Added: 3 years ago
From: teddiaustin
Views: 2,044
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (17)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • why such obnoxiously loud music? does it have anything to do with the topic?

  • @skuzzbunny I know it is difficult, but the website's video player and your pc/mac have volume controls. Best thing? It only requires a very limited amount of user input for you to customize your very own sound experience to fulfill your listening desires at the precise decibel level that works best for you. Cheers!

  • like the music... ^.^ why is? --.--

  • Is there any possible way I could find a video about science that doesn't have a creationist debate going on in the comments?

  • Another uneducated retard.

    Well I don't understand evolutionism that mean God done it. It does not mean I'm a semi-retard.

    99.98% of all the world career scientist agree that all living things have a common ancestry (Evolution).

  • Sure! However, the common ancestor link is actually the 'designer', not merely pond scum floating in a primordial soup.

    100% of scientists cannot determine that algae ever evolved into anything else, let alone an oak tree.

  • It was wrong of me to call you a retard and criticis you. I'm not questioning your inteligents because your video was pretty good and layed out nicly, but I am questiong your understanding of the information presented.

    Please Look up:

    How Evolution Works- Introduction (Part I)

    It the first in a series of video about Evolution. They are made by a Christain called Donexodus.

    Watch it and let me know what you think.

    And sorry again my original comment, it was totaly uncalled for.

  • I, personally, would not call DonExodus a Christian. I watched four of his videos, but he keeps stating "blah, blah, blah is a fact and is not debatable"

    There are many, including myself, who disagree that any 'science' let alone evolutionary fairy tales, imaginary animals and beliefs' are beyond debate. It is a claim of weakness, not strength. Instead of sayng something is not debatable, offer proof, like.... oh, I don't know....., maybe... uh... how about, algae into an oak tree perhaps?

  • -"However, the common ancestor link is actually the 'designer', not merely pond scum floating in a primordial soup."-

    There are many gods, which one?

  • You can choose any God/god you want to believe in. From algae evolving an oak tree, from pond scum evolving into humans, vs. each creature producing only likenesses of themselves as was designed.

    The latter belief is the only one is observable, testable, repeatable, verifiable each and every time by multiple quadrillions of creatures all around.

    But, hey, you can believe otherwise.... fill your belief system with whatever you want in imagination.

  • -"The latter belief is the only one is observable, testable, repeatable, verifiable each and every time by multiple quadrillions of creatures all around."-

    So the existence of a magical loprechaun with a mystical child is drawn from the complexity of beings?  What an interesting hypothesis. Transitional fossils help too.

  • hypothesis: a conjecture that can be TESTED. Random thoughts (even by those in science), that cannot be tested, by observation or experimentation and cannot be verified, are just random thoughts and are not 'science.

    Anyone can have a brain fart & scientists are not exempt.

    Next time you think you stumble across a evolutionary hypothesis, ask yourself if it can be tested by observation, or verified by experimentation.

    Differentiate between fantasy/imagination vs. scientific hypothesis.

  • -"Differentiate between fantasy/imagination vs. scientific hypothesis. "-

    The pot calls the kettle black, from my point of view, all scientific evidence point toward Prometheus as the creator.

    -"Next time you think you stumble across a evolutionary hypothesis, ask yourself if it can be tested by observation, or verified by experimentation."-

    We have seen how the jaw structure in the embryo of monodelphis is identical to that of reptiles. Together with the fossil record, it...

  • I never said God is scientific, but... God stated that all creatures will only produce likenesses of themselves. Multiple quadrillions of examples everywhere you choose to look.

  • -"God stated that all creatures will only produce likenesses of themselves. Multiple quadrillions of examples everywhere you choose to look."-

    So, this proves that God exists?

  • (cont.)... shows how the the reptilian jawbones, the articular and quadrate migrated into the middle ear to for m part of our hearing system.

  • The conclusion you came to is not considered 'science' (observable, testable, repeatable & verifiable.

    You are confusing your biased conclusion with 'evidence'.

    A common defect in evolution.

  • -"The conclusion you came to is not considered 'science' (observable, testable, repeatable & verifiable."-

    Allow me to translate: instead of researching what Fetrug has said, I've decided to make this ridiculous statement. Seriously, did you even look up what I said?

  • "did you even look up what I said"

    What did you say that is observable, testable, repeatable & verifiable?

    ALL else - eg. similarities in 'looks' is a conclusion based on bias, imagination and fantasy, not 'science'.

    Science has very very stringent rules and requirements, which you (and most others in evolutionism) aren't willing to apply to your 'thoughts'. You can base your beliefs on imaginary look-a-likes, but it is NOT science, science fiction maybe, but not science.

  • -"ALL else - eg. similarities in 'looks' is a conclusion based on bias, imagination and fantasy, not 'science'."-

    In other words, you haven't looked up anything, it's called "structure", if you didn't know, yes it's testable and observable, somethign which intelligent design is not. They're not lookalikes, they're observations made by real scientists, not witchdoctors.

  • I state: Observations/conclusions are often biased.

    Belief can alter observations; those with a particular belief will often see things as reinforcing their belief, even if they do not.

    Ludwik Fleck 1975

    Science is best defined as a careful, disciplined, logical search for knowledge about any & all aspects of the universe, obtained by examination of the best available evidence & ALWAYS subject to correction & improvement upon discovery of better evidence. What's left is magic. James Randi

  • -"I state: Observations/conclusions are often biased."-

    Okay, I believe that the observations that Jesus walked on water are biased. Your own beliefs are not shielded form criticism. Nuclear fusion, the germ theory, thermodynamics are all biased and should be thrown away.

  • I merely stated that observations are often biased. That you can't deal with that fact, is your problem, not mine. That one has to take a 'fact' and try to apply it to other statements, is the weakest argument one can actually make.

    Congrats on having the weakest argument to date!

  • -"Congrats on having the weakest argument to date!"-

    Objection, you said that observations sometimes are biased, I never said otherwise. I pointed out that your beliefs are not shielded from this criticism either.

  • Excellent video! If you don't mind, I may send you a couple of 'ideas' for more evolution videos.

  • What the bloody hell is "evolutionism?"

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more