If god created everything then what created god. can something come from nothing. well.....nothing IS. you can not have something that is truly nothing because nothing is something. deep down there will always be something. knowing this, that means anything is possible. It is possible that a higher intelligent being did created our universe but at the same time it is possible that we evolved here. it is possible that both happened. it is possible that we're just in a dream going to wake up 1 day
If God doesn't exist, then I challenge every person in this world to make the sun rise from the West and set in the East..... Why can't we stop death?
Or why don't we know our death date?
Why can't we measure a dream or how much love a couple has towards one another?
Evolution probably is intelligent design. Religions created by man are wrong and as humans we will never have the ability to understand our creator because it something outside our capacity to percieve and concieve with our senses and minds, that we obviously weren't designed to understand. One must arrive at thier own personal understanding of GOD and then he is able to worship without needing validation.
2:30 Recall that your Lord said to the angels, "I am placing a representative on Earth." They said, "Will You place therein one who will spread evil therein and shed blood, while we sing Your praises, glorify You, and uphold Your absolute authority?" He said, "I know what you do not know."
"this system (smell) can obviously not be the result of a series of coincidences" (because its so complex)----GUYS, THIS IS THE ARGUMENT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO UNDOUBTEDLY SWAY US ALL INTO BELIEVE IN CREATIONISM!!! hahahaha what a feeble attempt.....how about trying to provide actual legitimate evidence instead of just making unsupported claims!!!
In order to understand the un-understandable you have to think outside the box. The Creator of the universe would obviously have to be a being way beyond our understanding. Not bound by the physical realm we exist in. Not being bound by the laws of time gravity and space because He set these laws and He was before them. Open your eyes and you will see He is real and believing in darwinism actually involves more blind faith than actually believing in the Lord of the Earth. The God of the Bible.
In order to understand the un-understandable you have to think outside the box. The Creator of the universe would obviously have to be a being way beyond our understanding. Not bound by the physi
In order to understand the un-understandable you have to think outside the box. The Creator of the universe would obviously have to be a being way beyond our understanding. Not bound by the physical realm we exist in. Not being bound by the laws of time gravity and space because He set these laws and He was before them. Open your eyes and you will see He is real and believing in darwinism actually involves more blind faith than actually believing in the Lord of the Earth. The God of the Bible.
Clearly designed, just like many other parts of the human body, including the cell.
Every time the Drawinist views a video like this, he dies a little inside. For you see, he knows what he'll never publicly admit - that genetic mutation + natural selection is a very unconvincing argument to explain such complexity.
Essentially the study is erroneous and omits selection, mutation rates and is obscenely old. The way some mathematicians use probability in evolution is disgraceful, most of it's usage to try to falsify evolution is incomplete, utter nonsense or misused.
scienceminded, The mathematicians assumed that only one out of 1000 mutations are favorable. Not considering the effects of the 999 harmful mutations, they still showed it to be mathematically impossible for evolution by mutations and natural selection alone to account for all of the various forms of life living on the earth today, even allowing for six billion years of evolution or,for that matter,36 billion years.
Not withstanding it also ignores selection, that the reproduction of these organisms with beneficial mutation is increased and the bad mutations taken out of the population over time, the neutral mutations can add non-coding or junk DNA that can be used to form regulatory genes or new proteins.
I'll save you the trouble. The fact that God did create the Universe, Earth and man is irrefutable. Satan has done a very clever job of creating false religions, false science theories and man believes; with only a four dimensional capacity to understand a supernatural universe, that he undestands this is almost silly. Soon, this will be revealed with no doubt in anyones mind.
Can I quote you on that? Remember false witness is a sin my friend, I wouldn't want to make you into a hypocrite so retractions are considered repentance here.
:) not what I "ded". Its what we all have done. It will become interesting to see the events as they unfold. Granted, there is a lot of faith that is involved, which is contrary to you and I as humans...no matter what we believe. Faith goes beyond science and what all of us use as a way to judge and investigate our world.
I have seen no evidence faith is other than belief in something without evidence, which is really rather disappointing. I was perplexed at why everything would change in an hour, (if I understand you correctly) you full well knew it wouldn't be so because that violates scripture (paradox-you don't know so it could happen) so is essentially a lie. The 'catch' is the time frame but you provided one hour.
HFD's posts are informative, I think this is still Harun Yahya. The thing is HY never shows any evidence thereof for a creative design or process or evidence for any event to back it's belief in the Quran, when I've heard of it trying to defend its side, it just tries to kill evolution, they do it so poorly it is humorous, if they ever made a good counter argument or falsification it still doesn't mean their side is right.
Evolution has logical, but made up terms that obsfucate the truth with concepts that are at best ambiguous and designed to confuse. Evolution is impossible to have occurred as Scientist can't even create the simplist of cells. The theory of evolution was even doubted by Darwin as he stated that a number of assumptions must be made for it too work. The truth will come out and there will be nothing that non-believers will be able to do about it.....
It is in fact not dependent on our ability to produce a cell for evolution to occur, if you are one who believes mutation can't information that increases the genome or speciation doesn't occur I have news for you. What made up terms? Darwin knew nothing about genetics so please stay with arguments from this century.
Scienceminded....to a certain extent you are correct that this is not dependent on whether or not scientist can make a cell. However, Mutations are not progressive but they are missing a key code. The LIE is that mutations are a part of evolution. Big Lie. The terms in Evolution are made to fit the fake processes they come up with. This century has put smoke and mirrors with the evolution lie.
How are mutations not part of evolution exactly. If you want an example of information that complies with information theory being produced by mutation I can cite one.
A group of evolutionary mathematicians held a symposium at the Wistar Institute, the report of which was published under the title Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution. Mathematicians and a group of evolutionary biologists met to make presentations on natural selection and mutations.
Apparently you don't understand epistomology. How can you not believe what you know is true? It makes no sense to disbelieve what you know. As for fact. Evolution is a theory based upon facts. Facts are absolutely true and do not change. For example, the fact that I ate stuffed cabbage for lunch on april 11 will always be true. The theory of evolution however, is under constant revision. Evolution is not a fact, the individual pieces of evidence are.
furthermore, we must make it clear what we mean by the word "fact". in common rhetoric, no direferenct to where this "fact" came from or why it is indeed consideed a "fact". In Science the word "fact" means something different than in philosophy. In science a fact "is an objective and verifiable observation; in contrast with a hypothesis or theory, which is intended to explain or interpret facts."(wikipedia). I genrally prefer the philosophical definition as some might already notice.
Finnaly, its worth pointing out that even in scientific terms, strictly speaking evolution is not a fact. Portions of it may actually be verifiable observations, but we are discussing th e theory on the whole, including not only so called micro evolution, but also macro evolution. No one has ever actually witnessed a population of monkeys evolve into a population of humans. Instead they look for bones and make conjectures. This is not science folks. This is history.
"or writing fairy tales" quite probably, I think you do understand though that empiricism deals with repeatable direct observation only. When one uses evidence from the distant past, especially evidence that cannot be reproduced under controlled conditions, one is no longer able to use empirical methods of inquiry. Instead one must use legal/historical means. History is full of myths, legends, facts and fiction. Historians spend their lives trying to figure out what really happened.
Each historian has a different answer a different idea. Oh there will be concensus on some things. But, science is supposed to be empirical. Scientists once took pride in their reliance on the scientific method. Apparently science is not so important to scientists these days. There are historians, and anti theist hate mongerers who pass themselves off as scientists and claim to base every last word of what they claim as truth to be based on science. Who is holding them to a higher standard?
actuly 2 plus 2 is 4 is a fact not something we Believe I suggest you think about it before you make Crack pot Posts about beliving in none facts.
Fact is Evolution is 99% titanum solid I Believe you need wake as You are asleep. see the Diffrence. Truth is You think you know the Unknown we Know what we Know and Know what we Dont as in we Dont know. Fact Not a beliefe. Come out of The Cave Man you are Deluding PPL into Ignorance of belief of Unknown over Fact!
I cant believe that you don't believe that 2+2=4! Please by all means read up on epistemolgy before you make yourself look more foolish. Knowledge implies belief. Of course I half expected as much. Scientists do make the worst philosophers and don't often care much for the sanctity of language or logic. "Fact is Evolution is 99% titanum solid" no thats your opinion. Seems you confuse fact and opinion as well. The rest of what you said after that is complete gibberish.
You Think there is a Power in the Universe that talks to You.I dont have an Oppion on Facts as they are facts. Your delusion of Beliefe in the Unknown is Ignorant and Foolish and Kills PPl. epistemology is theory of knowledge is a branch of philosophy ok I have read and It proves Your beliefe derived from programing is No mach For Truth of Fact.
Your Crazy Beliefs in Nothing, you are Brainwashed to Think you know something that is Clear you dont as you just think it..
Ahh so you did look it up on wikipedia. You still don't understand that to know is to believe. Yet you think I'm the ignorant one. Try looking up what it says on facts. I ripped a quote from wikipedia also when I made a statement about facts. We aren't talking about God right now we are talking about epistemology, empiricism, proof, facts, and truth and what those words mean. Quit trying to change the subject. Please, try to use punctuation and spell check.
"Your delusion of Beliefe in the Unknown is Ignorant and Foolish and Kills PPl" Go ahead and do a criminal background check. You will find I have not killed anyone. Delusions don't kill people, people kill people. "beliefe derived from programing" read it again you didn't understand it. "Your Crazy Beliefs in Nothing" I believe in something not in nothing. True nothingness does not exist (at least according to Aristotle).
"You are aAbuser of childern and cant figure Out why can you" LOL How? Go ahead and fly out to Chicago and ask the children around me what they think of me. I assume that you concede that my "delusion" has not killed anyone. You are changing the subject again. This is a logical fallacy. Apparently you realize you are in over your head on the topic of truth, facts, belief, knowledge, empiricsm, and epistemology.
Not to mention that you were either quite possibly not reading not my post but someone elses as I never mentioned anything about God or being inside a cave man (even gay men these days can't do that simply because there are no cave men anymore). Nor did I claim to know the unknown that you know. Don't try to read between the lines because I never intend for anything to be there in the first place. If you think I am implying something unstated, then you have a vivid imagination.
It started with you saying believe it to be true its a beliefe. I was pointing out it is a Point of fact and has no need for Belief.
I dont Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it.
again you made many posts on that to tell me I was being Foolish I point out again that you have Proved only what I said to start with. we know what we Know and what we dont as it is Unknown as fact is fact. get It. read what you say.
"I don't Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it." you fool! I said read up on your epistemology first. You obviously didn't care to. Look it up on wikipedia. Knowledge is a subset of the intersection between belief and truth. Thus to "know" is to believe but believing is no necessarily knowing. This is something that was understood as far back as Plato. If something is true, you may believe it false or believe it to be true. This is independent of weather or not it is true or false.
"I don't Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it." you fool! I said read up on your epistemology first. You obviously didn't care to. Look it up on wikipedia. Knowledge is a subset of the intersection between belief and truth. Thus to "know" is to believe but believing is no necessarily knowing. This is something that was understood as far back as Plato. If something is true, you may believe it false or believe it to be true. This is independent of weather or not it is true or false.
"I don't Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it." you fool! I said read up on your epistemology first. You obviously didn't care to. Look it up on wikipedia. Knowledge is a subset of the intersection between belief and truth. Thus to "know" is to believe but believing is no necessarily knowing. This is something that was understood as far back as Plato. If something is true, you may believe it false or believe it to be true. This is independent of weather or not it is true or false.
if you read my post I did read it and thats a Fact. I have read and you are in error just sugest a beliefe in theory of knowledge being a branch of philosophy is the same as a Known fact is not its a beliefe.Please wake You are asleep.
Thats not what the wikipedia article says at all. Please, try again. This is a separate issue from what a fact is. Try reading what I said again. Maybe get someone else to explain it to you. I ask you again please respond only in coherent statements with proper punctuation and spelling.
Do you have an example of a test where a process or a law just appeared out of nothing. Poof!
No. It is, in fact, testable that laws have lawmakers and processes have designers. Thus, it is logical that the laws of nature and the process of evolution were Designed.
So, there is testable evidence of God. There is no testable evidence for atheism. I think you have blind atheism.
BANKS CREATE MONEY OUT OF NOTHING,How many of Your great fears have been created out of nothing? Your god came out of nothing Right makes Things out of Nothing right? makes Lots of Sence.The creator has no creator so it's a self-defeating argument wouldnt You say?
You cant prove the Unprovable. Its Unknown what you think you Know you Dont Its a Brainwashed Illusion. YOU are Born into the ready made World and can't see the Truth.Iam a Human Not Athiest its another Religion.PEACE and LOVE!
"Your god came out of nothing", "The creator has no creator"
Anthropomorphic argument. How could God come out of nothing or be created if God has always existed? Your atheistic mentors don't give you good arguments, but you believe anyway?
You have no testable evidence for atheism, but you still believe. Maybe you are brainwashed. My arguments and testable evidence still stands.
Universe, Energy, Plasma so What. I dont Know you dont Know and Labeling it as if you do doesnt make it so.
Iam not an Athiest or cant you read? You Have Flawed arguments about things you pretend to Know. You say God always was. How do you Know?
Testable show me the model or is it you mean its not Known just an idea so I would say that things are Known and Things are Unknown God is a label to pretend to Know the Unknown.PEACE and LOVE!
I said "if God has always existed?" God would not be God if he was subject to our temporal reality. Correct? Thus, it makes no sense to think that God was created. Being created is temporal and God wouldn't be controlled by causality.
You can test that laws have lawmakers. This is uncontradicted and useful for making prdictions. Thus, it is logical that the laws of nature have a Lawmaker/Enforcer.
No the Label is Not Possiable to Prove the Unknown as it has been used and proves Nothing. again show me the Model of this God you speak of> Look around Nothing is as it seems why label ideas to pretend you Know Unless You Think You should as You are programed To. You are Trying to prove I say prove I dont Know I do Know God is a Word To pretend to know the Unknown I do Know that you got this idea from others Brainwashed to pretend. it is still Unknown.
Mathematical infinity, etc., shows us that the super-natural IS possible. Infinity is not able to be realized in our finite world, but it IS theoretically possibe.
It is also testable and uncontradicted that laws have lawmakers/enforcers. Thus, it is logical that the laws of nature have a Lawmaker/Enforcer. Correct?
POSSIABLE IS NOT KNOWN its possiable we are all dead Living in the Light of the past so whats the point. THINK SUPER BE SUPER. THINK DELUSIONAL BE DELUSIONAL!.
Why get hung up on the word "Label"? You are an atheist by definition. Also, by your own definition you are "DELUSIONAL": You have no testable evidence supporting your point of view.
You can test that laws have lawmakers/law enforcers and processes have designers, etc. This is uncontradicted even by YOU. Thus, it is logical that the process of evolution and the laws of nature have a Lawmaker/Enforcer/Designer.
First, you need to provide testable evidence that the process of evolution was not Created. You do know that it IS testable that processes DO HAVE designers. Correct? This is uncontradicted and useful for making predictions.
Darwin said: "...we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator," (Origin of Species, p. 488)
Sticking your head in the sand wont make reality go away.When we stop questioning,we stop thinking.The best way to test a hypothesis is to do everything you can to disprove it,as I have done with the Word God and Turns out its a Word to pretend to Know the Unknown>
You still have no testable evidence. You need to provide testable evidence that the process of evolution was not Created. You know that it IS testable that processes DO HAVE designers. Correct? This is uncontradicted and useful for making predictions.
Darwin said: "...we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator," (Origin of Species, p. 488)
why does there need to be Designer? the process of evolution is routinely studied in the lab with a wide range of organisms. There is no evidence in favour of intelligent design. by your Process the Designer had to be Designed and who was that?it would not be the Designer but rather a design to Design. Now What? if you are Right then The Designer is Not Designing anything it is a construct of Something else. Peace and Love!
So as most creationists they use the word "coincidence", showing that they have absolutely no idea what evolution is about, and looses all credibility in an instant.
There are thousands of videos just on YouTube showing you how evolution is not about coincidences, see those AND THEN see this one. It falls on it's own illogic. Check out videos with Ken Miller, he is a biologist at Brown, and a Chrsitian as well. If you want to know the truth that is.
HFD: I'm not sure I quite got you there ... Do you agree with me that the video is BS. If so, why did you post it?
Random mutations is a necessary process of evolution, but natural selection makes sure the most optimal solutions necessary are achieved and preserved.
HFD: I read the word but assumed you had misspelled "evolution" as evil-lotion did not make any sense to me (I guess you rub it in and it makes you evil).
I disagree with you when you say we cannot see the evolution from simple cells to human beings in the fossil record. And evolution does not need to "increase the information in DNA" just as books don't need to increase the number of pages to have content.
HFD (cont.): God could have done it this way, but I think that if a divine power did it, we would actually see good design. Contrary to popular belief, the design of the human body has several serious flaws that support Darwins "not best possible, but good enough to survive" theory, rather than the "the human body is a miracle" divine design theory.
Theory of evolution does NOT claim that it is a ladder from cells to humans, it is a tree-like, humans and modern day ape branch from single common ancestor.
There are humans born with tails because we still have the gene to make tail, and it is a same gene that mice have. If we were created as separate species, why we have that gene?
If god created everything then what created god. can something come from nothing. well.....nothing IS. you can not have something that is truly nothing because nothing is something. deep down there will always be something. knowing this, that means anything is possible. It is possible that a higher intelligent being did created our universe but at the same time it is possible that we evolved here. it is possible that both happened. it is possible that we're just in a dream going to wake up 1 day
DeadHappyFilm 5 months ago
If God doesn't exist, then I challenge every person in this world to make the sun rise from the West and set in the East..... Why can't we stop death?
Or why don't we know our death date?
Why can't we measure a dream or how much love a couple has towards one another?
sth5desldr 10 months ago
Evolution probably is intelligent design. Religions created by man are wrong and as humans we will never have the ability to understand our creator because it something outside our capacity to percieve and concieve with our senses and minds, that we obviously weren't designed to understand. One must arrive at thier own personal understanding of GOD and then he is able to worship without needing validation.
Rebuilder11 11 months ago
another religious fanatic trying to sale his religious believes masked as "science".
If you want to make a point about religion you should try first a philosophical approach. That might serve you better.
Lesterernesto 1 year ago
@Lesterernesto
thanks for your advise,really i appreciate
so what should be said in a video like this?
i actually do not like the "jumping to the existence of God quickly" argument either
but in a short video like this,how much of theistic philosophy can be mentioned?
regards
HighFlyingDutchman 1 year ago
"Nothing in biology make sense except in the light of evolution" Theodosius Dobzhansky, 1937.
gusanita35 1 year ago
@gusanita35
exactly
to the brains that can not grasp the existence of the intelligence behind the curtain of matter
in fact it still makes no sense for you but you suppose it does
HighFlyingDutchman 1 year ago
You don´t understand what evolution means. God creation? Go to read "The God delusion" by Richard Dawkins. I´m agree with jwardmagic07.
gusanita35 1 year ago
@gusanita35
i do have a copy of the God Delusion by Richard Dawkins,it is actually a good book about showing the illogicality of Christian and Judeo belief
how about reading "The Devil's Delusion" by David Berlinski? which shows how subjective the evolutionist atheist scientists REALLY are
regards
HighFlyingDutchman 1 year ago
Humans are a fucking disease we are a biological monstrosity no god is responsible for this. Without humans earth would be a perfect place.
charlegamer 1 year ago
@charlegamer
2:30 Recall that your Lord said to the angels, "I am placing a representative on Earth." They said, "Will You place therein one who will spread evil therein and shed blood, while we sing Your praises, glorify You, and uphold Your absolute authority?" He said, "I know what you do not know."
HighFlyingDutchman 1 year ago
"this system (smell) can obviously not be the result of a series of coincidences" (because its so complex)----GUYS, THIS IS THE ARGUMENT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO UNDOUBTEDLY SWAY US ALL INTO BELIEVE IN CREATIONISM!!! hahahaha what a feeble attempt.....how about trying to provide actual legitimate evidence instead of just making unsupported claims!!!
feelmydeepthoughts 1 year ago
ahhhhhh! creationists!!!! HIDDEN AGENDA!!!! GET ME OUTTA HERE!!!
feelmydeepthoughts 1 year ago
WHAT DO ENDOCANNABINOIDS DO?
"Relax, eat, sleep, forget and protect"
Dr. Di Marzo
PHYSIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS & CONDITIONS AFFECTED BY ENDOCANNABINOIDS (a partial list)
Appetite/feeding, Blood pressure, Cerebral blood flow, Digestive system, Emesis & nausea, Immune system, Inflammation, Memory, Mood, Movement, Neuroprotection, Pain, Reproduction & Stress
Dr. Mechoulam
EssiacHempLaetrile 2 years ago
nice... Allahuakbar..
raijayzel 2 years ago
This video is highly informational on an educatinoal level, and highly annoying on a religious level.
jwardmagic07 2 years ago
In order to understand the un-understandable you have to think outside the box. The Creator of the universe would obviously have to be a being way beyond our understanding. Not bound by the physical realm we exist in. Not being bound by the laws of time gravity and space because He set these laws and He was before them. Open your eyes and you will see He is real and believing in darwinism actually involves more blind faith than actually believing in the Lord of the Earth. The God of the Bible.
Surgeitalia1984 2 years ago
Leave your imaginary friends at home.
YouTube is no place to solicit your insanity.
ReallyPsilly 2 years ago
I might say the same to you friend
Surgeitalia1984 2 years ago
Comment removed
edmondka 3 years ago
In order to understand the un-understandable you have to think outside the box. The Creator of the universe would obviously have to be a being way beyond our understanding. Not bound by the physi
Surgeitalia1984 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In order to understand the un-understandable you have to think outside the box. The Creator of the universe would obviously have to be a being way beyond our understanding. Not bound by the physical realm we exist in. Not being bound by the laws of time gravity and space because He set these laws and He was before them. Open your eyes and you will see He is real and believing in darwinism actually involves more blind faith than actually believing in the Lord of the Earth. The God of the Bible.
Surgeitalia1984 2 years ago
Clearly designed, just like many other parts of the human body, including the cell.
Every time the Drawinist views a video like this, he dies a little inside. For you see, he knows what he'll never publicly admit - that genetic mutation + natural selection is a very unconvincing argument to explain such complexity.
Not just one or two designs. Dozens upon dozens.
R.I.P. Myth of Macro-Evolution
TheJaredJammer 3 years ago
Essentially the study is erroneous and omits selection, mutation rates and is obscenely old. The way some mathematicians use probability in evolution is disgraceful, most of it's usage to try to falsify evolution is incomplete, utter nonsense or misused.
scienceminded 3 years ago
scienceminded, The mathematicians assumed that only one out of 1000 mutations are favorable. Not considering the effects of the 999 harmful mutations, they still showed it to be mathematically impossible for evolution by mutations and natural selection alone to account for all of the various forms of life living on the earth today, even allowing for six billion years of evolution or,for that matter,36 billion years.
tgambill 3 years ago
I will respond to this in full shortly, but two things I'd like to point out, this was done nearly 50 years ago, and two, most mutations are neutral.
scienceminded 3 years ago
Not withstanding it also ignores selection, that the reproduction of these organisms with beneficial mutation is increased and the bad mutations taken out of the population over time, the neutral mutations can add non-coding or junk DNA that can be used to form regulatory genes or new proteins.
scienceminded 3 years ago
I'll save you the trouble. The fact that God did create the Universe, Earth and man is irrefutable. Satan has done a very clever job of creating false religions, false science theories and man believes; with only a four dimensional capacity to understand a supernatural universe, that he undestands this is almost silly. Soon, this will be revealed with no doubt in anyones mind.
tgambill 3 years ago
How very uninformative.
scienceminded 3 years ago
:), not really, but this will become apparent soon. Everything will change in just one hour. Just remember what I said......
tgambill 3 years ago
Can I quote you on that? Remember false witness is a sin my friend, I wouldn't want to make you into a hypocrite so retractions are considered repentance here.
scienceminded 3 years ago
you can quote me on that..the only catch is the timeframe. Even Jesus himself doesn't know the day or the hour.
tgambill 3 years ago
'Everything will change in just one hour' see now look what you did!
scienceminded 3 years ago
:) not what I "ded". Its what we all have done. It will become interesting to see the events as they unfold. Granted, there is a lot of faith that is involved, which is contrary to you and I as humans...no matter what we believe. Faith goes beyond science and what all of us use as a way to judge and investigate our world.
tgambill 3 years ago
I have seen no evidence faith is other than belief in something without evidence, which is really rather disappointing. I was perplexed at why everything would change in an hour, (if I understand you correctly) you full well knew it wouldn't be so because that violates scripture (paradox-you don't know so it could happen) so is essentially a lie. The 'catch' is the time frame but you provided one hour.
scienceminded 3 years ago
Another inference was the beneficial mutation rate, in studies of low fitness organisms the beneficial mutation rate is at 16%.
scienceminded 3 years ago
another totally excellent video as usual love it. keep up the good work
batmanfan 3 years ago
"My dog has no nose."
-Well, then how does he smell?-
"Awful."
RexNunc 3 years ago 2
HFD's posts are informative, I think this is still Harun Yahya. The thing is HY never shows any evidence thereof for a creative design or process or evidence for any event to back it's belief in the Quran, when I've heard of it trying to defend its side, it just tries to kill evolution, they do it so poorly it is humorous, if they ever made a good counter argument or falsification it still doesn't mean their side is right.
scienceminded 3 years ago
Evolution has logical, but made up terms that obsfucate the truth with concepts that are at best ambiguous and designed to confuse. Evolution is impossible to have occurred as Scientist can't even create the simplist of cells. The theory of evolution was even doubted by Darwin as he stated that a number of assumptions must be made for it too work. The truth will come out and there will be nothing that non-believers will be able to do about it.....
tgambill 3 years ago
It is in fact not dependent on our ability to produce a cell for evolution to occur, if you are one who believes mutation can't information that increases the genome or speciation doesn't occur I have news for you. What made up terms? Darwin knew nothing about genetics so please stay with arguments from this century.
scienceminded 3 years ago
Scienceminded....to a certain extent you are correct that this is not dependent on whether or not scientist can make a cell. However, Mutations are not progressive but they are missing a key code. The LIE is that mutations are a part of evolution. Big Lie. The terms in Evolution are made to fit the fake processes they come up with. This century has put smoke and mirrors with the evolution lie.
tgambill 3 years ago
How are mutations not part of evolution exactly. If you want an example of information that complies with information theory being produced by mutation I can cite one.
scienceminded 3 years ago
A group of evolutionary mathematicians held a symposium at the Wistar Institute, the report of which was published under the title Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution. Mathematicians and a group of evolutionary biologists met to make presentations on natural selection and mutations.
tgambill 3 years ago
Joness is Patcondell Son!
arieyhanz 3 years ago
lol man this looks like 20yr old documentation for schools :D
senjindnb 3 years ago
Interesting video!!
smileyface83 3 years ago
tHANKs :)
HighFlyingDutchman 3 years ago
Intresting for the most part!!
5*****
cherrialbum 3 years ago
This video is really stupid, evolution is not a belief.
ortue 3 years ago 7
if you believe it to be true then this is a belief.
joness105639 3 years ago
No Its a Fact! You dont Believe Facts you Know Them.
Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
Apparently you don't understand epistomology. How can you not believe what you know is true? It makes no sense to disbelieve what you know. As for fact. Evolution is a theory based upon facts. Facts are absolutely true and do not change. For example, the fact that I ate stuffed cabbage for lunch on april 11 will always be true. The theory of evolution however, is under constant revision. Evolution is not a fact, the individual pieces of evidence are.
joness105639 3 years ago
furthermore, we must make it clear what we mean by the word "fact". in common rhetoric, no direferenct to where this "fact" came from or why it is indeed consideed a "fact". In Science the word "fact" means something different than in philosophy. In science a fact "is an objective and verifiable observation; in contrast with a hypothesis or theory, which is intended to explain or interpret facts."(wikipedia). I genrally prefer the philosophical definition as some might already notice.
joness105639 3 years ago
Finnaly, its worth pointing out that even in scientific terms, strictly speaking evolution is not a fact. Portions of it may actually be verifiable observations, but we are discussing th e theory on the whole, including not only so called micro evolution, but also macro evolution. No one has ever actually witnessed a population of monkeys evolve into a population of humans. Instead they look for bones and make conjectures. This is not science folks. This is history.
joness105639 3 years ago
or writing fairy tales
in fact,what evolutionists need is just crock fossils
but species always "ewolwe" perfectly in history
which shows they didnt evolve but created 1by1
or they were "evolved" by a conscious power
regards
HighFlyingDutchman 3 years ago
"or writing fairy tales" quite probably, I think you do understand though that empiricism deals with repeatable direct observation only. When one uses evidence from the distant past, especially evidence that cannot be reproduced under controlled conditions, one is no longer able to use empirical methods of inquiry. Instead one must use legal/historical means. History is full of myths, legends, facts and fiction. Historians spend their lives trying to figure out what really happened.
joness105639 3 years ago
Each historian has a different answer a different idea. Oh there will be concensus on some things. But, science is supposed to be empirical. Scientists once took pride in their reliance on the scientific method. Apparently science is not so important to scientists these days. There are historians, and anti theist hate mongerers who pass themselves off as scientists and claim to base every last word of what they claim as truth to be based on science. Who is holding them to a higher standard?
joness105639 3 years ago
actuly 2 plus 2 is 4 is a fact not something we Believe I suggest you think about it before you make Crack pot Posts about beliving in none facts.
Fact is Evolution is 99% titanum solid I Believe you need wake as You are asleep. see the Diffrence. Truth is You think you know the Unknown we Know what we Know and Know what we Dont as in we Dont know. Fact Not a beliefe. Come out of The Cave Man you are Deluding PPL into Ignorance of belief of Unknown over Fact!
Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
I cant believe that you don't believe that 2+2=4! Please by all means read up on epistemolgy before you make yourself look more foolish. Knowledge implies belief. Of course I half expected as much. Scientists do make the worst philosophers and don't often care much for the sanctity of language or logic. "Fact is Evolution is 99% titanum solid" no thats your opinion. Seems you confuse fact and opinion as well. The rest of what you said after that is complete gibberish.
joness105639 3 years ago
You Think there is a Power in the Universe that talks to You.I dont have an Oppion on Facts as they are facts. Your delusion of Beliefe in the Unknown is Ignorant and Foolish and Kills PPl. epistemology is theory of knowledge is a branch of philosophy ok I have read and It proves Your beliefe derived from programing is No mach For Truth of Fact.
Your Crazy Beliefs in Nothing, you are Brainwashed to Think you know something that is Clear you dont as you just think it..
Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
Ahh so you did look it up on wikipedia. You still don't understand that to know is to believe. Yet you think I'm the ignorant one. Try looking up what it says on facts. I ripped a quote from wikipedia also when I made a statement about facts. We aren't talking about God right now we are talking about epistemology, empiricism, proof, facts, and truth and what those words mean. Quit trying to change the subject. Please, try to use punctuation and spell check.
joness105639 3 years ago
"Your delusion of Beliefe in the Unknown is Ignorant and Foolish and Kills PPl" Go ahead and do a criminal background check. You will find I have not killed anyone. Delusions don't kill people, people kill people. "beliefe derived from programing" read it again you didn't understand it. "Your Crazy Beliefs in Nothing" I believe in something not in nothing. True nothingness does not exist (at least according to Aristotle).
joness105639 3 years ago
actualy If I did check on you then I find Nothing but delusion passed to Others Like Fact and they have passed it like fact and Have Killed.
You are aAbuser of childern and cant figure Out why can you>
Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
"You are aAbuser of childern and cant figure Out why can you" LOL How? Go ahead and fly out to Chicago and ask the children around me what they think of me. I assume that you concede that my "delusion" has not killed anyone. You are changing the subject again. This is a logical fallacy. Apparently you realize you are in over your head on the topic of truth, facts, belief, knowledge, empiricsm, and epistemology.
joness105639 3 years ago
Not to mention that you were either quite possibly not reading not my post but someone elses as I never mentioned anything about God or being inside a cave man (even gay men these days can't do that simply because there are no cave men anymore). Nor did I claim to know the unknown that you know. Don't try to read between the lines because I never intend for anything to be there in the first place. If you think I am implying something unstated, then you have a vivid imagination.
joness105639 3 years ago
It started with you saying believe it to be true its a beliefe. I was pointing out it is a Point of fact and has no need for Belief.
I dont Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it.
again you made many posts on that to tell me I was being Foolish I point out again that you have Proved only what I said to start with. we know what we Know and what we dont as it is Unknown as fact is fact. get It. read what you say.
Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
"I don't Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it." you fool! I said read up on your epistemology first. You obviously didn't care to. Look it up on wikipedia. Knowledge is a subset of the intersection between belief and truth. Thus to "know" is to believe but believing is no necessarily knowing. This is something that was understood as far back as Plato. If something is true, you may believe it false or believe it to be true. This is independent of weather or not it is true or false.
joness105639 3 years ago
"I don't Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it." you fool! I said read up on your epistemology first. You obviously didn't care to. Look it up on wikipedia. Knowledge is a subset of the intersection between belief and truth. Thus to "know" is to believe but believing is no necessarily knowing. This is something that was understood as far back as Plato. If something is true, you may believe it false or believe it to be true. This is independent of weather or not it is true or false.
joness105639 3 years ago
"I don't Believe 2 plus 2 is 4 I Know it." you fool! I said read up on your epistemology first. You obviously didn't care to. Look it up on wikipedia. Knowledge is a subset of the intersection between belief and truth. Thus to "know" is to believe but believing is no necessarily knowing. This is something that was understood as far back as Plato. If something is true, you may believe it false or believe it to be true. This is independent of weather or not it is true or false.
joness105639 3 years ago
sorry for the multiple post, damn earthlink.
joness105639 3 years ago
if you read my post I did read it and thats a Fact. I have read and you are in error just sugest a beliefe in theory of knowledge being a branch of philosophy is the same as a Known fact is not its a beliefe.Please wake You are asleep.
Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
Thats not what the wikipedia article says at all. Please, try again. This is a separate issue from what a fact is. Try reading what I said again. Maybe get someone else to explain it to you. I ask you again please respond only in coherent statements with proper punctuation and spelling.
joness105639 3 years ago
Good replies Joness. Evolution is actually more evidence of God, not less. Let's use paper dolls as an example...
Which takes more intelligence, and planning?
a) Cut out paper dolls.
b) Invent a simple process (like evolution) that will autonomously create paper dolls billions of years later by integrating billions of tiny changes.
equalsexes 3 years ago
Do you have an example of a test where a process or a law just appeared out of nothing. Poof!
No. It is, in fact, testable that laws have lawmakers and processes have designers. Thus, it is logical that the laws of nature and the process of evolution were Designed.
So, there is testable evidence of God. There is no testable evidence for atheism. I think you have blind atheism.
equalsexes 3 years ago
BANKS CREATE MONEY OUT OF NOTHING,How many of Your great fears have been created out of nothing? Your god came out of nothing Right makes Things out of Nothing right? makes Lots of Sence.The creator has no creator so it's a self-defeating argument wouldnt You say?
You cant prove the Unprovable. Its Unknown what you think you Know you Dont Its a Brainwashed Illusion. YOU are Born into the ready made World and can't see the Truth.Iam a Human Not Athiest its another Religion.PEACE and LOVE!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
"Your god came out of nothing", "The creator has no creator"
Anthropomorphic argument. How could God come out of nothing or be created if God has always existed? Your atheistic mentors don't give you good arguments, but you believe anyway?
You have no testable evidence for atheism, but you still believe. Maybe you are brainwashed. My arguments and testable evidence still stands.
equalsexes 3 years ago
Universe, Energy, Plasma so What. I dont Know you dont Know and Labeling it as if you do doesnt make it so.
Iam not an Athiest or cant you read? You Have Flawed arguments about things you pretend to Know. You say God always was. How do you Know?
Testable show me the model or is it you mean its not Known just an idea so I would say that things are Known and Things are Unknown God is a label to pretend to Know the Unknown.PEACE and LOVE!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
So, you believe God is possible?
I said "if God has always existed?" God would not be God if he was subject to our temporal reality. Correct? Thus, it makes no sense to think that God was created. Being created is temporal and God wouldn't be controlled by causality.
You can test that laws have lawmakers. This is uncontradicted and useful for making prdictions. Thus, it is logical that the laws of nature have a Lawmaker/Enforcer.
equalsexes 3 years ago
No the Label is Not Possiable to Prove the Unknown as it has been used and proves Nothing. again show me the Model of this God you speak of> Look around Nothing is as it seems why label ideas to pretend you Know Unless You Think You should as You are programed To. You are Trying to prove I say prove I dont Know I do Know God is a Word To pretend to know the Unknown I do Know that you got this idea from others Brainwashed to pretend. it is still Unknown.
PEACE and LOVE!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
"No..."
Then you are an atheist.
"is Not Possiable"
Mathematical infinity, etc., shows us that the super-natural IS possible. Infinity is not able to be realized in our finite world, but it IS theoretically possibe.
It is also testable and uncontradicted that laws have lawmakers/enforcers. Thus, it is logical that the laws of nature have a Lawmaker/Enforcer. Correct?
equalsexes 3 years ago
IAM a HUMAN not a Label You choose to Call Me.
SHOW ME THE MODEL!
YOU KNOW GOD HOW?
POSSIABLE IS NOT KNOWN its possiable we are all dead Living in the Light of the past so whats the point. THINK SUPER BE SUPER. THINK DELUSIONAL BE DELUSIONAL!.
PEACE and LOVE!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
"IAM...not a Label"
Why get hung up on the word "Label"? You are an atheist by definition. Also, by your own definition you are "DELUSIONAL": You have no testable evidence supporting your point of view.
You can test that laws have lawmakers/law enforcers and processes have designers, etc. This is uncontradicted even by YOU. Thus, it is logical that the process of evolution and the laws of nature have a Lawmaker/Enforcer/Designer.
Testable evidence is on the side of God.
equalsexes 3 years ago
IAM a HUMAN.
SHOW ME THE MODEL!
YOU KNOW GOD HOW?
Remember if You THINK DELUSIONAL You Will BE DELUSIONAL!
PEACE and LOVE!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
First, you need to provide testable evidence that the process of evolution was not Created. You do know that it IS testable that processes DO HAVE designers. Correct? This is uncontradicted and useful for making predictions.
Darwin said: "...we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator," (Origin of Species, p. 488)
equalsexes 3 years ago
Sticking your head in the sand wont make reality go away.When we stop questioning,we stop thinking.The best way to test a hypothesis is to do everything you can to disprove it,as I have done with the Word God and Turns out its a Word to pretend to Know the Unknown>
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
Modern evolutionary synthesis readily observable and highly testable.
NO!!it's all a big consipracy by the devil to send our kids to hell by Disproving god with facts.COME OUT OF THE CAVE.PEACE and LOVE!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
You still have no testable evidence. You need to provide testable evidence that the process of evolution was not Created. You know that it IS testable that processes DO HAVE designers. Correct? This is uncontradicted and useful for making predictions.
Darwin said: "...we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator," (Origin of Species, p. 488)
equalsexes 3 years ago
why does there need to be Designer? the process of evolution is routinely studied in the lab with a wide range of organisms. There is no evidence in favour of intelligent design. by your Process the Designer had to be Designed and who was that?it would not be the Designer but rather a design to Design. Now What? if you are Right then The Designer is Not Designing anything it is a construct of Something else. Peace and Love!
CanadianBeaver 3 years ago
actualy it is highly ttestable...a man in the clouds isnt
jwardmagic07 2 years ago
So as most creationists they use the word "coincidence", showing that they have absolutely no idea what evolution is about, and looses all credibility in an instant.
There are thousands of videos just on YouTube showing you how evolution is not about coincidences, see those AND THEN see this one. It falls on it's own illogic. Check out videos with Ken Miller, he is a biologist at Brown, and a Chrsitian as well. If you want to know the truth that is.
task2k 3 years ago
lol
evolution is not about coincidences yes
but the evillotion is
u need random mutations for the second
first one,which is all about natural selection already exists
peace
HighFlyingDutchman 3 years ago
HFD: I'm not sure I quite got you there ... Do you agree with me that the video is BS. If so, why did you post it?
Random mutations is a necessary process of evolution, but natural selection makes sure the most optimal solutions necessary are achieved and preserved.
task2k 3 years ago
of course i know that
but i wrote "evillotion" in second if u noticed
lol
i mean the evolution theory that claims the ladder from the cell(damn,ok,lets assume cell was already there :omg)to human
which is not supported by objective science
the only thing is the simple to complex history of fossils
which can only support it in a subjective view
also "God may have created them in that order"
too,
what evillotion needs is some random mutations that will increase the information in DNApeace
HighFlyingDutchman 3 years ago
HFD: I read the word but assumed you had misspelled "evolution" as evil-lotion did not make any sense to me (I guess you rub it in and it makes you evil).
I disagree with you when you say we cannot see the evolution from simple cells to human beings in the fossil record. And evolution does not need to "increase the information in DNA" just as books don't need to increase the number of pages to have content.
task2k 3 years ago
HFD (cont.): God could have done it this way, but I think that if a divine power did it, we would actually see good design. Contrary to popular belief, the design of the human body has several serious flaws that support Darwins "not best possible, but good enough to survive" theory, rather than the "the human body is a miracle" divine design theory.
task2k 3 years ago
HighFlyingDutchman:
Theory of evolution does NOT claim that it is a ladder from cells to humans, it is a tree-like, humans and modern day ape branch from single common ancestor.
There are humans born with tails because we still have the gene to make tail, and it is a same gene that mice have. If we were created as separate species, why we have that gene?
Saukko31 3 years ago
where were the bogeys? great video my friend,love and respect scotty and libby:0)
scottytoohottie123 3 years ago
scotty...you ate them.LOL!!
smileyface83 3 years ago
smileyface83 ooooohhhhh that is horrible,love and respect scotty and libby:0)
scottytoohottie123 3 years ago
5stars
world101010 3 years ago
What a great video!!!!!!
Allahu Akbar!
followingmypath 3 years ago
Well... At least the biology part was interesting.
garouHH 3 years ago