955 5 months ago
Piltdown man was said to be a fossil which proved man's evolution from apes. Books were written about him he was taken so seriously by Darwinists. For some 40yrs he was regarded as the missing link until it was proven to be a hoax. An orangutan's jaw stuck to a human skull. A total fraud fooled great Darwinist minds for so long, Darwinists books are full of similar falshoods. Still today, fossils that contradict Darwinist evolution are hidden away from public view... Darwinism = absolute FRAUD!
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Anyways...one fraud disproves everything else?
Devilonsteroids 5 months ago in playlist Science walks all over creationism
This has been flagged as spam show
@Devilonsteroids One fraud, you seem to be lacking in facts regarding the abundance of the fraudulent record of Darwinism Evolutionary hoaxers. They cannot prove Evolution (one species of life evolving into another completely different form of life separate from it's kind) so to further their demonic immoral cause they create fraud, lies, distortions, bias, subterfuge, skullduggery and deceit. Atheist Evolutionists are just copying their masters personality straits, Satan the Devil.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod I see you criticizing others and telling them to think "objectively" not "subjectively" yet I see you chose the subjective path. You know who didn't? The EVOLUTIONISTS who discovered that it was a human skull with an orangutan's jaw. Franz Weidenreich brought it to light that this skull was a hoax.Yet he believed in evolution! He acted OBJECTIVELY and UNBIASED and even when presented with evidence against his belief he revealed it! Now it's your turn to do the same!
SmallTownLee 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SmallTownLee Your opinion, and I really don't care about your degenerated immoral opinion. Atheistic Evolutionism is totally subjectivity and leads to spiritual ruin and eternal ruin. You are just to brainwashed, cynical, arrogant and have a hard heart. Subsequently, the glorious good news of the Christ cannot penetrate through. A quote from Jesus Christ. If every human on the planet lived and acted the way Jesus Christ did (TRUE CHRISTIANITY) the world would be a paradise, FACT!
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
you tube video:
DARWINISTS' EFFORTS TO COVER UP LIVING FOSSILS IS FRAUDULENT
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
The narrator is a liar and uses fraudulent information. Typical.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod No the information is factual and can be obtain from lots of other academic sources. I suppose you're going to start on about crocoducks and bananas next. fact don't change just because you don't want them to be facts.
Ackers555 5 months ago
@Ackers555 No the information is false, and material facts have proven that evolutionists, archeologists, have produced thousands of fraudulent fossils for notoriety, funding, and publicity. Others just grasp at straws to prove their Satanic teachings. You are the one who believes in evolution just to give you a reason to live your life in immorality. Subsequently, you desire your conscience to be desensitized by your beliefs, thereby allowing you to engage in loose conduct without judgment.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Morality is evolved.. You don't need religion to be moral. A matter of fact, basing your morals from a completely IMMORAL 2000 yr old book written by primitive man that supports slavery, racism, genocide, rape, etc is incredibly immoral.
And evidence for evolution isn't artificially made by archeologists. Why the hell would you beleive such a conspiracy? That's rediculous.. The evidence isn't just in fossils, it's observable in DNA, anatomy, molecular biology, geology, etc.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Let me explain morality for you real quick:
People with bad morals died off as a result (due to retaliation from people with GOOD morals), unable to reproduce and pass on the 'bad moral gene'. People with GOOD morals actually managed to survive long enough to reproduce (cooperative communities contribute to individual survival) and continue the 'good moral gene'. Moral evolution is very similar to physical evolution. It's natural selection; basic evolution.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Is that a quote from the BOOK OF DAFLEEGSTA according to you or are you just parroting what you hear from other misguided souls. Totally absurd convoluted logic which lacks all common sense.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Also your theory is totally ridiculous since the whole world is engulfed in evil immorality. Evolution in reverse fool.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Actually, evil still existed further supports evolution. We are just able to keep our species alive, not necessarily thrive in perfection (unlike the claim that theists make, since god is perfect and everything is his intent).
And I'm not sure what quote you are refering to.. Everything I've said I have valid evidence to back up.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod We don't need a god to be our judgement. We have a fellow community for that. If I do bad, I go to jail. People retaliate to protect themselves. Knowing this, it further impacts my decision (in addition to natural moral instinct) to do good for others. Also, if I do good things to other people, good things are more likely to happen to me in return.
The fact that you have to get your morals from a guide instead of your own thinking process tells me that you are a dangerous person.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Atheists are the most dangerous people on the planet since they account for billions of deaths. Your an idiot and a fool. Sorry, but true.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod WAIT WHAT?? Atheists account for billions of deaths?? The fuck? Prove that please.
Last I checked, religion is partly responsible for 9/11, the holocost, people praying to get better instead of receiving actual medical treatment, not to mention the countless acts of murder, genocide, 'eternal damnation', rape, man slaughter, etc that is mentioned in the bible.
Next to maybe resources (not even sure about that), religion is undoubtedly the primary cause of violence and wars.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Go do your homework child because by your mundane statements you have not conducted the proper research. Counterfeit religions account for millions of deaths just as counterfeit Christianity. Jesus Christ stated to love your enemies as yourself and pray for those who persecute you. True Christians to not go to war and kill others of the human family. So don't pull the RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD cliche since they do not do the will of Jehovah God anyway. There is only one TRUE FAITH.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Yeah, the bible says a lot of things that contradict itself. The point is that if you are able to pick and chose to the follow the good parts and ignore the bad parts, than you are using you OWN sense of morality to judge the bible. Why not skip the bible and use your own sense of morality alone?
And of course you think your specific faith is the true one despite the fact that all other religions of the world have the exact same amount of evidence (zero).
Do your research.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta I have done my research. Nearly 45 years of Biblical research, religions of the world, Biology, Evolution, Science, history and astronomy. I have come to the conclusion that all religions of the world are evil and by their conduct actually are in link with the Devil. Counterfeit Christianity is no better. You fail to understand the true premise of the Bible because you are haughty and arrogant. Stop parroting Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens who just WANT YOUR MONEY.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod I really doubt that you have done that much legitmate research. You seem extremely ignorant and misinformed.
If you are to base your morals on your religion, you must think your religion is true, correct?
But if you beleive that your religion is true, you must have some evidence for yourself to justify that beleif, correct?
Show the rest of the world what that evidence is.
I still don't understand why you need to follow external moral guidelines instead of thinking for yourself.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta I seem extremely ignorant and misinformed? Why, because I disagree with YOU? That does not make me ignorant nor misinformed. Sadly, it is you who is ignorant and misinformed because you follow blind guides of fellow human beings who die and are quickly forgotten. Example, Christopher Hitchens is dying of cancer and has faded from the pubic scene. He is already fading away from people's memories because he is out of sight out of mind. Stop worshiping sinful dying MAN!!!
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod I don't base my beleifs based on the books and the people who claim them (unlike you, and many theists/creationists seem to do). I base my beleifs on scientific facts which are supported by tangible evidence. Based on past experiences, I may assume certain claims are true if claimed by someone who has a history of true claims. That's not faith, it's logical thinking. I accept the possibility I could be wrong, but accept the probability that I'm not (based on EVIDENCE).
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Also, go on the internet and check for Atheist dictators and the deaths attributed to them. Do proper research before you open your mouth. Be slow about speaking and quick about hearing. Quote from the BIBLE.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod The amount of religious dictators and the deaths attributed to them FAR SURPASSES the atheist counter part. Also, it doesn't matter if a leader is atheist or theist when doing evil and causing death. What matters is whether or not they're doing evil and causing death BECAUSE of their atheism/theism.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Like I stated, if you can READ, do NOT give me the OLD CLICHE about FALSE RELIGIONS claiming GOD. They are no better than ATHEIST when it comes to exterminating people. Your logic is convoluted and spin. I reiterate, true CHRISTIANITY does not go to war and kill their fellow human FAMILY. Millions of true Christians do not go to war and will not enlist in the military. Which makes them morally superior to FALSE RELIGIONS / COUNTERFEIT CHRISTIANITY / ATHEISTS.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Every other religion thinks that YOUR religion is a false religion. How do you know which one is truly the right one if they all have just as little evidence?
Here:
/watch?v=DAuFJKQh83Y
A first step to educating yourself.
Get out of this delluded mind set that your beleif is the right one. If you want to be a good person, just try to be a good person. You don't need a potentially harmful and unreliable dictatorship called religion to do so.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta It is very simple. The second greatest commandment Jesus stated was to "LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." If TRUE Christians practiced this commandment, there would be no wars and mass extermination of their fellow human beings.True Christianity walks in the footsteps of Jesus Christ and imitates Jesus Christ in their lives. How can one be like Christ dropping bombs. Sadly, because of false religions and counterfeit Christianity atrocities, millions have lost their belief in a God.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Why do you not feel capable of making moral decisions on your own? And just because the bible says some nice things, or some true things, doesn't mean everything in it is nice or true.
I have a question for you.. Based on your beleif system, is it universally wrong to kill somebody? AKA would you EVER do it?
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Morality was created by Jehovah God and was given to human beings what we call a CONSCIENCE to distinguish right from wrong. It is a built in code implanted into the human spirit. Most human beings on this planet have seared their conscience to allow them to do the most evil and heinous crimes unimaginable. Has led to Evolutionary Atheism self-centered thinking, false religions, counterfeit Christianity and a immoral bankrupt world society.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod PROVE IT
You only beleive in your god because that book you worship says so. You have absolutely no valid reason to beleive in such rediculous claims. I've explained this to you over and over again, this is why I know you're ignorant. Don't feel bad, most theists are.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Your a lost soul of the land of the wicked. Your a fool and buffoon. Now go and masturbate while you watch some pornography. You are all alike. You hate Christianity because of the moral code, and you hate morality. You make moral laws convenient for yourself. That is why, most Atheists are Evolutionists, murderers, criminals, homosexuals, lesbians, pedophiles, thieves, fornicators, adulterers, drunkards. Christopher Hitchens a drunkard and chain smoker now dying of cancer.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod AKA I use logic and reasoning to determine fact from fiction where you on the other hand... don't.
Also, atheism has caused way more good than bad over history.. Where theism, has done quite the opposite.
Beleive what you want. You are simply an ignorant, misinformed, liar. I can't argue with ignorance, come back after you've done some research, are willing to acknowledge your arguments flaws, and stop making grossly innacurate assumptions.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Your logic is convoluted. You only parrot what other IMPERFECT MEN STATE. You don't even know your history. Go get a Master's Degree in history and than come back and talk to me. You do not have the slightest notion of Atheism history and the barbarism associated with it. Plain and simple, your an idiot, immature and need to grow up. Stop thinking like a child and think objectively, not SUBJECTIVE.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod I don't parrot anybody. I know you don't do this, but I actually think for myself. And it doesn't take a masters degree to realize how harmful religion is and how helpful science is. All you need is an internet connection and the will to learn.
And you are grossly misinformed. You are a perfect, living, breathing example of how harmful religion is to people. Religion has simply tricked you into being ignorant. You beleive what makes you feel good despite what evidence suggests.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta YYawwwnnnn!!!!! BLaaahh! Blaaaahhh! Yyawwwnnnn!
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod And that is why ignorance is so minimal in science :)
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Yyawwwnnnn!!!!! Blaaahhhh! Bllaaaaahhhh! Blaaahhhhhh! Yawwnnnnnn!
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod " Your a lost soul of the land of the wicked. Your a fool and buffoon. Now go and masturbate while you watch some pornography. You are all alike. You hate Christianity because of the moral code, and you hate morality." LOL SO YOU NEVER MASTURBATED BEFORE NEVER WATCHED PORNOGRAPHY YOU'RE SUCH A LIAR.
SuperKevinheart 4 months ago
@Jehovahourgod LIAR LIAR YOUR PANTS ARE ON FIRE LOL
SuperKevinheart 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta you make good points :)
SuperKevinheart 4 months ago
@DaFleegsta To kill a fellow human being of the human family is sinful. Sin is sin, regardless if it is murder, stealing, lying, fornicating, adultery, homosexuality, greediness, gluttony, drunkenness. All who PRACTICE such defilement's will not inherit the kingdom of God. So, to answer your question, would I kill another human being, NO! Don't play spin on the question by asking what if someone was trying to kill your family members etc....
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod Its not a spin on the question, thats exactly the point. According to you, since the bible says you shouldn't, it is wrong to defend yourself. If you had to kill to prevent yourself or your loved ones from being killed, you wouldn't do it. THAT IS THE HARM RELIGION CAUSES. It butchers your morality, rationality, and therefor negatively impacts your own self.
You are living proof that religion is harmful (to the ignorant and weak-minded, anyway). I feel sorry for you, I really do.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
@DaFleegsta Your an idiot.
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
@Jehovahourgod :)
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
Comment removed
Jehovahourgod 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jehovahourgod Every other religion thinks that YOUR religion is a false religion. How do you know which one is truly the right one if they all have just as little evidence?
Here:
/watch?v=DAuFJKQh83Y
A first step to educating yourself.
Get out of this delluded mind set that your beleif is the right one. If you want to be a good person, just try to be a good person. You don't need a potentially harmful and unreliable dictatorship called religion to do so.
DaFleegsta 5 months ago
hmm, since evo can not find any link between man & apes, why not try find a link between apes and its ancestor? man-ape is getting boring already. maybe evo can bring back excitement if evo can find ancestor of apes... but this time, no cheating please.
silaki1 5 months ago
this is the dumbest excuse for lack of fossil evidence when this is the basis of darwin's theory. is the evo theory getting desperate? i love watching evo videos & i forgave when fossils were forged & presented as evidence but this is getting stupid already. ID is putting out better science research output in halo dating, astronomy, dna & stuff. is evo going to lose? no way, go evo!
silaki1 5 months ago
(4th)
Macbeth (NOT a Creationist):
"Darwinism is not science."
Birch and Ehrlich:
"Darwinian evolution theory is 'outside of empirical science' but not necessarily false. No one can think of ways in which to test it."
sweetmikser 5 months ago
(3rd) Danson, New Scientist:
"Neo-Darwinism is now acknowledged as being unable to explain anything more than trivial change, and in default of some other theory we have none...despite the hostility of the witness provided by the fossil record, despite the innumerable difficulties, and despite the lack of even a credible theory, Darwinian evolution theory survives.... Can there be any other area of science as intellectually barren that has so little to support it?"
sweetmikser 5 months ago
(2nd) Further, Patterson said:
"What is the evidence for continuity? There ISN'T ANY in the fossils of animals and man. The connection between them is in in the mind."
A.S. Romer, paleontologist, evolutionist, admits:
"'Links' are missing just where we most fervently desire them, and it is all too probable that manky 'links' will CONTINUE TO BE MISSING."
Macbeth (NOT a Creationist):
"Darwinism is not science."
sweetmikser 5 months ago
Dr Patterson, paleontologist (and Darwinst):
"Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no: there is no way of answering the question. It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favored by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test."
So much for "Darwinian Evolution" being uh "science." FAIL.....
sweetmikser 5 months ago
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible in nature (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). Besides, species couldn't have survived with vital tissues, organs, biological systems still evolving? I discuss Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA." Read Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 5 months ago
There's no evidence that humans evolved from some ape-like ancestor anymore than there's evidence that apes, along with lemurs and monkeys, evolved from some dog-like ancestor. All the bones used to support human evolution have been found to be either hoaxes, non-human, or human, but not both non-human and human. They can reconstruct these bones to look like whatever they want! Some of the bones were found miles apart. Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS.
Mogley52 5 months ago
@gmcjetpilot hi there. You said that science is observable - well evolution has been observed directly in the laboratory. Evolution is a fact. I am a Christian who accepts evolution. Even if we had no fossils at all, the DNA evidence alone for evolution is overwhelming. God bless
bagospannerz 6 months ago
@gmcjetpilot Nice ad hominem attack there! Expected as that's all you idiots have. Talk about straw men...
SpecialEdAllstar 6 months ago
@gmcjetpilot Also, scientist have observed macro evolution and have made predictions based on evolutionary theory that have proven correct. Evolutionary theory is a stronger theory than gravitational theory. The best you can do with gravity is a crude mathematical model that roughly mimics what can be observed. Its quite apparent that you have little to no grasp on even the most elemental realities of science and the universe. Keep believing your fairy tale idiot.
SpecialEdAllstar 6 months ago
@SpecialEdAllsta
"scientist have observed macro evolution ..predictions based ..proven correct"
OBSERVED MACRO EVOLUTION? EXAMPLE? They find things & go back and SEE evolution predicted it? What happens is BS! They FORCE it into a narrow paradigm & ignore things that contradict or make excuses (dishonestly). Gravity per Einstein general relativity is distortion in space time, tested, observed & MATH IS NOT CRUDE JACKASS! Don't dare conflate REAL science w/ evolution, useless grand bull shit.
gmcjetpilot 6 months ago in playlist Evolution vs creationism
This video is sad. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE IS ALMOST 100% AN ATHEISTIC GROUP... That has an ATHEIST agenda.
Then they go after Curt Cameron? ha ha.
Of course we have variations between generations and WITH IN SPECIES.... there is no proof and it's an extrapolation WELL BEYOND the observed, we changed from other species. Evolution is a stretch with out PROOF! There is no proof ALL LIFE CAME FROM POUND SCUM.... This video is so trite and trivial it really shows how weak evolution is.
gmcjetpilot 6 months ago in playlist Evolution vs creationism
@gmcjetpilot Physics does not ever consider the supernatural as a cause. What 'unseen forces' it does take into consideration - like dark energy and matter - it does so because there is observable proof for their existence. There is not one shred of evidence to suggest that there is a god or that anything supernatural exists. Evolution is a FACT. It happens. There are literal mountains of evidence to support the theory we use to explain the underlying mechanics of the FACT of evolution.
SpecialEdAllstar 6 months ago
@SpecialEd
I'm 50, masters mechanical engineering and math? YOU? Straw man! I did not say "supernatural" liar. Let me guess you're a kid atheist, pro abortion & homosexuality and hate Christians? YAWN. You can't prove crap science by attacking "god" (you brought up). There's no mountain of evidence supporting evolution which, a smoke filled room full of assumptions, gaps, contradictions & subjective opinions. Science is observation, repeatable test, data. Evolution=RELIGION! Video=dishonest.
gmcjetpilot 6 months ago in playlist Evolution vs creationism
Comment removed
gmcjetpilot 6 months ago in playlist Evolution vs creationism
@luismartinez1091 I am going to have question your claiming to be a scientist. Evolutionary theory, while not perfect by any means, is our best explanation for how the facts came to be. Evolution is a fact like gravity is a fact - the underlying mechanics is where the theory comes in. You must be part of the crocoduck crowd. All species are transitional. Darwin's theory was not perfect to start with but it very close now. Nothing has ever been found that suggests this is not the correct path.
SpecialEdAllstar 6 months ago
@SpecialEdAllstar
We can MEASURE gravty, test gravity and have math for gravity.... WE HAVE NONE OF THAT FOR Evolution.
EVOLUTION IS ALL WE HAVE? Not science or a good endorsement. Evolution is the BEST fit for the man made boundary condition that everything has a naturalistic explanation. Why does physics consider unseen forces, black holes, wormholes, other dimensions (string theory) and other universes other than this one we can't see? BECAUSE IT's math, observation, science!
gmcjetpilot 6 months ago in playlist Evolution vs creationism
this video makes no sense. This video is trying to explain complex genotype manifestations with phenotypical variations within a lineage of species...Kind of far fetched. I am a scientist but this evolution theory makes very little sense. It is imperative for there to be intermediate forms otherwise the theory of evolution is just hypothetical. Darwin specifies this in his book: the origin of species .
luismartinez1091 6 months ago
junk
1983xita 6 months ago
There are a lot of big "jumps" where the gaps are filled up with an overactive imagination. Each "off shoot" is missing a picture. Your superstitious beliefs are not supported by real science. Evolution is a disgrace to science.
watch?v=t0dcH9RFfX8
JungleJargon 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JungleJargon
if evolution is a "disgrace", as you put it:
why would i believe in your religious creationism, if you can't explain AB resistance or Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
transtlantic 7 months ago
one hell of a video right here.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@Tripockets On average more than 100 speciation events are observed and published every year, and that's been true for several decades. The one consistant feature of creationists is dishonesty.
How do you think ring species come about?
gamesbok 7 months ago
WOW! Drawings! thank you for the scientific evidence supporting evolution. Also, thank you for refuting the scientific evidence against evolution. After all Kirk Cameron is definitely the premier scientist that refutes evolution. You got one thing right, you called it the evolutionary story. How about a mechanism that can create the genetic information needed to produce a novel organ, body plan, or system? Mutations fail, gene duplication fails, polyploidy fails. Make up a new story, EVO fails.
mejc2 7 months ago
@Tripockets Germany has just been devistated by a new form of E. Coli, genetically different from all forms known before. Genetically different, so it's evolution.
On average around 100 speciation events are published every year in the scientific literature.
As the good Christian Theo Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution"
You know you're descended from an ape, the ERV evidence alone will show you that.
gamesbok 7 months ago
The family album analogy fails completely. It only supports micro-evolution which is an undeniable fact. Although you may not have any resemblance with your ancestors after many generations, all are still homo-sapiens.
raponte1955 7 months ago
good analogy and good science.
Cainkane1 9 months ago
I personally do not care that much about the issue of evolution, but there are actually many very solid objections to, at least the Darwinianism, yes the fossils show the change in phenotype, but do not show speciation events. Of course we don't have all records, but this fact by itself doesn't confirm speciation. Are there any fossils showing transition between a whale and a small bat?
StopFear 9 months ago
@StopFear They just explained to you that fossils like that don't and shouldn't exist.
clerlic 8 months ago
@StopFear Whale and bat are different clades. Speciation events are commonly observed. There are not many objections to Darwinism, and none of them are solid.
gamesbok 7 months ago
@gamesbok
They are commonly observed? Where? as to whale and bat being different, I realize that, I know enough about evolution theory and darwinism to know though, that they require intermediate forms, which would indicate something like the size of common ancestor, or the path of evolution that would show how whale became whale, or at what point the common ancestor split to create the creatures that lead to existence of a bat and a whale forms.
StopFear 7 months ago
@StopFear Bullini, L and Nascetti, G, 1991, Speciation by Hybridization in phasmids and other insects, Canadian Journal of Zoology, Volume 68(8), pages 1747-1760.
Ramadevon, S and Deaken, M.A.B., 1991, The Gibbons speciation mechanism, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 145(4) pages 447-456.
Sharman, G.B., Close, R.L, Maynes, G.M., 1991, Chromosome evolution, phylogeny, and speciation of rock wallabies, Australian Journal of Zoology, Volume 37(2-4), pages 351-363
gamesbok 7 months ago
@StopFear Werth, C. R., and Windham, M.D., 1991, A model for divergent, allopatric, speciation of polyploid pteridophytes resulting from silencing of duplicate- gene expression, AM-Natural, Volume 137(4):515-526.
Spooner, D.M., Sytsma, K.J., Smith, J., A Molecular reexamination of diploid hybrid speciation of Solanum raphanifolium, Evolution, Volume 45, Number 3, pages 757-764.
gamesbok 7 months ago
@StopFear Arnold, M.L., Buckner, C.M., Robinson, J.J., 1991, Pollen-mediated introgression and hybrid speciation in Louisiana Irises, P-NAS-US, Volume 88, Number 4, pages 1398-1402.
Nevo, E., 1991, Evolutionary Theory and process of active speciation and adaptive radiation in subterranean mole rats, spalax-ehrenbergi superspecies, in Israel, Evolutionary Biology, Volume 25, pages 1-125.
There are about 100 papers witnessing speciation events ever year. These are a fraction from 1991.
gamesbok 7 months ago