@5tonyvvvv So, you know zip about either evolution or abiogenesis. Why don't you read up on it before you go making statements like this and revealing how pathetically ignorant you are?
@shanedk right made up bullshit terms by scientists...ok ..LOLEvolution is bullshit Tell me where information comes from???..no wait it happens all by it self..evolution only makes useless mutations that dont function
@5tonyvvvv I have a video showing how evolution produces information (see "Evolution CAN Increase information"). How much do YOU know about it? Can you even tell me the scientific definition of information? Go ahead: let's see how much you really know. What's the scientific definition of information?
@5tonyvvvv Oh, I know how to tell design. You can tell design when 1) we know the procedure for designing the thing in question, and 2) when we know of no natural way the thing could come about. NEITHER of those is the case with life. What you have is argument from personal incredulity, nothing more.
@5tonyvvvv unfortunate that you dont understand evolution. but let me ask you this, if it is not true, why get a flu shot? and if you dont understand why im asking that, you really need to pull your head out of the bible and join reality.
@bryansteeksma Atheists are so stubborn, they think this RNA research could happen on a primordial earth..HAHAHA
Synthesizing machines trained chemists controlling every step of the experiment, along with activated bases,which were not made from scratch.and controlled TEMPERATURES!!!! would all be found on a primordial earth???
@bryansteeksma "This engineered RNA" would break down do to the unstable conditions of it..similar to rats leaving a sinking ship..This artificial RNA..has ZERO chance of further evolving into a living cell.
Activated subunits are used along with templates taken from living sources..its not a geochemical relevant reaction.Intelligence created life not time and chance
@bryansteeksma Abiogenesis and evolution are very much connected...Tell an architect to build a skyscraper using no foundation, no base.just have the building float in thin air..let me me know what they will tell you..and how and when this great feat of engineering can be done..you need life to start in order for it to evolve....its nothing more than stubborn arrogant logic by evolutionists.
@bryansteeksma undirected natural processes, never produce life.homochirality, has never been solved, and as for panspermia and space crystals, and aliens seeding life on earth, that answers nothing only pushes the problem out into space!
@5tonyvvvv Friend, you can spew all the genetic jargon you like. It does not make you correct. Why? Because you are still a far-cry away from adumbrating the bridge between a creator God to an intervening God.
Using structural engineering as an analogy does not help you.
Logically, I do not have to refute any of your finer points. When it comes down to it, you cannot demonstrate why intelligence is the only, falsifiable, answer to why sentient life exists.
@5tonyvvvv Good one. How could I have been so blind. "You clearly know nothing" and "Moron"! Superb points! Its so clear to me now. Thank you for enlightening me. Guess I better get on my knees, pronto, before the world ends and I am cast into eternal flames.
You're right about one thing: panspermia, "space crystals", and aliens as explanations only begs the question. But your "theory" only begs the question also. It does nothing to explain the nature of this intelligence, or where it came from
@bryansteeksma Go learn what Homochirality is Moron.. molecules never organize them selves into life, and thats what evolutionary scientists expect to believe ASSUMPTIONS!!!, all you have to do is put time and chance with it, and the chemistry works!! what BULLSHIT!!!, and thats some faith!!
@5tonyvvvv Well, I will go read up on it. I am open to new perspectives. Can the same be said for you? We`ll see; I`ve never heard of Homochirality before.
As a side note, you`re points would be a little more palatable if you weren`t such a self-righteous douche about it. ;)
Or are you not interested in genuine discussion,l but instead want to dictate to others your ``truth`` while spitting in their faces?
I suspect hat time was going backwards before the time we know begin. My understanding is subatomic particles have the ability to go back in time. Considering there was no concept of time until humans started counting days and years on hour planet.
No, I am not a troll Dr. Shanedk. This is like a hybrid bear. GOD already gave us the answers: HE Exists, HE arranged the heavens and earth's layers and the stars and galaxis in the universe...
To add to that and according to evolution all things transfer energy from other sources and so on; therefore there is no perpetual energy or perpetual motion machines. Energy does not destroy or create itself. In order to be sustained, the universe must draw from another sustaining source and cannot be self contained as infinite, without a constant source of energy fed to it! Just figure it out.
"In order to be sustained, the universe must draw from another sustaining source" You're right. The amount of energy in the universe is fixed. Someday the universe will suffer heat death as a result. That day is not today. Our planet gets fed a constant stream of energy from the sun, at least until the sun burns itself out. Evolution is real. God is an "argument from ignorance". There is simply no way to know if god exist and no "good" purpose to speculating on the subject.
The newest studies I've read indicate the universe may resemble a three dimensional dodecahedron expanding inside a fourth dimensional hypersphere, but the concept still applies.
As it stands, it's around a 8 in 10 chance of being a dodecahedron depending on the Plank data interpretation, at least that's what I've read in the last Brian Clegg book. It's due to the similarity that exist in observed background radiation clustering when taking into account quadrants with 39 degrees of rotation. The theory of a dodecahedron universe dates back to 1998. Anyway, I'm just repeating what I've heard, I'm not scientist. It's available by goggling. Love your vids.
Your torus shape is a possible shape of a M-theory multi-verse, rather than the shape of the universe as perceived. You're confusing the universe and multiverse shape. The WMAP findings were, in part, used to try to detect curvature of inflation (which would effect distance) that could possibly be the result of it's origin's nature. The universe ended up being geometrically flat, ie no funky curves and hidden distances. The thing is, cosmogony is all theory at the moment; bad as deities.
Excuse me. I made a grevious error. Your torus shape was a possible shape that the universe could have been curved in. In a spherical or torus universe one could look out and see themselves if they looked far enough, in a flat universe you just look out forever and never see yourself regardless how far you looked. All curvature was pretty much ruled out by the WMAP data. It's all flat. Infinity in every direction regardless of the hot zone some call the boundary.
Has anyone been at the border of the universe as I have? You speak of the universe as though knew what it encompasses.And if you say "everything" you have to prove you know or have been in everypart of it. Just like a country has borders(limits), so the universe has.
As I explained, these are useless questions. Space and time were formed with the Big Bang and expand along with it. So there is no sense in which something could have "preceded" the Big Bang because time did not exist; there could also not be said to be any existence the universe is expanding into because the space itself is expanding, not matter expanding to fill an existing space.
Oh I see! That means Isaac Newton was wrong along with todays modern physics; because the BB had no origin because time wasn't invented yet therefore because absolute nothing existed at the place where the universe expanded and is continually expanding into, does not exist and never existed as something, right? Very interesting; how do you come to this amazing conclusion?
No, Einstein proved that all time in our universe is relative to our universe. Newton was wrong about a lot of things. He assumed the universe was infinite and couldn't figure out why an infinite amount of gravity wouldn't crush everything, so he put god into his equation by saying the "hand of god" kept the planets apart. He was wrong. He also assumed an "absolute time", or one that existed regardless of the means to keep time. Aristotle had the right idea, not Newton.
You have no answer and you have not answered and I am not presenting you with dogma. A scientific question what existence is the universe expanding into and to what existence did the Big bang come from?
I HAVE answered it! You're REFUSING to understand the nature of the big bang! The very QUESTION, and the assumptions embedded into it, show your own ignorance! There was NOTHING to "expand into" because THERE IS NO SPACE BEYOND IT! It didn't come FROM anywhere because there was no SPACE for it to be from and no TIME for there to be an existence then!
You can curse rant and rave to show everyone your true self! You did not answer the question simply because it has not yet been discovered as to what the BB was a reaction to, and as to where the universe is expanding into. If you want to play science with the big boys you must keep a civil tongue and debate in kind.
"A scientific question: what existence is the universe expanding into" Scientists don't know. Some suspect our expansion is only relative to our universe. "what existence did the Big bang come from?" Again, it's not known. You don't know, shanedk doesn't know. No-one knows. If you say you know, or god did it, you're a liar by default because you can't possibly know! M-theory with a ekpyrotic universe is possibly the closest we've come to knowing, but it's still theory!
@gotrootdude The Universe is expanding into EXISTENCE. The big bang came into existence in the EXISTENCE. Can one posible know this? Yes, I know 'cause G-Almighty put me there and showeth me these things.
@shanedk Dr. Shane, just because you don't understand or want to accept TRUHT, you will fly outside the real world? BTW, you overused the word bogos'ity...
Exactly! That means you cannot truthfully teach in schools and elsewhere theories as truths, that are unproven as yet; period end of discussion on that point. Teaching , "well there is a big bang from nothing expanding into nothing" destroys the laws of physics.
There is a lot more to it that is not understood yet. It is wrong to conceive the universe as an un-sourced solitary singularity without its boundaries infringing upon the non-universe's outer regions! This idea is self evident science.
You're only partly right. The "big bang" is taught as theory with evidence. It's a cosmological theory, not a cosmogony theory, and as such doesn't pretend to know what was before the expansion, therefore it does NOT say the universe came from nothing. Furthermore, physical laws are relational to our universe, not in what preceded it.
"It is wrong to conceive the universe as an un-sourced solitary singularity without its boundaries infringing upon the non-universe's outer regions!" Why? If you can't say why it's wrong, then it's only your theory that is is wrong.
Not only scientists; thinking people have been figuring things for centuries and don't know. You therefore now finally agree with me, by your statements, that truthfully the BB remains a theory which at present is not provable and can only be taught as a theory. E=mc2 is also now a theory of non-provability. It is close to the truth remaining quite inaccurate in actual energy value. Go find out what that means. Okay?
I don't see your contention. It seems your trying to put the theory of "God" creating the universe (which has no evidence) on equal footing with the "Big Bang" theory (which has numerous evidence). You can argue all you want but theories without evidence shouldn't be taught at all. They aren't equal to theories with evidence.
I think that a man fulfilling so many prophecies without messing up a single one would count as evidence, also I would like to enter exhibit b: human's being here. and for exhibit c: we have many different religions giving one potent God among all others, a flood, and a creation. now all stories are said to have a root to the truth, including your precious evolution. the root of your macro evolution theory is that micro evolution exists. the root to christianity is: Christ fulfilled prophesy
Religion, allegorically speaking, is a store selling a product that never needs to be delivered and if something goes wrong, there's no one to complain about because no one is running the store. Religious followers have just bought into the sales brochure for the invisible product. As such, religion needs no roots in truth. I'm not interested in sales brochures. I'm interested in facts and reality.
@sk8er4christ Christ's prophesies (that I have looked into) have been either non-specific or only quantified by Christian sources. What prophesies in Christianity do you find compelling?
and while you bash him with you bullshit...whats your answer to the birth of the universe. god.........BULLSHIT...science works for answers..while reigion propagates stories and fairytales...........SHUT UP
"BB is a reaction from something else. " Nothing is something. That's what Shanedk is trying to tell you. 4-4=nothing. 3-2-1=nothing. Nothing is nothing but 4-4 is something! Shanedk is following the idea that zero(nothing) is a symmetry state, that can be unfolded, used in various quantum theories.
Yeah, you are wasting your time. The "Big Bang" theory gives no clues to it's predecessor and anything, or nothing, you attempt to add changes that. Your god theory is not even on equal footing with shanedk's symmetry state as you don't have a concrete definition for god while shanedk's theory accurately describes observed quantum events, both, however, are just theories.
I gave you no god theory. WTF you thinking about. I discuss the true science of Physics when referring to a BB as a reaction from a cause, and to a universe expanding into some outer substance. True Physics commands and states these things as true; otherwise Physics is false if there is no pre-BB cause and no area into which the universe expands into. Stop clowning around; and please get off of your god complexes and get back to Physics, okay?
I wish evil, which some define as sin, never existed. Can anyone really deny evil is real? I can't force this idea upon you. Evil is voluntary. Pedophile victims tortured raped and murdered, are examples of evils that some call sin. This is one example in the news every week. Did you think every criminal never apprehended just goes free forever? Please enlighten me with your contrary experiences and knowledge?
You still did not answer my question about horrible crimes getting away free forever . Read it below again this time and stop clowning and avoiding the issues.
So you have no theories as to what preceeded the bb and what the universe is emptying into? Not one idea or rant? You think a dot coming frome nothing, and expanding into nothing, are the answers?
IDIOT! Why do you STILL NOT GET IT??? It's RIDICULOUS to talk about the universe "emptying into" ANYTHING! SPACE ITSELF IS EXPANDING!!! It's like saying you're at the North Pole and then you go North! It's RIDICULOUS!
shanedk Sorry about your incredible rudeness! Doesn't faze me though. Your expanding into nothing is impossible in the universe of Physics. Your big bang as a dot which just appeared without an origin is just as impossible in the universe of Physics. Either you explain the two or admit you cannot explain something which has not been yet discovered and stop being an immature person please it degrades your intelligence. Now answer correct and proper. Please!
Let us assume the laws of Physics prevail and are true, which all indications seem to approve;. If so, the universe is expanding into something outside of it, also the big bang is a reaction preceded by some action of cause. If these two statements are false, when we assume nothing preceded the BB and the universe is expanding into nothing; than the Laws of Physics need to be greatly revised!
No, it isn't; it's space itself that's expanding, so the idea of it expanding "into" anything is ludicrous.
Likewise, since time formed along with space in the Big Bang, the idea of something preceding it is meaningless. It's like mentioning something north of the North Pole.
The only thing that needs to be revised is your UNDERSTANDING of the theories--because you don't have a clue what they say.
This is the last time I reply to you. Your theory does not confirm the laws of physics before and beyond them universe. We have been through this many times before and your just as closed minded and stubborn as an old shoe. Please please do not reply you will get no conversation from me. Goodbye.
1. the bogosity guy is beyond obnoxious..i agree with most of what you are saying..but do you have to sound like such a dick when you say it? get a life
2. at around 6:20 with the "fine tuning" argument..it seems like he is making a much too solid conclusion simply based upon using different constants..i wont simply take his word that this program can fully model something as complex as the creation of a universe with different parameters..funny how the bogosity guy just revels in such evidence
Gaaaaauly, Shazam Gomer! I heard more hypocrisy, and non observable assumptions in 10 minutes than maybe anywhere before, You had to have help making this video, nobody 's that stupid on their own. Your just a wanna be scientist/debater living out your meaningless existance, with a reserved seat in the smoking section of the after life if you don't repent and change your ways. You won't find God in your miroscope or telescope fool, only in the word.
its really funny to hear any evolutionist claim truth in anything that supposedly happend over 15,000 yrs ago beyond human records.
planets bombarded by meteor's and other astral bodies is the cause of change in direction? lol show me and I will agree with you (not in virtual representation but in reality)
did ya see the movie Troy with Pitt? that was a great realization of the Invincible Akelee's (not sure on his name) who was supposed to be dipped in the river of the gods making his skin impenetrable.
where in the most likely case he was just simply such an awesome warrior he hadnt "not couldnt" be hurt.
The point is, just as forensic science can tell what happened at a murder scene better and more accurately than eyewitnesses, science can determine what happened in history better than human records.
stupid point according to your other theories, every planet has been bombarded with asteroids you twit! suck some more helium. Either that or your balls never "evolved"
P.S. darwin was not a real doctor! he went to collect bugs lol no science no nothing... hello!
well you say the planets that are rotating the opposite ways is because they were hit by lots of meteors? so why was it different when all the other planets got the same thing? that's an illogical argument you got going on trying to "debunk" the rotating debate
Damn you are dumb. They are spinning in different ways cause they were bombarded with lots of different things of different sizes and to different places.
Or did you think that all planets got hit by the same meteors with exactly the same speed to exactly the same spot?
lol you make yourself sound like such an idiot... just because i have more logic and can see things in a different view than you doesn't mean you have to attack me... coward!
lol... now that i have your attention... the moon is older than the earth... so how did it get "locked" in to an earth that did not exist until after the moon did
that would be a mild rotation. it's not spinning, if it was spinning we would see it... so what keeps it faced towards us? what keeps it from rotating faster since as they say bombardments of meteors is what make planets and so on spin. why isn't it spinning faster huh
there is a problem here, the moon is 4.6 billion years old... at least from the rock samples they have... and the oldest rock sample on earth is 3.6 billions years... So the moon was locked into the earth before the earth was even there huh?
"The oldest rocks on earth that have been dated thus far include 3.4 billion year old granites from the Barberton Mountain Land of South Africa, 3.7 billion year old granites of southwestern Greenland, ..." Levin, 1983
The ages of rocks returned to Earth from the Apollo missions range from 3.3 to about 4.6 billion years. The older age determinations are derived from rocks collected on the lunar highland, which may represent the original lunar crust.
So you believe the moon is 3.3 to 4.6 billion years old? And you say the moon is older than the earth? Interesting, I would like to hear your theory how it got "locked" in to earth as you said.
Actually the age of the earth and the age of the moon are dated to about the same time (4.6 billion years ago).
The age of the universe is between 13.5-14 billion years old (determined by completely independent methods).
Now the bible says the earth is about 6 thousands years old (thats a million fold difference from what the evidence says). Even if we were to say the scientific measures were slightly off you have to admit the bible is dead wrong. You really have no ground to stand on.
Its based on known dates stated in the bible and calculating back based on the genealogies listed. This gives a date of creation for the universe and earth between 6k-10k years old. Ask any young earth creationist (which you seem to be based on your statements) and they will tell you the same thing.
The thing that gets me with you guys is you never provide any evidence to support your claims you just make weak attacks on existing scientific theories.
Umm I think you missed the point. I don't think the bible is reliable at all. I was explaining how young earth creationist date the earth. For that purpose a margin of error of 12 years won't affect the outcome.
That's cute. So sure of your claims and the theories that you list them as fact. Remember you make observations, extrapolate, lean on what you know of science and assume that how ever many billion years ago certain events occured. Were you sick on the day when they taught about uncertainty at school?
True, uncertainty exsists in science, nothing is certain(semi contradiction). However these claims and theories have an abundunce of proof. Creationism on the other hand has fairy tales your supposed to take on faith. Can you even tell me why christian creation myths have any more support than say greek mythology creation myths?
lol no people have come out with accurate models of the world with the bible thank you! it's just covered up...
Creationist said dinasours were not old enough so there should be remains of tissues... hey what do you know they were right... hmmm no evidence, maybe you should get your facts straight guy.
what? I said dinasours were found with living tissues inside their bones, their own bones! their bones cut open and finding soft tissue... when theories say tissues cannot survive more than 100 thousand years...
shows your maturity there guy, say what you will but your not saying that against me in a sense your saying that against God. You won't have to answer to me for that you will have to answer to God for that one
Total win, Shane, thank you for this. I fail to see any decisive response from the Creationists, except ranting (which in my view worsens their point). I'm a Roman Catholic, however after some major reserching I have found out many new things. This is one of them. And I agree thoroughly. : - )
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Dear Christian brothers and sisters:
Arguing with an atheist is like walking in a circle. You're not getting anywhere. We should learn to ignore their videos and stop throwing our pearls to swine. And Shane is a definite swine. I know they come to OUR videos with our worship music and our praise and blaspheme left and right but debating them on their videos is pointless. Turn the other cheek.
lol! arguing with you is like walking in a circle. you deny all evidence and you call the holy bible your evidence. it was obviously written by man.money hungry man no-less. and even worse, you all do exactly what jesus told you not to. for starters: he told you all no to follow/worship him! second, he told you to close down all your churches, and thirdly, he said to not be to fricken judgemental!
Yet people have concluded science from the bible like the winds a guy did a whole model from the bible, and what do u know it came out to be accurate.
A lot of scientists study animal dung, too, and also 'conclude' science from that - far more useful to the real world than your brand of 'science'. OWNED??!! What are you, 12? Dont just get real, get an education.
IF you believe in evolution then...you believe in the beginning
!!!DIRT!!!(big bang, the stuff that exploded)
If you believe in creation...you believe in the beginning
!!!GOD!!!
Where did GOD come from, nobody knows!
Where did the dirt come from.. come on ... do you honestly believe that big bang come from a dot smaller that a period on this web page, thats what science teaches.
Hitler once said that people are more likely to believe in a big lie than a small lie!
Just kidding with a lot of my comments, Shane!! I was in the mood to play THE VOICE OF ANGER AND SARCASM AND (anything else). Just ignore my comments here and elsewhere.
It makes you wonder why he pushes so hard at making you believe what he believes. He has an ulterior motive, embedded deep within his subconscious. His stepdaddy played with his penis when he was five...this is where his belief in God had to be submerged. "God would not allow such an act." But it wasn't God, it was your stepdaddy. It was a HUMAN BEING who played with your penis. A human being with faulty beliefs. Don't blame it on God.
HaHaHaHa! Shane and his fellow skeptics are so full of SHIT!!! They can come up with SO MUCH mumbo jumbo but it's all logical bullshit! Do you really want to live in your LEFT BRAIN? Let me ask any living, sane person: Which would you rather have, a rational 1000 piece puzzle of a windmill, or a hot and sexy male or female to create passion and romance with??? Left-brained thinking, in and of itself, IS COMPLETE GARBAGE IN THE SCOPE OF HUMAN IDENTITY!
FEELINGS, FEELINGS, FEELINGS are where the truth of an individual emerges. Shane would have you believe that pencil-pushing logic is the end all, be all. DON'T TRUST HIM IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD!!!!! He can quote you facts, figures, measurements, etc. but it's all about how the left brain works so hard at rationalizing what CAN'T be rationalized. It's sad that he's living the life of a modern-day caveman. I'm surprised he's not doing the Geico commercials!
Time is merely a measurement between two events. If no events exist before the big bang and if the big bang is the first or initial event, it did indeed start time.
this is also why god can not exist outside of time. To do so would mean you do not exist and never have because you place your imaginary friend before the first event, rendering him impossible.
As far as science goes it does not claim to know how the big bang originated and is not intellectually corrupting itself by assuming.
Lol. "It is bible-believing creationists who gave us science as we know it today" *bogometer explodes*
Moralgo 1 year ago
Evolution is bullshit..ok right we came from non living materials as bacteria...no wait better yet..bacteria on the backs of crystals..LOL bullshit
5tonyvvvv 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv So, you know zip about either evolution or abiogenesis. Why don't you read up on it before you go making statements like this and revealing how pathetically ignorant you are?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk right made up bullshit terms by scientists...ok ..LOLEvolution is bullshit Tell me where information comes from???..no wait it happens all by it self..evolution only makes useless mutations that dont function
5tonyvvvv 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv I have a video showing how evolution produces information (see "Evolution CAN Increase information"). How much do YOU know about it? Can you even tell me the scientific definition of information? Go ahead: let's see how much you really know. What's the scientific definition of information?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk your ignorant..u cant see design !!!!!!!
5tonyvvvv 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv Oh, I know how to tell design. You can tell design when 1) we know the procedure for designing the thing in question, and 2) when we know of no natural way the thing could come about. NEITHER of those is the case with life. What you have is argument from personal incredulity, nothing more.
shanedk 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv unfortunate that you dont understand evolution. but let me ask you this, if it is not true, why get a flu shot? and if you dont understand why im asking that, you really need to pull your head out of the bible and join reality.
thor21476 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv Time to read! :) Happy reading!
bryansteeksma 10 months ago
@bryansteeksma Atheists are so stubborn, they think this RNA research could happen on a primordial earth..HAHAHA
Synthesizing machines trained chemists controlling every step of the experiment, along with activated bases,which were not made from scratch.and controlled TEMPERATURES!!!! would all be found on a primordial earth???
Yeah this is undirected natural processes..LOL
5tonyvvvv 10 months ago
@bryansteeksma "This engineered RNA" would break down do to the unstable conditions of it..similar to rats leaving a sinking ship..This artificial RNA..has ZERO chance of further evolving into a living cell.
Activated subunits are used along with templates taken from living sources..its not a geochemical relevant reaction.Intelligence created life not time and chance
5tonyvvvv 10 months ago
@bryansteeksma Abiogenesis and evolution are very much connected...Tell an architect to build a skyscraper using no foundation, no base.just have the building float in thin air..let me me know what they will tell you..and how and when this great feat of engineering can be done..you need life to start in order for it to evolve....its nothing more than stubborn arrogant logic by evolutionists.
5tonyvvvv 10 months ago
@bryansteeksma undirected natural processes, never produce life.homochirality, has never been solved, and as for panspermia and space crystals, and aliens seeding life on earth, that answers nothing only pushes the problem out into space!
5tonyvvvv 10 months ago
@5tonyvvvv Friend, you can spew all the genetic jargon you like. It does not make you correct. Why? Because you are still a far-cry away from adumbrating the bridge between a creator God to an intervening God.
Using structural engineering as an analogy does not help you.
Logically, I do not have to refute any of your finer points. When it comes down to it, you cannot demonstrate why intelligence is the only, falsifiable, answer to why sentient life exists.
bryansteeksma 10 months ago
@bryansteeksma LOL..You clearly know nothing, your just another indoctrinated moron!
5tonyvvvv 10 months ago
@5tonyvvvv Good one. How could I have been so blind. "You clearly know nothing" and "Moron"! Superb points! Its so clear to me now. Thank you for enlightening me. Guess I better get on my knees, pronto, before the world ends and I am cast into eternal flames.
You're right about one thing: panspermia, "space crystals", and aliens as explanations only begs the question. But your "theory" only begs the question also. It does nothing to explain the nature of this intelligence, or where it came from
bryansteeksma 10 months ago
@bryansteeksma Go learn what Homochirality is Moron.. molecules never organize them selves into life, and thats what evolutionary scientists expect to believe ASSUMPTIONS!!!, all you have to do is put time and chance with it, and the chemistry works!! what BULLSHIT!!!, and thats some faith!!
5tonyvvvv 10 months ago
@5tonyvvvv See the work of Dr. Jack Szostak. You are completely, utterly, and PATHETICALLY wrong.
shanedk 10 months ago
@5tonyvvvv Well, I will go read up on it. I am open to new perspectives. Can the same be said for you? We`ll see; I`ve never heard of Homochirality before.
As a side note, you`re points would be a little more palatable if you weren`t such a self-righteous douche about it. ;)
Or are you not interested in genuine discussion,l but instead want to dictate to others your ``truth`` while spitting in their faces?
bryansteeksma 9 months ago
@bryansteeksma Racemic mixtures is the problem
5tonyvvvv 9 months ago
This is awesome! I am subscribing!
LeaVeliz 1 year ago
Real scientists must go nuts having to deal with these guys. Like talking to kids, I guess.
Sonicmountain09 1 year ago
1:25 Brace for brain aneurysm. In 3...2...1...
AnonymousUbiquity 1 year ago
I suspect hat time was going backwards before the time we know begin. My understanding is subatomic particles have the ability to go back in time. Considering there was no concept of time until humans started counting days and years on hour planet.
MicrosoftsourceCode 2 years ago
I am not a troll. I am GOD's creation; GOD's messanger.
Airlightf 2 years ago
I believe a real god would have taught his messanger how to spell "messenger".
gotrootdude 2 years ago 2
@gotrootdude -so, to you a God's messanger is acutally God? Who doesn't make any errors?
Airlightf 2 years ago
No, I am not a troll Dr. Shanedk. This is like a hybrid bear. GOD already gave us the answers: HE Exists, HE arranged the heavens and earth's layers and the stars and galaxis in the universe...
Airlightf 2 years ago
Airlightf <<
To add to that and according to evolution all things transfer energy from other sources and so on; therefore there is no perpetual energy or perpetual motion machines. Energy does not destroy or create itself. In order to be sustained, the universe must draw from another sustaining source and cannot be self contained as infinite, without a constant source of energy fed to it! Just figure it out.
EGMAG 2 years ago
No one SAYS it's infinite. Just boundless. There's a difference.
shanedk 2 years ago
"In order to be sustained, the universe must draw from another sustaining source" You're right. The amount of energy in the universe is fixed. Someday the universe will suffer heat death as a result. That day is not today. Our planet gets fed a constant stream of energy from the sun, at least until the sun burns itself out. Evolution is real. God is an "argument from ignorance". There is simply no way to know if god exist and no "good" purpose to speculating on the subject.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
I am telling this 'cause I met with scientists at the border of the Universe which they cannot cross. Who put me ther? GOD.
Airlightf 2 years ago
Let Darwing what? Uff.
Airlightf 2 years ago
The universe had a beginning, right? And it is expanding. Therefore, it must have borders.
Airlightf 2 years ago
Think of the universe as the surface of a balloon that's being inflated. Does that surface have borders? No, it does not.
The data suggest that the universe is actually more torus-shaped, but the concept still applies.
shanedk 2 years ago
The newest studies I've read indicate the universe may resemble a three dimensional dodecahedron expanding inside a fourth dimensional hypersphere, but the concept still applies.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
Wouldn't a dodecahedron be non-Euclidean, and therefore ruled out by the WMAP findings?
shanedk 2 years ago
As it stands, it's around a 8 in 10 chance of being a dodecahedron depending on the Plank data interpretation, at least that's what I've read in the last Brian Clegg book. It's due to the similarity that exist in observed background radiation clustering when taking into account quadrants with 39 degrees of rotation. The theory of a dodecahedron universe dates back to 1998. Anyway, I'm just repeating what I've heard, I'm not scientist. It's available by goggling. Love your vids.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
Your torus shape is a possible shape of a M-theory multi-verse, rather than the shape of the universe as perceived. You're confusing the universe and multiverse shape. The WMAP findings were, in part, used to try to detect curvature of inflation (which would effect distance) that could possibly be the result of it's origin's nature. The universe ended up being geometrically flat, ie no funky curves and hidden distances. The thing is, cosmogony is all theory at the moment; bad as deities.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
Excuse me. I made a grevious error. Your torus shape was a possible shape that the universe could have been curved in. In a spherical or torus universe one could look out and see themselves if they looked far enough, in a flat universe you just look out forever and never see yourself regardless how far you looked. All curvature was pretty much ruled out by the WMAP data. It's all flat. Infinity in every direction regardless of the hot zone some call the boundary.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
Has anyone been at the border of the universe as I have? You speak of the universe as though knew what it encompasses.And if you say "everything" you have to prove you know or have been in everypart of it. Just like a country has borders(limits), so the universe has.
Airlightf 2 years ago
There is no border of the universe.
shanedk 2 years ago
chinese people created the universe, i asked one...
romanianskill 2 years ago 6
What existence preceeded the BB and to what existence has the BB expanded into?
EGMAG 2 years ago
As I explained, these are useless questions. Space and time were formed with the Big Bang and expand along with it. So there is no sense in which something could have "preceded" the Big Bang because time did not exist; there could also not be said to be any existence the universe is expanding into because the space itself is expanding, not matter expanding to fill an existing space.
shanedk 2 years ago
shanedk<<
Oh I see! That means Isaac Newton was wrong along with todays modern physics; because the BB had no origin because time wasn't invented yet therefore because absolute nothing existed at the place where the universe expanded and is continually expanding into, does not exist and never existed as something, right? Very interesting; how do you come to this amazing conclusion?
EGMAG 2 years ago
Newton was wrong about a LOT of things. Einstein proved that.
shanedk 2 years ago
shanedek Einstein proved that. <
Did Einstein prove what existence the universe is expanding into and to what existence the Big bang came from?
EGMAG 2 years ago
No, Einstein proved that all time in our universe is relative to our universe. Newton was wrong about a lot of things. He assumed the universe was infinite and couldn't figure out why an infinite amount of gravity wouldn't crush everything, so he put god into his equation by saying the "hand of god" kept the planets apart. He was wrong. He also assumed an "absolute time", or one that existed regardless of the means to keep time. Aristotle had the right idea, not Newton.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
And what makes you think that you or many scientists are right about a lot of things today?
Airlightf 2 years ago
Um.. Evidence. Where is yours?
gotrootdude 2 years ago
Here! I
Airlightf 2 years ago
shanedk these are useless quest<<
You just have no answer for these questions and everybody knows it. They are quite pertinent if we are to understand the laws of physics thoroughly.
Your answers are totally inconclusive in this matter. Be honest and say, ''you just don't know'', and be done with!
EGMAG 2 years ago
I HAVE answered it. OVER AND OVER AND OVER again. You just don't want to learn; your dogma is more important to you than reality.
shanedk 2 years ago
shanedk I HAVE<<
You have no answer and you have not answered and I am not presenting you with dogma. A scientific question what existence is the universe expanding into and to what existence did the Big bang come from?
EGMAG 2 years ago
I HAVE answered it! You're REFUSING to understand the nature of the big bang! The very QUESTION, and the assumptions embedded into it, show your own ignorance! There was NOTHING to "expand into" because THERE IS NO SPACE BEYOND IT! It didn't come FROM anywhere because there was no SPACE for it to be from and no TIME for there to be an existence then!
shanedk 2 years ago
shanedk I HAVE answered NOTHING<<
You can curse rant and rave to show everyone your true self! You did not answer the question simply because it has not yet been discovered as to what the BB was a reaction to, and as to where the universe is expanding into. If you want to play science with the big boys you must keep a civil tongue and debate in kind.
EGMAG 2 years ago
shanedk frantically in the big bang<<<
Would you like me to reveal what preceeded the big bang and what the universe is expanding into?
EGMAG 2 years ago
"A scientific question: what existence is the universe expanding into" Scientists don't know. Some suspect our expansion is only relative to our universe. "what existence did the Big bang come from?" Again, it's not known. You don't know, shanedk doesn't know. No-one knows. If you say you know, or god did it, you're a liar by default because you can't possibly know! M-theory with a ekpyrotic universe is possibly the closest we've come to knowing, but it's still theory!
gotrootdude 2 years ago
@gotrootdude The Universe is expanding into EXISTENCE. The big bang came into existence in the EXISTENCE. Can one posible know this? Yes, I know 'cause G-Almighty put me there and showeth me these things.
Airlightf 2 years ago
All right, I'm calling "troll" on this guy...
shanedk 2 years ago
@shanedk Dr. Shane, just because you don't understand or want to accept TRUHT, you will fly outside the real world? BTW, you overused the word bogos'ity...
Airlightf 2 years ago
Exactly! That means you cannot truthfully teach in schools and elsewhere theories as truths, that are unproven as yet; period end of discussion on that point. Teaching , "well there is a big bang from nothing expanding into nothing" destroys the laws of physics.
There is a lot more to it that is not understood yet. It is wrong to conceive the universe as an un-sourced solitary singularity without its boundaries infringing upon the non-universe's outer regions! This idea is self evident science.
EGMAG 2 years ago
So, you STILL haven't seen my video on theory vs. fact...
shanedk 2 years ago
You're only partly right. The "big bang" is taught as theory with evidence. It's a cosmological theory, not a cosmogony theory, and as such doesn't pretend to know what was before the expansion, therefore it does NOT say the universe came from nothing. Furthermore, physical laws are relational to our universe, not in what preceded it.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
"It is wrong to conceive the universe as an un-sourced solitary singularity without its boundaries infringing upon the non-universe's outer regions!" Why? If you can't say why it's wrong, then it's only your theory that is is wrong.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
gotrootdude Scientists don't know <<
Not only scientists; thinking people have been figuring things for centuries and don't know. You therefore now finally agree with me, by your statements, that truthfully the BB remains a theory which at present is not provable and can only be taught as a theory. E=mc2 is also now a theory of non-provability. It is close to the truth remaining quite inaccurate in actual energy value. Go find out what that means. Okay?
EGMAG 2 years ago
I don't see your contention. It seems your trying to put the theory of "God" creating the universe (which has no evidence) on equal footing with the "Big Bang" theory (which has numerous evidence). You can argue all you want but theories without evidence shouldn't be taught at all. They aren't equal to theories with evidence.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
I think that a man fulfilling so many prophecies without messing up a single one would count as evidence, also I would like to enter exhibit b: human's being here. and for exhibit c: we have many different religions giving one potent God among all others, a flood, and a creation. now all stories are said to have a root to the truth, including your precious evolution. the root of your macro evolution theory is that micro evolution exists. the root to christianity is: Christ fulfilled prophesy
sk8er4christ 2 years ago
Religion, allegorically speaking, is a store selling a product that never needs to be delivered and if something goes wrong, there's no one to complain about because no one is running the store. Religious followers have just bought into the sales brochure for the invisible product. As such, religion needs no roots in truth. I'm not interested in sales brochures. I'm interested in facts and reality.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
honestly if one were to replace the word religion with evolution, then the entire statement you just made would make just as much sense
littlemissblessed 2 years ago
No, it wouldn't, because evolution has delivered many benefits that make your life better every single day, even though you don't realize it.
shanedk 2 years ago
@sk8er4christ Christ's prophesies (that I have looked into) have been either non-specific or only quantified by Christian sources. What prophesies in Christianity do you find compelling?
ChaseKittens 1 year ago
and while you bash him with you bullshit...whats your answer to the birth of the universe. god.........BULLSHIT...science works for answers..while reigion propagates stories and fairytales...........SHUT UP
roxas12590 2 years ago
roxas12590 reigion <<
Not talking about religion. Talking bout pure science. cannot have a reaction from nothing. BB is a reaction from something else.
EGMAG 2 years ago
"BB is a reaction from something else. " Nothing is something. That's what Shanedk is trying to tell you. 4-4=nothing. 3-2-1=nothing. Nothing is nothing but 4-4 is something! Shanedk is following the idea that zero(nothing) is a symmetry state, that can be unfolded, used in various quantum theories.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
gotrootdude zero(nothing) is a symmetry state <<
Of course your obviously just wasting my time here; because all I am getting here are absolutely false nonsensical arguments.
EGMAG 2 years ago
Yeah, you are wasting your time. The "Big Bang" theory gives no clues to it's predecessor and anything, or nothing, you attempt to add changes that. Your god theory is not even on equal footing with shanedk's symmetry state as you don't have a concrete definition for god while shanedk's theory accurately describes observed quantum events, both, however, are just theories.
gotrootdude 2 years ago
gotrootdude god theory <<
I gave you no god theory. WTF you thinking about. I discuss the true science of Physics when referring to a BB as a reaction from a cause, and to a universe expanding into some outer substance. True Physics commands and states these things as true; otherwise Physics is false if there is no pre-BB cause and no area into which the universe expands into. Stop clowning around; and please get off of your god complexes and get back to Physics, okay?
EGMAG 2 years ago
roxas12590 reigion <<
Whether your atheist or not go and SIN no more atrocities and evil will stop.
EGMAG 2 years ago
Who's ideas of SIN would you force upon us?
gotrootdude 2 years ago
gotrootdude ideas of SIN <<
I wish evil, which some define as sin, never existed. Can anyone really deny evil is real? I can't force this idea upon you. Evil is voluntary. Pedophile victims tortured raped and murdered, are examples of evils that some call sin. This is one example in the news every week. Did you think every criminal never apprehended just goes free forever? Please enlighten me with your contrary experiences and knowledge?
EGMAG 2 years ago
No I don't deny evil exists. I just don't consider everything everyone calls "sin" as evil. Please enlighten me on who's ideas of sin?
gotrootdude 2 years ago
gotrootdude <<
Why does evil and good exist in human nature?
EGMAG 2 years ago
You still did not answer my question about horrible crimes getting away free forever . Read it below again this time and stop clowning and avoiding the issues.
EGMAG 2 years ago
I was there when "the big bang/the birth of the Universe" occurred. It was an Act of GOD.
Airlightf 2 years ago
shanedk hows it going?<<
So you have no theories as to what preceeded the bb and what the universe is emptying into? Not one idea or rant? You think a dot coming frome nothing, and expanding into nothing, are the answers?
EGMAG 2 years ago
IDIOT! Why do you STILL NOT GET IT??? It's RIDICULOUS to talk about the universe "emptying into" ANYTHING! SPACE ITSELF IS EXPANDING!!! It's like saying you're at the North Pole and then you go North! It's RIDICULOUS!
shanedk 2 years ago
shanedk Sorry about your incredible rudeness! Doesn't faze me though. Your expanding into nothing is impossible in the universe of Physics. Your big bang as a dot which just appeared without an origin is just as impossible in the universe of Physics. Either you explain the two or admit you cannot explain something which has not been yet discovered and stop being an immature person please it degrades your intelligence. Now answer correct and proper. Please!
EGMAG 2 years ago
what preceeded the bb(baby)?
Airlightf 2 years ago
Time was created in the Big Bang, so the idea of anything preceding it is nonsensical.
Do you even UNDERSTAND the theories you're trying to criticize?
shanedk 2 years ago
Before GOD made the Universe to become, there was DARKNESS and the deep Abyss.
Airlightf 2 years ago
Those are relative concepts. What were they in relation to?
shanedk 2 years ago
Time was created..? I knew it!! GOD created time!! Thank you Dr. Shane
Airlightf 2 years ago
I deem you a troll.
HailCthulhu 2 years ago
Airlightf <<
Let us assume the laws of Physics prevail and are true, which all indications seem to approve;. If so, the universe is expanding into something outside of it, also the big bang is a reaction preceded by some action of cause. If these two statements are false, when we assume nothing preceded the BB and the universe is expanding into nothing; than the Laws of Physics need to be greatly revised!
EGMAG 2 years ago
No, it isn't; it's space itself that's expanding, so the idea of it expanding "into" anything is ludicrous.
Likewise, since time formed along with space in the Big Bang, the idea of something preceding it is meaningless. It's like mentioning something north of the North Pole.
The only thing that needs to be revised is your UNDERSTANDING of the theories--because you don't have a clue what they say.
shanedk 2 years ago
shanedk <<
This is the last time I reply to you. Your theory does not confirm the laws of physics before and beyond them universe. We have been through this many times before and your just as closed minded and stubborn as an old shoe. Please please do not reply you will get no conversation from me. Goodbye.
EGMAG 2 years ago
You keep promising that, but you still keep coming back and bugging me...
If you want more details on this, see my video "'The God Delusion Refuted' Refuted."
shanedk 2 years ago
i certainly believe in God, i just like to think that the universe is God
mcparham 2 years ago
The universe is GOD's own Creation.
Airlightf 2 years ago
1. the bogosity guy is beyond obnoxious..i agree with most of what you are saying..but do you have to sound like such a dick when you say it? get a life
2. at around 6:20 with the "fine tuning" argument..it seems like he is making a much too solid conclusion simply based upon using different constants..i wont simply take his word that this program can fully model something as complex as the creation of a universe with different parameters..funny how the bogosity guy just revels in such evidence
mcparham 2 years ago
Gaaaaauly, Shazam Gomer! I heard more hypocrisy, and non observable assumptions in 10 minutes than maybe anywhere before, You had to have help making this video, nobody 's that stupid on their own. Your just a wanna be scientist/debater living out your meaningless existance, with a reserved seat in the smoking section of the after life if you don't repent and change your ways. You won't find God in your miroscope or telescope fool, only in the word.
rook1123 2 years ago
its really funny to hear any evolutionist claim truth in anything that supposedly happend over 15,000 yrs ago beyond human records.
planets bombarded by meteor's and other astral bodies is the cause of change in direction? lol show me and I will agree with you (not in virtual representation but in reality)
remieres 2 years ago
"Human records" have gods present and active at the battle of Troy and ninjas walking on water.
Science is BETTER.
shanedk 2 years ago
did ya see the movie Troy with Pitt? that was a great realization of the Invincible Akelee's (not sure on his name) who was supposed to be dipped in the river of the gods making his skin impenetrable.
where in the most likely case he was just simply such an awesome warrior he hadnt "not couldnt" be hurt.
remieres 2 years ago
Achilles, yeah.
The point is, just as forensic science can tell what happened at a murder scene better and more accurately than eyewitnesses, science can determine what happened in history better than human records.
shanedk 2 years ago
what a retard, you look and sound like Gomer Pyle in Devolution
rook1123 2 years ago
stupid point according to your other theories, every planet has been bombarded with asteroids you twit! suck some more helium. Either that or your balls never "evolved"
P.S. darwin was not a real doctor! he went to collect bugs lol no science no nothing... hello!
minime00 2 years ago
Yes, lots of planets were hit with lots of big and small things early on. This accounts for the variety we see! THAT'S THE POINT!!!
Idiot.
shanedk 2 years ago
well you say the planets that are rotating the opposite ways is because they were hit by lots of meteors? so why was it different when all the other planets got the same thing? that's an illogical argument you got going on trying to "debunk" the rotating debate
minime00 2 years ago
Damn you are dumb. They are spinning in different ways cause they were bombarded with lots of different things of different sizes and to different places.
Or did you think that all planets got hit by the same meteors with exactly the same speed to exactly the same spot?
Holy cow how stupid, dumbass.
antipul446 2 years ago 2
lol you make yourself sound like such an idiot... just because i have more logic and can see things in a different view than you doesn't mean you have to attack me... coward!
why isn't the moon spinning?
minime00 2 years ago
Seriously, why am I arguing with someone who thinks the moon isn't spinning. Even hard do consider how it would prove anything.
Not that it surprises me that you have no brains, dumbass.
Shit, you are stupid and make no sense like a cow with rabies.
antipul446 2 years ago
lol so why isn't the moon spinning? Idiot
minime00 2 years ago
It IS.
shanedk 2 years ago
the same as this planet huh... HENCE the saying the dark side of the moon! we would see both sides of the moon from earth here but we don't
minime00 2 years ago
Nope, wrong again. The moon isn't spinning the same way as the earth.
Moron.
antipul446 2 years ago
lol... now that i have your attention... the moon is older than the earth... so how did it get "locked" in to an earth that did not exist until after the moon did
minime00 2 years ago
There IS no dark side of the moon. Even Pink Floyd knew that!
The reason why we only see one side is because it IS spinning--spinning at the same rate as its orbit so it keeps one side to us.
There's a good video on TheBadAstronomer channel showing this.
shanedk 2 years ago
that would be a mild rotation. it's not spinning, if it was spinning we would see it... so what keeps it faced towards us? what keeps it from rotating faster since as they say bombardments of meteors is what make planets and so on spin. why isn't it spinning faster huh
minime00 2 years ago
It's called a "tidal lock." Go look it up.
shanedk 2 years ago
well now that i have your attention...
there is a problem here, the moon is 4.6 billion years old... at least from the rock samples they have... and the oldest rock sample on earth is 3.6 billions years... So the moon was locked into the earth before the earth was even there huh?
minime00 2 years ago
The moon is NOT older than the Earth. The Earth is 4.6 billion years, too. The moon formed from material that was used to form the Earth.
You're an idiotic, know-nothing, ignoramus.
shanedk 2 years ago
then i guess you don't believe in all scientific dating methods. Information... rocks tested from the moon a billion years older than the earth
minime00 2 years ago
No, they don't. Not with ANY dating method. You are a LIAR.
shanedk 2 years ago
Look it up
minime00 2 years ago
I HAVE. You're a LIAR.
shanedk 2 years ago
Either your blind or the scientific website is completely wrong and i don't think it's wrong because it was accurate
minime00 2 years ago
WHAT website? You never referenced one!
Uranium-lead dating yields a CONSISTENT dating for ALL of it to 4.6 billion years ago, according to the USGS website.
shanedk 2 years ago
"The oldest rocks on earth that have been dated thus far include 3.4 billion year old granites from the Barberton Mountain Land of South Africa, 3.7 billion year old granites of southwestern Greenland, ..." Levin, 1983
minime00 2 years ago
The ages of rocks returned to Earth from the Apollo missions range from 3.3 to about 4.6 billion years. The older age determinations are derived from rocks collected on the lunar highland, which may represent the original lunar crust.
minime00 2 years ago
So you believe the moon is 3.3 to 4.6 billion years old? And you say the moon is older than the earth? Interesting, I would like to hear your theory how it got "locked" in to earth as you said.
antipul446 2 years ago
I don't believe that crap, i believe God created everything... the other guy asked for a statement
Quit to judge are you?
minime00 2 years ago
Actually the age of the earth and the age of the moon are dated to about the same time (4.6 billion years ago).
The age of the universe is between 13.5-14 billion years old (determined by completely independent methods).
Now the bible says the earth is about 6 thousands years old (thats a million fold difference from what the evidence says). Even if we were to say the scientific measures were slightly off you have to admit the bible is dead wrong. You really have no ground to stand on.
brockunc 2 years ago
show me the bible verse that says the earth is only 6000 years old....
minime00 2 years ago 2
Its based on known dates stated in the bible and calculating back based on the genealogies listed. This gives a date of creation for the universe and earth between 6k-10k years old. Ask any young earth creationist (which you seem to be based on your statements) and they will tell you the same thing.
The thing that gets me with you guys is you never provide any evidence to support your claims you just make weak attacks on existing scientific theories.
brockunc 2 years ago
"Its based on known dates stated in the bible"
You mean dates like, the birth of Jesus, which is either 6 AD (if you go by the Qirinian census) or 6 BC (if you go by the death of King Herod)?
Yeah, that's such a reliable source...
shanedk 2 years ago
Umm I think you missed the point. I don't think the bible is reliable at all. I was explaining how young earth creationist date the earth. For that purpose a margin of error of 12 years won't affect the outcome.
brockunc 2 years ago 2
That's cute. So sure of your claims and the theories that you list them as fact. Remember you make observations, extrapolate, lean on what you know of science and assume that how ever many billion years ago certain events occured. Were you sick on the day when they taught about uncertainty at school?
jookieapc 2 years ago
True, uncertainty exsists in science, nothing is certain(semi contradiction). However these claims and theories have an abundunce of proof. Creationism on the other hand has fairy tales your supposed to take on faith. Can you even tell me why christian creation myths have any more support than say greek mythology creation myths?
user11235813213455 2 years ago
lol no people have come out with accurate models of the world with the bible thank you! it's just covered up...
Creationist said dinasours were not old enough so there should be remains of tissues... hey what do you know they were right... hmmm no evidence, maybe you should get your facts straight guy.
minime00 2 years ago
No, they weren't. There have NEVER been ANY dinosaur remains found with more recent species. EVER.
shanedk 2 years ago
what? I said dinasours were found with living tissues inside their bones, their own bones! their bones cut open and finding soft tissue... when theories say tissues cannot survive more than 100 thousand years...
minime00 2 years ago
No they actually found the body of jesus up a dinosaurs ass.
You can take my word on it, they really did find it.
And dont ask for a reference, just believe me.
antipul446 2 years ago
shows your maturity there guy, say what you will but your not saying that against me in a sense your saying that against God. You won't have to answer to me for that you will have to answer to God for that one
minime00 2 years ago
Naw man, they really did find it. Trust me.
Just like those dinosaurs with living tissues.
And you better be ready to answer to the flying spaghetti monster!! Idiot.
antipul446 2 years ago
oh no i feel so threatened to those who did a thumbs down...
wow you do have a wild imagination... if you really like spaghetti that much you should go eat some
minime00 2 years ago
Total win, Shane, thank you for this. I fail to see any decisive response from the Creationists, except ranting (which in my view worsens their point). I'm a Roman Catholic, however after some major reserching I have found out many new things. This is one of them. And I agree thoroughly. : - )
AccooftheSenones 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dear Christian brothers and sisters:
Arguing with an atheist is like walking in a circle. You're not getting anywhere. We should learn to ignore their videos and stop throwing our pearls to swine. And Shane is a definite swine. I know they come to OUR videos with our worship music and our praise and blaspheme left and right but debating them on their videos is pointless. Turn the other cheek.
Liriks 3 years ago
I laughed.
AccooftheSenones 3 years ago
lol! arguing with you is like walking in a circle. you deny all evidence and you call the holy bible your evidence. it was obviously written by man.money hungry man no-less. and even worse, you all do exactly what jesus told you not to. for starters: he told you all no to follow/worship him! second, he told you to close down all your churches, and thirdly, he said to not be to fricken judgemental!
catprince1015 3 years ago
my last comment was a reply to liriks
catprince1015 3 years ago
Yet people have concluded science from the bible like the winds a guy did a whole model from the bible, and what do u know it came out to be accurate.
OWNED!
minime00 2 years ago
A lot of scientists study animal dung, too, and also 'conclude' science from that - far more useful to the real world than your brand of 'science'. OWNED??!! What are you, 12? Dont just get real, get an education.
catprince1015 2 years ago
Honestly!!!
IF you believe in evolution then...you believe in the beginning
!!!DIRT!!!(big bang, the stuff that exploded)
If you believe in creation...you believe in the beginning
!!!GOD!!!
Where did GOD come from, nobody knows!
Where did the dirt come from.. come on ... do you honestly believe that big bang come from a dot smaller that a period on this web page, thats what science teaches.
Hitler once said that people are more likely to believe in a big lie than a small lie!
allensmith1000 3 years ago
*if you believe in creation...you believe in the beginning
!!!GOD!!!
God created man from dirt. what is dirt?
!!!!worm poo!!!!
DerivedApe 3 years ago
You have been watching WAY too much kent hovind my friend and Hilters quote could refer to Christianity just as easily as it could refer to evolution
user11235813213455 2 years ago
lol at "fine tuning" It isn't a coincidence that the parameters for life actually exist... We evolved on earth, so we're adapted to these conditions.
blackcaptor2 3 years ago
Just kidding with a lot of my comments, Shane!! I was in the mood to play THE VOICE OF ANGER AND SARCASM AND (anything else). Just ignore my comments here and elsewhere.
SatoriHi5 3 years ago
Why is sShane so steadfast???
It makes you wonder why he pushes so hard at making you believe what he believes. He has an ulterior motive, embedded deep within his subconscious. His stepdaddy played with his penis when he was five...this is where his belief in God had to be submerged. "God would not allow such an act." But it wasn't God, it was your stepdaddy. It was a HUMAN BEING who played with your penis. A human being with faulty beliefs. Don't blame it on God.
SatoriHi5 3 years ago
Besides, God made a lot of priests, acting in His name, to molest little boys.
catprince1015 2 years ago
HaHaHaHa! Shane and his fellow skeptics are so full of SHIT!!! They can come up with SO MUCH mumbo jumbo but it's all logical bullshit! Do you really want to live in your LEFT BRAIN? Let me ask any living, sane person: Which would you rather have, a rational 1000 piece puzzle of a windmill, or a hot and sexy male or female to create passion and romance with??? Left-brained thinking, in and of itself, IS COMPLETE GARBAGE IN THE SCOPE OF HUMAN IDENTITY!
SatoriHi5 3 years ago
FEELINGS, FEELINGS, FEELINGS are where the truth of an individual emerges. Shane would have you believe that pencil-pushing logic is the end all, be all. DON'T TRUST HIM IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD!!!!! He can quote you facts, figures, measurements, etc. but it's all about how the left brain works so hard at rationalizing what CAN'T be rationalized. It's sad that he's living the life of a modern-day caveman. I'm surprised he's not doing the Geico commercials!
SatoriHi5 3 years ago
I like your style.
blackcaptor2 3 years ago
Oh and a bomb from a terrorist may not be able to create order, but a bomb against a terrorist may :P
elldazzy 3 years ago
Really? You really think that the big bang started time? Hahaha you really are as funny as you look.
bendiblestraw 3 years ago
you really think we are made of mud, you really think a whale can swallow a man FUNNY
lutz504 3 years ago
Time is merely a measurement between two events. If no events exist before the big bang and if the big bang is the first or initial event, it did indeed start time.
this is also why god can not exist outside of time. To do so would mean you do not exist and never have because you place your imaginary friend before the first event, rendering him impossible.
As far as science goes it does not claim to know how the big bang originated and is not intellectually corrupting itself by assuming.
elldazzy 3 years ago