CHRIST is the only CREATOR... the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
God never said that man could exploit the earth as they wish...what a foolish comment. " That made it clear that God said man could exploit the earth as they wish"...I have never seen such twisting of scripture. Man was commanded to take care of the earth....Way to twist and take out of context basic truths of scripture.
@btbtom The only way for civilized people to accept religion is to NOT take it litterary.
"I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.’
So all women for all eternity shall suffer and serve because of a silly mistake done by one individual, which by the way God created with whatever faults she had.
Now I understand where religious people get their morals from!
@TheSaltyAdmiral He took the verse out of context. God did not say exploit the earth.
As to the verse you talk about. Nowhere does God say "for eternity" as you said. Nor does this verse mean that the woman is to serve the man. If we take a look at the whole of scripture God says the man should serve the woman also, not be some overbearing slave driver. I will not be judged by what Adam or Eve did. We all make enough mistakes of our own, we don't need to take the blame for others.
@btbtom Have dominion and ruling, in the context of the time when the scripture is written (900 - 1000 BC), was actually about exploitation -- rulers who have dominion over their subjects exploit their subjects -- that's the routine of those days.
@yellowlynx The immediate context and context of the entire bible is what I am talking about. God is commanding them to take care of creation. Whatever people did in 900-1000 doesn't create a context in the scripture. If God commands someone to take care of creation and they exploit it, well that is disobedience, not context. Jesus commands us to love your enemies. Well, in todays context where getting even is more important, does that happen?
@btbtom Whatever people did in 900-1000 is the context, because that was what the author of the Bible wants to say, otherwise, they would not use the words "have dominion/subdue" but "take care of creation" -- just give up these kind of interpretative maneuvouring and acrobats -- I know you want to make the Bible sound caring in YOUR interpretation, but 900 - 1000 BC authors have their say, and you cannot override them.
David Attenborough is just an icon, what a great man he is, and what an influence he has had on the presentation of nature and wildlife on television!
Look at the picture at 6.22 there is a good piece of evidence that the government is hiding the fact that there were once giant humans on the planet! You see a couple of huge skeletons. Strange? Not really, search and you will find..
@tommos1 lol more people want sex than playing soccer. did u understand? if u want porn u go redtube.com, if u want basketball go to nba.com. still dont understand? u must be a fail evolution
@tommos1 im sorry but i was a victim of hacking system when i open my youtube account it didnt open til 20 possible attemp then i got to reclaim this page. sorry its almost failure than evolution sorry.
@62Elvis That's not a fact, it was a claim of a religious newspaper in 1915. Historians and Darwin's children dismissed that claim. His last words were directed to his family.
Darwin said he wasn't an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God but more like an agnostic person.
the secret of kabbalah and kundalini in the stars BR YOD = 33 --- watch Solar Scorpio Kundalini at jagball22 type in jagball22 to learn the secret of the stars jagball22
@scottrex33 Of course it's fictional, all's it is, is a bunch of creation myths, whereas evolution is just part of nature, this whole idea of there being an Almighty creator is just a man-made idea
science does not disprove the existence of God, moreover it explains how God made things happen... The bible is written 2000 yrs ago therefore it is not to be taken literally. another thing to remember is that it was written by man.... how could someone 2000 yrs ago explain with modern day science waht God was doing... So than you either believe in the bible or you dont Science is just a method of explaining how everything was done
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; 20 - and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile."
STOP LOOKING AT THE PAST AND INSTEAD WHO CARES WHERE WERE FROM OR WHAT CREATED US THAT INFORMATION IS IRRELEVANT TO THE bigger picture what matters is where we are headed and at this rate where world is heading to its death adn why because people are looking into the past and trying to figure out the impossible if you believe in god thats your opinion if you dont thats also your opinion however get your eyes away from the back of your head and put them in front
Holy rollers think the earth is the center of the universe and it's history only spans a few million years. Religion needs to go!!! The world will survive and nations will prosper.
@Jnest55 I know you deeply believe in all the bullshit the church has crammed down your throat but in the "real world" I know your religion has made nations war for millenia!!!
@Jnest55 ok, I checked with a KJV. Gallilee still translates to Gallilee... three translates to three... Mount olivet translates to Mt Olivet... and bat translates to bat.
and Mrshitstained is as his name suggests. :-)
religion in general has been the cause to raise the sword, not one particular religion over the other.
@Jnest55 Just because you have an answer doesn't make it the right one; especially when reality doesn't even back up your version of the question. The universe got by just fine for billions of years without Christianity, and once Christianity dies out (like the Greek or Roman religions did) the universe will continue on for billions or trillions more. Even in the comparably tiny span of human history Christianity & all the other current religions will end up being nothing more than footnotes.
@Jnest55 If the moral laws were "absolute" there would be no stealing, murder, rape, dishonesty, etc. anywhere in the world. Last time I checked that wasn't the case, so either God is impotent or there is no such being. Christianity simply imposes a moral code by instilling fear into its adherents of a terrible punishment awaiting them in the afterlife, but that has been shown to be unnecessary & untrue because morality is an evolutionary advantage that assists with propagation of the species.
@Jnest55 Depends on how you define 'real'. Since we human animals share the same basic needs and live together in a society, our methods tend to be similar. Because the way we live is similar we also have similar likes and dislikes, loves and fears, etc. so it's not a surprise that we'd develop a code of behavior to facilitate a functioning and happy society. We aren't the only animals that do this either. No supernatural intervention is necessary if you know all the facts about the system.
@icemachine79 ice, serial killers and sociopaths dont hold the same values as most humans do, does that make what they do right or "not neccessarily wrong"?
In essence is there any such thing as right and wrong, or is that just subjegative on how a given person feels?
@Jnest55 You're right, they don't, which means they are unable to effectively socialize among humans as well as you or I, which means that there won't be as many of them around in future generations. There are many levels of 'right' and 'wrong' and yes it is subjective. But since humans as a species share certain needs and desires (such as the need for food, water, etc) we also tend to share certain views on what's right & wrong. Note the word 'tend'; there are usually exceptions to the rule.
@icemachine79 friend, absolute right and wrong has nothing to do with reproduction- take the laci dugard case for example- the sociopath involved there had several kids by his wife, and several by the child he kidnapped-he very effectively procreated my friend
Without absolute right and wrong we are nothing more than animals, with no values, no morals, nothing good at all
Feeling can change at any moment, and if theres no absolute right and wrong, why use the terms right and wrong anyways?
@Jnest55 Moral is subjective 100% Animals have their own moral standards that fit their way of life. If an animal started to mimic a human he would be unsuccessful, if a human would adopt animal moral standards he would be unsuccessful too.
@Jnest55 That we have such a developed brain and so much power over our environment. But the conscious brain is still only evolved as a tool to make our body survive and interact in our environment.
@Jnest55 We are the only ones that can do it thanks to the knowledge we build up for thousands of years. Our drive to explore, invent, etc does the rest. The same what drove us to develop stone tools and make fire.
Animals have been hunted by humans for millions of years so that could explain an instinctive fear. That would also explain why isolated populations such as the galapagos animals are so tame.
@Jnest55 How do you know the odds? Maybe its the same odds of an animal such as a bat developing echo location. If there is a niche(position in an ecosystem) to be exploited its not about odds but natural selection driving a species to specialize and take advantage of it.
I just say moral standards are subjective. If 2 persons argue about abortion being moral or immoral, how would you prove somebody is right or wrong? All we can do is make a law based on what most people agree on.
@Jnest55 Do you believe that life is 3.5 billion years old? Because the variation in species can only be explained because of hundreds of millions of years of evolution. On this timescale it only takes minimal changes to add up to the variety we see in the species (the kind of changes between you and any other human)
1 Different species converge back to common ancestors that doesn't have to resemble them at a first glance. Fossils of these ancestors definitely exist.
2 The mechanism is observable and testable but speciation itself takes thousands to millions of years.
3 Not in our lifetime, mostly... But there are examples of observed speciation in plants and animals. There are lots of other facts that confirm that boundries are really grey area's for example ringspecies.
@DutchNordic friend Im not going to argue with you about those things but Ill remind you of some facts:
The way evolutionists determine if a given animal\fossil is the anscestor of another is by measuring how many similar characteristics they have in structure,genetic material, and function
Also Ill remind you that families are classified by similarities animals share in the above areas
Also nowheres has microevolution been observed or successfully tested, it is completely hypothetical
@DutchNordic what you are talking about in #3 I presume to be referring to macroevolution
In case you dont know the difference, macroevolution never violates the boundaries of a kind or family
Microevolution does violate those boundaries(a chicken becoming a t rex for example
Macroevolution creates no new genetic material,it simply "turns on" and "turns off" already existing genetic traits-this has been observed and tested...
@DutchNordic Now in order for the theory of evolution to work, macroevolution must at some point become microevolution- as macroevolution never creates new genetic material and micro does- this however has never been observed or tested except in a hypothetical interpretation of history
From all evidence the evidence we can clearely see that the family(the Bible calls it "kinds") boundaries cannot be broken, neither have they ever been
@Jnest55 Also, I propose that you research more on the subject and do so from unbias sources (berkley or princeton site etc) before you keep spewing out bad information on the subject. Both micro and macro evolution have been observed. We have hundreds of transitional fossiles (both sides know that Lucy was a hoax). The thing about science is that it is unbias in it's nature, and only works from directly observable factors. It does not function to support any specific agenda.
@Jnest55 New mutations are new information. They can be good, bad or neutral.
Gene duplication is one way of getting more space in a genome. These are all facts.
Its not enough to claim that there is some unspecified boundary between species, you have to show where in the mechanism that boundary is, and why it cant be crossed. Because according to evolution macro and micro use exactly the same mechanism.
Usually mutations rearange genetic material in the creature-this rearangement is always harmful, in many cases leading to the untimely death of the creature
Mutations are seldom anything but harmful, and at best they are marginally beneficial and are not incorperated into the gene sequence
@Jnest55 You don't know what you are arguing against. You seem to think that circus freak show kind of mutations are needed for evolution. You don't know the difference between macro and micro evolution. You don't see that one modern species doesn't have to be able to change in to another modern species with a completely different body plan. Im not gonna give you an example of macro evolution.
@Jnest55 You seem to lack a mechanism to impose this limit, and the fossil record is awash with trasitional forms. The mechanism for macroevolution is obvious, well known, observable, well understood, and as a personal note, provides the technology that keeps me alive.
@Jnest55 Evolution never proposes that one species is born of a different species as that would defy evolution. Evolution is defined as descent with modification. I propose that you research evolution from unbias sources before you try to underhand or defy it. Evolution does not prove anything but how many species have changed over time and how new species have formed. The only problem that certain religious sects have with it is that it doesn't suggest that God is directly in control of it.
@darkblade1206 as a matter of fact dark, it does propose that.
For instance the dinosaurs supposedly evolved chickens; humans evolved from apes ; fish evolved from trilobytes;etc...
The interesting thing is that seldom,if ever, are any kind of transitional form found-all of the human-ape ones have since been proven to either be misidentified or a fraud(ie lucy and the Piltdown man)
@Jnest55 It does not propose that one thing is born from another thing dramatically as you put (a snake born from a woman etc.). These things happen gradually and over time. The fact is that evolution is true as it's the only scientific theory that has withstood the constant stream of scrutiny and testing, and still is the best explanation of the diversity of life. The interesting thing is that it's only small sects within religion that do not accept it.
@darkblade1206 dark while you say that evolution is the only theory that has stood the test of time, you neglect to mention that the God's Word and His believers have stood strong for more than 4000 years and are still just as strong as ever
@Jnest55 And in that time the God hypothesis added not one jot to human understanding. They gave us the Dark Ages, the Crusades, the Genocide of Moses and barbarism untold.
'God did it' contains no information, it leads nowhere, it contributes nothing to our understanding.
Evolution is implicit in the words reproduction, variation and selection. It's true because of the meaning of the words, a priori true, inevitable, unescapable. That ALL emperical evidence supports it is unnecessary.
@gamesbok Sir, I noticed that you used the words "technology" and "selected", however you surely could not have meant to use those terms because those words are only applicable when an inteligent being is involved and you deny the presence of this inteligent being.
@Jnest55 I use the term 'technology' because that is the correct term for the applied science that keeps me alive. Select, as in 'natural selection' is again the correct term. As the ozone layer filters UV and selects those frequencies of electromagnetic spectrum to transmit.
@Jnest55 That's a logical jump that you have no justification in making.
Transparently there are no absolute laws, for a law must inevitable fail. A circumstance must arise, in an unpredictable and uncertain future, where any rigid law would produce counter productive results. Interesting to note that Jesus taught attitude, he wasn't a law giver.
Morals evolved, and continue to evolve, as indeed they must. That's why your government has a legislature.
@Jnest55 cont. Morality allows human beings to co-operate, which increases our chances of survival. If Christianity was the source of these morals, then why are so many of them shared by cultures that were never Christians? Why was murder considered a crime by the Australian Aborigines centuries before Christianity was brought to the continent? The history of morality is complex, but it has a firm grounding in evolution and societal development; a supernatural explanation is unnecessary.
Man IS NOT on a higher moral plain than any animal on this earth?
Man is nothing more than a "higher evolved animal" with no REAL moral responsibility or purpose...in this case we would be exploiting the worl if we DONT live like apes in trees.....
evolution does not make sense- common sense contradicts it but yet how many people believe it, how many scientists foolishly hold to it!
@Jnest55 notice in speaking of the galapagos tortises how he says "isnt it possible over millions of years"- that is SPECULATION...speculation is NOT science...
I would like to see if an evolutionist can explain evolution and it's mechanisms without ever once using speculation. I doubt any can.
@Jnest55 Mark says that after appearing before the eleven disciples together in Gallilee, Jesus ascended to Heaven (Mark 16: 14, 19). Luke says Jesus ascended to Heaven at Bethany after walking with the disciples some time (Luke 24:50-51). John says Jesus appeared to the disciples at three times and that some of these appearances were near the Sea of Gallilee (John 21:1, 14). Acts says the disciples were at Mt. Olivet, a days journey from Jerusalem, when the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9-12).
@KourtlandtP First of all what Bible are you using? before you go any further, look those verses up in a King James, 1611 Version Bible.
If you still see contradictions in those verses after that, we will talk, but we can make no discussions on the Bible unless we are both using the same one.
@Jnest55 oh i didn't know the bible was originally written as the King James version. I would assume the latin vulgate would be more historically accurate, or perhaps the Gutenberg Bible, or a copy in the unaltered greek language... I shalt make a covenant with thineself to throweth unto the trash all thine copies of NIV versions of thoust holiest scripture.
@Jnest55 I love this one... Leviticus 11: 13“‘These are the birds you are to detest and not eat because they are detestable:...19the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
I am aware that youtube doesn't permit live sports, television shows and movies stream however, stream episodes [dot] net truly does. I really suggest you folks particularly #VIDEOPOSTERID# to go investigate for yourself!
Charles Darwin and the tree of life (SUB ENG) - part 2
@lordnimr0d Yeah I know the theory but It's a theory which proves nothing. I have no faith in man just faith in God. Man constantly changes things to prove themselves right. God never changes.
@lordnimr0d Please state your evidence, facts please with no theory's. God created every living thing on earth and the proof of it is every living thing on earth. Tell me how life came from non-life to prove any different?
To force any religion onto any child is child abuse, they are all born agnostic an should be left to there own thoughts, an feelings wihthout fear mongering god lovers an hell fearers, if there was a GOD, this invisible man who made humans, the most evil thing on this planet should be held accountable for crimes against animals an humanity, let children grow an make there own choices from what they feel or think
If human kind come from monkey that's mean god does not exist and if god does not exist that's mean the world come from chaos , so the origin of the world is come from chaos,,,,,
is not that a paradox ,,,,, when we see how the world is so organized from tiny things to huge things, from electron to planet and galaxy's,,,, i believe that the Theory of Charles Darwin is wrong
Ok David we know you don't like the Bible but your wrong about one thing, I still believe. Say hi to your friends at the zoo and tell them one day they can be a real boy. Just like you!
that is not true he never hated the bible he actually graduated because he wanted to study God. and is just a theory so don't jump to any conclusions is just a theory
What?? Jumping to conclusions?? I'll leave that to the evolutionists. Fact is that children are being brainwashed by this guy to believe his theory's as facts. Science teachers tend to leave out all that is missing and teach evolution as the one and only truth about humans.
From reading some comments, it's pretty obvious that dinosaurs are still living along humans today: they are those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. Anachronistic, gullible people who cling to fanciful stories made up by prehistoric shepherds. Hopefully, with the accessibility of knowledge brought forth by the internet, these dinosaurs will soon find themselves extinct.
Arguing on this subject is ridiculous... do any of you seriously think that you can change the others mind? No one knows, but everyone "Thinks" they know. There are some things that simply will never be found out... like, how did the universe start? All the matter ever made in one point is just as believable as a God. It's all personal believe. There is no right or wrong answer because there is no judge with an answer to compare it to.
Just for the record, it has been discovered that some of the dinosaur bones which was claimed to be discovered was actually being manufactured in China be evolutionists to back up their claims.
Check "Evolution Hoax" in Google and you,ll find out. Man never came from monkeys, just bcos they look alike doesnt mean they come from each other. Evolution is a theory, nothing more. Darwin thought since this species look together, maybe they actually came from each other, that;s not a fact is it??
@gregrutz, yes, a new theory always arises to back up evolutionary claims, there's no fixed theory, its all changed to fit a certain gap. That's not a fact. I really though evolution was something, not until i realised that evolutionists do actually create fake dinosaur bones from China, proving to be an actual complete bone set of discovered dinasours when actually its not, that's such a shame, shame of you evolutionists, for manufacturing lies to tell the masses. dats so dumb.
@theaccousticaddict: Argument by internet article? Really? There certainly have been frauds in paleontology, but they've been found out (by paleontologists, mind you) and flayed in public. It's not evolutionists creating fakes, it's fakers creating fakes. Do you deplore Holy Grails sold by theologians too?
That evolution happens is a fact; it has been observed in the lab and the field. How it happens, that is a theory, to date a completely successful one.
Anyone who thinks DNA is proof of god is a moron. It's a popular vehicle for ignorance, a very clever man came up with the lie and many, many stupid people believe it. Evolution is a fact, it cannot be denied or disproven, get over it.
No the bible isnt fictional, the truth is that you view God to be human, you limit his powers and abilities to that of man.s and by so doing, you find it impossible to believe that he can actually do all this things, but when you start thinking out of the box and taking God for who he actually is, you,d realise that nothing is impossible for him to do.
The bible is fictional? Oh, what wud you call a story that has it that life came from a dumb dead non life rock from space that exploded on earth, that life began as a single cell then evolved into a fish, then to all the animals we have today, then to monkey, then to man, that sounds so real huh? You really need to go back to the third grade, trust me.
@gregrutz, For the one millionth time, there's no verse in the bible that says that the earth is flat, but rather it has it that the earth is in a circular shape in the book of Isaiah.
There's no verse in the bible that says that the earth is 6000 years old, all this are lies forged on the bible to make it look false and impossible, if you ever come across a verse in the bible where it is written "The earth is flat" or "The earth is 6000 years old", please let me know, but for now, stop d lies.
if you pick up genesis, and read from the start, noah died 2006 years after the birth of adam. You can carry on from there. I'm betting it'll take probably 2000 years or so to waltz through exodus, and the age of kings. So yeah. 6000 years. Sure as heck aint 4 billion imo. unless u're saying your god was slacking for the 4 billion or so years in between the 1st 7 days and the creation of Adam.
Like i said. your lack of reading disturbs me. To counter an argument, You need to know its source.
It's not 4 billion years; it's estimated that it's closer to 13.5 billion, give or take a few hundred billion years, due to difficulties in measuring the true scale of cosmic microwave background (or cmb) radiation, very faint remnants of radiation left over from the big bang that serve as a sort of horizon in space/time.
@gregrutz "It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers...". So what if you can draw that on a flat piece of paper? It makes no difference, the truth is still the truth. The ways and things of God are not rocket science, its just that most are so ingorant that even the obvious makes no sense to them.
@goodking777: What you really mean here is "Believe as I do", even though we cannot know what you believe. You are saying that reading is not enough, we have to "understand", when the understandings differ from religion to religion, and even person to person.
and while I'm at it, i'll agree with gregutz totally. the earth is a sphere not a circle. The greeks identified the spherical construct long before the coming of your christ so unless the author is a peasant who spent his entire life in a barnyard he probably meant circle. or perhaps the gospels were indeed written by ignorant peasants! that would explain thus!
If the Bible is fictional, the Jews don't exist and certainly the history of the people of Israel is a creation of someone's mind and all the war happening there is all fictional as well. And that territory in palestine which we think Israel is situated don't exist either (It was all added to the map). Its all a weird conspiracy about GOD. Don't believe the christians they r wrong til they die and they r crazy about things they call faith, jesus resurrection and 2nd coming.
People get evolution and adaptation mixed up.. they are 2 very different things that relate but are not the same. Unless you have studies these subjects you cant post a credible comment, because it makes you just as ignorant as the other "uninformed believer". In my opinion, people should have their own choice without one belief crushing another.. if that were possible... there would be alot less to argue about and we'd live in a much more constructive world=P
Yes, Darwin thought evolution happened so slowly we would never have the chance to observe it in our own lifetime. Books like Darwins Finches show this to be an error. Or, more correctly, a correction.
The Origin Of Species was a brilliant leap forward in human understanding. Not wrong by a long shot, but a great start. Depressing to those looking for endings and absolute answers.
oh, so you are really a monkey, and your first ancestor is a fish that came from a single life cell from left over particles of an exploded rock from space with no life. Wow, here i was thinking that age comes with wisdom, when actually it doesn't, if you really believe this atrocious fake lies, then you actually need to go back to third grade mate, trust me. Just bcos Darwin thought that two specie who look alike might actually come from each other makes him 100% right? you,ve got to be kiddin
I am not an ape,i did not come from a monkey, i do not have a fish as a first ancestor, the life i am living did not come from a dumb non living rock particles that exploded on earth from space many years ago. I refuse to be hypnotised and to be mind controlled through stupid lies that cant even be imagined to happen in reality. I can never ever, not even on my death bed accept the fact that my ancestor was a monkey. I have seen the light, and those of the light cant be decieved,cos they can see
@theaccousticaddict: Care to demonstrate how you think evolution from a monkey-like animal to human is "impossible"? Or is it just a matter of faith? It is immaterial to me what you care to do on your death bed; it does matter to me that you inflict your beliefs on others by threats of hell.
PS: Your "first ancestor" goes a lot further back than a fish. Learn first what you are arguing about before showing off your ignorance.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
If anything, Charles Darwin made me even more convinced of God's existence. Charles Darwin was a simple Nephilim created and inspired by the Devil itself. May his followers die just as God took his children away from him . All this evolution do exist, but make no mistake in realising that it is the devils work itself, just as he came on earth and left his seed on it. God will completely destroy him and his seeds one day. The New World Order, will get us closer to the truism of spirituality.
Humans need to understand how life realy started, this has been explained by science and the universe is very well understood too. There is not one shred of evidence to show a 'God' Created us or the universe or even if there is A 'God wotching over us. We need to stop all this belief in a 'God' which has been destroying Humanity with War and religious differences. One day people will begin to see, hopefully mushroom clouds will not be what makes them see.
We don't need to stop believing. How does believing effect us? If you don't believe, and you die, then what chance do you have? There is either a god or there isn't so I don't see why people can't be entitled to their beliefs.
It helps them overcome the fear of death and understand 'complex' things like the universe and emotion. Religion offers a simple and easy on the brain solution, people just want to get on with their lives with the happy though that a 'God' is looking after them.
We are the same as the turtles. If you drive a car and hold on the steering wheel. We develop callus's on our skin.We were created to adapt to our surroundings. People who live in the tropics have darker skin.Why compare Darwin and the bible..WHY BOTHER
because people around the world are trying to teach Creationism in schools, because people are prepared to fly planes in to buildings commit suicide and even mass murder for whatever 'God they worship. They are your religious fanatics. More normal religious people who are not plotting to blow people up see their religion as a way of getting them through life and and also their way of family life having been brought up since childhood.
They don't teach creationism in schools in America. They teach Darwin's Theory of evolution.Maybe we need to replicate the experiments like they did in the movie Flatliner's. But I don't need to do that to believe in God. JESUS LIVES>>>>>>>>>JESUS LIVES>>>>>
the two gay angels. lol
jerryx2000 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CHRIST is the only CREATOR... the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
awayoutmovement 9 months ago
3 people are rediculous...
garywoodgrw 9 months ago 2
Holy Bible explains WHY God created world. Now HOW. Main mistake in this movie. Rest is OK :).
If you read Bible you will see TWO stories of creation, and both serve their different purpose.
Other mistake is that man CAN'T use world as he wishes, God didn't tell that to human.
krecikowi 9 months ago
@krecikowi God?....Wow, you still believe in Imaginary Beings?
Varoonmg 4 months ago
God never said that man could exploit the earth as they wish...what a foolish comment. " That made it clear that God said man could exploit the earth as they wish"...I have never seen such twisting of scripture. Man was commanded to take care of the earth....Way to twist and take out of context basic truths of scripture.
btbtom 10 months ago
@btbtom The only way for civilized people to accept religion is to NOT take it litterary.
"I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.’
So all women for all eternity shall suffer and serve because of a silly mistake done by one individual, which by the way God created with whatever faults she had.
Now I understand where religious people get their morals from!
TheSaltyAdmiral 10 months ago
@TheSaltyAdmiral He took the verse out of context. God did not say exploit the earth.
As to the verse you talk about. Nowhere does God say "for eternity" as you said. Nor does this verse mean that the woman is to serve the man. If we take a look at the whole of scripture God says the man should serve the woman also, not be some overbearing slave driver. I will not be judged by what Adam or Eve did. We all make enough mistakes of our own, we don't need to take the blame for others.
btbtom 10 months ago
@btbtom Have dominion and ruling, in the context of the time when the scripture is written (900 - 1000 BC), was actually about exploitation -- rulers who have dominion over their subjects exploit their subjects -- that's the routine of those days.
yellowlynx 10 months ago
@yellowlynx The immediate context and context of the entire bible is what I am talking about. God is commanding them to take care of creation. Whatever people did in 900-1000 doesn't create a context in the scripture. If God commands someone to take care of creation and they exploit it, well that is disobedience, not context. Jesus commands us to love your enemies. Well, in todays context where getting even is more important, does that happen?
btbtom 9 months ago
@btbtom Whatever people did in 900-1000 is the context, because that was what the author of the Bible wants to say, otherwise, they would not use the words "have dominion/subdue" but "take care of creation" -- just give up these kind of interpretative maneuvouring and acrobats -- I know you want to make the Bible sound caring in YOUR interpretation, but 900 - 1000 BC authors have their say, and you cannot override them.
yellowlynx 9 months ago
@yellowlynx Genesis older than than :).
krecikowi 9 months ago
David Attenborough is just an icon, what a great man he is, and what an influence he has had on the presentation of nature and wildlife on television!
doyoublush 10 months ago
The Dare Island Enigma is a novel concerning an alternative view of evolution see
video book trailer
dltanner99 1 year ago
what day did God create the microbes?
lurkerb 1 year ago
@lurkerb I suppose the devil created those.
BorryDutch 11 months ago
Look at the picture at 6.22 there is a good piece of evidence that the government is hiding the fact that there were once giant humans on the planet! You see a couple of huge skeletons. Strange? Not really, search and you will find..
Jilkie 1 year ago
Comment removed
buddah074 1 year ago
Comment removed
buddah074 1 year ago
Comment removed
buddah074 1 year ago
silly accent....u pretentious simpleton...british buck toothed fuckstick
johnnyak5 1 year ago
if god does exists why are there more likes than dislikes?
tommos1 1 year ago
@tommos1 lol more people want sex than playing soccer. did u understand? if u want porn u go redtube.com, if u want basketball go to nba.com. still dont understand? u must be a fail evolution
maxkaamsut 1 year ago
@maxkaamsut
what the hell are you on about?
tommos1 1 year ago
@tommos1 im sorry but i was a victim of hacking system when i open my youtube account it didnt open til 20 possible attemp then i got to reclaim this page. sorry its almost failure than evolution sorry.
maxkaamsut 1 year ago
@tommos1 im just so scared about this movie someone need help my name is charles
maxkaamsut 1 year ago
its a FACT that Charles Darwin became saved, i.e. a born-again believer before he died!
62Elvis 1 year ago
@62Elvis That's not a fact, it was a claim of a religious newspaper in 1915. Historians and Darwin's children dismissed that claim. His last words were directed to his family.
Darwin said he wasn't an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God but more like an agnostic person.
Pssybart 1 year ago
the secret of kabbalah and kundalini in the stars BR YOD = 33 --- watch Solar Scorpio Kundalini at jagball22 type in jagball22 to learn the secret of the stars jagball22
jagball22 1 year ago
awesome series
NaturalSelection101 1 year ago
I would like to say that I feel much better that the "Devine Creation" is a part of Darwin's Theories.
Karatekitty242 1 year ago
@scottrex33 Of course it's fictional, all's it is, is a bunch of creation myths, whereas evolution is just part of nature, this whole idea of there being an Almighty creator is just a man-made idea
90Randyboy 1 year ago
science does not disprove the existence of God, moreover it explains how God made things happen... The bible is written 2000 yrs ago therefore it is not to be taken literally. another thing to remember is that it was written by man.... how could someone 2000 yrs ago explain with modern day science waht God was doing... So than you either believe in the bible or you dont Science is just a method of explaining how everything was done
w33dsz 1 year ago
HE CHUCKLES!
bigbookofnothing 1 year ago
1 Corinthians 3:19-20
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; 20 - and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile."
8i680085 1 year ago
@8i680085 wooowww the first corinthians, what a piece of reliable information you have there.... cough >_>
gr4ndhustle 1 year ago
STOP LOOKING AT THE PAST AND INSTEAD WHO CARES WHERE WERE FROM OR WHAT CREATED US THAT INFORMATION IS IRRELEVANT TO THE bigger picture what matters is where we are headed and at this rate where world is heading to its death adn why because people are looking into the past and trying to figure out the impossible if you believe in god thats your opinion if you dont thats also your opinion however get your eyes away from the back of your head and put them in front
killerv12 1 year ago
@killerv12 By looking at our past we can aquire knowledge and with that knowledge make more informed decisions about our future.
Tenfyr 1 year ago 2
Holy rollers think the earth is the center of the universe and it's history only spans a few million years. Religion needs to go!!! The world will survive and nations will prosper.
MrShitstained 1 year ago
@MrShitstained well friend I can tell you this: nations are NOT prospering and the earth is dying...
why?
as a Christian I have an answer to those questions, but do YOU?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 I know you deeply believe in all the bullshit the church has crammed down your throat but in the "real world" I know your religion has made nations war for millenia!!!
MrShitstained 1 year ago
@MrShitstained dont say "my" religion.
"my" religion is the religion that was persicuted by the Catholic church.
"my" religion was the religion saying "love thy neighbor" while the Catholic church was starting wars.
"my" religion hasnt started wars and neither have I had it crammed down my throat.
you ought now to judge people by your own personal opinion and bias, you will find that your preconceptions are not always true...
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 ok, I checked with a KJV. Gallilee still translates to Gallilee... three translates to three... Mount olivet translates to Mt Olivet... and bat translates to bat.
and Mrshitstained is as his name suggests. :-)
religion in general has been the cause to raise the sword, not one particular religion over the other.
KourtlandtP 1 year ago
@KourtlandtP quote the whole verse(from KJV) and reference that you say contradicts...im sorry my memory is not the best
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Just because you have an answer doesn't make it the right one; especially when reality doesn't even back up your version of the question. The universe got by just fine for billions of years without Christianity, and once Christianity dies out (like the Greek or Roman religions did) the universe will continue on for billions or trillions more. Even in the comparably tiny span of human history Christianity & all the other current religions will end up being nothing more than footnotes.
icemachine79 1 year ago
@icemachine79 If the universe is just fine without Christianity(the belief in the Bible that is) I ask you,
From where are we to get moral laws from?
Are those moral laws absolute?
Do they apply to everyone?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 If the moral laws were "absolute" there would be no stealing, murder, rape, dishonesty, etc. anywhere in the world. Last time I checked that wasn't the case, so either God is impotent or there is no such being. Christianity simply imposes a moral code by instilling fear into its adherents of a terrible punishment awaiting them in the afterlife, but that has been shown to be unnecessary & untrue because morality is an evolutionary advantage that assists with propagation of the species.
icemachine79 1 year ago
@icemachine79 You say that since laws are broken they must not be absolute...
But let us logically examine this statement shall we?
Absolute laws do not mean that they will not be broken, on the contrary you can always expect them to be broken by some
However absolute laws simple mean that they apply to everyone, that they always apply
If evolution is true then there would be no absolutes, no absolute law, no absolute morals, there is no real right or wrong since we are just animals
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Depends on how you define 'real'. Since we human animals share the same basic needs and live together in a society, our methods tend to be similar. Because the way we live is similar we also have similar likes and dislikes, loves and fears, etc. so it's not a surprise that we'd develop a code of behavior to facilitate a functioning and happy society. We aren't the only animals that do this either. No supernatural intervention is necessary if you know all the facts about the system.
icemachine79 1 year ago
@icemachine79 ice, serial killers and sociopaths dont hold the same values as most humans do, does that make what they do right or "not neccessarily wrong"?
In essence is there any such thing as right and wrong, or is that just subjegative on how a given person feels?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 You're right, they don't, which means they are unable to effectively socialize among humans as well as you or I, which means that there won't be as many of them around in future generations. There are many levels of 'right' and 'wrong' and yes it is subjective. But since humans as a species share certain needs and desires (such as the need for food, water, etc) we also tend to share certain views on what's right & wrong. Note the word 'tend'; there are usually exceptions to the rule.
icemachine79 1 year ago
@icemachine79 friend, absolute right and wrong has nothing to do with reproduction- take the laci dugard case for example- the sociopath involved there had several kids by his wife, and several by the child he kidnapped-he very effectively procreated my friend
Without absolute right and wrong we are nothing more than animals, with no values, no morals, nothing good at all
Feeling can change at any moment, and if theres no absolute right and wrong, why use the terms right and wrong anyways?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Moral is subjective 100% Animals have their own moral standards that fit their way of life. If an animal started to mimic a human he would be unsuccessful, if a human would adopt animal moral standards he would be unsuccessful too.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Dutch, what then makes a human different from an animal?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 That we have such a developed brain and so much power over our environment. But the conscious brain is still only evolved as a tool to make our body survive and interact in our environment.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic why are we the only animals then that build machines,go to the moon,etc?
Why also are almost all animals instinctively afraid of humans?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 We are the only ones that can do it thanks to the knowledge we build up for thousands of years. Our drive to explore, invent, etc does the rest. The same what drove us to develop stone tools and make fire.
Animals have been hunted by humans for millions of years so that could explain an instinctive fear. That would also explain why isolated populations such as the galapagos animals are so tame.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Well all I can say is this: the odds of humans being the only inteligent species capable of doing such tasks would be a million to one...
Back to the subject of subjective morality, what youre saying is that theres no real right and wrong, am i right?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 How do you know the odds? Maybe its the same odds of an animal such as a bat developing echo location. If there is a niche(position in an ecosystem) to be exploited its not about odds but natural selection driving a species to specialize and take advantage of it.
I just say moral standards are subjective. If 2 persons argue about abortion being moral or immoral, how would you prove somebody is right or wrong? All we can do is make a law based on what most people agree on.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Look up how many species of living creatures there are...thats how I got that number(its way low)
Since you mentioned a bat developing echo location, how exactly did it do that?
How did it gradually develop a sophisticated radar system, a radar system on the level of what we have today?
Since you bring up abortion, Id like to ask you; Has a baby in the womb ever came out anything other than a human baby?
I mean has a snake ever been born from a woman?
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Do you believe that life is 3.5 billion years old? Because the variation in species can only be explained because of hundreds of millions of years of evolution. On this timescale it only takes minimal changes to add up to the variety we see in the species (the kind of changes between you and any other human)
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Dutch first of all there is an explanation for variation in species and its alot better than the evolutionary theory.
Here are a few of the problems with the way evolution accounts for variation in species:
1: There are no known transitional animals\fossils between most of the species
2: There is no observable mechanism that causes such speciation
3: While animals can adapt slightly to conditions, this adaption never breaks the boundaries of the animal family
Jnest55 1 year ago
Comment removed
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@Jnest55 @Jnest55
1 Different species converge back to common ancestors that doesn't have to resemble them at a first glance. Fossils of these ancestors definitely exist.
2 The mechanism is observable and testable but speciation itself takes thousands to millions of years.
3 Not in our lifetime, mostly... But there are examples of observed speciation in plants and animals. There are lots of other facts that confirm that boundries are really grey area's for example ringspecies.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic friend Im not going to argue with you about those things but Ill remind you of some facts:
The way evolutionists determine if a given animal\fossil is the anscestor of another is by measuring how many similar characteristics they have in structure,genetic material, and function
Also Ill remind you that families are classified by similarities animals share in the above areas
Also nowheres has microevolution been observed or successfully tested, it is completely hypothetical
Jnest55 1 year ago
@DutchNordic what you are talking about in #3 I presume to be referring to macroevolution
In case you dont know the difference, macroevolution never violates the boundaries of a kind or family
Microevolution does violate those boundaries(a chicken becoming a t rex for example
Macroevolution creates no new genetic material,it simply "turns on" and "turns off" already existing genetic traits-this has been observed and tested...
Jnest55 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Now in order for the theory of evolution to work, macroevolution must at some point become microevolution- as macroevolution never creates new genetic material and micro does- this however has never been observed or tested except in a hypothetical interpretation of history
From all evidence the evidence we can clearely see that the family(the Bible calls it "kinds") boundaries cannot be broken, neither have they ever been
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Also, I propose that you research more on the subject and do so from unbias sources (berkley or princeton site etc) before you keep spewing out bad information on the subject. Both micro and macro evolution have been observed. We have hundreds of transitional fossiles (both sides know that Lucy was a hoax). The thing about science is that it is unbias in it's nature, and only works from directly observable factors. It does not function to support any specific agenda.
darkblade1206 1 year ago
@Jnest55 New mutations are new information. They can be good, bad or neutral.
Gene duplication is one way of getting more space in a genome. These are all facts.
Its not enough to claim that there is some unspecified boundary between species, you have to show where in the mechanism that boundary is, and why it cant be crossed. Because according to evolution macro and micro use exactly the same mechanism.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Dutch, something about mutations:
Seldom do they ever "create" new information
Usually mutations rearange genetic material in the creature-this rearangement is always harmful, in many cases leading to the untimely death of the creature
Mutations are seldom anything but harmful, and at best they are marginally beneficial and are not incorperated into the gene sequence
Jnest55 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Also you are mixing up the term family and species
There are many different kinds of species, but not that many kinds of families
For instance a chiuawuah is a species of dog-which is the family which includes all species of dog
In no instance can a species in the animal family dog, gradually or otherwise, become a bird-another family
Hopefully Ive explained that clearly
Now as to micro and macro evolution, Id appreciate a source about observed microevolution
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 You don't know what you are arguing against. You seem to think that circus freak show kind of mutations are needed for evolution. You don't know the difference between macro and micro evolution. You don't see that one modern species doesn't have to be able to change in to another modern species with a completely different body plan. Im not gonna give you an example of macro evolution.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic I cant learn you how evolution works here. You have to start from the beginning.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
@DutchNordic Well friend I wish you the best of luck...
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 THe fossil evidence would not support your thesis.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@Jnest55 You seem to lack a mechanism to impose this limit, and the fossil record is awash with trasitional forms. The mechanism for macroevolution is obvious, well known, observable, well understood, and as a personal note, provides the technology that keeps me alive.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Evolution never proposes that one species is born of a different species as that would defy evolution. Evolution is defined as descent with modification. I propose that you research evolution from unbias sources before you try to underhand or defy it. Evolution does not prove anything but how many species have changed over time and how new species have formed. The only problem that certain religious sects have with it is that it doesn't suggest that God is directly in control of it.
darkblade1206 1 year ago
@darkblade1206 as a matter of fact dark, it does propose that.
For instance the dinosaurs supposedly evolved chickens; humans evolved from apes ; fish evolved from trilobytes;etc...
The interesting thing is that seldom,if ever, are any kind of transitional form found-all of the human-ape ones have since been proven to either be misidentified or a fraud(ie lucy and the Piltdown man)
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 It does not propose that one thing is born from another thing dramatically as you put (a snake born from a woman etc.). These things happen gradually and over time. The fact is that evolution is true as it's the only scientific theory that has withstood the constant stream of scrutiny and testing, and still is the best explanation of the diversity of life. The interesting thing is that it's only small sects within religion that do not accept it.
darkblade1206 1 year ago
@darkblade1206 dark while you say that evolution is the only theory that has stood the test of time, you neglect to mention that the God's Word and His believers have stood strong for more than 4000 years and are still just as strong as ever
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 And in that time the God hypothesis added not one jot to human understanding. They gave us the Dark Ages, the Crusades, the Genocide of Moses and barbarism untold.
'God did it' contains no information, it leads nowhere, it contributes nothing to our understanding.
Evolution is implicit in the words reproduction, variation and selection. It's true because of the meaning of the words, a priori true, inevitable, unescapable. That ALL emperical evidence supports it is unnecessary.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@Jnest55 How many times have you been to the moon? The first animal in space was a dog.
Animals are not instinctively afraid of man. They learn it.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@gamesbok Sir, I noticed that you used the words "technology" and "selected", however you surely could not have meant to use those terms because those words are only applicable when an inteligent being is involved and you deny the presence of this inteligent being.
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 I use the term 'technology' because that is the correct term for the applied science that keeps me alive. Select, as in 'natural selection' is again the correct term. As the ozone layer filters UV and selects those frequencies of electromagnetic spectrum to transmit.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@Jnest55 That's a logical jump that you have no justification in making.
Transparently there are no absolute laws, for a law must inevitable fail. A circumstance must arise, in an unpredictable and uncertain future, where any rigid law would produce counter productive results. Interesting to note that Jesus taught attitude, he wasn't a law giver.
Morals evolved, and continue to evolve, as indeed they must. That's why your government has a legislature.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@Jnest55 cont. Morality allows human beings to co-operate, which increases our chances of survival. If Christianity was the source of these morals, then why are so many of them shared by cultures that were never Christians? Why was murder considered a crime by the Australian Aborigines centuries before Christianity was brought to the continent? The history of morality is complex, but it has a firm grounding in evolution and societal development; a supernatural explanation is unnecessary.
icemachine79 1 year ago
@Jnest55 You haven't given this even a moment's thought, have you.
gamesbok 1 year ago
So man IS NOT superior to animals?
Man IS NOT on a higher moral plain than any animal on this earth?
Man is nothing more than a "higher evolved animal" with no REAL moral responsibility or purpose...in this case we would be exploiting the worl if we DONT live like apes in trees.....
evolution does not make sense- common sense contradicts it but yet how many people believe it, how many scientists foolishly hold to it!
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 notice in speaking of the galapagos tortises how he says "isnt it possible over millions of years"- that is SPECULATION...speculation is NOT science...
I would like to see if an evolutionist can explain evolution and it's mechanisms without ever once using speculation. I doubt any can.
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 I would like to see if a christian can explain why not a single resurrection story found in the gospels are identical. I doubt any can.
KourtlandtP 1 year ago
@KourtlandtP please give me verses that contradict each other
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Mark says that after appearing before the eleven disciples together in Gallilee, Jesus ascended to Heaven (Mark 16: 14, 19). Luke says Jesus ascended to Heaven at Bethany after walking with the disciples some time (Luke 24:50-51). John says Jesus appeared to the disciples at three times and that some of these appearances were near the Sea of Gallilee (John 21:1, 14). Acts says the disciples were at Mt. Olivet, a days journey from Jerusalem, when the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9-12).
KourtlandtP 1 year ago
@KourtlandtP First of all what Bible are you using? before you go any further, look those verses up in a King James, 1611 Version Bible.
If you still see contradictions in those verses after that, we will talk, but we can make no discussions on the Bible unless we are both using the same one.
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 oh i didn't know the bible was originally written as the King James version. I would assume the latin vulgate would be more historically accurate, or perhaps the Gutenberg Bible, or a copy in the unaltered greek language... I shalt make a covenant with thineself to throweth unto the trash all thine copies of NIV versions of thoust holiest scripture.
KourtlandtP 1 year ago
@KourtlandtP well like I said: get the KJV if you want to talk about the Bible with me.
Not only is it the most accurate, it also does not have contradictions-most other translations DO have contradictions(I wonder why?)
you will find that in the KJV those verses will read quite differently
Jnest55 1 year ago
@Jnest55 Also, Matthew does even state that jesus ascended into heaven! it just ends with Jesus on a mountain talking to the disciples.
KourtlandtP 1 year ago
@Jnest55 I love this one... Leviticus 11: 13“‘These are the birds you are to detest and not eat because they are detestable:...19the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
Bats are not birds :-)
KourtlandtP 1 year ago
believe is a disease
paashaasXD 1 year ago
I am aware that youtube doesn't permit live sports, television shows and movies stream however, stream episodes [dot] net truly does. I really suggest you folks particularly #VIDEOPOSTERID# to go investigate for yourself!
Charles Darwin and the tree of life (SUB ENG) - part 2
rickforb9751 1 year ago
While the subs are useful, having them obscuring the picture is pretty obnoxious.
oonsrd 1 year ago
@lordnimr0d Yeah I know the theory but It's a theory which proves nothing. I have no faith in man just faith in God. Man constantly changes things to prove themselves right. God never changes.
truthtalker49 1 year ago
I always thought that Darwin had fallen out of his own tree.
amzuel420 1 year ago
@lordnimr0d Please state your evidence, facts please with no theory's. God created every living thing on earth and the proof of it is every living thing on earth. Tell me how life came from non-life to prove any different?
truthtalker49 1 year ago
To force any religion onto any child is child abuse, they are all born agnostic an should be left to there own thoughts, an feelings wihthout fear mongering god lovers an hell fearers, if there was a GOD, this invisible man who made humans, the most evil thing on this planet should be held accountable for crimes against animals an humanity, let children grow an make there own choices from what they feel or think
peatree28 1 year ago
angry theoloids are so funny!
neukdoodneukdood 1 year ago
If human kind come from monkey that's mean god does not exist and if god does not exist that's mean the world come from chaos , so the origin of the world is come from chaos,,,,,
is not that a paradox ,,,,, when we see how the world is so organized from tiny things to huge things, from electron to planet and galaxy's,,,, i believe that the Theory of Charles Darwin is wrong
BerserkerEos 1 year ago
Ok David we know you don't like the Bible but your wrong about one thing, I still believe. Say hi to your friends at the zoo and tell them one day they can be a real boy. Just like you!
truthtalker49 1 year ago
that is not true he never hated the bible he actually graduated because he wanted to study God. and is just a theory so don't jump to any conclusions is just a theory
adeleon003 1 year ago
@adeleon003
What?? Jumping to conclusions?? I'll leave that to the evolutionists. Fact is that children are being brainwashed by this guy to believe his theory's as facts. Science teachers tend to leave out all that is missing and teach evolution as the one and only truth about humans.
truthtalker49 1 year ago
@truthtalker49 and God fearers leave out facts an proof, thats child abuse
peatree28 1 year ago
Nujabes - Lady Brown, thats wassup.
lagsinner 1 year ago
From reading some comments, it's pretty obvious that dinosaurs are still living along humans today: they are those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. Anachronistic, gullible people who cling to fanciful stories made up by prehistoric shepherds. Hopefully, with the accessibility of knowledge brought forth by the internet, these dinosaurs will soon find themselves extinct.
jeanfr523 1 year ago 38
@jeanfr523 i don't think jesus lived in prehistory. ancient is a better word.
mediumsporkkit 1 year ago
@jeanfr523 ^ this
Tenfyr 1 year ago
@jeanfr523 you just made my day!!
101rapterman 1 year ago
Arguing on this subject is ridiculous... do any of you seriously think that you can change the others mind? No one knows, but everyone "Thinks" they know. There are some things that simply will never be found out... like, how did the universe start? All the matter ever made in one point is just as believable as a God. It's all personal believe. There is no right or wrong answer because there is no judge with an answer to compare it to.
GilHeron 1 year ago
Just for the record, it has been discovered that some of the dinosaur bones which was claimed to be discovered was actually being manufactured in China be evolutionists to back up their claims.
Check "Evolution Hoax" in Google and you,ll find out. Man never came from monkeys, just bcos they look alike doesnt mean they come from each other. Evolution is a theory, nothing more. Darwin thought since this species look together, maybe they actually came from each other, that;s not a fact is it??
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict
Evolution has happened, proven fact.
There is a theory that explains How it happened.
If you can prove the theory wrong, then there will be a new theory about how it happened.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz, yes, a new theory always arises to back up evolutionary claims, there's no fixed theory, its all changed to fit a certain gap. That's not a fact. I really though evolution was something, not until i realised that evolutionists do actually create fake dinosaur bones from China, proving to be an actual complete bone set of discovered dinasours when actually its not, that's such a shame, shame of you evolutionists, for manufacturing lies to tell the masses. dats so dumb.
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
Comment removed
lonewolf1868 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict: Argument by internet article? Really? There certainly have been frauds in paleontology, but they've been found out (by paleontologists, mind you) and flayed in public. It's not evolutionists creating fakes, it's fakers creating fakes. Do you deplore Holy Grails sold by theologians too?
That evolution happens is a fact; it has been observed in the lab and the field. How it happens, that is a theory, to date a completely successful one.
"dat's so dumb." - about says it all.
puncheex 1 year ago
Anyone who thinks DNA is proof of god is a moron. It's a popular vehicle for ignorance, a very clever man came up with the lie and many, many stupid people believe it. Evolution is a fact, it cannot be denied or disproven, get over it.
BlaineDeschain 1 year ago 4
in 6:26 secs ....that Huge human looking set of bones....that can't be a human can it?????
Sweetmon89 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I just beat my high score playing my game from NEWFULLGAMES . COM
jfeilds123 1 year ago
That guy had bonner when he pointed at Eve. No offense 2 Christianity.
stanlee756 1 year ago
DNA code is empirical proof that biological life forms are a creative product of information and language. i.e.: Nous / Logos
Mr88playmaker 2 years ago
massively incorrect.
Bzdi138 1 year ago
(A) Information is: the communication or reception of knowledge or intelligence.
(B) Information exist independent of its medium.
(the same information can be stored in one's mind, expressed verbally, written on paper, typed on a computer etc.)
(C) Code = Language. Language originates in a MIND.
There ore only two types of language known to man: (1) That of human mind origin (2) DNA code.
Information is not matter or energy.
Language is not matter or energy.
Mr88playmaker 2 years ago
the bible is fictional
scottrex33 2 years ago 19
No the bible isnt fictional, the truth is that you view God to be human, you limit his powers and abilities to that of man.s and by so doing, you find it impossible to believe that he can actually do all this things, but when you start thinking out of the box and taking God for who he actually is, you,d realise that nothing is impossible for him to do.
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict "It is He who sits above the CIRCLE of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers..." Isaiah
I can draw a circle on a flat piece of paper.
gregrutz 1 year ago
Comment removed
lonewolf1868 1 year ago
The bible is fictional? Oh, what wud you call a story that has it that life came from a dumb dead non life rock from space that exploded on earth, that life began as a single cell then evolved into a fish, then to all the animals we have today, then to monkey, then to man, that sounds so real huh? You really need to go back to the third grade, trust me.
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict
Yes, science has proven the bible wrong many times. The men who wrote it thought the earth was flat.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz, For the one millionth time, there's no verse in the bible that says that the earth is flat, but rather it has it that the earth is in a circular shape in the book of Isaiah.
There's no verse in the bible that says that the earth is 6000 years old, all this are lies forged on the bible to make it look false and impossible, if you ever come across a verse in the bible where it is written "The earth is flat" or "The earth is 6000 years old", please let me know, but for now, stop d lies.
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
if you pick up genesis, and read from the start, noah died 2006 years after the birth of adam. You can carry on from there. I'm betting it'll take probably 2000 years or so to waltz through exodus, and the age of kings. So yeah. 6000 years. Sure as heck aint 4 billion imo. unless u're saying your god was slacking for the 4 billion or so years in between the 1st 7 days and the creation of Adam.
Like i said. your lack of reading disturbs me. To counter an argument, You need to know its source.
lonewolf1868 1 year ago
It's not 4 billion years; it's estimated that it's closer to 13.5 billion, give or take a few hundred billion years, due to difficulties in measuring the true scale of cosmic microwave background (or cmb) radiation, very faint remnants of radiation left over from the big bang that serve as a sort of horizon in space/time.
carlrs15 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict "It is He who sits above the CIRCLE of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers..." Isaiah
I can draw a Circle on a Flat piece of paper
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz "It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers...". So what if you can draw that on a flat piece of paper? It makes no difference, the truth is still the truth. The ways and things of God are not rocket science, its just that most are so ingorant that even the obvious makes no sense to them.
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict
The Truth is earhy mankind thought the earth was flat and the center of the solar system, not the first time the bible was wrong.
Evolution happened, proven fact.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict The two accounts clearly differ in the order of creation.
Gen1:25-27 humans are created after other animals
Gen2:18-19 humans created before other animals.
That's a contradiction. It comes from two different camps.
The Yahwist and Eulogist camps.
Gen1:27 man and woman are created at the same time
Gen2:18-22 Adam first, then animals, then Eve.
gregrutz 1 year ago
You definitely do not understand the scriptures. It is not one of those literatures of yours. Read clearly, dude.
goodking777 1 year ago
@goodking777
Does the scriptures say there was a global flood? If it does, it is wrong!
gregrutz 1 year ago
@goodking777: What you really mean here is "Believe as I do", even though we cannot know what you believe. You are saying that reading is not enough, we have to "understand", when the understandings differ from religion to religion, and even person to person.
puncheex 1 year ago
Comment removed
lonewolf1868 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
and while I'm at it, i'll agree with gregutz totally. the earth is a sphere not a circle. The greeks identified the spherical construct long before the coming of your christ so unless the author is a peasant who spent his entire life in a barnyard he probably meant circle. or perhaps the gospels were indeed written by ignorant peasants! that would explain thus!
lonewolf1868 1 year ago
@scottrex33
If the Bible is fictional, the Jews don't exist and certainly the history of the people of Israel is a creation of someone's mind and all the war happening there is all fictional as well. And that territory in palestine which we think Israel is situated don't exist either (It was all added to the map). Its all a weird conspiracy about GOD. Don't believe the christians they r wrong til they die and they r crazy about things they call faith, jesus resurrection and 2nd coming.
8i680085 1 year ago
thanks 4 posting =)
12WSarah 2 years ago
spicy, you a monkey....a........
kneenobla 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
darwin was an idiot!
kneenobla 2 years ago
Nah, he wasn't. It's actually you who's the idiot.
spicychickenwing31 2 years ago 3
People get evolution and adaptation mixed up.. they are 2 very different things that relate but are not the same. Unless you have studies these subjects you cant post a credible comment, because it makes you just as ignorant as the other "uninformed believer". In my opinion, people should have their own choice without one belief crushing another.. if that were possible... there would be alot less to argue about and we'd live in a much more constructive world=P
chawni1031 2 years ago
Evolution happened,
Darwin showed how it happened, natural selection. Most things didn't adapt, they just died. 99% of them.
gregrutz 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Darwin was wrong, evolution never happened. Its all one big web of lies.
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
Comment removed
gregrutz 1 year ago
Yes, Darwin thought evolution happened so slowly we would never have the chance to observe it in our own lifetime. Books like Darwins Finches show this to be an error. Or, more correctly, a correction.
The Origin Of Species was a brilliant leap forward in human understanding. Not wrong by a long shot, but a great start. Depressing to those looking for endings and absolute answers.
fillhixx 1 year ago
oh, so you are really a monkey, and your first ancestor is a fish that came from a single life cell from left over particles of an exploded rock from space with no life. Wow, here i was thinking that age comes with wisdom, when actually it doesn't, if you really believe this atrocious fake lies, then you actually need to go back to third grade mate, trust me. Just bcos Darwin thought that two specie who look alike might actually come from each other makes him 100% right? you,ve got to be kiddin
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
YES! That is why; all humans are still apes,
and all apes are still monkeys,
and all monkeys are still primates,
and all primates are still mammals.
and all mammals are still tetrapods.
Anyone with a third grade education knows that.
gregrutz 1 year ago
I am not an ape,i did not come from a monkey, i do not have a fish as a first ancestor, the life i am living did not come from a dumb non living rock particles that exploded on earth from space many years ago. I refuse to be hypnotised and to be mind controlled through stupid lies that cant even be imagined to happen in reality. I can never ever, not even on my death bed accept the fact that my ancestor was a monkey. I have seen the light, and those of the light cant be decieved,cos they can see
theaccousticaddict 1 year ago
I think in your case, theaccousticaddict, the light at the end of your tunnel is the oncoming train, and I almost feel sorry for you.
Almost.
lonewolf1868 1 year ago
@theaccousticaddict: Care to demonstrate how you think evolution from a monkey-like animal to human is "impossible"? Or is it just a matter of faith? It is immaterial to me what you care to do on your death bed; it does matter to me that you inflict your beliefs on others by threats of hell.
PS: Your "first ancestor" goes a lot further back than a fish. Learn first what you are arguing about before showing off your ignorance.
puncheex 1 year ago
Comment removed
JoeLBlack707 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If anything, Charles Darwin made me even more convinced of God's existence. Charles Darwin was a simple Nephilim created and inspired by the Devil itself. May his followers die just as God took his children away from him . All this evolution do exist, but make no mistake in realising that it is the devils work itself, just as he came on earth and left his seed on it. God will completely destroy him and his seeds one day. The New World Order, will get us closer to the truism of spirituality.
jamandrew12 2 years ago
Humans need to understand how life realy started, this has been explained by science and the universe is very well understood too. There is not one shred of evidence to show a 'God' Created us or the universe or even if there is A 'God wotching over us. We need to stop all this belief in a 'God' which has been destroying Humanity with War and religious differences. One day people will begin to see, hopefully mushroom clouds will not be what makes them see.
3556df44 2 years ago 5
We don't need to stop believing. How does believing effect us? If you don't believe, and you die, then what chance do you have? There is either a god or there isn't so I don't see why people can't be entitled to their beliefs.
IceMunga 2 years ago
It helps them overcome the fear of death and understand 'complex' things like the universe and emotion. Religion offers a simple and easy on the brain solution, people just want to get on with their lives with the happy though that a 'God' is looking after them.
3556df44 2 years ago
We are the same as the turtles. If you drive a car and hold on the steering wheel. We develop callus's on our skin.We were created to adapt to our surroundings. People who live in the tropics have darker skin.Why compare Darwin and the bible..WHY BOTHER
JimiHenbricks 2 years ago
because people around the world are trying to teach Creationism in schools, because people are prepared to fly planes in to buildings commit suicide and even mass murder for whatever 'God they worship. They are your religious fanatics. More normal religious people who are not plotting to blow people up see their religion as a way of getting them through life and and also their way of family life having been brought up since childhood.
3556df44 2 years ago
They don't teach creationism in schools in America. They teach Darwin's Theory of evolution.Maybe we need to replicate the experiments like they did in the movie Flatliner's. But I don't need to do that to believe in God. JESUS LIVES>>>>>>>>>JESUS LIVES>>>>>
JimiHenbricks 2 years ago
No, they don't teach religion [creationism] in schools, just science in science class.
gregrutz 2 years ago
Comment removed
triedge300 2 years ago