No problem my friend, there is no God for you, live your life as you wish, no rules, no purpose, everything is gone at death, God is a nice fantasy, but i believe that there is one, the evidence is everywhere, one question: is time finite? what do you think?
Am sorry but this kid is dumb and obviously has no life. If thinking the earth is more than a million years old helps you sleep at night well than good for you.Ya we evolved from monkeys were about 97% the same but did you ever think that maybe we all have the same creator. The bible isnt wrong. Did you know that NOAHS ark was found.No you probably didnt because you dont care. Now please go ahead and post another 3 pointless videos on Noahs ark not being real because thats what your good for.
Am sorry but this kid is dumb and obviously has no life. If thinking the earth is more than a million years old helps you sleep at night well than good for you.Ya we evolved from monkeys were about 97% the same but did you ever think that maybe we all have the same creator. The bible isnt wrong. Did you know that NOAHS arc was found.No you probably didnt because you dont care. Now please go ahead and post another 3 pointless videos on Noahs arc not being real because thats what your good for.
i strongly disagree with what youve posted here , but i really like your style in regards to argument,atheism isnt without cure,so God bless you,and keep studying
I love to point out to those who ridicule others and say things like "ha ha you think the earth is 6000 years old because the bible told you so".... Personally I do believe that the earth as we know it is about 6000 years old. The dawn of civilization happened about 6000 years ago, that is when homosapiens were able to master the art of the written language. So to me anything before that is just a 4.5 billion year old sandbox for archeologists and paleontologists to play in.
Excellent comment, People like this guy can't seem to understand things like that, and the fact that real history that has been accurately recorded seems to fade away around 5000 years or so ago? But, according to atheists and evos man has been on the planet for over a million years but for some strange reason technology mysteriously kicked in along with the growth of the human population just a few thousand years ago? This atheists told me human brains weren't WIRED for that, that long ago
Paintings are not as complex as writings, some of the oldest paintings have been found to be more than 10,000 years old.
The main reason why you believe the world is 6,000 years old is not because of the scientific evidence (which is lacking), but for religious reasons. Hindus for example don't have problems with the earth being billions of years old as vast time spans are expected in the vedhas, YECs however don't go that further because of the bible interpretation.
Humans try to prove creationists wrong is not going to work.
After creationists are rocks or aliens. Not humans appeartently.
It's really easy to say something has not been proven when you don't bother to understand what has been said and revert to beliving rocks....... Well except for every method of dating, and the entire science of geology.
Brilliant work. And obviously a lot of work too. Whether or not you convert anyone is beside the point. Your diligent research serves to bolster the arguments of those of like mind. And will contribute to the spread of reason overall.
So, the sun just stays the same size? Don't all other stars implode and pop eventually? I guess the sun will just be the last light in the universe. The scientists you read that info from just realized they screwed up again and did what they do best, Make up more bullshit excuses,"Whoops, it is shrinking Jim, just come up with something using a bunch of big scientific words, they wont know the difference!" I read that it shrinks in mass but not in radius, so one day it'll be a big hot pancake?
@TurboDally No I'm not, I read the same thing. Are you saying that the inside of the sun is burning out and the surface just remains as is? So after the inside is all burned up, the surface continues to remain? 4.6 billion years of that... We would have an air filled balloon of a sun by now... What was the purpose of the inside of the sun to begin with? Why do other stars shrink and pop, to become super novas and black holes? The radius has to shrink or expand, it doesn't just stay the same.
You need to understand the concept of "density". The sun could remain the same radius yet lose mass whilst maintaining the same radius.
"why do..."
I recommend asking a physicist these questions, they will tell you why certain things happen. As to the "purpose" of inside the sun, I don't know why you ask the question in such a way. But inside a star, steller nucleosynthesis occurs (synthesis of heavier elements from lighter ones).
who to believe. a kid with some "facts" about creationism. or a kid with some "facts" about evolutionisms. any or all of it could be unreliable information on both sides. this is the internet. the only way to come to a conclusion is to do your own research for BOTH sides of the argument and decide for yourself. i could spend my time to discredit some of the things this guy says. making 3 part video is not enough to prove or persuade anyone. waste of time
@dedeath I put a lot of effort into researching the claims to make this video. I specifically debunk a few of the claims for a young earth, and give my reasoning.
You claim that you can discredit some of the things I say in this video. I don't think you can. But actually stating your argument would be more constructive than just hinting that you have them, otherwise it looks like a "I can do that I just don't want to" situation.
you're very right. i dont want to, cause it wont change your mind at all. you find out for yourself, and im happy for you. but nonetheless, its an opinion. and you or anyone else cannot prove either side of the argument. if their was proof. there would be no argument at all. and no, im not gonna state my points in a 500 character limit comment on youtube. sorry. and i wont make a video or long email about it either because it wont change anyones mind. thus, waste of time
@dedeath Actually, presenting your arguments and showing their validity is the only way you'll change my mind. Feel free to email me your reasoning, and we can weigh the evidence.
what you're trying to do is get me to say i dont want to do that. so you can just call me ignorant and dont want to prove my point. i believe that science and religion must agree. and no, nothing i say will change your mind..... i could tell you some things that i believe could plant a seed in you, that will help you discover more on your own. but not change your mind completely
@dedeath I disagree that science and religion must, or even can agree. And I put forth my reasons why in this and other videos. I have given this topic a lot of thought, and I have developed reasons for why I believe what I believe. And I can share those reasons with anyone.
You, however, keep making assertions and don't back them up at all. You insist you have arguments, but I can't tell if they are reasonable or not because you refuse to tell them. Why should I give you any credibility?
you're completely dodging my entire point. im not here to show you any proof or anything. im here to tell you, that making videos like this doesnt change anyones mind. i wont change your mind, you wont change mine. and i really doubt you changed anyones mind with this video
@dedeath I completely agree, science and religion do match up, in about half the beliefs. I argue Genesis IS the Big Bang, read the order of what happened and the order things started appearing according to theories. Who cares what "God" is, the Sun gives us life and light the rest is made up to control populations.
@Albert10110 No problem my friend, there is no God for you, live your life as you wish, no rules, no purpose, everything is gone at death, God is a nice fantasy, but i believe that there is one, the evidence is everywhere, one question: is time finite? what do you think?
Now, let me tell you about the population problem with animals and humans over millions of years. 2 things, either the planet would be covered with humans and animals or, as the population of them vs food to eat reached equilibrium, the planet would be covered with bones. There is 70,000,000 year old bones dug up Right?
I totally agree with you, I have low expectations for everything I encounter, it's just my nature ;). However, the chance of anything becoming a fossil is very, very low. Teeth are the most preservable substances known to man and they seldom survive for a few 10's millions of years. So no, the world would not be covered with bones. Maybe I misunderstood your comment. Anyway i'll friend request you anyway. ;)
Sorry, I ran out of characters. The moon is in a frictionless environment, it's rate of movement away from the Earth will not change unless it encounters resistance of some kind, like a big meteor slamming directly into it. That would either stop it's movement, send it back towards Earth, or blow it to bits. Why is carbon 14 (that decays over around 10,000 years) found in something 70,000,000 years old. What about T-Rex bones found with soft tissue and red blood cells still inside them.
I don't believe, I know!! Where are the stars in the background of moon videos? Why is the horizon so small and jagged? If Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon, Who video taped him coming off the ship? I follow Dr. Kent Hovind closely too because he's right. If we get comets from the ort cloud they would burn up before they reached our solar system. You need to redo your math on the moon moving away from the Earth, about 1.2 billion years ago the moon would be touching the earth.
Pretty weak man. There's a whole lot more than the moon and sun story, by the way, there ain't no mirror on the moon because astronauts did not go there. You might be a big fancy word using talker, but you're still wrong.
-Scince part of this comment: time travel(to the past) & time viewing(of the future) are theorized to be possible.
-That being said everything already happened the instant that the universe was created. Every choice that will be made, has already been made, and we are able to observe these choices and the outcomes of these choices in a domain we call "time." All I'm saying..God didn't create earth & moon in six days..he created 1-D, 2-D, 3-D, 4-D, etc, & he created everything that was/will be
Ahh, so we Christians have a problem with carbon dating and starlight, but you have the "horizon problem." Type into the You Tube search engine "Distant Starlight Problem" and click on npage85's video. He explains it much better than I could.
does anyone know anything about venomfangx? im new to this whole argument. does he even go to school? is he one of those people who cant go out in the sun, or their skin will bubble? i mean, i knew how the sun worked when i was 9 (at most). i learned it......at school.....
I have written extensively on evolution versus YEC, and I must say that you do an exemplary job of countering YEC in an accessible way (that is to say, in layman's terms).
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz atheist zzzzzzzzzzz if they believe theres not god then they better be dedicated to know every thing but aparently they cant can they? How about you check out
I am a christian, but dont bash my comment yet, i dont believe the earth is 6000 years old, thats just plan stupid. BUT, the bible never says how old the earth is, or definded time rate for creation, since the 7 days can be interpreted to god as any length of time. I am impressed by you argument and agree with you, except the athiest thing.
I think it's funny when religious people try to come up with concrete evidence that God exists. If there is a God, she doesn't want to prove her existence. Anyone for some faith? Are they trying to prove it to the world, or just themselves? If you're such a stickler for christian fundamentalism why haven't you stoned some gays, or those who would work on the sabbath. Oh yea, I forgot the old testament is completely up for give and take interpretations.
good job! By the way, many are like myself, theistic evolutionists. I believe in a living God and a redeeming Saviour Jesus, who gradually created the earth and man over billions of years using His own God-created natural processes. Genesis 1-11 can be read in a more allegorical way without denying the Spirit's inspiration. The Bible is the word of God.
I think that God joined himself to man, and man to God, in the process of writing the bible. Man was not just a puppet or mouthpiece, but a willing and cooperative being. God spoke in man, and man spoke in God, to produce the Bible. I would not call it "possession"
valid opinion :) whats your view on natural selection and evolution? because these theories dont actually require any outside guidance such as a "god", surly the fittest survive and the weakest die anyway?
Well, I think God used natural selection to make all creatures, including man. The universe functions based on fundamental "laws" that are set at certain constants. Why? I believe God set up the universe so that it would create us. The universe also seems to have random and unpredictable aspects. Neils Bohr, physicist, speaking of the atomic level, said "an atom in a stationary state may in general even be said to possess a free choice between various possible transitions"
Thus even though there are seemingly immutable laws, which may speak to us of a deterministic universe, there are also probabilistic factors, which may relate to free will. Natural selection is based on deterministic outcomes as well as chance. The two irreconcilable concepts (to philosophy), of free will and determinism, coexist in nature, as well as in human nature. God lets us choose Him.
dont get tangled in this creationist argument, its a form of religious corruption, with little or no essential argument, other than to get people involved, and outraged by ludicrous religious statements. in any case, GOD, a metaphor for everything good, is just that, a metaphor. good for philosophy, bad for science
Alright I'm going to give an extremely over-simplified view of gravitational physics. Which is one rule, The further an object is from a gravitational force, the less effect this force has on that object.
As such one can assume an exponential curve as to the rate the moon would recede from the earth. If this rate is only now 4cm, imagine how many millionths of a nano-meter is must have once been citing the current theories on the proven age of the earth, our galaxy, and beyond.
the bible makes no claim that the earth is only 6000 years old.. because the seventh yom is clearly more than a one thousand year increment it is reasonable to conclude that the six yoms of creation should not be defined as merely six thousand years.
defining YOM in genesis1 as an indefinite period of time cannot be precluded, it's a legitimate interpretation.. accusations that interpreting it other than 24 hour days or even 1000 year days is a capitulation to athiests is groundless when one recognizes that Josephus (first century) Irenaeus (second century) Origin (third century), Augustine (fourth century), Aquinas (fourteenth century), and many others held such an interpretation long before modern geology and astronomy came along.
The first Humans sprung 6000 years ago. Just trace back the lineage in the Bible for it's all there. Just do the simple arithmetic. This means radio carbon dating is false by saying the first Human remains were around 200,000 years old. The Bible's truth shatters science yet again!... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! People have taken SHITS that have lasted longer than 6000 years!
macain94: I do not make the claim that the sun is 4.6 million years old, so I really can't make a counter-argument, nor do I know what you are talking about.
I do put forward refutations to a 6,000 year old earth arguments, and assert that a 4.55 billion year old earth is a more accurate age.
it's not even that believing in god, jesus christ, allah, whatever is contradictory to evolution or the fact that the earth is billions of years old. I'm a catholic, and I believe in Evolution (Macro and Micro), think the new earth theories are idiotic and generally think that the bible is a mishmash of things written by man, and man not only makes mistakes, but with multiple translations things like EARTH 6,000 YEARS OLD could be mistranslated. but yeah that guy is an idiot highfive
it's not even that believing in god, jesus christ, allah, whatever is contradictory to evolution or the fact that the earth is billions of years old. I'm a catholic, and I believe in Evolution (Macro and Micro), think the new earth theories are idiotic and generally think that the bible is a mishmash of things written by man, and man not only makes mistakes, but with multiple translations things like EARTH 6,000 YEARS OLD could be mistranslated. but yeah that guy is an idiot highfive
You're a catholic who believes the 6000 years old thing is a mis-translation? Ok, granted. However it's right there in the Bible that if you add up the ages of the lineage the first Humans are 6000 years old. So are you saying Human fossils that have been discovered to be 200,000 years old is false? Or did they mis-interpret the ages of people in the Bible too? Get real...
grendelee: I haven't deleted parts 2 and 3, I just simply haven't made them yet. This video took an extraordinary amount of time to research and write, so I've been procrastinating with the second and third parts.
romsoft3d: That isn't helpful. I'm completely open to criticism and comment, because I wonder why theists believe in something I find so transparently implausible. But if you simply say "dude you have no idea what your [sic] talking about" that doesn't enlighten me, and somewhat reinforces some notions I already have.
My jaw about dropped when i saw the end of the vid when he claimed the creationists use the tactice assuming the rate of change of something has always been constant. Are you kidding? Assuming a constant rate of change is the BASIS for all your main old Earth arguments. You want a great example? Ok check this vid youtube (dot) com/watch?v=lv-OWTQocJc
I find evolution quite humerous myself. I am all over evidence. My somewhat new belief in the Bible is BASED on evidence. I wouldn't have it any other way.
What sticks out the most afte watching this is 'that's not true because the scientists said..the scientists did...scientists..scientists...'
This guy believes in gods, just not THE God. Evidently his gods know exactly how the sun works, and were probably their to witness the dino's chocking on all the ash too. Gimmie a break.
Wrong, magicmut. You are trying to marry old Earth views with the Bible. Old Earth views are all still based on assumptions at their core. Until I see something that isn't based on assumption at its core, it's still a theory, a theory that gives the God haters something to feel warm and fuzzy about.
How can the world be 6000 years old when we can observe stars that are millions of light years away. For example if you observe a star thats 10 million light years away doesnt that mean that it took the light particles 10 million years traveling at the speed of light to reach your eyeball. The star might not even exist anymore. Youre basically watching history. So i dont know how you can oberve something so far away if the world is only 6000 years old? VenomFangX OWNED :)
Six days old, but God was not using the Roman calendar or any Human "time unit." My point is that; there are so many different ways to how to measure time, and deferent cultures had deferent ways of doing so... My point is that six days or even 6000 years can mean so many deferent things to deferent people...
Why are there scientists and great scientists that truly believe in God? And they believe in God like me, but people like me and those scientists do not think that the earth is 6,000 years old but billons years old.
Do not worry this is just the start, I am fully loaded!
I have good questions! What started the big bang? If not God?
@Roman55Legions Sorry that is not a good question, cause then... Who created God? and dont answer me with the usual stupid answer "God already existed", cause that is pure bullshit.
This was an excellently researched, articulate response. Thank you.
It's hard getting through to people who have been indoctrinated to think that personal belief/faith is a truth and everything that doesnt agree with that personal truth is false.
It's interesting that you showed a dolphin when you said that sea life would have arisen even without land. Dolphins are mammals and evolved from land creatures, so they wouldn't exist without land.
macman 13...I'm not sure, but I don't think that one of the requirements of being a mammal is that it had an anscestor that lived on the land. Correct me if i'm wrong, even so, evolution postulates that life began in the sea anyway, so to say a dolphin would not have evolved without land is pretty brazen.
It wouldn't have because it's ancestor was a land mammal, it is unlikely that air breathing creatures would have evolved if there were no land. It is also unlikely that creatures with fins moving up/down would have evolved instead of side/side, which is how fish have it and is a more efficient method.
I dont want to lead you to believe that I'm arguing with you, but given the complexity of evolution and the number of factors known and unknown that go into an single evolutionary pressure, you can't say that any feature would not arise. Fins, horizontal or verticle, for example are not the only means of aquatic transport. A fish might evolve lungs for breathing in an atmosphere to supply itself with a rich dose of oxygen during high-speed surface chases.
Also, I think mammals are warm-blooded, vertebrate animals characterized by the presence of sweat glands, including those that produce milk, and by the presence of: hair, three middle ear bones used in hearing, and a neocortex region in the brain...according to wikipedia.
I'm saying that making the assumption that horizontal fins arise because an animal comes from land is a huge over-simplification, whether it is true or not.
It is true, we can tell from phylogenetics and adapted traits versus inherited traits. The anatomy of sea mammals can be matched up perfectly with their land dwelling cousins. Original sea creatures (fish) have vertical fins because that is more efficient.
Fins are not the only form of aquatic transportation of course, but HORIZONTAL fins only exist in sea mammals because the muscles evolved from quadrupedal animals.
"As one creationist pamphlet put it, 'A frog turning instantaneously into a prince is called a fairy tale, but if you add a few million years, it's called evolutionary science.' "—*Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, p. 399.
servantofJesusC...please read a book other than the Bible. I know the Bible tells you to believe, love, and cherish the Bible, but a book like any other. In fact, there are amazing books that make even more sense then the Bible while simultaneously not requiring any faith to understand any of the concepts put forward in said books. Good luck!
there are other books by god too ... the quran for example ...yes you claim they are not.
please provide empirical evidence that the claims of your god being "the one true god" are in fact correct?
also if you claim the god of the quran is the "one true god" as well then please explain why the 2 books are not the same with regards to many issues.
No problem my friend, there is no God for you, live your life as you wish, no rules, no purpose, everything is gone at death, God is a nice fantasy, but i believe that there is one, the evidence is everywhere, one question: is time finite? what do you think?
xchris1800 5 months ago
where are parts 2 and 3?
93RebelSon 1 year ago
Am sorry but this kid is dumb and obviously has no life. If thinking the earth is more than a million years old helps you sleep at night well than good for you.Ya we evolved from monkeys were about 97% the same but did you ever think that maybe we all have the same creator. The bible isnt wrong. Did you know that NOAHS ark was found.No you probably didnt because you dont care. Now please go ahead and post another 3 pointless videos on Noahs ark not being real because thats what your good for.
Sammythebull1000 1 year ago
Am sorry but this kid is dumb and obviously has no life. If thinking the earth is more than a million years old helps you sleep at night well than good for you.Ya we evolved from monkeys were about 97% the same but did you ever think that maybe we all have the same creator. The bible isnt wrong. Did you know that NOAHS arc was found.No you probably didnt because you dont care. Now please go ahead and post another 3 pointless videos on Noahs arc not being real because thats what your good for.
Sammythebull1000 1 year ago
cvbcvbcb
xorganizationxvx 1 year ago
You guys are BOTH wasting your time arguing about this. There is a HUGE universe out there. WE ARE ALL MADE OF DIRT THAT IS AWAKE.
derman077 1 year ago
awesome. well done video.
matthewdoucette 1 year ago
i strongly disagree with what youve posted here , but i really like your style in regards to argument,atheism isnt without cure,so God bless you,and keep studying
plbobj 1 year ago
@plbobj what do you disagree with?
grendelee 1 year ago
I love to point out to those who ridicule others and say things like "ha ha you think the earth is 6000 years old because the bible told you so".... Personally I do believe that the earth as we know it is about 6000 years old. The dawn of civilization happened about 6000 years ago, that is when homosapiens were able to master the art of the written language. So to me anything before that is just a 4.5 billion year old sandbox for archeologists and paleontologists to play in.
klyydsdale 1 year ago
Excellent comment, People like this guy can't seem to understand things like that, and the fact that real history that has been accurately recorded seems to fade away around 5000 years or so ago? But, according to atheists and evos man has been on the planet for over a million years but for some strange reason technology mysteriously kicked in along with the growth of the human population just a few thousand years ago? This atheists told me human brains weren't WIRED for that, that long ago
ironman197268 1 year ago
Paintings are not as complex as writings, some of the oldest paintings have been found to be more than 10,000 years old.
The main reason why you believe the world is 6,000 years old is not because of the scientific evidence (which is lacking), but for religious reasons. Hindus for example don't have problems with the earth being billions of years old as vast time spans are expected in the vedhas, YECs however don't go that further because of the bible interpretation.
TurboDally 1 year ago
Earth is about 8 to 10 thousand years old. humans try and prove creationists wrong. just not going to work
liverpoolfc1892ynwa 2 years ago
Absolutely right.
Humans try to prove creationists wrong is not going to work.
After creationists are rocks or aliens. Not humans appeartently.
It's really easy to say something has not been proven when you don't bother to understand what has been said and revert to beliving rocks....... Well except for every method of dating, and the entire science of geology.
Spector567 2 years ago
Exactly - 6345 years, 4 months, 5 days, 8 hours and 15 minutes.
There...
Long live creotards. The future of our science.
Yippee !
Polonaise2008 2 years ago
as i hace studied egypt alot since the sphinx is 10,500 years old the 6000 year theory is wrong
wormsgarrett1 2 years ago
Brilliant work. And obviously a lot of work too. Whether or not you convert anyone is beside the point. Your diligent research serves to bolster the arguments of those of like mind. And will contribute to the spread of reason overall.
Well done sir.
entwood 2 years ago 2
So, the sun just stays the same size? Don't all other stars implode and pop eventually? I guess the sun will just be the last light in the universe. The scientists you read that info from just realized they screwed up again and did what they do best, Make up more bullshit excuses,"Whoops, it is shrinking Jim, just come up with something using a bunch of big scientific words, they wont know the difference!" I read that it shrinks in mass but not in radius, so one day it'll be a big hot pancake?
ironman197268 2 years ago
"So, the sun just stays the same size?"
No.
"I read that it shrinks in mass but not in radius"
Are you saying that you cannot differentiate between "mass" and "radius"?
A simple analogy:
A balloon with a small radius filled with water will have more mass than a balloon with a MASSIVE radius filled with air.
Science is only okay for your computer etc, but if it conflict with religion, no no no!
TurboDally 1 year ago
@TurboDally No I'm not, I read the same thing. Are you saying that the inside of the sun is burning out and the surface just remains as is? So after the inside is all burned up, the surface continues to remain? 4.6 billion years of that... We would have an air filled balloon of a sun by now... What was the purpose of the inside of the sun to begin with? Why do other stars shrink and pop, to become super novas and black holes? The radius has to shrink or expand, it doesn't just stay the same.
ironman197268 1 year ago
You need to understand the concept of "density". The sun could remain the same radius yet lose mass whilst maintaining the same radius.
"why do..."
I recommend asking a physicist these questions, they will tell you why certain things happen. As to the "purpose" of inside the sun, I don't know why you ask the question in such a way. But inside a star, steller nucleosynthesis occurs (synthesis of heavier elements from lighter ones).
TurboDally 1 year ago
"WAS THERE LIFE BEFORE ADAM"?This particular website will answer alot of questions.
emedina73 2 years ago
btw, i dont think you changed the mind of the person you are debunking either. which is exactly my point
dedeath 2 years ago
who to believe. a kid with some "facts" about creationism. or a kid with some "facts" about evolutionisms. any or all of it could be unreliable information on both sides. this is the internet. the only way to come to a conclusion is to do your own research for BOTH sides of the argument and decide for yourself. i could spend my time to discredit some of the things this guy says. making 3 part video is not enough to prove or persuade anyone. waste of time
dedeath 2 years ago
@dedeath I put a lot of effort into researching the claims to make this video. I specifically debunk a few of the claims for a young earth, and give my reasoning.
You claim that you can discredit some of the things I say in this video. I don't think you can. But actually stating your argument would be more constructive than just hinting that you have them, otherwise it looks like a "I can do that I just don't want to" situation.
Albert10110 2 years ago 2
you're very right. i dont want to, cause it wont change your mind at all. you find out for yourself, and im happy for you. but nonetheless, its an opinion. and you or anyone else cannot prove either side of the argument. if their was proof. there would be no argument at all. and no, im not gonna state my points in a 500 character limit comment on youtube. sorry. and i wont make a video or long email about it either because it wont change anyones mind. thus, waste of time
dedeath 2 years ago
@dedeath Actually, presenting your arguments and showing their validity is the only way you'll change my mind. Feel free to email me your reasoning, and we can weigh the evidence.
Albert10110 2 years ago
what you're trying to do is get me to say i dont want to do that. so you can just call me ignorant and dont want to prove my point. i believe that science and religion must agree. and no, nothing i say will change your mind..... i could tell you some things that i believe could plant a seed in you, that will help you discover more on your own. but not change your mind completely
dedeath 2 years ago
@dedeath I disagree that science and religion must, or even can agree. And I put forth my reasons why in this and other videos. I have given this topic a lot of thought, and I have developed reasons for why I believe what I believe. And I can share those reasons with anyone.
You, however, keep making assertions and don't back them up at all. You insist you have arguments, but I can't tell if they are reasonable or not because you refuse to tell them. Why should I give you any credibility?
Albert10110 2 years ago 3
you're completely dodging my entire point. im not here to show you any proof or anything. im here to tell you, that making videos like this doesnt change anyones mind. i wont change your mind, you wont change mine. and i really doubt you changed anyones mind with this video
dedeath 2 years ago
@dedeath Hard to change a mind filled with mud. Rinse that brain out and come back.
entwood 2 years ago
@dedeath I completely agree, science and religion do match up, in about half the beliefs. I argue Genesis IS the Big Bang, read the order of what happened and the order things started appearing according to theories. Who cares what "God" is, the Sun gives us life and light the rest is made up to control populations.
MusicIan423 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Albert10110 No problem my friend, there is no God for you, live your life as you wish, no rules, no purpose, everything is gone at death, God is a nice fantasy, but i believe that there is one, the evidence is everywhere, one question: is time finite? what do you think?
xchris1800 5 months ago
Now, let me tell you about the population problem with animals and humans over millions of years. 2 things, either the planet would be covered with humans and animals or, as the population of them vs food to eat reached equilibrium, the planet would be covered with bones. There is 70,000,000 year old bones dug up Right?
ironman197268 2 years ago
Comment removed
stillhuman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ironman you're so wrong it's laughable.
stillhuman 2 years ago
ironman197268 - That is just about the worst argument ever constructed. You have achieved an epic debate fail.
metalebd 2 years ago
I'm not arguing, I just gave him some reasoning behind my statement. If you call that an "epic debate fail," you have got some low expectations!!
ironman197268 2 years ago
I totally agree with you, I have low expectations for everything I encounter, it's just my nature ;). However, the chance of anything becoming a fossil is very, very low. Teeth are the most preservable substances known to man and they seldom survive for a few 10's millions of years. So no, the world would not be covered with bones. Maybe I misunderstood your comment. Anyway i'll friend request you anyway. ;)
metalebd 2 years ago
Sorry, I ran out of characters. The moon is in a frictionless environment, it's rate of movement away from the Earth will not change unless it encounters resistance of some kind, like a big meteor slamming directly into it. That would either stop it's movement, send it back towards Earth, or blow it to bits. Why is carbon 14 (that decays over around 10,000 years) found in something 70,000,000 years old. What about T-Rex bones found with soft tissue and red blood cells still inside them.
ironman197268 2 years ago
I don't believe, I know!! Where are the stars in the background of moon videos? Why is the horizon so small and jagged? If Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon, Who video taped him coming off the ship? I follow Dr. Kent Hovind closely too because he's right. If we get comets from the ort cloud they would burn up before they reached our solar system. You need to redo your math on the moon moving away from the Earth, about 1.2 billion years ago the moon would be touching the earth.
ironman197268 2 years ago
Pretty weak man. There's a whole lot more than the moon and sun story, by the way, there ain't no mirror on the moon because astronauts did not go there. You might be a big fancy word using talker, but you're still wrong.
ironman197268 2 years ago
So you believe that the planet is 6,000 years old, that I'm a "big fancy word using talker", and that the moon landings were faked.
Why is it that people with these views never give me any sort of reasoning behind their statements, just as you haven't?
Albert10110 2 years ago
you successfully dick slapped that kid over youtube... beautiful
eaterofemokids 2 years ago
Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2estring57 2 years ago
This is very well spoken and backed up with facts...Good for you!
gilby40 2 years ago
lol! thats a lot of alliteration at 3:25ish
EpiDot52 2 years ago
I agree completely!!!!!!!!!!
dndfan54 2 years ago
I'm Christian and I believe with you on the age of the Earth
Parkrose21 2 years ago
Me too!
Ludwag511 2 years ago
-Scince part of this comment: time travel(to the past) & time viewing(of the future) are theorized to be possible.
-That being said everything already happened the instant that the universe was created. Every choice that will be made, has already been made, and we are able to observe these choices and the outcomes of these choices in a domain we call "time." All I'm saying..God didn't create earth & moon in six days..he created 1-D, 2-D, 3-D, 4-D, etc, & he created everything that was/will be
PhysicsAndGod 2 years ago
Comment removed
CurtisWindover 2 years ago
Has VenomfangX said anything to you about what you said in this video since you've made it?
mastermind2566 2 years ago
i love ur nit picking tendencies!
thebestwillow 2 years ago
is it just me or do we all hate venomfangx
brigeboy95 3 years ago 2
we dont all hate, I just pitty. Hate is a strong word and should not be used for the like of VFX. Hate the message, pitty the man.
BuiltEnvironment 3 years ago 10
+10 million points for showing uncommon maturity on the internet
siddacious 3 years ago 4
Great refutation
Smokinn 3 years ago
Ahh, so we Christians have a problem with carbon dating and starlight, but you have the "horizon problem." Type into the You Tube search engine "Distant Starlight Problem" and click on npage85's video. He explains it much better than I could.
Peace and God Bless!
sk8teh14 3 years ago
when are you planning to place the second and third installment of this series on youtube?
dariendark 3 years ago 7
Again, well done.
1n354a 3 years ago
Great work
RamblingThinker 3 years ago
does anyone know anything about venomfangx? im new to this whole argument. does he even go to school? is he one of those people who cant go out in the sun, or their skin will bubble? i mean, i knew how the sun worked when i was 9 (at most). i learned it......at school.....
grendelee 3 years ago
Hes quite educated.. he is defending his faith. We all have a right to. Whether we choose to believe our faith is the real decision.
KoreanEugene 3 years ago
You look like the kid i used to pick on in my class
However I always respected his knowledge
(he also respected my weed we had a system)
Anyhoo good vid
Nice clear refutations
Good job 5 stars
Keep it up Quentin i mean Albert
But i do say you give venomfang way to much credit by making a 10 minute video
Its like pissing into the wind
666daedsidog 3 years ago
you fail in that you seem to think that he gives a shit about actual facts... People like this willfully ignore actual science.
Valkes 3 years ago
silly creationist, sientific facts are for saten worshipers! lol
fagotstomper 3 years ago
Err I'm not a creationist, I was referring to Venomvang..
Valkes 3 years ago
i know i was saying that joke about you
fagotstomper 3 years ago
Can we expect part 2 Albert10110?
I specially subscribed for that :P
Terrencje 3 years ago
nope, you subscribed for no reason. Go an hero.
Valkes 3 years ago
I have written extensively on evolution versus YEC, and I must say that you do an exemplary job of countering YEC in an accessible way (that is to say, in layman's terms).
Good job.
UnNethertrash 3 years ago
Give me Part 2! I mean it! Don't make me go Militant!
Cubanatheist 3 years ago 2
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz atheist zzzzzzzzzzz if they believe theres not god then they better be dedicated to know every thing but aparently they cant can they? How about you check out
drdino(dot)com
antigurus2 3 years ago
Kent Hovind is a moron and knows nothing about science or the theory of evolution. He doesn't even have a real Ph.D.
Cubanatheist 3 years ago
man I love this guy.
thanks Al for doing all the research and hard work to reply to VenomFangX's video.
jarret45 3 years ago
I am a christian, but dont bash my comment yet, i dont believe the earth is 6000 years old, thats just plan stupid. BUT, the bible never says how old the earth is, or definded time rate for creation, since the 7 days can be interpreted to god as any length of time. I am impressed by you argument and agree with you, except the athiest thing.
downbottomman 3 years ago
Lol, first time I've ever heard the "god" day different than an "earth" day thought process/interpretation. - funny stuff
Ambrosky3 3 years ago
Not so much funny as sensible.
downbottomman 3 years ago
I think it's funny when religious people try to come up with concrete evidence that God exists. If there is a God, she doesn't want to prove her existence. Anyone for some faith? Are they trying to prove it to the world, or just themselves? If you're such a stickler for christian fundamentalism why haven't you stoned some gays, or those who would work on the sabbath. Oh yea, I forgot the old testament is completely up for give and take interpretations.
Yabbablabba 3 years ago
good job! By the way, many are like myself, theistic evolutionists. I believe in a living God and a redeeming Saviour Jesus, who gradually created the earth and man over billions of years using His own God-created natural processes. Genesis 1-11 can be read in a more allegorical way without denying the Spirit's inspiration. The Bible is the word of God.
greenerman99 3 years ago
did god possess the people who wrote the bible?
LewisPearson 3 years ago
I think that God joined himself to man, and man to God, in the process of writing the bible. Man was not just a puppet or mouthpiece, but a willing and cooperative being. God spoke in man, and man spoke in God, to produce the Bible. I would not call it "possession"
greenerman99 3 years ago
valid opinion :) whats your view on natural selection and evolution? because these theories dont actually require any outside guidance such as a "god", surly the fittest survive and the weakest die anyway?
LewisPearson 3 years ago
im just curious btw, im not trying to start an argument about what theory is correct :)
LewisPearson 3 years ago
Well, I think God used natural selection to make all creatures, including man. The universe functions based on fundamental "laws" that are set at certain constants. Why? I believe God set up the universe so that it would create us. The universe also seems to have random and unpredictable aspects. Neils Bohr, physicist, speaking of the atomic level, said "an atom in a stationary state may in general even be said to possess a free choice between various possible transitions"
greenerman99 3 years ago
Thus even though there are seemingly immutable laws, which may speak to us of a deterministic universe, there are also probabilistic factors, which may relate to free will. Natural selection is based on deterministic outcomes as well as chance. The two irreconcilable concepts (to philosophy), of free will and determinism, coexist in nature, as well as in human nature. God lets us choose Him.
greenerman99 3 years ago
You are made of win. Please make this your profession (apart from becoming a world-renowned author and professor).
JustSayNoToNutbread 3 years ago
Can someone send me the link to this creationist guy shaun
Avionicgenius 3 years ago
His YouTube name is is VenomFangX
Albert10110 3 years ago
Thank you
Avionicgenius 3 years ago
LOL MAJOR BURN! (+ well supported evidence) Omg ur awesome Al. Keep up the good work and don't let religious nutcases get to you.
Deadlytrick 3 years ago
also, a display of a phenomenal research skis.
martinorozco 3 years ago
dont get tangled in this creationist argument, its a form of religious corruption, with little or no essential argument, other than to get people involved, and outraged by ludicrous religious statements. in any case, GOD, a metaphor for everything good, is just that, a metaphor. good for philosophy, bad for science
Jabulon88 3 years ago
Alright I'm going to give an extremely over-simplified view of gravitational physics. Which is one rule, The further an object is from a gravitational force, the less effect this force has on that object.
As such one can assume an exponential curve as to the rate the moon would recede from the earth. If this rate is only now 4cm, imagine how many millionths of a nano-meter is must have once been citing the current theories on the proven age of the earth, our galaxy, and beyond.
LokiCDK 3 years ago
I am happy to say that it was the Bible that made me an atheist!
Gabebro1 3 years ago 13
yeh i was a Cristian until i started reading the bible too 0.0
hajidude 3 years ago 2
the bible makes no claim that the earth is only 6000 years old.. because the seventh yom is clearly more than a one thousand year increment it is reasonable to conclude that the six yoms of creation should not be defined as merely six thousand years.
muzalot 3 years ago
defining YOM in genesis1 as an indefinite period of time cannot be precluded, it's a legitimate interpretation.. accusations that interpreting it other than 24 hour days or even 1000 year days is a capitulation to athiests is groundless when one recognizes that Josephus (first century) Irenaeus (second century) Origin (third century), Augustine (fourth century), Aquinas (fourteenth century), and many others held such an interpretation long before modern geology and astronomy came along.
muzalot 3 years ago
The first Humans sprung 6000 years ago. Just trace back the lineage in the Bible for it's all there. Just do the simple arithmetic. This means radio carbon dating is false by saying the first Human remains were around 200,000 years old. The Bible's truth shatters science yet again!... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! People have taken SHITS that have lasted longer than 6000 years!
silvercade 3 years ago
All true, great video.
peteq1972 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
how do you know the sun is 4.6 million years old can you do your carbon dating on the sun there is no way to prove anything is that old
macain94 3 years ago
So you're trying to debunk an argument he hasn't even made yet? Clever.
Perhaps you should wait and see what he has to say about this in the third part before you go shooting off at the mouth.
SuperKawaiiNeko 3 years ago
macain94: I do not make the claim that the sun is 4.6 million years old, so I really can't make a counter-argument, nor do I know what you are talking about.
I do put forward refutations to a 6,000 year old earth arguments, and assert that a 4.55 billion year old earth is a more accurate age.
Albert10110 3 years ago
This was great.
Here's a quote I think you'll find relevant and useful.
"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function."
~Albert Bartlett
Koratnia 4 years ago 2
Great work
aredington 4 years ago
it's not even that believing in god, jesus christ, allah, whatever is contradictory to evolution or the fact that the earth is billions of years old. I'm a catholic, and I believe in Evolution (Macro and Micro), think the new earth theories are idiotic and generally think that the bible is a mishmash of things written by man, and man not only makes mistakes, but with multiple translations things like EARTH 6,000 YEARS OLD could be mistranslated. but yeah that guy is an idiot highfive
douglovestheinternet 4 years ago
it's not even that believing in god, jesus christ, allah, whatever is contradictory to evolution or the fact that the earth is billions of years old. I'm a catholic, and I believe in Evolution (Macro and Micro), think the new earth theories are idiotic and generally think that the bible is a mishmash of things written by man, and man not only makes mistakes, but with multiple translations things like EARTH 6,000 YEARS OLD could be mistranslated. but yeah that guy is an idiot highfive
douglovestheinternet 4 years ago
You're a catholic who believes the 6000 years old thing is a mis-translation? Ok, granted. However it's right there in the Bible that if you add up the ages of the lineage the first Humans are 6000 years old. So are you saying Human fossils that have been discovered to be 200,000 years old is false? Or did they mis-interpret the ages of people in the Bible too? Get real...
silvercade 3 years ago
YOU ARE WRONG. Odin give me strength!
shabadoosa 4 years ago 4
this guy is awesome
tattashot 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hell awaits you.
crackwhore2007 4 years ago
You wish.
moebear 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hell awaits you.
crackwhore2007 4 years ago
You wish.
moebear 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Bullshit.
crackwhore2007 4 years ago
Aha! HHAHAHAAH! I GOT YOU KNOW, ALBERT! YOU ARE FLAWED! It's pronounced "dep-o-zishun" not "dee-paws-ih-tay-shun"
SUCK IT!
=] Just joking, I'm just 'nitpicking'
HPDDJ 4 years ago
well done :)
ndjarnag 4 years ago 2
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dont use truth and logic with Christians, it will hurt their feelings and they will call you a liberal!
CapnMak 4 years ago 8
Albert10110,
dont waist your time on sean, or what ever his name is.
i debunked him already then he bloked me from commenting his videos.
religion=FICTION
science=FACT
zaxan 4 years ago 5
did anyone realize that the bible has changed and rewritten since its been made? you can actually SEE the differences. next?
grendelee 4 years ago
where are the 2nd and 3rd parts?
migkillertwo 4 years ago
people are watching these, albert, you dont have to delete the 2 and 3rd parts
grendelee 4 years ago
grendelee: I haven't deleted parts 2 and 3, I just simply haven't made them yet. This video took an extraordinary amount of time to research and write, so I've been procrastinating with the second and third parts.
Albert10110 4 years ago
dude you have no idea what your talking about.. you just got the ideas from someone.
so you have no idea what your talking about go learn kid.
romsoft3d 4 years ago
romsoft3d: That isn't helpful. I'm completely open to criticism and comment, because I wonder why theists believe in something I find so transparently implausible. But if you simply say "dude you have no idea what your [sic] talking about" that doesn't enlighten me, and somewhat reinforces some notions I already have.
Albert10110 4 years ago
Hmmm.. tell me do you know how old is the earth? or dd you hear from other people?
no one can tell the age of the earth.. unless you lived that time, i don't think you did.
NO ONE CAN TELL THE AGE OF THE EARTH, NO ONE.
romsoft3d 4 years ago
i bet this is just as helpful.
i know how the sun works. and thats what it does. so....hes right.
grendelee 4 years ago
Superb refutations!
pos777 4 years ago
I hope parts 2 and 3 come out soon.
graaar 4 years ago
Creationists don't use Matthew to determine the age of the Earth, it only starts with Abraham.
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
My jaw about dropped when i saw the end of the vid when he claimed the creationists use the tactice assuming the rate of change of something has always been constant. Are you kidding? Assuming a constant rate of change is the BASIS for all your main old Earth arguments. You want a great example? Ok check this vid youtube (dot) com/watch?v=lv-OWTQocJc
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
scientists DONT assume the rate of change in things like radiometric halflives are constant.
they have evidence that shows it has been constant.
so now evidence is "assuming".
creationists are funny.
memoryofakiss 4 years ago
I find evolution quite humerous myself. I am all over evidence. My somewhat new belief in the Bible is BASED on evidence. I wouldn't have it any other way.
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
What sticks out the most afte watching this is 'that's not true because the scientists said..the scientists did...scientists..scientists...'
This guy believes in gods, just not THE God. Evidently his gods know exactly how the sun works, and were probably their to witness the dino's chocking on all the ash too. Gimmie a break.
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
Love this guy!
drfunk444 4 years ago
i find your videos to be very elegantly explained, please let me know the location of the 2nd and 3rd parts.
atticusyellow 4 years ago
Excellent work. One might think these creationist arguments have been refuted far too many times, but for some reason they're still being used.
soulhunger1 4 years ago
Very very cool.
Why not put this as a video response to Venomfangx's video?
darktango78 4 years ago
the earth is old but humans have only existed for aprox. six thousand years.
magicmut 4 years ago
Wrong, magicmut. You are trying to marry old Earth views with the Bible. Old Earth views are all still based on assumptions at their core. Until I see something that isn't based on assumption at its core, it's still a theory, a theory that gives the God haters something to feel warm and fuzzy about.
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
check out KENT HOVIND if you want to argue someone
goodgood123321 4 years ago
You. Fucking. RULE. Love it bro, you rule so hard it hurts!
Rufio80 4 years ago
Great video, alot of good info, but where are the other vids?
vegassilenttype 4 years ago
PWNED! This video is 1337! Shawn is a NUB. LOL! Hehe, good job!
Cierra1985 4 years ago 2
Just want you to know, you're my hero!
siredward800 4 years ago
How can the world be 6000 years old when we can observe stars that are millions of light years away. For example if you observe a star thats 10 million light years away doesnt that mean that it took the light particles 10 million years traveling at the speed of light to reach your eyeball. The star might not even exist anymore. Youre basically watching history. So i dont know how you can oberve something so far away if the world is only 6000 years old? VenomFangX OWNED :)
whatuseruser 4 years ago
Awesome dude!
Voice0fEnergy 4 years ago
When is 2 of 3 coming out? ...I have been waiting sooooo long
MycroftHolmz 4 years ago
yeah! where the **** are those other vids?
migkillertwo 4 years ago
Six days old, but God was not using the Roman calendar or any Human "time unit." My point is that; there are so many different ways to how to measure time, and deferent cultures had deferent ways of doing so... My point is that six days or even 6000 years can mean so many deferent things to deferent people...
Roman55Legions 4 years ago
Why are there scientists and great scientists that truly believe in God? And they believe in God like me, but people like me and those scientists do not think that the earth is 6,000 years old but billons years old.
Do not worry this is just the start, I am fully loaded!
I have good questions! What started the big bang? If not God?
Roman55Legions 4 years ago
@Roman55Legions Sorry that is not a good question, cause then... Who created God? and dont answer me with the usual stupid answer "God already existed", cause that is pure bullshit.
OwnYouGood 4 years ago 2
This was an excellently researched, articulate response. Thank you.
It's hard getting through to people who have been indoctrinated to think that personal belief/faith is a truth and everything that doesnt agree with that personal truth is false.
steegpinkgoat 4 years ago
It's interesting that you showed a dolphin when you said that sea life would have arisen even without land. Dolphins are mammals and evolved from land creatures, so they wouldn't exist without land.
Everything else was good.
macman13 4 years ago
macman 13...I'm not sure, but I don't think that one of the requirements of being a mammal is that it had an anscestor that lived on the land. Correct me if i'm wrong, even so, evolution postulates that life began in the sea anyway, so to say a dolphin would not have evolved without land is pretty brazen.
steegpinkgoat 4 years ago
It wouldn't have because it's ancestor was a land mammal, it is unlikely that air breathing creatures would have evolved if there were no land. It is also unlikely that creatures with fins moving up/down would have evolved instead of side/side, which is how fish have it and is a more efficient method.
macman13 4 years ago
I dont want to lead you to believe that I'm arguing with you, but given the complexity of evolution and the number of factors known and unknown that go into an single evolutionary pressure, you can't say that any feature would not arise. Fins, horizontal or verticle, for example are not the only means of aquatic transport. A fish might evolve lungs for breathing in an atmosphere to supply itself with a rich dose of oxygen during high-speed surface chases.
steegpinkgoat 4 years ago
Also, I think mammals are warm-blooded, vertebrate animals characterized by the presence of sweat glands, including those that produce milk, and by the presence of: hair, three middle ear bones used in hearing, and a neocortex region in the brain...according to wikipedia.
steegpinkgoat 4 years ago
That's accurate, what's your point?
macman13 4 years ago
I'm saying that making the assumption that horizontal fins arise because an animal comes from land is a huge over-simplification, whether it is true or not.
steegpinkgoat 4 years ago
It is true, we can tell from phylogenetics and adapted traits versus inherited traits. The anatomy of sea mammals can be matched up perfectly with their land dwelling cousins. Original sea creatures (fish) have vertical fins because that is more efficient.
macman13 4 years ago
Fins are not the only form of aquatic transportation of course, but HORIZONTAL fins only exist in sea mammals because the muscles evolved from quadrupedal animals.
macman13 4 years ago
"As one creationist pamphlet put it, 'A frog turning instantaneously into a prince is called a fairy tale, but if you add a few million years, it's called evolutionary science.' "—*Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, p. 399.
servantofJesusC 4 years ago
servantofJesusC...please read a book other than the Bible. I know the Bible tells you to believe, love, and cherish the Bible, but a book like any other. In fact, there are amazing books that make even more sense then the Bible while simultaneously not requiring any faith to understand any of the concepts put forward in said books. Good luck!
steegpinkgoat 4 years ago
I've read other books. Is servantofJesusC to trust the word of man over the word of God?
It takes more faith to think we are all a cosmic accident than to believe in a creator by far.
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
there are other books by god too ... the quran for example ...yes you claim they are not.
please provide empirical evidence that the claims of your god being "the one true god" are in fact correct?
also if you claim the god of the quran is the "one true god" as well then please explain why the 2 books are not the same with regards to many issues.
memoryofakiss 4 years ago
It's nice to see you agree they aren't the same. Look into the history of how the Quran came about. I'll make 2 short points of many.
1. Quran = from God according to one man (like the Book of Mormon)
2. Bible = unmatched fullfilled prophecy and the word of God according 40+ men/women of different ethnic, time, and professional backgrounds.
truthseeker1973 4 years ago
im not agreeing with you ... im calling you a presumptuous fool. =P
please show me a prediction that was made in no uncertain terms where specific details were given that was not potentially self fulfilling...
also since you claim the bible was written by god then point me to the "gospel of yahweh" or we can talk about inconsistancies between the gospels....
memoryofakiss 4 years ago