@fishingbirb Can you please tell me how having similar genetic coding implies you are of common decent?? Similar cellular processes need similar genetic coding. To transport sodium into a cell you need to same transporter protein regardless if you are a dog or a monkey. You share 80% (or something near to that number) of your genome with a banana. Do you have a common ancestor with a banana?
In response to the description, yes I can. Scientists recently witnessed a bacterium develop the ability to digest nylon fiber, a material only recently made. That requires a genetic mutation adding to the species' traits.
@Jshect If you want to hear real bull shit you should look up Darwinian atheist theologian Dawkins predication on species being designoids not intelligently deigned and for dessert you could go and watch that video where land mammals are shown as magically altering organs and limbs while evolving into whales. We are paying taxes to have that shamanistic bull crap taught in school under the cover of science
This whole speech is a lie all fossils are transitional forms, just like you are a transition from your parents to your children, he also leaves out that genetics confirm common descent. Also evolution is the most validated science in history... Micro evolution,macro evolution there is so much he purposely leaves out ,makes look like a retard. l
No intermediary fossils? We have tons. If you disagree, then i gotta ask: what scientific degree do you hold that make you think your conclusion is more credible than the experts? What accomplishment have you made in that field to demonstrate your knowledge? What papers have you published that highlight your expertise in the area?
I find it funny when Creationists accuse evolutionary biologists of basing their conclusions on some lame "leap of faith", but at the same time they hold faith in the highest regard when it concerns their decision to worship Jesus.
Kids, this man DOES NOT BELIEVE WHAT HE SAYS. He's too smart. I'll give him at least that much credit.
In fact, I think he's SO smart, that he knew ahead of time that he could get up on stage and LIE OUT OF HIS ASS and that a certain segment of the population (ahem.. X-tians) would eat his lies up like a hungry cat eagerly lapping up milk.
What's that say about what he thinks the average intelligence level of a Christian is if he KNEW he could stand there, lie and you'd eat it up? Not much.
Just like Bible talks about heaven, there has to be any observation of such of that world that Bible is suggesting. Huble space telescope did not detected any picture of heaven that Bible described. Nor physical equation proved it. Only Bible says about it. And if Christians wants Bible to be accepted as truth, prove the Bible with science, and mathmatic.
@veracuiz The Big Bang was a non-observed occurrence, but is the accepted theory on how the universe came into existence. Many quantum physicists believe in parallel universes and this too is scientifically non-observable.
Of course it has to be science vs science. If Christian people wants to prove God is exist, they have to show up with some scientific evidence of God. For example, a wikik special material left on Earth which was part of God or any law of Physic that prove heaven. Just claiming that this is from Bible, that does not prove anything. In order for Religion to be justified, Religion also has to become science.
@veracuiz My friend, all the evidence you could ever ask for and more is available and waiting for you if your heart is open. It is this way on purpose, because is there were certain kinds of evidence, there would be no volition involved, and Jesus does not ask you to know and love Him out of compulsion. What we have scientifically, allows us a logical leap of faith, and when we meet Him spiritually, our hunch is confirmed by His presence in us, the power He has that changes our lives.
@jesserotholz No. There are no scientific evidence on Bible. I have searched about that for monthes and researched. Every claims to prove Bible with science are just Bogous. There are no direct evidence. For example this guy is saying that fossile record prove Noah of Arc and Bible? lol What christian people are saying with Bible and science, they are just translating Bible with word of science without reasoning. Even Chritian people are misunderstanding the historical period in Jews people.
@jesserotholz Okay, let's talk about fossil and Noah of Arc. Fossils are already telling us that the Earth is at least more then millions and billions years old. (By radio active decay) When did the Noah of Arc happened according to Bible??? Definately less then ten thousand years right? Earth was form when?? six thousand years ago??(from Bible lol Christians tries to prove Bible with science but only thing they can do is to just fit everything they have to Bible without any appropriate proves.
@jesserotholz And about the character call Jesus Christ, how can you be so sure that Jesus was exact character as written on Bible? First of all, woman cannot get pregnant with out mens' help. Marry got pregnant without any sperms according to Bible. Right? But that is impossible. Bible is telling science fiction or Harry Potter. Magic. lol. If Jesus was really born from Marry without father, then only thing we can think is rape.
@jesserotholz What I'm saying is that if Christians really wants to prove that Mary got pregnant just like Bible says, first you guys need to prove that Egg cell can proliferate into diploid nucleus cell with out fusing with sperm. Or Jesus was monoploidy human living thing?? lol It has to be prove that human can be monoploidy too in order to prove Jesus was really born from Marry without sex.
@jesserotholz But if you ask me do I believe in God, my answer is I don't know. Because there are no scientifically proven that God is exist or not. If God does exist, it is not neccessariily God from Christian. That God could be the citizen from higher dimensional world. Who know? but what I'm saying is that Bible cannot be prove. With Chritian science logic, I can even prove the Harry Potter or Lord of the Ring with Science!! lol
@jesserotholz And do you know what is the best science fiction/ History fiction novel?? It's Bible. Bible is no difference from Lord of the Ring, Harry Potter, Romeo and Juliet, MacBeth, and ect. Christian people are trying to prove Romeo and Juliet with science. Just putting things together without proving it. How funny is that??
Religion is just an enterprise built on lies and ignorance. Ofcourse this guy knows what his saying is untrue but he has built his life around it and is serving his own interest spreading the propaganda. Everyday I am becoming less tolerant of religion and seeing more clearly how corrupt it is for humanity. Christianity needs to die.
@scottclements78 Yup, that's definitely the way to go. Becoming more close minded and assuming everyone who's not you is wrong. Why not throw in some conspiracy theories too! (The Pope was involved in JFK's assassination as was Mickey Mouse and three of the seven Dwarves.)
@PointyMetalObjects There is a line between being "open minded" and "closed minded". That line is called truth and evidence. Christians who are given evidence and truth decide to ignore it to continue to spread their lies are nothing for humanity. No one is more close minded than christians who refuse to accept modern knowledge in support of their bronze age superstition and myths. Open you mind to the truth and imagine what you will. Christianity is a gone era. Fool.
@scottclements78 Regardless of your views, it's a fact that modern science doesn't have all the answers. The Big Bang is a theory, the fossil record is incomplete to say the least since fossilization has specific requirements, and the argument that evolution happens over billions of years is also not something that can be observed. My beef is with the fact you dismiss people who don't think like you.
@PointyMetalObjects My beef is that people refuse to accept the truth. Evidence that we do have is enough. You accept what is written in a book and preached by idiots in a church something with absolutely no substance whatsoever. How can you justify that? While science has explained many things in detail which can be tested. How do germs become resistant to drugs? They evolve resistance through natural selection just as all living things do. Evolution is observed and a fact.
@PointyMetalObjects Sir, allow me to assist with your edification. Just for the sake of argument, let's say the fossil record is immaterial. Organisms can be grouped by sequence similarity via DNA sequence comparison and the resulting phylogenetic trees are consistent with taxonomy. DNA confirmed the paleontological tree of life which scientists had envisioned long before it was CONFIRMED by DNA sequence analysis. Consequently, evolution is one of the most validated theories in all of science.
Honestly where do these people get thie info,complete misconception of evolution, i wonder sometimes if these people know that there lying or if there so far gone they actually believe thier own lies
Beyond belief that in the 21st century there can be such stupidity in the face of facts that have proved the theory of evolution from natural selection to be true.
Hey Strawballs, In a word Bullshit ! You say that Darwin was unsure of the mechanisms to account for evolution ....Yes correct and hardly surprising given his theory was formulated in the 1850s. He may well have said that it would have to wait for future discoveries to validate his theory ...... Erm it has. It called DNA mapping which even without Darwins theory of evolution clearly shows we all have a common ancestry ; from Human to Hydra we are from the same stuff. You Idiot
@jontibloom Having a biochemistry degree, I'd like to interject. DNA mapping allows for base sequences of DNA in a genome to be uncovered. Mapping in and of itself, shows nothing but a base sequence. This sequence can then be compared to other similar sequences in other species, whose gene may or may not create protein/RNA etc with a similar function. Different methods using statistical analysis are used to find to what degree these genes differ. This is called Bioinformatics.
@jontibloom ...even this in and of itself tells us nothing about evolutionary information between the two species, simply how different they are. We then assume Darwinian evolution and look at mutation frequency, which varies in certain bases and certain genes. Using this information, an evolutionary tree can be constructed. DNA mapping doesn't prove evolution, and neither does bioinformatics, though bioinformatics can make of the claim of constructing evolutionary trees. You idiot.
The reason that there was an explosion in evolution is because the conditions on land were not favourable to animal life. All life began in the sea. Algae in the sea produced oxygen which sustained life there. Once plants invaded the land and filled the atmosphere with oxygen, animals could follow. Land provides a greater range of environmental challenges, so adaptation accelerated.
(...CONT) As for fossilisation - it is a VERY rare event that something fossilises since it requires precise conditions. This is why the fossil record is so sketchy, and you tend to find lots of fossils in the same place, since they are subject to the same conditions. Back then, the earth was hot and humid for the most part, so this promotes rapid decay of organic matter. We are lucky to have ANY fossils at all. Not to mention the dinosaurs chewing everything up!!!
« Land provides a greater range of environmental challenges, so adaptation accelerated »
Coupla comments:
- Do you have references to any peer reviewed papers supporting the claim that sea-borne evolution produces diversity at a lower rate than land-borne evolution?
- Also, oxygen was already being produced on a massive scale by algae by then. Even today, ocean-based oxygen production exceeds land-based production by orders of magnitude.
@XGralgrathor I am not back-tracking when I say that sea-borne evolution according to the fossil record drove the Cambrian Explosion that gave rise to the majority of the Earth's phyla. What I meant was that land produces different challenges (more rapidly fluctuating temperatures, the potential to take to the sky, more violent weather conditions, greater influence of gravitational forces not negated by the support of the water column CONT
@XGralgrathor Yes, the Cambrian Explosion was the most rapid evolutionary event, but land exerted a whole new raft of challenges that would have required an evolutionary response and forced diversity as everything found its niche. This is my own hypothesis based on my knowledge of evolution. No papers cited.
Yes, the oceans produce a vast amount of oxygen even today, but land based plants make a significant contribution. Cut down a rainforest and see.
@jrv94 here is a question, you state all life derived in the ocean etc.. show how a animal cell could form into a plant cell or vice versa. since the basis of abiogensis is that life arose by the compiling of amino acids forming the first simple cell. for this simple cell to have "evolved" it would have had to have DNA coding in it to be able to produce off spring consisting of animal dna or plant dna.
so it really comes down to the chicken and the egg, in this case, animal or plant
@dathonscholtz Going from a plant to an animal cell is a completely different discussion from abiogenesis. A few simple mutations can take care of the former. There is no confirmws mechanism for abiogenesis but I believe the leading hypothesis is the RNA world hypothesis, which you can look up on wikipedia in 22 hours...
@dathonscholtz Animal cells and plant cells evolved independently. One didn't change into the other. All cells contain mitochondria (with a few exceptions), and plant cells contain both mitochodria and chloroplasts. These are thought to have arisen through some symbiotic relationship (and forgive me because I am rusty on this) whereby prokaryotic cells came to live inside other cells and all benefitted from the relationship. CONT
@jrv94 The whole construct was able to survive and multiply well, but over time, the prokaryotic cells became more specialised and could not survive outside the host. Eventually, these became the mitchodrion and the chloroplast. It is a well established theory called the endosymbiotic theory.
Answer #2: By asking what "caused" it you are begging the question and I don't have to answer it (just being a prick ;)
Answer #3: The universe has always existed
Answer#4: Read a book by someone who thinks they have a scientific answer. This is youtube; I don't study that stuff.
Answer#5: It was a god that I have personally experienced and he is watching children when they masturbate and will punish them for all eternity if they don't apologize for it.
@UpoundBUTTS Science has shown the universe has a clear beginning so no the universe isnt eternal. God can punish for such sins hes God. Anyway that is all God bless.
Many theist macro biologist also believe this god you worship did it thru a natural process.
Lee also lied about the fossil record in this video. We actually have a number of peer reviewed papers on both macro and micro evolution. The only differences between the 2 is time scale. To accept one but not the other is like saying walking to the the bathroom in my house to piss is possible but walking to a gas station to piss is impossible.
@TheMrgoku1985 Now yes there are some processes but science has said that there is a clear beginning and that the universe is not eternal so at one time no universe so what started the universe Question where are these so called transitional forms there would be millions and not just ape to man but for every creature at every so called stage of evolution. In the begining God. God bless.
@TheMrgoku1985 Yeah youre right that also show that it had to start at a defined time and scripture says in Ps 104:2b :Who stretch out the heavens like a curtain. With satelites today we can see that the universe is expanding thus fulfilling scripture.
To rephrase the question: what is the definition of speciation? If we know how to define it then we can start to examine whether there is evidence it has happened over a period short enough to be observable.
So the argument against macroevolution is based on the idea that it happens on too long a time scale for it to be observed, therefore we don't have direct evidence for it. Is that right? Is it also correct that the argument against the origin of new species (speciation) is the same? Do people consider these to be synonymous? How would Strobel define speciation - the event that seems to define the difference between micro- and macro?
This guy is a joke, having a man like this who makes such ridiculous claims in a position of leadership in the church gives christianity a bad name and is frankly an insult to intelligent, scientifically minded christians everywhere. He should be ashamed of himself
@solitaryman098 It is impossible to fully understand a lie. I have put many years into the study of evolution and in my mind, I do not see it to be true.
@TheGreekMan1981 Many years of studying what anti-evolution advocates say or many years of studying what evolution actually is? Do you have a degree in biology? Because it's impossible to fully understand evolution and still deny it. It's a fact, whether you like it or not.
@solitaryman098 So according to you, anyone who has a degree in biology concedes to the theory of evolution as most accept it? That is a fallacy. There are many with a degree in biology who do not accept evolution as fact.
@TheGreekMan1981 It's extremely likely that if you have a degree in biology you'll accept the theory of evolution as fact. I didn't say everyone does. Don't tell me about logical fallacies and then go make a strawman fallacy yourself.
And if by "many" you mean less than 5%, you'd be about correct. The overwhelming majority of the scientific community accepts evolution as a fact. You'll never get over 90% of people to agree on something if it's a matter of opinion. That has to tell you something
@solitaryman098 The majority also taught that the planets revolved around the earth?, if you were sick, its because of bad blood, hence blood letting, When has it become that majority determines truth?
@shakinahstorm You're right, the majority doesn't necessarily indicate truth. But there's a crucial difference between bloodletting/geocentricism and evolution. One was based on urban legends, mythology, and superstition and the other is based on scientific principles. If you have evidence which falsifies evolution, by all means, provide it. Until then you have no case against evolution. Your argument consists of an argument from ignorance. i.e. I don't understand therefore god.
@solitaryman098 Enviromental adaptation is based on scientific principals, enviromental adaptation giving us all of the differant species, sorry but this is nothing more then speculation and assumption. Differant races and breeds YES, differant species NO.
@TheGreekMan1981 Again, my original point stands. Those who argue against evolution don't understand it. Micro and macroevolution is the exact same thing. There is no difference except the scale of time involved. But if you wish to make a point, would you care to identify the mechanism by which an organism stops itself evolving too much?
Oh by the way, I am currently completing a degree in evolutionary biology, so you can be sure I'm taking the time to study evolution in its entirety.
@TheGreekMan1981 Haha, well put. How can he say they are the exact same thing. That is what evolutionists have been doing for years is extrapolating a slight variation in a species to claim that new information can transform a species into a new one. Micro and Macro are COMPLETELY different.
Also, with new research into evo-devo, we now know that the amount of genetic variation required for macroevolutionary change is much smaller than we had previously thought. This is because changes that affect embryonic development, the time that the body plan is being laid out, can cause drastic changes. If you are genuinely interested in the evidence for evolution I suggest you look it up.
@solitaryman098 And this goes for the ex evolutionists who were ranked highly within the evolutionary community???. Sorry champ, but the people who argue against it are awake!
@solitaryman098 Lets get it straight in no way do i feel superior to anyone, its by belief that we were all created equal and that we are all of equal value. You are as much of a champion as i am or the next person. And yes i do believe my last statement to be true.
OOOOkay the evolution of the whale is very well documented and understood.What Lee Strobel is either lying or being extremly uninformed.
The list of scientist (there were very few of them who were biologists) is not much more then a sand corn in the dessert of those who do accept evolution.
@shakinahstorm Reading Carnegie religious conversion to Darwinism it becomes clear that its only purpose is to rationalize atheism, freeing them from moral inhibitions and give its believer comfort by confirming the finality of death. "I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear," Carnegie wrote. "Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better' became my motto, my true source of comfort."
there is evolution but it only goes on a bit(microevolution) then stops.WTF
There is no fossel record WTF has he ever went to a museum There are family trees of most creatures.Mans family tree from fish all they way up to humans he either does not know what he is talking about or he is lying.
@ahhninjadragon You could line up fossiliferous remains to fit just about any evolutionary fairy tale your imaginary could conceive. The dead bones used to support the silly voodoo tale of land mammals turning into whales could be recycled and reorganized to support other fairytales. Atheism and the finality of death are very comforting
The genetic test used to determine relation between people is the same test used to determine relation between species. The genetic evidence amounts to LEGAL PROOF of common ancestry.
As for the list of scientific dissent, even the most ardent evolutionary scientist would have to sign it as evolutionary theory encompasses more than just mutation and random mutation. On the other hand, project "Steve" seems to be having much more success.
@qabala Litteral bullshit. You could use the same tests and conclude to a same creator. There are no apes presently on their way to turn into men and there should be if evolution were an ongoing process as claimed in Darwinian Holy scriptures. Mutation is widely known not to be beneficial thus the term mutant. Monsanto is screwing our crops with his ugly mutants. The theory encompasses a great hope for atheists in the finality of death.
@ozowen I am not a believer in your cult. There is nothing ethical in siding with atheists who are clearly blaspheming God's name only because they share your faith in a Darwinian Genesis. Your acting sanctimonious increases the stench of your Darwinian vomit.
@alexthasy. I note you are posting around the place but refusing to rise to the simple challenge of debating ethically. Is it too far beyond you? I preferred to think not, but will you prove me wrong and be unable to approach the discussion with integrity?
@Darwinsman Ozowen belongs to the theist sect of evolutionism but don't worry he gives no role to a creator God in the magical evolutionary process supported by a law of witchcraft
Lee Strobel is a fool... no I take that back, he's making some serious money publishing his videos and his books. Lots of people take his stuff seriously. Lee Strobel is dishonest and is publishing foolishness from which he is making money.
@ozowen Of course Stobel is doing it for the money. He may be a charlaton, but he's no fool. He's is a shrewd businessman and there are plenty of gullible fools out there just waiting to swallow his crap and swell his coffers.
@Darwinsman Your bone sifters and fairy tale makers are heavily subsidized with our tax money. I saw a little girl maybe 6 or 7 praising her god that had made her evolve from an ape. You are brainwashing them from the cradle and it is working.
@alexthasy Quote: "I saw a little girl maybe 6 or 7 praising her god that had made her evolve from an ape."
No you didn't. No-one in their right mind would allow you anywhere near a young child of that age.
I've been reading comments between you and Honestman395. You do break the 9th commandment constantly.
If I was you, I would be hoping that god doesn't exist. Because you are a prime canditate for Hell, and say that from my training as a minister. Praising him will not be enough.
@ozowen I've already worked that out. Everything that Alex says about anybody else, you can tell that he is judging it by what he would think himself.
I think you're right about him hating education. If he has had any education at all, which I doubt he has, I think he was home schooled by a kindergarten child.
@Darwinsman That is what is called slandering . In your atheist cult you have no moral restraint and are free to engage in any disgusting attacks. Exposing Darwin as a false prophet and his priests as liars, deceivers and all out forgers is not slandering. It is true that kids are being brainwashed almost from the cradle in your cult ridiculous fairytales. I did see that little girl on TV thanking your god for her ape ancestry .
@alexthasy "..you have no moral restraint and are free to engage in any disgusting attacks." Hypocrite!
You slander people every day and have no qualms about it. But you forget, every day you post and every post is an insight into your mind. We all have a good idea about you by now. You're self absorbed, arrogant and believe that your opinion is right no matter what. You know that anything you believe is good and anything you disapprove of is bad. You crave power & recognition
..You cannot accept that anything you say could be untrue so, even if you say something everyone else sees as a lie- it cannot be a lie- they must be the liars to accuse you.
You are completely rational- in your mind. And since you think it, it must be true. You say you are rational- so rational you must be. If anyone challenges your logic- they must be irrational or lying- because you think for yourself and you are always right.
@alexthasy What is slander about not wanting someone like you near young children. I meant that you would pollute their young minds. What were you thinking about?
You were thinking I was accusing you of wanting sexual relations with a young child, weren't you?
Yucchh!!! You really do have a mind that lives down in the sewers.
Since you are always right, since you have opinions that are correct and since you should be recognised as a great mind, it is wearisome that people treat you with contempt. They must be contemptible to do so.
It can't be you can it? You are always right. You are always true. Your insights are great and people should see things from your point of view.
We also know that you fear education. You fear "brain washing" but what that means is having to think, having to explore possibilities and concepts you didn't think up.
It might mean accepting that what you thought was wrong in some way. It means being challenged.
Oh yes alex, we know you.
We know you fear evidence and study because they challenge your inner world. Its balance could be upset by a new thought and you fear that more than anything.
@ozowen Believing in a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary fairy tale has nothing to do with education. It is just a way to blaspheme an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God substituting him with a weird goddess an old fool borrowed to Greek paganism.
@alexthasy Yep, once you get exposed for being the twat you are you always revert back to the same basic nonsense. The entire post is drivel. Would you like me to address each point and rip it to shreds for you?
@Darwinsman An author makes money from his or hers publications, and they automatically become shrewd business men or women?. This is all it is you have offered up, please can i have somthing that indicates his shrewdness?. See this is all to common when a persons beliefs are confronted, character assasination is an indicator of desperation and insecurity, only the cornered feel the need to attack, and its just so AMAZINGLY popular amongst the athiestic evolutionists!
He said science has virtually failed to substantiate macro-evolution. This is not true.Not only has it been substantiated, speciation has been observed, transitional forms are in abundance.
He talks about the Cambrian Explosion and carefully omits mention of the wealth of Pre-Cambrian fossils. This is particularly deceptive and a technique common in YECS.
@shakinahstorm The YECS position is that the Cambrian period is the creation period and they are very careful to deny or omit the Pre Cambrian fossels. I live in Australia and we have a wealth of Pre Cambrian fossils here.
He says how Darwin expected that future dioscoveries will bear out his theory. Strobel claims they haven't- they have- big time.
He compares the bat & the whale. We have a poor fossil history of the bat- but an excellent one for the whale.
@shakinahstorm The ad by the scientists gave the impression that there is serious dispute among scientists. The ad represents less than .05% of scientists. His spin gave a very different perspective.
Finally- he said this was a science vs science issue. A huge lie. On any single scientific Theory there will be dissent. But the level of dissent on Evolution is so small as to be nearly zero. There are bigger disagreements about gravity (which has serious flaws as a theory)
@ozowen See the thing is, all that you have given me here, ire in no way any examples of dishonesty?, youve given many examples of disagreeance but none of dishonesty???. For an example, i like Lee are well aware that any claims of macro evolution being a substantiated science, falls well short of the mark?, I mean if one was to say that its a pile of well substantiated assumptions, its only then that you will finding yaself alot closer to the mark.
You can make that argument perhaps about most of the vid, but not about the 100 scientists. Not at all. That hyperbole is made worse yet when you know that only 20 of the scientists concerned had degrees in a related field to evolution. and
Not all were even degree holding scientists.
But I contest the rest as well. Strobel is a journo- he knows how to research. I say he did so with mal intent.
@ozowen Of course you have a college of Cardinals that submits papers supporting the fairy tales of a Darwinian evolutionary creation that will become article of faith after passing the scrutiny of the holy conclave. They gave us Saint Lucy and the holy relics supporting the absurd tale of land mammals magically evolving into whales after crossing millions of years an numerous species. The Roman church uses the same stystem
@alexthasy "Accusing those of not believing like him" That also is a lie. Alex- you really are the most dishonest piece of shit on these threads. You distort everything you talk about.
Accusing alexthasy of behaving without integrity is my best response to alexthasy- who acts without integrity and logic.
@ozowen I know only of the devil that could be more sleazy and more of a liar than yourself. Pretending to be a Christian while teaming with atheists in blaspheming his name and slurring anyone that would praise the creator God for his omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence withing his creation. I agree about my incredulity towards a Darwinian rewriting of Genesis but not sharing your faith and that of your atheist brothers in an evolutionary creation has nothing to do with integrity
If you claim I am blaspheming God by accepting evolution- then you must prove your view of special Creation is valid. Please do so. You need to accept that so far your arguments are invalid. Not one of them has passed the logic test/ evidence test or the
truth test. So, present a new argument. One that is logical, one you have avtual evidence for and one that is honest.
If you can do this then it might be you can prove my supposed blasphemy. If you can't then you fail...
@ozowen Your silly Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation fairytale rests solely on conjectures and hope by atheists that God does not exist. Keep enjoying your fellowship with your brothers in Darwin that so candidly and meanly blaspheme the living God. You are indeed not only sharing in the Darwinian genesis heresy but you are also participating in their blaspheme.
@alexthasy "Your silly Darwinian atheistic evolutionary..." Prove that it rests on conjectures.
"and hope by atheists that God does not exist" Proe this. Prove for example that francis Collins, Human Genome Project leader, evolutionary geneticist and Evangelical Christian is trying to prove God doesn't exist.
"Keep enjoying your fellowship with your brothers in Darwin" Not an argument but it is a logical fallacy. Fail.
You will note that I have desisted from ad hominem arguments. Ie; I am not attacking you personally. I will attack your arguments unless you provide a valid one.
Your choice to continue personal attacks is of course your choice- but it will speak volumes about you.
If your response is only "I have already clearly... blah blah blah" then note this. Every claim you have made I have demonstrated that it is a logical mess and/ or is a lie and/ or has no evidence.
So, unless you can add evidence to previous arguments- then they are invalid. If you cannot make your claims logical then they are invalid. BTW, responding with "there is nothing logical about ..." then you are only dodging the issue.
@ozowen You do not believe in the omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of a creator God so you could not believe that he could have created all things and that he is indeed overseeing the breath of life he has given to every living creature as well as their reproductivity. I do not believe in the omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of the myth of natural selection so I could not believe that she could have taken a simple life form through billions of years of evolution
@alexthasy That whole post is inaccurate. In fact I consider it a lie. I do believe in an Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient God. I do not accept your theology. This post is a vain attempt to use the Guilty by Association fallacy. Do you have a real argument or not?
Re the drivel in the 2nd paragraph. That claim is without basis. If you repeat it without evidence I will ignore it. It is a strawman argument alongside argument from incredulity.
@ozowen I am not the one needing to support that natural selection could have created the species by taking a simple life form through billions of years of evolution and turn it into a multitude of well designed species,. I don't have the faith that she could have pulled the miracle and the conjectural bullshit served by your priests I do not believe in, call it incredulity if that makes you feel good. I don't enjoy the company of those blaspheming the living God. The stench is offensive
Now you are dodging the issue. You accused me of blasphemy. If you can't uphold this charge then withdraw it. Refusal to withdraw it renders you a liar.
So, back to the blasphemy charge. The 2nd paragraph was entirely an argument from incredulity (blatantly so). An argument from incredulity is simply "I can't see how it work so it can't work". That is not logically valid. Describe what is wrong with how it works other than you don't have faith or intellect or something.
I will now be away for a few hours (probably). If you can, please justify your position. You claim I am a heretic, a blasphemer. If you can't I will happily explain why I deride YECS as a cult.
You may even choose to deal with my argument logically, rationally, when I do.
I am. Alex can be encouraged to debate with integrity. He has done so before and although those events didn't last long he showed some capacity for this.
Besides, it is worth it. If he learns to do so then perhaps folks can have real discussions with him. Perhaps he will offer real argument and make real points?
@ozowen Stop talking integrity, sleazy little snake. Darwinman is obviously one that takes pleasure in blaspheming the living God. How can you compromise with defilers of the Most High and turn around and moralize others?. There is no integrity in denying the omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of a creator God and promoting an old defrocked priest atheistic evolutionary creation fairytale
@alexthasy There you go with your lies again. Darwin was never a priest. Yet another piece oof Libel to be forwarded to the Darwin Trust.
Personal abuse and lying are your stock in trade. You'd better hope there is no god. If there was, from my limited training as a minister and 60yrs of bible study, I can tell you that there is no way you would ever get to your heaven.
@fishingbirb Can you please tell me how having similar genetic coding implies you are of common decent?? Similar cellular processes need similar genetic coding. To transport sodium into a cell you need to same transporter protein regardless if you are a dog or a monkey. You share 80% (or something near to that number) of your genome with a banana. Do you have a common ancestor with a banana?
ceeds123 1 day ago
In response to the description, yes I can. Scientists recently witnessed a bacterium develop the ability to digest nylon fiber, a material only recently made. That requires a genetic mutation adding to the species' traits.
travmanbw43 2 days ago
He's preaching bullshit to the idiots... and they lap it up and open their wallets to him..
walldodger1969 1 week ago
Comment removed
alexthasy 1 week ago
he didn't show how the fossil record proves god, and even if he did how would he know it was the Christian god and not Allah or Thor.
Jshect 1 week ago
This guys is full of shit
Jshect 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jshect If you want to hear real bull shit you should look up Darwinian atheist theologian Dawkins predication on species being designoids not intelligently deigned and for dessert you could go and watch that video where land mammals are shown as magically altering organs and limbs while evolving into whales. We are paying taxes to have that shamanistic bull crap taught in school under the cover of science
alexthasy 1 week ago
This whole speech is a lie all fossils are transitional forms, just like you are a transition from your parents to your children, he also leaves out that genetics confirm common descent. Also evolution is the most validated science in history... Micro evolution,macro evolution there is so much he purposely leaves out ,makes look like a retard. l
Fishingbirb 1 week ago
in 150 years of developing science you're not going to catch a glimpse of an early ape-like creature turning into a humanoid, are you?
IAINoodle 2 weeks ago
Sounds like he has nothing to say. Is he a mime?
DCHOGYOJI1 2 weeks ago
THIS IS TROLL LOGIC!
notBananaSlama 2 weeks ago
No intermediary fossils? We have tons. If you disagree, then i gotta ask: what scientific degree do you hold that make you think your conclusion is more credible than the experts? What accomplishment have you made in that field to demonstrate your knowledge? What papers have you published that highlight your expertise in the area?
Nice try Lee. Go suck a Bible.
Casshyr 2 weeks ago
I find it funny when Creationists accuse evolutionary biologists of basing their conclusions on some lame "leap of faith", but at the same time they hold faith in the highest regard when it concerns their decision to worship Jesus.
jasonjon88 3 weeks ago
Fuck you Lee strobel. Fuck you.
l0rdoflol 3 weeks ago
Kids, this man DOES NOT BELIEVE WHAT HE SAYS. He's too smart. I'll give him at least that much credit.
In fact, I think he's SO smart, that he knew ahead of time that he could get up on stage and LIE OUT OF HIS ASS and that a certain segment of the population (ahem.. X-tians) would eat his lies up like a hungry cat eagerly lapping up milk.
What's that say about what he thinks the average intelligence level of a Christian is if he KNEW he could stand there, lie and you'd eat it up? Not much.
2eelShmeal 3 weeks ago
False.
EscRtn84 4 weeks ago
Just like Bible talks about heaven, there has to be any observation of such of that world that Bible is suggesting. Huble space telescope did not detected any picture of heaven that Bible described. Nor physical equation proved it. Only Bible says about it. And if Christians wants Bible to be accepted as truth, prove the Bible with science, and mathmatic.
veracuiz 4 weeks ago
@veracuiz The Big Bang was a non-observed occurrence, but is the accepted theory on how the universe came into existence. Many quantum physicists believe in parallel universes and this too is scientifically non-observable.
PointyMetalObjects 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PointyMetalObjects Yes of course. We are seeing quantum physic through mathmatic equation. Not with faith.
veracuiz 1 week ago
Of course it has to be science vs science. If Christian people wants to prove God is exist, they have to show up with some scientific evidence of God. For example, a wikik special material left on Earth which was part of God or any law of Physic that prove heaven. Just claiming that this is from Bible, that does not prove anything. In order for Religion to be justified, Religion also has to become science.
veracuiz 4 weeks ago
@veracuiz My friend, all the evidence you could ever ask for and more is available and waiting for you if your heart is open. It is this way on purpose, because is there were certain kinds of evidence, there would be no volition involved, and Jesus does not ask you to know and love Him out of compulsion. What we have scientifically, allows us a logical leap of faith, and when we meet Him spiritually, our hunch is confirmed by His presence in us, the power He has that changes our lives.
jesserotholz 3 weeks ago
@jesserotholz No. There are no scientific evidence on Bible. I have searched about that for monthes and researched. Every claims to prove Bible with science are just Bogous. There are no direct evidence. For example this guy is saying that fossile record prove Noah of Arc and Bible? lol What christian people are saying with Bible and science, they are just translating Bible with word of science without reasoning. Even Chritian people are misunderstanding the historical period in Jews people.
veracuiz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jesserotholz Okay, let's talk about fossil and Noah of Arc. Fossils are already telling us that the Earth is at least more then millions and billions years old. (By radio active decay) When did the Noah of Arc happened according to Bible??? Definately less then ten thousand years right? Earth was form when?? six thousand years ago??(from Bible lol Christians tries to prove Bible with science but only thing they can do is to just fit everything they have to Bible without any appropriate proves.
veracuiz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jesserotholz And about the character call Jesus Christ, how can you be so sure that Jesus was exact character as written on Bible? First of all, woman cannot get pregnant with out mens' help. Marry got pregnant without any sperms according to Bible. Right? But that is impossible. Bible is telling science fiction or Harry Potter. Magic. lol. If Jesus was really born from Marry without father, then only thing we can think is rape.
veracuiz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jesserotholz What I'm saying is that if Christians really wants to prove that Mary got pregnant just like Bible says, first you guys need to prove that Egg cell can proliferate into diploid nucleus cell with out fusing with sperm. Or Jesus was monoploidy human living thing?? lol It has to be prove that human can be monoploidy too in order to prove Jesus was really born from Marry without sex.
veracuiz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jesserotholz But if you ask me do I believe in God, my answer is I don't know. Because there are no scientifically proven that God is exist or not. If God does exist, it is not neccessariily God from Christian. That God could be the citizen from higher dimensional world. Who know? but what I'm saying is that Bible cannot be prove. With Chritian science logic, I can even prove the Harry Potter or Lord of the Ring with Science!! lol
veracuiz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jesserotholz And do you know what is the best science fiction/ History fiction novel?? It's Bible. Bible is no difference from Lord of the Ring, Harry Potter, Romeo and Juliet, MacBeth, and ect. Christian people are trying to prove Romeo and Juliet with science. Just putting things together without proving it. How funny is that??
veracuiz 1 week ago
He needs to read books.
TKStoddart 4 weeks ago
I just love Lee Strobel
RBMarkus 4 weeks ago
Religion is just an enterprise built on lies and ignorance. Ofcourse this guy knows what his saying is untrue but he has built his life around it and is serving his own interest spreading the propaganda. Everyday I am becoming less tolerant of religion and seeing more clearly how corrupt it is for humanity. Christianity needs to die.
scottclements78 1 month ago in playlist 2011 Golden Crocoduck nominees
@scottclements78 Yup, that's definitely the way to go. Becoming more close minded and assuming everyone who's not you is wrong. Why not throw in some conspiracy theories too! (The Pope was involved in JFK's assassination as was Mickey Mouse and three of the seven Dwarves.)
PointyMetalObjects 3 weeks ago
@PointyMetalObjects There is a line between being "open minded" and "closed minded". That line is called truth and evidence. Christians who are given evidence and truth decide to ignore it to continue to spread their lies are nothing for humanity. No one is more close minded than christians who refuse to accept modern knowledge in support of their bronze age superstition and myths. Open you mind to the truth and imagine what you will. Christianity is a gone era. Fool.
scottclements78 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
PointyMetalObjects 3 weeks ago
@scottclements78 Regardless of your views, it's a fact that modern science doesn't have all the answers. The Big Bang is a theory, the fossil record is incomplete to say the least since fossilization has specific requirements, and the argument that evolution happens over billions of years is also not something that can be observed. My beef is with the fact you dismiss people who don't think like you.
PointyMetalObjects 3 weeks ago
@PointyMetalObjects My beef is that people refuse to accept the truth. Evidence that we do have is enough. You accept what is written in a book and preached by idiots in a church something with absolutely no substance whatsoever. How can you justify that? While science has explained many things in detail which can be tested. How do germs become resistant to drugs? They evolve resistance through natural selection just as all living things do. Evolution is observed and a fact.
scottclements78 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
CynicalSkeptic1 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
CynicalSkeptic1 2 weeks ago
@PointyMetalObjects Sir, allow me to assist with your edification. Just for the sake of argument, let's say the fossil record is immaterial. Organisms can be grouped by sequence similarity via DNA sequence comparison and the resulting phylogenetic trees are consistent with taxonomy. DNA confirmed the paleontological tree of life which scientists had envisioned long before it was CONFIRMED by DNA sequence analysis. Consequently, evolution is one of the most validated theories in all of science.
CynicalSkeptic1 2 weeks ago
@CynicalSkeptic1 Thank you for being polite, sir (madam?).
PointyMetalObjects 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CynicalSkeptic1 Thank you for being polite, sir (madam?).
PointyMetalObjects 2 weeks ago
@PointyMetalObjects Here are some links about evolution if you are interested:
talkorigins(dot)org/faqs/comdesc/section1
anthro(dot)palomar(dot)edu/evolve/evolve_3
wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
evolution(dot)berkeley(dot)edu/evolibrary/search/topicbrowse2
txtwriter(dot)com/backgrounders/evolution/evcontents
wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution
You can ignore the information if you prefer....but that doesn't make it disappear.
CynicalSkeptic1 2 weeks ago
The sheer blatant idiocy burns my ears.
Nashhinton 1 month ago
Honestly where do these people get thie info,complete misconception of evolution, i wonder sometimes if these people know that there lying or if there so far gone they actually believe thier own lies
Fishingbirb 1 month ago
Beyond belief that in the 21st century there can be such stupidity in the face of facts that have proved the theory of evolution from natural selection to be true.
currie1967 1 month ago
Hey Strawballs, In a word Bullshit ! You say that Darwin was unsure of the mechanisms to account for evolution ....Yes correct and hardly surprising given his theory was formulated in the 1850s. He may well have said that it would have to wait for future discoveries to validate his theory ...... Erm it has. It called DNA mapping which even without Darwins theory of evolution clearly shows we all have a common ancestry ; from Human to Hydra we are from the same stuff. You Idiot
jontibloom 1 month ago 2
@jontibloom Having a biochemistry degree, I'd like to interject. DNA mapping allows for base sequences of DNA in a genome to be uncovered. Mapping in and of itself, shows nothing but a base sequence. This sequence can then be compared to other similar sequences in other species, whose gene may or may not create protein/RNA etc with a similar function. Different methods using statistical analysis are used to find to what degree these genes differ. This is called Bioinformatics.
dontwatchpornatwork 1 month ago
@jontibloom ...even this in and of itself tells us nothing about evolutionary information between the two species, simply how different they are. We then assume Darwinian evolution and look at mutation frequency, which varies in certain bases and certain genes. Using this information, an evolutionary tree can be constructed. DNA mapping doesn't prove evolution, and neither does bioinformatics, though bioinformatics can make of the claim of constructing evolutionary trees. You idiot.
dontwatchpornatwork 1 month ago
The reason that there was an explosion in evolution is because the conditions on land were not favourable to animal life. All life began in the sea. Algae in the sea produced oxygen which sustained life there. Once plants invaded the land and filled the atmosphere with oxygen, animals could follow. Land provides a greater range of environmental challenges, so adaptation accelerated.
jrv94 1 month ago
(...CONT) As for fossilisation - it is a VERY rare event that something fossilises since it requires precise conditions. This is why the fossil record is so sketchy, and you tend to find lots of fossils in the same place, since they are subject to the same conditions. Back then, the earth was hot and humid for the most part, so this promotes rapid decay of organic matter. We are lucky to have ANY fossils at all. Not to mention the dinosaurs chewing everything up!!!
jrv94 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jrv94
« Land provides a greater range of environmental challenges, so adaptation accelerated »
Coupla comments:
- Do you have references to any peer reviewed papers supporting the claim that sea-borne evolution produces diversity at a lower rate than land-borne evolution?
- Also, oxygen was already being produced on a massive scale by algae by then. Even today, ocean-based oxygen production exceeds land-based production by orders of magnitude.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
@XGralgrathor I am not back-tracking when I say that sea-borne evolution according to the fossil record drove the Cambrian Explosion that gave rise to the majority of the Earth's phyla. What I meant was that land produces different challenges (more rapidly fluctuating temperatures, the potential to take to the sky, more violent weather conditions, greater influence of gravitational forces not negated by the support of the water column CONT
jrv94 1 month ago
@XGralgrathor Yes, the Cambrian Explosion was the most rapid evolutionary event, but land exerted a whole new raft of challenges that would have required an evolutionary response and forced diversity as everything found its niche. This is my own hypothesis based on my knowledge of evolution. No papers cited.
Yes, the oceans produce a vast amount of oxygen even today, but land based plants make a significant contribution. Cut down a rainforest and see.
jrv94 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jrv94
« Cut down a rainforest and see »
According to the info at my disposal the contribution to turnover is some 28%, but the net contribution to global oxygen production is negligible:
Broeker, 2006, Breathing easy: Et tu, O2 (Columbia University thesis)
Moran, 1993, Deforestation and Land Use in the Brazilian Amazon
MrGralgrathor 1 month ago
@jrv94 here is a question, you state all life derived in the ocean etc.. show how a animal cell could form into a plant cell or vice versa. since the basis of abiogensis is that life arose by the compiling of amino acids forming the first simple cell. for this simple cell to have "evolved" it would have had to have DNA coding in it to be able to produce off spring consisting of animal dna or plant dna.
so it really comes down to the chicken and the egg, in this case, animal or plant
dathonscholtz 1 month ago
@dathonscholtz Going from a plant to an animal cell is a completely different discussion from abiogenesis. A few simple mutations can take care of the former. There is no confirmws mechanism for abiogenesis but I believe the leading hypothesis is the RNA world hypothesis, which you can look up on wikipedia in 22 hours...
90lsls 1 month ago
@dathonscholtz Animal cells and plant cells evolved independently. One didn't change into the other. All cells contain mitochondria (with a few exceptions), and plant cells contain both mitochodria and chloroplasts. These are thought to have arisen through some symbiotic relationship (and forgive me because I am rusty on this) whereby prokaryotic cells came to live inside other cells and all benefitted from the relationship. CONT
jrv94 1 month ago
@jrv94 The whole construct was able to survive and multiply well, but over time, the prokaryotic cells became more specialised and could not survive outside the host. Eventually, these became the mitchodrion and the chloroplast. It is a well established theory called the endosymbiotic theory.
jrv94 1 month ago
this guy knows he is full of shit yet he keeps talking
kris6682 1 month ago
@kris6682 how so?
gr8vibes2 1 month ago
It's funny that he brings up whales when we have a relatively complete collection of whale intermediaries. Silly creationists, they don't even try.
And on the bat: If bats were designed to fly then why don't they have pneumatic bones like birds? Bad design?
UpoundBUTTS 1 month ago
@UpoundBUTTS Question? How did the universe begin? Science had proven it a clear beginning. So what happened to cause it?
billywarren22 1 month ago
@billywarren22
Answer #1: We don't know.
Answer #2: By asking what "caused" it you are begging the question and I don't have to answer it (just being a prick ;)
Answer #3: The universe has always existed
Answer#4: Read a book by someone who thinks they have a scientific answer. This is youtube; I don't study that stuff.
Answer#5: It was a god that I have personally experienced and he is watching children when they masturbate and will punish them for all eternity if they don't apologize for it.
UpoundBUTTS 1 month ago
@UpoundBUTTS Science has shown the universe has a clear beginning so no the universe isnt eternal. God can punish for such sins hes God. Anyway that is all God bless.
billywarren22 1 month ago
@billywarren22
The big bang is the oldest traceable point NOT the beginning.
So what you are asking for is an answer to dead forensic trail NOT an answer for the beginning of the universe.
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@billywarren22
Many theist macro biologist also believe this god you worship did it thru a natural process.
Lee also lied about the fossil record in this video. We actually have a number of peer reviewed papers on both macro and micro evolution. The only differences between the 2 is time scale. To accept one but not the other is like saying walking to the the bathroom in my house to piss is possible but walking to a gas station to piss is impossible.
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@TheMrgoku1985 Now yes there are some processes but science has said that there is a clear beginning and that the universe is not eternal so at one time no universe so what started the universe Question where are these so called transitional forms there would be millions and not just ape to man but for every creature at every so called stage of evolution. In the begining God. God bless.
billywarren22 1 month ago
@billywarren22
This claim is deceptive one because it is growing not shrinking.
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@TheMrgoku1985 Yeah youre right that also show that it had to start at a defined time and scripture says in Ps 104:2b :Who stretch out the heavens like a curtain. With satelites today we can see that the universe is expanding thus fulfilling scripture.
billywarren22 1 month ago
@billywarren22
And in a assertion(logical fallacy) of a "designed" universe macro evolution still SHOWS to have occurred.
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@billywarren22
I also stated the big bang is NOT the beginning just the oldest traceable point.
You are using detraction techniques now. Quit with the strawman arguments
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
To rephrase the question: what is the definition of speciation? If we know how to define it then we can start to examine whether there is evidence it has happened over a period short enough to be observable.
baileyrichard0 1 month ago
So the argument against macroevolution is based on the idea that it happens on too long a time scale for it to be observed, therefore we don't have direct evidence for it. Is that right? Is it also correct that the argument against the origin of new species (speciation) is the same? Do people consider these to be synonymous? How would Strobel define speciation - the event that seems to define the difference between micro- and macro?
baileyrichard0 1 month ago
This guy is a joke, having a man like this who makes such ridiculous claims in a position of leadership in the church gives christianity a bad name and is frankly an insult to intelligent, scientifically minded christians everywhere. He should be ashamed of himself
11matthew1111 1 month ago
@11matthew1111 Hes in a position of leadership?
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
Once again, the only people who argue against evolution are the ones who don't understand it.
solitaryman098 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 It is impossible to fully understand a lie. I have put many years into the study of evolution and in my mind, I do not see it to be true.
TheGreekMan1981 1 month ago
@TheGreekMan1981 Many years of studying what anti-evolution advocates say or many years of studying what evolution actually is? Do you have a degree in biology? Because it's impossible to fully understand evolution and still deny it. It's a fact, whether you like it or not.
solitaryman098 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 So according to you, anyone who has a degree in biology concedes to the theory of evolution as most accept it? That is a fallacy. There are many with a degree in biology who do not accept evolution as fact.
TheGreekMan1981 1 month ago
@TheGreekMan1981 It's extremely likely that if you have a degree in biology you'll accept the theory of evolution as fact. I didn't say everyone does. Don't tell me about logical fallacies and then go make a strawman fallacy yourself.
And if by "many" you mean less than 5%, you'd be about correct. The overwhelming majority of the scientific community accepts evolution as a fact. You'll never get over 90% of people to agree on something if it's a matter of opinion. That has to tell you something
solitaryman098 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 The majority also taught that the planets revolved around the earth?, if you were sick, its because of bad blood, hence blood letting, When has it become that majority determines truth?
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
@shakinahstorm You're right, the majority doesn't necessarily indicate truth. But there's a crucial difference between bloodletting/geocentricism and evolution. One was based on urban legends, mythology, and superstition and the other is based on scientific principles. If you have evidence which falsifies evolution, by all means, provide it. Until then you have no case against evolution. Your argument consists of an argument from ignorance. i.e. I don't understand therefore god.
solitaryman098 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 Enviromental adaptation is based on scientific principals, enviromental adaptation giving us all of the differant species, sorry but this is nothing more then speculation and assumption. Differant races and breeds YES, differant species NO.
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 It is ashamed that people like you don't take the time to really study evolution in its entirety.
Microevolution = fact
Macroevolution = a bunch of bull crap ( NOT FACT )
Keep believing these lies if you want
TheGreekMan1981 1 month ago
@TheGreekMan1981 Again, my original point stands. Those who argue against evolution don't understand it. Micro and macroevolution is the exact same thing. There is no difference except the scale of time involved. But if you wish to make a point, would you care to identify the mechanism by which an organism stops itself evolving too much?
Oh by the way, I am currently completing a degree in evolutionary biology, so you can be sure I'm taking the time to study evolution in its entirety.
solitaryman098 1 month ago
@TheGreekMan1981 Haha, well put. How can he say they are the exact same thing. That is what evolutionists have been doing for years is extrapolating a slight variation in a species to claim that new information can transform a species into a new one. Micro and Macro are COMPLETELY different.
ian9toes 1 month ago
@ian9toes No sir. We have observed speciation.
Also, with new research into evo-devo, we now know that the amount of genetic variation required for macroevolutionary change is much smaller than we had previously thought. This is because changes that affect embryonic development, the time that the body plan is being laid out, can cause drastic changes. If you are genuinely interested in the evidence for evolution I suggest you look it up.
UpoundBUTTS 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 And this goes for the ex evolutionists who were ranked highly within the evolutionary community???. Sorry champ, but the people who argue against it are awake!
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
@shakinahstorm I'll let you believe that, champ. Whatever gives you a false sense of superiority.
solitaryman098 1 month ago
@solitaryman098 Lets get it straight in no way do i feel superior to anyone, its by belief that we were all created equal and that we are all of equal value. You are as much of a champion as i am or the next person. And yes i do believe my last statement to be true.
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
@shakinahstorm
If we were all created equal, what was so special about Jesus?
sjeses 1 month ago
@sjeses Jesus proclaimed to be God.
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
this guy.....wow
TheLawlbringer 1 month ago
@TheLawlbringer I know, what a Champion!
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
666 likes... hahaha =P
J0shReed 1 month ago
Comment removed
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 month ago
OMG! I love this guy. Reading one of his books now, and I can hardly put it down!!!
stormsophia1994 1 month ago
@stormsophia1994
He's an idiot. You "love" the way his twists and distorts science in order to make it fit with his stone-age beliefs? SAD
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 month ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Can i have 1 example within this presentation where he has twisted and distorted the science please. Thankyou
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
retard...
TerratenienteFox 1 month ago
OOOOkay the evolution of the whale is very well documented and understood.What Lee Strobel is either lying or being extremly uninformed.
The list of scientist (there were very few of them who were biologists) is not much more then a sand corn in the dessert of those who do accept evolution.
TioPhillippe 1 month ago
With naked eye I can see that his brain is not too big... :)
trhtpc 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shakinahstorm Reading Carnegie religious conversion to Darwinism it becomes clear that its only purpose is to rationalize atheism, freeing them from moral inhibitions and give its believer comfort by confirming the finality of death. "I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear," Carnegie wrote. "Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better' became my motto, my true source of comfort."
alexthasy 1 month ago
there is evolution but it only goes on a bit(microevolution) then stops.WTF
There is no fossel record WTF has he ever went to a museum There are family trees of most creatures.Mans family tree from fish all they way up to humans he either does not know what he is talking about or he is lying.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ahhninjadragon You could line up fossiliferous remains to fit just about any evolutionary fairy tale your imaginary could conceive. The dead bones used to support the silly voodoo tale of land mammals turning into whales could be recycled and reorganized to support other fairytales. Atheism and the finality of death are very comforting
alexthasy 1 month ago
The genetic test used to determine relation between people is the same test used to determine relation between species. The genetic evidence amounts to LEGAL PROOF of common ancestry.
As for the list of scientific dissent, even the most ardent evolutionary scientist would have to sign it as evolutionary theory encompasses more than just mutation and random mutation. On the other hand, project "Steve" seems to be having much more success.
qabala 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@qabala Litteral bullshit. You could use the same tests and conclude to a same creator. There are no apes presently on their way to turn into men and there should be if evolution were an ongoing process as claimed in Darwinian Holy scriptures. Mutation is widely known not to be beneficial thus the term mutant. Monsanto is screwing our crops with his ugly mutants. The theory encompasses a great hope for atheists in the finality of death.
alexthasy 1 month ago
Comment removed
Darwinsman 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozowen I am not a believer in your cult. There is nothing ethical in siding with atheists who are clearly blaspheming God's name only because they share your faith in a Darwinian Genesis. Your acting sanctimonious increases the stench of your Darwinian vomit.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy. I note you are posting around the place but refusing to rise to the simple challenge of debating ethically. Is it too far beyond you? I preferred to think not, but will you prove me wrong and be unable to approach the discussion with integrity?
ozowen 1 month ago
Comment removed
alexthasy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darwinsman Ozowen belongs to the theist sect of evolutionism but don't worry he gives no role to a creator God in the magical evolutionary process supported by a law of witchcraft
alexthasy 1 month ago
Lee Strobel is a fool... no I take that back, he's making some serious money publishing his videos and his books. Lots of people take his stuff seriously. Lee Strobel is dishonest and is publishing foolishness from which he is making money.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen Of course Stobel is doing it for the money. He may be a charlaton, but he's no fool. He's is a shrewd businessman and there are plenty of gullible fools out there just waiting to swallow his crap and swell his coffers.
Darwinsman 2 months ago
@Darwinsman Your bone sifters and fairy tale makers are heavily subsidized with our tax money. I saw a little girl maybe 6 or 7 praising her god that had made her evolve from an ape. You are brainwashing them from the cradle and it is working.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy Quote: "I saw a little girl maybe 6 or 7 praising her god that had made her evolve from an ape."
No you didn't. No-one in their right mind would allow you anywhere near a young child of that age.
I've been reading comments between you and Honestman395. You do break the 9th commandment constantly.
If I was you, I would be hoping that god doesn't exist. Because you are a prime canditate for Hell, and say that from my training as a minister. Praising him will not be enough.
Darwinsman 2 months ago
@Darwinsman "No-one in their right mind would allow you anywhere near a young child of that age." But he still thinks about her all the time....
ozowen 2 months ago
Comment removed
Darwinsman 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozowen I've already worked that out. Everything that Alex says about anybody else, you can tell that he is judging it by what he would think himself.
I think you're right about him hating education. If he has had any education at all, which I doubt he has, I think he was home schooled by a kindergarten child.
Darwinsman 2 months ago
@Darwinsman That is what is called slandering . In your atheist cult you have no moral restraint and are free to engage in any disgusting attacks. Exposing Darwin as a false prophet and his priests as liars, deceivers and all out forgers is not slandering. It is true that kids are being brainwashed almost from the cradle in your cult ridiculous fairytales. I did see that little girl on TV thanking your god for her ape ancestry .
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy "..you have no moral restraint and are free to engage in any disgusting attacks." Hypocrite!
You slander people every day and have no qualms about it. But you forget, every day you post and every post is an insight into your mind. We all have a good idea about you by now. You're self absorbed, arrogant and believe that your opinion is right no matter what. You know that anything you believe is good and anything you disapprove of is bad. You crave power & recognition
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
..You cannot accept that anything you say could be untrue so, even if you say something everyone else sees as a lie- it cannot be a lie- they must be the liars to accuse you.
You are completely rational- in your mind. And since you think it, it must be true. You say you are rational- so rational you must be. If anyone challenges your logic- they must be irrational or lying- because you think for yourself and you are always right.
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy What is slander about not wanting someone like you near young children. I meant that you would pollute their young minds. What were you thinking about?
You were thinking I was accusing you of wanting sexual relations with a young child, weren't you?
Yucchh!!! You really do have a mind that lives down in the sewers.
You're not only contemptable, you are disgusting.
Darwinsman 2 months ago
@alexthasy
Since you are always right, since you have opinions that are correct and since you should be recognised as a great mind, it is wearisome that people treat you with contempt. They must be contemptible to do so.
It can't be you can it? You are always right. You are always true. Your insights are great and people should see things from your point of view.
Oh yes, alex, we know you.
That's why your posts are so funny.
LOL
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
Hey guess what alex.
We also know that you fear education. You fear "brain washing" but what that means is having to think, having to explore possibilities and concepts you didn't think up.
It might mean accepting that what you thought was wrong in some way. It means being challenged.
Oh yes alex, we know you.
We know you fear evidence and study because they challenge your inner world. Its balance could be upset by a new thought and you fear that more than anything.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen Believing in a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary fairy tale has nothing to do with education. It is just a way to blaspheme an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God substituting him with a weird goddess an old fool borrowed to Greek paganism.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy Yep, once you get exposed for being the twat you are you always revert back to the same basic nonsense. The entire post is drivel. Would you like me to address each point and rip it to shreds for you?
ozowen 2 months ago
Comment removed
shakinahstorm 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darwinsman An author makes money from his or hers publications, and they automatically become shrewd business men or women?. This is all it is you have offered up, please can i have somthing that indicates his shrewdness?. See this is all to common when a persons beliefs are confronted, character assasination is an indicator of desperation and insecurity, only the cornered feel the need to attack, and its just so AMAZINGLY popular amongst the athiestic evolutionists!
shakinahstorm 2 months ago
@ozowen Can i please have some examples of Lee's dishonesty please?. Thankyou
shakinahstorm 2 months ago
@shakinahstorm
He said science has virtually failed to substantiate macro-evolution. This is not true.Not only has it been substantiated, speciation has been observed, transitional forms are in abundance.
He talks about the Cambrian Explosion and carefully omits mention of the wealth of Pre-Cambrian fossils. This is particularly deceptive and a technique common in YECS.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen Happy new year Owen :)
shakinahstorm 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shakinahstorm Happy SaintLucy's mess
alexthasy 1 month ago
@shakinahstorm The YECS position is that the Cambrian period is the creation period and they are very careful to deny or omit the Pre Cambrian fossels. I live in Australia and we have a wealth of Pre Cambrian fossils here.
He says how Darwin expected that future dioscoveries will bear out his theory. Strobel claims they haven't- they have- big time.
He compares the bat & the whale. We have a poor fossil history of the bat- but an excellent one for the whale.
ozowen 2 months ago
@shakinahstorm The ad by the scientists gave the impression that there is serious dispute among scientists. The ad represents less than .05% of scientists. His spin gave a very different perspective.
Finally- he said this was a science vs science issue. A huge lie. On any single scientific Theory there will be dissent. But the level of dissent on Evolution is so small as to be nearly zero. There are bigger disagreements about gravity (which has serious flaws as a theory)
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen See the thing is, all that you have given me here, ire in no way any examples of dishonesty?, youve given many examples of disagreeance but none of dishonesty???. For an example, i like Lee are well aware that any claims of macro evolution being a substantiated science, falls well short of the mark?, I mean if one was to say that its a pile of well substantiated assumptions, its only then that you will finding yaself alot closer to the mark.
shakinahstorm 2 months ago
@shakinahstorm
You can make that argument perhaps about most of the vid, but not about the 100 scientists. Not at all. That hyperbole is made worse yet when you know that only 20 of the scientists concerned had degrees in a related field to evolution. and
Not all were even degree holding scientists.
But I contest the rest as well. Strobel is a journo- he knows how to research. I say he did so with mal intent.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen Of course you have a college of Cardinals that submits papers supporting the fairy tales of a Darwinian evolutionary creation that will become article of faith after passing the scrutiny of the holy conclave. They gave us Saint Lucy and the holy relics supporting the absurd tale of land mammals magically evolving into whales after crossing millions of years an numerous species. The Roman church uses the same stystem
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy "Of course you have a colle...."
Strawman argument resting on an argument from incredulity.
Epic fail!
ozowen 2 months ago
@shakinahstorm Accusing those of not believing like him of lacking integrity is ozowen best argument.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy "Accusing those of not believing like him" That also is a lie. Alex- you really are the most dishonest piece of shit on these threads. You distort everything you talk about.
Accusing alexthasy of behaving without integrity is my best response to alexthasy- who acts without integrity and logic.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen I know only of the devil that could be more sleazy and more of a liar than yourself. Pretending to be a Christian while teaming with atheists in blaspheming his name and slurring anyone that would praise the creator God for his omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence withing his creation. I agree about my incredulity towards a Darwinian rewriting of Genesis but not sharing your faith and that of your atheist brothers in an evolutionary creation has nothing to do with integrity
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy
If you claim I am blaspheming God by accepting evolution- then you must prove your view of special Creation is valid. Please do so. You need to accept that so far your arguments are invalid. Not one of them has passed the logic test/ evidence test or the
truth test. So, present a new argument. One that is logical, one you have avtual evidence for and one that is honest.
If you can do this then it might be you can prove my supposed blasphemy. If you can't then you fail...
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen Your silly Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation fairytale rests solely on conjectures and hope by atheists that God does not exist. Keep enjoying your fellowship with your brothers in Darwin that so candidly and meanly blaspheme the living God. You are indeed not only sharing in the Darwinian genesis heresy but you are also participating in their blaspheme.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy "Your silly Darwinian atheistic evolutionary..." Prove that it rests on conjectures.
"and hope by atheists that God does not exist" Proe this. Prove for example that francis Collins, Human Genome Project leader, evolutionary geneticist and Evangelical Christian is trying to prove God doesn't exist.
"Keep enjoying your fellowship with your brothers in Darwin" Not an argument but it is a logical fallacy. Fail.
ozowen 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexthasy "You are indeed not only sharing in the Darwinian genesis heresy but you are also participating in their blaspheme. "
You repeated the claim but aren't attempting to prove it. Allegation is not proof.
FAIL
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
You will note that I have desisted from ad hominem arguments. Ie; I am not attacking you personally. I will attack your arguments unless you provide a valid one.
Your choice to continue personal attacks is of course your choice- but it will speak volumes about you.
Your choice.
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
If your response is only "I have already clearly... blah blah blah" then note this. Every claim you have made I have demonstrated that it is a logical mess and/ or is a lie and/ or has no evidence.
So, unless you can add evidence to previous arguments- then they are invalid. If you cannot make your claims logical then they are invalid. BTW, responding with "there is nothing logical about ..." then you are only dodging the issue.
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
BTW, your claims that I lie have not been proven by you. So either cough up some proof or this will continue to be proof of your deceitfulness!
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen You do not believe in the omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of a creator God so you could not believe that he could have created all things and that he is indeed overseeing the breath of life he has given to every living creature as well as their reproductivity. I do not believe in the omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of the myth of natural selection so I could not believe that she could have taken a simple life form through billions of years of evolution
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy That whole post is inaccurate. In fact I consider it a lie. I do believe in an Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient God. I do not accept your theology. This post is a vain attempt to use the Guilty by Association fallacy. Do you have a real argument or not?
Re the drivel in the 2nd paragraph. That claim is without basis. If you repeat it without evidence I will ignore it. It is a strawman argument alongside argument from incredulity.
Illogical and thus invalid.
Try again
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen I am not the one needing to support that natural selection could have created the species by taking a simple life form through billions of years of evolution and turn it into a multitude of well designed species,. I don't have the faith that she could have pulled the miracle and the conjectural bullshit served by your priests I do not believe in, call it incredulity if that makes you feel good. I don't enjoy the company of those blaspheming the living God. The stench is offensive
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy
Now you are dodging the issue. You accused me of blasphemy. If you can't uphold this charge then withdraw it. Refusal to withdraw it renders you a liar.
So, back to the blasphemy charge. The 2nd paragraph was entirely an argument from incredulity (blatantly so). An argument from incredulity is simply "I can't see how it work so it can't work". That is not logically valid. Describe what is wrong with how it works other than you don't have faith or intellect or something.
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
For my part I consider YECS and its variants to be a cult. Ie; heresy. Prove me wrong.
ozowen 2 months ago
@alexthasy
I will now be away for a few hours (probably). If you can, please justify your position. You claim I am a heretic, a blasphemer. If you can't I will happily explain why I deride YECS as a cult.
You may even choose to deal with my argument logically, rationally, when I do.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen You are a very optimistic person.
Darwinsman 2 months ago
@Darwinsman
I am. Alex can be encouraged to debate with integrity. He has done so before and although those events didn't last long he showed some capacity for this.
Besides, it is worth it. If he learns to do so then perhaps folks can have real discussions with him. Perhaps he will offer real argument and make real points?
I'd like to think so.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen
I think we are going in a minute- will be gone for a bit now.
ozowen 2 months ago
@ozowen As I said. You are an optimist. Good luck. I'll watch with interest.
Darwinsman 2 months ago
Comment removed
alexthasy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozowen Stop talking integrity, sleazy little snake. Darwinman is obviously one that takes pleasure in blaspheming the living God. How can you compromise with defilers of the Most High and turn around and moralize others?. There is no integrity in denying the omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of a creator God and promoting an old defrocked priest atheistic evolutionary creation fairytale
alexthasy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexthasy TROLL!!! WHAHAAHA
srexob715 1 month ago
@alexthasy There you go with your lies again. Darwin was never a priest. Yet another piece oof Libel to be forwarded to the Darwin Trust.
Personal abuse and lying are your stock in trade. You'd better hope there is no god. If there was, from my limited training as a minister and 60yrs of bible study, I can tell you that there is no way you would ever get to your heaven.
Darwinsman 1 month ago