I someday hope to live in a world where the argument "I don't know the answer to X, therefore I know the answer to X and it's magic" is not only rare but laughed at when it is made.
@stevebee92653 Pfft the question is stupid. It's the same way evolution always works. Moving parts of ones anatomy is always useful and downright common. Eyes are no exception. One might well ask how wrists could evolve or necks. It's simply ignorance. And as with all things, if one can feign ignorance for something, somebody can try to shove a God into that hole. It's rather pathetic.
@Tatarize Right. Pffft all questions you can't answer. You obviously don't have enough education to even comment here. I love how people as gullible as you use such incredible name calling as you show with your MO. You have no idea how stupid you look.
"Evolution just made it." = "God just made it." The only difference is in the speed of the make, and the semantics.
@stevebee92653 I said the question was stupid and from a place of ignorance. I did not intend that as a pejorative. The question is rather easily answered and the only reason to ask it is if one really isn't well versed in the subject.
Despite your attempt to claim that evolution is on as flimsy grounds as God, I said that it works the same way that all evolution does. Which is actually by a well understood mechanism. Which isn't saying magic (like God) but natural selection.
@Tatarize Magic is magic. No matter if God didit or Natural Selection didit. The end result is exactly the same. You have been fooled into thinking an entity without the slightest bit of intelligence can do the exact same magic as the religious think God did. So if you want to be fooled, fine. Just realize it. Your notion that "the question" is "rather easily answered" shows the depth of your naivety.
@stevebee92653 Generally when something is magical, you can think about it such that if you break it into it's composite parts, it's just made of ideas. While dissecting God's magic, this is all we get. But, evolution is very easy explained and broken into very specific parts. It's all atoms. And if something is made entirely of atoms its generally wrong to call it magic.
@Tatarize Entities cannot assemble themselves and come to life, then further assemble themselves into more and more complex inventions. When you think that happened from a source with absolutely zero intelligence, even though every experience you and every other person who ever existed on the Earth says it cannot , you are a magic believer just as much as any religious person. You have deluded yourself. You don't need to keep telling me about your delusions that you think are science.
@stevebee92653 Entities do assemble themselves. All the time. That's developmental biology. That's how bodies are built. Self-assembly. The plan for how that body is built is what evolves. It's actually rather straight forward science and well understood, just not by you apparently.
@stevebee92653 "Entities assemble themselves. Right. Every day." -- Yes. They do. You are making broad statements that even negates the development of a fetus. Self-assembling without intelligent overseeing is how living critters work. Tweaking that self assembling pattern and having nature sort the tweaks by their survival is how evolution works. You want to deny evolution, but trying to do so with overly broad statements makes you look a fool.
@stevebee92653 And there is land in Florida. You are suppose to offer beach front property in a land locked region or a bridge. There's plenty of land in Florida that is for sale.
The song mentions red roses, and eyeless roses show complete knowledge of the entire light spectrum, as it is observed by nectar gathering bees, they also understand (without minds or noses) fragrance and the desire of the flying insects they intentionally attract to pollinate their blossoms.
And as the song says, for me and you.
It’s all creating an environment, and yet many in it prefer to see it as unknowing and mindless, which is one way of showing a lack of appreciation, and disapproval.
@clementedelacuadra I am glad you are interested in origins no matter what you believe. This is fascinating stuff. Hard to believe everyone isn't as fascinated as we are. When I built my house about 20 miles from the ocean and on a 500 ft. hill we dug up 60 million year old shark's teeth. Amazing to hold something in your hand that is from a 60 million year old animal.
@clementedelacuadra El registro fósil es claro. Evolución no sucedió. Han dejado engañar en moda de grupo. Ir a un museo en algún momento y mirar realmente los fósiles. Vea si puede ver mucho cambio. Simplemente no existen. Si te vas, fingir que no tienes ningún conocimiento previo de cómo se formaron las especies. Ir con una mente en blanco. Luego tomar un buen aspecto. ¿Qué crees que te deben ver que no.
@clementedelacuadra What is a Creat? You, in typical indoctrinate fashion, think you are talking to a religious person? Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not. Further evidence of severe indoctrination on your part. "If he isn't A, well then he is B". Well, I am not A or B.
When you tell your fellow indoctrinates they laugh...my, how embarrassing for me. I'm so hurt. boo hoo I hope I can recover. I'll just have to try. I hope your fellow indoctrinates have better thinking skills than you. do.
@clementedelacuadra "How was this eye created?" Don't know. "When?" Don't know. "By whom?" Whom? You assume a personage. You mean the source? Don't know.
Neither do you or any person who ever walked the earth. There are certainly lots of people who foolishly think they do know. Like you.
IC was "reckoned not to be so?" Not so. Unless yo mean your laughable mouse trap boy, Miller. If you think that disproves IC, try pulling out your PC power cord. Or your optic nerve. Report back.
different cells pick up light in various degrees of clarity. our eye moves to aim the center at what we need to see most clear. moving eyes is faster and burns less energy than moving the entire head, and turning the head then eyes increases our range of sight. now all animals are like this. owls cannot move their eyes because of their size, they are evolved to capture more light to see at night, thus they have that advantage, but no room for muscles or movement. just a few intelligent examples.
Just because you can't figure out how a human eye works, does not disprove the integrity of the theory of evolution. Just as people once thought the sun revolved around the Earth because they had no evidence to prove otherwise, doesn't mean they were right. Same in your case, you think the 'architecture' of the human eye is impossible, but it doesn't mean it actually is.
@stevebee92653 Why don't you try elaborating, rather than telling me I'm stupid. It's simple enough, you can't understand the eye's evolution, that doesn't mean the eye did not evolve. Just because something is beyond your comprehension, doesn't mean that it's untrue. That's all I was saying.
@tawari6 If you think, and have been sold a bill of goods that complex utilitarian entities can design and build themselves, and you truly believe that notion, I can't "elaborate" any more. You cannot be helped. My videos should be enough to tell you why. Eyes and cameras don't design and assemble themselves. And your belief that they do goes against everything you have ever experienced. If you choose to believe anyway, as I say, I cannot help you.
@tawari6 If you think, and have been sold a bill of goods that complex utilitarian entities can design and build themselves, and you truly believe that notion, I can't "elaborate" any more. You cannot be helped. My videos should be enough to tell you why. Eyes and cameras don't design and assemble themselves. And your belief that they do goes against everything you have ever experienced. If you choose to believe anyway, as I say, I cannot help you.
This guy is fun to watch. BTW Potholer54 said you are in the running so congrats.
Your arguments are so stupid and trivial that I can only inquire about the kind of psychological state one most have to proclaim such drivel. To call it silly is to give it more credit then it deserves, to call it crap just does not go far enough to explain is awfulness.
@thesparitan Instead of ragging like all evollutionauts do, answer the question posed. You can't so your only choice is your evo copy-paste ragging in typical evo-zombie fashion. "Your arguments are so stupid and trivial that........I can't answer them....and....potholer says....and" :-D
@stevebee92653 That didnt make much sense. How does anything I wrote look copy and paste to you? I just said you are wacko, its not very hard to come up with that idea on my own. If I had copied a sentence from a website then I would understand. Second, I only bring up Potholer because he does very funny videos on people like you, and I think you would probably enjoy being made fun of. Its not that I was usually anything he said as a directive. You will make a good video is all.
@thesparitan Your problem is you are a huge bore. You have nothing of intelligence to say. "Copy/paste" because you say what all other evo-zombies say. You are an indoctrinate, and brain locked. You have no idea that you are, and never will. Sorry. Bye
Evolution is a fraud. Viruses were created for this hoax to take. In order to turn you into lower energy forms, you are fed and smothered in petrols. Your brain is stunted at birth with vaccines,...although your mother's no better off, so now a smart child is a miracle, and is reliant on "evolutionary science" to hide the fact their poison was rejected. Doc says, "take more meds". Did you know that everything plastic is poison, no matter what they say. Use your remaining shred of common sense :)
@drone8888 You’re right. All medicine has managed to do is double our life span. Humanity was much better off at a time when people died painfully from mouth infections and diseases like small pox and polio disfigured and tortured millions.
Well, Im not really sure what you mean by "that type of mutation doesn't exist", so I wouldn't know what to search for. What type exactly? I'd rather hear it from you anyway.
@wipetywipe For starters, your first comment was extremely insulting, dumb, and not the least bit knowledgeable: "What do you call someone who flunks out of medical school? A Dentist."
Makes you look idiotic. Why would anyone want to waste a minute's time talking to you? Try Google.
The point of this video is how did a fixed "tea cup" eye free itself up to become a rotating globe. Got it? There are no mutations that can do that. So get yourself to Google, and see if you can prove me wrong.
@stevebee92653 I watched the video. Your argument seems to hinge on what you perceive to be the only means by which gradual changes can accumulate - that they occur gradually over 3D space, one cell at a time. Like an eyeball being fully fixed, then partially freed, then completely freed. Why is it impossible for a single mutation to affect the entire surface of the eye all at once? I'm not trying to prove that it IS possible. I just want to know why you claim it IS NOT possible.
I can't help but feel people who post videos then disable the comment ratings, delete posts, and disable video voting are scared to discover the majority of people think their videos are weak.
Big thumbs down for the poor logic and science in these videos.
@BumJungle Looks like you are far more eager to grade me than to figure out how eyes freed themselves up and became balls. You are a very typical evo-bore.
@stevebee92653 What a suprise - no evidence, just conjecture and insults. Guess that's why you failed in your pursuit in becoming an M.D.
This is why the majority of free thinking, rational minded and intelligently honest people think that people like you are crackpots. Hence why you disable comments. And remove comments. I wonder how this one will last.
I think you need to leave medical topics to those qualified to discuss them in an honest fashion.
@BumJungle Gee, shock of shocks. An insult. That hurts. It worked. I wonder if "those qualified to discuss them in an honest fashion" know how eyes freed themselves up from the fully attached "tea cups" to become freely rotating balls. Ya know, I bet they do. They probably have a good fable on the subject that you will believe. You better do a gullibility check on yourself. You have been fooled. Bye.
@stevebee92653 Your error is just a failure of imagination. You assume that the small steps in which evolution occurs must equate to small changes in 3D space in each step, like building an earlobe one cell at a time. Cant you imagine a single mutation with a large phenotypic effect, like one that produces more growth hormone so descendants are always much larger, or one in which a connective tissue malfunctions so an eyeball is freed from from its surroundings. Must you be so simple-minded?
@wipetywipe This is so funny to read, "your error is just a failure of imagination" So that's what evolution is based on, imagination. Imagining things that could happen that there is no evidence to support. Makes perfect sense. Like stevebee92653 said, "your error is you believe in fantasy" cause fantasy originates from imagination.
@3zzi32008 Viruses multiply and at the same time exhibit tiny mutations. Some of those mutated viruses are immune to the drugs designed to stop them. This is observable and occurring. Try telling a medical research biologist that’s all happening in the imagination. You might be laughed at yourself :)
@kingdan415 I think you don't think. You accept what someone told you. . I don't care how long it had, eyes couldn't invent and assemble themselves. If you believe they did, good for you. Why bother me?
@kingdan415 Good for you. Keep you mind open, whatever you believe. We don't have the answers, and if someone tells you they do, from any source, be very skeptical.
@kingdan415 if u research ur own false beliefs well enough you would realise that some of the earliest forms of eyes in the fossill record dateing to the early cambrian period are also identical to some of the most complex eye structures in existence today
@wild0hawk What does that say? Eyes appeared fully "evolved" in the Cambrian? You are giving evidence against your apparent belief system. Did you miss the point of this vid? How did eyes free themselves up?
@stevebee92653 there might be a case for devolution, where slight devolutionary changes occurs to some species that inhabit regions that r too awkward for there biological and physical capabilities.Yeh im pretty convinced from wat ive learned that most liveing species were somehow placed on this planet in a very simmiliar form to how they would be viewed millions of years later, allmost all given the capabilities to adapt to varying enviroments wisout really distorting from the orignal design
Instead of just saying evolution is wrong, how bout you enlighten to how the eye came to be exactly. Without God of course, (with you not being religious) Since you are obviously far more informed than say a biologist for instance
@stevebee92653 I found 3854 peer reviewed papers on pub med and every single one of them offer a far better answer than yours... You can't sit behind your computer just saying all of this evolution stuff is false without offering your own hypothesis! You look like a theist who is blindly and ignorantly denouncing a theory that is supported be evdience in many different fields of science with a predisposed and unfounded agenda. Do you dismiss the theory of quantum electrodynamics with such ease?
@TheEVILutionist You read every single one of them? WOW. Called bullshitting for your belief. Evo-peer reviewed papers are fables, just like the religion itself. I don't dismiss real science. The only fake I know of is evolution. Know of any others?
@stevebee92653 It's fake because the thought of ocular muscles developing through natural selection is hard? Fables? How do you differentiate "real science"? Is it practical application maybe?
@TheEVILutionist Since zero muscles have ever been observed to developed through NS and RM, or any partial steps to that development, I think we can safely say oculomotor muscles didn't either. So what makes you think they did? Someone told you they did, and you believed. Why is that any different than any religion? I differentiate real science by real observability and testability. Since no bio-system of any kind has been observed being assembled by NS and RM, I can conclude quite easily....
@PaulinaPaulino Evolution is doing now what religion did for hundreds of years. It is a bogus theory that is blocking an honest scientific search. You make an enormous assumption. That I am religious. You are way off. I gave that up long ago.
The questions I pose are available and answerable for any scientist if they can. But they cannot be answered in the light of evolution. Not at all. Not by any human being.
@stevebee92653 Why? Why can't they be "answered in the light of evolution"? At one time it was said the the earth was flat, and that God said do in the bible, and that was it. And we know how THAT turned out.
You assume that those diagrams show the evolution of the skull and surrounding tissue. This is not the case. The diagram shows the evolution of the eye ball. This tissue was already surrounded by muscle which with small changes could become the muscles that move the eye. Eye tissue is vulnerable so we evolved lids and sockets to protect it from damage. This is the same reason why cave species don't have eyes. They removed the vulnerability cause with no light theres no advantage to eyes.
@svenypoodles Astounding. Amazing what evolution will do to people and their trainers get them to believe. "With small changes could become the muscles that move the eye"? You better get some schooling.
@stevebee92653 You criticize others for not engaging in a discussion, but then you dismiss me with a condescending comment lacking any substance. I had the respect to address your argument, but you responded by attacking my education and insinuated that I had succumb to some sort of brain washing. Do not pretend that you wish to engage in a discussion when you are so arrogant as to not even indulge in the idea that you may be wrong. You are a close-minded hypocrite. I'm done with you.
@svenypoodles He did exactly the same thing to me, Sveny, he has no argument, no facts, lies and/or distorts facts. His response to me when I challenged him was:
"@PaulinaPaulino You need some education. You are over you head, but trying real hard. ... I hope you're not on something."
@stevebee92653 You criticize others for not engaging in a discussion, but then you dismiss me with a condescending comment lacking any substance. I had the respect to address your argument, but you responded by attacking my education and insinuated that I had succumb to some sort of brain washing. Do not pretend that you wish to engage in a discussion when you are so arrogant as to not even indulge in the idea that you may be wrong. You are a close-minded hypocrite. I'm done with you.
and ofcourse ratings are disabled just like on every other creationist video because they know nobody cares about their bullshit. creationists cant handle the criticism they only want others to listen to their own shit.
@EtaCarinae "and ofcourse" they are disabled to get rid of gullible indoctrinates who waste time and space and who have absolutely not a thing of interest to say..... like you!
the rating system is just a thumbs up or thumbs down so how could anyone waste your time by saying something thats not interesting when the only action involved in rating a video is pressing a button.
nice try anyway, you might want to disable comments as well, that's what most of your creationist friends do these days. oh that's right, any view that doesn't agree with yours is 'a waste of time'.
@EtaCarinaez Oh, gee. I wonder what rating you would give me. What a laugh. You can't converse intelligently about what's in the vid. You are nothing but a brainless troll. So, scoot! Shoo! Bye
@EtaCarinaez BTW, where is your channel? I always like to see what kind of channel gullible people like you have. Your comments are by the dozens of dozens. Over and over. That's why comments get disabled. Waste of time. I don't disable. I love to watch evo-indoctrinates make fools of themselves like you already have. Saying "fuck you" on this venue only makes you look stupider, and hurts no one. The fact that you have no idea what's in this vid makes you look DUMB. One more shot, then bye.
you and your video are surely going to change the future of mankind because you've got some super important information that will change our views of evolution completely. have you received an oscar yet? because apparently you just made a discovery that will change 200 years worth of scientific study. Oh wait you haven't even been contacted by anyone? I wonder why that is.. anyway have fun making youtube videos. don't forget to disable comments next time
@EtaCarinaez Yes, two Oscars! What indoctrination does to people will never cease to amaze me. Not going to finish with a very scientific fuck you? "Smatter wit ya? Bye
you say that its impossible to evolve the eye but yet it has already happen. so tell me should i rip my eyes out because it may offend god all mighty with the fact that i have eyes but yet i shouldnt have evolve them. people like you only really argue about this do to error or to hear your self talk. >:-(
As the eye became more complex and there was an increase of nerves to send signals to the brain, the extra nerves crowded inside the retina on top of the sensors instead of underneath as in invertebrate animals and the nerves way to the brain is through a hole in the retina which cause the blind spot in our vision. Plus six muscles are used to move the eye when three is sufficient to do the same job and the retina is inside out. Not deliberately designed-- designed by natural selection.
If you look at the formation of the eye, the rotational eye is clearly more advantageous to any complex organism such as humans or horses, chameleons etc. The muscular ligaments of the eye would be needed to move the eye in the first place to form a convergent pov. I think if you took the time to study developmental biology or biophysics, you would understand evolution much better.
@pSychOAtDawn It's advantageous ergo it was invented assembled and constructed by NS and RM? So in your mind anything that is an advantage evolved into existence? If you took the time to study this vid you would wonder how a fixed eye evolved into a rotational ball with six muscles, blood, and nerve systems that attached themselves to the ball to move it. Next you would figure out that that scenario cannot evolve in small steps. But you won't because you are a believer not a scientist.
@stevebee92653 A mutation that turns out beneficial, as would a rotating eye instead of a stationary image of an eye, would be more advantageous to an organism in nature. Some organisms have expressed the mutation and capitalized on it's genetic success through generations of reproduction. I seriously think the eye evolved before we had necks that could even turn. Rationalize it. The six muscles would come, not at once but in series. Organismic evolution is a gradual process, not an impatient 1.
@pSychOAtDawn You're telling me a story that someone told you. You just don't realize it, and you never will. You are indoctrinated and therefore impossible to argue with. You aren't sharp enough, due to said indoctrination, to see the absurdity in you explanation.
@stevebee92653 I'm not telling you a story. I've rationalized this from the 2 years that I've learned basic developmental biology and chemistry. You are the one that is denying all reasoning to just "believe". By being somewhat critical about evolution, you've just helped scientific minds reinforce what they know about the wonders of evo and how it makes sense. You've given up and categorized me in the "indoctrinated" section just to discredit me. Nice. Show's your arrogance, my friend.
@pSychOAtDawn You relay absurd stories you have made up. You don't think on your own. I pose a problem here on this vid of the steps from the fixed "tea cup" eye Eugenie says was the beginning of eyeballs to the free and rotating eyeball. You can't even consider or address that problem of THE STEPS. Why? Pretty basic challenge. You act as if it's invisible. I ask reality. You shun it. So what's the point in discussing? So tell me how the freeing of the eyeball occurred according to evo.
@stevebee92653 Guilty of doublespeak right there in the first two sentences. The steps to an eyeball are clearly gradual!!! It's not like they appeared magically in hours. This kinda biological development obviously takes time. A baby needs 9 months to grow from a piece of shit cell to a complex organism. You can look at a baby fetus and look at the steps a baby's cell's took to form an eyeball. Duh! Think using REAL life situations! I seriously don't have the time for this right now T_T *smh*
@pSychOAtDawn My gawd. Think of a fully attached cup freeing itself to make a loose and rotating eyeball. Would at 10% freed eyeball do anything but be just as stuck as a fully attached eyeball? I love the "DUH". This is obviously WAY over your head. So believe away. A fetus is your comparison? You are not smart or educated enough to even think about this stuff. I feel bad for you. Bye.
Hmm... Well I guess if you're too lazy to go to school and get an education I guess there's nothing wrong with getting your facts out of a book that was written by a bunch of cave dwelling drug crazed hermits (ie... The Bible!). If however you are curious about how the world works then maybe you'll quit blaming god for everything and realize just how fascinating and complex nature really is and maybe appreciate our place in it a bit more... We are ALL related.
@mycatistigger Why do you evos insist on making yourselves look so dumb. There are points in the vid that you cannot address, not even one, so you play the religion card. Well, I am not. So you look dumb there. As well as in the fact that you can't address the challenges in the vid. So dumb. sigh
Hey, evolutionists, does bone marrow need red blood cells to exist? Or can it exist without red blood? Or let me ask this instead: Which came first, bone marrow or red blood cells?
Questions for the evolutionists among us...and I know this is a hard one for you, so it's OK to take your time...soooooo...here it is: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
@greaterdebater the egg came first, so did the red blood cell. If you look at it through the eyes of gradual, biophysical evolution, the red blood cell had to come first as any other cell cannot form an organism or organ without a cell. The egg came before the chicken as well, as you cannot start from an organism and then form a cell. All life evolves from it's most simplest form; a cell.
@pSychOAtDawn So, the red cell evolved and looked around and said, "hot damn, I need a heart, some veins and arteries, some brothers & sisters (white cells) - I've got to talk the other cells into evolving these body parts. Might as well evolve skin, bones, liver, lungs stomach, sex organs as well so I can circulate and bring nutrients & oxygen to these organs". But if there were no hearts, lungs, livers, skin etc anywhere on the earth, why would a red cell evolve? Just for the hell of it?
@cheaterfive100 No these adaptations came gradually in our universe. Most likely these simple cells started in water as most of our bodies still require huge amounts of it. The cell, a complex and precise ratio of certain natural and abundant elements, then started consuming other smaller complex cells through a process called phagocytosis. It was then possible to adapt some of these organelles to itself; eg. Mitochondria.
Well done Steve. I've always wondered this point and I'm glad to come across your video. You probably could have added that all the nerves and blood vessels were bundled into one convenient harness in preparation for the eye to detach itself from the surrounding tissue. I'm wondering if any darwits can think of a scenario where and why this would be selected...(I wouldn't hold my breath though)
@gmh1206 Thanks! I kind of broadly cover the nerve/eyeball conundrum in Part 1: Eye Evolution: It's Impossible. Mind boggling to think how these entities came together.
@gmh1206 Yep, jebus made the eye and he made it perfect. The blind spot of the eye is apart of Jebus' master plan too. And sometimes the retina tears, but that is something Jebus wanted to happen to test their faith. Oh, and as a person ages, his eyesight gets worse, causing billions of people around the world to have to wear glasses. This problem is a perfect edition, perfectly placed into the perfect design of the eye by Jebus. One more thing - sometimes people are born blind. Thx Jebus!
@blucas6 My goodness, with NS and mutations, you'd think by now the eye would be perfect. No blind spots, no glaucoma, no blindness, all due to the wonderful world of evolution. In fact, due to evo, cancer should be gone by now along with M.S., cerebral palsy, and a host of other horrible deseases. Yay NS and mutations. Thank you Charlie Darbin.
@cheaterfive100 And if a supreme being created us in her likeness, we wouldn't have all of these imperfections either. Seems no one knows how the eyeball formed. At least evolutionists are presenting a plausible theory.
@blucas6 definitely sad how some people will resort to mockery since they have no intelligent way to refute sound reasoning. also sad how people refuse to give Jesus credit for things going well, but are quick to blame Him when things go wrong. all part of the Christian-bashing agenda I suppose.
@blucas6 And the temporal nature of a design doesn't exclude a designer does it now? The eye surpasses any human made camera eg 10 billion to 1 contrast ratio, sensitive to a single photon, auto focus, cleaning, repairing, assembling and the clincher for me is that it is algorithmically encoded on a piece of material (DNA) weighing less than 6 picograms. Furthermore, a high bandwidth signal at 30 FPS and 150 megapixel res is encoded on 1 million low bandwidth nerves. Thank you Jesus indeed!
I like your video, it has common sense. Darwinism is no longer science, its a religion that is interested exclusively in maintaining itself.
Everyone who dares to question evolution is being badmouthed and flamed all over youtube. I get the feeling that this is turning into something like a second inquisition.
Wow stevebee I was in the process of creating a video a lot like this one to respond to that air head eugenie scott when I came across yours. I like all the videos you have to select from. GREAT STUFF and It would be a miracle for anyone to argue these from a scientific standpoint but as you know, Miracles can and DO happen else what would life itself be. Some cosmic coincidence? Ooops, wouldn't want to piss off the darwits would we. After all they are the "Philosopher Kings of Science"! heh
@Ultramediacorp Thanks for the compliments! So nice to get get a good comment. 90% are darwits. No science but repeated dogma. Natural selection invented and assembled EVERYTHING!
@MidgardEagle You some sort of mind reader? How do you know what I looked up or didn't? I try to get people to think. Not much luck yet, as you have shown.
The eye is actually part of the brain, so the more interesting question would be, how did immobile light sensitive cells on the outer layers (skin?) of an organism end up becoming part of the brain system? There are actually muscles in the eye that allow it to rotate so the horizon always appears level. Just think how many critters had to endure falling over all the time before they got THAT right!
Pathetic. You can't see what the advantage is of being able to move our eyes around and focus light from any point in our visual field onto the most sensitive part of our retinas? And, as to the muscles, there were probably muscles attached to the skin for other purposes (perhaps a more rudimentary way of moving the eye or squeezing the cup shut) that gradually became what they are today as the eye acquired greater freedom of movement.
The solution is simple given that eyes also exist on stalks in the case of crustaceans. The fact is, an "eye" can develop anywhere, at any time. It's that simple a piece of equipment.
@MrMZaccone Do you really believe that something as fantastic as an eye can just develop anywhere? That its just a simple piece of equipment? I'm no scientist but I'll have to put that in my notebook of completely goofy statements.
@cheaterfive100 Do you have any other explanation for the fact that they have done just that? Starfish for instance have an eye on the end of each arm. The conch has eyes on the end of it's tentacles and scallops have rows of many eyes which can be regrown if lost to accident or predator. If they do grow anywhere (they do) and can be regrown (they can), what's the problem? Next time you want to log a "goofy statement" try logging actual goofy occurences instead, you'll learn more.
@outatime333 No God argument here, sorry. Only real science. Natural selection couldn't possibly do the job science says it did. And if you believe it did, have at it. Believe away.
@MrMZaccone It's the only explanation. "We aren't within light years of figuring it out.." The notion that non-occurring miraculous mutations, and animals selectively procreating, killing, and dying being the source of complex visual systems isn't even in the realm of fantasy. We can't admit that we don't know. Humans are too conceited. And evolution will spend hundreds of years blocking a really scientific search for the true MO. It sure isn't natural selection.
@stevebee92653 Let me make sure I understand you. You're saying that the only explanation is that we have no Idea how it works? ... That's fairly innofensive, I suppose. Although, I'm afraid I'm not as skeptical as you are about current scientific theory, I suppose I could buy that one. A light year, by the way is a measure of distance, not time. Just trying to help.
"I wondered why those tiny arms on their magnificent T. Rex fossil didnt evolve a lick in millions of years. Wouldnt a T. Rex with bigger arms be a better grappler?"
Wouldn't you consider concentrating on traits you regard as unsophisticated - like the arms of T. Rex - as casting doubt on evolution, while ignoring highly sophisticated traits - such as the massive jaws, teeth, and hindquarters - highly supportive of evolution - as being just a tad selective in your evidentiary focus?
... - how do you account for the fact that modern animals are absent from strata contemporary with T. Rex? Where did they come from, and how? What's your explanation?
Now, I'm curious. If you deny the guidance of a creator, and you deny the principles that underpin evolution, then I would like to know by what principles you do ascribe the diversity of life on Earth. Given that you're comfortable with long time scales - accepting the existence of T. Rex, for example, and allowing him "millions of years" during which he somehow failed to achieve an upper body musculature rivaling Schwarzenegger's...
"Imagine us as two year olds who are trying to figure out the engineering and assembly of a 747."
Why would the speculations of anyone, two-year-olds included, on the nature of 747s be considered analogous to an investigation into the principles driving the diversification of life when A) 747s do not reproduce; B) they do not pass along traits to the offspring they don't create; and C) they do not undergo mutations to the traits they don't pass along to the offspring they don't create?
@stevebee92653 Did you see his comments to me? Dude just doesn't have a clue. Dawkins' over-simplified, generic diagrams fail to show how utterly fantastic the eye actually is. He thinks it'd be more efficient with a verted retina, and a mechanism to produce UV-blocking chemicals to obviate the problem the inverted retina and the choroid layer obviates quite simply and beautifully...without hindering vision one bit. Wonder if Dawkins ever told him about "Müller cells".
@PZG4SS I love the " eye is a bad design" thing. The most incredible design imaginable, the most incredible functioning bio-device is "bad design". What a laugh. Patches doesn't get anything. But he is in a long line of indoctrinates. So he shouldn't feel too bad. He has lots of company.
@stevebee92653 Indeed. The trouble with being indoctrinated is that you don't know it's happening, but that's the whole point!
I wonder what his take is on the enzyme your lungs produce in order to counteract the surface tension of water...without it, we'd suffocate to death very soon! That's somewhat of an "either-or" situation....hard to explain with evolution. It would have needed to work perfectly with the proto-lungs straight from the beginning or else evolution stops dead, literally.
"the idea that selected mutations can form and cause the design of incredibly complex electromechanical organs and bio-devices is no more than wishful fantasy."
Why, Steve? What mechanism do you propose that would prevent the accumulation of beneficial mutations over geological periods of time that would yield the results you mention? Aside from your own personal incredulity, you haven't said WHY you feel this is impossible.
how ironic to use song by a blind singer, yeah prove the omnipotent god created eyes that go bad
blindedby2monkeys 3 weeks ago
@blindedby2monkeys Oh golly. An "either or" comment. How unique. Good thinking.
stevebee92653 3 weeks ago
I someday hope to live in a world where the argument "I don't know the answer to X, therefore I know the answer to X and it's magic" is not only rare but laughed at when it is made.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize Hey, me too. Laughed at is very important! Great comment. Uh, there are questions posed, and uh....never mind.
stevebee92653 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 Pfft the question is stupid. It's the same way evolution always works. Moving parts of ones anatomy is always useful and downright common. Eyes are no exception. One might well ask how wrists could evolve or necks. It's simply ignorance. And as with all things, if one can feign ignorance for something, somebody can try to shove a God into that hole. It's rather pathetic.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize Right. Pffft all questions you can't answer. You obviously don't have enough education to even comment here. I love how people as gullible as you use such incredible name calling as you show with your MO. You have no idea how stupid you look.
"Evolution just made it." = "God just made it." The only difference is in the speed of the make, and the semantics.
stevebee92653 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 I said the question was stupid and from a place of ignorance. I did not intend that as a pejorative. The question is rather easily answered and the only reason to ask it is if one really isn't well versed in the subject.
Despite your attempt to claim that evolution is on as flimsy grounds as God, I said that it works the same way that all evolution does. Which is actually by a well understood mechanism. Which isn't saying magic (like God) but natural selection.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize Magic is magic. No matter if God didit or Natural Selection didit. The end result is exactly the same. You have been fooled into thinking an entity without the slightest bit of intelligence can do the exact same magic as the religious think God did. So if you want to be fooled, fine. Just realize it. Your notion that "the question" is "rather easily answered" shows the depth of your naivety.
stevebee92653 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 Generally when something is magical, you can think about it such that if you break it into it's composite parts, it's just made of ideas. While dissecting God's magic, this is all we get. But, evolution is very easy explained and broken into very specific parts. It's all atoms. And if something is made entirely of atoms its generally wrong to call it magic.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize Entities cannot assemble themselves and come to life, then further assemble themselves into more and more complex inventions. When you think that happened from a source with absolutely zero intelligence, even though every experience you and every other person who ever existed on the Earth says it cannot , you are a magic believer just as much as any religious person. You have deluded yourself. You don't need to keep telling me about your delusions that you think are science.
stevebee92653 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 Entities do assemble themselves. All the time. That's developmental biology. That's how bodies are built. Self-assembly. The plan for how that body is built is what evolves. It's actually rather straight forward science and well understood, just not by you apparently.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize Right. Entities assemble themselves. Right. Every day. I have some land in Florida I'd like to sell you. Interested?
stevebee92653 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 Yes, how do you suppose you go from a zygote to a human being? Magic? No. It's self assembly.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize You are not educated enough to comment here. Sorry. Out of your league.
stevebee92653 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 All those Biology classes in college for nothing! Drat.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@Tatarize Yea, that's a shame. They didn't tell you the difference between an embryo forming, and evolution? Get your goddam money back!
stevebee92653 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stevebee92653 "Entities assemble themselves. Right. Every day." -- Yes. They do. You are making broad statements that even negates the development of a fetus. Self-assembling without intelligent overseeing is how living critters work. Tweaking that self assembling pattern and having nature sort the tweaks by their survival is how evolution works. You want to deny evolution, but trying to do so with overly broad statements makes you look a fool.
Tatarize 1 month ago
@stevebee92653 And there is land in Florida. You are suppose to offer beach front property in a land locked region or a bridge. There's plenty of land in Florida that is for sale.
Tatarize 1 month ago
Comment removed
Tatarize 1 month ago
The song mentions red roses, and eyeless roses show complete knowledge of the entire light spectrum, as it is observed by nectar gathering bees, they also understand (without minds or noses) fragrance and the desire of the flying insects they intentionally attract to pollinate their blossoms.
And as the song says, for me and you.
It’s all creating an environment, and yet many in it prefer to see it as unknowing and mindless, which is one way of showing a lack of appreciation, and disapproval.
theloosegoose333 2 months ago
@clementedelacuadra Adios.
stevebee92653 3 months ago
@clementedelacuadra I am glad you are interested in origins no matter what you believe. This is fascinating stuff. Hard to believe everyone isn't as fascinated as we are. When I built my house about 20 miles from the ocean and on a 500 ft. hill we dug up 60 million year old shark's teeth. Amazing to hold something in your hand that is from a 60 million year old animal.
stevebee92653 3 months ago
@clementedelacuadra El registro fósil es claro. Evolución no sucedió. Han dejado engañar en moda de grupo. Ir a un museo en algún momento y mirar realmente los fósiles. Vea si puede ver mucho cambio. Simplemente no existen. Si te vas, fingir que no tienes ningún conocimiento previo de cómo se formaron las especies. Ir con una mente en blanco. Luego tomar un buen aspecto. ¿Qué crees que te deben ver que no.
stevebee92653 3 months ago
@clementedelacuadra What is a Creat? You, in typical indoctrinate fashion, think you are talking to a religious person? Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not. Further evidence of severe indoctrination on your part. "If he isn't A, well then he is B". Well, I am not A or B.
When you tell your fellow indoctrinates they laugh...my, how embarrassing for me. I'm so hurt. boo hoo I hope I can recover. I'll just have to try. I hope your fellow indoctrinates have better thinking skills than you. do.
stevebee92653 3 months ago
@clementedelacuadra You believe those cartoon drawings from 1910 are REAL? Es bueno para usted. Creo que personas crédulas son más felices. ¿Verdad?
stevebee92653 3 months ago
@clementedelacuadra "How was this eye created?" Don't know. "When?" Don't know. "By whom?" Whom? You assume a personage. You mean the source? Don't know.
Neither do you or any person who ever walked the earth. There are certainly lots of people who foolishly think they do know. Like you.
IC was "reckoned not to be so?" Not so. Unless yo mean your laughable mouse trap boy, Miller. If you think that disproves IC, try pulling out your PC power cord. Or your optic nerve. Report back.
stevebee92653 3 months ago
different cells pick up light in various degrees of clarity. our eye moves to aim the center at what we need to see most clear. moving eyes is faster and burns less energy than moving the entire head, and turning the head then eyes increases our range of sight. now all animals are like this. owls cannot move their eyes because of their size, they are evolved to capture more light to see at night, thus they have that advantage, but no room for muscles or movement. just a few intelligent examples.
kss341 4 months ago
@kss341 ***not all animals***
kss341 4 months ago
Just because you can't figure out how a human eye works, does not disprove the integrity of the theory of evolution. Just as people once thought the sun revolved around the Earth because they had no evidence to prove otherwise, doesn't mean they were right. Same in your case, you think the 'architecture' of the human eye is impossible, but it doesn't mean it actually is.
tawari6 5 months ago
@tawari6 For your sake, I hope you are joking. If not, your brain is in deep doo doo.
stevebee92653 5 months ago
@stevebee92653 Why don't you try elaborating, rather than telling me I'm stupid. It's simple enough, you can't understand the eye's evolution, that doesn't mean the eye did not evolve. Just because something is beyond your comprehension, doesn't mean that it's untrue. That's all I was saying.
tawari6 5 months ago
@tawari6 If you think, and have been sold a bill of goods that complex utilitarian entities can design and build themselves, and you truly believe that notion, I can't "elaborate" any more. You cannot be helped. My videos should be enough to tell you why. Eyes and cameras don't design and assemble themselves. And your belief that they do goes against everything you have ever experienced. If you choose to believe anyway, as I say, I cannot help you.
stevebee92653 5 months ago
@tawari6 If you think, and have been sold a bill of goods that complex utilitarian entities can design and build themselves, and you truly believe that notion, I can't "elaborate" any more. You cannot be helped. My videos should be enough to tell you why. Eyes and cameras don't design and assemble themselves. And your belief that they do goes against everything you have ever experienced. If you choose to believe anyway, as I say, I cannot help you.
stevebee92653 5 months ago
Its been millions and millions of years, this is definitely possible jackass
dekudude68 5 months ago
@dekudude68 I'm a jackass and you don't even know me? That hurts. Gee, maybe you would like me if you really knew me.
stevebee92653 5 months ago
@stevebee92653 maybe we should meet then?
dekudude68 4 months ago
This guy is fun to watch. BTW Potholer54 said you are in the running so congrats.
Your arguments are so stupid and trivial that I can only inquire about the kind of psychological state one most have to proclaim such drivel. To call it silly is to give it more credit then it deserves, to call it crap just does not go far enough to explain is awfulness.
thesparitan 6 months ago
@thesparitan Instead of ragging like all evollutionauts do, answer the question posed. You can't so your only choice is your evo copy-paste ragging in typical evo-zombie fashion. "Your arguments are so stupid and trivial that........I can't answer them....and....potholer says....and" :-D
stevebee92653 6 months ago
@stevebee92653 That didnt make much sense. How does anything I wrote look copy and paste to you? I just said you are wacko, its not very hard to come up with that idea on my own. If I had copied a sentence from a website then I would understand. Second, I only bring up Potholer because he does very funny videos on people like you, and I think you would probably enjoy being made fun of. Its not that I was usually anything he said as a directive. You will make a good video is all.
thesparitan 6 months ago
@thesparitan Your problem is you are a huge bore. You have nothing of intelligence to say. "Copy/paste" because you say what all other evo-zombies say. You are an indoctrinate, and brain locked. You have no idea that you are, and never will. Sorry. Bye
stevebee92653 6 months ago
interesting why not enable ratings i wanted to like this video
itssaab 6 months ago
Evolution is a fraud. Viruses were created for this hoax to take. In order to turn you into lower energy forms, you are fed and smothered in petrols. Your brain is stunted at birth with vaccines,...although your mother's no better off, so now a smart child is a miracle, and is reliant on "evolutionary science" to hide the fact their poison was rejected. Doc says, "take more meds". Did you know that everything plastic is poison, no matter what they say. Use your remaining shred of common sense :)
drone8888 8 months ago
@drone8888 You’re right. All medicine has managed to do is double our life span. Humanity was much better off at a time when people died painfully from mouth infections and diseases like small pox and polio disfigured and tortured millions.
NotEnoughLions 8 months ago
Well, Im not really sure what you mean by "that type of mutation doesn't exist", so I wouldn't know what to search for. What type exactly? I'd rather hear it from you anyway.
wipetywipe 1 year ago
@wipetywipe For starters, your first comment was extremely insulting, dumb, and not the least bit knowledgeable: "What do you call someone who flunks out of medical school? A Dentist."
Makes you look idiotic. Why would anyone want to waste a minute's time talking to you? Try Google.
The point of this video is how did a fixed "tea cup" eye free itself up to become a rotating globe. Got it? There are no mutations that can do that. So get yourself to Google, and see if you can prove me wrong.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 The dentist joke is from Seinfeld - the anti-dentite episode. Yes, it was at your expense, but it was just a joke. Lighten up.
wipetywipe 1 year ago
@wipetywipe Ah, a joke. Not Seinfeld's best. But a joke. So, OK.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@wipetywipe I guess another good one is, what do you call someone who flunks out of dental school? A biologist!
cheaterfive100 11 months ago
@stevebee92653 I watched the video. Your argument seems to hinge on what you perceive to be the only means by which gradual changes can accumulate - that they occur gradually over 3D space, one cell at a time. Like an eyeball being fully fixed, then partially freed, then completely freed. Why is it impossible for a single mutation to affect the entire surface of the eye all at once? I'm not trying to prove that it IS possible. I just want to know why you claim it IS NOT possible.
wipetywipe 1 year ago
@wipetywipe No mutation has ever formed that could free the eyeball. Or do or make any other complex bio-device. Or any part of one. Ever.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
I can't help but feel people who post videos then disable the comment ratings, delete posts, and disable video voting are scared to discover the majority of people think their videos are weak.
Big thumbs down for the poor logic and science in these videos.
BumJungle 1 year ago
@BumJungle Looks like you are far more eager to grade me than to figure out how eyes freed themselves up and became balls. You are a very typical evo-bore.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 What a suprise - no evidence, just conjecture and insults. Guess that's why you failed in your pursuit in becoming an M.D.
This is why the majority of free thinking, rational minded and intelligently honest people think that people like you are crackpots. Hence why you disable comments. And remove comments. I wonder how this one will last.
I think you need to leave medical topics to those qualified to discuss them in an honest fashion.
BumJungle 1 year ago
@BumJungle Gee, shock of shocks. An insult. That hurts. It worked. I wonder if "those qualified to discuss them in an honest fashion" know how eyes freed themselves up from the fully attached "tea cups" to become freely rotating balls. Ya know, I bet they do. They probably have a good fable on the subject that you will believe. You better do a gullibility check on yourself. You have been fooled. Bye.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Your error is just a failure of imagination. You assume that the small steps in which evolution occurs must equate to small changes in 3D space in each step, like building an earlobe one cell at a time. Cant you imagine a single mutation with a large phenotypic effect, like one that produces more growth hormone so descendants are always much larger, or one in which a connective tissue malfunctions so an eyeball is freed from from its surroundings. Must you be so simple-minded?
wipetywipe 1 year ago
@wipetywipe No, since that type of mutation doesn't exist. Your error is you believe fantasy.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 What type of mutations exist?
wipetywipe 1 year ago
@wipetywipe Try Google or Wiki.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@wipetywipe This is so funny to read, "your error is just a failure of imagination" So that's what evolution is based on, imagination. Imagining things that could happen that there is no evidence to support. Makes perfect sense. Like stevebee92653 said, "your error is you believe in fantasy" cause fantasy originates from imagination.
3zzi32008 8 months ago
@3zzi32008 Viruses multiply and at the same time exhibit tiny mutations. Some of those mutated viruses are immune to the drugs designed to stop them. This is observable and occurring. Try telling a medical research biologist that’s all happening in the imagination. You might be laughed at yourself :)
NotEnoughLions 8 months ago
Comment removed
wipetywipe 1 year ago
What do you call someone who flunks out of medical school? A Dentist.
wipetywipe 1 year ago
i think you fail to grasp how long this took to evolve, millions of years with tiny incremental changes.
kingdan415 1 year ago
@kingdan415 I think you don't think. You accept what someone told you. . I don't care how long it had, eyes couldn't invent and assemble themselves. If you believe they did, good for you. Why bother me?
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 was just commenting really, i respect your opinion, im not going to be one of these people who flame for beliefs
kingdan415 1 year ago
@kingdan415 Good for you. Keep you mind open, whatever you believe. We don't have the answers, and if someone tells you they do, from any source, be very skeptical.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@kingdan415 if u research ur own false beliefs well enough you would realise that some of the earliest forms of eyes in the fossill record dateing to the early cambrian period are also identical to some of the most complex eye structures in existence today
wild0hawk 1 year ago
@wild0hawk What does that say? Eyes appeared fully "evolved" in the Cambrian? You are giving evidence against your apparent belief system. Did you miss the point of this vid? How did eyes free themselves up?
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 there might be a case for devolution, where slight devolutionary changes occurs to some species that inhabit regions that r too awkward for there biological and physical capabilities.Yeh im pretty convinced from wat ive learned that most liveing species were somehow placed on this planet in a very simmiliar form to how they would be viewed millions of years later, allmost all given the capabilities to adapt to varying enviroments wisout really distorting from the orignal design
wild0hawk 1 year ago
Instead of just saying evolution is wrong, how bout you enlighten to how the eye came to be exactly. Without God of course, (with you not being religious) Since you are obviously far more informed than say a biologist for instance
TheEVILutionist 1 year ago
@TheEVILutionist Actually I am far less gullible. Not really more informed. And you of course, know the answer you would get from me, so why ask?
(1) Not natural selection et al
(2) We don't yet know
There. The answer that you already knew you would get.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 I found 3854 peer reviewed papers on pub med and every single one of them offer a far better answer than yours... You can't sit behind your computer just saying all of this evolution stuff is false without offering your own hypothesis! You look like a theist who is blindly and ignorantly denouncing a theory that is supported be evdience in many different fields of science with a predisposed and unfounded agenda. Do you dismiss the theory of quantum electrodynamics with such ease?
TheEVILutionist 1 year ago
@TheEVILutionist You read every single one of them? WOW. Called bullshitting for your belief. Evo-peer reviewed papers are fables, just like the religion itself. I don't dismiss real science. The only fake I know of is evolution. Know of any others?
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 It's fake because the thought of ocular muscles developing through natural selection is hard? Fables? How do you differentiate "real science"? Is it practical application maybe?
TheEVILutionist 1 year ago
@TheEVILutionist Since zero muscles have ever been observed to developed through NS and RM, or any partial steps to that development, I think we can safely say oculomotor muscles didn't either. So what makes you think they did? Someone told you they did, and you believed. Why is that any different than any religion? I differentiate real science by real observability and testability. Since no bio-system of any kind has been observed being assembled by NS and RM, I can conclude quite easily....
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Did you say speciation has never been observed?
TheEVILutionist 1 year ago
@TheEVILutionist No.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 What is speciation to you then?
TheEVILutionist 1 year ago
As I see your video here that you bring up some excellent question to pose to yourself, or to scientists.
Instead, what you do, is to say "we don't have all the answers, therefore, I am going to say that God did it."
Why would you or anyone else make that leap? Why not actually do some research? Why not speak to people that are currently doing research?
It is exactly your kind of thinking that hindered all progress on medicines... because, when people got sick, we all know it was "demons".
PaulinaPaulino 1 year ago
@PaulinaPaulino Evolution is doing now what religion did for hundreds of years. It is a bogus theory that is blocking an honest scientific search. You make an enormous assumption. That I am religious. You are way off. I gave that up long ago.
The questions I pose are available and answerable for any scientist if they can. But they cannot be answered in the light of evolution. Not at all. Not by any human being.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Why? Why can't they be "answered in the light of evolution"? At one time it was said the the earth was flat, and that God said do in the bible, and that was it. And we know how THAT turned out.
Why do you hate science so much?
PaulinaPaulino 1 year ago
You assume that those diagrams show the evolution of the skull and surrounding tissue. This is not the case. The diagram shows the evolution of the eye ball. This tissue was already surrounded by muscle which with small changes could become the muscles that move the eye. Eye tissue is vulnerable so we evolved lids and sockets to protect it from damage. This is the same reason why cave species don't have eyes. They removed the vulnerability cause with no light theres no advantage to eyes.
svenypoodles 1 year ago
@svenypoodles Astounding. Amazing what evolution will do to people and their trainers get them to believe. "With small changes could become the muscles that move the eye"? You better get some schooling.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 You criticize others for not engaging in a discussion, but then you dismiss me with a condescending comment lacking any substance. I had the respect to address your argument, but you responded by attacking my education and insinuated that I had succumb to some sort of brain washing. Do not pretend that you wish to engage in a discussion when you are so arrogant as to not even indulge in the idea that you may be wrong. You are a close-minded hypocrite. I'm done with you.
svenypoodles 1 year ago
@svenypoodles He did exactly the same thing to me, Sveny, he has no argument, no facts, lies and/or distorts facts. His response to me when I challenged him was:
"@PaulinaPaulino You need some education. You are over you head, but trying real hard. ... I hope you're not on something."
PaulinaPaulino 1 year ago
@PaulinaPaulino You need some education. You are over you head, but trying real hard. ... I hope you're not on something."
stevebee92653 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stevebee92653 You criticize others for not engaging in a discussion, but then you dismiss me with a condescending comment lacking any substance. I had the respect to address your argument, but you responded by attacking my education and insinuated that I had succumb to some sort of brain washing. Do not pretend that you wish to engage in a discussion when you are so arrogant as to not even indulge in the idea that you may be wrong. You are a close-minded hypocrite. I'm done with you.
svenypoodles 1 year ago
love the music
and it's good to know you took the time to research about the current eyes we have
sad how you are so confused about evolution, but hey at least you try :)
good luck in your search for enlightenment
sabin97 1 year ago
great video, many thanks.
algadykhalifa 1 year ago
and ofcourse ratings are disabled just like on every other creationist video because they know nobody cares about their bullshit. creationists cant handle the criticism they only want others to listen to their own shit.
EtaCarinaez 1 year ago
@EtaCarinae "and ofcourse" they are disabled to get rid of gullible indoctrinates who waste time and space and who have absolutely not a thing of interest to say..... like you!
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653
the rating system is just a thumbs up or thumbs down so how could anyone waste your time by saying something thats not interesting when the only action involved in rating a video is pressing a button.
nice try anyway, you might want to disable comments as well, that's what most of your creationist friends do these days. oh that's right, any view that doesn't agree with yours is 'a waste of time'.
well fuck you then
EtaCarinaez 1 year ago
@EtaCarinaez Oh, gee. I wonder what rating you would give me. What a laugh. You can't converse intelligently about what's in the vid. You are nothing but a brainless troll. So, scoot! Shoo! Bye
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@EtaCarinaez BTW, where is your channel? I always like to see what kind of channel gullible people like you have. Your comments are by the dozens of dozens. Over and over. That's why comments get disabled. Waste of time. I don't disable. I love to watch evo-indoctrinates make fools of themselves like you already have. Saying "fuck you" on this venue only makes you look stupider, and hurts no one. The fact that you have no idea what's in this vid makes you look DUMB. One more shot, then bye.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653
you and your video are surely going to change the future of mankind because you've got some super important information that will change our views of evolution completely. have you received an oscar yet? because apparently you just made a discovery that will change 200 years worth of scientific study. Oh wait you haven't even been contacted by anyone? I wonder why that is.. anyway have fun making youtube videos. don't forget to disable comments next time
EtaCarinaez 1 year ago
@EtaCarinaez Yes, two Oscars! What indoctrination does to people will never cease to amaze me. Not going to finish with a very scientific fuck you? "Smatter wit ya? Bye
stevebee92653 1 year ago
you say that its impossible to evolve the eye but yet it has already happen. so tell me should i rip my eyes out because it may offend god all mighty with the fact that i have eyes but yet i shouldnt have evolve them. people like you only really argue about this do to error or to hear your self talk. >:-(
ForTheLoveOfBlue 1 year ago
@cheaterfive100
/watch?v=LObuQhCozCo
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
As the eye became more complex and there was an increase of nerves to send signals to the brain, the extra nerves crowded inside the retina on top of the sensors instead of underneath as in invertebrate animals and the nerves way to the brain is through a hole in the retina which cause the blind spot in our vision. Plus six muscles are used to move the eye when three is sufficient to do the same job and the retina is inside out. Not deliberately designed-- designed by natural selection.
pwnUgood 1 year ago
@pwnUgood I hope for your sake your kidding. If not, you hold the world's record for gullibility.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
If you look at the formation of the eye, the rotational eye is clearly more advantageous to any complex organism such as humans or horses, chameleons etc. The muscular ligaments of the eye would be needed to move the eye in the first place to form a convergent pov. I think if you took the time to study developmental biology or biophysics, you would understand evolution much better.
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
@pSychOAtDawn It's advantageous ergo it was invented assembled and constructed by NS and RM? So in your mind anything that is an advantage evolved into existence? If you took the time to study this vid you would wonder how a fixed eye evolved into a rotational ball with six muscles, blood, and nerve systems that attached themselves to the ball to move it. Next you would figure out that that scenario cannot evolve in small steps. But you won't because you are a believer not a scientist.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 A mutation that turns out beneficial, as would a rotating eye instead of a stationary image of an eye, would be more advantageous to an organism in nature. Some organisms have expressed the mutation and capitalized on it's genetic success through generations of reproduction. I seriously think the eye evolved before we had necks that could even turn. Rationalize it. The six muscles would come, not at once but in series. Organismic evolution is a gradual process, not an impatient 1.
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
@pSychOAtDawn What I love about evolution: It makes story tellers of all believers.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 I said rationalize it. I'm not telling you a story. I'm giving you reasons. These aren't metaphors you're dealing with.
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
@pSychOAtDawn You're telling me a story that someone told you. You just don't realize it, and you never will. You are indoctrinated and therefore impossible to argue with. You aren't sharp enough, due to said indoctrination, to see the absurdity in you explanation.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 I'm not telling you a story. I've rationalized this from the 2 years that I've learned basic developmental biology and chemistry. You are the one that is denying all reasoning to just "believe". By being somewhat critical about evolution, you've just helped scientific minds reinforce what they know about the wonders of evo and how it makes sense. You've given up and categorized me in the "indoctrinated" section just to discredit me. Nice. Show's your arrogance, my friend.
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
@pSychOAtDawn You relay absurd stories you have made up. You don't think on your own. I pose a problem here on this vid of the steps from the fixed "tea cup" eye Eugenie says was the beginning of eyeballs to the free and rotating eyeball. You can't even consider or address that problem of THE STEPS. Why? Pretty basic challenge. You act as if it's invisible. I ask reality. You shun it. So what's the point in discussing? So tell me how the freeing of the eyeball occurred according to evo.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Guilty of doublespeak right there in the first two sentences. The steps to an eyeball are clearly gradual!!! It's not like they appeared magically in hours. This kinda biological development obviously takes time. A baby needs 9 months to grow from a piece of shit cell to a complex organism. You can look at a baby fetus and look at the steps a baby's cell's took to form an eyeball. Duh! Think using REAL life situations! I seriously don't have the time for this right now T_T *smh*
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
@pSychOAtDawn My gawd. Think of a fully attached cup freeing itself to make a loose and rotating eyeball. Would at 10% freed eyeball do anything but be just as stuck as a fully attached eyeball? I love the "DUH". This is obviously WAY over your head. So believe away. A fetus is your comparison? You are not smart or educated enough to even think about this stuff. I feel bad for you. Bye.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
Comment removed
michaelpettet164 1 year ago
Hmm... Well I guess if you're too lazy to go to school and get an education I guess there's nothing wrong with getting your facts out of a book that was written by a bunch of cave dwelling drug crazed hermits (ie... The Bible!). If however you are curious about how the world works then maybe you'll quit blaming god for everything and realize just how fascinating and complex nature really is and maybe appreciate our place in it a bit more... We are ALL related.
michaelpettet164 1 year ago
The eye is a complex thing.
Therefrore god exists.
That makes sense.
mycatistigger 1 year ago
@mycatistigger Why do you evos insist on making yourselves look so dumb. There are points in the vid that you cannot address, not even one, so you play the religion card. Well, I am not. So you look dumb there. As well as in the fact that you can't address the challenges in the vid. So dumb. sigh
stevebee92653 1 year ago
Hey, evolutionists, does bone marrow need red blood cells to exist? Or can it exist without red blood? Or let me ask this instead: Which came first, bone marrow or red blood cells?
greaterdebater 1 year ago
Questions for the evolutionists among us...and I know this is a hard one for you, so it's OK to take your time...soooooo...here it is: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
greaterdebater 1 year ago
@greaterdebater the egg came first, so did the red blood cell. If you look at it through the eyes of gradual, biophysical evolution, the red blood cell had to come first as any other cell cannot form an organism or organ without a cell. The egg came before the chicken as well, as you cannot start from an organism and then form a cell. All life evolves from it's most simplest form; a cell.
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
@pSychOAtDawn So, the red cell evolved and looked around and said, "hot damn, I need a heart, some veins and arteries, some brothers & sisters (white cells) - I've got to talk the other cells into evolving these body parts. Might as well evolve skin, bones, liver, lungs stomach, sex organs as well so I can circulate and bring nutrients & oxygen to these organs". But if there were no hearts, lungs, livers, skin etc anywhere on the earth, why would a red cell evolve? Just for the hell of it?
cheaterfive100 1 year ago
@cheaterfive100 No these adaptations came gradually in our universe. Most likely these simple cells started in water as most of our bodies still require huge amounts of it. The cell, a complex and precise ratio of certain natural and abundant elements, then started consuming other smaller complex cells through a process called phagocytosis. It was then possible to adapt some of these organelles to itself; eg. Mitochondria.
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
Comment removed
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
Comment removed
pSychOAtDawn 1 year ago
Well done Steve. I've always wondered this point and I'm glad to come across your video. You probably could have added that all the nerves and blood vessels were bundled into one convenient harness in preparation for the eye to detach itself from the surrounding tissue. I'm wondering if any darwits can think of a scenario where and why this would be selected...(I wouldn't hold my breath though)
gmh1206 1 year ago
@gmh1206 Thanks! I kind of broadly cover the nerve/eyeball conundrum in Part 1: Eye Evolution: It's Impossible. Mind boggling to think how these entities came together.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@gmh1206 Yep, jebus made the eye and he made it perfect. The blind spot of the eye is apart of Jebus' master plan too. And sometimes the retina tears, but that is something Jebus wanted to happen to test their faith. Oh, and as a person ages, his eyesight gets worse, causing billions of people around the world to have to wear glasses. This problem is a perfect edition, perfectly placed into the perfect design of the eye by Jebus. One more thing - sometimes people are born blind. Thx Jebus!
blucas6 1 year ago
@blucas6 My gawd, how dumb can you be.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@blucas6 My goodness, with NS and mutations, you'd think by now the eye would be perfect. No blind spots, no glaucoma, no blindness, all due to the wonderful world of evolution. In fact, due to evo, cancer should be gone by now along with M.S., cerebral palsy, and a host of other horrible deseases. Yay NS and mutations. Thank you Charlie Darbin.
cheaterfive100 1 year ago
@cheaterfive100 And if a supreme being created us in her likeness, we wouldn't have all of these imperfections either. Seems no one knows how the eyeball formed. At least evolutionists are presenting a plausible theory.
coolronification 1 year ago
@coolronification Then you should go with the "plausible theory". I'll stick with we don't have a clue.
cheaterfive100 1 year ago
@blucas6 definitely sad how some people will resort to mockery since they have no intelligent way to refute sound reasoning. also sad how people refuse to give Jesus credit for things going well, but are quick to blame Him when things go wrong. all part of the Christian-bashing agenda I suppose.
greaterdebater 1 year ago
@blucas6 And the temporal nature of a design doesn't exclude a designer does it now? The eye surpasses any human made camera eg 10 billion to 1 contrast ratio, sensitive to a single photon, auto focus, cleaning, repairing, assembling and the clincher for me is that it is algorithmically encoded on a piece of material (DNA) weighing less than 6 picograms. Furthermore, a high bandwidth signal at 30 FPS and 150 megapixel res is encoded on 1 million low bandwidth nerves. Thank you Jesus indeed!
gmh1206 1 year ago
I like your video, it has common sense. Darwinism is no longer science, its a religion that is interested exclusively in maintaining itself.
Everyone who dares to question evolution is being badmouthed and flamed all over youtube. I get the feeling that this is turning into something like a second inquisition.
Aerensiniac 1 year ago
@Aerensiniac You are right on. Thanks. Amazing how this fake is forced on us all. If you didn't get it in school, TV nature shows will get you.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
Wow stevebee I was in the process of creating a video a lot like this one to respond to that air head eugenie scott when I came across yours. I like all the videos you have to select from. GREAT STUFF and It would be a miracle for anyone to argue these from a scientific standpoint but as you know, Miracles can and DO happen else what would life itself be. Some cosmic coincidence? Ooops, wouldn't want to piss off the darwits would we. After all they are the "Philosopher Kings of Science"! heh
Ultramediacorp 1 year ago
@Ultramediacorp Thanks for the compliments! So nice to get get a good comment. 90% are darwits. No science but repeated dogma. Natural selection invented and assembled EVERYTHING!
stevebee92653 1 year ago
Why do you post questions in YT videos instead of trying to look up answers yourself?
MidgardEagle 1 year ago
@MidgardEagle You some sort of mind reader? How do you know what I looked up or didn't? I try to get people to think. Not much luck yet, as you have shown.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
The eye is actually part of the brain, so the more interesting question would be, how did immobile light sensitive cells on the outer layers (skin?) of an organism end up becoming part of the brain system? There are actually muscles in the eye that allow it to rotate so the horizon always appears level. Just think how many critters had to endure falling over all the time before they got THAT right!
PZG4SS 1 year ago
Pathetic. You can't see what the advantage is of being able to move our eyes around and focus light from any point in our visual field onto the most sensitive part of our retinas? And, as to the muscles, there were probably muscles attached to the skin for other purposes (perhaps a more rudimentary way of moving the eye or squeezing the cup shut) that gradually became what they are today as the eye acquired greater freedom of movement.
jodiebug1 1 year ago
The solution is simple given that eyes also exist on stalks in the case of crustaceans. The fact is, an "eye" can develop anywhere, at any time. It's that simple a piece of equipment.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone You are in serious need of an education.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Actually, no I'm not.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone Do you really believe that something as fantastic as an eye can just develop anywhere? That its just a simple piece of equipment? I'm no scientist but I'll have to put that in my notebook of completely goofy statements.
cheaterfive100 1 year ago
@cheaterfive100 Do you have any other explanation for the fact that they have done just that? Starfish for instance have an eye on the end of each arm. The conch has eyes on the end of it's tentacles and scallops have rows of many eyes which can be regrown if lost to accident or predator. If they do grow anywhere (they do) and can be regrown (they can), what's the problem? Next time you want to log a "goofy statement" try logging actual goofy occurences instead, you'll learn more.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
More invincibility of ignorance...
pontecanis 1 year ago
A greater insult to nature is the idea that God planned everything and nature was not involved.
outatime333 1 year ago
@outatime333 No God argument here, sorry. Only real science. Natural selection couldn't possibly do the job science says it did. And if you believe it did, have at it. Believe away.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 You have a better explanation I presume?
outatime333 1 year ago
@outatime333 Oh, much better. And honest. Nothing made up. No natural selection magic, or god magic.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 So what's this better explanation?
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone It's the only explanation. "We aren't within light years of figuring it out.." The notion that non-occurring miraculous mutations, and animals selectively procreating, killing, and dying being the source of complex visual systems isn't even in the realm of fantasy. We can't admit that we don't know. Humans are too conceited. And evolution will spend hundreds of years blocking a really scientific search for the true MO. It sure isn't natural selection.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Let me make sure I understand you. You're saying that the only explanation is that we have no Idea how it works? ... That's fairly innofensive, I suppose. Although, I'm afraid I'm not as skeptical as you are about current scientific theory, I suppose I could buy that one. A light year, by the way is a measure of distance, not time. Just trying to help.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone No idea how nature formed. Roger that. You get credit for being a rare open minded evo. Of course I was using LY as a mataphor.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
"I wondered why those tiny arms on their magnificent T. Rex fossil didnt evolve a lick in millions of years. Wouldnt a T. Rex with bigger arms be a better grappler?"
Wouldn't you consider concentrating on traits you regard as unsophisticated - like the arms of T. Rex - as casting doubt on evolution, while ignoring highly sophisticated traits - such as the massive jaws, teeth, and hindquarters - highly supportive of evolution - as being just a tad selective in your evidentiary focus?
PatchesRips 1 year ago
(cont'd)
... - how do you account for the fact that modern animals are absent from strata contemporary with T. Rex? Where did they come from, and how? What's your explanation?
PatchesRips 1 year ago
Now, I'm curious. If you deny the guidance of a creator, and you deny the principles that underpin evolution, then I would like to know by what principles you do ascribe the diversity of life on Earth. Given that you're comfortable with long time scales - accepting the existence of T. Rex, for example, and allowing him "millions of years" during which he somehow failed to achieve an upper body musculature rivaling Schwarzenegger's...
(cont'd)
PatchesRips 1 year ago
Comment removed
PatchesRips 1 year ago
Comment removed
PatchesRips 1 year ago
Comment removed
PatchesRips 1 year ago
"Imagine us as two year olds who are trying to figure out the engineering and assembly of a 747."
Why would the speculations of anyone, two-year-olds included, on the nature of 747s be considered analogous to an investigation into the principles driving the diversification of life when A) 747s do not reproduce; B) they do not pass along traits to the offspring they don't create; and C) they do not undergo mutations to the traits they don't pass along to the offspring they don't create?
PatchesRips 1 year ago
@PatchesRips Astounding. You just don't get anything.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Did you see his comments to me? Dude just doesn't have a clue. Dawkins' over-simplified, generic diagrams fail to show how utterly fantastic the eye actually is. He thinks it'd be more efficient with a verted retina, and a mechanism to produce UV-blocking chemicals to obviate the problem the inverted retina and the choroid layer obviates quite simply and beautifully...without hindering vision one bit. Wonder if Dawkins ever told him about "Müller cells".
PZG4SS 1 year ago
@PZG4SS I love the " eye is a bad design" thing. The most incredible design imaginable, the most incredible functioning bio-device is "bad design". What a laugh. Patches doesn't get anything. But he is in a long line of indoctrinates. So he shouldn't feel too bad. He has lots of company.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 Indeed. The trouble with being indoctrinated is that you don't know it's happening, but that's the whole point!
I wonder what his take is on the enzyme your lungs produce in order to counteract the surface tension of water...without it, we'd suffocate to death very soon! That's somewhat of an "either-or" situation....hard to explain with evolution. It would have needed to work perfectly with the proto-lungs straight from the beginning or else evolution stops dead, literally.
PZG4SS 1 year ago
"the idea that selected mutations can form and cause the design of incredibly complex electromechanical organs and bio-devices is no more than wishful fantasy."
Why, Steve? What mechanism do you propose that would prevent the accumulation of beneficial mutations over geological periods of time that would yield the results you mention? Aside from your own personal incredulity, you haven't said WHY you feel this is impossible.
PatchesRips 1 year ago