Science has one major advantage over religion... LACK OF EGO! Science is merely the most logical explanation based on the evidence currently available and is ALWAYS subject to change. Science is not afraid to be wrong because it is about TRUTH , not about opinion or perfection. Please people lets EDUCATE our children to THINK so religion can RIP as a dark page in history....
at a time measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla (Darwin)
the creators of religions like chrisitianity were geniuses.. (altho a compilation of older religions) that is something that i can say confidently. to keep you locked up in a prison cell that you can not smell taste feel or touch.. (i sound like morpheus now xD) to obey and keep eachother in check, very devisive, very smart.
if it wasn't for science you religious pussyfarts wouldn't even be able to communicate with one another over this artificial connection.. you trust your fucking cars and airplanes and boats because you know it works... now please don't tell me god made those things.. because that would be an extremely ignorant mindset and i expect no reasonable discussion coming forth from a deluded brain like that.. you religious lackeys should focus on more recent works, enough believing in ancient fairy tales
@waj1173, you should really consider reading playaspec's comment before calling someone a retard, if you think the theory of evolution can ever become a fact, you clearly do not understand what a fact is.
omfg is she retarded it is a theory the whole point of a theory is it is not fact it is designed to be critiqued and changed until it is fact. and btw stick men/women deserve respect
@aoiahiru The purpose of theory of evolution through natural selection is to explain the diversity of different species on Earth, not to explain how life originated. That said, the concepts behind natural selection can be and often are applied to various hypotheses of abiogenesis. However, at ths time we do not have a comprehensive theory behind the origins of life on Earth, and the theory of evolution does not attempt to broach this subject.
@aoiahiru You are sorely mistaken. How life originally emerged is not the concept behind evolution. Evolution and the theories surrounding it don't even discuss how life originally emerged. Biological evolution is the change in the frequency of alleles in a population through successive generations and says nothing about origins of life. We know this happens, in the same way we know gravity exists. The theory of evolution through natural selection is the model that explains how this all occurs.
They used the same tactics "Let's take it to the public and convince them" on the global warming.
They want to make it a popularity contest because the general public is much easier to handle. They don't want to argue with the scholars because they have all the evidence.
In years gone by the Priests held total power. Only they were allowed to read and inturpret the Holy books, only they could CHOOSE what was true or false. The common man could not be trusted to discern for himself.
@ScrewtapeStudios academia has not become the new priesthood. The "experts" are such because they have spent years becoming experts. The common man can study advanced quantum physics to biology if they want. Also anyone i think can put forward a paper if they use proper channels. SO nope. not the new priesthood ^_^
I'll tell you what's insulting is that a man (Charles Darwin) bred a "theory" out of thin air with absolutely no evidence, no support, and no rational thought. He then wrote a book on it and said that if no evidence was found then the theory should be cast out. Years later no evidence was found, but they kept the "theory" and after getting desperate began to make up proof. It's now brainwashing all kids and the only reason people believe it, is because IT'S FACT, and you better not argue.
@ShellySummers Just about any "transitional" fossil has been proved to be only a bird or monkey or whatever. And in some cases (such as Lucy for example) parts were just completely thrown together and called proof so fundings would continue.
@EvolutionSlayer There are plenty of transitional fossils. Even without fossils. We have a copy of it in the genes. Look up Retroviruses and androgeno retroviruses also maybe Pseudogene. Hope these help.
The best way to disprove a theory is to know it inside and out, then point out inconsistencies and/or flaws in the theory. My advice to you if you wish to change peoples minds is to learn the theory, tell people what is wrong with the theory and hope that they are open-minded and don't have so much faith in their world view that they refuse to see any and all evidence to the contrary.
@EvolutionSlayer Darwin discusses the reasoning behind his theory in his book, and it is well supported. Many of the ideas he had were actually incorrect and we've discovered that over time. However, the general idea of natural selection holds. Since then, mountains of evidence supporting the theory of evolution through natural selection (which explains the fact of evolution which is easily observed) have been discovered. It is the foundation of modern biology, no bioligist disputes this.
What we need to do is find some good, smart, rich people who will reprint another copy of the bible with our own 50 page evolution introduction, as well as a quick history lesson. That outta get up ray's nose and the whole christian community. Just to let the government know we are tied of religious bs. I believe religion has had way too much influence on the world and it's time to take action. no more god's will !!!!
Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a woman made from a rib was convinced by a talking snake with to eat from a magical tree...
Zep, evolution is that one day nothing decided it was lonely so it magically put 8 planets in perfect order orbiting the sun and gave different ones moons and rings, etc. Forget the space aspects. Let's just talk about the fact that then life had to magically form for no reason and that life was in water so it magically turned into an ape and then somehow years later that ape decided it wanted to be a human and magically turned in to one. By the way, a rock is supposed to prove all this happened
@MotionFrequency Evolution has nothing to do with our solar system. evolution takes a pretty hard swing at the diversity of life on our planet. If there is a creator out there that designed our known universe, that creator must have come from somewhere. A theist argument is only as good as saying the chicken came before the egg...or the other way around. It's hard to percieve how the universe or life came to be, but genisis? come on. Thats a load.
@MotionFrequency If you actually believe that biologists claim anything like what you said actually happens, then that just makes me sad. Is that really the state of education regarding this topic today? Instead of making up fantasies about what you think evolution is and then arguing against that, why don't you educate yourself about the topic before you actually lodge objections to it? I've rarely seen a more twisted and unrecognizable distortion of evolution in my time discussing it.
According to Comfort's website, "Nothing has been removed from Darwins original work." Anthropologist and executive director of the National Center for Science Education, Dr. Eugenie C. Scott, reviewed the book and noted that Comfort deleted four chapters by Darwin that described the evidence for evolution.
You are talking about science from the 1870's , It's a little outdated don't you think? You should watch- The Case for a Creator (Chapter 1 of 10) It speaks of the bacteria flagellum how it has complex parts resembling a motor that could only be created by intelligent design, It makes a pretty good case that life didn't happen by random chance, It's very thought provoking
Yea well the bacterial flagellum Can be dissembled down. To less then 10 parts and those parts can be explained down. The person that came up with that idea if i remember right was a biologist and should have remembered that.
Explain ? I'm listening, This would be comparable with an electric motor building itself , Clearly you can see that these parts come with instructions . It would be like putting people to work without telling them what they are to do.
Time will tell, I suppose there will always be the argument...As for me, I believe in a creator. Kinda takes the fun out of life, If this were all there was.... My point was you can break it down all you want, But it is undeniable that everything is under some type of control. As I said before Darwin theory is old as is the bible,
So you know. I am an agnostic theist. So let me say it like this. If there is a creator. Then that creator wouldn't want or need to micromanage everything in the universe. It would in fact create a system with laws it could manipulate but would be self sustaining. Dogmatic following of any religion leads to most an ignoring of the first gift the creator would have given us. Common sense. Also it is deniable that everything is under some type of control. That's no different then scientist....
But we have the capability to peer deep into cells now, And to cling to a notion based on fossil records without looking at all the evidence is imprudent. Anyway take care.
....Saying they have it all worked out. They don't. We only know a smallest of the small portion of the puzzle. I do believe they are extremely conceited in that regard. Then again theist have been doing that for centuries. Must be human nature. It was very nice conversing with you. Godspeed in all your journeys.
Maxwell's Electromagnetic theory and Hertz's discovery of radio waves also date from the 1870's, yet both remain unchallenged and are the foundations of modern physics and telecommunications. Like EM theory, Natural Selection has been exhaustively proven and forms the foundations of modern science. Biology is simply incomprehensible without Darwinian Evolution. All supposed instances of "Irreducible Complexity" have found to have simpler evolutionary antecedents. Eppur si Evolversi!
the Bible dates back futher..No one as I can tell is disputing Maxwell's Electromagnetic theory and Hertz's discovery of radio waves, Probably because it's good science and God was not part of the equation ...I'm sure those magical radio waves sounded about as unbelievable in those days as God sounds to people in this (sophisticated) time period today .
Antiquity of authorship in no way validates truthfulness. The Enuma Elish predates the Bible by millenia, yet I doubt you worship Ishtar and Marduk.
Darwinian Evolution is one of humanity's most profound discoveries, and is the exhaustively established bedrock of biology. Many adamantly refuse to embrace this cardinal principle of life due to distaste for its implications: Organisms aren't the masterworks or images of divinity, but the culmination of contrivance and racking up of necessity.
Ouch!,,, I'm not validating anything or dismissing anything, Because I truly don't know, I would hate to be so arrogant as to think that I did based on other peoples findings. But... Excluding God doesn't make the argument go away..
Darwin himself say's " If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not have been formed by successive numerous slight modifications then his theory would break down, I'm sure if Darwin could have peered through today's microscopes , Then the Origin of species might read a little different. Percival Lowell sketch the surface of mars and seen canals... Origin of species has its place in the science world.
@swiftkickinthaass Thus far, such a thing has not been demonstrated. In fact, it would almost be impossible to demonstrate this as it would require comprehensive knowledge of what is possible and what isn't... if we had that, science would be obsolete.
@Hottides "Antiquity of authorship in no way validates truthfulness."
SO true. I am clueless as to why this seems so hard for some to understand.Some that believe the antiquity of ideas, as well, makes them valid...must also believe the world is flat. Science, logic, critical thinking, and reasoning are such mysteries to these people.
KC I'm scientifically thinking that it's a scientific fact that nothing can not produce everything. To argue that would be silly. Logically I'm thinking that things don't just magically happen and planets fall into the perfect order,location, for no other reason that nothing was bored one day. Critically thinking, what made life decide one day to exist, the water wasn't good enough so it turned into a monkey, then it wanted to be human? We reason more than people give us credit for, don't deny!
so since quantum computing and quatum physics and parapsychology, isnt a science based on a sense of spiritual world? or in a sense...a type of Metaphysics that goes beyond standard science? because if you are for science, than you cannot deny quantum physics and the very idea or time warp and travels and things of that nature. Because it is science in theory. All im saying is, dont be so quick to judge those of the spiritual nature, and yes, about 3200scientists all claimed it cannot just exist
3200 biologist said evolutions doesn't exist? 3200 Paleontologist said evolution doesn't exist? No the ones in the fields directly relating to evolutionary theory. All agree it exists. Ow and by the way. I AM AN AGNOSTIC THEIST :)
ur problem is you have one minded ideas in you. let me make something clear for you and make you look like an idiot. Go to times magazine or popsci website, and look up the interviews with scientists. 90% of scientists, in a poll, said: they have to be skeptics of science itself, because science cannot explain it's existence. And go on saying EVERY SCIENTISTS KNOWS SOMETHING CANNOT BE CREATED OUT OF NOTHING!!! go look it up. i like how everyone talks shit, but cant back it up
Science can not explain sciences existence? Are you kidding me. Science never said everything came from nothing. Not cosmology or biology. It is the fundamentalist religious nuts that say that. You ask me it is the fundies that get in the way of spiritual people. Dogmatic following of any religion is crazy.
Now don't get me wrong. I believe that science and spirituality can go hand in hand. It's just that you can not replicate spiritual matters. Can not quantify them.
I bet you dont even know how a cell phone is really made. see unlike you monkeys i actually work with technology and manufacturing.Tell me how you came upon the idea that religioius believers dont believe in science & it cant work together? show me ur proof of every religious person saying this? your an idiot, and didnt read the bible- it has mixture of both science &religion and states one cant work without the other. we want you on your knees? HAHAHAHAH.oh yeah, get outta ur moms basement nut
@kprofscrts " it has mixture of both science &religion and states one cant work without the other."
Ironic then, that science seems to work best without religion, as religion has a long history of blocking progress and villifying those who employ logic and reason to understand our reality instead of simply accepting the religious authority's proclamations about it.
the drop of ink will become diluted and disappear.
in fact, consider that the bath (symbolizing death) and having water coming back in2 the bath (because the rest of the original species will still reproduce)
surly the drop of ink (being the new gene) goes down the drain.
it douse take millions of years for a new gene 2 occur....
Ok so you want to to go with bad metaphors then. Ok how about this. That drop of dye would in fact become part of the walls of the tub. While the majority of water goes down the drain. An imperceptible portion of the ink would stay behind. Actually a more accurate look at it would be the hep b virus which is highly contagious and can last on a surface for a long period of time. Ow the reason hep b is more accurate is. Even though it is diluted. Anyone drinking out of that tub even after it..
... was diluted. Could in fact get the strain. If they didn't have their shots. Even after the tub was drained and refilled. A lot more accurate metaphor :)
a quick science question .. consider evolution imagine the first of a new species . is it male of femail.. ok .. imagin it has eyes for the first time... so that it can look for a mate .. hold on .. its the first of its kind ... who is it going 2 mate with !!!!!! its probably not gonna live longer than 100 years .. and evolution takes millions of years .. ..... . . .. . . ... .. oh dear .. ....
The Bible has a lot more on scientific methods than you think. In fact the Bible make science meaningful except the areas that science can't explain or areas than scientific theory was proposed based on something else than science.
I don't agree with you, i guess that's your thinking but that's misinformed.
You really have to site concrete examples.
plus the Bible more than just a book It has spiritual side to it so u can't compare spiritual to physical things it won't work.
This video has nothing to do with the bible. It has to do with a creationist fuck whit messing with a scientific book. I would be just as cranky if someone wanted to make a bible or a koran. With the wording "Once upon a time" at the beginning of every book.
im with you on your statement eklizia., because the bible does allow science and spirituality. and just like you said, in areas science cannot explain itself, spiritual doctrines can and do. even worlds top scientists believe in the same idea. but it takes some lunatic from youtube to prove there hard years of work wrong i guess.
God still loves you. he gave us all free-will so yuo can think any way you like. Charles Darwin evolution was a " theory " nothing more and nothing less.
oh no, and allah loves you too, see the point there? Hey why we are at it, Venus the god of love does love you, heck even mars the god of war loves you. your one religion is not right just because you believe it, its not right because its present, heck the romans have just as much evidence for there own gods as yours. I mean at least there gods are planets!
Gravity is a theory, nothing more nothing less, go jump off a building and test it. Evolution has the evidence backing it up none against.
No. Cancer for kids if it was designed by a higher being *is* evil by any standards. If someone does prove to me that there is a god, he's a prick and not worthy of praise.
No, evolution is a FACT, and has been endlessly documented and proven. It's *NATURAL SELCTION*, the mechinism that *drives* evolution that is a theory.
According to the Wictionary a scientific theory is: 1) A coherent statement or set of statements that attempts to explain observed phenomena. 2) A logical structure that enables one to deduce the possible results of every experiment that falls within its purview.
Every modern conveinence in your life is the end result of a scientific theory, yet you use these things to belittle science and the scientific method. Not only is this intellectually dishonest, but it's hypocritical. Your dismissal of science only demonstrates your arrogance. How do you know that evolution itself isn't the work of God? If God 'works in mysterious ways', then what makes you so privy to the inner workings of the universe? You haven't studied His work nearly as much as science has
Haven't you heard, academia won't allow open debates. Have you seen the Movie Expelled? Darwin wasn't science, it was a theory ... debunked time and time again. Consider studying what you suppress and you will see it plain as day.
In order to be in open debate. You have to come with testable hypothesis. Since god would in fact be outside something that is testable. Or at the very least observable.
Your right Darwin isn't science. Evolutionary theories have far exceeded what Darwin could have understood about biology. In his day. There have been massive advances in the fields of biology and germ theory since then. RNA although discovered in the 1860's wasn't really part of main stream science till after the 1930's
Darwin was a person. A person that made a monumental discovery. Evolution debunked. What all that crap on the creationist sites? Is that the "debunked" your talking about. Every single thing i have looked up on those sites. EASILY explained by natural means. There are thousand of biologists looking into biology and evolutionary theories. They have no problem reconciling their faith with what is observed.
The reason i believe this is the case? Because they don't want to dumb down god!
They want to fully appreciate what they believe god put here. I believe YEC's are a significant portion of what is wrong with FAITH today! For i see fundamentalist and religion messing with the natural process of learning about ourselves and beyond.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The only attempt of showing any evidence of EVOLUTION from ThunderF00t was a salamander that ended up not being able to breed. That doesn't sound like it would work to me.
Just like a Horse and a Donkey that mate makes an ASS that cant breed..
Sounds like God's way of STOPPING issues from certain breeding.
A horse will never become a different specifies over MILLIONS of years.
And there IS NO PROOF of it.
Evolution has been debunked years ago and it's almost laughable if not so sad.
Yeah, and the bible has been debunked gazillions of times... and still, some poeple are dumb enough to still believe in the crap written in that fat book.
Naw read the book. Much of the information is out of date. I am annoyed these cats would stoop so low. Then again not surprised. Watched enough of their videos and looked at several sites. They only go after stuff. AFTER science has found out it is incorrect. NOT BEFORE!
What I think these people are trying to do is politicize science and knowledge. Make people believe it`s a matter of opinion.
They are not really concenrned with the truth. Just holding power over the ignorant people the minister. So people having actual knowledge of things hurts their interests.
Of course using pseudo-science in order to disprove science does not prove the bible right. But this sublety is obviously lost on their intended audiece.
Ah, so your reasoning is "Atheists lie, therefore it is my duty as a Good Christian to lie!". Makes perfect sense. What can I say - you are a paragon of morality.
Really? Says who? Your little book? Funny thing, I have a book right here which says:
"Christians have no right to give lessons on morality, and, by the way, VyckRo guzzles Jesus Juice"
So, since it's in a book, it must be true, huh?
Also, based on the fact that your comment is a run-on sentence containing at least 3 typos and 2 grammatical errors, I suggest that you refrain from commenting while intoxicated. Your response can wait until you've sobered up. Thank you.
Oh goody! You've done such a wonderful job of butchering the English language, I can't wait to see how badly you mangle French and Italian! Wanna try some German and Spanish, too, while you're at it?
It's "langue second" and "Christen-Führer", and I'm not from the US. Also, your Spanish sentence made no sense. If you had left out the middle part it would have been ok.
Da li razumeš ovaj jezik?
Not a bad attempt, all in all, yet hardly enough to justify your ego - especially in light of your ridiculous theistic beliefs, and your asinine demonization of people who do not share them. And no, growing up in a back-assward country doesn't give you any insight into atheism.
God is many things, but for certain he/she is not an individual gender nor, does anyone have or hold the real information. This is the ultimate test. If you believe in evolution, you are contradicting yourself, because science states "something cannot happen out of nothing", if you refer to your physics in college or astrophysics, you will hear this repetitively.also, It's not right to label. It's in our human nature to have an open mind. Science is needed as well as hope and belief in a creator
Yep. An invisible friend. A security-blanket. A refuge for ignorance. A fairy tale. Too many things to list.
"If you believe in evolution, you are contradicting yourself, because science states ..."
Please don't pretend to understand science. The only thing worse than a bible-thumper is a bible-thumper who tries to mask his ignorance with pseudo-scientific nonsense.
Your objection to evolution demonstrates that you do not undesrtand the topic. You could not have researched both sides of the debate and made the objection above. Only if you've listened to people on one side could you have such a poor understanding of the topic. You appear to confuse the words of men claiming to be speaking on behalf of god with the words of god himself.
A) you just described abiogenesis B) half of the first rna cell has been found to be able to form in an early earth environment C)The beginning of dna rna and basic simple molecules would take millions of years over many different areas. So yea the numbers work out over time.
stickfigures? lol, where would we be today without the pioneers of science who were theists, should we throw out there contributions to there various fields?
I think some people misunderstand what atheism means. I think God is just about as likely as a unicorn who shits skittles and farts rainbows. I don't think God is impossible, but I feel that it is highly unlikely and most likely doesn't exist to a degree of 99.999999%. I wouldn't call myself an agnostic though. I just feel science explains the world better
Um, I was addressing "tjbena86". I read the part of your profile where you identify as an "agnostic theist", so I was aware of that.
Since you did mention it, though ... I know it's technically possible to be an agnostic theist, but I find it hard to see how that would work in practice. It's like saying that you're agnostic about the existence of santa claus, but you keep putting out the milk and cookies because you think he'll show up this time. It doesn't make sense to me.
Yah, I don't feel like you can disprove God, but you can certainly point out it is very unlikely. I'm very sure he doesn't exist almost to the point that I could say he doesn't, but I cant. Just like I cant say Leprachauns and midgets with the power to fly and eat candy with their butthole don't exist. So I guess I'm an agnostic atheist with a heavy emphasis on the atheist side.
The religious uneducated wackaloons mock science; but they have no trouble at all using the fruits of science; like computers, television, airplanes, vaccines, dental treatments, medical treatments, drugs, I could go on. Even making a youtube relies on such principles as the speed of light and quantum mechanics. Vaccines are based on the fact that organisms mutate and change. I bet even little Kirk Cameron was delivered by an obstetrician using anesthesia, more science.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Sorry, SIR, but evolution is a lie and theists don't look down on the scientific method - they invented it. So many straw-men in this video. And an "agnostic theist?" What? Stop! Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Theists at swords end. For the early church held sway over science. Burning at the statke house arrest and slandering the others. So no it wasn't theist that made the scientific method. It was scientist that believed in god that did. Theist are people that study religion. Nice try. The "SIR" comment. Wait let me see if i can feel insulted. NOPE YOUR A DIPSHIT! Sorry can't feel insulted.
Wrong! A THEIST is someone who believes in God. Adding an "a" to it makes it the opposite. That's why an A-THEIST believes there is no God.
Sir (not you this time) Francis Bacon invented the scientific method and was a theist (he believed in God and was in fact a Christian). All the major branches of science were started by theists (most were Christians). Science would have never come out of the atheistic worldview. Check it out. Even Dawkins agrees with me.
So tell me again. How did the church deal with theistic scientist that found discovered new phenomena that contradicted the certain religious text they "followed"? I seem to have forgotten. Galano would so not have been a theist. He was way to narcissistic. He only had the information on hand in 1600's. That is a big time "theist:" you would have never been able to claim. BTW you have to remember those people didn't have access to the knowledge we have now a days.
If we were to take the numbers of athiest and agnostic teachers at universities. Compare them to the numbers of agnostic universities 300 yrs ago. I think you would notice a small trend. More agnostic atheist teachers means more advances at startling speed. Although computers and other instruments speed up the process. It is the fact scientist now a days are aloud to be more free and open. Is what has led to all the crazy advances. I am not saying that theist can't do science. I admit there
Science advanced because theists expected to find order and rationality in the universe because they believed it was designed by God. An atheist can expect no such order to the universe. Atheism dramitically impedes the progress of science.
It was primarily the Catholic church that persecuted Galileo. They were following their own doctrines, not those of the Bible and Christianity.
Galileo most likely was a theist (though not necessarily a Christian). Most people were because it is the most common-sense, rational position to take.
I believe that agnostic is the only way to go. Theist agnostic mind you "which is why i am one". But agnostic none the less. SInce science can neither prove nor disprove god. Neither can philosophy. So it becomes a question of what your personal relationship with well everything is. Dogmatic following does not allow ones relationship to grow.
There is nothing to back up such a theory, as there is no way to alter time to see what would've happened if Atheists were the only ones left to "invent science."
he is pretty much the muslim version of kent hovind. A while back i was trying to find videos on the subject. "Why is the muslim community not speaking out more in the main stream media." Out against the radical's of the muslim religion. Never found anything satisfactory on that subject. I did see a few by Dr Naik. I was less then impressed. Still would like to know this numbers thing though. Most of the muslims I have met are very nice and peaceful. SO I AM CONFUSED BY THAT.
Wow you look like you got made fun of a TON in school (elementary-high)... and you look like a science nerd :/ ..get a boyfriend/husband and do something useful with your time.
Come on, man. That is uncalled for. She is entitled to her opinion, and although I disagree with her I defend her right to say it. A lack of civility is the death of all lively debate and the reason we are in such a gridlock of hatred in this country. We should try to disagree without being disagreeable.
THE BIBLE IS JUST A BOOK DAT SUCKSS LIKE EVERY OTHER BOOK. :) the bible isnt real its just made up by CRAZY INSANE WHITE PEOPLE ON FUCKNG CRACK AND OTHER DRUGS/ o.o
How about we add the scientific view to your precious Bible. How about we add the American Indian view of cosmology to work, as an intro the Bible. How about we add all other views to your Bible.
Leave your stupid mythology out of a science book, and we'll leave science out of your Bible!
the book is a mathmatical phenomena? how so. Please don't say the bible code. It works just as well in the koran the bible and moby dick. So please let me know in what other way theses books is a mathmatical phenoena.
I am of the opinion that science and faith are not exclusive of each other. I also have no problem entertaining other faiths. I am not a radical Christian but a spiritual searcher who advocates fairness. While the faith may be mythology (by the actual definition of the word that most people don't understand), it is far from stupid.
Don't lead with your emotions; it sometimes makes you leave your reason behind.
Why do people have such an issue with this? No one is changing the book! They are just adding an introduction that offers a counterpoint. Don't lecture me on how academia works. It works just like this! Evolution has been forced on students for years without allowing intelligent design equal time. This book is closer to real academia than the one-sided approach we've seen in public schools for years.
The book is not being changed. An introduction has been added showing the creationist point of view. If you don't want to read it, if you aren't interested, then don't read it. I happen to be interested.
Darwin did not believe it why should I? He recanted everything he said about evolution - do your research. You must be really scared about people who are religious, yet you say you are a transexual that is why you want the bible gone. The bible is firm about its stand with regards to you and others like you and you do not like the bible because of this fact. If sodom and gommorah are true and the bible is true, what will happen to you according to the bible? Thats right, you get rid of the bible
DO YOUR RESEARCH darwin was going to seminary school when he wrote origin of species. Ow i forgot what happened with the people god had the angels save in sadom and gamora. Ow wait that is write the father had sex with the daughters in a cave. You quote to me. come with a better story please. BTW i would be as out raged with someone wanting to add something like this to the bible. Like Once upon a time at the beginning of all the stories.
yes, darwin believed in God, and you say that the Bible preaches against people like Shelley, but the Bible also says that you can sell your daughter into slavery and that if you work on the Sabbath, you should be put to death.
Darwin did not believe in god. His wife did. Check out the films made by Richard Dawkins about Darwin. He clearly states that Darwin did not believe in god.
More lies from the religious folks. If he didn't believe in God, then why did he attend Christ's College Cambridge where he earned a degree in preparation for Ordination as a minister of religion? Why then did he devote so much space in The Origin of Species to write about his faith, and how torn he was that his discoveries conflicted with his faith? Because, unlike you and yours, he was intellictually HONEST.
Theory is not science that’s fact and truth; you are just losing the debate no need to get upset.
MrBritam 5 months ago
Science has one major advantage over religion... LACK OF EGO! Science is merely the most logical explanation based on the evidence currently available and is ALWAYS subject to change. Science is not afraid to be wrong because it is about TRUTH , not about opinion or perfection. Please people lets EDUCATE our children to THINK so religion can RIP as a dark page in history....
z3r0Projects 7 months ago
at a time measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla (Darwin)
swiftWord 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
jesus christ is lord amen
MrFollowingjesus 7 months ago
I am glad you mentioned the free thinking theist community.
TheFaceOfJohnPants 11 months ago
the creators of religions like chrisitianity were geniuses.. (altho a compilation of older religions) that is something that i can say confidently. to keep you locked up in a prison cell that you can not smell taste feel or touch.. (i sound like morpheus now xD) to obey and keep eachother in check, very devisive, very smart.
gr4ndhustle 11 months ago
if it wasn't for science you religious pussyfarts wouldn't even be able to communicate with one another over this artificial connection.. you trust your fucking cars and airplanes and boats because you know it works... now please don't tell me god made those things.. because that would be an extremely ignorant mindset and i expect no reasonable discussion coming forth from a deluded brain like that.. you religious lackeys should focus on more recent works, enough believing in ancient fairy tales
gr4ndhustle 11 months ago
@waj1173, you should really consider reading playaspec's comment before calling someone a retard, if you think the theory of evolution can ever become a fact, you clearly do not understand what a fact is.
anthonyhiscox 1 year ago
omfg is she retarded it is a theory the whole point of a theory is it is not fact it is designed to be critiqued and changed until it is fact. and btw stick men/women deserve respect
waj1173 1 year ago
@aoiahiru The purpose of theory of evolution through natural selection is to explain the diversity of different species on Earth, not to explain how life originated. That said, the concepts behind natural selection can be and often are applied to various hypotheses of abiogenesis. However, at ths time we do not have a comprehensive theory behind the origins of life on Earth, and the theory of evolution does not attempt to broach this subject.
Arkalius80 1 year ago
@aoiahiru You are sorely mistaken. How life originally emerged is not the concept behind evolution. Evolution and the theories surrounding it don't even discuss how life originally emerged. Biological evolution is the change in the frequency of alleles in a population through successive generations and says nothing about origins of life. We know this happens, in the same way we know gravity exists. The theory of evolution through natural selection is the model that explains how this all occurs.
Arkalius80 1 year ago
They used the same tactics "Let's take it to the public and convince them" on the global warming.
They want to make it a popularity contest because the general public is much easier to handle. They don't want to argue with the scholars because they have all the evidence.
allgoo19 1 year ago
In years gone by the Priests held total power. Only they were allowed to read and inturpret the Holy books, only they could CHOOSE what was true or false. The common man could not be trusted to discern for himself.
Has academia become the new priest hood?
ScrewtapeStudios 1 year ago
@ScrewtapeStudios academia has not become the new priesthood. The "experts" are such because they have spent years becoming experts. The common man can study advanced quantum physics to biology if they want. Also anyone i think can put forward a paper if they use proper channels. SO nope. not the new priesthood ^_^
ShellySummers 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Gahh, you're fucking ugly
MRLfromhell 1 year ago
I'll tell you what's insulting is that a man (Charles Darwin) bred a "theory" out of thin air with absolutely no evidence, no support, and no rational thought. He then wrote a book on it and said that if no evidence was found then the theory should be cast out. Years later no evidence was found, but they kept the "theory" and after getting desperate began to make up proof. It's now brainwashing all kids and the only reason people believe it, is because IT'S FACT, and you better not argue.
EvolutionSlayer 1 year ago
@EvolutionSlayer i better not argue really. NO proof? I don't even know where to begin.
The made up proof you are talking about? Give me some examples ^_^
ShellySummers 1 year ago
@ShellySummers Just about any "transitional" fossil has been proved to be only a bird or monkey or whatever. And in some cases (such as Lucy for example) parts were just completely thrown together and called proof so fundings would continue.
EvolutionSlayer 1 year ago
@EvolutionSlayer There are plenty of transitional fossils. Even without fossils. We have a copy of it in the genes. Look up Retroviruses and androgeno retroviruses also maybe Pseudogene. Hope these help.
ShellySummers 1 year ago
Comment removed
06121990 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The best way to disprove a theory is to know it inside and out, then point out inconsistencies and/or flaws in the theory. My advice to you if you wish to change peoples minds is to learn the theory, tell people what is wrong with the theory and hope that they are open-minded and don't have so much faith in their world view that they refuse to see any and all evidence to the contrary.
*hint*hint*nudge*nudge*wink*wink*smile*
06121990 1 year ago
@EvolutionSlayer Darwin discusses the reasoning behind his theory in his book, and it is well supported. Many of the ideas he had were actually incorrect and we've discovered that over time. However, the general idea of natural selection holds. Since then, mountains of evidence supporting the theory of evolution through natural selection (which explains the fact of evolution which is easily observed) have been discovered. It is the foundation of modern biology, no bioligist disputes this.
Arkalius80 1 year ago
What we need to do is find some good, smart, rich people who will reprint another copy of the bible with our own 50 page evolution introduction, as well as a quick history lesson. That outta get up ray's nose and the whole christian community. Just to let the government know we are tied of religious bs. I believe religion has had way too much influence on the world and it's time to take action. no more god's will !!!!
Earthunite 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
google Doe's Account.
seekfears 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Umm? Have you ever had a boyfriend?
spritewars 2 years ago
*applose*
eikedeus 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
looks like you're from another kind of species
Later!!
Bonerific0 2 years ago
Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a woman made from a rib was convinced by a talking snake with to eat from a magical tree...
zepfan74 2 years ago 3
Zep, evolution is that one day nothing decided it was lonely so it magically put 8 planets in perfect order orbiting the sun and gave different ones moons and rings, etc. Forget the space aspects. Let's just talk about the fact that then life had to magically form for no reason and that life was in water so it magically turned into an ape and then somehow years later that ape decided it wanted to be a human and magically turned in to one. By the way, a rock is supposed to prove all this happened
MotionFrequency 1 year ago
@MotionFrequency Evolution has nothing to do with our solar system. evolution takes a pretty hard swing at the diversity of life on our planet. If there is a creator out there that designed our known universe, that creator must have come from somewhere. A theist argument is only as good as saying the chicken came before the egg...or the other way around. It's hard to percieve how the universe or life came to be, but genisis? come on. Thats a load.
epshot 1 year ago
@MotionFrequency If you actually believe that biologists claim anything like what you said actually happens, then that just makes me sad. Is that really the state of education regarding this topic today? Instead of making up fantasies about what you think evolution is and then arguing against that, why don't you educate yourself about the topic before you actually lodge objections to it? I've rarely seen a more twisted and unrecognizable distortion of evolution in my time discussing it.
Arkalius80 1 year ago
According to Comfort's website, "Nothing has been removed from Darwins original work." Anthropologist and executive director of the National Center for Science Education, Dr. Eugenie C. Scott, reviewed the book and noted that Comfort deleted four chapters by Darwin that described the evidence for evolution.
xephyr1000 2 years ago
You are talking about science from the 1870's , It's a little outdated don't you think? You should watch- The Case for a Creator (Chapter 1 of 10) It speaks of the bacteria flagellum how it has complex parts resembling a motor that could only be created by intelligent design, It makes a pretty good case that life didn't happen by random chance, It's very thought provoking
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
Yea well the bacterial flagellum Can be dissembled down. To less then 10 parts and those parts can be explained down. The person that came up with that idea if i remember right was a biologist and should have remembered that.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Explain ? I'm listening, This would be comparable with an electric motor building itself , Clearly you can see that these parts come with instructions . It would be like putting people to work without telling them what they are to do.
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
here is a good link to a video that can explain why the bacterial doesn't mean an intelligent designer.
watch?v=K_HVrjKcvrU should get you right there :)
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Time will tell, I suppose there will always be the argument...As for me, I believe in a creator. Kinda takes the fun out of life, If this were all there was.... My point was you can break it down all you want, But it is undeniable that everything is under some type of control. As I said before Darwin theory is old as is the bible,
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
So you know. I am an agnostic theist. So let me say it like this. If there is a creator. Then that creator wouldn't want or need to micromanage everything in the universe. It would in fact create a system with laws it could manipulate but would be self sustaining. Dogmatic following of any religion leads to most an ignoring of the first gift the creator would have given us. Common sense. Also it is deniable that everything is under some type of control. That's no different then scientist....
ShellySummers 2 years ago
But we have the capability to peer deep into cells now, And to cling to a notion based on fossil records without looking at all the evidence is imprudent. Anyway take care.
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
....Saying they have it all worked out. They don't. We only know a smallest of the small portion of the puzzle. I do believe they are extremely conceited in that regard. Then again theist have been doing that for centuries. Must be human nature. It was very nice conversing with you. Godspeed in all your journeys.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
u 2
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
Maxwell's Electromagnetic theory and Hertz's discovery of radio waves also date from the 1870's, yet both remain unchallenged and are the foundations of modern physics and telecommunications. Like EM theory, Natural Selection has been exhaustively proven and forms the foundations of modern science. Biology is simply incomprehensible without Darwinian Evolution. All supposed instances of "Irreducible Complexity" have found to have simpler evolutionary antecedents. Eppur si Evolversi!
Hottides 2 years ago
the Bible dates back futher..No one as I can tell is disputing Maxwell's Electromagnetic theory and Hertz's discovery of radio waves, Probably because it's good science and God was not part of the equation ...I'm sure those magical radio waves sounded about as unbelievable in those days as God sounds to people in this (sophisticated) time period today .
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
Antiquity of authorship in no way validates truthfulness. The Enuma Elish predates the Bible by millenia, yet I doubt you worship Ishtar and Marduk.
Darwinian Evolution is one of humanity's most profound discoveries, and is the exhaustively established bedrock of biology. Many adamantly refuse to embrace this cardinal principle of life due to distaste for its implications: Organisms aren't the masterworks or images of divinity, but the culmination of contrivance and racking up of necessity.
Hottides 2 years ago
Ouch!,,, I'm not validating anything or dismissing anything, Because I truly don't know, I would hate to be so arrogant as to think that I did based on other peoples findings. But... Excluding God doesn't make the argument go away..
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
Darwin himself say's " If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not have been formed by successive numerous slight modifications then his theory would break down, I'm sure if Darwin could have peered through today's microscopes , Then the Origin of species might read a little different. Percival Lowell sketch the surface of mars and seen canals... Origin of species has its place in the science world.
swiftkickinthaass 2 years ago
@swiftkickinthaass Thus far, such a thing has not been demonstrated. In fact, it would almost be impossible to demonstrate this as it would require comprehensive knowledge of what is possible and what isn't... if we had that, science would be obsolete.
Arkalius80 1 year ago
@Hottides "Antiquity of authorship in no way validates truthfulness."
SO true. I am clueless as to why this seems so hard for some to understand.Some that believe the antiquity of ideas, as well, makes them valid...must also believe the world is flat. Science, logic, critical thinking, and reasoning are such mysteries to these people.
kcgirlgeek 2 years ago
KC I'm scientifically thinking that it's a scientific fact that nothing can not produce everything. To argue that would be silly. Logically I'm thinking that things don't just magically happen and planets fall into the perfect order,location, for no other reason that nothing was bored one day. Critically thinking, what made life decide one day to exist, the water wasn't good enough so it turned into a monkey, then it wanted to be human? We reason more than people give us credit for, don't deny!
MotionFrequency 1 year ago
so since quantum computing and quatum physics and parapsychology, isnt a science based on a sense of spiritual world? or in a sense...a type of Metaphysics that goes beyond standard science? because if you are for science, than you cannot deny quantum physics and the very idea or time warp and travels and things of that nature. Because it is science in theory. All im saying is, dont be so quick to judge those of the spiritual nature, and yes, about 3200scientists all claimed it cannot just exist
kprofscrts 2 years ago
3200 biologist said evolutions doesn't exist? 3200 Paleontologist said evolution doesn't exist? No the ones in the fields directly relating to evolutionary theory. All agree it exists. Ow and by the way. I AM AN AGNOSTIC THEIST :)
ShellySummers 2 years ago
ur problem is you have one minded ideas in you. let me make something clear for you and make you look like an idiot. Go to times magazine or popsci website, and look up the interviews with scientists. 90% of scientists, in a poll, said: they have to be skeptics of science itself, because science cannot explain it's existence. And go on saying EVERY SCIENTISTS KNOWS SOMETHING CANNOT BE CREATED OUT OF NOTHING!!! go look it up. i like how everyone talks shit, but cant back it up
kprofscrts 2 years ago
Science can not explain sciences existence? Are you kidding me. Science never said everything came from nothing. Not cosmology or biology. It is the fundamentalist religious nuts that say that. You ask me it is the fundies that get in the way of spiritual people. Dogmatic following of any religion is crazy.
Now don't get me wrong. I believe that science and spirituality can go hand in hand. It's just that you can not replicate spiritual matters. Can not quantify them.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
I bet you dont even know how a cell phone is really made. see unlike you monkeys i actually work with technology and manufacturing.Tell me how you came upon the idea that religioius believers dont believe in science & it cant work together? show me ur proof of every religious person saying this? your an idiot, and didnt read the bible- it has mixture of both science &religion and states one cant work without the other. we want you on your knees? HAHAHAHAH.oh yeah, get outta ur moms basement nut
kprofscrts 2 years ago
@kprofscrts " it has mixture of both science &religion and states one cant work without the other."
Ironic then, that science seems to work best without religion, as religion has a long history of blocking progress and villifying those who employ logic and reason to understand our reality instead of simply accepting the religious authority's proclamations about it.
Arkalius80 1 year ago
fair enough..
imagine then that you take a bath .
(talking about genetics now.)
and put a drop of ink into the bath .
(symbolizing the new gene)
the drop of ink will become diluted and disappear.
in fact, consider that the bath (symbolizing death) and having water coming back in2 the bath (because the rest of the original species will still reproduce)
surly the drop of ink (being the new gene) goes down the drain.
it douse take millions of years for a new gene 2 occur....
.... oh dear ...
songngroove 2 years ago
Ok so you want to to go with bad metaphors then. Ok how about this. That drop of dye would in fact become part of the walls of the tub. While the majority of water goes down the drain. An imperceptible portion of the ink would stay behind. Actually a more accurate look at it would be the hep b virus which is highly contagious and can last on a surface for a long period of time. Ow the reason hep b is more accurate is. Even though it is diluted. Anyone drinking out of that tub even after it..
ShellySummers 2 years ago
... was diluted. Could in fact get the strain. If they didn't have their shots. Even after the tub was drained and refilled. A lot more accurate metaphor :)
ShellySummers 2 years ago
shaunashq 2 years ago
Ok consider this.
The new species would still be able to reproduce with the previous species.
Lets say there is 5 species.
A can reproduce with a's b's and c's but not d's
now b can go with b's a and but not c or d
c can go with a and d
That list is to show you just a little of how it is possible for a species to reproduce with another.
Please that argument only makes sense to ray comfort. Ow wait that is who i talked smack about in this video. :)
ShellySummers 2 years ago
The Bible has a lot more on scientific methods than you think. In fact the Bible make science meaningful except the areas that science can't explain or areas than scientific theory was proposed based on something else than science.
I don't agree with you, i guess that's your thinking but that's misinformed.
You really have to site concrete examples.
plus the Bible more than just a book It has spiritual side to it so u can't compare spiritual to physical things it won't work.
eklizia 2 years ago
This video has nothing to do with the bible. It has to do with a creationist fuck whit messing with a scientific book. I would be just as cranky if someone wanted to make a bible or a koran. With the wording "Once upon a time" at the beginning of every book.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
im with you on your statement eklizia., because the bible does allow science and spirituality. and just like you said, in areas science cannot explain itself, spiritual doctrines can and do. even worlds top scientists believe in the same idea. but it takes some lunatic from youtube to prove there hard years of work wrong i guess.
kprofscrts 2 years ago
Comment removed
eklizia 2 years ago
WOW!! Ignorance at it's best.
Aysemp1174 2 years ago
I can't believe that in this day and age
science still has to drag 'religious whack-o's'
kicking and screaming into reality.
They seem to enjoy the fruits of scientific labor
more than anyone with their medicine addictions, SUV's,
cell phone sexting, hair implants,
and bottled water.
blackbike1200 2 years ago
what is so funny, the idiots at "the way of the master" turned off their comments. LOL, you should have seen all of the comments.
Silly church nuts.
MagikPoo 2 years ago
u look like mona lisa and sound like james earl jones
darkmarkrammstein 2 years ago
God still loves you. he gave us all free-will so yuo can think any way you like. Charles Darwin evolution was a " theory " nothing more and nothing less.
RevKR187 2 years ago
oh no, and allah loves you too, see the point there? Hey why we are at it, Venus the god of love does love you, heck even mars the god of war loves you. your one religion is not right just because you believe it, its not right because its present, heck the romans have just as much evidence for there own gods as yours. I mean at least there gods are planets!
Gravity is a theory, nothing more nothing less, go jump off a building and test it. Evolution has the evidence backing it up none against.
ChrisDelo2 2 years ago
And allowed us to be evil? And so we can force our way into hell by going against him? it makes no sense to me please explain...
NastySquirrel12 2 years ago
Comment removed
RevKR187 2 years ago
"i just refuse to believe that we came from monkeys."
There you go mis-representing science again. We did *NOT* come from monkeys, we share a common ancestor. We've measured it by comparing genes.
playaspec 2 years ago 2
No. Cancer for kids if it was designed by a higher being *is* evil by any standards. If someone does prove to me that there is a god, he's a prick and not worthy of praise.
Munro1Man 2 years ago
No, evolution is a FACT, and has been endlessly documented and proven. It's *NATURAL SELCTION*, the mechinism that *drives* evolution that is a theory.
According to the Wictionary a scientific theory is: 1) A coherent statement or set of statements that attempts to explain observed phenomena. 2) A logical structure that enables one to deduce the possible results of every experiment that falls within its purview.
playaspec 2 years ago 6
Every modern conveinence in your life is the end result of a scientific theory, yet you use these things to belittle science and the scientific method. Not only is this intellectually dishonest, but it's hypocritical. Your dismissal of science only demonstrates your arrogance. How do you know that evolution itself isn't the work of God? If God 'works in mysterious ways', then what makes you so privy to the inner workings of the universe? You haven't studied His work nearly as much as science has
playaspec 2 years ago
Halls of academia--lol, idiot bitch.
MrGregable 2 years ago
Heya 8)) - you are so right!
xox <3
PurplenovaX 2 years ago
LOL, so have I, your a fuckwit dressed up as a fuckwit - great fashion matching 8))
PurplenovaX 2 years ago
@ShellySummers
Haven't you heard, academia won't allow open debates. Have you seen the Movie Expelled? Darwin wasn't science, it was a theory ... debunked time and time again. Consider studying what you suppress and you will see it plain as day.
johnm295 2 years ago
In order to be in open debate. You have to come with testable hypothesis. Since god would in fact be outside something that is testable. Or at the very least observable.
Your right Darwin isn't science. Evolutionary theories have far exceeded what Darwin could have understood about biology. In his day. There have been massive advances in the fields of biology and germ theory since then. RNA although discovered in the 1860's wasn't really part of main stream science till after the 1930's
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Darwin was a person. A person that made a monumental discovery. Evolution debunked. What all that crap on the creationist sites? Is that the "debunked" your talking about. Every single thing i have looked up on those sites. EASILY explained by natural means. There are thousand of biologists looking into biology and evolutionary theories. They have no problem reconciling their faith with what is observed.
The reason i believe this is the case? Because they don't want to dumb down god!
ShellySummers 2 years ago
They want to fully appreciate what they believe god put here. I believe YEC's are a significant portion of what is wrong with FAITH today! For i see fundamentalist and religion messing with the natural process of learning about ourselves and beyond.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
I like ZOMGitsCriss better...
agoogua 2 years ago
You must be a theist, if not please go join there camp NOW!! lol.
CondorDM 2 years ago
Why?
agoogua 2 years ago
Its the B O chick that carved in her face!
libertatem997 2 years ago
No god.
CondorDM 2 years ago
That whole stuff is going to back-fire on those that use cheap tricks. It's going to smurf right into their faces...
tmafkap 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The only attempt of showing any evidence of EVOLUTION from ThunderF00t was a salamander that ended up not being able to breed. That doesn't sound like it would work to me.
Just like a Horse and a Donkey that mate makes an ASS that cant breed..
Sounds like God's way of STOPPING issues from certain breeding.
A horse will never become a different specifies over MILLIONS of years.
And there IS NO PROOF of it.
Evolution has been debunked years ago and it's almost laughable if not so sad.
HatedChristian 2 years ago
The only attempt? You really have not been watching many Thunderfoot videos have you?
GO check out lithodidman if you want to see somebody who concentrates on evolution.
dangerouslytalented 2 years ago
Actually some donkeys are not born sterile but the majority are. Evolution has not been "debunked" nice try.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Yeah, and the bible has been debunked gazillions of times... and still, some poeple are dumb enough to still believe in the crap written in that fat book.
tmafkap 2 years ago
Your just plain lying, hoping people will just believe your plain lie?.
For those who do, there not listening anyway, whats laughable is the wasted time you took to say this, your a joke, Ha...Ha..Ha lol.
CondorDM 2 years ago
Are you saying people houldn`t read the book?
paolo27th 2 years ago
Naw read the book. Much of the information is out of date. I am annoyed these cats would stoop so low. Then again not surprised. Watched enough of their videos and looked at several sites. They only go after stuff. AFTER science has found out it is incorrect. NOT BEFORE!
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Agreed.
What I think these people are trying to do is politicize science and knowledge. Make people believe it`s a matter of opinion.
They are not really concenrned with the truth. Just holding power over the ignorant people the minister. So people having actual knowledge of things hurts their interests.
Of course using pseudo-science in order to disprove science does not prove the bible right. But this sublety is obviously lost on their intended audiece.
paolo27th 2 years ago 4
Right on. Wow very nicely said. Very cool thank you for the post! Need more people on both sides thinking things threw like this.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
You have heard of free speech? This is an introduction of the book.
Anyone can write an introduction, introduction does not change the book.
VyckRo 2 years ago
Yeah, but the introduction is full of debunked and ignorant arguments. Is is the same a spreading lies !!
TheistsAreMorons 2 years ago
TheistsAreNotMorons
"a spreading lies" You mean how atheists do on YT?
VyckRo 2 years ago
Ah, so your reasoning is "Atheists lie, therefore it is my duty as a Good Christian to lie!". Makes perfect sense. What can I say - you are a paragon of morality.
Or possibly a complete twit.
Probably the latter.
c6gunner 2 years ago
c6gunner!
Not here it is about "the one without sin to cast the first stone"A atheist has no right to give a lessons of morality
VyckRo 2 years ago
Really? Says who? Your little book? Funny thing, I have a book right here which says:
"Christians have no right to give lessons on morality, and, by the way, VyckRo guzzles Jesus Juice"
So, since it's in a book, it must be true, huh?
Also, based on the fact that your comment is a run-on sentence containing at least 3 typos and 2 grammatical errors, I suggest that you refrain from commenting while intoxicated. Your response can wait until you've sobered up. Thank you.
c6gunner 2 years ago
I would like to give you an answer in Italian, French or Latin, but I fear you know only English
VyckRo 2 years ago
Oh goody! You've done such a wonderful job of butchering the English language, I can't wait to see how badly you mangle French and Italian! Wanna try some German and Spanish, too, while you're at it?
c6gunner 2 years ago
Si tu insistes, a mi me parece bien, pero porque pretendes conocer todos estos idiomas ?
Tu es de Canada, le francais devrais etre ton segonde langue!
Ein Land, ein Reich, ein Atheist-Führer
Daca vrei pot sa iti spun si pe limba mea ceva adica pe romana!
Nel nostro paese si insegnano molte piu lingue nelle scuole non come negli USA
VyckRo 2 years ago
It's "langue second" and "Christen-Führer", and I'm not from the US. Also, your Spanish sentence made no sense. If you had left out the middle part it would have been ok.
Da li razumeš ovaj jezik?
Not a bad attempt, all in all, yet hardly enough to justify your ego - especially in light of your ridiculous theistic beliefs, and your asinine demonization of people who do not share them. And no, growing up in a back-assward country doesn't give you any insight into atheism.
c6gunner 2 years ago
My spanish sentence made no sense because you used Google Translate.
Culture and civilization have nothing in common. Rome had civilization (road, bridges) Greece had culture.
America and India, America is civilization, but is primitive in a spiritual sense.
You can have civilization but I have culture
VyckRo 2 years ago
What in the world are you going on about now? Do you have ADD? You jump topics almost as often as does Ray Comfort!
c6gunner 2 years ago
So you saying "Shut up about these crazy theist promoting there ideas, don't wanna get in there way right?".
Lets jump more topics.
CondorDM 2 years ago
God is many things, but for certain he/she is not an individual gender nor, does anyone have or hold the real information. This is the ultimate test. If you believe in evolution, you are contradicting yourself, because science states "something cannot happen out of nothing", if you refer to your physics in college or astrophysics, you will hear this repetitively.also, It's not right to label. It's in our human nature to have an open mind. Science is needed as well as hope and belief in a creator
kprofscrts 2 years ago
"God is many things"
Yep. An invisible friend. A security-blanket. A refuge for ignorance. A fairy tale. Too many things to list.
"If you believe in evolution, you are contradicting yourself, because science states ..."
Please don't pretend to understand science. The only thing worse than a bible-thumper is a bible-thumper who tries to mask his ignorance with pseudo-scientific nonsense.
c6gunner 2 years ago
Your objection to evolution demonstrates that you do not undesrtand the topic. You could not have researched both sides of the debate and made the objection above. Only if you've listened to people on one side could you have such a poor understanding of the topic. You appear to confuse the words of men claiming to be speaking on behalf of god with the words of god himself.
EternalAlert 2 years ago
The mathematical probability of a SINGLE CELL coming about by chance is 1/10340,000,000, the fraction 1 divided by 1 followed by 340 million zeros!
And then this cell must live long enough to reproduce.
And then the reproduced cell must live long enough to do the same.
And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity.
And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity.
And long before the first "accident" evolution is nothing but a silly, mystical fairy tale.
HatedChristian 2 years ago
and the chances of creation as in your magic book says is Zero , Talk about a silly, mystical fairy tale.
Tony2438 2 years ago
Also You are talking about Abiogenesis not Evolution you don't even know what subject you are talking about
Tony2438 2 years ago 2
A) you just described abiogenesis B) half of the first rna cell has been found to be able to form in an early earth environment C)The beginning of dna rna and basic simple molecules would take millions of years over many different areas. So yea the numbers work out over time.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
what's the origin of your species!? GODDAMN!!
merks91 2 years ago
You are displaying a stunning lack of intelligence while exposing you hatred for God.
ytmachx 2 years ago
why do you have a beard? ITS A SheMAN hahaha
muckraker100 2 years ago
She has no beard. its just poor lighting.
zoopu 2 years ago
stickfigures? lol, where would we be today without the pioneers of science who were theists, should we throw out there contributions to there various fields?
elGuapo45 2 years ago
I have no problem with theist scientist. Ray comfort is the one with the banana argument. SO lets not be confusing him with a real scientist.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Why should we give a shit about antiquated science?
sparxDjay 2 years ago
k es UN TIO O UNA TIA? ERESSS FEEEO DE COOJONES,AL NACER TE METIERON EN UNA URNA CON LOS CRISTALES TINTADOS XA K NO TE VIERAN,FEEEO
polvorillento 2 years ago
your confused, theyre not changing it, they added a 50 page introduction to it, you should research abit before posting stupid videos that are false.
stickypopciclesticks 2 years ago
I suggest every freethinker order a copy of this, tear out Bananaman Comforts creatard twaddle and you have a free copy of the ORoTS!
YOu can use the creatard stuff to line bird cages or start campfires.
bartyfarslar 2 years ago
what is this ? I am confused is this a dude or a chick?
randomlife41 2 years ago
I think some people misunderstand what atheism means. I think God is just about as likely as a unicorn who shits skittles and farts rainbows. I don't think God is impossible, but I feel that it is highly unlikely and most likely doesn't exist to a degree of 99.999999%. I wouldn't call myself an agnostic though. I just feel science explains the world better
tjbena86 2 years ago
tjbena86,
i never want to eat skittles again. thank you lol
Tikada22 2 years ago 2
You're an agnostic atheist, as are most other atheists. People who say they're agnostic usually don't really know what that word means.
c6gunner 2 years ago
I am an agnostic theist actually.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Um, I was addressing "tjbena86". I read the part of your profile where you identify as an "agnostic theist", so I was aware of that.
Since you did mention it, though ... I know it's technically possible to be an agnostic theist, but I find it hard to see how that would work in practice. It's like saying that you're agnostic about the existence of santa claus, but you keep putting out the milk and cookies because you think he'll show up this time. It doesn't make sense to me.
c6gunner 2 years ago
Yah, I don't feel like you can disprove God, but you can certainly point out it is very unlikely. I'm very sure he doesn't exist almost to the point that I could say he doesn't, but I cant. Just like I cant say Leprachauns and midgets with the power to fly and eat candy with their butthole don't exist. So I guess I'm an agnostic atheist with a heavy emphasis on the atheist side.
tjbena86 2 years ago
oh wow this bitch gotta mustache
bakebooey 2 years ago
what does that have to do with anything?
WhamBamThankYouMadam 2 years ago
The religious uneducated wackaloons mock science; but they have no trouble at all using the fruits of science; like computers, television, airplanes, vaccines, dental treatments, medical treatments, drugs, I could go on. Even making a youtube relies on such principles as the speed of light and quantum mechanics. Vaccines are based on the fact that organisms mutate and change. I bet even little Kirk Cameron was delivered by an obstetrician using anesthesia, more science.
newmac 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Sorry, SIR, but evolution is a lie and theists don't look down on the scientific method - they invented it. So many straw-men in this video. And an "agnostic theist?" What? Stop! Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
bestvalue 2 years ago
Theists at swords end. For the early church held sway over science. Burning at the statke house arrest and slandering the others. So no it wasn't theist that made the scientific method. It was scientist that believed in god that did. Theist are people that study religion. Nice try. The "SIR" comment. Wait let me see if i can feel insulted. NOPE YOUR A DIPSHIT! Sorry can't feel insulted.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Wrong! A THEIST is someone who believes in God. Adding an "a" to it makes it the opposite. That's why an A-THEIST believes there is no God.
Sir (not you this time) Francis Bacon invented the scientific method and was a theist (he believed in God and was in fact a Christian). All the major branches of science were started by theists (most were Christians). Science would have never come out of the atheistic worldview. Check it out. Even Dawkins agrees with me.
bestvalue 2 years ago
So tell me again. How did the church deal with theistic scientist that found discovered new phenomena that contradicted the certain religious text they "followed"? I seem to have forgotten. Galano would so not have been a theist. He was way to narcissistic. He only had the information on hand in 1600's. That is a big time "theist:" you would have never been able to claim. BTW you have to remember those people didn't have access to the knowledge we have now a days.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
If we were to take the numbers of athiest and agnostic teachers at universities. Compare them to the numbers of agnostic universities 300 yrs ago. I think you would notice a small trend. More agnostic atheist teachers means more advances at startling speed. Although computers and other instruments speed up the process. It is the fact scientist now a days are aloud to be more free and open. Is what has led to all the crazy advances. I am not saying that theist can't do science. I admit there
ShellySummers 2 years ago
are plenty that do. I Disagree that those theist you mentioned made the advances BECAUSE they were theist.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
Science advanced because theists expected to find order and rationality in the universe because they believed it was designed by God. An atheist can expect no such order to the universe. Atheism dramitically impedes the progress of science.
bestvalue 2 years ago
It was primarily the Catholic church that persecuted Galileo. They were following their own doctrines, not those of the Bible and Christianity.
Galileo most likely was a theist (though not necessarily a Christian). Most people were because it is the most common-sense, rational position to take.
bestvalue 2 years ago
I believe that agnostic is the only way to go. Theist agnostic mind you "which is why i am one". But agnostic none the less. SInce science can neither prove nor disprove god. Neither can philosophy. So it becomes a question of what your personal relationship with well everything is. Dogmatic following does not allow ones relationship to grow.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
i wanna suck your dick
grilledwhatulike2 2 years ago
There is nothing to back up such a theory, as there is no way to alter time to see what would've happened if Atheists were the only ones left to "invent science."
Your point is moot.
AmerikanRejekt 2 years ago
Like your passion, but these twits are only singing to those who are so utterly stupid as to be their choir.
intelligentfalling 2 years ago
Comment removed
sajibaby1 2 years ago
he is pretty much the muslim version of kent hovind. A while back i was trying to find videos on the subject. "Why is the muslim community not speaking out more in the main stream media." Out against the radical's of the muslim religion. Never found anything satisfactory on that subject. I did see a few by Dr Naik. I was less then impressed. Still would like to know this numbers thing though. Most of the muslims I have met are very nice and peaceful. SO I AM CONFUSED BY THAT.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
The actual Origin question is still up for debate. Not if we evolved, but from what did we evolve from.
Nina Jablonksi and Elaine Morgan have interesting data about who/what/how we evolved.
The scientific community can be just as stubborn as the religious community sadly.
elspoko 2 years ago
Comment removed
sajibaby1 2 years ago
Wow you look like you got made fun of a TON in school (elementary-high)... and you look like a science nerd :/ ..get a boyfriend/husband and do something useful with your time.
sp3ncerr 2 years ago
Come on, man. That is uncalled for. She is entitled to her opinion, and although I disagree with her I defend her right to say it. A lack of civility is the death of all lively debate and the reason we are in such a gridlock of hatred in this country. We should try to disagree without being disagreeable.
Catmatt4KSU 2 years ago
I actually like spencerr's insult. imaginative and kind of nice. In a weird sort of way :)
ShellySummers 2 years ago
What's wrong? Don't you think theories should EVOLVE? LMAO!
theunbubba 2 years ago
THE BIBLE IS JUST A BOOK DAT SUCKSS LIKE EVERY OTHER BOOK. :) the bible isnt real its just made up by CRAZY INSANE WHITE PEOPLE ON FUCKNG CRACK AND OTHER DRUGS/ o.o
Baysidecrazy 2 years ago
How about we add the scientific view to your precious Bible. How about we add the American Indian view of cosmology to work, as an intro the Bible. How about we add all other views to your Bible.
Leave your stupid mythology out of a science book, and we'll leave science out of your Bible!
dnourie1 2 years ago
Comment removed
sajibaby1 2 years ago
the book is a mathmatical phenomena? how so. Please don't say the bible code. It works just as well in the koran the bible and moby dick. So please let me know in what other way theses books is a mathmatical phenoena.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
I am of the opinion that science and faith are not exclusive of each other. I also have no problem entertaining other faiths. I am not a radical Christian but a spiritual searcher who advocates fairness. While the faith may be mythology (by the actual definition of the word that most people don't understand), it is far from stupid.
Don't lead with your emotions; it sometimes makes you leave your reason behind.
Catmatt4KSU 2 years ago
Why do people have such an issue with this? No one is changing the book! They are just adding an introduction that offers a counterpoint. Don't lecture me on how academia works. It works just like this! Evolution has been forced on students for years without allowing intelligent design equal time. This book is closer to real academia than the one-sided approach we've seen in public schools for years.
Catmatt4KSU 2 years ago
lol wow.. your pretty ignorant.
mwaters526 2 years ago
The book is not being changed. An introduction has been added showing the creationist point of view. If you don't want to read it, if you aren't interested, then don't read it. I happen to be interested.
snapecharmer 2 years ago
lol hahaaa this makes me laugh... is it a girl or a guy.... i couldnt get past how stupid she is... i cant stop laughing!!!!
liltheavenhere 2 years ago
Darwin did not believe it why should I? He recanted everything he said about evolution - do your research. You must be really scared about people who are religious, yet you say you are a transexual that is why you want the bible gone. The bible is firm about its stand with regards to you and others like you and you do not like the bible because of this fact. If sodom and gommorah are true and the bible is true, what will happen to you according to the bible? Thats right, you get rid of the bible
aleemiles 2 years ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH darwin was going to seminary school when he wrote origin of species. Ow i forgot what happened with the people god had the angels save in sadom and gamora. Ow wait that is write the father had sex with the daughters in a cave. You quote to me. come with a better story please. BTW i would be as out raged with someone wanting to add something like this to the bible. Like Once upon a time at the beginning of all the stories.
ShellySummers 2 years ago
yes, darwin believed in God, and you say that the Bible preaches against people like Shelley, but the Bible also says that you can sell your daughter into slavery and that if you work on the Sabbath, you should be put to death.
AnonymousB2B 2 years ago 2
Darwin did not believe in god. His wife did. Check out the films made by Richard Dawkins about Darwin. He clearly states that Darwin did not believe in god.
mathmit 2 years ago
actually since I posted that Matt, I found that he indeed did not, thanks Mathmit, I misspoke.
AnonymousB2B 2 years ago
More lies from the religious folks. If he didn't believe in God, then why did he attend Christ's College Cambridge where he earned a degree in preparation for Ordination as a minister of religion? Why then did he devote so much space in The Origin of Species to write about his faith, and how torn he was that his discoveries conflicted with his faith? Because, unlike you and yours, he was intellictually HONEST.
playaspec 2 years ago