We all love to put our thoughts into words with the hope of some truth and reality to spring out of our reasoning. But to does who believe that natural cause and effects are the engines that produce information inside the DNA, Problems arise. These problems are so huge that we dare not talk about them. We close our eyes and wish them away.
@takirid That's becuse you have you creation glasses on. (I'm a because person) I'm NOT shitty with u personally (It's fun but a waste of time arguing with yecs). But I'll argue with u (when I got time). It's all so pointless when we both know we will get NOWHERE! Anyway... About glasses. The fossil record and DNA both indicate evolution and creation (beatifully). DNA is very neary the same as fossil record (we were a poofteeth % wrong with fossill record). They both say life started simple.
@takirid Both the fossil record and DNA say life became gradually more complex. But, with your creationists glasses on, it is a catagory system made by God and indicates that it is not only intelligently designed but also sort-of catedgorised! One point each, and so this is not good for any argument! So lets get to something we can all see with our own eyes (if we go on a guided tour that is). Go on a guided tour of all the LARGE impact craters! But first I WILL SHOW ID WITH EVOLUTION.
@takirid (With MY glasses on) The big bang created all the matter in the uni and made quarks (and other particles, such as mesons, including electron, and photons etc and heat). Anyway, the quarks formed protons and neutrons (inside protons varified by accelerators etc). 3 quarks formed a proton and 3 quarks formed a newtron (and other smaller particals are different in each). These protons and neutrons were in a state of PLASMA (like the sun and a canle flame). Among free electrons!
@takirid In the plasma, less neutrons combined with SOME protons, to form neuclei of helium (and other trace element neuclei). When the plasma cooled enough (for the flame to go-out so-to-speak) THE ELECTRONS STARTED WHIZZING AROUND THE NEUCLEI. This happens NOW, when we extinguish a flame. A MIRACLE (is God doing it???). Anyway all these atoms formed (from the original particles, and a flame is great evidence, as well as particle accelerators). These atoms formed stars (observed NOW).
@takirid Inside stars, there is fusion power and it TURNS ONE SUBSTANCE INTO ANOTHER SUBSTANCE. (EVOLUTION). This is observed when a neuclear bomb goes off. (NO u don't believe that do you)? Inside stars, many substances are made and when they explode the heaviest metals are made. We come from an exploded star because uranium exists! All these new elements (and remaining original elements) made US! The calcium in our bones, etc, etc. ARE THESE ORIGINAL PARTICLES "DESIGNER PARTICALS"?!?
@takirid Is this ID or what? Were the original particles from the the big bang inteligently designed? U say that ID points towards an inteligent creator. But this also demonstrates that evolution also points to an inteligent designer (but you dont believe in evolution) and say that it can't do it by it's self. What about God being OMNIPITENT (spell) Can't god design particles that CAN do this if god is omnipitent???
@takirid If u want to do some study on my style, see my video called "OOH, OOH, OOH, OOH". and read my arguments wht silly creationists. And see how I was educated by creation science on my video called "5 EASY WAYS TO DEBUNK A YOUNG EARTH (TALK)".
@takirid But I said I changed my mind and will argue craters once. The craters are proven by iridium (and other rare substances) and tektites (glass marble formations). Google earth impact craters and you will see craters (up to 300 km diam). A 200km one has a soil volume of at least 150,000 cubic kms (blasted into the air). Your science fiction ark wouldn't survive! And that's just ONE impact! 50over 50 km, some over 100km and a few LARGER! And U put them ALL in the flood!!! (HA! HA!).
@takirid A 200 km diam crater with average depth, say 5 km. Volume = pye r squared x average depth. = 3.14 x100 x 100 x 5 = 150,000 cubic kms of soil and rock blasted out, making a hole 200 km diameter. How many neuclear bombs would we need to do this? The craters are there, fact. Some are that big, fact. And a couple bigger and all the others, fact. You can't argue the amount of soil and rock moved instantly, fact. Common sennse says nothing would survive. But you haven't got any!
this is the crappiest depiction for evolution I've ever seen, this is hilarious (especially all the creationists who think this was done by a respected scientist or something).
The problem is evolution and all the scientific facts are not proofs there is no creator. I dont believe in creation the way it is seen by christian. But it is not because animal adapt and change over time that there is no creator let's say a god or any supreme intelligence dumb some cell on a big laboratory like earth to see what will come of it, US, It is not more stupid than any believing. it is just less accepted. Im not saying that it is the thruth but who know.. Sorry, im not english
Let me state this for ALL THE IDIOTS OUT THERE ....Cause theres alot of em...ADAPTION IS A SCIENTIFIC FACT...Why...Because of PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. ...EVOLUTION IS A MYTH AND A RELIGION...Why..? Because of a LACK OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE...You know, The SAME REASON you morons blast people who believe in a creator...LACK OF SCIENTIFIC PROOF or PHYSICAL EVIDENCE...PLEASE...If you are PAYING FOR YOUR EDUCATION ... STOP!!!
@armageddon2419 Evolution is simply when a species adapts in divergent ways long enough that it becomes reproductively isolated from other members of its group. It then becomes a new species. This is the point in which it has evolved. The adaptations continue until the organisms have changed into several slightly different species, eventually changing dramatically from the original species that started the group. Not magic, just common sense.
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO CHROMOSOMES FUSED TOGETHER (gee, the evolution religion loves that one...even without physical evidence, They still love that one)....BLESS MY SOUL...A MIRACLE...A REAL CHRISTMAS MIRACLE !!! You see people...EVOLUTIONISTS DO BELIEVE IN MIRACLES AND ARE FAR LESS SCIENTIFIC THAN WE THINK. some people will believe anything !!!
How many chromosomes does a human have...? ----------- How many chromosomes do Great Apes have...? ------- That, Folks, is what I would call a MIRACLE...NO, Better....ITS MAGICK...YES...ABRA-CADABRA...Please...Tell me you didnt pay for that EDUCATION. And Evolutionists call Creationists Irrational
@armageddon2419 Human's have 23 pairs, all other Great Apes have 24 pairs. In Human's chomosomes 2 and 4 fused several million years ago, hence we have one less pair. The process is called chromosonal fusion. It has happened to horses and zebras as well.
Which is more ABSURD...That Animals turn into different Animals...which by the way there is absaloutely NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF FOR... or ...That A Superior Intelligence is a Grand and Exact Architect....IT TAKES FAR MORE OF A LEAP OF FAITH TO ''BELIEVE'' in The Fairy Tale called Evolution...HISTORY AND SCIENCE HAS SHOWN US...Animals ADAPT...They DO NOT CHANGE FROM ONE KIND OF ANIMAL TO ANOTHER...HOLY CRAP...What moron would believe that..?
@armageddon2419 YOU FUCKING RETARD DO YOUR RESEARCH! Evolution has been observed. I will give you a example, there was a group of scientist released a couple of carnivorous lizards into the a island to study them, but do to complications they had to leave and could not return for 20 years. And when they did they found the lizards great, great, etc, grankids have devoleped new muscles and a new digestive system and became herbivorous to adapt to their inviroment!Thats just one ex.
@HeadShoht JACKHOLE.....You are an IDIOT....That is ADAPTION...NOT EVOLUTION....The Lizard DID NOT turn into a rhinocaurous....And I dont care how many millions of years you wait...IT WONT!!!
@armageddon2419 Evolution is basically adaption, it is adapting and changing for the better! If a animal has been "adapting" for millions of years it WILL turn into another animal! Oh and how about your bible explain the dinosaurs and early human fossils we found such as Homo Erectus? We came from those early humans! We are Homo Sapiens, we became a new species! I'd like to see what you have to say now! Buttpipe.
@HeadShoht JACKHOLE...WHO EVER SAID I BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE...RELIGION IS A JOKE...LIKE EVOLUTION WHICH IS JUST AS FALSE AS THOSE OF CHRISTENDOM...FOR THE LAST TIME...BECAUSE YOUR A DORK....LISTEN...IM A SCIENTIST....FACTS, MAM, JUST THE FACTS....A. NO, ADAPTION IS NOT EVOLUTION...DORK!!!! 2. NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE HAS THERE EVER BEEN SCIENTIFIC, PHYSICAL EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT KINDS OF ANIMALS TURN INTO OR CHANGE INTO DIFFERENT KINDS OF ANIMALS SO PISS OFF YOU MORON!!!!
@armageddon2419 Then why don't you explain the fossils of the early humans and the example I gave you, evolution is treated as a fact in the scientific community because of all the information! Also why do some humans have some Neadnderthal DNA? If your so smart you would know the answer in evolution!!! Why are humans 95% genetically simailir to humans? Why are there subspecies of animal? How did there get to be so many different types of animals? EVOLUTION!!!!
This is baloney! No amphibians, just fish to mammal. Alsomhlknlfdh
sdfljsdfgdgdglb gll
Also if there were such things dinosaurs fossils were are proto-mammal phossils?>
thang tgnbn frutang gsrjs;kgdj sgh;p Ï of the .dtg God blortek von smarzingham? Thorkspeld villendengmyar une esque fromage pour le herbivore?> STFU edgl ♪
@AngeloNiklis Makes about as much sense as most arguments against evolution :) But yeah, in all reality, this video is REALLY bad. Not an accurate representation of the theory of evolution at all.
@takirid What do you base your assertion that evolution is a myth on? So far your argument has lacked any real substance, "it's rubbish cause I don't believe it" is not a substantial argument. It has no value in any conversation.
@takirid This doesn't answer that question. Evolution is the theory of how simple organisms became more complex over time. You cannot lump all theories into one, that is not how they work. If you want an education in all aspects of biology go to school. You are the one offering an alternative to what is taught in schools, enlighten me as to your evidence. The evidence that supports evolution is: DNA, comparative morphology, fossil records, geographic distribution to name a few.
@archy526 DNA dose'nt support evolution it supports creation. As for the fossil record.If evolution were a fact,the fossil evidence would surely reveal a gradual changing from one kind of life into another.And that would have to be the case regardless of which variation of evolutionary theory is accepted.If evolution were a fact,the fossil record would reveal beginnings of new structures in living things.There should be at least some fossils to prove your morphing,but there is none.
@takirid First off, how is DNA evidence for creation and not evolution? The minute differences between the DNA of different organisms fits exactly with the previous thought decent lines through evolution. The fossil record does support evolution, vestigial structures show the morphology stages and evolutionary changes occur in bursts, it is not like a gradual slope linear line, it is more like a stair case. The organisms typically change in response to something (I.E. climate change)
"I am wasting my time with some one who has no clue about the process of life."
LOL RUN AWAY
BECUASE YOU CANT SUPPLY A RELIGIOUS EXCUSE FOR THE FACTS I STATED!
" Go back to school, and don't wast my time."
You need to go back to school, or rather stop going to religious brain washing so you can accept the facts you already know THE ONES TAUGHT AT SCHOOL AND EVERY GREAT UNIVERSITY IN THE WORLD.
@gorilla199uncensored you religious ppl need to take your fairy tale shit somewhere else if you actually studied biology you would know that there were fossil of mammals that date back millions of years before the first ape even stud up straight idiot
@gorilla199uncensored DNA molecules lie tightly coiled in the chromosomes of the cell.Your genes,which are section of DNA molecuels,contain all the information necessary to make you what you are."The genetic program carried in DNA makes every living thing different from all other living things.This DNA program makes a dog different from a fish,a zebra different from arose and a willow different fom a wasp.It makes you different from every other person on earth.
@gorilla199uncensored DNA is made up of two strands wound around each other and takes on a shape like that of a spiral staircase or a twisted ladder with rungs.The two strands are connected by combinations of four compounds called bases.They form the rungs of the twisting DNA ladder.The exact order of the bases in the DNA molecule is what determines the genetic information it carries.This determines virtually everything about you,from the color of your eyes,shape of nose.
@gorilla199uncensored The amount of informatiom contained within the DNA of just one of your cells is staggering.Since DNA is responsible for passing on hereditary information from one generation of cells to the next,it has been called the master plan of all life.So you people who accept evolution "need to ask yourselves"where did this master plan come from.Was it by chance or by design.The only conclusion that we can come to that there is a designer who created all things
@takirid You simply stated that DNA is complex, therefore it must have been designed. That is not a real argument. If you except that DNA exists and that it is passed down through heredity, then by default you except the process of evolution. (even if you don't think so) If parents pass on their genes, then those who have more offspring (those that are more fit) have more representative genes in the gene pool. That is the basis for natural selection.
@archy526 Yes DNA is complex.And the reason why its complex,because there is a designer.Like I said before, the DNA code for all living thing is according to its own kind not some evolutionary scientific fiction based on theory.This is what Charles Darwin in his conclusion to the Origin of the Species, he wrote of the grandeur of the "view of life, with its several powers,having been originally breathed by the Creator.
@takirid As I have stated before, evolution in no way addresses the concept of a creator, it simply states how organisms attained their current form. Based on heredity, what happens if a group of individuals splits, then one half decides only the tallest individuals will reproduce and the other only the shortest. After a few hundred generations of this, how will the individuals from each group compare? Will their genes still look the same? Or will they have lost the "short genes"?
@archy526 Then you tell me, how did this complex world we live on all come about.And as for the tallest an the shortest its called variety,but they still remain the same.Just like Roses there are Red,Yellow,White Roses but they still remain Roses. Same with the Human race weather tall or short,black,white,yellow or brown they still remain Human,same apply to all other living things.
@takirid I make no claim to know how this planet came into being, there are theories, one may be right. that is not the discussion, evolution is not about origin, it is about diversification. You are getting stuck on semantics, if the ONLY difference was height, then yes it would be variety, but as the divergences occur more and the old genes are lost (those carrying them do not reproduce) they would eventually become significantly different. different size, different genes.
@archy526 If these genes differ enough, they not only look different but can no longer create viable offspring (IE horses and donkeys= sterile mules). That is speciation. I don't see why this is so hard to comprehend. natural selection is based on reproduction, those who reproduce more have more representation in the gene pool, those that don't eventually cease to be in the gene pool.
@archy526 This is what Professor Behe had to say about Natural Selection:If you search the scientific literature, you will discover that nobody has made a serious attempt-an experimental attempt or detailed model-that explains how such molecular machines arose by Darwinian processes.This is despite the fact that in ten years since my book was published,many scientific organization,such as the National Academy of sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
@archy526 -continue: have issued urgent appeals to their memberships to do everything they can to fend off the idea that life provides evidence of intelligent design.
@takirid Behe also presents in his book that establishes the concept of irreducible complexity that because a car crash could be "set up" to look like it was real even though it wasn't that a creator could have "set up" evolution to look like it was the rout organisms took. That is not science, it is philosophy. Both irreducible complexity and specific complexity rely on the concept that if evolution is wrong then intelligent design must be right. That alone destroys its credibility.
@archy526 Both of their ideas boil down to disproving evolution (which they fail at) and assuming that intelligent design is the ONLY alternative to evolution. The biggest issue with this is it IS NOT SCIENCE. You can not prove one idea by disproving another. That is not proof for anything other than one being wrong. If anyone could present one valid piece of information on intelligent design the conversation would be worth having. There has yet to be any presented.
@archy526 Proof "DNA" the code for all living things,thats why we have a intelligent designer.You are the one thats closed your mind to the truth just like those scientist.that Behe worked with.They know there's a Designer but they rather spin alot of bullshit.What about you, are you a scientist.
@takirid Give me one reason OTHER than the fact that DNA is complex (because that is NOT proof) that proves a designer by using DNA. Describing how it works and its composition do not favor ID, they are however used to efficiently prove evolution by way of natural selection. Heritability is how natural selection works. That is it's mechanism. My mind is not closed to ideas with merit. I have read the texts that the ID movement are based on and are not founded in science.
@takirid U are HARD WIRED! and no fact is going to move you. Nobody can argue with volume of soil for a given crater size!!! Google craters and u will see a good shot of the 250 km diam crater in Africa (I done a utube video about craters with it). The volume would be about 200,000 cubic kms! Imagine the energy REQUIRED to move all that soil and rock (instantly)!!! And that's only one, u have all the other big ones, one catostropic one each week instead of one in millions of years.
@takirid Darwin's Black Box:The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution By Michael J. Behe pg. 193. I thought you said you read it. I did, and it states exactly what I said earlier. pg 194 "the upshot of this conclusion- anything could have been purposely arranged- is that we cannot know that something has not been designed." His words not mine. He seems nice, but his conclusions are misguided at best.
@takirid I'm not sure if that was a question or statement. Your grammar was lacking, much like your argument. I will make mine clear: YES. I think that the majority of the scientific community (depending on your source, %95 to %99.9) knows better than a handful of people with degrees presenting pseudo scientific findings in non peer reviewed publications. It is unfortunate that uneducated people can read the "rubbish" published by the ID movement and think that it is science. It is not.
@takirid The impact craters prove an old earth. Google impacts on earth (from both sides) and u will see that there's no way ANYTHING would survive If ALL those impacts happened within one year!! NO WAY. How many cubic km of soil was in a 200 km diam crater. Thousands of cubic kms of ejected soil and rock, into the air, from just ONE impact. There are 50 craters over 50 km, several over 100 km, a few around 200 and one 300 km. No creationist has been able to answer this so don't bother!!!
@takirid And on top of what archy526 says, you should also realize the remaining 5% of scientists who don't accept evolution theory are all because of their religious faith which they assume to be true a prior. There is zero scientific evidence against evolution that is published within a peer-reviewed academic journal. You want to put religious faith over science? Fine, but if that's your stand, then there's nothing further to discuss.
@takirid To confirm before I leave you alone: so you are then indeed saying religious faith triumphs over whatever science can give you? Cuz looking at your history, you don't act like it. You speak as if you demand evidence for evolution, yet in the end, you just admit here that even if all scientific evidence point towards evolution (which in a way it does already), you still won't accept it simply because of your religious faith. That is indeed what you are saying, correct?
@Casshyr So we dont need rocket science (or creation science) to know that the world is NOT 6000 yrs old (otherwise we simply would NOT be here). A 35 km one is only a little one and there is an (unconfirmed impact) 500 km diam. How many CUBIC KMs of soil and rock would come from one that is over 100 km diam? Thousands of cubic kilometers of debris instantly flung into the air. How much energy would that require? Billions of yrs explains why we are here!
@Casshyr Only billions of years explain why we are here and the world had a chance to recover between strikes. But creationists put ALL the large impacts in the flood (and rewrite the Bible big-time). But the problem only gets worse for them because all these catostopic events are ALL happening within ONE YEAR! (HA-HA-HA). How could anything survive that? (maybe a few microbes). The initial shock wave of the very first big one would pulverize the ark.
@Justwantahover LOL that's a good one. Although I can already imaging them making up excuses like "oh they all happen on the first day, when God first created the Earth, without any creatures. God put us on this planet after those craters were formed..." or some other bs..essentially their denial of radiometric dating give them the freedom to move dates around to fit their messed up logic.
@Casshyr But the flood buggers that theory up (I suppose) so they either put them in the flood or just say they are formations from flood (withiridium and tektitesaround them). They must recon if they struck initially, they would have been eroded by the flood. I don't know why they do this, they are mad!@!
@Justwantahover Answering black sky! I hope u can help me (and no creationist has challenged me after a bit of arguing). An atomic bomb blows a hole a couple ar a few hundred meters round (and varies a bit with different locations). The volume of it would be only a tiny fraction of a cubic km. The 1km diam arizona crater would be nearly 100 times more volume of soil (and still only about a quarter of a cubic km). You seen the volcanoes, Imagine 150,000 cubic kms flung out!
@Justwantahover I'm not saying that ALL of it chokes the air (just the really fine stuff) and most of it is just flung out and lands way outside the crater. Look at the ones on the moon and u will see spoke-like features where the debris was flung out. The (yet unconfirmed) largest crater on earth (500km diam) is about the same size as the largest ones on the moon (whick were filled with lava from inside the moon). They punctured the moon when it was hotter inside than now.
@Casshyr Then u have the problem of the tens of thousands of cubic kms of debris in the atmosphere. This would have caused dark skies for decades. It proves the world is old (hands down) and I didn't use any rocket science (only length x times breadth x depth). And I didn't really need to use many figures (because they spesk for themselves) and you can see it in the soil! And anyone can SEE IT WITH THEIR OWN EYES! Plain and simple! No creationis has had the last word on this issue!!!
@Justwantahover LOL. Ok, what if they say "no the damage isn't that significant. You are exaggerating the effect. No modern scientists have ever observe a 30km meteoroid falling into Earth. We don't know what would really happen. What you describe is merely a simulation, and it's wrong". What do you say to that?
@Casshyr Not one creationist has been able to even get close to getting past this one and they can't answer it. U can go on a guided tour of the largest impact craters and see how big they are (up to 300 km diam). A few around 200 km, several over 100 km amd 50 over 50 km diam (and a 50 km one has supposedly caused a mass extinction). Imagine excavating a 3.5 km one (How long would that take). Imagine the energy! A 35km one would have 1000 times more soil in it (that's no longer there).
@Casshyr How can it be wrong? All I'm saying is fact that anyone can see simple lenght x breadth x depth for increased volume of soil inside a crater (that is no longer there). Where is the exageration? The photos from NASA comfirm size and number of craters. How much soil and rock comes out of a 200 km diam crater? Pie r squared x depth. 3.14 x 100x100 x 5 (say10 km average depth (and half that just to be conservative). = OVER I50,000 CUBIC KLMS!!! Theres a few that size and larger!
@Justwantahover I understand the amount of soul that would be rocketed up into the sky. But there's no actual observation that this soil would, to use your words, "black out the sky" and cause massive extinction. What if all that soil simply fall back down and only creatures within a 500km radius died, but everywhere else is fine...(kinda like an atomic bomb explosion exception without the radiation), if that's their argument, what would be your counter-argument?
@Justwantahover I'm not disagreeing with u btw, i'm simply trying to see any possible messed-up "loopholes" they may come up, cuz i think ur points are great, but i want to be prepared before i use it lol
@Justwantahover I know u basically agree (It's just that nobody can argue with the volume of soil for a given diameter of crater) and it's that simple! You don't really need anything else to prove an old earth, but we have stax of other evidence: distant star light, fossil record backed up by DNA (which can also be seen as ID), No evidence of r-decay accell, trilobites died out but not jell-fish (debunks flood with impacts), the list goes on. Google impacts and use them for yecs.
@Justwantahover Iknow u believe in evolution (with the fairies dancing around looking after the puddle brewing up life). The fairies also made the electrons start whizzing around the protons and helium neuclei (for the first time and even now). In a flame, some of the electrons are free-floating and are not whizzing! It's called PLASMA. It's when they start whizzing again, and go down in "orbit levels"; IS WHY WE SEE THE FLAME! I believe in the fairies (so-to-speak)! My friend!
@takirid You are purposely setting up an impossible scenario for you to accept evolution by basically saying "i refuse to believe in it until i see one kind evolving to another kind with my own eyes", yet you also know such transition takes on the scale of million of years, yet you can live probably not even up to 100. See the contradiction? With the stringent irrational conditions you have set here, you made yourself close-minded and impossible to discuss with.
@Casshyr I am not closed minded,in fact I have researched some of the evolutionary theories put forward and some of the comments they have made."Christopher Booker,said this:"It was a beautifully simple and attractive theory. the only trouble was that,as Darwin was himself at lest partly aware,it was full of colossal holes." Regarding Darwin's Origin of Species,he observed:"We have this book which has become famous for explaining the origin of species in fact does nothing of the kind.
@takirid See, there's your problem again. Why do you put the words of a journalist over the words of scientists?? Do you think Christopher has even taken any 4th year genetics course at a credited university? You shouldn't quote from people who don't even have a Masters in science. Journalist is not a scientist. At least find quotes from someone with PhDs in biology! Some creationists do indeed have that, at least quote from them, please!
@takirid "I quoted him because he's one of your lot,Booker the evo-man." => NO! Christopher Booker is a proponent of intelligent design. btw, you should also realize Booker also wrote about how there's no danger to passive smoking, and disagree on the correlation between that to cancer. Talk about being stupid! And you trust anything he has to say in science?? Hypothetically, even if he is indeed an evolutionist (which he is not), he is certainly not on par with science.
@Casshyr U are right about the debris but the incredibly huge amount of it means that if u take two zeros off that amount, for the amount that went into the air and it's still thousands of cubic klms (so lets take another zero off). And 200 cubic kms may be more realistic! But even if it was that low theres all the other strikes (a few bigger) for the ark to contend with. See my channel, you may like it, CHEERS! (Will study impacts, they say it got dark.)
@Justwantahover hmm...how is it something they can see with their own eyes? Are you talking about radiometric dating of those craters? cuz you forget, they don't believe in that either lol (at least as long as it's dated to be under 6000 years)
@takirid Will just ONE creationist be convinced of evolution (nomatter how much evidence (of which you have NONE and never will have any). Why do you argue with us (i'm definitely NOT going to argue with you). And why is he arguing with you? It's completely POINTLESS! I can persuade my wall to believe in evolution, BUT NOT YOU, NO NEVER, NOT IN 6000 YRS..... WHY ARE YOU ARGUING???
@Justwantahover Im not arguing,I am simply stating the facts that DNA puts your evolutionary theory in the rubbuish bin.Like I have always said, DNA is the blue print to all living things,Proof of a intelligent Deisgner.Now if you want to talk to your wall "hey bro, thats fine with me,everyone to own thing.
@archy526 I also said that the DNA determines the heredity of every living thing,according to its own kind, that a Gorilla,Monkey,Fish,Dog,Human,that each one has there own blue print or DNA Code that determines what they will be.There offsprings will look like them according to there own kind,no evolution transition, they will always be what they are,according to its own kind.Those in the scientific community know this but they refuse to give credit to a Creator.
@takirid You can't say evolution is a myth because we have solid good evidence where as Creation by a high power only evidence is in scrolls and books and is not credible at all.I myself believe either we evolved or that Aliens with advanced technology created us from a primitive species of primate and accelerated our evolution by hundreds of thousands of years.But believing a creature that is invisible and lives in the sky created us is absurd.
Creationists: you can't use God to explain anything unless you first offer scientific proof for God. I believe in existence of aliens somewhere in this universe, but i don't use them to explain the stuff we don't know!
@ethanswenson15 and in the video we were retarded monkey fish frogs up until about half way through our evolution wen all fish traits dissapeared. I thinks there is more wrong here then just tails for to long
@ethanswenson15 it looks like a visual aid that christians would use when attempting to be deroggatory to evolution, you know, how they always assume that evolution states that fish jumped to man with no steps in between.
@takirid how is evolution a fraud, or for that matter, hard to understand? Evolution is the process of slight or significant anatomical changes in an existing creature biology over time until it becomes a new species entirely. this process is initiated by changes in the creatures environment that call for beneficial adaptations on the creature's biological structure. what is incorrect about that statement?
Dinosaurs will come out from underground; antichrist is a white gay man with red eyes; mark of the antichrist is a green electronic tattoo with sixes that is given when one stretches their hand to receive world passport; ufos=demons=aliens=ascended masters=ghosts=channeled entities=dead relatives during seances; atlantis is underneath mariana trench; china will attack russia; don't worship the antichrist; don't take his mark; don't go into a ufo ship under any circumstances
lol... anyone else notice the perfectly human forearms at 0:11. Yea, I'm pretty sure that's not part of evolution theory... but then again, who the fuck knows? They sure don't...
evolution is not certain actually. I don't know how else we could have come about, but that doesn't mean that evolution magically created all of life. And if anyone reading this is going to PRETEND that they know how evolution did all this, you can go fuck off right now becuase you fucking don't... no one does. Science is working on it though! We'll figure it out some day! Until then just keep on BELIEVING in evolution!!!
@taodragon24 not that hard... and no body making it harder except those who dont accept it, or at least don't think about simple examples, Bacteria might be a good and fast one. ask your self why global health organizations or w/e name it is warn people not to take antibiotics without doctor direction. for one reason, newer generation of bacteria became more resistant to AB drugs, thus stronger AB needed. the phrase newer generation become stronger is ...Evolution.
@tsysx5 While I believe in the science behind evolution, I have to point out that your argument does not support it. What you have presented is actually adaptation not evolution. I am pointing this out because it is a weak argument, while there are many stronger ones. The resulting AB resistant bacteria would not be new species. Though given enough time this could lead to a new species, it is not yet evolution.
« I am pointing this out because it is a weak argument »
Problem is that creationists don't understand that most of science is not about directly observing the hypothesized mechanisms, but about inferring them, deriving them from observation. They seem unable to understand that there is no qualitative difference between inferring something that cannot be directly observed because of its temporal scope and inferring something that cannot be directly observed because of its spatial scope.
@archy526 my friend evolution is result of natural selection and adaptation to changing in life.
an example, old giraffes used to have short nick, what made their nick longer?
adapting to new environment where only they found their food source on long trees. newer species appeared (for a reason to adapt new environment) and those managed to survive while the short nick species died .
with bacteria the first generation become only adapted but the second and third will bcome new species
@tsysx5 It is not evolution until the new organisms can no longer reproduce with the old organisms. It is called speciation. Every organism changes throughout its life, both physically and genetically, it is not until enough of these changes occur in a population to make a new species arrive that it has evolved. As I said, it could lead to evolution, and it is most definitely a part of the process of evolution but it in it self is not evolution. The scales are very different.
@taodragon24 I will tell you why people have a hard time having to understand Evolution" it is because it is a mythology" and the biggist fraud in the Evoscience community
00:40 It's Keanu Reeves!!
CRANTELListheNAME 1 day ago
big lie
MrKm1123 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We all love to put our thoughts into words with the hope of some truth and reality to spring out of our reasoning. But to does who believe that natural cause and effects are the engines that produce information inside the DNA, Problems arise. These problems are so huge that we dare not talk about them. We close our eyes and wish them away.
morrisdecat 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evidence of the existence of true God
watch?v=Vl12NtmqMYQ
watch?v=0xXgsndwxD4&feature=channel_video_title
watch?v=4wV0vV5Hrp0&feature=related
watch?v=BXiNXDDdaK8&feature=related
watch?v=azAOtB65Td0&feature=related
watch?v=RjKGlNVmnqc&feature=related
ThePero20111 3 days ago
l'home vient du singe pas du poisson ...
MegaSkazzy 1 week ago
@MegaSkazzy
L'Homme ne vient pas du singe. L'Homme et le singe ont un ancêtre commun remontant à 10 millions d'année.
EasyTweet 1 week ago
is the pic of your dady ???? lol monky boy
youraminp 1 week ago
O homem evoluiu do peixe? nossa...
MrStifler112 2 weeks ago
i could do that with any two different things, but it doesn't matter they are not related.
Jakeroo002 2 weeks ago
the hell is my tail.. this video or cheap slide show is retarded
PaintballM16 2 weeks ago
Retarded video
wing2912 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bat sonar,Shark's Electric Sense,Snake's Infrared sensing,Hummingbird's 80 wing flaps per second,
Cat's night vision,Migratory birds orientation sense,And The 120 billion neuron cells of the human brain.
I believe evolutionists should praise the almighty random mutations !
YamiYami17 3 weeks ago
It doesn't work like that, but the art work is incredibly creative and cool.
jessydaytime 3 weeks ago
Stop talking rubbish,The DNA Code is Gods blue print for all livng things.
takirid 3 weeks ago
You should read your information properly, he said dent on the car,flat tyre but the car and tyre still remained same ok.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid That's becuse you have you creation glasses on. (I'm a because person) I'm NOT shitty with u personally (It's fun but a waste of time arguing with yecs). But I'll argue with u (when I got time). It's all so pointless when we both know we will get NOWHERE! Anyway... About glasses. The fossil record and DNA both indicate evolution and creation (beatifully). DNA is very neary the same as fossil record (we were a poofteeth % wrong with fossill record). They both say life started simple.
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid Both the fossil record and DNA say life became gradually more complex. But, with your creationists glasses on, it is a catagory system made by God and indicates that it is not only intelligently designed but also sort-of catedgorised! One point each, and so this is not good for any argument! So lets get to something we can all see with our own eyes (if we go on a guided tour that is). Go on a guided tour of all the LARGE impact craters! But first I WILL SHOW ID WITH EVOLUTION.
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover Stop talking science fiction, Why are you sending me all this stuff,you said you did not want to wast your time with me
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid (With MY glasses on) The big bang created all the matter in the uni and made quarks (and other particles, such as mesons, including electron, and photons etc and heat). Anyway, the quarks formed protons and neutrons (inside protons varified by accelerators etc). 3 quarks formed a proton and 3 quarks formed a newtron (and other smaller particals are different in each). These protons and neutrons were in a state of PLASMA (like the sun and a canle flame). Among free electrons!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid In the plasma, less neutrons combined with SOME protons, to form neuclei of helium (and other trace element neuclei). When the plasma cooled enough (for the flame to go-out so-to-speak) THE ELECTRONS STARTED WHIZZING AROUND THE NEUCLEI. This happens NOW, when we extinguish a flame. A MIRACLE (is God doing it???). Anyway all these atoms formed (from the original particles, and a flame is great evidence, as well as particle accelerators). These atoms formed stars (observed NOW).
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid Inside stars, there is fusion power and it TURNS ONE SUBSTANCE INTO ANOTHER SUBSTANCE. (EVOLUTION). This is observed when a neuclear bomb goes off. (NO u don't believe that do you)? Inside stars, many substances are made and when they explode the heaviest metals are made. We come from an exploded star because uranium exists! All these new elements (and remaining original elements) made US! The calcium in our bones, etc, etc. ARE THESE ORIGINAL PARTICLES "DESIGNER PARTICALS"?!?
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid Is this ID or what? Were the original particles from the the big bang inteligently designed? U say that ID points towards an inteligent creator. But this also demonstrates that evolution also points to an inteligent designer (but you dont believe in evolution) and say that it can't do it by it's self. What about God being OMNIPITENT (spell) Can't god design particles that CAN do this if god is omnipitent???
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid If u want to do some study on my style, see my video called "OOH, OOH, OOH, OOH". and read my arguments wht silly creationists. And see how I was educated by creation science on my video called "5 EASY WAYS TO DEBUNK A YOUNG EARTH (TALK)".
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover You think I believe 144000 hours creation.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid But I said I changed my mind and will argue craters once. The craters are proven by iridium (and other rare substances) and tektites (glass marble formations). Google earth impact craters and you will see craters (up to 300 km diam). A 200km one has a soil volume of at least 150,000 cubic kms (blasted into the air). Your science fiction ark wouldn't survive! And that's just ONE impact! 50over 50 km, some over 100km and a few LARGER! And U put them ALL in the flood!!! (HA! HA!).
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid A 200 km diam crater with average depth, say 5 km. Volume = pye r squared x average depth. = 3.14 x100 x 100 x 5 = 150,000 cubic kms of soil and rock blasted out, making a hole 200 km diameter. How many neuclear bombs would we need to do this? The craters are there, fact. Some are that big, fact. And a couple bigger and all the others, fact. You can't argue the amount of soil and rock moved instantly, fact. Common sennse says nothing would survive. But you haven't got any!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
i dont know what to believe...
BryNevz3D 3 weeks ago
why dont we keep evolutionating? hmmm I DONT KNOW BECAUSE THIS IS BULLSHIT.
daryps03 3 weeks ago
@daryps03 We are still evolving, evolving into creationists!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover YOU JUMPED THE FENCE NOW
takirid 3 weeks ago
0:35 I knew Brock Lesnar was a monkey ...
Fupper16 3 weeks ago
this is the crappiest depiction for evolution I've ever seen, this is hilarious (especially all the creationists who think this was done by a respected scientist or something).
PoisonousJaws 4 weeks ago
crap
BazNard 1 month ago
Where are the bones for all these creatures?
AHEMexcuseme 1 month ago
The problem is evolution and all the scientific facts are not proofs there is no creator. I dont believe in creation the way it is seen by christian. But it is not because animal adapt and change over time that there is no creator let's say a god or any supreme intelligence dumb some cell on a big laboratory like earth to see what will come of it, US, It is not more stupid than any believing. it is just less accepted. Im not saying that it is the thruth but who know.. Sorry, im not english
Tadlada 1 month ago
That's ridiculous. Why people insist on animal wants to be?
Erkekerkege 1 month ago
yea...uh...not quite
tbradyman99 1 month ago
Let me state this for ALL THE IDIOTS OUT THERE ....Cause theres alot of em...ADAPTION IS A SCIENTIFIC FACT...Why...Because of PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. ...EVOLUTION IS A MYTH AND A RELIGION...Why..? Because of a LACK OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE...You know, The SAME REASON you morons blast people who believe in a creator...LACK OF SCIENTIFIC PROOF or PHYSICAL EVIDENCE...PLEASE...If you are PAYING FOR YOUR EDUCATION ... STOP!!!
armageddon2419 1 month ago
@armageddon2419 Evolution is simply when a species adapts in divergent ways long enough that it becomes reproductively isolated from other members of its group. It then becomes a new species. This is the point in which it has evolved. The adaptations continue until the organisms have changed into several slightly different species, eventually changing dramatically from the original species that started the group. Not magic, just common sense.
archy526 1 month ago
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO CHROMOSOMES FUSED TOGETHER (gee, the evolution religion loves that one...even without physical evidence, They still love that one)....BLESS MY SOUL...A MIRACLE...A REAL CHRISTMAS MIRACLE !!! You see people...EVOLUTIONISTS DO BELIEVE IN MIRACLES AND ARE FAR LESS SCIENTIFIC THAN WE THINK. some people will believe anything !!!
armageddon2419 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How many chromosomes does a human have...? ----------- How many chromosomes do Great Apes have...? ------- That, Folks, is what I would call a MIRACLE...NO, Better....ITS MAGICK...YES...ABRA-CADABRA...Please...Tell me you didnt pay for that EDUCATION. And Evolutionists call Creationists Irrational
armageddon2419 1 month ago
How many chromosomes do Great Apes have...?
armageddon2419 1 month ago
@armageddon2419 Human's have 23 pairs, all other Great Apes have 24 pairs. In Human's chomosomes 2 and 4 fused several million years ago, hence we have one less pair. The process is called chromosonal fusion. It has happened to horses and zebras as well.
elanxx 1 month ago
How many chromosomes does a human have...?
armageddon2419 1 month ago
Which is more ABSURD...That Animals turn into different Animals...which by the way there is absaloutely NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF FOR... or ...That A Superior Intelligence is a Grand and Exact Architect....IT TAKES FAR MORE OF A LEAP OF FAITH TO ''BELIEVE'' in The Fairy Tale called Evolution...HISTORY AND SCIENCE HAS SHOWN US...Animals ADAPT...They DO NOT CHANGE FROM ONE KIND OF ANIMAL TO ANOTHER...HOLY CRAP...What moron would believe that..?
armageddon2419 1 month ago
@armageddon2419 YOU FUCKING RETARD DO YOUR RESEARCH! Evolution has been observed. I will give you a example, there was a group of scientist released a couple of carnivorous lizards into the a island to study them, but do to complications they had to leave and could not return for 20 years. And when they did they found the lizards great, great, etc, grankids have devoleped new muscles and a new digestive system and became herbivorous to adapt to their inviroment!Thats just one ex.
HeadShoht 1 month ago
@HeadShoht JACKHOLE.....You are an IDIOT....That is ADAPTION...NOT EVOLUTION....The Lizard DID NOT turn into a rhinocaurous....And I dont care how many millions of years you wait...IT WONT!!!
armageddon2419 1 month ago
@armageddon2419 Evolution is basically adaption, it is adapting and changing for the better! If a animal has been "adapting" for millions of years it WILL turn into another animal! Oh and how about your bible explain the dinosaurs and early human fossils we found such as Homo Erectus? We came from those early humans! We are Homo Sapiens, we became a new species! I'd like to see what you have to say now! Buttpipe.
HeadShoht 1 month ago
@HeadShoht JACKHOLE...WHO EVER SAID I BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE...RELIGION IS A JOKE...LIKE EVOLUTION WHICH IS JUST AS FALSE AS THOSE OF CHRISTENDOM...FOR THE LAST TIME...BECAUSE YOUR A DORK....LISTEN...IM A SCIENTIST....FACTS, MAM, JUST THE FACTS....A. NO, ADAPTION IS NOT EVOLUTION...DORK!!!! 2. NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE HAS THERE EVER BEEN SCIENTIFIC, PHYSICAL EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT KINDS OF ANIMALS TURN INTO OR CHANGE INTO DIFFERENT KINDS OF ANIMALS SO PISS OFF YOU MORON!!!!
armageddon2419 1 month ago
@armageddon2419 Then why don't you explain the fossils of the early humans and the example I gave you, evolution is treated as a fact in the scientific community because of all the information! Also why do some humans have some Neadnderthal DNA? If your so smart you would know the answer in evolution!!! Why are humans 95% genetically simailir to humans? Why are there subspecies of animal? How did there get to be so many different types of animals? EVOLUTION!!!!
HeadShoht 1 month ago
This is baloney! No amphibians, just fish to mammal. Alsomhlknlfdh
sdfljsdfgdgdglb gll
Also if there were such things dinosaurs fossils were are proto-mammal phossils?>
thang tgnbn frutang gsrjs;kgdj sgh;p Ï of the .dtg God blortek von smarzingham? Thorkspeld villendengmyar une esque fromage pour le herbivore?> STFU edgl ♪
Well, you get the picture.
AngeloNiklis 1 month ago
@AngeloNiklis Makes about as much sense as most arguments against evolution :) But yeah, in all reality, this video is REALLY bad. Not an accurate representation of the theory of evolution at all.
archy526 1 month ago
i do bring value to the discussion that evolution is a myth
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid What do you base your assertion that evolution is a myth on? So far your argument has lacked any real substance, "it's rubbish cause I don't believe it" is not a substantial argument. It has no value in any conversation.
archy526 1 month ago
@archy526 Show me your facts on evolution.Life how did it all start
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid This doesn't answer that question. Evolution is the theory of how simple organisms became more complex over time. You cannot lump all theories into one, that is not how they work. If you want an education in all aspects of biology go to school. You are the one offering an alternative to what is taught in schools, enlighten me as to your evidence. The evidence that supports evolution is: DNA, comparative morphology, fossil records, geographic distribution to name a few.
archy526 1 month ago
@archy526 DNA dose'nt support evolution it supports creation. As for the fossil record.If evolution were a fact,the fossil evidence would surely reveal a gradual changing from one kind of life into another.And that would have to be the case regardless of which variation of evolutionary theory is accepted.If evolution were a fact,the fossil record would reveal beginnings of new structures in living things.There should be at least some fossils to prove your morphing,but there is none.
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid First off, how is DNA evidence for creation and not evolution? The minute differences between the DNA of different organisms fits exactly with the previous thought decent lines through evolution. The fossil record does support evolution, vestigial structures show the morphology stages and evolutionary changes occur in bursts, it is not like a gradual slope linear line, it is more like a stair case. The organisms typically change in response to something (I.E. climate change)
archy526 1 month ago
@archy526 The fossil record does not support evolution.DNA supports creation read my thread
takirid 4 weeks ago
@takirid
"The fossil record does not support evolution"
LOL
Why has not even one mammal been found before they evolved?
Same for birds
Same for everything :)
gorilla199uncensored 4 weeks ago
@gorilla199uncensored I am wasting my time with some one who has no clue about the process of life. Go back to school, and don't wast my time.
takirid 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
gorilla199uncensored 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I am wasting my time with some one who has no clue about the process of life."
LOL RUN AWAY
BECUASE YOU CANT SUPPLY A RELIGIOUS EXCUSE FOR THE FACTS I STATED!
" Go back to school, and don't wast my time."
You need to go back to school, or rather stop going to religious brain washing so you can accept the facts you already know THE ONES TAUGHT AT SCHOOL AND EVERY GREAT UNIVERSITY IN THE WORLD.
Thats right EVOLUTION!
gorilla199uncensored 3 weeks ago
@gorilla199uncensored you religious ppl need to take your fairy tale shit somewhere else if you actually studied biology you would know that there were fossil of mammals that date back millions of years before the first ape even stud up straight idiot
91markster 3 weeks ago
@takirid
"DNA dose'nt support evolution it supports creation"
Ok explain in creationist terms (as for all creationism I dont expect any evidnece just your baseless (like your rleigion) excuses)
Why do humans have DNA for tails?
Why do humnans have DNA to make vitamin C but its missaligned so its useless?
Why does every other greta ape have the exact same misslaignment?
Why do manatees have hip sockets but no legs? LOL
gorilla199uncensored 4 weeks ago
@gorilla199uncensored DNA molecules lie tightly coiled in the chromosomes of the cell.Your genes,which are section of DNA molecuels,contain all the information necessary to make you what you are."The genetic program carried in DNA makes every living thing different from all other living things.This DNA program makes a dog different from a fish,a zebra different from arose and a willow different fom a wasp.It makes you different from every other person on earth.
takirid 4 weeks ago
@gorilla199uncensored DNA is made up of two strands wound around each other and takes on a shape like that of a spiral staircase or a twisted ladder with rungs.The two strands are connected by combinations of four compounds called bases.They form the rungs of the twisting DNA ladder.The exact order of the bases in the DNA molecule is what determines the genetic information it carries.This determines virtually everything about you,from the color of your eyes,shape of nose.
takirid 4 weeks ago
@gorilla199uncensored The amount of informatiom contained within the DNA of just one of your cells is staggering.Since DNA is responsible for passing on hereditary information from one generation of cells to the next,it has been called the master plan of all life.So you people who accept evolution "need to ask yourselves"where did this master plan come from.Was it by chance or by design.The only conclusion that we can come to that there is a designer who created all things
takirid 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@takirid
"Was it by chance or by design."
Nice logical fallacy of the false dicotomy.
Explain why your statement is a logical fallacy!
"The only conclusion that we can come to that there is a designer who created all
things"
So you accept the fact humans share a common ancestors with chimps?
What excuse do you have humans having inactive tail DNA? :)
gorilla199uncensored 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@takirid
Heres the undeniable proof of evol;ution, you couldnt even make up excuses for!
WHY CANT YOU EVEN MAKE AN EXCUSE? LOL
As i said undeniable even for a lying creatard such as yourself.
Why do humans have DNA for tails?
Why do humnans have DNA to make vitamin C but its missaligned so its useless?
Why does every other greta ape have the exact same misslaignment?
Why do manatees have hip sockets but no legs? LOL
gorilla199uncensored 4 weeks ago
@takirid You simply stated that DNA is complex, therefore it must have been designed. That is not a real argument. If you except that DNA exists and that it is passed down through heredity, then by default you except the process of evolution. (even if you don't think so) If parents pass on their genes, then those who have more offspring (those that are more fit) have more representative genes in the gene pool. That is the basis for natural selection.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Yes DNA is complex.And the reason why its complex,because there is a designer.Like I said before, the DNA code for all living thing is according to its own kind not some evolutionary scientific fiction based on theory.This is what Charles Darwin in his conclusion to the Origin of the Species, he wrote of the grandeur of the "view of life, with its several powers,having been originally breathed by the Creator.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid As I have stated before, evolution in no way addresses the concept of a creator, it simply states how organisms attained their current form. Based on heredity, what happens if a group of individuals splits, then one half decides only the tallest individuals will reproduce and the other only the shortest. After a few hundred generations of this, how will the individuals from each group compare? Will their genes still look the same? Or will they have lost the "short genes"?
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Then you tell me, how did this complex world we live on all come about.And as for the tallest an the shortest its called variety,but they still remain the same.Just like Roses there are Red,Yellow,White Roses but they still remain Roses. Same with the Human race weather tall or short,black,white,yellow or brown they still remain Human,same apply to all other living things.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid I make no claim to know how this planet came into being, there are theories, one may be right. that is not the discussion, evolution is not about origin, it is about diversification. You are getting stuck on semantics, if the ONLY difference was height, then yes it would be variety, but as the divergences occur more and the old genes are lost (those carrying them do not reproduce) they would eventually become significantly different. different size, different genes.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 If these genes differ enough, they not only look different but can no longer create viable offspring (IE horses and donkeys= sterile mules). That is speciation. I don't see why this is so hard to comprehend. natural selection is based on reproduction, those who reproduce more have more representation in the gene pool, those that don't eventually cease to be in the gene pool.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 This is what Professor Behe had to say about Natural Selection:If you search the scientific literature, you will discover that nobody has made a serious attempt-an experimental attempt or detailed model-that explains how such molecular machines arose by Darwinian processes.This is despite the fact that in ten years since my book was published,many scientific organization,such as the National Academy of sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
takirid 3 weeks ago
@archy526 -continue: have issued urgent appeals to their memberships to do everything they can to fend off the idea that life provides evidence of intelligent design.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid Behe also presents in his book that establishes the concept of irreducible complexity that because a car crash could be "set up" to look like it was real even though it wasn't that a creator could have "set up" evolution to look like it was the rout organisms took. That is not science, it is philosophy. Both irreducible complexity and specific complexity rely on the concept that if evolution is wrong then intelligent design must be right. That alone destroys its credibility.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Both of their ideas boil down to disproving evolution (which they fail at) and assuming that intelligent design is the ONLY alternative to evolution. The biggest issue with this is it IS NOT SCIENCE. You can not prove one idea by disproving another. That is not proof for anything other than one being wrong. If anyone could present one valid piece of information on intelligent design the conversation would be worth having. There has yet to be any presented.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@tahirid You still never answered the question about your level of education.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Proof "DNA" the code for all living things,thats why we have a intelligent designer.You are the one thats closed your mind to the truth just like those scientist.that Behe worked with.They know there's a Designer but they rather spin alot of bullshit.What about you, are you a scientist.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid Give me one reason OTHER than the fact that DNA is complex (because that is NOT proof) that proves a designer by using DNA. Describing how it works and its composition do not favor ID, they are however used to efficiently prove evolution by way of natural selection. Heritability is how natural selection works. That is it's mechanism. My mind is not closed to ideas with merit. I have read the texts that the ID movement are based on and are not founded in science.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 I have few hour ago hint DNA we all have it bye
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid U are HARD WIRED! and no fact is going to move you. Nobody can argue with volume of soil for a given crater size!!! Google craters and u will see a good shot of the 250 km diam crater in Africa (I done a utube video about craters with it). The volume would be about 200,000 cubic kms! Imagine the energy REQUIRED to move all that soil and rock (instantly)!!! And that's only one, u have all the other big ones, one catostropic one each week instead of one in millions of years.
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover What your point about some holes in the earth
takirid 3 weeks ago
@archy526 I read that, an it had nothing to do with a car crash your twisting his words.Thats right intelligent design is right
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid Darwin's Black Box:The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution By Michael J. Behe pg. 193. I thought you said you read it. I did, and it states exactly what I said earlier. pg 194 "the upshot of this conclusion- anything could have been purposely arranged- is that we cannot know that something has not been designed." His words not mine. He seems nice, but his conclusions are misguided at best.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Misguided.So you know better,you. a scientist
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid I'm not sure if that was a question or statement. Your grammar was lacking, much like your argument. I will make mine clear: YES. I think that the majority of the scientific community (depending on your source, %95 to %99.9) knows better than a handful of people with degrees presenting pseudo scientific findings in non peer reviewed publications. It is unfortunate that uneducated people can read the "rubbish" published by the ID movement and think that it is science. It is not.
archy526 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Im sorry you feel that way bro.well it time to move on bye.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid The impact craters prove an old earth. Google impacts on earth (from both sides) and u will see that there's no way ANYTHING would survive If ALL those impacts happened within one year!! NO WAY. How many cubic km of soil was in a 200 km diam crater. Thousands of cubic kms of ejected soil and rock, into the air, from just ONE impact. There are 50 craters over 50 km, several over 100 km, a few around 200 and one 300 km. No creationist has been able to answer this so don't bother!!!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@takirid And on top of what archy526 says, you should also realize the remaining 5% of scientists who don't accept evolution theory are all because of their religious faith which they assume to be true a prior. There is zero scientific evidence against evolution that is published within a peer-reviewed academic journal. You want to put religious faith over science? Fine, but if that's your stand, then there's nothing further to discuss.
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr Thats ok with me bro
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid To confirm before I leave you alone: so you are then indeed saying religious faith triumphs over whatever science can give you? Cuz looking at your history, you don't act like it. You speak as if you demand evidence for evolution, yet in the end, you just admit here that even if all scientific evidence point towards evolution (which in a way it does already), you still won't accept it simply because of your religious faith. That is indeed what you are saying, correct?
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr Points to a Creator with the support of Science bye
takirid 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr So we dont need rocket science (or creation science) to know that the world is NOT 6000 yrs old (otherwise we simply would NOT be here). A 35 km one is only a little one and there is an (unconfirmed impact) 500 km diam. How many CUBIC KMs of soil and rock would come from one that is over 100 km diam? Thousands of cubic kilometers of debris instantly flung into the air. How much energy would that require? Billions of yrs explains why we are here!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr Only billions of years explain why we are here and the world had a chance to recover between strikes. But creationists put ALL the large impacts in the flood (and rewrite the Bible big-time). But the problem only gets worse for them because all these catostopic events are ALL happening within ONE YEAR! (HA-HA-HA). How could anything survive that? (maybe a few microbes). The initial shock wave of the very first big one would pulverize the ark.
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover LOL that's a good one. Although I can already imaging them making up excuses like "oh they all happen on the first day, when God first created the Earth, without any creatures. God put us on this planet after those craters were formed..." or some other bs..essentially their denial of radiometric dating give them the freedom to move dates around to fit their messed up logic.
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr But the flood buggers that theory up (I suppose) so they either put them in the flood or just say they are formations from flood (withiridium and tektitesaround them). They must recon if they struck initially, they would have been eroded by the flood. I don't know why they do this, they are mad!@!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover Answering black sky! I hope u can help me (and no creationist has challenged me after a bit of arguing). An atomic bomb blows a hole a couple ar a few hundred meters round (and varies a bit with different locations). The volume of it would be only a tiny fraction of a cubic km. The 1km diam arizona crater would be nearly 100 times more volume of soil (and still only about a quarter of a cubic km). You seen the volcanoes, Imagine 150,000 cubic kms flung out!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover I'm not saying that ALL of it chokes the air (just the really fine stuff) and most of it is just flung out and lands way outside the crater. Look at the ones on the moon and u will see spoke-like features where the debris was flung out. The (yet unconfirmed) largest crater on earth (500km diam) is about the same size as the largest ones on the moon (whick were filled with lava from inside the moon). They punctured the moon when it was hotter inside than now.
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr Then u have the problem of the tens of thousands of cubic kms of debris in the atmosphere. This would have caused dark skies for decades. It proves the world is old (hands down) and I didn't use any rocket science (only length x times breadth x depth). And I didn't really need to use many figures (because they spesk for themselves) and you can see it in the soil! And anyone can SEE IT WITH THEIR OWN EYES! Plain and simple! No creationis has had the last word on this issue!!!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover LOL. Ok, what if they say "no the damage isn't that significant. You are exaggerating the effect. No modern scientists have ever observe a 30km meteoroid falling into Earth. We don't know what would really happen. What you describe is merely a simulation, and it's wrong". What do you say to that?
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr Not one creationist has been able to even get close to getting past this one and they can't answer it. U can go on a guided tour of the largest impact craters and see how big they are (up to 300 km diam). A few around 200 km, several over 100 km amd 50 over 50 km diam (and a 50 km one has supposedly caused a mass extinction). Imagine excavating a 3.5 km one (How long would that take). Imagine the energy! A 35km one would have 1000 times more soil in it (that's no longer there).
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr How can it be wrong? All I'm saying is fact that anyone can see simple lenght x breadth x depth for increased volume of soil inside a crater (that is no longer there). Where is the exageration? The photos from NASA comfirm size and number of craters. How much soil and rock comes out of a 200 km diam crater? Pie r squared x depth. 3.14 x 100x100 x 5 (say10 km average depth (and half that just to be conservative). = OVER I50,000 CUBIC KLMS!!! Theres a few that size and larger!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover I understand the amount of soul that would be rocketed up into the sky. But there's no actual observation that this soil would, to use your words, "black out the sky" and cause massive extinction. What if all that soil simply fall back down and only creatures within a 500km radius died, but everywhere else is fine...(kinda like an atomic bomb explosion exception without the radiation), if that's their argument, what would be your counter-argument?
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover I'm not disagreeing with u btw, i'm simply trying to see any possible messed-up "loopholes" they may come up, cuz i think ur points are great, but i want to be prepared before i use it lol
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr If u cant understand that simple math, go and show it to sombody who can (like a ten yr old kid).
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover I know u basically agree (It's just that nobody can argue with the volume of soil for a given diameter of crater) and it's that simple! You don't really need anything else to prove an old earth, but we have stax of other evidence: distant star light, fossil record backed up by DNA (which can also be seen as ID), No evidence of r-decay accell, trilobites died out but not jell-fish (debunks flood with impacts), the list goes on. Google impacts and use them for yecs.
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover Iknow u believe in evolution (with the fairies dancing around looking after the puddle brewing up life). The fairies also made the electrons start whizzing around the protons and helium neuclei (for the first time and even now). In a flame, some of the electrons are free-floating and are not whizzing! It's called PLASMA. It's when they start whizzing again, and go down in "orbit levels"; IS WHY WE SEE THE FLAME! I believe in the fairies (so-to-speak)! My friend!
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@archy526 Why don't you read the rest of his comments where they won't admit to the truth.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid You are purposely setting up an impossible scenario for you to accept evolution by basically saying "i refuse to believe in it until i see one kind evolving to another kind with my own eyes", yet you also know such transition takes on the scale of million of years, yet you can live probably not even up to 100. See the contradiction? With the stringent irrational conditions you have set here, you made yourself close-minded and impossible to discuss with.
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr I am not closed minded,in fact I have researched some of the evolutionary theories put forward and some of the comments they have made."Christopher Booker,said this:"It was a beautifully simple and attractive theory. the only trouble was that,as Darwin was himself at lest partly aware,it was full of colossal holes." Regarding Darwin's Origin of Species,he observed:"We have this book which has become famous for explaining the origin of species in fact does nothing of the kind.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid See, there's your problem again. Why do you put the words of a journalist over the words of scientists?? Do you think Christopher has even taken any 4th year genetics course at a credited university? You shouldn't quote from people who don't even have a Masters in science. Journalist is not a scientist. At least find quotes from someone with PhDs in biology! Some creationists do indeed have that, at least quote from them, please!
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr I quoted him because he's one of your lot,Booker the evo-man.
takirid 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@takirid "I quoted him because he's one of your lot,Booker the evo-man." => NO! Christopher Booker is a proponent of intelligent design. btw, you should also realize Booker also wrote about how there's no danger to passive smoking, and disagree on the correlation between that to cancer. Talk about being stupid! And you trust anything he has to say in science?? Hypothetically, even if he is indeed an evolutionist (which he is not), he is certainly not on par with science.
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr U are right about the debris but the incredibly huge amount of it means that if u take two zeros off that amount, for the amount that went into the air and it's still thousands of cubic klms (so lets take another zero off). And 200 cubic kms may be more realistic! But even if it was that low theres all the other strikes (a few bigger) for the ark to contend with. See my channel, you may like it, CHEERS! (Will study impacts, they say it got dark.)
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Casshyr There is something these stupid yecs can see with their own eyes (that proves an old earth). Ask them to Google "Impact craters on earth".
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover hmm...how is it something they can see with their own eyes? Are you talking about radiometric dating of those craters? cuz you forget, they don't believe in that either lol (at least as long as it's dated to be under 6000 years)
Casshyr 3 weeks ago
@takirid Will just ONE creationist be convinced of evolution (nomatter how much evidence (of which you have NONE and never will have any). Why do you argue with us (i'm definitely NOT going to argue with you). And why is he arguing with you? It's completely POINTLESS! I can persuade my wall to believe in evolution, BUT NOT YOU, NO NEVER, NOT IN 6000 YRS..... WHY ARE YOU ARGUING???
Justwantahover 3 weeks ago
@Justwantahover Im not arguing,I am simply stating the facts that DNA puts your evolutionary theory in the rubbuish bin.Like I have always said, DNA is the blue print to all living things,Proof of a intelligent Deisgner.Now if you want to talk to your wall "hey bro, thats fine with me,everyone to own thing.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@archy526 I also said that the DNA determines the heredity of every living thing,according to its own kind, that a Gorilla,Monkey,Fish,Dog,Human,that each one has there own blue print or DNA Code that determines what they will be.There offsprings will look like them according to there own kind,no evolution transition, they will always be what they are,according to its own kind.Those in the scientific community know this but they refuse to give credit to a Creator.
takirid 3 weeks ago
@takirid You can't say evolution is a myth because we have solid good evidence where as Creation by a high power only evidence is in scrolls and books and is not credible at all.I myself believe either we evolved or that Aliens with advanced technology created us from a primitive species of primate and accelerated our evolution by hundreds of thousands of years.But believing a creature that is invisible and lives in the sky created us is absurd.
JordoF6 1 month ago
Whats my intelligence got to do with what we talking about,
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid Because if you are not educated in the subject you are arguing against you bring nothing of value to the discussion.
archy526 1 month ago
moron and idiot of evolution of us humans
luka7646 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Creationists: you can't use God to explain anything unless you first offer scientific proof for God. I believe in existence of aliens somewhere in this universe, but i don't use them to explain the stuff we don't know!
Casshyr 1 month ago
@Casshyr I like your point. Very clever.
archy526 1 month ago
very poor animation of human evolution.
scottclements78 1 month ago
What was the question about I forgot
takirid 1 month ago
What I find odd is that the last transition before humans has a tail, which is inaccurate...
TaylorReints 1 month ago
Because its just a load of rubbish, all the stuff they got on evolution should be sent to the rubbish dump my friend.
takirid 1 month ago
Actually we went from monkeys to apes and then to more human like. In the video we have tails far to long.
ethanswenson15 1 month ago
@ethanswenson15 and in the video we were retarded monkey fish frogs up until about half way through our evolution wen all fish traits dissapeared. I thinks there is more wrong here then just tails for to long
natesdevices 1 month ago
@natesdevices Yeah, this video has a lot of problems. It looks like something one would have found in the 1890s.
ethanswenson15 1 month ago
@ethanswenson15 it looks like a visual aid that christians would use when attempting to be deroggatory to evolution, you know, how they always assume that evolution states that fish jumped to man with no steps in between.
natesdevices 1 month ago
evolution my version
plankten>tadpole>fish>frog>lizerd>mouse>beaver>monkey>ape>hairy human>human>hairless human>
MrFreestew 1 month ago
Like I said before the,designer has no beginnig no ending
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid how is evolution a fraud, or for that matter, hard to understand? Evolution is the process of slight or significant anatomical changes in an existing creature biology over time until it becomes a new species entirely. this process is initiated by changes in the creatures environment that call for beneficial adaptations on the creature's biological structure. what is incorrect about that statement?
natesdevices 1 month ago
Fish to man is a load of BS thats why they are foolish
takirid 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dinosaurs will come out from underground; antichrist is a white gay man with red eyes; mark of the antichrist is a green electronic tattoo with sixes that is given when one stretches their hand to receive world passport; ufos=demons=aliens=ascended masters=ghosts=channeled entities=dead relatives during seances; atlantis is underneath mariana trench; china will attack russia; don't worship the antichrist; don't take his mark; don't go into a ufo ship under any circumstances
goodinfotoknow 1 month ago
I never go swiming in open water. Thats because fish fuck in it...
Ow... wait...!?
Patridehard 1 month ago
evolution is bs, make a vid explaining the big fire cracker in the sky big theory :)
eric80510 1 month ago
Comment removed
archy526 1 month ago
Designer had no begining no ending always existed.But thats hard for evolutionst to except
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid i know but the can believe in this fish to man bullshit
MrProblem1997 1 month ago
lol... anyone else notice the perfectly human forearms at 0:11. Yea, I'm pretty sure that's not part of evolution theory... but then again, who the fuck knows? They sure don't...
tpstrat14 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
evolution is not certain actually. I don't know how else we could have come about, but that doesn't mean that evolution magically created all of life. And if anyone reading this is going to PRETEND that they know how evolution did all this, you can go fuck off right now becuase you fucking don't... no one does. Science is working on it though! We'll figure it out some day! Until then just keep on BELIEVING in evolution!!!
tpstrat14 1 month ago
Are we the smartest species on Earth right now? Cause someone told me that apes were the smartest species, they discovered things first, right?
DarkLance15 1 month ago
@DarkLance15 we are apes lol
ReekDaMan1 1 month ago
@DarkLance15 We are apes, and 'Apes' isn't a species, it's a group of very many species
MagMag96 1 month ago
@MagMag96 Oh ok thanks for telling me.
DarkLance15 1 month ago
@DarkLance15 your welcome :P
MagMag96 1 month ago
That must have been on another planet, it had nothing at all to do with what we know about the stages of evolution on Earth:)
winterstellar 1 month ago
this is so scary imagine them sleeping with you!!!
123dongeo 1 month ago
hands and feet are the same from 0:15 and on. lame
jewelfewel 1 month ago
so does this mean millions of years from now we'll grow wings..?
NotUrPuppet08 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NotUrPuppet08
"so does this mean millions of years from now we'll grow wings..?"
No, its possible but extremely unlikely.
gorilla199uncensored 1 month ago
@NotUrPuppet08
No this video makes no sense. Please read a biology textbook if you want to know about evolution
wing2912 1 month ago
Wizard, well thats better than nothing.Yep the wizard created the earth and all living things
takirid 1 month ago
@takirid lol right
ReekDaMan1 1 month ago
this is dumb. people have a hard enough time seeing the truth in evolution, dont make it any harder
taodragon24 1 month ago 2
@taodragon24 not that hard... and no body making it harder except those who dont accept it, or at least don't think about simple examples, Bacteria might be a good and fast one. ask your self why global health organizations or w/e name it is warn people not to take antibiotics without doctor direction. for one reason, newer generation of bacteria became more resistant to AB drugs, thus stronger AB needed. the phrase newer generation become stronger is ...Evolution.
tsysx5 1 month ago
@tsysx5 While I believe in the science behind evolution, I have to point out that your argument does not support it. What you have presented is actually adaptation not evolution. I am pointing this out because it is a weak argument, while there are many stronger ones. The resulting AB resistant bacteria would not be new species. Though given enough time this could lead to a new species, it is not yet evolution.
archy526 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« I am pointing this out because it is a weak argument »
Problem is that creationists don't understand that most of science is not about directly observing the hypothesized mechanisms, but about inferring them, deriving them from observation. They seem unable to understand that there is no qualitative difference between inferring something that cannot be directly observed because of its temporal scope and inferring something that cannot be directly observed because of its spatial scope.
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
@archy526 my friend evolution is result of natural selection and adaptation to changing in life.
an example, old giraffes used to have short nick, what made their nick longer?
adapting to new environment where only they found their food source on long trees. newer species appeared (for a reason to adapt new environment) and those managed to survive while the short nick species died .
with bacteria the first generation become only adapted but the second and third will bcome new species
tsysx5 1 month ago
@tsysx5 It is not evolution until the new organisms can no longer reproduce with the old organisms. It is called speciation. Every organism changes throughout its life, both physically and genetically, it is not until enough of these changes occur in a population to make a new species arrive that it has evolved. As I said, it could lead to evolution, and it is most definitely a part of the process of evolution but it in it self is not evolution. The scales are very different.
archy526 1 month ago
@archy526 if it leads to new species it is evolution.
tsysx5 1 month ago
@taodragon24 I will tell you why people have a hard time having to understand Evolution" it is because it is a mythology" and the biggist fraud in the Evoscience community
takirid 1 month ago