Hmm. Despite the fact that I disagree with your viewpoints, and think you're delusional, I hope you got your videos put back (too lazy to check, despite the age of this video). Abuse of the DMCA, or any of the multitude of poorly phrased anti-piracy laws, is idiotic and counter productive.
i am happy that youtube is reviewing the case/has reviewed the case, because if there is no copyright infringement then you should be allowed to post your videos, despite how little i agree with what you say, i will fight to the death for your right to say it (to paraphrase voltaire).
"probably an atheist" - Brilliant, I am certain this video, when taken together with your others, will convince nearly every thinking person out there of the righteousness of your position and truth of your claims.
Come to think of it, this might actually just show everyone who sees it that you are of the mind to make baseless claims and accusations. In the latter case it's possible you will have successfully destroyed any chance you had of changing minds.
Actually, there are several companies called "Front Page Media". It's not that difficult to Google it. I Googled it and got four different results with the name "Front Page Media".
And it's not polite to just assume that an atheist flagged your video.
When my windows were broken and "devil worshipper" was spray painted on the side of my house, I didn't automatically blame the Christians from the church across the street, so you have no right to blame atheists right off the bat for your video.
"...filed by somebody I GUESS doesn't like what I've been saying, so PROBABLY an atheist..."?
"So I'm GUESSING this is just some random atheist guy..."?
Seriously? You have no facts re: the identitiy or motivation of the flagger yet you post a vid titled "ATHEIST CENSORSHIP" wherein you make unfounded assumptions and accusations. That's called bearing false witness.
You could be right, but as with all of your arguments, you don't have evidence to support it.
You know. If the measure of how right you are is how much your opposition censors you. Then the Atheist side wins hands down, although i dunno maybe you're somehow unaware of the arseholery and censorship practiced routinely by your side.
Christian mythology is fairy tales. .talking snake . .talking burning bushes. . Talking donkeys. . people walking on water. . zombies. . magic . .pregnant virgins. . Grow up people . .read other books besides that ancient text. . Seriously . .
If you were to do research, many Atheist accounts have had the same problems man, it happens to both sides. cult of dusty had issues and a few others i know.
How can you claim for other people censorship, if you're the first not to allow to vote your video or the comments to it, and most likely also the comments are subject to your approval?
anyhow: I know from your other videos that your arguments are tame and petty.
You're absolutely wrong about absolutely everything, and it's trivial easy to disprove everything you say, but that doesn't justify censoring you. Whoever did that was stupid, and it wasn't necessarily an atheist.
And one person filling a false DMCA claim doesn't mean your arguments are strong....
I'm NOT afraid of anything your saying buddy.Your arguments are strong if you live in a delusional world of beliefs and that is coming from an EX CHRISTIAN and PROUD OF IT!!!!.
@oemfx1965 "coming from an EX CHRISTIAN and PROUD OF IT!!!!." According to 1 John 2:19 there is no such thing as an ex Christian. That verse is rather clear, if a person "leaves" the faith, then that indulvidual was never in the faith in the first place.
It's funny how both theists and atheists do this to each other. Both sides chose to believe it's because they're making good arguments but in actuality it's just because there are assholes on both sides of the argument who don't want to hear a good argument from either side so instead they attempt to sensor. BTW, I am an atheist and I think your arguments suck and I pity you for believing in them, but I will fight to the death for your right to argue them.
@Draidis Damnit I wish likes weren't disabled on this video so I could vote this comment up. Draidis, this is exactly right. One may not agree with what GodLowDown is saying, but that doesn't mean anyone has the right to infringe on him saying it. I agree with your post in every capacity.
You're censoring yourself buddy, blocking ratings? Removing your own videos? What, is the little man afraid that people might not like what he says and instead have different opinions? Awwwww...
Someone you don't know wrongfully flags your videos for copyright. This person leaves no information about himself. And you immediately assume he/she's an atheist, and label the video accordingly?
Have you forgot that there are other religions that disagree with yours? In fact, most of the world disagrees with your beliefs.
As an atheist, I want more loonies on YouTube. With every video I gain greater understanding of why I disbelieve. Keep the nonsense coming.
Actually, if you were a complete nutjob, there would be a greater need to shut you down, because there'd still be 11k+ people listening to your insane ramblings, and a good percentage of them would take you seriously.
I say ship atheists out of the country and as far as copyright infringement, they have to prove that what you say is theirs, let the atheists spread their hate, God will take care of them.
Soooo... your GUESSING its an Atheist, and you make a whole video complaining that Atheists are trying to shut you down, when you have NO EVIDENCE that it is an Atheist that did it. Maybe you should make a video claiming JEWISH CENSORSHIP... or ISLAMIC CENSORSHIP, you know, just in case it was one of those groups trying to keep you down!!! Or maybe one of the thousand other groups in the world who may find your videos awful like the rest of us do. FAIL
I don't really agree with most of what you say, but the internet should not be censored like this, we should be free to argue respectfully with about our differing conclusions on life. For anybody who tries to block provocative yet intelligent discussion such as this, for shame your pathetic cowardice, while I don't agree with your beliefs, thumbs up on your free speech.
@Zebarbas Personally I never understood why folks here are always whining about ratings and I don't see how it has anything to do with the video myself. There are no good Christian arguments to an atheist! Christian videos will always get rated down simply because it's a Christian video. Many Christians take away the option for atheists to rate down their video because many atheists have diarrhea of the dislike button. Let me ask, how many atheists do you know thumb up any Christian video?
@YhwhKhai I've thumbed up all of venomfangx's current videos. And i use to like veritas48's for example. I have thumbed down atheist videos aswell, and there are atheistic arguments that are widely used with which i don't agree.
The internet is the atheist land, you're always going to get some thumbs down just for being a christian, but I think that if people lose this smug attitude the ratings won't suffer that much.
@Zebarbas And also. This guy strawmans everything. Atheists don't belive the world came out of nothing. Generally we accept our ignorance. And we don't have, as a general rule, a problem with god.
Like most theists you have delusions of grandeur and more importantly, a victim complex. The religious hold every seat of power in the United States, and yet at every turn you cry that you're being oppressed, or in this case, censored. What I'm curious about is if you'll censor my post. What if I call you a fucking idiot? Will you take this comment down? If you do you are a complete hypocrite in more ways than one my friend.
@chardlb "Been looking for one of your videos that doesn't have the ratings disabled. Found one."
And I betcha you thumbed it down like most if not all atheists do! Which is why Christians remove the option and I would too if I had videos up. Instead of whining about ratings, just dispute the video! Ratings has nothing to do with censorship if the poster gives the opportunity to respond to the video or comment on it.
Atheism is the new aspect that makes non educated scientists behave like non educated religious fanatics. So now its the same fanaticism as religion but with the certainty of science which has as many holes as religion when it comes to those juicy questions we really really want answered. I need just as much imagination in science to "see"
Have you taken a close look at the Christian/Muslim censorship on youtube? There's the well know case of VenomfangX and his twice filing DMCA's one of which he was court ordered to make a public apology for.
and have you ever noticed that Christians/Muslims have comments/ratings turned off by a margin of about 10 to 1 over atheist posts?
Look into it.
As for being afraid of what you're saying, what have you said? I see very little.
You got pranked by a retard and somehow (in your self-righteous mind) that means your arguments are "that strong"? Seriously? Are you serioously that deluded?
You and your arguments are idiotic. It was probably a christian trying to keep you from embarrassing them. See what I did there I made a claim with absolutely no base or evidence. The reason you think this way is probably why you're no an atheist in the first place.
White racists used the same fallacious argument against Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s peaceful marches when it was reported that white racists were violently attacking the peaceful black marchers -- the notion was that Dr. King must be doing something wrong if his marches inspired so much violence from his opponents.
History shows that your argument is not merely incorrect, but laughably incorrect.
The same fallacious argument has been used against innocent rape victims -- the girl must have wanted it, because obviously, the rapist chose to attack her instead of some other girl -- she must have done something to entice the rapist that the other girls didn't do. That argument (your argument) is clearly fallacious, so you lose.
The atheist does this quite often. I know of one Theist whose channel has been taken down by the same dishonest atheist tactics seven times, and there are many other Theists who have fallen victim to the atheist's dishonesty at least once.
Advice to Theists: BACK UP YOUR VIDEOS! In some cases, you may not be able to get YT to reinstate them.
The fact that the atheist does this so often does show that we are winning the debate, and the fact that YT allows him to do it shows that YT is biased.
people here keep commenting that his arguments aren't good and that they get ignored. why all the hype then? these are people who are coming on this site, just to say that his arguments aren't worth listening to?
It´s sad that your videos are taken down due to somebodys whim. But I just gotta say that the same happens to videoes by Atheists too. Should they/we blame Theists then??
Wow really? My page went down so ill blame atheists blindly. You might as well blame blacks, or whites, or gays, or any random type of person. Why do you pick out athiests? Atheists are people.. a good deal of which don't even use youtube at all.
Pro-atheist here. Sorry to hear that some guy tried to shut you down. But I wouldn't say "you're doing something right". I've seen cultists use exactly the same reasoning to prove "they're right". You've heard of them, the ones with famous actors on their ranks.
Another point is that you can't be sure it was an atheist who took you down. It's just speculation. Careful with those statements, you're lowering yourself.
In any case, keep talking. Nothing like a good debate to bring out the truth.
This copyright shit is getting old. You kids need to quit filing "copyright" infringement stuff against each other. Atheists are getting this as much as the theists. The lame part of it is that every time a page gets a "copyright infringement," the user comes back EVERY TIME and says: "See guys, people wanna shut me down because they are scared I'm right." Christ. Just stop so we don't have to hear bullshit like this anymore. Nobody is censoring Godlowdown because they "fear his truth," lmao.
@godlowdown if you whatched your responces a guy researched front page media you werent the only one hit by it it aparently wanted to steal personel information and identity theft so it tried to scam a bunch of people you were one some atheists were some and people who had nothing at all to do with this debate
And I don't have the time to explain this all to you.
Though one last logical fact which should be considered is this; With billions of species, all consuming vast amounts of food and water every day, each one requiring different temperatures and degrees of light, how would they survive to be distributed in such a non-random way on earth?
About the fish; how many saltwater fish survive the freshwater that rainwater consists of?
continuation: the other views the diversity of life, and theorizes using the base principles of geology, chemistry, atomic physics and so on. You don't seem to understand the fact that had your claims been in any way logical and scientifically curious in nature, then EVERYTHING we know about the world, and the universe would have to be re-written. The same principles of radiometric dating exist in microwave ovens and X-ray scanners.
Continued: Your criticism of the use of evolutionary theory in dating I agree would be horrendous if they did in the same exact place. However, if this action is performed via knowing the age of certain areas of rock, and seeing what animals live in this area then estimating the age of a separate rock by the fossils in it because radiometric dating may be difficult. This is not intended as evidence for evolution, merely an application of one of the most successful theories of all time.
@Solensherre I would suggest you reread my posts, yes I know quite a bit, but your posts don't prove my info wrong. 1st point we don't know which rock started on this earth, this dates back to the fall of man the world became cursed and because of it everything started to decay so even when rocks are formed they start decaying you cannot assume that there wasn't any decay. 2nd No not all waterbased animals would die due to the flood that made no sense at all.
cpnti: they may have 100's of methods but they don't use all of em for various reasons. they get different results. As I stated with a lump of tuff they got 3 different results. How can you say that's accurate? Just because its measured that way doesn't make it right, now in fairness the same can be said about 1000s years so that's why I say we don't know for sure and I won't assume that it is like you guys do. your last point just basically stated how you assume age you cannot assume facts
conti: and not in evidence if a lawyer does this he or she gets laughed at in court. How do you know which one is right? When something has too many flaws and uncertainty it should not be accepted as fact as what evolution has been. I would ask that you read some of Ken Ham's books. They're pretty good and explains how Creation did happen.
@FamousDave2186 Ok, let's get this straight, you think that the uncertainties, which may account for 100 million years discrepancy between various methods when measuring the billions is enough to discard radiometric dating when it goes past your supposed start of the universe?
I agree we don't know for sure, but in so far evaluating creation 1000s of years ago versus Big Bang then eventually evolution billions of years ago, the two are mismatched. One starts with the conclusion (God created
@Solensherre first point yes because its assuming something without any proof. You claim evolution is scientific ok so let me see if I get this right? According to you in the beginning there was nothing- and absolutely nothing was happening to absolutely nothing. Then one random day- absolutely nothing exploded and absolutely nothing became... Everything. Then the nothing became everything (for no reason at all) rearranged itself into self- replicating, intricately complex life forms.This
conti: Abiogenic beginning of life- you say happened only once- unwitnessed- and never happened again- Billions of years ago- How convenient. Give me one example of a mutation which can be seen to increase the useful, beneficial information in the genome?
3rd did you read all of my posts or did you just pick and choose. I really don't feel like putting everything I wrote on here back again so I'll pm you everything about Noah's Ark and we can go from there. We don't don't know if the flood's
conti: water was just rainwater for it says all water were gushing out from the earth. Its possible to believe they took two fish put them in a bowl of freshwater than after the flood found an oasis to let the fish populate. The Bible doesn't go into detail about that nor is that piece of information even important. but for you thing before it I'll give in pm.
edit: subtract that part about the fresh water fish here's some info I found. (I'm sorry for that)
We do not know how salty the sea was before the flood. The flood was initiated by the breaking up of the “fountains of the great deep” (Genesis 7:11). Whatever the “fountains of the great deep” were the flood must have been associated with massive earth movements, because of the weight of the water alone, which would have resulted in great volcanic activity.
conti: Volcanoes emit huge amounts of steam, and underwater lava creates hot water/steam, which dissolves minerals, adding salt to the water. Furthermore, erosion accompanying the movement of water off the continents after the flood would have added salt to the oceans. In other words, we would expect the pre-flood ocean waters to be less salty than they were after the flood. There is also a possibility that stable fresh and saltwater layers developed and persisted in some parts of the ocean.
conti:Fresh water can sit on top of salt water for extended periods of time. Turbulence may have been sufficiently low at high latitudes for such layering to persist and allow the survival of both freshwater and saltwater species in those areas.
So it is not unreasonable to believe that both fresh water and salt water can coexist I've even learn something today thanks for that.
@FamousDave2186 I would like to continue this debate with pms please, it seems the 500 character limit is too little for both of us. If you feel the need for these debates to be publicized, I am sure we could agree to some means (i.e. copy pasting to this site, or production of videos with our discussions either in text or some more complicated format).
Also, like I did not mention in my pm, it saddens me that I made you enlightened in such a fallacious way...
Continued: agree on an aproximate age of the earth, and yes with a rather high uncertainty, does that nopt at all allude to you that the earth is between 3.8 billion to 5.7 billion years old? Not to mention the background radiation of the universe which effectively dates the universe to aprox 15 billion years?
There is plenty uncertainty, that is true, but that still means that the age of the earth/universe is measured in billions, not thousands of years.
Plus I love how your christian teachings haven't thought you how not to be a big ass. I mean, here you go with no evidence, saying that it was an atheist that issued the complaint.
But I'm not suprised....I mean to be christian means to jump to any conclusion you want for answers to questions that you don't have the answer for. Like explaing what evidence there to support the exsistence of a god
That's weird. I'm sitting here watching all your 12 available vids in order, and they're really not even challenging. It's like shooting fallacies in a barrel. But you haven't made a lot of outrageous undocumented claims, like Nephilimfree or some others, so it's really not that bad. Mostly just opinions and tunnel-vision perceptions. Not sure why anyone would get upset enough to censor. Unless you censored them.
@OptimisticCynic715 No apologist has ever made a claim that has any credible evidence behind it. If they did it would be world news. But they cover this point by playing the smug victim.
I haven't seen any of your videos, except for your pathetically fallacious "How To Make an Atheists Head Explode" video, and even though that video was a really bad argument that wouldn't work on anyone intelligent, I still think that you have the right to broadcast your videos. Whoever false flagged you is an asshole, whether or not they are an atheist. BTW, atheists get the false flagging as well as theists, so censorship certainly isn't an atheist thing.
Love when you guys act like the victims...it's a laugh. Nobody is afraid of you. lol another invisible man believer that's a legend in his own mind...the same mind that thinks you can get two of every animal on a ship. Happy Holidays.
@elric6661 I think it's funny that people who have nothing better to say decide to ridicule someone, I worry for when you have to discuss a bloody good apologist, no wait I don't, you will shut your eyes and ears and run for the hills.
@australianresistance There exist a good apologist? That would be a first. And since I am an atheist if there ever was a good argument I would listen but the fact is atheism exist because the argument has not been forthcoming and not one shred of evidence has been presented.
@elric6661 no you don't want to listen otherwise you'd try to prove your own theory. I highly doubt you actually challenge what your science teacher has taught you. You just believe it cause you don't want to accept the Word of God. I'll pm you a website if you want to prove me wrong and you will listen. If you do please click on the links of other blogs they have on there, and one more thing no insults.
@FamousDave2186 This is getting sad and boring I get you don't understand the scientific method and after I explain it you still will Choose to not get it. I don't have to prove there are no pink unicorns in my backyard as there has there has never been any proof of a pink unicorn. It is the person making the fantastic claim that must provide the verifiable falsifiable proof. By your rules you must believe in the unicorn ..same amount of proof.
@elric6661 for someone who wants to be proven wrong you sure jump to conclusions don't you. I understand the scientific method its you who doesn't understand it, and that source I gave you explains why evolution doesn't follow the scientific method. Pink unicorns? Someone been drinking the Richard dawkins kool-aid lately, if you want to play like that then explain to me why a watch can make itself. No one to help it just form on its own, by your logic that should happen so explain.
I'm reminded of one of the world's smartest man, Albert Einstein, who said this " I want to know God's thoughts; all the rest is just details." and another quote is " when the solution is simple, God is answering." Now why would a smart man like him say that? If he used the scientific method as you claim shouldn't he be an atheist? Instead he believed in Creation. Why is that the most respectable man in science was a Creationist if evolution is true. Think about that one.
@FamousDave2186 Please stop He was very smart and if you care about facts or the truth you can find all the times he stated himself as an atheist who was fed up with theist taking his poetic words out of context or just lying about him. Isn't there some "false witness" thing your suppose to be against? Funny with my secular morels I'm the one who cared about the truth.
@elric6661 yes Albert was smart not Dawkins. You should watch that video where he was stumped on. "Ever seen a a mutation that befitted a genome?" His respose "umm... I... ahh... stop the type."Yeah he sure explain that one didn't he. He then writes an article which goes against that scientific belief called evolution. He only believes what he wants to believe just like you. You claim to care about the truth yet you look at one perspective and not give another view a chance. If I'm so wrong
conti: than you should have no problem explaining why my source I pm you yesterday is wrong. why don't do that? is it because you can't? The reason i explain the watch is to prove my point, evolution would tell us nothing somehow became our universe, well what cause that big bang and why doesn't it happen anymore? Why aren't living things evolving anymore? where are the fossils to prove missing links, why do we die? Why do people do good if its survival of the fittest? After all isn't now
conti: seen as barbaric to kill someone for food or other wants and needs? Why do you even care if we are wrong what's it to you. Are reason is to share God's love and show you are Savior Jesus Christ died on the cross for our atonement of our sins. Whoever shall believe in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life with the Father (God) in Heaven. What's your motive for trying to spread atheism? How was gold made? Remember we can't create gold, we can meld it and make a coin out of it.
conti: but science doesn't explain as far as I know why or how gold existence. A Creator would've had to have created it by the Earth otherwise there is no explaintion why it even exist in the first place. My faith is not blind, you and every other atheist is the one barring false witness read my source it explains why evolution cannot happen. Oh and one more thing that kool aid comment is not an insult, I'm sorry you were offended by that however when someone says something similar to what
conti: he or anyone says you're just taking that idea to make fun of us, you'll just believe whatever he says and accept it as fact, kinda sounds like blind faith to me, so if I'm guilty of it so are you then. That's what I ment by that. I serve a God who can and does do anything. You serve yourself, what can you do that God can't huh? Can you walk on water? Can you depart the red sea? Can you help a young man take down a Giant? Can you make it rain for 40 days and 40 nights? Until then cya.
@FamousDave2186 Both The atheist Albert and the Atheist Dawkins are smarter then you and I did see the full unedited so called stumped vid so I know what really happened. Wow you just keep lying and thinking I will not call you on it, you have no ethics at all, you sir are a real Christian.
@elric6661 Albert Einstein was not an atheist, he was Jewish who believed in God and those quotes are what he really stated. No you didn't watch no full unedited because what I just told you really happen. But why can't you answer my questions? If you cannot do that then you can't prove evolution happen, and if evolution didn't happen than a Creator did create this Earth. Simple as that. The only thing you have to do is pray and ask Jesus to come into your heart and believe he is the Son of God
conti: who died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day hence Easter. I'll continue to keep praying for you and all atheist out there to find Jesus. oh and thank you for the complement, I'm glad I am a Christian. I'm not a liar, I'm a man who stands up for what's right. You choose whatever you want to believe but for me and my house we serve the Lord.
@FamousDave2186 Not a liar? All I have seen from you are lies...But I do believe you do stand up to keep the lie alive....or maybe your only in need of help..good luck with the serving thing. Glad I'm not a slave..Quick say something stupid about how ill serve after dead and feel good that just like everything you say you'll need no proof of that either.
@FamousDave2186 Born a jew became an atheist but that's only the facts...and you have faith and I see your still shifting the goal post. But it's ok I understand that really all you have. all you ever had. Well reading you live the life is more than boring so I am Done. I will have an informed conversation with someone and get this one out of my head. Now you can type..the world is flat all day long and keep believing in unicorns. After all you can't prove they don't.
@elric6661 (Facepalm) Never said the world was flat why do you guys do that? No Albert was not an atheist and no history supports that. Since you have no desire to read my source I gave you I'll share some of those point to everyone: (taken from source) Yes, there are many fossils lying around. That means a lot of plants and animals died and we can find their fossilized remains. Someone who believes in evolution would have you believe this happened over time. Think logically, if a rat died in
conti: an open field today, or a deer died in the woods, would either become fossilized? Would they stay put and untouched on the ground long enough to be covered by dirt eventually and become fossilized? No. They would be eaten by other animals and blown around by the winds and rains until a complete skeleton was no longer available. The reality is that there is no evidence that fossils were formed continually (or are being formed continually) as the theory of evolution predicts.
conti: On the other hand, what would happen if there were a worldwide flood, causing everything to drown, including the rat and the deer? They might float for awhile, but would eventually sink to the bottom of the water. Next, the sediment on the bottom of the water would cover the remains (since it is very mobile compared to dirt on land—especially if there is a flood going on at the time) starting the process of fossilization.
conti: There is no question that the large number of fossils testifies to the accuracy of the creation model rather than the theory of evolution model. There goes your fossils. I'm dying to hear your response to this.
I can go on much longer with actual facts that does prove the Bible to be true, I can goon to say how prophesies in the Bible were true and how archeologist prove the Bible to be accurate. One more thing even after I give you these facts you decided what to do with them.
@FamousDave2186 Read your source, told you I did...oops i see your lieing again. just like your souce did. Sorry my secular education allows me to know the facts. And to Quote Einstein "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly". Another quote "The idea of a personal god is quite alien to me and seems even naive"...
@FamousDave2186 ... now I'll let you show your lack of integrity and honesty and lie about this also....as for flat earth? If the intellectual and factual dishonesty fit.....PS you fossil proof shows your ignorance to much to bother with. nice thing is I dont have to have one or two cheery picked sources....The facts have many reliable reputable confirmable widely published sources. But that's only the truth....nothing to do with you.
@elric6661 I love how you claim I'm lying but don't back that claim up please share with me how that was wrong and no you never said you read my source otherwise you've tried to claim where the facts are wrong seems like you're the one who's lying. Seems like that is a reasonable explanation to me so let's see those "reliable" sources than. I'll continue to keep showing you proof you call it whatever you want and do whatever you want with it.
conti: (taken from source) Scientists discovered “living fossils” like the coelacanth that have not changed in form for “millions of years.:”
This is a genuine embarrassment for scientists who believe in evolution, who had to scramble for ideas that explained why these animals did not evolve while others did. (They had to find some explanation, or admit that the theory of evolution was wrong.) A popular example of such an explanation uses the concept of “stabilizing selection,”
conti: which would be worded like this: “Natural selection prevented change by eliminating all the innovations, sometimes for periods of millions of years.” Notice that this statement is the exact opposite of normal evolutionary thought If that is really the case, we wonder why some “renegade” species chose to follow stabilizing selection while others chose to evolve. The reality is that the theory of evolution has no valid explanation for living fossils.
conti: This is an example of the concept of stasis—standing in one spot. It may help you to know that stasis is not limited to “living fossils.” Stephen Jay Gould (an evolutionist) stated, “Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking pretty much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless.”
Conti: Therefore, both living fossils and the fossil record itself are in conflict with the theory of evolution, which normally teaches that we should see constant change in species—not stasis. Actually, the concept of stasis fits the Bible’s creation model perfectly. We would expect created plants and animals to remain in stasis—the way God created them.
conti: That's funny you said there's undeniable proof but yet you're own evolutionist just pointed out a flaw. Might want to check out that secular education on that one, let's see if you have the answer to that one. Like Jesus once said "For those who have an ear to hear, let them hear." Are you listening now or are you still covering your ears and not hearing the facts?
@FamousDave2186 lol your sad, Love the Einstein but huh? I just finished an article on people like you the kind that are hardwired to believe a lie even in the face of overwhelming evidence.. But that's science so you will not get it. Your sad and a liar and to drunk on the three or for sudo scientist who buck up to bother with, Buy the way two of every animal will not fit in one tub ether. Happy holidays. And now that I have met you, I still haven't found a good apologist.
@elric6661 so why can't you argue my points then? It seems you don't get science and learn how to make sentences, I'm not asking for perfect sentences but come on my niece makes better sentences than this and she's only 5. You might want to add yourself to that being hardwired to believe a lie since I've provided evidence and sense you've not come up with anything to prove me wrong. It was not a tub it was an ark, BIG DIFFERENCE. However I'm glad you mention that, on to the next point:
conti: " The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits (Genesis 6:15) History will tell us that it wasn't until the late 1800's does a ship built exceeded the capacity of Noah's ark. A cubit can vary anywhere from 17.5 inches (45cm) to 22inches (56cm) Even if we were to be conservative here that would still give you a sizable vessel. Now if one or two men today can build a large house in 12 weeks how much more could 3 or 4 men do
conti: in a few years? Adam's descendants were making complex musical instruments, forging metal, and building cities- (not the ones we have today but you get the idea) their tools, machines, and techniques were not primitive.
History has shown that technology can be lost. In Egypt, China, and the Americas the earlier dynasties built more impressive buildings or had finer art or better science. Many so-called modern inventions or just re-inventions, like concrete which the Romans used.
conti: Even accounting for possible loss of technology due to the Flood, early post- Flood civilizations display all the engineering know-how necessary for a project like Noah's Ark. People sawing and drilling wood in Noah's day, only a few centuries before the Egyptians were sawing and drilling granite, is very reasonable!
" Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you, to keep them alive (Genesis 6:20)
Noah didn't have to search for them, they came to him. The world map which I'm sure you'd even agree with was completely different before the Flood. The animals simply arrived at the Ark as if called by a "Homing instinct."
conti: Though this was probably a supernatural event, compare it to the migratory behavior we see in some animals today: the migration of Canada geese and other birds, the amazing flights of Monarch butterflies, annual travels of whales and fish, hibernation instincts, earthquake sensitivity and countless other fascinating capabilities of God's animal kingdom.
The ark didn't need to carry every kind of animal- nor did God command it. I carried only air breathing, land dwelling animals, creeping
conti: things, and winged animals such as birds. Fish whales and many amphibious creatures could have survived in sufficient numbers outside the Ark. This cuts down significantly the total number of animals that needed to be on board.
Another factor which greatly reduces the space requirements is the fact that the tremendous variety in species we see today did not exist in the days of Noah. Only the parent"kinds" of these species were required to be on board in order to repopulate the earth.
conti: here's one example: more than 200 different breeds of dogs exist today, from poodles to the St. Bernard- all of which descended from one original dog "kind" (as have the wolf, dingo, etc.). Many other types of animals- cat kind, horse kind, cow kind ect- have similarly been naturally and selectively bred to achieve the wonderful variation in species that we have today. God "programmed" this variety into the genetic code of all animal kinds- even us! God also made it impossible for the
conti: basic "kinds" of animals to breed and reproduce with each other. Cats and dogs cannot breed to make a new type of creature. This is by God's design, and it is one fact out of many that makes evolution impossible.
Noah wouldn't have taken the largest animals onto the Ark: it is more than likely he took juveniles aboard the Ark to repopulate the earth after the Flood was over. They require less space, less food, and have less waste so the only logical explanation on that one.
conti: Using a short cubit of 18 inches (46cm) for the Ark to be conservative, the conclusion is that " less than half of the cumulative area of the Ark's three decks need to have been occupied by the animals and their enclosures" ( taken from Woodmorappe, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, p 16 of book) This meant there was plenty of room for fresh food, water, and even many other people.
There you go. Ken Ham's books where I got most of this source explains way more than I did Please read them
Why not just say it was a miracle? Where is the glory of God if it can be rationally explained? That does not further our proof for God, but rather simplifies it. Though I am not religious, I once was, and part of that was believing in the miracles of God.
If all the stories in the Bible are scientifically valid, that is less evidence for a God. If it was possible that thge earth flooded (I still don't think so) then there is no need for God.
@Solensherre that didn't make any sense. Yes miracles can't be explained like how a flood came to be but explaining that a flood did happen using logic explains why the Bible is true. I didn't say how God did it, I explain how its believable that it did happen. You claim you don't think the earth was flooded so please tell me how I'm wrong in my past statement because that seems more logical than what evolution teaches?
@FamousDave2186 Well, my point was that miracles don't need science and reason. But obviously you desire to apply them, so here goes;
Scientifically, the flood does not account for the distribution of species on the earth like evolution does, nor is the gathering, fitting and feeding of billions of species viable in any way. Evolution is the most accurate, best supported scientific theory to diversity of life. You may assume some things on abiogenesis (we know little atm) but evolution is fact.
@Solensherre That didn't explain anything. You just made a statement, anyone can do that. Let's test some of that accuracy shall we. Here's one example for you:
(taken from source) Most people do not know that most rock layers are “dated” by the fossils they contain. Scientists will choose a special reference fossil called an “index fossil.” Then they assume (based on the phylogenetic tree) that the “simple” index fossils were the oldest. Finding one of these “oldest” index fossils in a
conti: layer identifies that layer as the “oldest.” They then assign a date to that rock layer (based on the theory of evolution) and record that date on their geologic time scale. They continue this process with the “more complex” index fossils—assigning each increase in “complexity” to a younger rock layer until they complete filling out the geologic time scale. (A complete geologic time scale is also referred to as a “geologic column.”)
Hmm. Despite the fact that I disagree with your viewpoints, and think you're delusional, I hope you got your videos put back (too lazy to check, despite the age of this video). Abuse of the DMCA, or any of the multitude of poorly phrased anti-piracy laws, is idiotic and counter productive.
arethkyntaul 2 weeks ago
i am happy that youtube is reviewing the case/has reviewed the case, because if there is no copyright infringement then you should be allowed to post your videos, despite how little i agree with what you say, i will fight to the death for your right to say it (to paraphrase voltaire).
fuckinghellyoutwat 3 weeks ago
"probably an atheist" - Brilliant, I am certain this video, when taken together with your others, will convince nearly every thinking person out there of the righteousness of your position and truth of your claims.
Come to think of it, this might actually just show everyone who sees it that you are of the mind to make baseless claims and accusations. In the latter case it's possible you will have successfully destroyed any chance you had of changing minds.
AndreisEntaro 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Actually, there are several companies called "Front Page Media". It's not that difficult to Google it. I Googled it and got four different results with the name "Front Page Media".
And it's not polite to just assume that an atheist flagged your video.
When my windows were broken and "devil worshipper" was spray painted on the side of my house, I didn't automatically blame the Christians from the church across the street, so you have no right to blame atheists right off the bat for your video.
RiskyCricket 2 months ago
Lol, are you insanely paranoid or just a pro troll?
AresExodus 3 months ago
@AresExodus
Pro TROLL... look, no ratings on this video! Looks like somebody CENSORED them... I just don't know who though...
GuitarMannnnnn 2 months ago
@GodLowDown
"...filed by somebody I GUESS doesn't like what I've been saying, so PROBABLY an atheist..."?
"So I'm GUESSING this is just some random atheist guy..."?
Seriously? You have no facts re: the identitiy or motivation of the flagger yet you post a vid titled "ATHEIST CENSORSHIP" wherein you make unfounded assumptions and accusations. That's called bearing false witness.
You could be right, but as with all of your arguments, you don't have evidence to support it.
Qillz 3 months ago
You know. If the measure of how right you are is how much your opposition censors you. Then the Atheist side wins hands down, although i dunno maybe you're somehow unaware of the arseholery and censorship practiced routinely by your side.
mrdarkevilme 3 months ago
You are a complete nut job and your arguments hold no merit.
Junglist1974 3 months ago
Christian mythology is fairy tales. .talking snake . .talking burning bushes. . Talking donkeys. . people walking on water. . zombies. . magic . .pregnant virgins. . Grow up people . .read other books besides that ancient text. . Seriously . .
0019josh7100 4 months ago
@GodLowDown why do you have ratings disabled? is not freedom of speech important to you?
MoralRapist 4 months ago
If you were to do research, many Atheist accounts have had the same problems man, it happens to both sides. cult of dusty had issues and a few others i know.
Madkevin88 4 months ago
@Madkevin88 yup. exactly.
MoralRapist 4 months ago
"If I was a complete nutjob"? Uhm, I'm thinking your problems with this individual are more along the lines of nutjob A verses nutjob B.
Two nutjobs bitchslapping each other on YouTube doesn't amount to you making any compelling arguments. Sorry to disabuse you of that notion.
moopism 5 months ago
You make very valid points. I am pleased to see that people who can actually analise things objectively receive such feedback.
theawesomebeliever 5 months ago
You might just be annoying.
MindfreakCM 6 months ago
How can you claim for other people censorship, if you're the first not to allow to vote your video or the comments to it, and most likely also the comments are subject to your approval?
anyhow: I know from your other videos that your arguments are tame and petty.
FreeSilio 6 months ago
Cool man don't listen to those Atheist fools they don't know there butt from a hole in the ground.
greenhornet123 6 months ago
You're absolutely wrong about absolutely everything, and it's trivial easy to disprove everything you say, but that doesn't justify censoring you. Whoever did that was stupid, and it wasn't necessarily an atheist.
And one person filling a false DMCA claim doesn't mean your arguments are strong....
Aleex490 6 months ago
"Apparently I'm so persuasive that somebody is trying to shut me up". LMFAO!!!
profsat5 6 months ago
Did you ever think that maybe you're just annoying?
Chilldudeski 6 months ago
I'm NOT afraid of anything your saying buddy.Your arguments are strong if you live in a delusional world of beliefs and that is coming from an EX CHRISTIAN and PROUD OF IT!!!!.
oemfx1965 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@oemfx1965 "coming from an EX CHRISTIAN and PROUD OF IT!!!!." According to 1 John 2:19 there is no such thing as an ex Christian. That verse is rather clear, if a person "leaves" the faith, then that indulvidual was never in the faith in the first place.
theabiotictheory 6 months ago
Either your message in this video is correct, or there are some really shitty people on the internet.
TakesTwoToTango 6 months ago
"assumption is the mother of all fuck ups"
Darusdei 7 months ago
its annoying how you assume its an atheist. Thats like saying 'someone stole my T.V must have been a black guy'.
Neall07 7 months ago
Ah censorship, good thing we can all share our opinions on here with a healthy thumbs up or thumbs down...
ImmaDwarfKicker 7 months ago
Don't worry, your arguments still suck. And so does the guy who did this to you.
NicolSD 7 months ago
It's probably the music you used you stupid fuck.
werebee 7 months ago
@werebee word! **thumbs up** keep answering if u agreed its prob music
hansson2000 7 months ago
Just one douche bag messing with another douche bag. Maybe get a life and stop worrying that others dont share your views.
jmstew0319 7 months ago
It's funny how both theists and atheists do this to each other. Both sides chose to believe it's because they're making good arguments but in actuality it's just because there are assholes on both sides of the argument who don't want to hear a good argument from either side so instead they attempt to sensor. BTW, I am an atheist and I think your arguments suck and I pity you for believing in them, but I will fight to the death for your right to argue them.
Draidis 7 months ago
@Draidis Damnit I wish likes weren't disabled on this video so I could vote this comment up. Draidis, this is exactly right. One may not agree with what GodLowDown is saying, but that doesn't mean anyone has the right to infringe on him saying it. I agree with your post in every capacity.
Geddicus 7 months ago
@Draidis Damn it!!!! I wanna thumbs up!!!
BoySamusMetroid 7 months ago
@BoySamusMetroid Thanks buddy!
Draidis 7 months ago
You're censoring yourself buddy, blocking ratings? Removing your own videos? What, is the little man afraid that people might not like what he says and instead have different opinions? Awwwww...
MrMosstin 8 months ago
good job whoever u are out there. you've encouraged this retard to make more shit videos....
k0rps3gynd3r 8 months ago
dont like what your saying???? imagine that.....
k0rps3gynd3r 8 months ago
.... that's the sound of your head exploding from overinflation.
qac1pitt 8 months ago
So let me get this straight.
Someone you don't know wrongfully flags your videos for copyright. This person leaves no information about himself. And you immediately assume he/she's an atheist, and label the video accordingly?
Have you forgot that there are other religions that disagree with yours? In fact, most of the world disagrees with your beliefs.
As an atheist, I want more loonies on YouTube. With every video I gain greater understanding of why I disbelieve. Keep the nonsense coming.
SeveredFootLoki 8 months ago
What a bizarre life it must be to base your life and beliefs on things with no evidence.
Hufflewaffle 8 months ago
I have to ask, is this guy a satirist? Is he impersonating and making fun of christians? I'm finding it hard to tell at times.
ArchhereticK 8 months ago
Isn't disabling ratings a type of censorship?
narco73 8 months ago
@narco73 like
Vodkainjected 8 months ago
@narco73 Look up the definition of censorship... then you can answer your own question
arktheball 8 months ago
@arktheball Good idea. I looked it up, and yes, disabling ratings is indeed a type if censorship.
"to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable"
And btw. It was a rhetorical question.
narco73 8 months ago
Okay, you just took yourself to a while new level of stupid in this video. Congratulations.
iOnlyHaveThisForWoW 8 months ago
Actually, if you were a complete nutjob, there would be a greater need to shut you down, because there'd still be 11k+ people listening to your insane ramblings, and a good percentage of them would take you seriously.
Lyinginbedmon 8 months ago
You're not special, it happens to everyone on both sides. They only do it so they can get your information and exploit it.
Steve7508 9 months ago
I say ship atheists out of the country and as far as copyright infringement, they have to prove that what you say is theirs, let the atheists spread their hate, God will take care of them.
smurfboywv 9 months ago
Soooo... your GUESSING its an Atheist, and you make a whole video complaining that Atheists are trying to shut you down, when you have NO EVIDENCE that it is an Atheist that did it. Maybe you should make a video claiming JEWISH CENSORSHIP... or ISLAMIC CENSORSHIP, you know, just in case it was one of those groups trying to keep you down!!! Or maybe one of the thousand other groups in the world who may find your videos awful like the rest of us do. FAIL
AtticusSD 9 months ago
The same thing has happened to many, many Atheists... don't point fingers.
FloridaLiberal 9 months ago
I don't really agree with most of what you say, but the internet should not be censored like this, we should be free to argue respectfully with about our differing conclusions on life. For anybody who tries to block provocative yet intelligent discussion such as this, for shame your pathetic cowardice, while I don't agree with your beliefs, thumbs up on your free speech.
RPSM101 9 months ago
I'm sorry that you were attacked. I'm glad you were able to sort it out with Youtube.
IcySkeptic 9 months ago
Comment removed
IcySkeptic 9 months ago
No, you are a nutjob. But people listen to you. This is why they felt the need to take you down for a short while.
TheMightyShell 9 months ago
If your arguments are that good why do you disable ratings?
Anyhow, false flagging happens to everyone. Atheists included, so this is no more than a dishonest way of making your case. Thumbs down.
Zebarbas 9 months ago
@Zebarbas Personally I never understood why folks here are always whining about ratings and I don't see how it has anything to do with the video myself. There are no good Christian arguments to an atheist! Christian videos will always get rated down simply because it's a Christian video. Many Christians take away the option for atheists to rate down their video because many atheists have diarrhea of the dislike button. Let me ask, how many atheists do you know thumb up any Christian video?
YhwhKhai 9 months ago
@YhwhKhai I've thumbed up all of venomfangx's current videos. And i use to like veritas48's for example. I have thumbed down atheist videos aswell, and there are atheistic arguments that are widely used with which i don't agree.
The internet is the atheist land, you're always going to get some thumbs down just for being a christian, but I think that if people lose this smug attitude the ratings won't suffer that much.
Generally you reap what you sow here.
Zebarbas 9 months ago
@Zebarbas And also. This guy strawmans everything. Atheists don't belive the world came out of nothing. Generally we accept our ignorance. And we don't have, as a general rule, a problem with god.
Zebarbas 9 months ago
@Zebarbas cause no matter how good his argument would be, anyone who didn't want to believe what he has to say would give it a bad rating.
gibsonlesfan14 9 months ago
Like most theists you have delusions of grandeur and more importantly, a victim complex. The religious hold every seat of power in the United States, and yet at every turn you cry that you're being oppressed, or in this case, censored. What I'm curious about is if you'll censor my post. What if I call you a fucking idiot? Will you take this comment down? If you do you are a complete hypocrite in more ways than one my friend.
brogin 9 months ago
Been looking for one of your videos that doesn't have the ratings disabled.
Found one.
Look at the ratings, mate. It's not a conspiracy, lots of people don't like you, your theories, your warped logic and your false god...
chardlb 9 months ago
@chardlb "Been looking for one of your videos that doesn't have the ratings disabled. Found one."
And I betcha you thumbed it down like most if not all atheists do! Which is why Christians remove the option and I would too if I had videos up. Instead of whining about ratings, just dispute the video! Ratings has nothing to do with censorship if the poster gives the opportunity to respond to the video or comment on it.
YhwhKhai 9 months ago
dude youtube took your videos off because freedom of speech is as solid as the framework which science was built on.
RecordsRolling 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheism is the new aspect that makes non educated scientists behave like non educated religious fanatics. So now its the same fanaticism as religion but with the certainty of science which has as many holes as religion when it comes to those juicy questions we really really want answered. I need just as much imagination in science to "see"
RecordsRolling 9 months ago
Have you taken a close look at the Christian/Muslim censorship on youtube? There's the well know case of VenomfangX and his twice filing DMCA's one of which he was court ordered to make a public apology for.
and have you ever noticed that Christians/Muslims have comments/ratings turned off by a margin of about 10 to 1 over atheist posts?
Look into it.
As for being afraid of what you're saying, what have you said? I see very little.
swilson3d 10 months ago
You got pranked by a retard and somehow (in your self-righteous mind) that means your arguments are "that strong"? Seriously? Are you serioously that deluded?
ArchhereticK 10 months ago
You and your arguments are idiotic. It was probably a christian trying to keep you from embarrassing them. See what I did there I made a claim with absolutely no base or evidence. The reason you think this way is probably why you're no an atheist in the first place.
XKaliber2097 10 months ago
Hey.... shutup.
Pinage 10 months ago
@TheAtheistCognition You state an interesting, albeit fallacious, argument:
White racists used the same fallacious argument against Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s peaceful marches when it was reported that white racists were violently attacking the peaceful black marchers -- the notion was that Dr. King must be doing something wrong if his marches inspired so much violence from his opponents.
History shows that your argument is not merely incorrect, but laughably incorrect.
1GodOnlyOne 11 months ago
The same fallacious argument has been used against innocent rape victims -- the girl must have wanted it, because obviously, the rapist chose to attack her instead of some other girl -- she must have done something to entice the rapist that the other girls didn't do. That argument (your argument) is clearly fallacious, so you lose.
atheist total fail
1GodOnlyOne 11 months ago
The atheist does this quite often. I know of one Theist whose channel has been taken down by the same dishonest atheist tactics seven times, and there are many other Theists who have fallen victim to the atheist's dishonesty at least once.
Advice to Theists: BACK UP YOUR VIDEOS! In some cases, you may not be able to get YT to reinstate them.
The fact that the atheist does this so often does show that we are winning the debate, and the fact that YT allows him to do it shows that YT is biased.
1GodOnlyOne 11 months ago
Hmmm out of 100 posts i think about 90% dont make it through, and 100% with shockofgod.
purepwn01 11 months ago
@purepwn01
Yeah... no censorship there....
mtszabo 11 months ago
1 douche bag does not a conspiracy make.
hardinmichael1981 11 months ago
people here keep commenting that his arguments aren't good and that they get ignored. why all the hype then? these are people who are coming on this site, just to say that his arguments aren't worth listening to?
alexavasquez1992 11 months ago
you got trolled, get over yourself, its the internet....fuck
JuiceBoxheero 11 months ago
This guy is the equivalent of the high school retard who doesn't realize he's being mocked.
ChakatBlackstar 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wow complaining about censorship? you? YOU FUCKING HYPOCRITE!
86Corvus 11 months ago
It´s sad that your videos are taken down due to somebodys whim. But I just gotta say that the same happens to videoes by Atheists too. Should they/we blame Theists then??
Nekhet 1 year ago
Wow really? My page went down so ill blame atheists blindly. You might as well blame blacks, or whites, or gays, or any random type of person. Why do you pick out athiests? Atheists are people.. a good deal of which don't even use youtube at all.
Lyomic 1 year ago
No you arguments aren't that good and you are ignored. The guy who false dcma you is just an asshole.
gotnatas 1 year ago
Pro-atheist here. Sorry to hear that some guy tried to shut you down. But I wouldn't say "you're doing something right". I've seen cultists use exactly the same reasoning to prove "they're right". You've heard of them, the ones with famous actors on their ranks.
Another point is that you can't be sure it was an atheist who took you down. It's just speculation. Careful with those statements, you're lowering yourself.
In any case, keep talking. Nothing like a good debate to bring out the truth.
rickg22 1 year ago
This copyright shit is getting old. You kids need to quit filing "copyright" infringement stuff against each other. Atheists are getting this as much as the theists. The lame part of it is that every time a page gets a "copyright infringement," the user comes back EVERY TIME and says: "See guys, people wanna shut me down because they are scared I'm right." Christ. Just stop so we don't have to hear bullshit like this anymore. Nobody is censoring Godlowdown because they "fear his truth," lmao.
instereovideos 1 year ago
I love how you assume it was an Atheist ...
TEEJAY9920 1 year ago
For the record, it's not that your arguments are so good that people get afraid. It's that your arguments are so bad that people get annoyed.
wanad8 1 year ago
LOL so.. ATHEIST CENSORSHIP and then he enables rating on this video while all the other ones i've seen have rating disabled.
hawkister 1 year ago
Make your argument right here on the comments then. I'd like to hear them.
logicalmind4 1 year ago
CHRISTIAN CONCLUSIONS! Pft...
jp00000420 1 year ago
@godlowdown if you whatched your responces a guy researched front page media you werent the only one hit by it it aparently wanted to steal personel information and identity theft so it tried to scam a bunch of people you were one some atheists were some and people who had nothing at all to do with this debate
cake1834 1 year ago
trolololol he trolllls youuuu
Hav0cAttack 1 year ago
Who ever did this is an asshole (Btw, im atheist)
Everyone should have a right to freedom of speech...
KeistasZmogelis 1 year ago
And I don't have the time to explain this all to you.
Though one last logical fact which should be considered is this; With billions of species, all consuming vast amounts of food and water every day, each one requiring different temperatures and degrees of light, how would they survive to be distributed in such a non-random way on earth?
About the fish; how many saltwater fish survive the freshwater that rainwater consists of?
Finally, where did all the water come from?
Solensherre 1 year ago
continuation: the other views the diversity of life, and theorizes using the base principles of geology, chemistry, atomic physics and so on. You don't seem to understand the fact that had your claims been in any way logical and scientifically curious in nature, then EVERYTHING we know about the world, and the universe would have to be re-written. The same principles of radiometric dating exist in microwave ovens and X-ray scanners.
Solensherre 1 year ago
Continued: Your criticism of the use of evolutionary theory in dating I agree would be horrendous if they did in the same exact place. However, if this action is performed via knowing the age of certain areas of rock, and seeing what animals live in this area then estimating the age of a separate rock by the fossils in it because radiometric dating may be difficult. This is not intended as evidence for evolution, merely an application of one of the most successful theories of all time.
Solensherre 1 year ago
@Solensherre I would suggest you reread my posts, yes I know quite a bit, but your posts don't prove my info wrong. 1st point we don't know which rock started on this earth, this dates back to the fall of man the world became cursed and because of it everything started to decay so even when rocks are formed they start decaying you cannot assume that there wasn't any decay. 2nd No not all waterbased animals would die due to the flood that made no sense at all.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
cpnti: they may have 100's of methods but they don't use all of em for various reasons. they get different results. As I stated with a lump of tuff they got 3 different results. How can you say that's accurate? Just because its measured that way doesn't make it right, now in fairness the same can be said about 1000s years so that's why I say we don't know for sure and I won't assume that it is like you guys do. your last point just basically stated how you assume age you cannot assume facts
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: and not in evidence if a lawyer does this he or she gets laughed at in court. How do you know which one is right? When something has too many flaws and uncertainty it should not be accepted as fact as what evolution has been. I would ask that you read some of Ken Ham's books. They're pretty good and explains how Creation did happen.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Ok, let's get this straight, you think that the uncertainties, which may account for 100 million years discrepancy between various methods when measuring the billions is enough to discard radiometric dating when it goes past your supposed start of the universe?
I agree we don't know for sure, but in so far evaluating creation 1000s of years ago versus Big Bang then eventually evolution billions of years ago, the two are mismatched. One starts with the conclusion (God created
Solensherre 1 year ago
@Solensherre first point yes because its assuming something without any proof. You claim evolution is scientific ok so let me see if I get this right? According to you in the beginning there was nothing- and absolutely nothing was happening to absolutely nothing. Then one random day- absolutely nothing exploded and absolutely nothing became... Everything. Then the nothing became everything (for no reason at all) rearranged itself into self- replicating, intricately complex life forms.This
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: Abiogenic beginning of life- you say happened only once- unwitnessed- and never happened again- Billions of years ago- How convenient. Give me one example of a mutation which can be seen to increase the useful, beneficial information in the genome?
3rd did you read all of my posts or did you just pick and choose. I really don't feel like putting everything I wrote on here back again so I'll pm you everything about Noah's Ark and we can go from there. We don't don't know if the flood's
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: water was just rainwater for it says all water were gushing out from the earth. Its possible to believe they took two fish put them in a bowl of freshwater than after the flood found an oasis to let the fish populate. The Bible doesn't go into detail about that nor is that piece of information even important. but for you thing before it I'll give in pm.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
edit: subtract that part about the fresh water fish here's some info I found. (I'm sorry for that)
We do not know how salty the sea was before the flood. The flood was initiated by the breaking up of the “fountains of the great deep” (Genesis 7:11). Whatever the “fountains of the great deep” were the flood must have been associated with massive earth movements, because of the weight of the water alone, which would have resulted in great volcanic activity.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: Volcanoes emit huge amounts of steam, and underwater lava creates hot water/steam, which dissolves minerals, adding salt to the water. Furthermore, erosion accompanying the movement of water off the continents after the flood would have added salt to the oceans. In other words, we would expect the pre-flood ocean waters to be less salty than they were after the flood. There is also a possibility that stable fresh and saltwater layers developed and persisted in some parts of the ocean.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti:Fresh water can sit on top of salt water for extended periods of time. Turbulence may have been sufficiently low at high latitudes for such layering to persist and allow the survival of both freshwater and saltwater species in those areas.
So it is not unreasonable to believe that both fresh water and salt water can coexist I've even learn something today thanks for that.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 I would like to continue this debate with pms please, it seems the 500 character limit is too little for both of us. If you feel the need for these debates to be publicized, I am sure we could agree to some means (i.e. copy pasting to this site, or production of videos with our discussions either in text or some more complicated format).
Also, like I did not mention in my pm, it saddens me that I made you enlightened in such a fallacious way...
Solensherre 1 year ago
Continued: agree on an aproximate age of the earth, and yes with a rather high uncertainty, does that nopt at all allude to you that the earth is between 3.8 billion to 5.7 billion years old? Not to mention the background radiation of the universe which effectively dates the universe to aprox 15 billion years?
There is plenty uncertainty, that is true, but that still means that the age of the earth/universe is measured in billions, not thousands of years.
Solensherre 1 year ago
@GodLowDown If it is indeed an atheist who attempted to censor you, I would, as a fellow atheist, apologize for his behaviour.
No matter the heresy, no matter the pain of being heard, no matter the disagreements, all should be allowed to speak till their throat goes sore.
Solensherre 1 year ago
"If my arguements didn't have an merit....."
Eh sorry to tell you............but they don't.
Plus I love how your christian teachings haven't thought you how not to be a big ass. I mean, here you go with no evidence, saying that it was an atheist that issued the complaint.
But I'm not suprised....I mean to be christian means to jump to any conclusion you want for answers to questions that you don't have the answer for. Like explaing what evidence there to support the exsistence of a god
ComisarNolan 1 year ago
Which video was shut down?
That's weird. I'm sitting here watching all your 12 available vids in order, and they're really not even challenging. It's like shooting fallacies in a barrel. But you haven't made a lot of outrageous undocumented claims, like Nephilimfree or some others, so it's really not that bad. Mostly just opinions and tunnel-vision perceptions. Not sure why anyone would get upset enough to censor. Unless you censored them.
I think everyone should be able to speak ideas.
OptimisticCynic715 1 year ago
@OptimisticCynic715 No apologist has ever made a claim that has any credible evidence behind it. If they did it would be world news. But they cover this point by playing the smug victim.
elric6661 1 year ago
I haven't seen any of your videos, except for your pathetically fallacious "How To Make an Atheists Head Explode" video, and even though that video was a really bad argument that wouldn't work on anyone intelligent, I still think that you have the right to broadcast your videos. Whoever false flagged you is an asshole, whether or not they are an atheist. BTW, atheists get the false flagging as well as theists, so censorship certainly isn't an atheist thing.
IsaacDomagalski 1 year ago
@IsaacDomagalski I saw the vid, I am an atheist my heads still here...so he was wrong...again.
elric6661 1 year ago
Chances are it was a Theist that did that because your videos make them look stupid.
AstarothDeathSquirre 1 year ago
hello world..
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
I find it funny that you are complaining about censorship, but you screen the comments.
tombert256 1 year ago
Love when you guys act like the victims...it's a laugh. Nobody is afraid of you. lol another invisible man believer that's a legend in his own mind...the same mind that thinks you can get two of every animal on a ship. Happy Holidays.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 I think it's funny that people who have nothing better to say decide to ridicule someone, I worry for when you have to discuss a bloody good apologist, no wait I don't, you will shut your eyes and ears and run for the hills.
australianresistance 1 year ago
@australianresistance There exist a good apologist? That would be a first. And since I am an atheist if there ever was a good argument I would listen but the fact is atheism exist because the argument has not been forthcoming and not one shred of evidence has been presented.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 no you don't want to listen otherwise you'd try to prove your own theory. I highly doubt you actually challenge what your science teacher has taught you. You just believe it cause you don't want to accept the Word of God. I'll pm you a website if you want to prove me wrong and you will listen. If you do please click on the links of other blogs they have on there, and one more thing no insults.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 This is getting sad and boring I get you don't understand the scientific method and after I explain it you still will Choose to not get it. I don't have to prove there are no pink unicorns in my backyard as there has there has never been any proof of a pink unicorn. It is the person making the fantastic claim that must provide the verifiable falsifiable proof. By your rules you must believe in the unicorn ..same amount of proof.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 for someone who wants to be proven wrong you sure jump to conclusions don't you. I understand the scientific method its you who doesn't understand it, and that source I gave you explains why evolution doesn't follow the scientific method. Pink unicorns? Someone been drinking the Richard dawkins kool-aid lately, if you want to play like that then explain to me why a watch can make itself. No one to help it just form on its own, by your logic that should happen so explain.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
I'm reminded of one of the world's smartest man, Albert Einstein, who said this " I want to know God's thoughts; all the rest is just details." and another quote is " when the solution is simple, God is answering." Now why would a smart man like him say that? If he used the scientific method as you claim shouldn't he be an atheist? Instead he believed in Creation. Why is that the most respectable man in science was a Creationist if evolution is true. Think about that one.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Please stop He was very smart and if you care about facts or the truth you can find all the times he stated himself as an atheist who was fed up with theist taking his poetic words out of context or just lying about him. Isn't there some "false witness" thing your suppose to be against? Funny with my secular morels I'm the one who cared about the truth.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 yes Albert was smart not Dawkins. You should watch that video where he was stumped on. "Ever seen a a mutation that befitted a genome?" His respose "umm... I... ahh... stop the type."Yeah he sure explain that one didn't he. He then writes an article which goes against that scientific belief called evolution. He only believes what he wants to believe just like you. You claim to care about the truth yet you look at one perspective and not give another view a chance. If I'm so wrong
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: than you should have no problem explaining why my source I pm you yesterday is wrong. why don't do that? is it because you can't? The reason i explain the watch is to prove my point, evolution would tell us nothing somehow became our universe, well what cause that big bang and why doesn't it happen anymore? Why aren't living things evolving anymore? where are the fossils to prove missing links, why do we die? Why do people do good if its survival of the fittest? After all isn't now
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: seen as barbaric to kill someone for food or other wants and needs? Why do you even care if we are wrong what's it to you. Are reason is to share God's love and show you are Savior Jesus Christ died on the cross for our atonement of our sins. Whoever shall believe in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life with the Father (God) in Heaven. What's your motive for trying to spread atheism? How was gold made? Remember we can't create gold, we can meld it and make a coin out of it.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: but science doesn't explain as far as I know why or how gold existence. A Creator would've had to have created it by the Earth otherwise there is no explaintion why it even exist in the first place. My faith is not blind, you and every other atheist is the one barring false witness read my source it explains why evolution cannot happen. Oh and one more thing that kool aid comment is not an insult, I'm sorry you were offended by that however when someone says something similar to what
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: he or anyone says you're just taking that idea to make fun of us, you'll just believe whatever he says and accept it as fact, kinda sounds like blind faith to me, so if I'm guilty of it so are you then. That's what I ment by that. I serve a God who can and does do anything. You serve yourself, what can you do that God can't huh? Can you walk on water? Can you depart the red sea? Can you help a young man take down a Giant? Can you make it rain for 40 days and 40 nights? Until then cya.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Both The atheist Albert and the Atheist Dawkins are smarter then you and I did see the full unedited so called stumped vid so I know what really happened. Wow you just keep lying and thinking I will not call you on it, you have no ethics at all, you sir are a real Christian.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 Albert Einstein was not an atheist, he was Jewish who believed in God and those quotes are what he really stated. No you didn't watch no full unedited because what I just told you really happen. But why can't you answer my questions? If you cannot do that then you can't prove evolution happen, and if evolution didn't happen than a Creator did create this Earth. Simple as that. The only thing you have to do is pray and ask Jesus to come into your heart and believe he is the Son of God
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: who died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day hence Easter. I'll continue to keep praying for you and all atheist out there to find Jesus. oh and thank you for the complement, I'm glad I am a Christian. I'm not a liar, I'm a man who stands up for what's right. You choose whatever you want to believe but for me and my house we serve the Lord.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Not a liar? All I have seen from you are lies...But I do believe you do stand up to keep the lie alive....or maybe your only in need of help..good luck with the serving thing. Glad I'm not a slave..Quick say something stupid about how ill serve after dead and feel good that just like everything you say you'll need no proof of that either.
elric6661 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Born a jew became an atheist but that's only the facts...and you have faith and I see your still shifting the goal post. But it's ok I understand that really all you have. all you ever had. Well reading you live the life is more than boring so I am Done. I will have an informed conversation with someone and get this one out of my head. Now you can type..the world is flat all day long and keep believing in unicorns. After all you can't prove they don't.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 (Facepalm) Never said the world was flat why do you guys do that? No Albert was not an atheist and no history supports that. Since you have no desire to read my source I gave you I'll share some of those point to everyone: (taken from source) Yes, there are many fossils lying around. That means a lot of plants and animals died and we can find their fossilized remains. Someone who believes in evolution would have you believe this happened over time. Think logically, if a rat died in
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: an open field today, or a deer died in the woods, would either become fossilized? Would they stay put and untouched on the ground long enough to be covered by dirt eventually and become fossilized? No. They would be eaten by other animals and blown around by the winds and rains until a complete skeleton was no longer available. The reality is that there is no evidence that fossils were formed continually (or are being formed continually) as the theory of evolution predicts.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: On the other hand, what would happen if there were a worldwide flood, causing everything to drown, including the rat and the deer? They might float for awhile, but would eventually sink to the bottom of the water. Next, the sediment on the bottom of the water would cover the remains (since it is very mobile compared to dirt on land—especially if there is a flood going on at the time) starting the process of fossilization.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: There is no question that the large number of fossils testifies to the accuracy of the creation model rather than the theory of evolution model. There goes your fossils. I'm dying to hear your response to this.
I can go on much longer with actual facts that does prove the Bible to be true, I can goon to say how prophesies in the Bible were true and how archeologist prove the Bible to be accurate. One more thing even after I give you these facts you decided what to do with them.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
I'll continue to keep showing you proof since you don't think we have any.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Read your source, told you I did...oops i see your lieing again. just like your souce did. Sorry my secular education allows me to know the facts. And to Quote Einstein "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly". Another quote "The idea of a personal god is quite alien to me and seems even naive"...
elric6661 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 ... now I'll let you show your lack of integrity and honesty and lie about this also....as for flat earth? If the intellectual and factual dishonesty fit.....PS you fossil proof shows your ignorance to much to bother with. nice thing is I dont have to have one or two cheery picked sources....The facts have many reliable reputable confirmable widely published sources. But that's only the truth....nothing to do with you.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 I love how you claim I'm lying but don't back that claim up please share with me how that was wrong and no you never said you read my source otherwise you've tried to claim where the facts are wrong seems like you're the one who's lying. Seems like that is a reasonable explanation to me so let's see those "reliable" sources than. I'll continue to keep showing you proof you call it whatever you want and do whatever you want with it.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: (taken from source) Scientists discovered “living fossils” like the coelacanth that have not changed in form for “millions of years.:”
This is a genuine embarrassment for scientists who believe in evolution, who had to scramble for ideas that explained why these animals did not evolve while others did. (They had to find some explanation, or admit that the theory of evolution was wrong.) A popular example of such an explanation uses the concept of “stabilizing selection,”
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: which would be worded like this: “Natural selection prevented change by eliminating all the innovations, sometimes for periods of millions of years.” Notice that this statement is the exact opposite of normal evolutionary thought If that is really the case, we wonder why some “renegade” species chose to follow stabilizing selection while others chose to evolve. The reality is that the theory of evolution has no valid explanation for living fossils.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: This is an example of the concept of stasis—standing in one spot. It may help you to know that stasis is not limited to “living fossils.” Stephen Jay Gould (an evolutionist) stated, “Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking pretty much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless.”
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
Conti: Therefore, both living fossils and the fossil record itself are in conflict with the theory of evolution, which normally teaches that we should see constant change in species—not stasis. Actually, the concept of stasis fits the Bible’s creation model perfectly. We would expect created plants and animals to remain in stasis—the way God created them.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: That's funny you said there's undeniable proof but yet you're own evolutionist just pointed out a flaw. Might want to check out that secular education on that one, let's see if you have the answer to that one. Like Jesus once said "For those who have an ear to hear, let them hear." Are you listening now or are you still covering your ears and not hearing the facts?
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 lol your sad, Love the Einstein but huh? I just finished an article on people like you the kind that are hardwired to believe a lie even in the face of overwhelming evidence.. But that's science so you will not get it. Your sad and a liar and to drunk on the three or for sudo scientist who buck up to bother with, Buy the way two of every animal will not fit in one tub ether. Happy holidays. And now that I have met you, I still haven't found a good apologist.
elric6661 1 year ago
@elric6661 so why can't you argue my points then? It seems you don't get science and learn how to make sentences, I'm not asking for perfect sentences but come on my niece makes better sentences than this and she's only 5. You might want to add yourself to that being hardwired to believe a lie since I've provided evidence and sense you've not come up with anything to prove me wrong. It was not a tub it was an ark, BIG DIFFERENCE. However I'm glad you mention that, on to the next point:
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: " The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits (Genesis 6:15) History will tell us that it wasn't until the late 1800's does a ship built exceeded the capacity of Noah's ark. A cubit can vary anywhere from 17.5 inches (45cm) to 22inches (56cm) Even if we were to be conservative here that would still give you a sizable vessel. Now if one or two men today can build a large house in 12 weeks how much more could 3 or 4 men do
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: in a few years? Adam's descendants were making complex musical instruments, forging metal, and building cities- (not the ones we have today but you get the idea) their tools, machines, and techniques were not primitive.
History has shown that technology can be lost. In Egypt, China, and the Americas the earlier dynasties built more impressive buildings or had finer art or better science. Many so-called modern inventions or just re-inventions, like concrete which the Romans used.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: Even accounting for possible loss of technology due to the Flood, early post- Flood civilizations display all the engineering know-how necessary for a project like Noah's Ark. People sawing and drilling wood in Noah's day, only a few centuries before the Egyptians were sawing and drilling granite, is very reasonable!
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: Next is how Noah round up the animals:
" Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you, to keep them alive (Genesis 6:20)
Noah didn't have to search for them, they came to him. The world map which I'm sure you'd even agree with was completely different before the Flood. The animals simply arrived at the Ark as if called by a "Homing instinct."
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: Though this was probably a supernatural event, compare it to the migratory behavior we see in some animals today: the migration of Canada geese and other birds, the amazing flights of Monarch butterflies, annual travels of whales and fish, hibernation instincts, earthquake sensitivity and countless other fascinating capabilities of God's animal kingdom.
The ark didn't need to carry every kind of animal- nor did God command it. I carried only air breathing, land dwelling animals, creeping
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: things, and winged animals such as birds. Fish whales and many amphibious creatures could have survived in sufficient numbers outside the Ark. This cuts down significantly the total number of animals that needed to be on board.
Another factor which greatly reduces the space requirements is the fact that the tremendous variety in species we see today did not exist in the days of Noah. Only the parent"kinds" of these species were required to be on board in order to repopulate the earth.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: here's one example: more than 200 different breeds of dogs exist today, from poodles to the St. Bernard- all of which descended from one original dog "kind" (as have the wolf, dingo, etc.). Many other types of animals- cat kind, horse kind, cow kind ect- have similarly been naturally and selectively bred to achieve the wonderful variation in species that we have today. God "programmed" this variety into the genetic code of all animal kinds- even us! God also made it impossible for the
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: basic "kinds" of animals to breed and reproduce with each other. Cats and dogs cannot breed to make a new type of creature. This is by God's design, and it is one fact out of many that makes evolution impossible.
Noah wouldn't have taken the largest animals onto the Ark: it is more than likely he took juveniles aboard the Ark to repopulate the earth after the Flood was over. They require less space, less food, and have less waste so the only logical explanation on that one.
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: Using a short cubit of 18 inches (46cm) for the Ark to be conservative, the conclusion is that " less than half of the cumulative area of the Ark's three decks need to have been occupied by the animals and their enclosures" ( taken from Woodmorappe, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, p 16 of book) This meant there was plenty of room for fresh food, water, and even many other people.
There you go. Ken Ham's books where I got most of this source explains way more than I did Please read them
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 I just have one simple question;
Why not just say it was a miracle? Where is the glory of God if it can be rationally explained? That does not further our proof for God, but rather simplifies it. Though I am not religious, I once was, and part of that was believing in the miracles of God.
If all the stories in the Bible are scientifically valid, that is less evidence for a God. If it was possible that thge earth flooded (I still don't think so) then there is no need for God.
Solensherre 1 year ago
@Solensherre that didn't make any sense. Yes miracles can't be explained like how a flood came to be but explaining that a flood did happen using logic explains why the Bible is true. I didn't say how God did it, I explain how its believable that it did happen. You claim you don't think the earth was flooded so please tell me how I'm wrong in my past statement because that seems more logical than what evolution teaches?
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
@FamousDave2186 Well, my point was that miracles don't need science and reason. But obviously you desire to apply them, so here goes;
Scientifically, the flood does not account for the distribution of species on the earth like evolution does, nor is the gathering, fitting and feeding of billions of species viable in any way. Evolution is the most accurate, best supported scientific theory to diversity of life. You may assume some things on abiogenesis (we know little atm) but evolution is fact.
Solensherre 1 year ago
@Solensherre That didn't explain anything. You just made a statement, anyone can do that. Let's test some of that accuracy shall we. Here's one example for you:
(taken from source) Most people do not know that most rock layers are “dated” by the fossils they contain. Scientists will choose a special reference fossil called an “index fossil.” Then they assume (based on the phylogenetic tree) that the “simple” index fossils were the oldest. Finding one of these “oldest” index fossils in a
FamousDave2186 1 year ago
conti: layer identifies that layer as the “oldest.” They then assign a date to that rock layer (based on the theory of evolution) and record that date on their geologic time scale. They continue this process with the “more complex” index fossils—assigning each increase in “complexity” to a younger rock layer until they complete filling out the geologic time scale. (A complete geologic time scale is also referred to as a “geologic column.”)
FamousDave2186 1 y