the one thing preachers and evolution debater have in common is they both speak from a pulpit and have an audience gobble it up.... 90% of the time no one takes time to add in common sense or even do a little reading for themselves.
If our created species(glo fish) evolve with-in the same evolution theory that people have made a new religion off of. Then in a few billion years it is possible that our created glo-fish will make their way out of the water and in trillions of years could they be humanoid .... and then if so are they created evolved or both?
First of all we didn't 'create' any glow fish species. We genetically manipulated the Zebrafish to make it glow. They might not all share the same genes but they are still the same species. Secondly no if given the chance it is highly unlikely that the whole evolutionary history would play out exactly the same way.
@infinit888 how do you know it wouldn't repeat and how can you say it with such conviction.
Everything happens in steps. Did you read the article on how they brought back the Flu of 1918 .... By piecing the genome together one piece at a time. Which means it is possible to make something from scratch. We only advance, and in time we will create species that are 100% man-made. We only have accomplished this with microscopic organism but the computer used to take up a whole house now look at it.
@fawkUtube "how do you know it wouldn't repeat and how can you say it with such conviction."
Because unlike you I have a better understanding of evolutionary biology. There are both non-random (natural selection) and random components (mutations, genetic drift) to evolution and even the non-random events are essentially probabilistic in nature. So if you were to calculate the probability of our evolutionary history playing out exactly the same the result would be negligible.
@fawkUtube "Which means it is possible to make something from scratch"
This is not what creationism postulates. Creationism entails that all biological organisms where created from nothing fully formed in their current state by a supernatural being.
I'm aware of mycoplasma laboratorium engineered by Craig Venter. It however does not fit the definition of Creationism. It's better classified as a synthetic lifeform. It even has several watermarks for us to be able to identify it as such.
@infinit888 And we couldn't have been placed here in the form of a microbiological experiment and evolved into human? Or even placed here entirely when we are doing the same thing? I know it sounds crazy but if it is possible for us to do it then it is possible that it has already been done.
It doesn't sound that crazy - it's just really improbable considering the evidence. You are talking about an alien species that evolved consciousness and technology to create a primitive lifeform & interstellar travel which then decided to travel thousands of light years (possibly while earth was still red hot) to arrive at the earth 3,8 mya years ago and then decide to not only not colonize earth but to release an organism which shows no evidence of design.
@infinit888 "it's just really improbable" Improbable doesn't mean impossible. I like to think of possibilities not probability. The probability of a planet making life on it's on its own is pretty improbable but is believed. DNA is really a malleable substance the fact we can mold it raises my interest....Living computers ... Right now we can only change folders in the files of the programs but we will be writing our own programs in the future the more we advance.
I didn't say it did. That's also the reason why I said it's not really crazy.
"The probability of a planet making life on it's on its own is pretty improbable but is believed."
Sure because your alternative hypothesis isn't the most parsimonious. It entails that life arose naturally just on another planet and if you're willing to accept that why add all the other complications (i.e. interstellar travel) to a hypothesis?
@infinit888 (Google Scientists explore genome of methane-breathing microbe) would it be a prime candidate to splice with other DNA to send life to Mars? Aside from not having a moon being cold and the dust storms it could happen.
@fawkUtube There are more complications for life on mars like a thin atmosphere and a solid core not giving a structured global magnetic field. Any organism living on the surface would be susceptible to ionizing & lower frequency UV radiation.
Last time I heard the consensus was that life on the surface of mars is not likely. However the possibility that there already is life under the surface of mars still needs to be explored.
@infinit888 i know we are getting off topic but If we create a micro-organism that breathes methane and expels carbon dioxide and other green house gases Similar to the way we have plants expel oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide? Then could the bacteria assist in the making of an atmosphere?
a snippet from the 1918 flu resurrection experiment
By painstakingly piecing together viral fragments from hospital specimens and a victim buried in Alaskan permafrost, Jeff Taubenberger and colleagues at the US Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Rockville, Maryland, have now sequenced all eight coding regions of the 1918 flu virus's genome. They published the last three - coding for the polymerase complex that allows the virus to replicate - on Wednesday (Nature DOI: 10.1038/nature04230).
If dolly the sheep and glofish are our "creations" then it is possible that we were created, if we can repeat the same. The possibility exist and a good scientific mind wouldn't shun something if even a shred of possibility is there,and since the possibility can be repeated in a lab in real-time i am not ready to write it off.
If anyone has listened to P.Z. Myers' break down of this sorry excuse for a debate you will realise that these douche bags changed the topic at the last minute with the excuse of clarity for Simmons. If P.Z. was to pull out because of this blatant creationist dishonesty you would have never heard the end of these idiots whining about how he pulled out at the last minute. These idiots wonder why credible scientists are wary of doing these type of debates.
@ptango101 Theyre not idiots. Well, they are, but more to the point they're liars. I don't believe for an instant that changing the debate topic was an accident. That's something you just dont do. And somehow they managed to inform PZ's opponent, but "scheduling" kept them from informing PZ? Behind those sincere sounding apologies was just a nest of sick dishonesty. No wonder Focus on the Family is a certified hate group. Kudo's to PZ for handling that intentional set up trap.
@htomerif Actually I must agree with you on that one. Every dishonest tactic is well thought out. To think that the announcers story about "communication difficulties" being the problem is utter bullshit. I think the fact that they didn't voice the original debate topic that they proposed to Myers is a big tell. How much lower can these people go?
This video in only an opinion. There are 250,000 plus published(in main stream scientific journals), peer reviewed(in main stream scientific journals) scientific papers on evolution, in the past 150 years. Yet you say you can disprove the theorum. Please post the published (main stream scientific journal), peer reviewed (main stream scientific journal) paper that does.
=) when you splice a jelly fish and a coral gene into a fish and make a new spieces like glo fish according to these guys it is evolution and not creationism ROFL
@fawkUtube forget the glo fish, what about london underground mosquitoes? That's a clear demonstration of speciation in process, observed and documented without stretching over thousands or millions of years.
love it when an idiot atheist scientist says "creationism doesn't exist". It just shows clearly how narrow minded your average "critical thinking scientist" is. Tunnel vision failing to see past your own nose. If creationism doesn't exist then where do glo fish come from? they surely didn't evolve,hence creationism is real and proven by the same scientist who can't see it. Im not saying evolution isnt real but when you clone manipulate splice genteically program and make species it's CREATIONISM
@PhobicOne go ahead, argue glo fish were evolved and not created... and since we evolved from fish who is to say in 100 billion years our glo fish wont be humanoid and then is that evolution or creationism? my mind is open =)
@PhobicOne i dont think you find another idiot to take your side that glo fish evolved but if you can please lock yourselves into a room and light up some c-4
Idiot herds of sheep who can't think for themselves..... I wouldn't respond if i wasn't allergic to mental retardation.
Go ahead spend your life trying to prove something genetically programed scientifically in a lab is "evolution"
@fawkUtube Poe's Law, everybody. Quick show of hands of who thinks this guy's really this retarded or just pretending to be a creationist to make them look bad?
@fawkUtube Nobody denies that Creationism aka Faith-Psychotic CreaTardation exist. I go further, that the Creation had been governed by a TOTALLY UNKNOWN number (0,1,100s,1000s...!) of Heavenly CreatorZ with totally unknown properties, and had been brought forrth, in these ways, that the "Theory" of Evolution brilliantly pictures. To claim "EITHER YEC OR no G-D" is a false dichotomy. If you do not TRUST [YOUR] G-D to create by evolution, THEN you are suffering from FAITH-PSYCHOSIS.
@fawkUtube i think it's pretty obvious that the definition for creationism in these debates is usually associated to the supernatural and what you just said is fucking retarded
It proves it is possible even by feeble human hands. Why do you think it is called genetic hacking/programing ... think of us as advanced computer programs with A,T,C, and G's instead of ones and zeros
@w I don't deny evolution or creationism because i believe both exist the point i was making is you can't write off creationism. Evolution to me is nothing more than adaptation for instance Europeans are fair skinned living above the equator. Africans are dark and are at the equator either they or we have evolved to live in our environments. If an European goes to Africa he'd better bring his sunscreen. Asians have slant eyes I'm sure for some reason in there part of the globe.U Knowhat i mean.
@fawkUtube "I don't deny evolution or creationism because i believe both exist". No, that's the whole point of these debates. Only one scenario is true, either life evolved, or some supernatural being beemed us into existence and we simply are the way we are, we don't change over time. Nobody fucking denies that glo fish don't exist because we don't attribute their creation to the conventional definition of creationism. You're basically arguing with yourself over nothing trying to be the smart
For the truth about religion & top Bible scholarship try Robert M. Price, ' The reason driven life '. Also Dan Barker, Valerie Tarico, John W. Loftus, Victor J. Stenger. For humanity's shared moral core & belief in Matt 7v12 The Golden Rule try wisdomcommons. Also try comparative religion- read the 1500BCE papyrus of Ani & the Koran & Book of Mormon on skepticsannotatedbible. No one would give credence to such writings except for peer pressure & threats of death & hell. See. RichardDawkinsnet
Dont adhere to Darwin's theories anymore? You mean the natural selection? Why is Dawkins kept on mentioning Darwin natural selection all the time? and which framework did Darwin provide? Darwin stated that species evolved slowly over long period time. Can anyone show how giraffe gradually evolve from short necked four legged animals?
@BeBoBli I spent years on the internet searching and came up with nothing showing incremental changes on giraffe evolution. The supposed descendant of a giraffe is so small that all parts of its body must be elongated to conform with massive giraffe size and the 4 meters difference in height. Millions of books were written using giraffe as an iconic example of evolution yet no evidence that it ever evolved at all.
It adapted favourably to an environment where trees have consumables available high up. The giraffe has to work less to eat continuously and it makes for a strong natural defense as well. Just because there is little evidence of this with say, transitional fossils, just means we haven't bothered digging. Do you think this honestly says anything about the truthfulness of the theory of evolution the whole? The fact that we never dug for giraffe transitional fossils?
@BeBoBli Researchers have found out that giraffes normally feed on vegetation lower than 2 meters even during droughts. It is not logical that short necked animals simply starved to death for refusing to eat the vegetation on the ground. Goats are known to climb trees and would not need a longer neck to survive. Since female giraffes are normally shorter by a meter compared to males they should have starved and died out too. More than 100 million fossils were unearthed and no evidence yet.
Could you please answer the following: "Do you honestly think that not having transitional fossils for giraffes should put into question the truthfulness of the theory of evolution as a whole?"
@BeBoBli Yes, of course the entire theory can be put in question. If you make giraffe as an iconic example in millions of biology textbooks you must have something to back it up. You cannot just say this small deer-like animal evolved in small incremental steps then show giraffe as a descendant with 4 meters difference in height with all its body parts elongated. That is speculation. Then you see on one hand bacteria and fruit fly never evolved for millions of years.
@BeBoBli Yes. I have. The neo-Darwinism stated that species evolved slow in incremental steps, but to save neo-Darwinism from embarrassing scarcity of fossils, punctuated equilibrium stated that species showed almost no evolution for a very long time then there was a burst of evolution in a short period of time. An alternative theory would be a modified Punctuated equilibrium, almost stasis but no burst, that is, no evolution at all, Thereby consistent with giraffe,bacteria, crocs, sharks etc.
I have heard of this 'burst', but do not know what to think of it since I have not studied obscure zoological transitional fossils. I don't think it's embarrassing that there is a scarcity of fossils, nor do I think it puts the theory at risk of being terribly untrue -as a whole-. You may very well be the lucky guy to find out why the giraffe is the way it is if you stay interested long enough, and append the information to the overall theory of evolution.
@BeBoBli embarrassing scarcity of fossils was actually mentioned by the author of Punctuated equilibrium. My alternative theory is observable and verifiable. unlike both neodarwinian or punctuated equilibrium.
@BeBoBli Just like Neo-Darwinism inability to explain origin of life or where the cell come from or to account for explosion of the species in the cambrian period where many fully developed species with no apparent ancestors existed, we just let other theory to account for their existence species in the strata. At least this theory is observable and verifiable unlike punctuated or neodarwinian. Observable in fossils of scorpions, crocs, lizards, sharks, tigers, fruit flies, horseshoe crabs, etc.
@daogdaog Years of searching and you couldn't find the Climacoceras? Are you willfully ignorant or are you a creationist? Come on, out with it. If you're just going to get around to preaching, cut to the chase.
@fdasherv That is precisely why evolution is false. Research has found out that Samotherium 3m in height the supposed descendant of Climacoceras actually existed before Climacoceras 1.5m. Okapi the supposed relative of giraffe existed before both Climacoceras and Samotherium. How could Samotherium that looked almost a giraffe evolved into its ancestor deer like with long antlers Climacoceras?
@daogdaog You obviously get your skewed information from the creationist liars websites. They deliberately misrepresent archeological and genetic facts because their agenda couldn't possibly exist without lies. What would a serious research institution need with falsehoods? They're not serious and neither are you. Have you spoken to a genetic zoobiologist or an actual paleontologist? Like I said, just get to the preaching already. You know you believe in Adam and Eve and the flood and all that.
@fdasherv There is no need to drag religion in this discussion. You cannot find that kind of info in any creationist websites. The research was actually made by evolutionist biologists who were puzzled as how giraffe got its long neck. Dont rely too much on wikipedia. It wont give you much info on how giraffe evolved and when Climacoceras and Samotherium first existed. Read some research papers.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
I simply don't understand how so many doctors can have a degree in medicine while simultaneous having such fundamental misunderstandings about biology.
Absolutely, its a tactic of these intellectually dishonest fraudsters that they try to frame the debate eliminating all questioning of there redundant creationism from the premise in question. They don't want an even playing field and now the islamic apologists are doing the same thing by having debates about the veracity of democracy and at the same time levering in dogma by the shovel full. Very nice PZ, point it out every time.
i don't even need to watch the other 4 parts. PZ has already annihilated simmons. of course i will though, because hearing a creationist get pwned is one of my favourite past times (:
About as disturbing as being old enough to have followed the 'evolution' of definitions throughout the years, ranging from an accepted literal application of the word "theory" to the indefinite, conveniently non-committal one you refer to, now. I also remember when science deemed monkeys as ancestors of modern man... they have since recanted on that, as well. I wonder what other modifications will be necessary as reason debunks subsequent 'theories' ?
@Redshield666 No, the popular press and public deemed monkeys to be ancestors of man. Science has always viewed them as relatives with whom we share a common ancestor in the geologically recent past. Your usage of the word theory seems to confuse it's popular and scientific meanings. In any event, advancement and revision of evolutionary theory is to be expected given the huge advancements in our understanding of genetic biology in the last 50 years. It is religion that remains static.
The schools of the day were teaching that man was directly descended from apes... I was there, I saw it, participated in it, end of story. And, you're right in the last part of your comment, which acknowledges the revision of old beliefs... which is all that they are, they're not irrefutable facts. They require the same amount of faith, as with religion, in light of the fact that no one alive, today, actually witnessed the events proposed by abiogenesis and evolution.
@Redshield666 Apes are different to monkeys but yes, we are decended from within the tribe of Apes. This was correct then and it is still correct now. Science does indeed revise itself - but it does this on the basis of evidence. It does not need faith or belief. The theories of gravity, of relativity, of quantumn mechanics - all have gone through the same process. Coincidently, we have and do observe evolution in organisms that rapidly produce thousands of generations within our lifetimes.
The "no-one was there" argument is imbecilic. It is so imbecilic that it is dishonest.
If you are not a dishonest person, retract that argument. And in this era when general education is available, and you have so zealously eschewed it, you should be ashamed. GET AN EDUCATION. Intro to Logic is a freshman-level course in college, and some high schools teach it.
Using the "you weren't there" defense in this context is exactly as stupid as using it in a criminal trial.
And, I'm still waiting for admissible evidence to substantiate the presumption evolutionists have in asserting their religion over that of any other, in the 'court' of academic and social jurisprudence. We are to just assume evolution is correct or be vilified as morons, based upon the say-so of the arrogant, self-aggrandizing priests of modern-day techno-paganism, such as Myers.
You'll be here a long time, waiting for me to bow the knee to religious extremism of that order.
@Redshield666 I'm not impressed by your attempt to discredit the theory of evolution by bringing it down to the level of your religion. Just as those who deny theories such as gravity or a spherical earth would be considered morons by any modern basis of judgement, those who deny evolution's uncanny ability to explain facts observed in the world today should also be considered morons. This is because they base their denial not on reasonable discrepancies, but on a complete ignorance of facts.
Well, unless I'm actually talking with a research scientist or biologist, here, I'd propose to you that it is you, sir, that is the one with the unwarranted belief, relying on the judgments and observations of strangers, having never participated in their experiments or studies or even met with them, face to face. Nor have you, yourself, observed the events you and they so dogmatically state MUST have happened.
And, at least I'm honest in not cloaking "faith" with "theory"!
@Redshield666 I don't have faith in the theory of evolution. Faith is belief without evidence. I have seen plenty of evidence for evolution, and even though I haven't experienced it firsthand, there is so much of it that it becomes unreasonable not to accept it.
And if relying on the judgements of strangers is such a bad thing, I propose that everyone should cease belief in all religious texts immediately.
@Redshield666 You do not have to assume anything, all you have to do is educate yourself. It looks like you do not understand how science works and even worse, you do not appreciate what the effects of science have done for your life.
@Redshield666 "social jurisprudence"...you have heard of the Dover Trial?
"academic jurisprudence" there is no such thing. The process is called peer review. The number of peer reviewed papers in professional academic journals presenting supporting evidence for evolution numbers in the tens of thousand.
All that tells us is that there are tens of thousands of individuals, out there, with the WRONG view of reality. I knew that long before you said anything.
@cbooth2004 "Using the "you weren't there" defense in this context is exactly as stupid as using it in a criminal trial." Not exactly. You're being too generous. It's actually far, far, stupider, for scientific epistemology is more thoroughgoing, more exacting, more precise,,more refined,more intelligent conducted, and in all ways *vastly* superior to "courtroom" epistemology.
Though I'm not in the habit of retracting anything that I say, or jumping when ordered to, merely on demand of some unknown, I will go as far as to restate that not only were there no living witnesses to the events prescribed by the religious dogma of abiogenesis and evolution, the whole premise, itself, is ridiculous in view of the obvious presence of divine thought in nature's design.
I certainly don't need any college course to help me interpret what common sense already does.
Are you kidding me?!?!?! "I certainly don't need any college course to help me interpret what common sense already does."
That is, by far, the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. I see the sun rise in the morning and set at night, therefore common sense tells me the sun revolves around the Earth. Any serious study of the subject, however, disproves common sense. If you are unwilling to engage in this learning process, in any subject, you are only bathing in ignorance.
No doubt you haven't heard anything other than your own dogma in a long time, with the mouth you have. Since you know it all, why bother talking here? Your arrogance shall suffice for you, young sir! I wouldn't debate you if my life depended on it... and, by my estimation, it doesn't!
Invoking that most-hated maxim that living life accordingly has everything to gain and nothing to lose, I'd say you are the one out on a limb and that it's you that had better 'pony up', son.
Dogma? Debate me? Pony up? What are you talking about?
I don't know everything (obviously), but I know that closing your mind to new ideas so you can rely solely upon "common sense" is intellectual suicide; it's insulating yourself from the truth. There's nothing virtuous about being ignorant.
Umm... who are you talking to? You don't know anything about my actions or beliefs, so how can you even pretend to admonish me for them? Seriously, grow up.
@Redshield666 So if "were you there?" is an admissible argument about evolution, then surely it applies to the Bible. Obviously the writers of the Bible must post-date the creation event, so they weren't there. You can claim that the Biblical account was inspired by God, but... how do you know? You weren't there. And saying we can trust it because it's inspired undermines the rationale behind the "Were you there?" argument. To be consistent, you have to adopt a nearly universal skepticism.
@Nullifidian Not when the tenets of evolution work in practical application. There needs not be any skepticism about evolution aside from religious nonsense.
Yeah... if you only knew how many times I've heard "I don't know" from the Darwinist crowd. That and "Science changes all of the time, old theories being discarded for new."
Show me something conclusive and I'll believe. Something demonstrable to everyone and not just some scientist in some obscure lab, somewhere. Something that we can all see without having to take some 'expert's' word for it... in other words, the same request that I get regarding invisible "Sky Daddy."
@Redshield666 Show me something conclusive...If you you are only convinced by the evidence happening before your eyes, then you probably think that the moon landing never happened, since you were not there?
You weren't there when the "Big Bang" supposedly occurred, either. Stop evading the issue. Your cult holds dominance with it's world-view, now, you can demonstrate to me why I should respect it... because, I don't.
Sorry, fuckwad, but you're wrong on the "making up" business. In fact, there's been more shenanigans involved with Darwinism and evolution, over the years, relatively speaking, than in the entire history of so-called Christianity... which was merely organized paganism to begin with, eventually spawning the idiotic theory of evolution, itself.
Piltdown Man, Lucy, Archaeoraptor, Haeckel's Embryos, etc, are just a few examples that we know of. Censorship probably hides much more.
Guess what fagsuck, Scientists are the ones that exposed fraudulent claims, dipshit. The scientific process is self correcting. If you had a fucking clue, or a single shred of proof to invalidate evolution you'd be famous,... and you're not, just another uneducated anonymous fuckwit spewing trash and more bullshit on youtube.
It's proven itself to be a religion for shitheads like yourself, piss stain. Even your esteemed guru/con artist Dawkins thinks there could be an intelligent design to life, an admission forced out of him by a much smarter man. I mean, even he knows it's all horseshit, but, keeping you idiots in the dark helps pay his bills.
You dummies will believe anything, AS LONG as it defames or denies God. Once it does that, all thinking processes shut down, again, with you as living proof.
You can spew your vile ignorant uneducated verbal feces all you like, it doesn't change a thing. Your argument is over... been over for over a century and a half. time to grow up.
That evolution happens fact and THAT has not a fucking thing to do with your silly ass mythical sky friend. Your god is irrelevant, time to grow up.
150 years and still counting the number of retards that can't stop sucking their thumb and let go of their blankie.
"Even your esteemed guru/con artist Dawkins thinks there could be an intelligent design to life, an admission forced out of him by a much smarter man."
Forced? Try again. Dawkins wasn't forced into anything. Dawkins never said design isn't a possibility, slight as it is. Because as unlikely as it is, 100% certainty cannot be achieved about a designed state, this includes you. What IS certain is that evolution happens.
Try listening, try reading viable sources, try an education.
"Forced? Try again. Dawkins wasn't forced into anything. Dawkins never said design isn't a possibility, slight as it is. Because as unlikely as it is, 100% certainty cannot be achieved about a designed state, this includes you. What IS certain is that evolution happens."
-Proven? Really where? Show us where there is "proof" that evolution is a religion. Or even a consensus (outside of the creatard community that makes that shit up). Where? Is there some credible academic institution that certifies evolution as a religion? Fuckwit.
And, evolution is not only a religion, complete with it's own set of prophets, gurus, apostles (you) and other such miscreants and con artists, it's big business! Go check out Tricky Dicky Dawkins' website where he peddles all sorts of anti-theist trinkets and memorabilia, t-shirts, etc. It's hip, (and profitable) nowadays, being a member of the ape-worshiping cult of Darwin, Grand Vizier of Simpletons.
This is your proof that evolution is a religion? So... you admit that religion is a business?
Try to focus now... here's the difference;
The religious take money from the sick, weak, dying and diseased by the vile lying promise of divine intervention, which never happens. The money is used for million dollar homes, personal aircraft, tummy tucks and gold leaf embossing on hats and furniture of your false "prophets" like Popoff & Hinn
...While Dawkins foundation funds Education, medical science (to ACTUALLY heal the sick), to vercome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and human suffering.
When his foundation pays for supplies for world crises, like Japan quake,flood, & Nuclear problems, they don't waste shipping weight,space,cost, efforts on shipping useless heavy bibles, they send water, food, Medicine and don't expect praise for a mythical juju man.
Evolution is simply pagan nature-worship all tied up in a nice neat little modernized version for secular idiots full of themselves and too mod to accept anything so primitive as what their stick-worshiping predecessors did, while contemporary, more advanced and intelligent races worshiped God.
And, Dawkins is for Dawkins... period.
Arguing? Son, just like with thousands of others on these sites, you're beyond arguing with. You're pure entertainment, nothing more.
the pure entertainment is mutual. I so enjoy watching the irrational writhe in a puddle of circular stupidity.
But surely if it is just pagan nature-worship drivel, what could be simpler than disproving it? There must be one single point of proof against all the millions of validated instances of proof of your myth? Surely after all these millennium you could come up with something?...
Yup, same as always. Have a nice trip in your delusion.
Its not me you need to convince. My "stance" has nothing to do with dogma. I grew up with religion. I've already been through 30 yrs of careful consideration of religion. I have read the OT, NT KJV, NIV, Talmud, Torah, QuRan, Hadith, mere Christianity (Lewis0 as well as Hitchens Dennet, Harris and Dawkins. And regarding Evolution... I have read countless publications including those published, endorsed by "Dishonesty Institute."....
@Redshield666 I am also educated. And a great part of that education is geared toward critical thinking and analysis. You haven't brought up any item of discussion opposing biological validity of Evolution that we all haven''t heard before ad-naseum. Your ignorance and meaningless spewings of parroted creationist website propaganda goes the same place it always does, into an abyss of ignorance. What you fail to understand, as most all creationists do...
...is that your squawking on a you tube channel is completely pointless, you can't win. If you want to convince someone of the validity of your argument, you need to go through the process. There IS no shortcut. To Disprove scientifically validated facts, ONLY the scientific method will work. Convincing one person does nothing. You need to take your argument to the forum of the worlds scientific community and get a consensus. Short of that, you ramble in futility.
Darwins Theory, was only a stepping stone to current knowledge. That evolution happens, is stone-cold, rock-solid FACT. Our understanding of the process has been validated in staggering, irrefutable proportions. Denying evolution happens is no less than ignorance, or lack of acceptance due its polarity with unfounded beliefs.
Disregarding facts, doesn't change facts.
So unless you can provide proof that passes worldwide accepted process of the scientific method, you're pissing on your own leg.
LOL! Evolution is not, repeat, NOT happening, dummkopf. What you call evolution is merely adaptation... an organism's limited ability to adapt to it's surroundings WITHOUT it's basic cellular/genetic structure changing or fomenting new life forms. Accepting Darwinism is no less than ignorance with a tendency toward stupidity.
And nice try separating yourself from Darwinism, just like you did from your/it's earlier position that men evolved from apes.
"Evolution is not, repeat, NOT happening, dummkopf. What you call evolution is merely adaptation... an organism's limited ability to adapt to it's surroundings WITHOUT it's basic cellular/genetic structure changing or fomenting new life forms. "
-Then prove it... the worlds scientific community is waiting, will praise you for it and make you rich and famous... go ahead, any time now.
"LOL! Evolution is not, repeat, NOT happening, dummkopf. "
- Apparently not your family, and maybe repeating it to yourself over and over and over... helps your mental state, but it'll never change the state of reality, or fact.
"just like you did from your/it's earlier position that men evolved from apes. "
-Um... yeah. The world is still waiting for your proof just like all the other uneducated fuckwit religious fucknut babbling creationists on the planet. Idiot of futility
They've also saved more lives than God if you accept the Bible to be true, he killed a fair few in that didn't he?
In fact he killed more than Satan, and Satan only killed them when he had God's permission. I read through your previous comments with @nolobede you seem to have presented no evidence for your claim that creationism is true and instead only posted infantile Ad Hominem attacks.
He's not finished with that, either. (Word to the idiot)
I could also say Satan started all of this, too, but then that would let Adam off of the hook. Legally and morally, God had the right to kill Adam. He spared him, giving your pal Satan opportunity to show the universe how wrong he is.
You've been a busy little texter... I won't bother answering all of your drivel, I'll just say your theories are only worthy of Ad Hominem.
Really? My theories have evidence. Your hypotheses (and that's what they are) have none, you can't even demonstrate why anyone should believe in God or The Bible.
"God had the right to kill Adam." Did he really? Why exactly? (assuming your God actually exists)
If you can only reply with Ad Hominem then you do realise why I don't take you and other christians seriously?
"I could also say Satan started all of this, too" You could, but you would need evidence for this claim.
You can say what you like, I'm asking for evidence of what you say. In your theology is God not Omniscient, Omnipotent and Benevolent? If he is: He knew Satan would hurt people, He had the power to stop Satan and He loves humans, so why didn't he stop Satan? (Assuming any of these things exist).
@WaltonSauce He's loving like a parent, if you misbehave he's gonna punish you.He knows what Satan is doing,he lets him to test us which would make Life a test and give us purpose. You want EVIDENCE the Bible's real, look up all of its FULFILLED PROPHECIES, through the prophets.They never mention them because they never READ the bible but it has ALWAYS guessed right. They deny religion because they question and question things we don't know the answer to but I can do this ALL DAY with science.
Fulfilled prophecies, like what? Saying the new testament fulfilled OT is no different than saying chamber of secrets fulfilled philosophers stone's prophecies.
You clearly don't know what a theory is in Science.
I don't care if newton read the bible everyday, that's an appeal to authority
Heres a word for you Abiogenesis, and if all life came from more life, surely god must have too. That is special pleading.
@WaltonSauce I'm not saying God didn't come from anything but hey, doesn't change the fact that there's a higher beings. Prophecies about jerusalem being destroyed and rebuilt. If you match them with history they're are right on point, I can show you a series of videos with valid sources if you'd like. I know what theory is...THEORY of Evolution, like somehow over time alien genetics got mixed with genetics of apes. DNA destroys evolution when studied. Look up prophecies yourself, don't be lazy!
@rkyeun NO HES NOT, look at you. You probably sin EVERY SINGLE DAY of your life. Probably have no self-control, no purpose to life and listen to all the BS people feed you. Search for the Truth my friend, it'll set you free and don't let anyone stop you. If you want the shortcut, look up all the biblical fulfilled prophechies or ignore them and swing aimlessly but the puritans are the perfect example of what "god-given" rights and equality can form until corruption kicks in. Look at the US now.
@rkyeun The law condemns! A King who loves his child and teaches him not to break laws, one day finds his son, reaching age of reason, has murdered another. The son is arrested, convicted, and sentenced to death by the King. This King may love his son with all his heart, but he also loves the one murdered just as much and the law and penalty is firm! This King is a JUST king not a omnicidal maniac. One difference! God loves you so much he will take the penalty for you, if you allow him. LOVE!
Except of course that I haven't murdered. The law this king enforces is one entirely of his own making, enforced with tyranny greater than North Korea, reflecting his own colossal ignorance and immorality. Under his law the penalty for murder is not death, which might be a just punishment, but rather this king commands jaywalkers to suffer eternal torture. Oh, but he loves you. So if you will but allow yourself to be forced to suck his cock, you may be spared.
Lol, biologists argue amongst themselves if creationists are worth their time.
PZ: Guys, this creationist wants to debate me on radio, I accepted
Biologist 1: Why? You will end up having to teach him evolution...
PZ: No, I think he might already have an understanding it, he published a book about it afterall...
Biologist 2: Yeah but... He's a creationist, no way he understands evolution.
PZ: .... aww shit.
letsgocaps8 2 weeks ago 3
Bravo Myers
gextvedde 1 month ago
Wow The Title of this Video is so true;;; DESTROYED Dr. Simmons ..
sunofwill 1 month ago 2
* stabilizing moon*
fawkUtube 2 months ago
on a side note i wonder what you would get if you crossed narwhals and a pony =)
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube I think you would get an underwater unicorn.
htomerif 2 months ago
If your wondering Im not a creationist nor an evolutionist I am an indigo child
fawkUtube 2 months ago
the one thing preachers and evolution debater have in common is they both speak from a pulpit and have an audience gobble it up.... 90% of the time no one takes time to add in common sense or even do a little reading for themselves.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
If our created species(glo fish) evolve with-in the same evolution theory that people have made a new religion off of. Then in a few billion years it is possible that our created glo-fish will make their way out of the water and in trillions of years could they be humanoid .... and then if so are they created evolved or both?
expand your thinking
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube "If our created species"
First of all we didn't 'create' any glow fish species. We genetically manipulated the Zebrafish to make it glow. They might not all share the same genes but they are still the same species. Secondly no if given the chance it is highly unlikely that the whole evolutionary history would play out exactly the same way.
infinit888 2 months ago
@infinit888 how do you know it wouldn't repeat and how can you say it with such conviction.
Everything happens in steps. Did you read the article on how they brought back the Flu of 1918 .... By piecing the genome together one piece at a time. Which means it is possible to make something from scratch. We only advance, and in time we will create species that are 100% man-made. We only have accomplished this with microscopic organism but the computer used to take up a whole house now look at it.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube "how do you know it wouldn't repeat and how can you say it with such conviction."
Because unlike you I have a better understanding of evolutionary biology. There are both non-random (natural selection) and random components (mutations, genetic drift) to evolution and even the non-random events are essentially probabilistic in nature. So if you were to calculate the probability of our evolutionary history playing out exactly the same the result would be negligible.
infinit888 2 months ago
@fawkUtube "Which means it is possible to make something from scratch"
This is not what creationism postulates. Creationism entails that all biological organisms where created from nothing fully formed in their current state by a supernatural being.
I'm aware of mycoplasma laboratorium engineered by Craig Venter. It however does not fit the definition of Creationism. It's better classified as a synthetic lifeform. It even has several watermarks for us to be able to identify it as such.
infinit888 2 months ago
@infinit888 And we couldn't have been placed here in the form of a microbiological experiment and evolved into human? Or even placed here entirely when we are doing the same thing? I know it sounds crazy but if it is possible for us to do it then it is possible that it has already been done.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube "I know it sounds crazy"
It doesn't sound that crazy - it's just really improbable considering the evidence. You are talking about an alien species that evolved consciousness and technology to create a primitive lifeform & interstellar travel which then decided to travel thousands of light years (possibly while earth was still red hot) to arrive at the earth 3,8 mya years ago and then decide to not only not colonize earth but to release an organism which shows no evidence of design.
infinit888 2 months ago
@infinit888 "it's just really improbable" Improbable doesn't mean impossible. I like to think of possibilities not probability. The probability of a planet making life on it's on its own is pretty improbable but is believed. DNA is really a malleable substance the fact we can mold it raises my interest....Living computers ... Right now we can only change folders in the files of the programs but we will be writing our own programs in the future the more we advance.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube "Improbable doesn't mean impossible."
I didn't say it did. That's also the reason why I said it's not really crazy.
"The probability of a planet making life on it's on its own is pretty improbable but is believed."
Sure because your alternative hypothesis isn't the most parsimonious. It entails that life arose naturally just on another planet and if you're willing to accept that why add all the other complications (i.e. interstellar travel) to a hypothesis?
infinit888 2 months ago
@infinit888 (Google Scientists explore genome of methane-breathing microbe) would it be a prime candidate to splice with other DNA to send life to Mars? Aside from not having a moon being cold and the dust storms it could happen.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube There are more complications for life on mars like a thin atmosphere and a solid core not giving a structured global magnetic field. Any organism living on the surface would be susceptible to ionizing & lower frequency UV radiation.
Last time I heard the consensus was that life on the surface of mars is not likely. However the possibility that there already is life under the surface of mars still needs to be explored.
infinit888 2 months ago
@infinit888 i know we are getting off topic but If we create a micro-organism that breathes methane and expels carbon dioxide and other green house gases Similar to the way we have plants expel oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide? Then could the bacteria assist in the making of an atmosphere?
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@infinit888 google : Advance or horror: The first lab-created organism
fawkUtube 2 months ago
a snippet from the 1918 flu resurrection experiment
By painstakingly piecing together viral fragments from hospital specimens and a victim buried in Alaskan permafrost, Jeff Taubenberger and colleagues at the US Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Rockville, Maryland, have now sequenced all eight coding regions of the 1918 flu virus's genome. They published the last three - coding for the polymerase complex that allows the virus to replicate - on Wednesday (Nature DOI: 10.1038/nature04230).
fawkUtube 2 months ago
newscientist(.)com/article/dn8103-us-scientists-resurrect-deadly-1918-flu(.)html
fawkUtube 2 months ago
If dolly the sheep and glofish are our "creations" then it is possible that we were created, if we can repeat the same. The possibility exist and a good scientific mind wouldn't shun something if even a shred of possibility is there,and since the possibility can be repeated in a lab in real-time i am not ready to write it off.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
If anyone has listened to P.Z. Myers' break down of this sorry excuse for a debate you will realise that these douche bags changed the topic at the last minute with the excuse of clarity for Simmons. If P.Z. was to pull out because of this blatant creationist dishonesty you would have never heard the end of these idiots whining about how he pulled out at the last minute. These idiots wonder why credible scientists are wary of doing these type of debates.
ptango101 2 months ago
@ptango101 Theyre not idiots. Well, they are, but more to the point they're liars. I don't believe for an instant that changing the debate topic was an accident. That's something you just dont do. And somehow they managed to inform PZ's opponent, but "scheduling" kept them from informing PZ? Behind those sincere sounding apologies was just a nest of sick dishonesty. No wonder Focus on the Family is a certified hate group. Kudo's to PZ for handling that intentional set up trap.
htomerif 2 months ago
@htomerif Actually I must agree with you on that one. Every dishonest tactic is well thought out. To think that the announcers story about "communication difficulties" being the problem is utter bullshit. I think the fact that they didn't voice the original debate topic that they proposed to Myers is a big tell. How much lower can these people go?
ptango101 2 months ago
This video in only an opinion. There are 250,000 plus published(in main stream scientific journals), peer reviewed(in main stream scientific journals) scientific papers on evolution, in the past 150 years. Yet you say you can disprove the theorum. Please post the published (main stream scientific journal), peer reviewed (main stream scientific journal) paper that does.
wizard970 2 months ago
=) when you splice a jelly fish and a coral gene into a fish and make a new spieces like glo fish according to these guys it is evolution and not creationism ROFL
fawkUtube 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fawkUtube forget the glo fish, what about london underground mosquitoes? That's a clear demonstration of speciation in process, observed and documented without stretching over thousands or millions of years.
Casshyr 2 months ago
love it when an idiot atheist scientist says "creationism doesn't exist". It just shows clearly how narrow minded your average "critical thinking scientist" is. Tunnel vision failing to see past your own nose. If creationism doesn't exist then where do glo fish come from? they surely didn't evolve,hence creationism is real and proven by the same scientist who can't see it. Im not saying evolution isnt real but when you clone manipulate splice genteically program and make species it's CREATIONISM
fawkUtube 3 months ago
@fawkUtube Poe's Law in action.
PhobicOne 3 months ago
@PhobicOne go ahead, argue glo fish were evolved and not created... and since we evolved from fish who is to say in 100 billion years our glo fish wont be humanoid and then is that evolution or creationism? my mind is open =)
fawkUtube 3 months ago
@fawkUtube whales evolved from land animals similar to hippos
mrsquishyboots 3 months ago
@fawkUtube Poe's Law in action.
PhobicOne 3 months ago
@PhobicOne i dont think you find another idiot to take your side that glo fish evolved but if you can please lock yourselves into a room and light up some c-4
Idiot herds of sheep who can't think for themselves..... I wouldn't respond if i wasn't allergic to mental retardation.
Go ahead spend your life trying to prove something genetically programed scientifically in a lab is "evolution"
Better yet convince me that yellow is blue.
fawkUtube 3 months ago
@fawkUtube Poe's Law, everybody. Quick show of hands of who thinks this guy's really this retarded or just pretending to be a creationist to make them look bad?
PhobicOne 3 months ago 5
@PhobicOne failed robot.
fawkUtube 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PhobicOne Ok listen God created man not evolution or the big bang
CWilson743 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PhobicOne Yes, I think he's a FUCKING retard.
outlaw87100 2 months ago
@PhobicOne The creationist is not pretending. He's a retard.
darwinkilledgod dot blogspot dot com
bobx2x2 4 weeks ago
@fawkUtube Nobody denies that Creationism aka Faith-Psychotic CreaTardation exist. I go further, that the Creation had been governed by a TOTALLY UNKNOWN number (0,1,100s,1000s...!) of Heavenly CreatorZ with totally unknown properties, and had been brought forrth, in these ways, that the "Theory" of Evolution brilliantly pictures. To claim "EITHER YEC OR no G-D" is a false dichotomy. If you do not TRUST [YOUR] G-D to create by evolution, THEN you are suffering from FAITH-PSYCHOSIS.
kleenex3000 3 months ago
Comment removed
KillKrazy666 2 months ago
@fawkUtube i think it's pretty obvious that the definition for creationism in these debates is usually associated to the supernatural and what you just said is fucking retarded
wHisperis001 2 months ago
Comment removed
fawkUtube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It proves it is possible even by feeble human hands. Why do you think it is called genetic hacking/programing ... think of us as advanced computer programs with A,T,C, and G's instead of ones and zeros
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@w I don't deny evolution or creationism because i believe both exist the point i was making is you can't write off creationism. Evolution to me is nothing more than adaptation for instance Europeans are fair skinned living above the equator. Africans are dark and are at the equator either they or we have evolved to live in our environments. If an European goes to Africa he'd better bring his sunscreen. Asians have slant eyes I'm sure for some reason in there part of the globe.U Knowhat i mean.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
@fawkUtube "I don't deny evolution or creationism because i believe both exist". No, that's the whole point of these debates. Only one scenario is true, either life evolved, or some supernatural being beemed us into existence and we simply are the way we are, we don't change over time. Nobody fucking denies that glo fish don't exist because we don't attribute their creation to the conventional definition of creationism. You're basically arguing with yourself over nothing trying to be the smart
wHisperis001 2 months ago
@wHisperis001 If a scientist who evolved can create and be god to an animal then both are possible.
fawkUtube 2 months ago
My god... Sometimes the word 'OWNED' just isn't enough. I can't wait to hear the rest of the wait. Awesome!
ubernaffa 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For the truth about religion & top Bible scholarship try Robert M. Price, ' The reason driven life '. Also Dan Barker, Valerie Tarico, John W. Loftus, Victor J. Stenger. For humanity's shared moral core & belief in Matt 7v12 The Golden Rule try wisdomcommons. Also try comparative religion- read the 1500BCE papyrus of Ani & the Koran & Book of Mormon on skepticsannotatedbible. No one would give credence to such writings except for peer pressure & threats of death & hell. See. RichardDawkinsnet
zytigon 4 months ago
Comment removed
MrHoolits 4 months ago
@MrHoolits You must have been listening to a different debate
MrBellybell 4 months ago
@MrBellybell, Wow, I got the 2 backwards, Thanks, I'm deleting my comment.
PZ Myers did destroy Simmons.!
MrHoolits 4 months ago
Dont adhere to Darwin's theories anymore? You mean the natural selection? Why is Dawkins kept on mentioning Darwin natural selection all the time? and which framework did Darwin provide? Darwin stated that species evolved slowly over long period time. Can anyone show how giraffe gradually evolve from short necked four legged animals?
daogdaog 4 months ago
Comment removed
sl3ya44 4 months ago
@daogdaog
Yeah, Google can.
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli I spent years on the internet searching and came up with nothing showing incremental changes on giraffe evolution. The supposed descendant of a giraffe is so small that all parts of its body must be elongated to conform with massive giraffe size and the 4 meters difference in height. Millions of books were written using giraffe as an iconic example of evolution yet no evidence that it ever evolved at all.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog
It adapted favourably to an environment where trees have consumables available high up. The giraffe has to work less to eat continuously and it makes for a strong natural defense as well. Just because there is little evidence of this with say, transitional fossils, just means we haven't bothered digging. Do you think this honestly says anything about the truthfulness of the theory of evolution the whole? The fact that we never dug for giraffe transitional fossils?
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli Researchers have found out that giraffes normally feed on vegetation lower than 2 meters even during droughts. It is not logical that short necked animals simply starved to death for refusing to eat the vegetation on the ground. Goats are known to climb trees and would not need a longer neck to survive. Since female giraffes are normally shorter by a meter compared to males they should have starved and died out too. More than 100 million fossils were unearthed and no evidence yet.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog
Could you please answer the following: "Do you honestly think that not having transitional fossils for giraffes should put into question the truthfulness of the theory of evolution as a whole?"
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli Yes, of course the entire theory can be put in question. If you make giraffe as an iconic example in millions of biology textbooks you must have something to back it up. You cannot just say this small deer-like animal evolved in small incremental steps then show giraffe as a descendant with 4 meters difference in height with all its body parts elongated. That is speculation. Then you see on one hand bacteria and fruit fly never evolved for millions of years.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog
Do you have any alternative explanations you'd like to provide to explain this strange absence of giraffe transitions?
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli Yes. I have. The neo-Darwinism stated that species evolved slow in incremental steps, but to save neo-Darwinism from embarrassing scarcity of fossils, punctuated equilibrium stated that species showed almost no evolution for a very long time then there was a burst of evolution in a short period of time. An alternative theory would be a modified Punctuated equilibrium, almost stasis but no burst, that is, no evolution at all, Thereby consistent with giraffe,bacteria, crocs, sharks etc.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog
I have heard of this 'burst', but do not know what to think of it since I have not studied obscure zoological transitional fossils. I don't think it's embarrassing that there is a scarcity of fossils, nor do I think it puts the theory at risk of being terribly untrue -as a whole-. You may very well be the lucky guy to find out why the giraffe is the way it is if you stay interested long enough, and append the information to the overall theory of evolution.
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli embarrassing scarcity of fossils was actually mentioned by the author of Punctuated equilibrium. My alternative theory is observable and verifiable. unlike both neodarwinian or punctuated equilibrium.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog
So, where did they come from if not from other creatures?
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli Just like Neo-Darwinism inability to explain origin of life or where the cell come from or to account for explosion of the species in the cambrian period where many fully developed species with no apparent ancestors existed, we just let other theory to account for their existence species in the strata. At least this theory is observable and verifiable unlike punctuated or neodarwinian. Observable in fossils of scorpions, crocs, lizards, sharks, tigers, fruit flies, horseshoe crabs, etc.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog
Thanks to you, I will read Gould's book "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory".
BeBoBli 4 months ago
@BeBoBli welcome. thanks to you too for being open minded.
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog Years of searching and you couldn't find the Climacoceras? Are you willfully ignorant or are you a creationist? Come on, out with it. If you're just going to get around to preaching, cut to the chase.
fdasherv 4 months ago
@fdasherv That is precisely why evolution is false. Research has found out that Samotherium 3m in height the supposed descendant of Climacoceras actually existed before Climacoceras 1.5m. Okapi the supposed relative of giraffe existed before both Climacoceras and Samotherium. How could Samotherium that looked almost a giraffe evolved into its ancestor deer like with long antlers Climacoceras?
daogdaog 4 months ago
@daogdaog You obviously get your skewed information from the creationist liars websites. They deliberately misrepresent archeological and genetic facts because their agenda couldn't possibly exist without lies. What would a serious research institution need with falsehoods? They're not serious and neither are you. Have you spoken to a genetic zoobiologist or an actual paleontologist? Like I said, just get to the preaching already. You know you believe in Adam and Eve and the flood and all that.
fdasherv 4 months ago
@fdasherv There is no need to drag religion in this discussion. You cannot find that kind of info in any creationist websites. The research was actually made by evolutionist biologists who were puzzled as how giraffe got its long neck. Dont rely too much on wikipedia. It wont give you much info on how giraffe evolved and when Climacoceras and Samotherium first existed. Read some research papers.
daogdaog 4 months ago
1:03 - "before we begin this destru... err... discussion" #LOL
StrikaAmaru 5 months ago
Comment removed
StrikaAmaru 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (DONATED) FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The FOOL hath said in his heart,... "There is no God"
reasons4god 5 months ago
Wow. PZ just destroyed all of you ID boneheads.
drgoldteef 5 months ago
You can bring a christian to the pool of truth but you cant make him/her drink.
benaberry 6 months ago
I simply don't understand how so many doctors can have a degree in medicine while simultaneous having such fundamental misunderstandings about biology.
opmike343 6 months ago
Absolutely, its a tactic of these intellectually dishonest fraudsters that they try to frame the debate eliminating all questioning of there redundant creationism from the premise in question. They don't want an even playing field and now the islamic apologists are doing the same thing by having debates about the veracity of democracy and at the same time levering in dogma by the shovel full. Very nice PZ, point it out every time.
strangetranceoffaith 6 months ago
05:48 NO
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
gulbirk 7 months ago
@gulbirk Nah, there are definitely some exquisitely stupid questions.
Samuraionthewall 6 months ago
Dr. Myers came out of the gate looking for blood. Bravo.
hobokombat 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@creationistroll
why would i believe in your religious creationism, if you can't explain AB resistance or Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
logic for you:
creationism: i see no Intelligent designer, but one exists - appeal to ignorance.
transtlantic 7 months ago
"There is only one true reality."
Proclaim this to your friends; Find out how many of us have an inability to allow ourselves to think critically.
Or, best case scenario, end up having an awesome discussion amongst friends.
WickeDFate4 7 months ago
creationist MOFO..OWWWWNEDDDDDD... love yur work PZZZZ.... alwasy admired you.
chinamanspeakenlis 7 months ago
"Faith based reasoning". It would seem at least two of the three words in this phrase are at complete odds with each other.
Aralith1 7 months ago
2:50 this is the scariest mutant I've ever seen. A Hydra-Cat !!
SolDeSaBelle 7 months ago
Comment removed
SolDeSaBelle 7 months ago
From what I can tell already. this is going to be HILARIOUS
KaslarProductions 8 months ago
i don't even need to watch the other 4 parts. PZ has already annihilated simmons. of course i will though, because hearing a creationist get pwned is one of my favourite past times (:
ilytopy 8 months ago 12
good one
mystisme 9 months ago
heh... the "Discovery Institute" has the one conviction of destroying the single most impactful discovery of humanity. Beautiful irony.
StevenBee2 9 months ago 2
Does anyone else find it disturbing that a doctor doesn't understand the word theory as it applies to science?
momentofsciencetx 9 months ago
@momentofsciencetx
About as disturbing as being old enough to have followed the 'evolution' of definitions throughout the years, ranging from an accepted literal application of the word "theory" to the indefinite, conveniently non-committal one you refer to, now. I also remember when science deemed monkeys as ancestors of modern man... they have since recanted on that, as well. I wonder what other modifications will be necessary as reason debunks subsequent 'theories' ?
Redshield666 8 months ago
@Redshield666 No, the popular press and public deemed monkeys to be ancestors of man. Science has always viewed them as relatives with whom we share a common ancestor in the geologically recent past. Your usage of the word theory seems to confuse it's popular and scientific meanings. In any event, advancement and revision of evolutionary theory is to be expected given the huge advancements in our understanding of genetic biology in the last 50 years. It is religion that remains static.
XtalQRP 8 months ago
@XtalQRP
The schools of the day were teaching that man was directly descended from apes... I was there, I saw it, participated in it, end of story. And, you're right in the last part of your comment, which acknowledges the revision of old beliefs... which is all that they are, they're not irrefutable facts. They require the same amount of faith, as with religion, in light of the fact that no one alive, today, actually witnessed the events proposed by abiogenesis and evolution.
Redshield666 8 months ago
@Redshield666 Apes are different to monkeys but yes, we are decended from within the tribe of Apes. This was correct then and it is still correct now. Science does indeed revise itself - but it does this on the basis of evidence. It does not need faith or belief. The theories of gravity, of relativity, of quantumn mechanics - all have gone through the same process. Coincidently, we have and do observe evolution in organisms that rapidly produce thousands of generations within our lifetimes.
XtalQRP 8 months ago
@Redshield666
The "no-one was there" argument is imbecilic. It is so imbecilic that it is dishonest.
If you are not a dishonest person, retract that argument. And in this era when general education is available, and you have so zealously eschewed it, you should be ashamed. GET AN EDUCATION. Intro to Logic is a freshman-level course in college, and some high schools teach it.
Using the "you weren't there" defense in this context is exactly as stupid as using it in a criminal trial.
cbooth2004 7 months ago
@cbooth2004
And, I'm still waiting for admissible evidence to substantiate the presumption evolutionists have in asserting their religion over that of any other, in the 'court' of academic and social jurisprudence. We are to just assume evolution is correct or be vilified as morons, based upon the say-so of the arrogant, self-aggrandizing priests of modern-day techno-paganism, such as Myers.
You'll be here a long time, waiting for me to bow the knee to religious extremism of that order.
Redshield666 7 months ago
@Redshield666 I'm not impressed by your attempt to discredit the theory of evolution by bringing it down to the level of your religion. Just as those who deny theories such as gravity or a spherical earth would be considered morons by any modern basis of judgement, those who deny evolution's uncanny ability to explain facts observed in the world today should also be considered morons. This is because they base their denial not on reasonable discrepancies, but on a complete ignorance of facts.
PetercAW 7 months ago
@PetercAW
Well, unless I'm actually talking with a research scientist or biologist, here, I'd propose to you that it is you, sir, that is the one with the unwarranted belief, relying on the judgments and observations of strangers, having never participated in their experiments or studies or even met with them, face to face. Nor have you, yourself, observed the events you and they so dogmatically state MUST have happened.
And, at least I'm honest in not cloaking "faith" with "theory"!
Redshield666 7 months ago
@Redshield666 I don't have faith in the theory of evolution. Faith is belief without evidence. I have seen plenty of evidence for evolution, and even though I haven't experienced it firsthand, there is so much of it that it becomes unreasonable not to accept it.
And if relying on the judgements of strangers is such a bad thing, I propose that everyone should cease belief in all religious texts immediately.
PetercAW 7 months ago
@Redshield666 You do not have to assume anything, all you have to do is educate yourself. It looks like you do not understand how science works and even worse, you do not appreciate what the effects of science have done for your life.
uglyandbad 7 months ago
@Redshield666 "social jurisprudence"...you have heard of the Dover Trial?
"academic jurisprudence" there is no such thing. The process is called peer review. The number of peer reviewed papers in professional academic journals presenting supporting evidence for evolution numbers in the tens of thousand.
TomFynn 6 months ago 2
@TomFynn
All that tells us is that there are tens of thousands of individuals, out there, with the WRONG view of reality. I knew that long before you said anything.
Redshield666 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cbooth2004 "Using the "you weren't there" defense in this context is exactly as stupid as using it in a criminal trial." Not exactly. You're being too generous. It's actually far, far, stupider, for scientific epistemology is more thoroughgoing, more exacting, more precise,,more refined,more intelligent conducted, and in all ways *vastly* superior to "courtroom" epistemology.
polymath7 7 months ago
Respond to this video...
I.e., Prosecution: "His DNA was found at the scene." Defense: "How do you know, you weren't there!"
Prosecution: [fingerprints] Defense: "How do you know, you weren't there!"
Prosecution: [ballistics, the gun was fired from position x] Defense: "How do you know, you weren't there!"
Etc.
cbooth2004 7 months ago
@cbooth2004
Though I'm not in the habit of retracting anything that I say, or jumping when ordered to, merely on demand of some unknown, I will go as far as to restate that not only were there no living witnesses to the events prescribed by the religious dogma of abiogenesis and evolution, the whole premise, itself, is ridiculous in view of the obvious presence of divine thought in nature's design.
I certainly don't need any college course to help me interpret what common sense already does.
Redshield666 7 months ago
@Redshield666
Are you kidding me?!?!?! "I certainly don't need any college course to help me interpret what common sense already does."
That is, by far, the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. I see the sun rise in the morning and set at night, therefore common sense tells me the sun revolves around the Earth. Any serious study of the subject, however, disproves common sense. If you are unwilling to engage in this learning process, in any subject, you are only bathing in ignorance.
ultramerton 7 months ago
@ultramerton
No doubt you haven't heard anything other than your own dogma in a long time, with the mouth you have. Since you know it all, why bother talking here? Your arrogance shall suffice for you, young sir! I wouldn't debate you if my life depended on it... and, by my estimation, it doesn't!
Invoking that most-hated maxim that living life accordingly has everything to gain and nothing to lose, I'd say you are the one out on a limb and that it's you that had better 'pony up', son.
Redshield666 7 months ago
@Redshield666
Dogma? Debate me? Pony up? What are you talking about?
I don't know everything (obviously), but I know that closing your mind to new ideas so you can rely solely upon "common sense" is intellectual suicide; it's insulating yourself from the truth. There's nothing virtuous about being ignorant.
ultramerton 7 months ago
@ultramerton
"There's nothing virtuous about being ignorant."
Well, then, I suggest you live by your own maxim.
We're done.
Redshield666 7 months ago
@Redshield666
Umm... who are you talking to? You don't know anything about my actions or beliefs, so how can you even pretend to admonish me for them? Seriously, grow up.
ultramerton 7 months ago
@Redshield666 So if "were you there?" is an admissible argument about evolution, then surely it applies to the Bible. Obviously the writers of the Bible must post-date the creation event, so they weren't there. You can claim that the Biblical account was inspired by God, but... how do you know? You weren't there. And saying we can trust it because it's inspired undermines the rationale behind the "Were you there?" argument. To be consistent, you have to adopt a nearly universal skepticism.
Nullifidian 7 months ago
@Nullifidian Not when the tenets of evolution work in practical application. There needs not be any skepticism about evolution aside from religious nonsense.
alphaenemy 6 months ago
@alphaenemy I'm afraid you completely missed the point of my statement.
Nullifidian 6 months ago
@Redshield666 As wonderful an example of the God delusion as any.
TomFynn 6 months ago
@TomFynn
The Darwin bullshit is an even better example of delusional thinking.
Redshield666 6 months ago
@Redshield666 Evolution has what Creationism hasn't: evidence, facts and the power to explain.
Creationism is just a way of getting around having to admit: "I don't know" with something that is supposed to sound like Big Words.
TomFynn 6 months ago
@TomFynn
Yeah... if you only knew how many times I've heard "I don't know" from the Darwinist crowd. That and "Science changes all of the time, old theories being discarded for new."
Show me something conclusive and I'll believe. Something demonstrable to everyone and not just some scientist in some obscure lab, somewhere. Something that we can all see without having to take some 'expert's' word for it... in other words, the same request that I get regarding invisible "Sky Daddy."
Redshield666 6 months ago
@Redshield666 Show me something conclusive...If you you are only convinced by the evidence happening before your eyes, then you probably think that the moon landing never happened, since you were not there?
TomFynn 6 months ago
@TomFynn
You weren't there when the "Big Bang" supposedly occurred, either. Stop evading the issue. Your cult holds dominance with it's world-view, now, you can demonstrate to me why I should respect it... because, I don't.
Redshield666 6 months ago
@Redshield666 Ah, yes. As Sam Harris put it: "What evidence do have for someone who does not value evidence?"
At least in one thing we agree: I do not respect your "world-view" either.
TomFynn 6 months ago
@Redshield666
"Yeah... if you only knew how many times I've heard "I don't know" from the Darwinist crowd."
-Yes, saying "we don't know" is called "intellectual honesty, wherein when science doesn't have an answer, it doesn't MAKE ONE UP.
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
Sorry, fuckwad, but you're wrong on the "making up" business. In fact, there's been more shenanigans involved with Darwinism and evolution, over the years, relatively speaking, than in the entire history of so-called Christianity... which was merely organized paganism to begin with, eventually spawning the idiotic theory of evolution, itself.
Piltdown Man, Lucy, Archaeoraptor, Haeckel's Embryos, etc, are just a few examples that we know of. Censorship probably hides much more.
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
Guess what fagsuck, Scientists are the ones that exposed fraudulent claims, dipshit. The scientific process is self correcting. If you had a fucking clue, or a single shred of proof to invalidate evolution you'd be famous,... and you're not, just another uneducated anonymous fuckwit spewing trash and more bullshit on youtube.
Like I said, 150 years and counting.
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666
"The Darwin bullshit is an even better example of delusional thinking."
-Yet, we still wait for you to prove it as so... 150 years and counting.
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
It's proven itself to be a religion for shitheads like yourself, piss stain. Even your esteemed guru/con artist Dawkins thinks there could be an intelligent design to life, an admission forced out of him by a much smarter man. I mean, even he knows it's all horseshit, but, keeping you idiots in the dark helps pay his bills.
You dummies will believe anything, AS LONG as it defames or denies God. Once it does that, all thinking processes shut down, again, with you as living proof.
Redshield666 5 months ago
Comment removed
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666
Hows it feel being a retard, retard?
You can spew your vile ignorant uneducated verbal feces all you like, it doesn't change a thing. Your argument is over... been over for over a century and a half. time to grow up.
That evolution happens fact and THAT has not a fucking thing to do with your silly ass mythical sky friend. Your god is irrelevant, time to grow up.
150 years and still counting the number of retards that can't stop sucking their thumb and let go of their blankie.
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666
"Even your esteemed guru/con artist Dawkins thinks there could be an intelligent design to life, an admission forced out of him by a much smarter man."
Forced? Try again. Dawkins wasn't forced into anything. Dawkins never said design isn't a possibility, slight as it is. Because as unlikely as it is, 100% certainty cannot be achieved about a designed state, this includes you. What IS certain is that evolution happens.
Try listening, try reading viable sources, try an education.
nolobede 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nolobede
"Forced? Try again. Dawkins wasn't forced into anything. Dawkins never said design isn't a possibility, slight as it is. Because as unlikely as it is, 100% certainty cannot be achieved about a designed state, this includes you. What IS certain is that evolution happens."
LMAO!
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
"It's proven itself to be a religion"
-Proven? Really where? Show us where there is "proof" that evolution is a religion. Or even a consensus (outside of the creatard community that makes that shit up). Where? Is there some credible academic institution that certifies evolution as a religion? Fuckwit.
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
And, evolution is not only a religion, complete with it's own set of prophets, gurus, apostles (you) and other such miscreants and con artists, it's big business! Go check out Tricky Dicky Dawkins' website where he peddles all sorts of anti-theist trinkets and memorabilia, t-shirts, etc. It's hip, (and profitable) nowadays, being a member of the ape-worshiping cult of Darwin, Grand Vizier of Simpletons.
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
This is your proof that evolution is a religion? So... you admit that religion is a business?
Try to focus now... here's the difference;
The religious take money from the sick, weak, dying and diseased by the vile lying promise of divine intervention, which never happens. The money is used for million dollar homes, personal aircraft, tummy tucks and gold leaf embossing on hats and furniture of your false "prophets" like Popoff & Hinn
of RDF sells products for funding education
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666
...While Dawkins foundation funds Education, medical science (to ACTUALLY heal the sick), to vercome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and human suffering.
When his foundation pays for supplies for world crises, like Japan quake,flood, & Nuclear problems, they don't waste shipping weight,space,cost, efforts on shipping useless heavy bibles, they send water, food, Medicine and don't expect praise for a mythical juju man.
You've no argument, still just blathering
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
Evolution is simply pagan nature-worship all tied up in a nice neat little modernized version for secular idiots full of themselves and too mod to accept anything so primitive as what their stick-worshiping predecessors did, while contemporary, more advanced and intelligent races worshiped God.
And, Dawkins is for Dawkins... period.
Arguing? Son, just like with thousands of others on these sites, you're beyond arguing with. You're pure entertainment, nothing more.
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
the pure entertainment is mutual. I so enjoy watching the irrational writhe in a puddle of circular stupidity.
But surely if it is just pagan nature-worship drivel, what could be simpler than disproving it? There must be one single point of proof against all the millions of validated instances of proof of your myth? Surely after all these millennium you could come up with something?...
Yup, same as always. Have a nice trip in your delusion.
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
"But surely if it is just pagan nature-worship drivel, what could be simpler than disproving it?"
It's not hard at all... when someone is willing to listen. And, when I do, will that inspire you to rethink your dogmatic stance on origins?
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
Its not me you need to convince. My "stance" has nothing to do with dogma. I grew up with religion. I've already been through 30 yrs of careful consideration of religion. I have read the OT, NT KJV, NIV, Talmud, Torah, QuRan, Hadith, mere Christianity (Lewis0 as well as Hitchens Dennet, Harris and Dawkins. And regarding Evolution... I have read countless publications including those published, endorsed by "Dishonesty Institute."....
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666 I am also educated. And a great part of that education is geared toward critical thinking and analysis. You haven't brought up any item of discussion opposing biological validity of Evolution that we all haven''t heard before ad-naseum. Your ignorance and meaningless spewings of parroted creationist website propaganda goes the same place it always does, into an abyss of ignorance. What you fail to understand, as most all creationists do...
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666
...is that your squawking on a you tube channel is completely pointless, you can't win. If you want to convince someone of the validity of your argument, you need to go through the process. There IS no shortcut. To Disprove scientifically validated facts, ONLY the scientific method will work. Convincing one person does nothing. You need to take your argument to the forum of the worlds scientific community and get a consensus. Short of that, you ramble in futility.
nolobede 5 months ago
Darwins Theory, was only a stepping stone to current knowledge. That evolution happens, is stone-cold, rock-solid FACT. Our understanding of the process has been validated in staggering, irrefutable proportions. Denying evolution happens is no less than ignorance, or lack of acceptance due its polarity with unfounded beliefs.
Disregarding facts, doesn't change facts.
So unless you can provide proof that passes worldwide accepted process of the scientific method, you're pissing on your own leg.
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
LOL! Evolution is not, repeat, NOT happening, dummkopf. What you call evolution is merely adaptation... an organism's limited ability to adapt to it's surroundings WITHOUT it's basic cellular/genetic structure changing or fomenting new life forms. Accepting Darwinism is no less than ignorance with a tendency toward stupidity.
And nice try separating yourself from Darwinism, just like you did from your/it's earlier position that men evolved from apes.
Redshield666 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Redshield666
"Evolution is not, repeat, NOT happening, dummkopf. What you call evolution is merely adaptation... an organism's limited ability to adapt to it's surroundings WITHOUT it's basic cellular/genetic structure changing or fomenting new life forms. "
-Then prove it... the worlds scientific community is waiting, will praise you for it and make you rich and famous... go ahead, any time now.
nolobede 5 months ago
@Redshield666
"LOL! Evolution is not, repeat, NOT happening, dummkopf. "
- Apparently not your family, and maybe repeating it to yourself over and over and over... helps your mental state, but it'll never change the state of reality, or fact.
"just like you did from your/it's earlier position that men evolved from apes. "
-Um... yeah. The world is still waiting for your proof just like all the other uneducated fuckwit religious fucknut babbling creationists on the planet. Idiot of futility
nolobede 5 months ago
@nolobede
@Redshield666
talkorigins. org/faqs/comdesc/
myxo.css.msu.edu/lenski/pdf/2008,%20PNAS,%20Blount%20et%20al.pdf
Evolution is, I repeat IS HAPPENING. It has been observed, it has been tested.
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WaltonSauce
"Evolution is, I repeat IS HAPPENING. "
... No shit! Maybe you should read the whole thread before you post.
I'm sure you meant to post to Mr Ignorance redshield666 ?
nolobede 5 months ago
@WaltonSauce
LMAO!
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
"more advanced and intelligent races worshiped God."
Clearly, I see how God has saved so many more likes than biology. OH WAIT HE HASN'T.
He hasn't saved any, you can't even demonstrate that he exists.
How many has biology saved? Let me think... How about I give you a short list of benefits from knowledge of biology:
Penicillin, Vaccinations, Modern Medicine, Painkillers, Anaesthetic, Agriculture. All of these have saved more lives than God.
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@Redshield666
They've also saved more lives than God if you accept the Bible to be true, he killed a fair few in that didn't he?
In fact he killed more than Satan, and Satan only killed them when he had God's permission. I read through your previous comments with @nolobede you seem to have presented no evidence for your claim that creationism is true and instead only posted infantile Ad Hominem attacks.
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@WaltonSauce
"... he killed a fair few in that didn't he?"
He's not finished with that, either. (Word to the idiot)
I could also say Satan started all of this, too, but then that would let Adam off of the hook. Legally and morally, God had the right to kill Adam. He spared him, giving your pal Satan opportunity to show the universe how wrong he is.
You've been a busy little texter... I won't bother answering all of your drivel, I'll just say your theories are only worthy of Ad Hominem.
Redshield666 5 months ago
@Redshield666
Really? My theories have evidence. Your hypotheses (and that's what they are) have none, you can't even demonstrate why anyone should believe in God or The Bible.
"God had the right to kill Adam." Did he really? Why exactly? (assuming your God actually exists)
If you can only reply with Ad Hominem then you do realise why I don't take you and other christians seriously?
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@Redshield666
"I could also say Satan started all of this, too" You could, but you would need evidence for this claim.
You can say what you like, I'm asking for evidence of what you say. In your theology is God not Omniscient, Omnipotent and Benevolent? If he is: He knew Satan would hurt people, He had the power to stop Satan and He loves humans, so why didn't he stop Satan? (Assuming any of these things exist).
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@WaltonSauce He's loving like a parent, if you misbehave he's gonna punish you.He knows what Satan is doing,he lets him to test us which would make Life a test and give us purpose. You want EVIDENCE the Bible's real, look up all of its FULFILLED PROPHECIES, through the prophets.They never mention them because they never READ the bible but it has ALWAYS guessed right. They deny religion because they question and question things we don't know the answer to but I can do this ALL DAY with science.
Killswitch305 5 months ago
@Killswitch305
Fulfilled prophecies, like what? Saying the new testament fulfilled OT is no different than saying chamber of secrets fulfilled philosophers stone's prophecies.
You clearly don't know what a theory is in Science.
I don't care if newton read the bible everyday, that's an appeal to authority
Heres a word for you Abiogenesis, and if all life came from more life, surely god must have too. That is special pleading.
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@WaltonSauce I'm not saying God didn't come from anything but hey, doesn't change the fact that there's a higher beings. Prophecies about jerusalem being destroyed and rebuilt. If you match them with history they're are right on point, I can show you a series of videos with valid sources if you'd like. I know what theory is...THEORY of Evolution, like somehow over time alien genetics got mixed with genetics of apes. DNA destroys evolution when studied. Look up prophecies yourself, don't be lazy!
Killswitch305 5 months ago
@Killswitch305
DNA destroys evolution, yeah sure it does, no mention of aliens in it. And I'm a genetics student mate, so don't lie about DNA.
Prophecies about Jerusalem being destroyed and rebuilt, WOW how godlike. Still no evidence that God exists. Again you have no idea what a theory is...
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@Killswitch305
Look up BASIC genetics, burden of proof and basic scientific method yourself, don't be lazy.
WaltonSauce 5 months ago
@Killswitch305
> He's loving like a parent, if you misbehave he's gonna set you on fire and burn you forever in eternal torment...
Oh wait. That's not like a loving parent. That's like an omnicidal maniac.
rkyeun 5 months ago
@rkyeun NO HES NOT, look at you. You probably sin EVERY SINGLE DAY of your life. Probably have no self-control, no purpose to life and listen to all the BS people feed you. Search for the Truth my friend, it'll set you free and don't let anyone stop you. If you want the shortcut, look up all the biblical fulfilled prophechies or ignore them and swing aimlessly but the puritans are the perfect example of what "god-given" rights and equality can form until corruption kicks in. Look at the US now.
Killswitch305 5 months ago
@Killswitch305
Your own words back at you, but with sarcasm.
rkyeun 5 months ago
@rkyeun The law condemns! A King who loves his child and teaches him not to break laws, one day finds his son, reaching age of reason, has murdered another. The son is arrested, convicted, and sentenced to death by the King. This King may love his son with all his heart, but he also loves the one murdered just as much and the law and penalty is firm! This King is a JUST king not a omnicidal maniac. One difference! God loves you so much he will take the penalty for you, if you allow him. LOVE!
PhalanxPerception 5 months ago in playlist PZ Myers destroys Simmonds in evolution debate
@PhalanxPerception
Except of course that I haven't murdered. The law this king enforces is one entirely of his own making, enforced with tyranny greater than North Korea, reflecting his own colossal ignorance and immorality. Under his law the penalty for murder is not death, which might be a just punishment, but rather this king commands jaywalkers to suffer eternal torture. Oh, but he loves you. So if you will but allow yourself to be forced to suck his cock, you may be spared.
No thanks.
rkyeun 5 months ago