Added: 4 years ago
From: TheBadAstronomer
Views: 4,594
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (431)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • if u believe in evolution it means u believe nothing can explode into everything.you then believe that rain falling on rocks can make them come alive. two hocus pocus bs stories that are totally unscientific. two things that the pro evolution religion never want to talk about.

  • maybe if we didn't rob people we wouldn't have the problem of arguing over who gets the loot.

    so, you get raped day in and day out by the feds, oh, but we can call in and leave them a message. maybe they'll give a shit one day. what a great country!

  • @junior00bacon00chee are you serious? i'm proud to pay taxes. the ones doing the raping are the corporate bigwigs who are UNREGULATED therefore allowed to screw their customers however they feel necessary. i'd rather pay more taxes for universal healthcare than take the risk of a family or friend getting terribly sick, denied their healthcare because of a "preexisting condition," or go bankrupt trying to pay for it. the capitalists who live only for profit make me sick.

  • @frustratedlogician

    corporations are state created, defined, and enforced entities. the state and corps are like two peas in a pod, there is no real struggle between them, that is all just for political show. to say they are unregulated is just a blatant lie, there are tens of thousands of regulations, and big business loves them b/c they wrote them.

    i'd love for everyone to be taken care of too, but unfortunately we have to deal with reality, and economic science is our only guiding light.

  • (cont'd)

    moreover, the problem with health care is very obvious. why do you think it costs so much? insurance companies and the govt are best buds, and they've been raping us for decades on health care, that's why little visits cost hundreds or thousands of dollars. what needs to happen is the complete abolition of the state in all markets. that means goodbye fascist state-corporate nightmare.

  • "the capitalists who live only for profit make me sick."

    people who support threatening others with being locked into cages like animals if they don't fork over their earnings to strangers make me sick.

    if greed is evil, then surely extorting people, as well as routinely committing every crime known to man, is also an evil. yet, you are "proud to pay taxes" to a criminal gang. that's like a slave saying "i'm proud to wear these chains!"

    i wish more people adhered to science and rationality.

  • @junior00bacon00chee i do adhere to science and rationality, you're just not making any sense. it's a fallacy to say "corporations are state created, defined, and enforced entities" -- that only applies to things like the post office are (which, last time i checked, didn't price-gouge). if you completely abolished the state in any market, corruption would run rampant--the problem is that our current corrupt representatives are bribed enormous sums NOT to protect their delegates.

  • @junior00bacon00chee and to say the government is "committing every crime known to man" and "a criminal gang" is so hyperbolized i don't even know where to begin, except for to say stop getting your news from michelle bachman. taxation HAS representation. and if so many elected officials weren't in the pockets of big businesses, we wouldn't have the poverty divides we have now, and regulations would ACTUALLY PROTECT the vulnerable citizens they're supposed to.

  • @junior00bacon00chee to call it stealing really just shows you don't care about the welfare of people. sure it goes to fund wars we don't want and bail out bankers who don't need it, but you know what, if we didn't have so many dishonest corporatists in the house and senate, our taxes would go to worthwhile causes. it's not the system that needs fixing, it's the greedy fucks letting it go on. and "pure free market capitalists" are a huge part of the problem.

  • @frustratedlogician

    wow, you are in steep. who is michelle bachman? i don't have a TV.

    anywho, you are mixing separate issues here. clearly, threatening people with cages is extortion, i'm not sure how that can be denied. the issue you are arguing is whether or not such action is justifiable.

    also, it is a non sequitur to say that my statement of the facts means i don't care about people.

  • "i do adhere to science and rationality"

    except when it comes to economics, then who cares about rationality.

    it is the state monopolized law which creates corporations as fictional legal entities. i'm not sure anyone would dispute this.

  • "if you completely abolished the state in any market, corruption would run rampant"

    yes, thank god we have the oh so uncorrupt state to prevent corruption from "running rampant." really?....

    you only assume that about a "free market" and im going to assume that you and i disagree on the definition of "free market."

  • @junior00bacon00chee "it is the state monopolized law which creates corporations as fictional legal entities" what do you mean by this? i don't see how a corporation is supposed to be a "legal entity" or a fictional one. monopoly laws basically say there has to be competition, you can't dominate a market. and i don't know where you're from, but the penalties for not paying taxes is not "cages," that's reserved for people who commit FRAUD and EVASION- and that's min security prisons = babysitter

  • @junior00bacon00chee but anyway, i didn't study economics in school, so maybe you do have me on this one. i'll admit when i don't know-- but i still stand by the fact that the problem with our government is the people in the house/senate who are OWNED by big corporations. regardless of how you feel about taxes, in a perfect world our government would protect consumers from the parasites that worship the bottom line. and im not sure if its right, but i assumed free market = no gov't oversight

  • @frustratedlogician

    okay, well i basically agree with you on the current situation. but why place any faith at all in this institution at all? i am just trying to say that big corporations are an outgrowth of statism, the two are inseparable.

    govt oversight is shit. it only makes bribery easier when you encode into the law that the govt should be the great "overseer."

    yes, at least consider rational economics, im not saying you even have to give up a lot of what you're saying.

  • @frustratedlogician The welfare system is designed to stop revolutions. In other countries when people can't feed their children, they take up weapons and take the food they need and reform the government, wipe out corporations etc. It is a pendulum. When welfare fails the money goes to 10,000% inflation, the US will either be taken over by whomever still has power (Chinese) or will have a revolution.

  • @junior00bacon00chee The corporations own the politicians, own the universities, and are only out for money and nothing else. It is the corporate way. Pharmaceuticals are horrible at getting drugs approved that are actually helping to destroy the human genome.

  • @frustratedlogician I find it amazing that you have any logic left that you can see how corporations out of control are ruining our country, yet you actually believe in evolution. Don't you know that corporations feed money to universities and they promote evolution for the sake of having amoral people working for them to rape the public. A corp. does not want someone who believes in "love one another" working for them.

    You are a contradiction and that is why you are so messed up emotionally.

  • @frustratedlogician The reason for the current depression in the US is greedy banks that are unregulated. After the great depression of 1930's the use installed regulations on banks to stop them from doing it again. In the 70's-90's They paid off politicians to get the "banking reform laws" so they could be free to do it again. Read history. Listen to old people! Wake up!

  • @GSFY

    the only true "regulation" is the pressure that would be felt on companies if we lived in a free market society. the threat of losing customers or not making a profit would force them to comply with the preferences of consumers. "regulation" cannot come from legislation, govt "reg" is designed by corpos to eliminate their competition.

    ever hear of the early 1920s depression? no, b/c the govt did nothing and the correction happened quickly. the Great D. was b/c the govt intervened.

  • @GSFY

    the root of the problem is government manipulation of money and credit. let's just look to the federal reserve...who "regulates" them when they operate in complete secrecy and have no oversight whatsoever? they've been counterfeiting money for decades on the order of trillions and trillions of dollars, and this is what causes the boom/bust cycle. a depression is simply the time when the market realizes that the boom was fake and resources are reallocated towards profitable ventures.

  • @junior00bacon00chee LIke I said we did not learn from the "great depression" in which banks and financial companies were running rampant with no controls. The US is heading for extreme inflation and a huge drop in economic status in the world.

  • @junior00bacon00chee It is not government, but corporations controlling government. There should be a law that corporations cannot contribute to any politician. There should be a "pool" of money for elections and that every politician can only get money for campaign from that. Lobby should be outlawed.

  • @GSFY

    you are just toying with meaningless policy measures. the root of the problem, ie, the very existence of the State, remains. the "government" is just a group of people who are perceived as legitimate in extorting and bullying other people with the threat of guns and cages. corporate law as we know it is a product of the monopolization of law via the State. govt cannot "regulate" banks, only the threat of competition can. the govt option just opens the door to mass bribery.

  • @junior00bacon00chee The government has a right to control banks with laws, because the law is based on allowing people the right to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If what anyone or any corporation does interferes with others rights, then you are to be put in jail.

    Bankers need to go to jail for what they did, not be bailed out.

  • @GoodScienceForYou It has nothing to do with anything but money, the bankers are greedy bastards.

    And while you are here, you are a dip shit.

  • @junior00bacon00chee After the "great depression" we had all sorts of banking and securities laws. During the 90's everybody forgot the depression and its cause. So new laws "lovingly" referred to as "banking reform" laws. The banks had issues with anyone telling them or limiting their ability to make money and charge whatever they want for any use of their money (that they borrowed from the government bank, which is privately owned by a bunch of bankers. WTF?)

    Now the US is close to collapse.

  • @junior00bacon00chee We do not live in a free market society. We live in a corporation controlled society. Small businesses are devoured by large corps and either absorbed or shut down, to kill competition. Study company buyouts.

  • @GoodScienceForYou

    100% agreed. my question is what is the root of this problem? is this the "way it is" so we should adopt a spirit of apathy and compliance? or is this the result of an unnecessary institution whose existence has been perpetuated by the myth that this one entity should be able to extort everyone else and scribble decrees down on paper backed by the threat of lethal force?

    let's get rid of the State, and then begin to deal with humanities problems.

  • @junior00bacon00chee We need to modify the country and make it so no corporation can buy politicians and that lobbies are against the law. No politician can be bought. Period. It is based on a free market with the people in charge of the market.

  • @junior00bacon00chee People don't want to be bothered if they have food shelter, toys, and their children are not starving. All of that is changing in the USA. As soon as you cause children to be hungry, you have revolution.

  • Stop all funding for all religious crap being taught in school! Evodeulsionism is a religion of morons. There is no science in delusional bullshit.

  • @GoodScienceForYou - what YOU are preaching is religious crap.

    GSFY: "we are honest Christians who believe in God and believe in what is taught"

  • @GoodScienceForYou

    i'm about to watch some of your vids, i'm interested to hear your criticisms of evolution. from where i am now i think, on the whole, the overall theory that organisms originate from previous generations of lesser intelligence and complexity seems to be the only viable possibility. what else would explain the origin all of these organisms we see today?

  • @junior00bacon00chee Start from the beginning.

    /watch?v=sPPafzd4wGI

    /watch?v=bQrkBtnD_UQ

    /watch?v=ZeAzlfNrqKM

  • @junior00bacon00chee The absolutely CLEAR DNA evidence only shows genetic degradation in all creatures in which we have the parent of the species and the DNA. Humans have over 4500 genetic defects that are considered to be genetic diseases. There are other defects that just weaken us.

  • @GoodScienceForYou If DNA degrades all the time, then how did evolution happen? It is a fact that it did.

  • @TheBadAstronomer sorry for trolling your comments, gotta take out the trash now and then. keep making videos!

  • By the way, below is the first amendment for those who have already been brain washed.

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    The money is not establishing a religine. I'm sorry Mr. Bad Astronomer.

  • It's funding an exclusively religious doctrine being taught as scientific fact in a school. Same thing.

  • @navystevo2233 its not establishing one, but it helps to promote one over others.

  • Pardon me, Creation Science is science. If you would like to speak to me one on one you may. Being closed minded is not a scientific. The scientific mind is an open one.

  • magic isnt science

  • Creationism is not based on scientific method. It's purely empirical and nothing like this:

    1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

    2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena.

    3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

    4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

  • @ccmps

    Sir Francis Bacon pretty much invented the scientific method, and he was a creationist.

  • @navystevo2233 Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! BS

  • @navystevo2233 actually, its not science. what creationists do is read the bible, then look at the world and try to find pieces of evidence to support it. ok, so you found maybe 10 or 15 pieces of reality that could back it up. too bad it means nothing next to hundreds of thousands plus pieces of evidence in support of big bang cosmology and biological evolution. i can give you examples if you'd like.

  • @frustratedlogician What evodelusionists do is to believe in evolution, then project that belief on evidence. They ignore all the contrary and obvious facts. There is NO evidence of any complex creature, magically becoming more complex, nor do we have any evidence of this magical process. It is one messed up religion arguing with other religions. Don't be a dumb ass believer in anything that has no absolute evidence.

  • @GoodScienceForYou: "There is NO evidence of any complex creature, magically becoming more complex...". You are correct about one thing, magic does not enter the picture. It is you creationists that believe in a magical creation from a deity speaking the universe into existence. Evolution is science - too bad your Bible is not.

    .

    Do you know the laws of karma? You are going to pay a heavy price for all of your lies.

  • @GoodScienceForYou clearly you're right because all you do is insult people. aaaaand clearly, by the response you posted, you don't understand much about genetics either. exactly HOW are chimps TOO CLOSE to be distant cousins? they're the result of WHAT interbreeding before the fusion? you don't understand, EVERY HUMAN'S CHROMOSOME #2 has these traits.

    tell you what, i gave you some evidence, and you ignored it and came up with some drivel to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

  • Comment removed

  • GSFY - you have been unable to point to ANY evidence to support your idiotic humans interbreeding with gorillas to produce chimp notion(and then humans with chimps to produce Neanderthals!). I've asked you on various videos to highlight any specific DNA sequences or ERV insertion patterns that might support your daft idea, but each time you run away. Even funnier is your claim that this happened less than 4000 years ago - over 500 years after the building of the pyramids!! You're a clown Jimmy.

  • @GoodScienceForYou you are clearly an idiot, and have just demonstrated you don't know the difference between genetics and morphology. good job. you're not worth my time (same reason no geneticists have "refuted" your silly idea), so this is my last comment. digesting nylon is a new trait, done by a brand-new (at the time) enzyme made by a frameshift mutation. and yes there are many ex's: WHALES BIRDS and HOOFED MAMMALS are only SOME of the best documented MACROchanges.

  • @frustratedlogician - GoodScienceForYou is a fundie who lies and pretends not to have a religion. At least VenomFangX never claimed to be other than a Christian, but GSFY constantly denies it. He is a delusional fool who claims to have an IQ of 180 and to have read 200,000 peer-reviewed papers, 20,000 of them "in-depth".

    .He's making NephilimFree look sane by comparison.

  • @AlanCFA i know i know, i just get those bouts of foolish optimism... i don't mind trying to help people, until i get, you know... frustrated

  • Comment removed

  • @GoodScienceForYou if you actually read my comments, you'd know i don't hold any beliefs. plus you're blindly making unfounded assertions about me, which aren't true. as for you, all your friends and people you subscribe to are all creationists, so to say your stance isn't based on religion is bullshit. talk to me about chromosome 2. or mitochondrial DNA. let's hear why YOU think it's evidence of "interbreeding."

  • @GoodScienceForYou: "Anyone who believes in anything, without evidence, is a dumb ass". You believe in God you do so without evidence. Thus, by your own words, you are a dumb ass.

    . Don't give us the "God = Truth" bullshit either - you believe in the Christian god and we all know it. But if you have changed you mind on that, please feel free to emphatically deny Christ and disavow any adherence to Christianity. Don't merely state that you have no religion, make it real.

  • @frustratedlogician You are clearly beyond stupid. You fall for that bacteria crap. Bacteria has never evolved. It has always remained single cell and does the same thing. It digests any digestible carbon based "food" and makes enzymes. It has never done anything else. You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. You would not make a pimple on a real scientist's ass. De-evolution is all that is shown in the only real physical evidence we have, DNA. Wake up from your religious BS.

  • @GoodScienceForYou i'm still not over how laughable you are. you say interbreeding accounts for human chromosome 2 and the pattern of ERVs we see in primates. chimps are due to interbreeding? THEN WHY ARE CHIMPS FERTILE, BUT MULES AREN'T??? jesus buttfucking christ you are a RUHTARD

  • @GoodScienceForYou we DO have evidence of gene duplication and transposons in eukaryotes, as well as conjugation, transduction and transformation in prokaryotes. it's not magic, but it they increase genetic information, making more susceptibility to frameshift mutations, deletions, and substitution mutations, which in turn can create new traits in an individual.

    if you'd stop trolling and read a goddamn book, you may learn something.

  • @frustratedlogician First of all, what "new traits" are you talking about? We have already see that these traits are laying dormant within the Genome. A species being able to adapt to the enviroment has never caused complete transformation into a new genus or even an elaborate subspecies. They all have the same foundational genetics until extinction. We have 88% of the, now living, non vertebrates as fossils some over 125myo, with no foundational changes. That is fact. Not one evolved.

  • @GoodScienceForYou you would benefit very much from this video:

    /watch?v=OHmiRXNK8yQ

    please tell me how any of the genetic evidence given (with citations OMG) is "projected beliefs" and what "obvious facts" it gets wrong (with citations plz). oh, and how normal mutation rates over a vast time span are "magical processes," and how "goddidit" is NOT a magical process. please.

  • The ONLY physical evidence we have on genetics is DNA, chromosomes, and that evidence only shows geneteic losses with mutations on all complex creatures. The oldests of the genetic lineage was far more fit, far more intelligent, far more able to survive and the process of life is one of de-evolving towards only less able to adapt and eventually extinction. That is why we have so many extinct creatures.

  • @frustratedlogician It is the Evotards who pull out the magical card with no logic and does not follow the laws of science. There is no such thing as "random" in the universe. It does not exist in real science. There is only cause and result. When people are perpetuating fraud on the public they pull the magic random card out of their asses and say with conviction. "Random mutations cause evolution". Since random is not a word in science then neither is evolution.

  • @frustratedlogician Have you looked at the over 200 citations on my forum and the over 88,000 papers on genetic loss I sent you to read? You are a lazy bastard.

  • @GoodScienceForYou well, assuming you have this gem of an idea (really a comedic gem), why doesn't the geneticist community, the larger community of academic biologists, and the entire scientific community not accept your ideas? have you submitted them for peer review? why and how could literally MILLIONS of educated people from ALL OVER THE GLOBE keep down what is "obviously the truth" ?

    go back to bible college and preach your crap there. you really don't know how bad you look.

  • @GoodScienceForYou and another question, if that hairy superhuman species encompasses up to the old world monkeys (catarrhini) then what about the strepsirrhini (lemurs, aye-ayes, etc) ?? they weren't included, but somehow "devolved" into their current form? and what about the rest of the eutherians? did they "devolve" magically to show similarities to the rest of the primates you claimed were included in this furry superhuman ape?

  • @frustratedlogician We don't have all the DNA evidence on all creatures, yet. All that we have so far, where the predecessor is still living in the wild or from a shifting of plates and separated, the older was far more fit and more able to adapt.

  • @frustratedlogician You don't understand genetic programming. A feature may or may not be used and can be called upon, like chicken teeth, an atavism, not yet completely removed. When creatures were created they had much more ability to adapt. That doesn't mean they were all hairy, but had the potential for hair. They did not have tails but had the potential. You need to realize this. Black skin, white skin all from the same original genetics. There really is no such thing as race.

  • @GoodScienceForYou i've shown a great deal of patience sifting through your buffoonery. if you're so smaht, why haven't you been vindicated? why hasn't anyone stepped in to prove me wrong? why has everyone else you troll on just ragequit instead of trying to set you right?

    because you are a brainwashed religious troll. your pastor and religious circle is full of shit. which version of the bible do you read, KJV? or is it dianetics? you seem as scientifically inept as a scientologist...

  • @frustratedlogician You have not even listened to me nor have you read my writings. Therefore you are not teachable. You think you know something because you spout off populare religiuos mythology of your pseudo science.

    Yet you are not able to stop outside your bullshit long enough to learn. That is pathetic. I KNOW all your beliefs, and your pseudo science better than you.

  • @frustratedlogician You seem to be one who has been brainwashed and culturally deprived of your objective reasoning. When you decided that the best thing to do was to lay down like a bitch dog for some bullshit conformity, religious idea of evolution, WITH NO EVIDENCE AT ALL. It shows how inept you are at protecting your mind from bullshit.

  • @frustratedlogician The real axioms of science. 1/ Never believe anyone on anything. Find your own truth. 2/ Never form beliefs. Beliefs destroy your credibility and ruin science. 3/ Only go with absolute knowledge that cannot be refuted as your evidence. 4/ Don't join any human associations who control your mind for money, fear of loss, or any human weakness, like needing prestige, college degrees etc. 5/ Remember the scientific LAW of cause and result. If that is avoided then it is religion.

  • @GoodScienceForYou right, newton was a fraud. i do no exert any force upon the earth, nor does it upon me.

    UMAD BRO?

  • @GoodScienceForYou but, praytell, when did this mystical surry superhuman species live? 4,000 years ago? 10,000? and what kind of special powers did they have that we lost?

    surely not science or civilization, we'd have evidence. no medicine, no art, no creative powers, else we'd have found it. could they fly, use x-ray vision, lift ten times their mass?

    and... what were dinosaurs? super evolved perfect lizards? because, you know they're not actually lizards, right...? and what about birds?

  • @frustratedlogician The special powers they had was EXTREME adaptability and strength that we no longer have. They were adaptable to all types of foods, all types of climates. They were made that way. As we degrade we become more limited to the climates, and environments.

  • @frustratedlogician No one knows the age of the earth, nor the universe, nor the age of humanity because we have made up measuring methods based on very primitive, stupid, ideas. Really stupid to believe in radiometric dating. It is also a religious myth with no way to verify it as even a real method.

  • @frustratedlogician "when did this" According to messed up extremely crude and worthless dating systems, about 250,000 years ago. There have been several findings of genetically degraded humans who went extinct. All of the hominids are these short lived mutants that went extinct fast. Most are found by high levels of radiation, by volcanoes.

  • @GoodScienceForYou meant to write *furry, not surry.

    but what made them "perfectly" created? if they didn't have culture/art/medicine/anything worth preserving, how were they "superior" to us?

    your wacky ideas raise more questions than they answer. try being honest with yourself, it relieves a great deal of mental anguish.

  • @frustratedlogician If you were to put modern humanity in the wild, take away all their modern aids for life, 90% would die, because they are not fit for survival without serious help. The ancients survived with NO medicines and pretty poor foods at time. If they did not we would not be here in our state of genetic degradation today.

  • @frustratedlogician How do you know they did not have culture, art, or anything, if you were not there. The ancients were physically able to do things that we moderns are not capable of doing any longer. 

  • Why the hell do you want to destroy the economy like that! Senator Vitter is an active restaraunnuer.....restarranteu­r ...resterauntrew. He tips extremely well and I hate you for doing this!

  • @ GoodScienceForYou I've yet to see you provide any evidence against evolution. All I've seen is you calling fellow Youtube commentators and me stupid. What you need to do is get your head out of your butt and stop acting like an jerk to everybody. And how dare you call scientists idiots. Scientists are people who have devoted their lives to their passion of attempting to understand and explore a very complicated universe.

  • lol, creationists always crack me up silly ppl

  • YEAH!!GOOOO......CREATIONIST!!­!you evos really make me laugh,seriously.if you wonder why you make me laugh,look at what you "BELIEVE"(not proven=religion),yet you hate creationist,double standards of the highest level,lol*smh*

  • "has incomplete, contradictory and sometimes falsified historical evidence"

    Just because parts of a theory have been falsified does not disprove the theory. That is the nature of science. Hypothesize, observe, discard what doesn't work, keep what does and move on.

    That is SCIENCE!

  • "Just because parts of a theory have been falsified does not disprove the theory." You cannot falsify anything, you can only show it as NOT PROVEN. The whole theory is held up by partial truth. A lot of lies are held up by partial truth and sideways logic. They imply that normal genetics is proof of evolution. It isn't.

  • "they imply that normal genetics is proof of evolution. It isn't." Bullshit. Genetics as proven that all life came from a common ancestor. For example, the human genome has plant DNA in it. Illustrating that we all came from one single cell. People dislike evolution because it puts their 'fairy tales' in harms way. Tough.

  • watch?v=4--Frypeg00

  • watch?v=neXvOtmk4no

  • Anything that --

    asserts chance occurrences that fall exponentially outside the realm of chance;

    theorizes events that contradict established laws (not theories) of science;

    cannot be verified or falsified through experiment

    has no direct observational evidence for its position

    has incomplete, contradictory and sometimes falsified historical evidence --

    whatever that is, it's not SCIENCE.

  • HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

    OH the irony!

    Get a life man, I can't believe you think that creationism is science.

  • So are you proposing we just not teach biology at all? uh, no. We need to teach science. and evolution is the scientific basis of modern biology.

  • Evolution of creatures is a fantasy. Why would you want to teach fantasy in school?

    What part of "NOT PROVEN, SO DON'T BELIEVE, is so hard to comprehend.

  • I don't know why I'm responding to you again. You keep saying the same thing over without adding anything new. You seem to be a false skeptic. You follow denialism, so whatever the consensus view, you must deny it.

    You can test for evolution. There is documented, objective, evidence of evolution. I linked to the story before about Richard Lenski's experiment with E.coli over twenty years.

    But it doesn't matter what anyone tells you man. I predict you will come back with the same response...

  • pot -> calling kettle black.

    adaptation is evolution.

    my logic is sideways? wow, that's rich.

    At least you said something different. I'll give you that.

  • you can test for evolution

    they're doing it right now

    in fact evidence has risen to infer that we humans have accelerated our evolving speed since the dawn of civilization to 2000 times faster

  • I would like to see you re-manufacture an ancient ape and see if it turns into a human! What are you a dumb ass?

    How about taking a look at what is real, not fantasy. There is no evidence at all of any creatures ever evolving. It is a fraud on the public. There are no transitional fossils. There is no trail other than complete and distinct creatures that remained the same then went extinct.

    You have no evidence, no way to test and no way to continue with this crap.

  • What idiots do is to study things with belief, and no objectivity at all. What a real scientist does is to study an see what is real and what is false with no preconceived belief or idea to reinforce fantasy.

    If you have "evoldelusion glasses on" all you see is evolution where there is none.

    You see a turd on the ground and it "suggests" evolution. It actually "suggests" something took a crap.

  • The irony of having a name like "GoodScienceForYou" and being a raving kook is delicious.

  • Comment removed

  • GoodScienceForYou, If you actually knew a thing about science you'd know that there's no such thing a "proof" in science. Prove that atoms exist. Prove that bacteria disease.

    Anyways, judging by your insulting language and attitude you have some serious emotional issues with science. You sound a lot like tony48219 before he went on a murder/suicide rampage. I don't consider you mentally stable enough to handle a rational discussion so I won't be speaking to you further.

  • Comment removed

  • That's nice. Like I said you are clearly not mentally stable enough to have a rational discussion. Please seek help before you fly completely off the rails like tony48219.

  • Comment removed

  • @GoodScienceForYou and, after sequencing the great ape genomes, we know two of their smaller ones fused together to make our 2nd biggest, because all the same genes and promoters are all in the same order corresponding to the ancestral ones. and, since telomeres are ONLY found on the ends, and since there's supposed to be just ONE centromere in the middle, there's no way around it unless your god wanted to trick us.

    so, instead of mindlessly insulting ppl, how about you address this.

  • @frustratedlogician I insult ignorance and religious beliefs that are NOW in science, being pawned off as the theory of evolution. You dumb ass beliefs that creatures can violate genetics is what makes you stupid. If you don't want to be stupid, stop believing in pop cultural religious nonsense. Get this into your head, without physical evidence that isn't just opinions of believers all you have is BS, not science. The physical evidence doesn't exist for creatures evolving from less complex.

  • @GodScienceForYoga "I insult ignorance and religious beliefs that are NOW in science...". No, you insult everybody who disagrees with YOUR ignorance and YOUR religious beliefs. You are a Christian who doesn't have the guts to admit it.

    .

    How come you are still posting your drivel on YouTube? I thought that you were doing a musical tour of Europe? What happened, couldn't they find a stadium big enough to hold the massive crowds?

  • @GoodScienceForYou my turn: humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, the other apes have 24 pairs. how can common ancestry be accurate? losing a whole pair is fatal, would never be inherited. well, unlike you, people know how to sequence and analyze DNA. and, wouldn't you know it, one of OUR chromosomes has stuff where it doesn't belong: an extra telomere (end cap) in the middle, and an extra centromere (centerpiece) slightly 2/3 of the way up = OBVIOUS signs of a fusion of 2 ancestral chromosomes.

  • @frustratedlogician This fact is what I wanted you to focus on, because it makes human's the most probable parent of chimps. You think I don't know what I am talking about, but I wanted you to take note of this fact as the only limiting factor in human/primate interbreeding. Chimps are far too close to humans to be some distant cousins. They seem to be the direct result of interbreeding prior to the fusion. This is what is obvious.

    

  • @GoodScienceForYou how? i hate to use the word in a forum like this, but to anyone who knows BASIC genetics, that claim is FUCKING RETARDED. you really think humans are a parent species of chimps?

    wow let the south secede. please.

  • @frustratedlogician So, far not one PHD in genetics has been able to refute my humans as the parent of chimps hypothesis. Let's see if you can do it?

  • @GoodScienceForYou: "So, far not one PHD in genetics has been able to refute my humans as the parent of chimps hypothesis". Name one who made an effort. You may as well say that no Hollywood actress ever refused a date inviation.

    .

    Face it, Jimbo. You are an idiot and everybody knows it.

  • If you have the data from this test, then bring it out for all to see. Actually I see a continual, accelerated, degradation of the genome of humans from pollution and lack of morals and ethics, broken families. The human culture is degraded and continues to kill each other, promote hate and nationalism. Cancer and heart disease is rampant, over 50% of the population of the US is on psychotropic drugs for mental illness and stress. You actually think that is "evolution". It s devolution.

  • @GoodScienceForYou you clearly don't know anything about genetics or molecular biology. accelerated degradation caused by lack of morals and broken families? no, only in your head. the human cultures are fucked up because we have crazy religious people killing other people, religious senators and congresspeople passing back-asswards laws, and people like you spreading ignorance to whomever you can infect. unfortunately for us, stupid people are highly fecund.

  • @frustratedlogician You are arrogant, weak minded, and believe in fairy tales. You fall for popular beliefs that have zero evidence. How stupid is that? About as stupid as all the dumb evotards out there. Your ignorance of the obvious, comes from the brainwashing from academia. Academia has a terrible track record and has always been proven wrong as time goes on.

  • @GoodScienceForYou "god formed man from the dust of the earth." you're right your version is more realistic. talking snakes? pillars of salt? obviously.

    i'll give you some more evidence if you can handle it. heard of mitochondrial DNA? it's another molecular clock (like cytochrome C and markers on the Y chromosome) we use to discern phylogenetic relationships

    patterns of inherited endogenous retroviruses is another. look at a phylogenetic tree constructed w/ERVs, tell me gods not a smartass.

  • @frustratedlogician There is no evidence that having similar or even exact same DNA coding shows any relationship at all. It shows that the world of elements is finite and there are only so many ways to make tissue that performs a task. If it performs the same task, obviously it is made the same way. Don't be so ignorant of the obvious. You are brainwashed, because you want to believe this shit. Retrovirus easily and better explained by interbreeding. Dumb ass!

  • @frustratedlogician Why are you asking me this question. I don't discuss religious ideas. I only discuss science. You are the idiots who keep arguing creationism against Evodelusionism. You are a nut case.

  • @frustratedlogician I think your logic is speculation, not logic. Scientists tell us that all modern humans came from Mitochondrial Eve. To try to make that sound less Biblical, they say what that means is more like a group of 8 people or couples. Well, those 8 people had to have come from a fewer number of parents, so all humans are descendant from one couple, and yet we survive and exist. Since humans have 46 chromosomes vs 48 in apes, all humans come from that one individual who first had 46

  • @Elhardt ..."To try to make that sound less Biblical, they say" No, they don't. They say it because they want to say the truth, not because they care how Biblical it sounds, otherwise they wouldn't of chose the name Eve.

    And no, they do not say this was a group of 8 people, they say Mitochondrial Eve is the last woman to be related to everyone alive today.

  • @9hello123 I had just seen a documentary a few months ago where right out of the woman's mouth she said that the whole Mitochondrial Eve thing wasn't really a single woman we all came from, but represented more or less a group of individuals we came from. So excuse me for quoting an evolutionary scientist. And I'm not sure what your comment "last woman related to everyone alive today" means. Mitochondrial Eve should be the first woman everyone alive today is descended from.

  • @Elhardt "So excuse me for quoting an evolutionary scientist." You didn't quote anything.

    ""last woman related to everyone alive today" means. Mitochondrial Eve should be the first woman everyone alive today is descended from."

    Clearly you don't understand it then and are trying to put the bible into it. The first woman is purely a semantic decision of when does something become a human and is purely down to how we define it and is both impossible to tell and not science.

  • @Elhardt The last woman related to everyone would be the most recent woman to of been related to every woman alive today.

    "he said that the whole Mitochondrial Eve thing wasn't really a single woman we all came from" You've largely misunderstood this as well. Mitochondrial Eve was an individual woman, who then reproduced and made a group of women, who then continued to reproduce.

  • @Elhardt you misunderstand the documentary, or it was poorly scripted. imagine a whole population of proto-humans, or a pre-human population of primates. what this means is, as this population changes, there is ONE woman whose descendants end up later evolving into the human lineage. or, you could say, the "mother of all living humans today..." but she would STILL be a part of her OWN population, none of whom are actually human. also 8 couples = 16 ppl = 32 parents. this is MORE, not LESS

  • @frustratedlogician You do not understand what is shown in DNA. The original of the species was nearly perfect in its genetic engineering. In all creatures. The natural turn of events is for it to degrade as all humans are degraded. Humans are degrading faster than ever, with all of our ignorance and avoiding the natural laws of genetic science.

  • @GoodScienceForYou LOL, you again. "the original of the species was nearly perfect..." so, you're saying god's design isn't perfect?

    "the natural turn of events is for it to degrade..." you're not seriously bringing up thermodynamics when talking about population genetics, are you?

    "...natural laws of genetic science." what, like the molecular clocks we use to date speciation events in the past? next time you go to the doctor, tell him not to take a throat swab or culture, cuz it's a lie!!!

  • @frustratedlogician In order for anything to manifest it must be imperfect by nature. That is how it is. Anything in perfection cannot exist in physical matter. The reality is that DNA is the ONLY physical evidence we have on any of this nonsense, and DNA is absolute in the fact that is ONLY shows genetic degradation.

    If you don't know that you are insane and are incapable of rational thought. DNA is (read carefully) Absolutely irrefutable physical evidence against evolution. Clear as can be

  • @GoodScienceForYou the thing is, you're making these wild claims and not offering any evidence to prove it. how can nothing perfect manifest in physical matter (and how do you define perfect?) and how does it ONLY show degradation (from what starting point?)

    mitochondrial DNA, endogenous retroviruses, cytochrome C sequencing, ribosomal RNA sequencing all INDEPENDANTLY show the same tree of life. show me why that's a coincidence, or stop trolling for stupid people to feed your lies.

  • @frustratedlogician I have an IQ higher than 99% of the people on earth. I don't fall for religious ideas and ideology being pawned off as science. The ONLY evidence we have is DNA. DNA only shows genetic losses in all multicellular creatures. In every mutation event the odds are from 70% to 90% of damage to the genetics and weakening of the fitness. These are facts. There are no magic mutations that fix screwed up DNA. There is no "evolution". There's only genetic degradation.

  • @GoodScienceForYou People that bring up their IQ to try to sound smart, whether or not you are completely lying, are idiots.

  • @frustratedlogician The "tree of life" is a lot of made up human garbage and projection.  Unless you have direct genetic information you cannot tie any creature to any other. Just having some similar genetics does not tie anything to some evolutionary tree. There are only 20 amino acids. The odds of them being combined to make the same tissue types in other creatures is 100% and have no genetic connection at all.

  • @GoodScienceForYou i like how you didn't give anything of substance in your answer--except falsehoods. instead of inundating you with facts you'll just ignore, why don't you answer me some questions-- like WHY ribosomal RNA sequencing can and does ACCURATELY predict the genus and species of bacteria in an infection? or why medical research on animals is translated to humans so well? you can't say "it's a common design so it works" then at the same time say "there's no genetic similarity"

  • @GoodScienceForYou another question, what do scientists have to gain if there is some global conspiracy about evolution? why would the majority of scientists accept it with "no good evidence" (i lol), while clowns like you think you know the truth and are sharing it on your kitchen whiteboard? why would doctors and researchers use a known fraudulent idea to diagnose diseases, and find cures? theories have predictive power, and are either supported or rejected. this one happens to WORK.

  • @frustratedlogician Are you really that stupid? People have had religious beliefs for thousands of years. Academia has been controlled by this crap of pop beliefs for thousands of years. Why don't you know this?

    Evolution does not work. It has not contributed a single positive result for anyone. DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence against any form of evolution.

  • @GoodScienceForYou listen you twat, what i accept to be true is REFUTABLE, while you cling to some bullshit for the sake of your own weak ass psyche. AND you still haven't answered my questions. explain human chromosome #2.

    until then, you are nothing but a trollface.jpg. YOU get an education, and learn about the PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY OF SCIENCE instead of getting confused with random FACTS OF SCIENCE.

  • @frustratedlogician Human chromosome #2 is the fusion of two chromosomes. It shows that chimps and humans are from the same exact genetic lineage along with ERV's and DNA. Why don't you know this?

  • @frustratedlogician "human chromosome #2." Chimps and humans come from the same exact genetic parent, a superior human species. The chimp chromosome did not fuse, only the humans did. A fused chromosome is a genetic defect caused by mutations. There are only genetic defects shown in DNA evidence.

    Chimps have lost over 18 genes in the HA-1 showing genetic losses in reason, speech and in skull size.

    DNA only shows degradation with speciation. All the evidence fits perfectly with DNA.

  • @GoodScienceForYou ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah­aha. your reasoning speaks for itself, and your failed attempt at trolling provide infinite lulz. how was that superior human species related to the gorillas and orangutans, by some even more superior human species from whom we've degraded even further? then what about our relation to the monkeys and gibbons? and, was this superior human-chimp hybrid species fully hairy, or did chimps "lose information" to become covered with hair?

  • @frustratedlogician You are beyond stupid. All you have to do is look at the evidence. You can see the DNA, Chromosomes in Chimps, Orangutans, Gorillas, Macaque Monkeys. The loss of hair is obvious on modern humans at the present time. And some still retain a lot of hair. The atrophy and loss of genetics varies from the original based on the environmental conditions and the mutagens. Why don't you know this? It is basic biology.

  • @frustratedlogician Here is how it really works. The ability to produce cells for many different functions, foods, enviornments, was programmed at the beginning. Hair, muscle tissue, organs, bone structures, brain. The origin of all species is far superior to the present version. In all cases. As time goes on the ability to produce hair in humans is nearly gone, in chimps it is not. The brain capacity , and brain function shown in the HAR-1 of humans and chimps show chimps lost much more

  • @GoodScienceForYou but you never answer WHY. WHY OH WHY does human chromosome #2 have an extra centromere, and an extra telomere where it doesn't belong, both no longer functional? "god did it."

    WHY OH WHY do the pattern of ERVs in the great apes (let alone the rest of mammalia...) show a pattern of inheritance instead of random insertions? "god did it that way."

    besides your implied "goddidit," these things would all have to be random for our current model not to be true...but they're not!

  • @frustratedlogician If you were to actually think about these things instead of just laying down to your religious beliefs, you would see why. I have explained this in detail at the "Neutral Evolution Forum" Go read and get a real education.

  • @frustratedlogician I am only discussing the fact that Evodelusionism is a religion. You bringing up antoher religious dogma is NOT science. The fact that you argue your pseudo science against another religion only prooves it is a religion. If it were true there would be no doubts and nobody could deny it. However it is a religion of morons to believe that creatures magically improve, when DNA only shows genetic losses.

  • @GoodScienceForYou: :here is no evidence that having similar or even exact same DNA coding shows any relationship at all. It shows that the world of elements is finite and there are only so many ways to make tissue that performs a task."

    .

    Oh, you mean the "same design implies same designer" argument. Why are you such a COWARD to constantly use creationist arguments and then LIE through your teeth and claim not to be a creationist?

  • &q