ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe works don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
DISORDER IN THE UNIVERSE is no argument against God's existence. The disorder is because of chance and entropy, but the order can only be rationally explained due to design. If I discovered a broken watch on the ground, the disorder is no evidence that there wasn't a designer behind the watch. Please read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Many atheists think they have no burden of proof because they’re not claiming the existence of something. That is not true. Atheists are claiming something. They are claiming that we are here by chance and atheists expect for everyone to accept that claim on faith because they certainly can’t prove it. Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
A person who was born under Christianism one day got to the conclusion that there is no God thanks to a Philosophy teach by a Bunch of Retired Priests better known as Socialists. But of course, the question is not if God is real, the question is How you gonna remove that Name once and for all? When all the scars of the wars through history done just to remove a simple Name leaves more disaster and suffering than a 1,000 Hurricanes?That name is a more complex than what the Marxists think.
@jerrygreg2 No sir, I am not even close to such a degree since who in the world is? We all know this! This ain't new? Who is God? Really, who is he? All i know is that name is already here and it really make NATIONS insane! Who owns the Bible?The Marxists or the Fascists? Islam? Everybody is preaching us the same book over and over! Even atheist are preaching you the Book! But still the subject is Him! God? But he ain't real atheists! Who are this imaginary beings atheists are fighting against?
I think there is no better example of evolution than the computer. My last computer simply appeared out of thin air, completely evolved directly from the last computer I owned. Nothing inside this computer was intelligently created, and nothing about my new computer indicates that it is to be used in any intelligent way. But here I am, using it intelligently to prove how the rest of the universe appeared in the exact same way that my computer did.
@bustedprius So, you're comparing your computer, which was assembled from pre-existing matter for the purpose of being a tool to do a specific task for our need, to living cell.
@bustedprius Evolution says no such thing. Evolution doesn't deal with how life started, it only explains its diversity. Also, saying that a super invisible sky fairy did it answers nothing. You have to first proves that the supernatural and the deity exist, and then, demonstrate with empirical evidence how the natural universe can be created by "supernatural" means. Just arguing the veracity of whatever bronze age story you believe in is simple speculation.
@bustedprius We can't explain everything yet, and there's still a lot to discover, but from what we understand, we know that all the bronze age creation stories are wrong. Using the gap argument for god is also nonsense. By that, I mean to point to whatever can't be explain and fill it out with god, for instance, what happened before the big bang or how life started. It's also argument made from ignorance and that's how our ancestors created so many myths. When they couldn't explain the
@bustedprius natural world and its phenomena (wind, rain, earthquake, sunrise etc) due to their lack of scientific understanding, they made assumption out of ignorance and came up with supernatural explanations. However, today, we understand the natural laws that govern them, thus we don't offer sacrifice to Poseidon before we go on a cruise, nor do we think volcanic activities are evidence of Yahweh. It's amazing how the more our scientific knowledge is increasing, the more god continues to
@bustedprius shrink. They use to live on mount Olympus, mount Sinai, or in a tabernacle in Jerusalem. He uses to interact with his creation to reward or punish human. Once we explain natural phenomena, god then retreats to the sky. Well, we begin to understanding the universe and observed it, god then retreats outside space/time as a fuzzy figure that started the big bang and uses magic to create life. Well, it's only a matter of time for him to retreat farther more
Vocally self-identifying Atheism isn't about God. It doesn't have anything to do with God one way or the other. It is, like most things, primarily about political power, or a desire for self-determination.
I.e., "I don't want to believe in God, because according to most formal religions, if I do, that means I will be under the authority of someone else."
I love how evolutionist produce well thought out and logically explained points to make a case, while creationist produce largely misconstrued facts to drive home a point that often makes no sense anyway. Let them believe what they want. the rest of us will shrug off their rants and get back to learning about the universe.
@jray1806 The sad thing is, that neither group realise the degree to which, paradoxically, they're both right. Evolution absolutely exists; but the Cymatic principle ("In the beginning was the Word," more or less) does too.
@jray1806 The problem is that while you're busy learning about the universe, creationists are busy invading the class rooms - undermining science and the scientific method to further their own agenda through children.
Now, I have no problem with what people believe in, but I have a problem when they try to force their belief down other peoples throats and in the process attack the scientific method. That makes me angry as hell!
listening why do you care people think what they think some will like vegatable some will like meat some will like evolution other religoen some will be gay others will like chicks me personally chicks,poultry,and belive in god but seriously dont trust the church since it is often a bunch of hypocrites and liars lets just live our lives and stop trying to be right for your egos leave your fucking egos be and get along god youve been fighting for to long over opionons
Brock is the atheist antidote, any thoughts that christianity and such is a better thing than atheism is instantly cured via the antidote that is Brock, the skirt chasing pokemon trainer...I mean, the atheistAntidote
However, what I find interesting in this whole evolution/creationism debate is that evolutionary theory makes absolutely no claims one way or another about the metaphysical world (aka higher powers, pre big-bang, etc).
Distilled to its very essence it is simply changes in gene frequencies over time.
On all sides of the debate science is once again being politicized, which saddens me.
Well, yeah. Evolution has nothing to do with the origins of the universe, the earth, or life itself. Gradual change in the genetic make-up of organisms in response to environmental changes, accounting for the diversity of life on Earth is all it is.
Attempting to lump cosmology, abiogenesis, and social philosophies in with the theory is rather annoying when people do it, is it not?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Why are there not billions of the supposed "links"? Why is it SO hard to find a match, so far there are no HUMAN connections......just ideas. Just more monkeys.
Again, LWX, I listed about a dozen "links" in human evolution in this video alone. There are plenty of transitional fossils between humans and our primitive ancestors. You just have to open your eyes and look at them instead of shutting them and repeating over and over "there are no transitional fossils! there are no transitional fossils! there are no transitional fossils!" - doing this wont make them disappear.
Creationists have plenty of frauds too. Creationists books presented a decayed shark as a decayed dinosaur to show to possibility of their coexistence with humans. Creationists presented fraudulent human footprints with dinosaur foot prints in the Paulxy River Valley for the same purpose.
Well then you know that some of the most well accepted claims, such as "gravity is what keeps our feet to the ground" and "germs make us sick" are in fact based on theories (gravitational theory and germ theory, respectively).
Also, you should know that things like "speciation occurs" and "mutation and natural selection occurs" are indeed fact. And since mutation + natural selection = evolution, then that part of evolution is a fact.
Evolution as Fact and Theory. There's a short article on this subject by Stephen J. Gould called "Evolution as Fact and Theory." You can find it online if you just do a quick google search... but, eh, you're probably not going to bother.
Sorry to burst your bubble but Evolution is both fact and theory, meaning research just hasn't been completed by it. You can refuse to agree with me, but that just makes you ignorant, the same ignorance that makes you believe there is only one true religion, one god, and one world.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
isn't evolution just a mere Theory? If it was such FACT as you claim, there would be no argument. But no proof exists. And before you say "get educated", I am on the subject. But merely because I do not agree with your fraud and lies you will call me ignorant......atheists and evolutionists are a total joke....
if you were educated on the matter you would know what a scientific theory is and yes you are ignorant. plz do the rest of us the favor and do not procreate!
You did little more than bring two more beings into the world that, if you indoctrinate them with your idiocy, must be purged with the rest of the intellectually inferior.
You'll find it to be quite a bit less than 90%. But genocide seems so harsh. I prefer "deleted from the hard drive of reality". We need to reformat it otherwise it will all crash due to the virus of w32.Religion.
When has it been debunked? And there has not been a debater in the scientific community about evolution for 100 years now. A debate require both side to have evidence, only one side has evidence, Evolution. Face it, there is evidence, and only those who are brain washed by creationist propaganda believe there is none. Yes 3 fossil were hoax, but that does not change the thousand scientist have found and tested. We have transitional fossils, and the "missing link" has many candidates.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
LMFAO!! The "missing link has many candidates"...!
What a joke. It's like running for office. Whoever fills the "theory" the best wins the position. Geez, just admit it is agenda driven bullshit. I buy evolution but not for humans....just doesn't work.
OK youtube is not letting me post so I'm not sure this will get through.
There are evidence and you are denying it because you lack information of it. Go to a museum, read articles, and actually study it before you claim to know anything about it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Been there, read it and seen it. Nothing conclusive. All theory and opinion. Get back when you finally have a FACT to give.....I know it will be a while ;)
Why do humans have tail bones and dna for tail closed in our gene pool. Why have Pod Mrcaru lizard evolve. How do you explain the fact hat dolphin have spines of land creatures. How is it that there are dinosaurs with feathers.
You do not understand evolution, nor do you understand science. You go far as to ignore evidence found years ago and claim it doesn't exist. You should at least learn before claiming crap like this.
Evolution explains why we have tailbones, appendices, and the genes neccessary for the production of yolk (although they are broken). Why we have a yolk sac in early development and why we share so many physical traits with so much of this planets life. It explains why there are mammals in the sea and fish that travel across land. It shows that we are the products of an unbroken lineage stretching back billions of years, and that we share that lineage with every other lifeform on earth.
Genetic variation within a population increases with time.
This is the fact of evolution. It has been proven both in the lab and in wild populations. The theory of evolution by natural selection is the explanation for the diversity of life on earth. It uses the fact along with other facts(natural selection/nested heirarchy/etc.) to show how a natural process could create such a diverse ecosystem.
Do you know what a theory in science is? If you don't know then I assume you don't know evolution at all. Beside Gravity is a theory, the Atom is, and many more. There is no such thing as an "evolutionist" or a "Gravitionist" or any other dumb crap creationist spew out. Are you denying the people who work all there life and found these fossils. If you've been in a museum you should see a lot of fossils, and if you were educated in the subject you wouldn't deny it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
aww, did I hurt your evolved feelings?
Right, the effects of gravity are there, but no one knows what exactly creates it. Evolution has not been proven yet, so what's your point? It's a really really STRONG theory and we like it a lot? Is that your defense?
Well you are defending be just saying that Evolution is false, since it contradict your own warped world view.
My 8 year old niece pointed out the stupidity of Adam and Eve, just because her father breeds dogs, and pointed out that there would be inbreeded offspring in the end.
So what, gravity, i.e. an attraction between bodies of mass DOESN'T exist just because it's a theory? You really hurt your own case, man. And did you mean to just call evolution through natural selection a strong theory? 'Cause that's a pretty good description of it, seeing so there's no other scientific theory to compete with it. And before you ask no, sorry, god making life out of dirt with magic is NOT science.
There is no argument. Just the uneducated repeating the same debunked falsehoods over and over again, and a revolving door of the educated scientific hobbyists repeating those debunkings.
Meanwhile professional scientists go on researching and largely ignore the Ben Steins and Brock Lawley's of this world.
You may say that you're educated on the subject but your lack of understanding of even the very basics of the scientific method demonstrate otherwise.
Evolution is both a theory and a fact. We've observed evolution on both a micro and macro level as well as having tonnes of evidence in disciplines such as genetics and palaeontology. It's a fact that organisms evolve. The theory of evolution is the explanation as to how/when/why organisms evolved.
LWX, are you sure you're aware of the evidence for evolution? If so, I would enjoy a video from you explaining why you reject the fossil record, genetic evidence, geological distribution of organisms, and the evidence from embryology. Because, so far, I haven't heard any creationist do this (most of them either ignore the evidence or completely misunderstand/misrepresent the evidence).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
evidence....WHAT evidence?! All the frauds, mistakes, partial finds, side shows.....give me a break.
Billions of humans throughout history, billions of primates.....not one "missing link". Scientists with an agenda have time and time again LIED to "prove" evolution. You MIGHT be able to prove evolution of a horse or fish, but not a human.
LWX, in this very video that you are posting a comment on, I listed about a dozen examples of legitimate hominid finds. Your friend Lawley, on the other hand, listed only 1 fraud that mainstream science actually accepted (and that was refuted by OTHER SCIENTISTS about 60 years ago).
Good luck arguing with LWX, antybu, he thinks sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling "LALALALALA I can't see any evidence" is a slam dunk argument against evolution.
If you consider anything labelled a "theory", regardless of the context, as mere speculation then jump off a fucking cliff. Don't worry, gravity is only a theory, it's never been proven. In fact, the theory of gravity been disproved.
That was quite unoriginal of you, bringing up the Theory of Gravity. Gravity has my ass planted to this chair. What the theory refers to is WHERE gravity originates. There is ZERO PROOF or where it comes from and what creates it. We can only prove the results of it. So yeah, gravity is merely a theory, the RESULTS of it are FACT.
LWX, I remember you brought up this gravity argument that you have in one of your videos because I distinctly remember explaining to you that the theory of gravity doesn't attempt to explain its origin. The theory simply states that two bodies of mass are attracted to each other (proportional to the masses and 1 over the distance squared).
IF that is the text book definition, that is a sad SAD definition. Gravity is FACT. We see it work every day. Show me what causes it....oops....no one can.
LWX, you don't seem to understand the implications of the theory of gravity. I'm not sure why you feel it's a "sad" definition. This theory tells us, for example, that there is some attractive force between the mass in my body and the mass in your body, even though we are likely nowhere near each other. I find that incredible.
The true saddest definition of the theory of gravity was from my fiancee's grandmother (a very nice lady, albeit a hardcore creationist) who seriously told me that gravity is, "actually god's love binding his children to this Earth until they are ready to join him in heaven." Honestly, I shit you not. She wasn't kidding. A fun holiday weekend indeed.
@Dabigg107 A scientific theory is merely explains scientific observations. A law is is a concise verbal or mathematical statement of a relation that expresses a fundamental principle of science. Therefore, the theory of gravity DESCRIBES what is observed. This is why people laugh and mock when someone says evolution is "only a theory." It is clear that the person doesn't know the definitions.
@Dabigg107 Gravity is both a law an a theory. The law is the formula you use to calculate the acceleration caused by gravity. The theory explains why gravity works. Evolution can't be expressed as any equation, which is why there is no law.
If you don't like the example of the theory of gravity, how bout germ theory? Germ theory, like evolution, is only a theory, not a law. Therefore, it must have no proof behind it whatsoever, right?=P
You've just shot yourself in the foot. The exact same applies to evolution.
Do you consider DNA evidence to be reliable in the scenario of a court case? If so, how can you reject just the DNA evidence for evolution and remain intellectually honest and consistent?
There's also the fusion of chromosome two, ERVs, tiktaalik and the observed evolution Pod Mrcaru lizard just to name a few evidences for evolution.
The funny thing about the Archaeoraptor hoax is that it thurned out to be the upper body of an early bird (Yanomis) and another, yet undiscovered species, Microraptor.
Microraptor, as it turns out, is a great transitional between dromaeosaurs and birds.
Wow, way to nitpick something totally irrelevent. Shows the intelligence of someone who fails so hard at actual debating that he has to completely circumnavitage an actual discussion of facts and focus instead on mundane, unrelated details. (insert obnoxious smiley face here in place of an actual defensible point)
I know why people believe Brock's opinions...1st you have to be good looking. Have cool graphics. Then you have to speak emphatically. Then censor opposing view points. Preach to the choir and allow only those comments to show. Don't admit to errors or apologize for mistakes.
"One day you'll answer to your maker and pay for all the clueless souls that you led astray. Till then, all the best my man."
How disshonest can you get with this kind of statement? Reading beetwen the lines it says "you're wrong, and you're going to hell, but I dont want you there, god does".
This is not far from "I dont hate fags, god does". Stop laundring your own bigottry by name dropping your sky daddy. At least have the balls to be honest.
All excellent anty, as usual you speak the obvious truth which would otherwise be obscured by the misguided sincerety of a dopey fundamentalist. It's just as well people like you exist otherwise fragile minds might get taken in by unsubstantiated accusations of people like the tiresome AA.
Actually, the various creationists lies haven't been very damaging. I think plenty of people already understand that creationists like Lawley are motivated to lie by their dogmatic beliefs.
There were some hoaxes there but you played them down. One day you'll answer to your maker and pay for all the clueless souls that you led astray. Till then, all the best my man.
So? Shroud of Turin was a hoax. You don't see me pointing to that to try to disprove Christianity. Besides, only one of the hoaxes actually fooled mainstream science - and that was over 50 years ago when the dating methods weren't so great.
And one day you will answer to the flying spaghetti monster and you will have to answer for all the meatballs you have eaten in your life! ... I'm sorry, does that sound ridiculous? Well, it's no more ridiculous than your proposition.
SonIstheFatherofMan, one day you might answer to your maker, if he exists at all (which I highly doubt) and you may or may not be judged by him to be a self-righteous, clueless individual who ought to have used his brain to investigate the truth claims of the Bible, but either way, you're gonna die. Till then, all the best, my man.
I fully understand and sympathize with that statement and I've had doubts myself. You're smart enough to know that you don't know everything, therefore, you can't possibly know for certain if G-d exists so why reject Him outright without proof?
I don't reject this god outright. I've examined the supposed evidence and found it lacking, and on further examination of the proposition, I find it incredibly unlikely.
You're right that I don't know absolutely whether or not this god exists, but I could say the same about Santa Claus. But also similar to Santa, I find the proposition so unlikely that, in a colloquial sense at least, I'll just say that this god doesn't exist.
I would take you back to the "singularity". What caused that? Its not about believing in Jonah or Noah its about the logical proposition that everything must have been created by someone/something. I guess you just gotta believe without evidence (faith). I hope you feel the calling one day. Take care.
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 4 months ago
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 4 months ago
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 4 months ago
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe works don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
Mogley52 4 months ago
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 4 months ago
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 4 months ago
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 4 months ago
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).
Mogley52 4 months ago
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 4 months ago
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
Mogley52 4 months ago
DISORDER IN THE UNIVERSE is no argument against God's existence. The disorder is because of chance and entropy, but the order can only be rationally explained due to design. If I discovered a broken watch on the ground, the disorder is no evidence that there wasn't a designer behind the watch. Please read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Many atheists think they have no burden of proof because they’re not claiming the existence of something. That is not true. Atheists are claiming something. They are claiming that we are here by chance and atheists expect for everyone to accept that claim on faith because they certainly can’t prove it. Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
A person who was born under Christianism one day got to the conclusion that there is no God thanks to a Philosophy teach by a Bunch of Retired Priests better known as Socialists. But of course, the question is not if God is real, the question is How you gonna remove that Name once and for all? When all the scars of the wars through history done just to remove a simple Name leaves more disaster and suffering than a 1,000 Hurricanes?That name is a more complex than what the Marxists think.
TheBadgeOfThe45 6 months ago
@TheBadgeOfThe45 Yes, that's perfectly clear! Obviously a great intellect at work.
jerrygreg2 5 months ago
@jerrygreg2 No sir, I am not even close to such a degree since who in the world is? We all know this! This ain't new? Who is God? Really, who is he? All i know is that name is already here and it really make NATIONS insane! Who owns the Bible?The Marxists or the Fascists? Islam? Everybody is preaching us the same book over and over! Even atheist are preaching you the Book! But still the subject is Him! God? But he ain't real atheists! Who are this imaginary beings atheists are fighting against?
TheBadgeOfThe45 5 months ago
@TheBadgeOfThe45 God is a lady who lives in Greenland. That's for sure.
jerrygreg2 5 months ago
I think there is no better example of evolution than the computer. My last computer simply appeared out of thin air, completely evolved directly from the last computer I owned. Nothing inside this computer was intelligently created, and nothing about my new computer indicates that it is to be used in any intelligent way. But here I am, using it intelligently to prove how the rest of the universe appeared in the exact same way that my computer did.
bustedprius 9 months ago
@bustedprius You clearly no nothing about evolution if you think computers can evolve.
Jesse2K12 8 months ago
@Jesse2K12 Yes well...you clearly need to reread my post to get the actual meaning out of it. (btw..know != no)
bustedprius 8 months ago
@bustedprius So, you're comparing your computer, which was assembled from pre-existing matter for the purpose of being a tool to do a specific task for our need, to living cell.
petion2010 8 months ago
@petion2010 Yup, pretty stupid of me, right? Just about as dumb as supposing that living cells evolved out of pre-existing matter.
bustedprius 8 months ago
@bustedprius Evolution says no such thing. Evolution doesn't deal with how life started, it only explains its diversity. Also, saying that a super invisible sky fairy did it answers nothing. You have to first proves that the supernatural and the deity exist, and then, demonstrate with empirical evidence how the natural universe can be created by "supernatural" means. Just arguing the veracity of whatever bronze age story you believe in is simple speculation.
petion2010 8 months ago
@bustedprius We can't explain everything yet, and there's still a lot to discover, but from what we understand, we know that all the bronze age creation stories are wrong. Using the gap argument for god is also nonsense. By that, I mean to point to whatever can't be explain and fill it out with god, for instance, what happened before the big bang or how life started. It's also argument made from ignorance and that's how our ancestors created so many myths. When they couldn't explain the
petion2010 8 months ago
@bustedprius natural world and its phenomena (wind, rain, earthquake, sunrise etc) due to their lack of scientific understanding, they made assumption out of ignorance and came up with supernatural explanations. However, today, we understand the natural laws that govern them, thus we don't offer sacrifice to Poseidon before we go on a cruise, nor do we think volcanic activities are evidence of Yahweh. It's amazing how the more our scientific knowledge is increasing, the more god continues to
petion2010 8 months ago
@bustedprius shrink. They use to live on mount Olympus, mount Sinai, or in a tabernacle in Jerusalem. He uses to interact with his creation to reward or punish human. Once we explain natural phenomena, god then retreats to the sky. Well, we begin to understanding the universe and observed it, god then retreats outside space/time as a fuzzy figure that started the big bang and uses magic to create life. Well, it's only a matter of time for him to retreat farther more
petion2010 8 months ago
Vocally self-identifying Atheism isn't about God. It doesn't have anything to do with God one way or the other. It is, like most things, primarily about political power, or a desire for self-determination.
I.e., "I don't want to believe in God, because according to most formal religions, if I do, that means I will be under the authority of someone else."
petrus4 11 months ago
I love how evolutionist produce well thought out and logically explained points to make a case, while creationist produce largely misconstrued facts to drive home a point that often makes no sense anyway. Let them believe what they want. the rest of us will shrug off their rants and get back to learning about the universe.
jray1806 1 year ago
@jray1806 The sad thing is, that neither group realise the degree to which, paradoxically, they're both right. Evolution absolutely exists; but the Cymatic principle ("In the beginning was the Word," more or less) does too.
petrus4 11 months ago
@jray1806 The problem is that while you're busy learning about the universe, creationists are busy invading the class rooms - undermining science and the scientific method to further their own agenda through children.
Now, I have no problem with what people believe in, but I have a problem when they try to force their belief down other peoples throats and in the process attack the scientific method. That makes me angry as hell!
auritone 9 months ago
You call this guy is a "pseudo-musician"? Is he lip syncing or something?
brodycatsmouth 1 year ago
its so funny that this video will note other videos errors while this guy spells: "Nabraska"... this is so typical dishonest atheist! hahaha!
gerinja 1 year ago
@gerinja how the hell is a spelling error dishonest
Brock excludes facts ON PURPOSE
there's a differnce
lol
InquisitorDracomual 1 year ago
listening why do you care people think what they think some will like vegatable some will like meat some will like evolution other religoen some will be gay others will like chicks me personally chicks,poultry,and belive in god but seriously dont trust the church since it is often a bunch of hypocrites and liars lets just live our lives and stop trying to be right for your egos leave your fucking egos be and get along god youve been fighting for to long over opionons
1holybladex 1 year ago
Actually, there was murdering of the pygmies. Because many evolutionist claimed that they were the missing links between man and ape.
vivaramones 1 year ago
Brock is the atheist antidote, any thoughts that christianity and such is a better thing than atheism is instantly cured via the antidote that is Brock, the skirt chasing pokemon trainer...I mean, the atheistAntidote
Zuifan 1 year ago
D-D-D-Dominated
rokth 2 years ago
Piltdown Man was only really accepted in Britan, as if gave the impression that Man's origins began there.
Arceoraptor was actually composite fossil, containing two dinosaur\bird transitions.
Great video!
5 star'd and subbed!
lowcomedy 2 years ago
Nice video.
However, what I find interesting in this whole evolution/creationism debate is that evolutionary theory makes absolutely no claims one way or another about the metaphysical world (aka higher powers, pre big-bang, etc).
Distilled to its very essence it is simply changes in gene frequencies over time.
On all sides of the debate science is once again being politicized, which saddens me.
wonderweasel 2 years ago
Well, yeah. Evolution has nothing to do with the origins of the universe, the earth, or life itself. Gradual change in the genetic make-up of organisms in response to environmental changes, accounting for the diversity of life on Earth is all it is.
Attempting to lump cosmology, abiogenesis, and social philosophies in with the theory is rather annoying when people do it, is it not?
TehCybernerd 2 years ago 7
Anyone else hearing "Mr. LOLly" ?
IMelkor42 2 years ago
Great refutation antybu, well researched and well put together.
squirrly001 2 years ago
Dawkins has stated that he wants himself recorded on his deathbed
He knows full well that the theists will lie and try to say he had a deathbed conversion.
I think he fully understands what type of people some theists are. their the type that would actually lie about a mans last words.
MarcusCardiff 2 years ago
Dude, I love your videos. Informational and well researched. Keep up the good work!
kvaks3000 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why are there not billions of the supposed "links"? Why is it SO hard to find a match, so far there are no HUMAN connections......just ideas. Just more monkeys.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Again, LWX, I listed about a dozen "links" in human evolution in this video alone. There are plenty of transitional fossils between humans and our primitive ancestors. You just have to open your eyes and look at them instead of shutting them and repeating over and over "there are no transitional fossils! there are no transitional fossils! there are no transitional fossils!" - doing this wont make them disappear.
antybu86 2 years ago 16
@antybu86 I think you had a mistake there, on the 6th you said maunstream science instead of mainsteam science.
TheSickness14 1 year ago
"....so far there are no HUMAN connections"
Did you watch the video which you're posting comments on?
Un0riginalAlias 2 years ago
Very true. It was more like a lemur than human.
animefreak10x 2 years ago
damn, great video dude!
sureup 2 years ago
Creationists have plenty of frauds too. Creationists books presented a decayed shark as a decayed dinosaur to show to possibility of their coexistence with humans. Creationists presented fraudulent human footprints with dinosaur foot prints in the Paulxy River Valley for the same purpose.
YOURINQUIRER 2 years ago 3
dontch yoo talh bout myy magic whhhite jesus!
Steadno 2 years ago
Another wonderful critique! Thanks, I'm starting to enjoy these more and more, keep up the good work!
nosely05 2 years ago
Beautifully done mate!
ulthea 2 years ago 2
OMFG that pic of Brock at the end is utterly revolting. He's pouting his lips like Hansel!
ghostofdayinperson 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A scientific FACT is "water boils at 212 degrees". Proven. Fact.
Evolution is a collection of theories, hypothesis and ideas.....not FACT.
There is plenty of FACT in science.....evolution just happens to not be one of them :)
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
LordWhorfinX, either you don't know much about evolution or you don't know much about science as a whole... which is it?
antybu86 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i know plenty of both... people just get pissy because I don't agree with their sci fi dreams..
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Well then you know that some of the most well accepted claims, such as "gravity is what keeps our feet to the ground" and "germs make us sick" are in fact based on theories (gravitational theory and germ theory, respectively).
Also, you should know that things like "speciation occurs" and "mutation and natural selection occurs" are indeed fact. And since mutation + natural selection = evolution, then that part of evolution is a fact.
(continued)
antybu86 2 years ago
(continued from above)
Evolution as Fact and Theory. There's a short article on this subject by Stephen J. Gould called "Evolution as Fact and Theory." You can find it online if you just do a quick google search... but, eh, you're probably not going to bother.
antybu86 2 years ago
Sorry to burst your bubble but Evolution is both fact and theory, meaning research just hasn't been completed by it. You can refuse to agree with me, but that just makes you ignorant, the same ignorance that makes you believe there is only one true religion, one god, and one world.
latinacurves 2 years ago 5
There are plenty of educated people here, and you just happen not to be one of them, FACT.
You are just an attention whore.
NikiDaDude 2 years ago
...right....like you know me...lol
go away troll....
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
And the sad, SAD part of all this is that you actually think you know what the flying FUCK you're talking about....
338dmac 2 years ago 5
Brock Lawley drinks his own pee.
johnnyphoenix74 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ah, the maturity of the sleazy atheist...lol
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
isn't evolution just a mere Theory? If it was such FACT as you claim, there would be no argument. But no proof exists. And before you say "get educated", I am on the subject. But merely because I do not agree with your fraud and lies you will call me ignorant......atheists and evolutionists are a total joke....
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
if you were educated on the matter you would know what a scientific theory is and yes you are ignorant. plz do the rest of us the favor and do not procreate!
TimeLord6646 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I know what a theory is. I have already procreated twice. Evolution is not FACT. :)
You lose.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
You did little more than bring two more beings into the world that, if you indoctrinate them with your idiocy, must be purged with the rest of the intellectually inferior.
zomghawtness 2 years ago
so you're saying people of religion should be "purged"? As in genocide of 90% of the planet?
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
You'll find it to be quite a bit less than 90%. But genocide seems so harsh. I prefer "deleted from the hard drive of reality". We need to reformat it otherwise it will all crash due to the virus of w32.Religion.
zomghawtness 2 years ago
After your last comment I'll just conclude that you must either be a 13 year old kid on dad's pc or mentally retarded....lol.
Have a nice existence......
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
You have no understanding of anything on the matter do you...
PhantomT69 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I do, if it is such "FACT" why is it so heavily debated and debunked time and time again? Because it's agenda driven lies.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
When has it been debunked? And there has not been a debater in the scientific community about evolution for 100 years now. A debate require both side to have evidence, only one side has evidence, Evolution. Face it, there is evidence, and only those who are brain washed by creationist propaganda believe there is none. Yes 3 fossil were hoax, but that does not change the thousand scientist have found and tested. We have transitional fossils, and the "missing link" has many candidates.
PhantomT69 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LMFAO!! The "missing link has many candidates"...!
What a joke. It's like running for office. Whoever fills the "theory" the best wins the position. Geez, just admit it is agenda driven bullshit. I buy evolution but not for humans....just doesn't work.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
OK youtube is not letting me post so I'm not sure this will get through.
There are evidence and you are denying it because you lack information of it. Go to a museum, read articles, and actually study it before you claim to know anything about it.
PhantomT69 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Been there, read it and seen it. Nothing conclusive. All theory and opinion. Get back when you finally have a FACT to give.....I know it will be a while ;)
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Why do humans have tail bones and dna for tail closed in our gene pool. Why have Pod Mrcaru lizard evolve. How do you explain the fact hat dolphin have spines of land creatures. How is it that there are dinosaurs with feathers.
You do not understand evolution, nor do you understand science. You go far as to ignore evidence found years ago and claim it doesn't exist. You should at least learn before claiming crap like this.
PhantomT69 2 years ago 5
LordWhorfinX, Your own bible sums your attitude up well.
Hear this, you foolish and senseless people, who have eyes but do not see, who have ears but do not hear, Jer 5:21
MarcusCardiff 2 years ago
that doesn't sum up anything you moron
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Evolution explains why we have tailbones, appendices, and the genes neccessary for the production of yolk (although they are broken). Why we have a yolk sac in early development and why we share so many physical traits with so much of this planets life. It explains why there are mammals in the sea and fish that travel across land. It shows that we are the products of an unbroken lineage stretching back billions of years, and that we share that lineage with every other lifeform on earth.
Cowinspace 2 years ago
Genetic variation within a population increases with time.
This is the fact of evolution. It has been proven both in the lab and in wild populations. The theory of evolution by natural selection is the explanation for the diversity of life on earth. It uses the fact along with other facts(natural selection/nested heirarchy/etc.) to show how a natural process could create such a diverse ecosystem.
Cowinspace 2 years ago
there is a fact to give, why don't you get back to us when you have proven god?
Krensharpaw 2 years ago
ok, get back to me when you prove nothing happens when you die
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
So you believe evolution happened in animales...but not humans? Are you mental or something?
That's like saying "gravity holds our feet down, but gnomes hold down everything else on the planet".
Krensharpaw 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you're an idiot..lmao.... also, it's spelled "animals" you moron.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
LordWhorfin, wow, what a come back.
Also, it was a typo moron.
Krensharpaw 2 years ago
whorfin what agenda might that be?
thegillotine09 2 years ago
Do you know what a theory in science is? If you don't know then I assume you don't know evolution at all. Beside Gravity is a theory, the Atom is, and many more. There is no such thing as an "evolutionist" or a "Gravitionist" or any other dumb crap creationist spew out. Are you denying the people who work all there life and found these fossils. If you've been in a museum you should see a lot of fossils, and if you were educated in the subject you wouldn't deny it.
PhantomT69 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
aww, did I hurt your evolved feelings?
Right, the effects of gravity are there, but no one knows what exactly creates it. Evolution has not been proven yet, so what's your point? It's a really really STRONG theory and we like it a lot? Is that your defense?
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
so, evolution is not a fact. But it's better then "God did it"
Is THAT your defense?
10thAngel 2 years ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
there is the difference...I dont have to DEFEND anything :)
But you admitted it's not a fact....good. That's a start...
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Well you are defending be just saying that Evolution is false, since it contradict your own warped world view.
My 8 year old niece pointed out the stupidity of Adam and Eve, just because her father breeds dogs, and pointed out that there would be inbreeded offspring in the end.
10thAngel 2 years ago 14
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't care what you retarded 8 year old niece thinks she knows about religion.
The fact remains that you agree that evolution is NOT a fact :)
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
You are just not getting it do you? You claim to know what a scientific theory is, yet you are showing clear ignorence on the subject.
Yes it's a scientific theory, though Abiogenesis is a fact.
10thAngel 2 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LMFAO!! No it isn't...lol
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
You have no clue what evolution is, what abiogenesis is or what Science it. You owe your life to it.
mmm redneck americans.
10thAngel 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"redneck Americans"...WOW.....what a fucking bigot!!! LOL
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Oh yeah, So you calling my neice retarded, THAT is not wrong? Fucking hypocrite.
10thAngel 2 years ago 8
WOW you're really playing the victim
You must be a redneck
TheOriginalHamster 2 years ago
wow, you're kind of a dick
a dick who was owned by a retarded 8 year old niece
ireallyloveericlyons 2 years ago 6
So what, gravity, i.e. an attraction between bodies of mass DOESN'T exist just because it's a theory? You really hurt your own case, man. And did you mean to just call evolution through natural selection a strong theory? 'Cause that's a pretty good description of it, seeing so there's no other scientific theory to compete with it. And before you ask no, sorry, god making life out of dirt with magic is NOT science.
338dmac 2 years ago 2
"there would be no argument:"
There is no argument. Just the uneducated repeating the same debunked falsehoods over and over again, and a revolving door of the educated scientific hobbyists repeating those debunkings.
Meanwhile professional scientists go on researching and largely ignore the Ben Steins and Brock Lawley's of this world.
Jermbot15 2 years ago 2
"... Atheists and evolutionists are a total joke..."
read: "I am making an unsubstantiated appeal to ridicule for lack of an actual understanding of the material in question"
338dmac 2 years ago 5
You may say that you're educated on the subject but your lack of understanding of even the very basics of the scientific method demonstrate otherwise.
Evolution is both a theory and a fact. We've observed evolution on both a micro and macro level as well as having tonnes of evidence in disciplines such as genetics and palaeontology. It's a fact that organisms evolve. The theory of evolution is the explanation as to how/when/why organisms evolved.
Un0riginalAlias 2 years ago
Human evolution is 100% totally unproven. Period.
And ZOMGHAWTNESS, I'm still waiting for your response.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
LWX, are you sure you're aware of the evidence for evolution? If so, I would enjoy a video from you explaining why you reject the fossil record, genetic evidence, geological distribution of organisms, and the evidence from embryology. Because, so far, I haven't heard any creationist do this (most of them either ignore the evidence or completely misunderstand/misrepresent the evidence).
antybu86 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
evidence....WHAT evidence?! All the frauds, mistakes, partial finds, side shows.....give me a break.
Billions of humans throughout history, billions of primates.....not one "missing link". Scientists with an agenda have time and time again LIED to "prove" evolution. You MIGHT be able to prove evolution of a horse or fish, but not a human.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
LWX, in this very video that you are posting a comment on, I listed about a dozen examples of legitimate hominid finds. Your friend Lawley, on the other hand, listed only 1 fraud that mainstream science actually accepted (and that was refuted by OTHER SCIENTISTS about 60 years ago).
antybu86 2 years ago
Good luck arguing with LWX, antybu, he thinks sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling "LALALALALA I can't see any evidence" is a slam dunk argument against evolution.
octarhaberee 2 years ago
If you consider anything labelled a "theory", regardless of the context, as mere speculation then jump off a fucking cliff. Don't worry, gravity is only a theory, it's never been proven. In fact, the theory of gravity been disproved.
What response?
Un0riginalAlias 2 years ago
That was quite unoriginal of you, bringing up the Theory of Gravity. Gravity has my ass planted to this chair. What the theory refers to is WHERE gravity originates. There is ZERO PROOF or where it comes from and what creates it. We can only prove the results of it. So yeah, gravity is merely a theory, the RESULTS of it are FACT.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
LWX, I remember you brought up this gravity argument that you have in one of your videos because I distinctly remember explaining to you that the theory of gravity doesn't attempt to explain its origin. The theory simply states that two bodies of mass are attracted to each other (proportional to the masses and 1 over the distance squared).
antybu86 2 years ago
IF that is the text book definition, that is a sad SAD definition. Gravity is FACT. We see it work every day. Show me what causes it....oops....no one can.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
LWX, you don't seem to understand the implications of the theory of gravity. I'm not sure why you feel it's a "sad" definition. This theory tells us, for example, that there is some attractive force between the mass in my body and the mass in your body, even though we are likely nowhere near each other. I find that incredible.
antybu86 2 years ago
The true saddest definition of the theory of gravity was from my fiancee's grandmother (a very nice lady, albeit a hardcore creationist) who seriously told me that gravity is, "actually god's love binding his children to this Earth until they are ready to join him in heaven." Honestly, I shit you not. She wasn't kidding. A fun holiday weekend indeed.
Love your videos, keep up the great work.
assgoblin2damax 2 years ago
@antybu86 It's the LAW of gravity not theory.
Dabigg107 1 year ago
@Dabigg107 A scientific theory is merely explains scientific observations. A law is is a concise verbal or mathematical statement of a relation that expresses a fundamental principle of science. Therefore, the theory of gravity DESCRIBES what is observed. This is why people laugh and mock when someone says evolution is "only a theory." It is clear that the person doesn't know the definitions.
amberview30 1 year ago
@Dabigg107 Gravity is both a law an a theory. The law is the formula you use to calculate the acceleration caused by gravity. The theory explains why gravity works. Evolution can't be expressed as any equation, which is why there is no law.
AceOfSevens 1 year ago
@Dabigg107
If you don't like the example of the theory of gravity, how bout germ theory? Germ theory, like evolution, is only a theory, not a law. Therefore, it must have no proof behind it whatsoever, right?=P
chinchychilla 1 year ago
@LordWhorfinX I hope gravity is not a fact - facts are trivial and gravity is definitely not trivial..
jcgadfly 1 year ago
You've just shot yourself in the foot. The exact same applies to evolution.
Do you consider DNA evidence to be reliable in the scenario of a court case? If so, how can you reject just the DNA evidence for evolution and remain intellectually honest and consistent?
There's also the fusion of chromosome two, ERVs, tiktaalik and the observed evolution Pod Mrcaru lizard just to name a few evidences for evolution.
Un0riginalAlias 2 years ago
Grammatical correction: The observed evolution of the Pod Mrcaru lizard.
Un0riginalAlias 2 years ago
The funny thing about the Archaeoraptor hoax is that it thurned out to be the upper body of an early bird (Yanomis) and another, yet undiscovered species, Microraptor.
Microraptor, as it turns out, is a great transitional between dromaeosaurs and birds.
We have the fossils, we win!
TheAngryBum 2 years ago 3
You ask why Brock's opinions should be trusted since he is intentionally dishonest and willfully ignorant.
Could it be because he's intentionally dishonest and willfully ignorant for Jesus?
That doesn't seem like a very good reason to me, but it sure seems to work for other creationists.
Orsbore 2 years ago
Brock are an asshole, he also suffers from VFX-syndrome.
10thAngel 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Brock are an asshole"......nice..lol. Grammar failure. Shows the intelligence of the person attempting to throw out an insult. ;)
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
OH SO SORRY THAT MY FIRST LANGUAGE ISN'T ENGLISH... fucking jackass.
10thAngel 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Well GOOD for you!! :D No one cares.. ;)
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
You're obviously showing that you care by replying.
latinacurves 2 years ago 2
Wow, way to nitpick something totally irrelevent. Shows the intelligence of someone who fails so hard at actual debating that he has to completely circumnavitage an actual discussion of facts and focus instead on mundane, unrelated details. (insert obnoxious smiley face here in place of an actual defensible point)
338dmac 2 years ago 2
Absolutely brilliant, succinctly done. You and SoCal are splendid :D
bewarethelizards42 2 years ago
50 Platinum stars
AuntieDiluvian 2 years ago
I know why people believe Brock's opinions...1st you have to be good looking. Have cool graphics. Then you have to speak emphatically. Then censor opposing view points. Preach to the choir and allow only those comments to show. Don't admit to errors or apologize for mistakes.
yo1o2eggs 2 years ago 3
Hahaha, perfect!
ContinuumXT 2 years ago
SonistheFatherofMan wrote:
"One day you'll answer to your maker and pay for all the clueless souls that you led astray. Till then, all the best my man."
How disshonest can you get with this kind of statement? Reading beetwen the lines it says "you're wrong, and you're going to hell, but I dont want you there, god does".
This is not far from "I dont hate fags, god does". Stop laundring your own bigottry by name dropping your sky daddy. At least have the balls to be honest.
albedo00 2 years ago
I fear this "hero" is a villain ;o)
Excellent work! Thanks for helping keep youtube honest and intelligent.
myintellectualjourny 2 years ago
All excellent anty, as usual you speak the obvious truth which would otherwise be obscured by the misguided sincerety of a dopey fundamentalist. It's just as well people like you exist otherwise fragile minds might get taken in by unsubstantiated accusations of people like the tiresome AA.
Petematrix 2 years ago
Look at his forehead. Total Neanderthal.
anthonzi 2 years ago
This is nothing more than damage control.
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
Actually, the various creationists lies haven't been very damaging. I think plenty of people already understand that creationists like Lawley are motivated to lie by their dogmatic beliefs.
antybu86 2 years ago
Forget Lawley, he's not credible in my opinion. Lies? What lies?
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
The way in which creationists attempt to paint science as untrustworthy by making various false claims (as documented in this video).
antybu86 2 years ago
There were some hoaxes there but you played them down. One day you'll answer to your maker and pay for all the clueless souls that you led astray. Till then, all the best my man.
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
So? Shroud of Turin was a hoax. You don't see me pointing to that to try to disprove Christianity. Besides, only one of the hoaxes actually fooled mainstream science - and that was over 50 years ago when the dating methods weren't so great.
And one day you will answer to the flying spaghetti monster and you will have to answer for all the meatballs you have eaten in your life! ... I'm sorry, does that sound ridiculous? Well, it's no more ridiculous than your proposition.
antybu86 2 years ago
We'll just have to wait and see then.
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
SonIstheFatherofMan, one day you might answer to your maker, if he exists at all (which I highly doubt) and you may or may not be judged by him to be a self-righteous, clueless individual who ought to have used his brain to investigate the truth claims of the Bible, but either way, you're gonna die. Till then, all the best, my man.
TimCubUAkbar 2 years ago
He does exist and He's waiting for you.
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
I feel like if there were actually any evidence of your god's existence, then you wouldn't have to resort to making simple assertions like that.
antybu86 2 years ago
Wish I could prove it bro
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
Then I hope you're fair enough to admit that there is no reason for me to believe in something for which I have absolutely no evidence.
antybu86 2 years ago
I fully understand and sympathize with that statement and I've had doubts myself. You're smart enough to know that you don't know everything, therefore, you can't possibly know for certain if G-d exists so why reject Him outright without proof?
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago
I don't reject this god outright. I've examined the supposed evidence and found it lacking, and on further examination of the proposition, I find it incredibly unlikely.
You're right that I don't know absolutely whether or not this god exists, but I could say the same about Santa Claus. But also similar to Santa, I find the proposition so unlikely that, in a colloquial sense at least, I'll just say that this god doesn't exist.
antybu86 2 years ago
I would take you back to the "singularity". What caused that? Its not about believing in Jonah or Noah its about the logical proposition that everything must have been created by someone/something. I guess you just gotta believe without evidence (faith). I hope you feel the calling one day. Take care.
SonistheFatherofMan 2 years ago