Anyone can learn this stuff. Gene duplication is the answer most evolutionary biologists will give because this video is absolutely right. Genetic mutations can lend to adaptation, but they nearly always break genes in the process. Unfortunately gene duplication doesn't really work either because it must be assumed that the existing gene is preserved while the copy is free to dramatically mutate. Somehow the gene expression system incorporates the new function. Yeah, not impressive.
@circusOFprecision Not only is gene duplication in and of itself impressive, but we've actually observed mutation of a duplicate gene add over 2300 bits of functional information to a genome.
Yeah it happens in plants quite frequently. And then gene expression makes more plants. It happens in bacteria too. And then more bacteria are produced. But even if it does lead to evolution, you can't simply say it's a mutation or a copying error. Bacteria can do all sorts of radical things with their genomes. So as is typical with Darwinian thought, a genetic change is automatically assumed to be an evolutionary change towards increasing complexity.
And you completely miss the point. The individual frame reading error, or whatever the mutation might be, was never claimed to cause major phylogenetic change in a single event. The point was that mechanisms do indeed exist that can simultaneously increase information and complexity. This is not assumed, we've observed them.
You know whats so funny, Russ? That they believe a fish would teach itself to breath out of water. How stupid is that? How would they survive that? And what would be their reason? They are surviving just fine being a fish, they don't have the capacity to think about anything else but being a fish! Nature has even less of a brain! Thats scientific fact! I am beginning to believe fish may be smarter and wiser than some of our "modern" scientists today who believe in such fairytale philosophies.
@cathy356 'That they believe a fish would teach itself to breath out of water. How stupid is that?'
That's so stupid that creationists use to strawman the actual process of fish-tetrapod evolution. Evolution is not directional or goal oriented, it's certainly not a will of action. That's more along the lines of Lamarckian evolution, the idea that traits are acquired during the life of the organism and passed on.
Has anyone else noticed how evolutionists have to think and talk in circles, and have to accuse their opponents of doing what they are doing? Seems like I've heard of that before...hmmm...who else does that?...
@don142128 Thanks for your input. You have hit the nail on the head. He is fervently defending his religious belief, though he may not realize Darwinism is a belief. He's very zealous. I can respect the fact that he's a true beliver in Darwinism & is standing up for his faith. I wish more Christians would do the same & help us get the religious philosophies of Darwinism & "millions of years" out of the schools
@TheScienceFoundation Right. I'm still waiting for you to identify those granite layers among the strata layers in Grand Canyon; a source showing how life began on its own; one kind of creature "evolving" into another; etc. The C-14 in the same range of amounts through all fossil-bearing strata, though refuting old-earth beliefs and Darwinism in the process, should be the least of your worries as genetic research continues to reveal the impossibility of goo-to-you change
@CreationMinistries The Zoroaster granite is at the base of the grand canyon, abiogenetic study has only progressed towards supporting a simple beginning of life, and you still haven't sufficiently defined 'kind'
There are no worries for evolution/old earth, your ignorant and inability to actually source your claims still doesn't constitute an argument.
So, do you have that source for your C-14 claim of it being found even in all layers, yes or no?
@TheScienceFoundation The Zoraster granite, which is mixed in the the various schists in the bottom of the Canyon, are below the sedimentary layers, not within them. Nice to know that scientists, building on millions of other researchers efforts, with billions of $'s & computers thrown in, are progressing toward revealing that only massive amounts of intelligent design can even attempt to explain how life could've started - let us know when they discover God's Word was right from Gen 1:1
@CreationMinistries Yes, it's at the base of the sediment which is not at all mixed according to its property in water.
It's called operational science, employing constant certain variables. The tests done are replications of natural settings. You've set it up in your mind to reject it either way "scientists haven't come close to producing life from non-life"
"Oh they have? Well it took intelligent scientists to do it"
Just one of the many reasons no one of consequence takes you seriously
@TheScienceFoundation "..no one of consequence.." I must break my rule & call you a pompous bag of hot air. Speaking of which, why can't you just say you were wrong about the granite? I'm glad you know what operational science is - you must realize origin of life issues are about historical science & aren't testable. One must have faith in what they believe. Until scientists show how life could viably form on its own (which they can't do) I don't need to say anything
@CreationMinistries I was never wrong because I never said the granite was anywhere but at the base of the strata. Why can't you just admit you completely made up the claim regarding C-14 being found in all layers? It's an operational study on a historical event, the past 60 years of molecular biology has only supported the notion of abiogenesis while absolutely nothing has been done to support creationism.
Well, honestly, I wasn't commenting to you. Secondly, No...no jokes intended. Not everybody believes your religion. Some actually do believe the truth. But, thanks for your comment anyway.
@don142128 Well it was a joke whether you intended it to be or not, because no one who hasn't risked drowning while drinking a glass of water actually believes the crap Russ is selling, you're probably either trolling or Russ on a sock account trying to boost moral on your own debunked videos.
@TheScienceFoundation Maybe you could trick more unsuspecting people if you would practice the garbage that you spew out. Allow me to quote YOU in an earlier comment. "Have you noticed that you have nothing but personal insults against people correcting the creationists here? I don't suspect you have but pay attention from here on out, no creationist will bring a single valid point to any discussion, but only dodge questions and employ personal attacks."
@TheScienceFoundation No...I think you know exactly what I meant. But in case you don't know, I'll gladly explain it to you...you fell into your own trap. There, so simple that even an evolutionist could understand it...atleast I think an evol. could understand it??? So now, it's time for you to defend the comment that you made about the "no valid points, personal attacks, " etc. that we use against you and your religion...after spewing your venom about creationists.
@don142128 I know what you meant, it's just that you're wrong. I've already demonstrated that you have nothing legitimate supporting your/Russ' claims. I've been asking Russ for a source on one of his claims he made a month ago with absolutely no reply at all. Ask him yourself about his claim that C-14 is found evenly in all layers because thus far all it's been is his bare assertion with no support.
@TheScienceFoundation I know you know what I meant. Don't you see what you're doing? You're falling into a trap that YOU are setting. If you have any shred of honesty in you, you'll have to admit that you are accusing creationists of doing EXACTLY what evolutionists do. It's in almost every comment that you've posted. Just read your monitor's screen, it's all there. Doesn't that tell you that maybe something isn't right with your worldview?
@don142128 Yes, I know what you thought you meant but again, it's just the matter of you being wrong. All I've done thus far is demonstrate that you have nothing to support your position, which is why you're dodging now.
Try asking Russ for that C-14 source, if you're not going to, don't pretend you interested in who is trying to make accurate claims and who is not.
@TheScienceFoundation You just CAN'T do it. Well, all sarcasm and witticisms aside, one day soon you will have to answer for your unbelief and willful ignorance. And you will realize how wrong you were. Unfortunately it will be too late. All the hatred, anger, pride and filthy self-righteousness that you cling to now will mean nothing to you on that day. I'll close by asking you one more time, to please accept Christ as your Savior now, before that fearsome day arrives.
@don142128 I just did, notice how Russ didn't even try to answer my question regarding his C-14 claim, but instead dodged?
That's convenient that 'I'll be proven wrong' when there's absolutely nothing demonstrable that can be presented and that you can't do it now, with actual evidence.
@TheScienceFoundation There is more than ample evidence of Creation that has been shown to you. But since your an Infidel, you CAN'T admit the truth. Your false pseudo-science/religion has forced you to play the willful ignorance game. That's the reason why ALL evolutionists MUST dodge the questions, and deny the true evidence. Again, you can either believe now, or wait until it's too late. But either way, you WILL be a believer. All sinners WILL believe one day.
@don142128 No, absolutely no evidence of creation has been shown, just fallacies, such as invalid inferences based on erroneous analogies and in Russ' case, outright fabication such as C-14 being found evenly in all layers.
I've answered all of your questions thus far and you've presented nothing but the same recycle fallacy in response.
@TheScienceFoundation See, I took your advice and payed CLOSE attention to what YOU said. "Oh what a tangled web we weave..." LOL! YOU'RE the only one trying to tell us jokes...dirty jokes at that, on here. Again, thank you for commenting.
Russ, just wanted to let you know that I gave the Creation message, and your dvds to a co-worker. She had never heard the truth of the Gospel, and she had been fully indoctrinated into the false evolutionary belief system. When she did hear the truth, and saw it in God's Word, she said it opened her eyes to reality, and that "everything made sense now..". She also told her daughters. They BOTH want to know more! Thanks for these postings.
@don142128 Thank you for using our DVDs to help them! Things do make a lot of sense when seen through the correct biblical worldview. May God continue to bless your efforts and their growing faith
Thanks for these short clips here on youtube CreationMinistries! Good someone is showing real science and speaking the truth. I use info from these clips for myself and for friends who also appreciate them. Thanks Mr Russ Miller! (To many people, or maybe the same people? writing negativ criticism, undeserved) ;-)
HOX genes are control genes which guide where genetic data places the well designed parts of an organism. A mutation in a HOX gene leads to monstrocities, like a frog with its left leg jutting out of its right shoulder. The leg is useless, not having the muscles or nervous system to control it. Most HOX mutation victims are quickly removed by Selection - much like I point out in this 90-second video....boom...roasted.
These well indoctrinated children who are sitting in the evolutionary training centers today, will in fact be in the government and society of tomorrow. Satan's goal has always been to try and destroy God's Creation. He, and his minions WILL fail. They already have.
@don142128 These well educated children who are actually learning real biology are almost certainly going to reject ignorance in the form of fundamentalist christianity.
@TheScienceFoundation Fundamental Christianity is what has kept marxism and communism from destroying our country till now. The reason evolution is pushed so much on our children is to actually brainwash them into thinking like a communist and not have a real purpose in this world. You have already grown up into this realm and are thinking exactly as they want you to think. You are in bondage, and a robot. You are controlled. We are free, we think critical, Russ is a "hero" and Christ wins!
@TheScienceFoundation No, you are wrong, Mr. "science man", don't presuppose my past, you are dumb for using that! Shows how brainwashed you are. You apply fairy tales to scientific facts, we call it "bait and switch." You see, you have to explain your fairytales using the biblical "kind" we all can see and understand logically, then you switch it to "sci-fi"; you might as well give the pelican credit for your delivery into this world..because that's as far as your "science" seems to go..
Respond to this video...I already know all about your psychological projection. I don't need to read other pages about it. ..Look at your own knowledge, it is a missing chain, let alone a missing link. The thing that is the saddest is that you know better. You just want to wish your darwinistic idea as true, because you are afraid to face yourself before God and everyone. I don't blame you in your case...
@cathy356 You're certainly aware of your projection being used to assert that I'm projecting. The missing links aren't missing, and you should try applying 1% of the scrutiny to your views that you apply to actual science. Then maybe you'd realize how ridiculous you sound.
@cathy356 Try approaching subjects with a mind unclouded by political and dogmatic misconceptions and you will begin to be rewarded with understanding. It is a persistent and obstinate dogmatic interpretation often found within fundamentalism of all creeds which easily leads to conceptual barriers. It is disheartening to see those who are eager to erect their own prisons so that they may shout "freedom!" at barren walls.
@RoGhrianadh You are speaking to yourself, I could out knowledge you any day and turn your own logic inside out. But it would help if you had some of your own to begin with.
Respond to this video...I am not politically correct about anything, and I'm more knowledgable by it! You on the other hand, have to be, because the opposite is God fearing.
@cathy356 How on earth do you think you can be objective about anything if you admit you're starting from the position of believing in god no matter what?
The Infidels that control the public indoctrination system have an agenda. It is their goal to "evolutionize" society so they can have the godless, anarchical society that we are increasingly seeing today. It's what the Infidels have been hoping for since they came up with the scheme of a public "education" system, as they have stated in their Communist Manifesto. If you want to destroy something, you start from the inside, at the heart of it. That's EXACTLY what they've done.
@TheScienceFoundation You...AGAIN! I thought maybe you would have magically evolved yourself a new friend from a rock, or a hunk of Play Doh... or something, so you could have someone to argue with and preach your evo. belief system too! LOL! Just kidding of course. I'm sad to see that you're STILL denying reality. BUT...atleast you're NOT arguing the fact that Infidels and other wicked fools DO INDEED control the "education" system, and they DO have an agenda. That's a start!
@don142128 They aren't intelligent enough to look ahead and accept wisdom, they settled for monkey thoughts in the "past" instead, now they don't realize that they are being controlled politically, mentally and that they will perish, they might even volunteer for it!
@cathy356 Thank you for commenting. YES...the unsaved WILL VOLUNTARILY accept being controlled. They are unsaved and trapped in their wicked, lustful, spiritually dead human nature. To the unsaved, sin is just a normal way of life. That's a BIG part of why the evolutionists cling to such a flawed, mystical belief system. That's why no matter how much evidence we show them, and there is an abundance of true evidence, and no matter what we say, it WON'T mean a thing to the Infidels.
@cathy356 It takes a "special" kind of wicked fool to believe in the mythological, mystical worldview that is called evolution. The self-righteous, wicked fools who believe and preach the myth of evolution do so because they have an agenda. Their goal is to destroy EVERYTHING that God has created. Teaching TRUE science IS NOT what the fools have in mind. Because true science reveals God's Glory thru His Creation.
@don142128 those are persuasive facts. no, they don't come close to a logical explanation. evolution is something we observe, what you just wrote is you opinion and your belief. you go into a point that these people try to smear religion, yet refer to them as wicked, thus effectively(in your eyes) smearing them. you have an agenda here. your goal to to stop people from building something people put trust in outside of religion. and your ignorant to think evolution is a world view.
@don142128 believe and preach that's te basis of faith not science like how a priest preaches and the flock believes his word everything you put there is not facts or counter facts just what nonsensical bashing of evolution which in no way dissolves the consistancy of science and the facts which observations have brought to the table. you aren't making points you spewing emotions and blind faith that bear no reason.
"falsely teaches that mutations add new beneficial genetic data"
Again, being ignorant of processes that add information doesn't mean they don't exist.
This is the kind of retardation that is turning 85% of kids off of the christian faith by the time they leave for college, because your nonsense claims are refuted by anyone interested in the facts with a search of the data in 5 seconds flat.
This is a video detailing the observed addition of a new gene with a new function /watch?v=gJVjTh98aHU
@TheScienceFoundation (you here again?) Fact1. Kids dont care about real science. THATS WY kids believe in Darwinism. I know many people believing Evolution, they say it is because school teaching it, so it must be true. But they dont know why, and dont care. As long as God is out of the picture.. Why are you still fighting God?
@bambuskaktusa You have that the wrong way around, kids have an inherently inquisitive nature generally unaffected by dogma. Everyone I know that accepts evolution pretty reasonably understands how it's the only scientific explanation for the diversity of life on earth.
I'm not fighting god as you can't fight an imaginary figure, I'm fighting people selling pseudo-science under the guise of his word
@TheScienceFoundation You are a Darwinian prophet...betting all your eggs, or is that chickens..?.. not sure which you believe 'evolved' first....on the refuted belief in Darwinism. You are desparately trying to cling to what is already refuted yet still taught in public schools. Very sad to see how much time you spend on my sites which you claim are so false. Gene Depletion + Selection makes your belief a refuted fairy tale
Duplicating already existing genetic data is not the creation of new & beneficial data. This has nothing to do with meeting Darwinian needs. Thanks for allowing folks to see you have nothing but smoke & mirrors...oh yeah, and HOX gene mutations... (-:
@CreationMinistries Duplicating existing genetic data increases the net quantity of material for mutations to act upon, then one copy can maintain original function while the other is free to mutate and take on novel function.
Mutations do not lead a bacteria cell to turn into a biology professor = whether the professor believes he mutated his way from a bacterium is another issue
@CreationMinistries Ignorance of actual biology does not affect evolutions standing as the only scientific explanation for biodiversity. Whether creationists believe their ignorance actually constitutes an argument is another story.
@TheScienceFoundation Then strangely enough, if we have no argument, why are you arguing with us? Why are you wasting your time? And why in the world would you care, if you are so right? If you are right, and telling the truth, no one would find evidence against your story, but sadly ALL evidence is against your story, thats why we argue with you, you are spreading lies to our children. They get enough lies around CHRISTmas and EASTer! That too is turning the truth into lies!
@TheScienceFoundation LOL your still here getting embarrassed. Please provide a plausible mechanism of how male and female sexual organs evolved. (hint: you can't :D)
@TheScienceFoundation That's a real non answer. Why would a hermaphroditic species evolve in the first place? provide a plausible mechanism for the evolution of male and female sex organs. What type of environmental pressures would cause such mutations to be selected for? Any scenario you create is absurd.
@9pt9 No, that's a perfectly valid answer. 'Why' is a pointless question, as evolution is not directional. Any orifice by which gametes can be exchanged can serve as a primitive sex organ. The pressures that would select for sexual reproduction are the fact that it produces higher variation, any scenario I posit is perfectly plausible to anyone with any working knowledge of biology.
@TheScienceFoundation Notice you cant provide an evolutionary scenario. Simply because it's absurd. NS would have to "know" exacty how far along the penis in one organism and the vagina in the other was progressing in order to be ready once they are done evolving. Impossible is the only word to
Describe it for anybody with a working knowledge of biology. Provide a scenario or you must denounce evolution right now.
@9pt9 Notice I've already pointed out that there are hermaphrodites that can demonstrably sexually reproduce and that you seem to think ignoring that fact means it goes away. Natural selection doesn't have to know anything, existing traits which allow a certain organism to live longer and reproduce more is passed on at a higher frequency.
@TheScienceFoundation The existence of hermaphrodites proves how male and female sex organs evolved? You must be joking. How could a penis evolve wo "knowing" exactly how the vagina is progressing since that is where it's use will be? Scenarios like this are a death blow to evolution but your faith will prevent you from facing it.
@9pt9 The existence of hermaphrodites that can swap gametes prove that sexual reproduction can evolve. Not joking, but then again I'm not the one continually failing to understand that natural selection doesn't have to know anything.
@TheScienceFoundation One thing we know for sure is that evolution didn't do it. God is the best scientific inference to the best explanation. The actual mechanism is : God spoke.....
@9pt9 No, one thing creationists have to remain ignorant of is the fact that evolution did do it. There is no inference to god doing anything, all you have is assertion
@TheScienceFoundation You have just described your own religion of pre-suppostition "evolution" brought together with imaginary billions of years which can't be tested either! But at least our religion is fact based on what we see and know about the world around us as it exists now, under a microscope or in our back yard. What we see and understand always points to our Creator; where we have our foundations intact & unchangable for 6K yrs: not some old fashioned "dreamer" from the recent past
@TheScienceFoundation Evolution is actually a red herring. If there was any real evidence that RMNS could create all the complex biosystems we observe I'd accept it and chalk it up to God. Why do you really want to not believe in God? What a pointless existence. Science will never disprove Gods existence.
So you admit that no matter what we find and no matter what I show you, you're going to accredit it to what amounts to invisible magic.
Science doesn't have to disprove god, science is an inductive methodology, that means you have to have actual positive evidence for your positive claim, and you have none for god, just bias.
@TheScienceFoundation "invisible magic" lol, you forget that there is an infallible bible that has never been refuted and Jesus who has come back from the dead both proof positive of Gods existence.
@9pt9 Yes, invisible magic. There is no demonstrable difference between what you're claiming and invisible magic. The bible has been refuted, christians unwillingness to accept it doesn't mean it isn't so, and the only 'evidence' of jesus' resurrection is the bible, so that's entirely circular logic.
@TheScienceFoundation Wow, I can't believe you use Christian logic from the Bible to assert your claim that the Bible isn't logical! Hahaha! Typical. Your belief in even the morals you claim to have, come from the Bible's teaching. You could not even know that you exist, if it weren't for the Word of God and the knowledge He has set before us. Start using the logic from the brain He has given you. Thank God that you were created to think, in the first place!
Respond to this video.....oh and alot you know, you listen to secular gossip, instead of real truth. Search, you have to search for the truth, no one will put it on a platter for you to just eat. God made honest people to have to search away from the majority that swallows anything. Thats what you have been fed, right off a platter to your mouth! Thats how lies are so easily digested.
@cathy356 Don't bother with the non-science foundation guy. He commits more fallacies than almost anyone...esp. the fallacy of invincible ignorance..no matter how much evidence you show him, he refuses to change. He's only interested in denying science to support atheism and it's efforts to censor all rival evidence and distort and falsely malign what he's prejudiced against. Btw, my channel has ~200 creation science videos that are also helpful.
@evoTARDSareINSANE Ask Russ, the guy that uploaded this video, what he thinks about people that use personal attacks instead of addressing someones point.
@PhantomOfChaosSkin You consistently fail to understand how science works.Processes we see operating now are assumed to operate the same in history in general (there are a few exceptions, but not many). Without this, universal common descent has not a shred of basis in science. Neither does the Big Bang and many other things in forensic and historical science. Your delusions are only evidence for me to use in my university classes to demonstrate that atheism makes people stupid about science.
@TheScienceFoundation blah blah.."fallacies and question begging", the same exact thing could be said about evolution that is never seen happening and pure conjecture. Try "the inference to the best explanation". It's the same old crap from you brainlocked evolutionauts. You guys are so sad.
@9pt9 Except that we aren't claiming it happened only in the past via a completely unknown and by definition unknowable mechanism, so no the same couldn't be said about evolution unless you want to keep sounding ignorant. The same processes we observe today drove evolution in the past
@TheScienceFoundation Haha! Again, so what! How does that tell us that we (humans) were hermaphroditic? Use scientific observation if you please, the kind of knowledge that we can see and understand, (like "kinds" producing their own "kinds") (we have billions of examples of knowledge of that)..thanks..
@cathy356 'How does that tell us that we (humans) were hermaphroditic' Shifting the goalposts, the question was how sexual reproduction can evolve, this shows exactly how.
@TheScienceFoundation How can you increase variations that are already there? How would you even know you are increasing them? You know nothing of simple genes in a gene pool? You must be an amateur "darwinist." You should try science sometime.
@9pt9 Go easy on him, he thinks that his ancestors are volcanic rocks, that dinosaurs now have wings and eat out of our birdfeeders, and that he is very well educated. :D We laugh about it, but it's really no laughing matter. These are victims of years of evolutionary indoctrination and conditioning programs.
@don142128 Have you noticed that you have nothing but personal insults against people correcting the creationists here? I don't suspect you have but pay attention from here on out, no creationist will bring a single valid point to any discussion, but only dodge questions and employ personal attacks.
@TheScienceFoundation Does the term "hypocrite" mean anything to you? By the way, new studies on DNA mutation rates, coupled with Gene Depletion, are putting the final nails into the coffin of Neo-Darwinism. While you employ cheap insults and refuted and biased Darwinian "studies" real science is a Christian's best friend
@CreationMinistries Actually modern mutation rates are even more evidence for evolution, bearing in mind that remaining ignorant of processes that add information doesn't mean they don't exist. We're about 4% different than chimps, we have 3 billion base pairs and we've been diverging for about 7 million years with an average generation time of 15 years.
@TheScienceFoundation The brain dead Infidel fools on here have been shown AMPLE evidence of the truth. But they have CHOSEN to deny it all because they choose to be WILLFULLY ignorant and they DO NOT WANT God to exist. Therefore I will continue to demonstrate how foolish these fools are. So please...continue making fools and liars out of yourselves. It's helping people realize that your evolutionary belief system is truly a false religion and has NOTHING to do with true science.
@TheScienceFoundation Youre too brainlocked by "only what you can measure" philosophy. Where did it all come from? Where did all the organization come from? Your worldview loses and will always lose. Why? It offers nothing to anybody exept dark hopelessness.
It's PERFECTLY logical to assume God did it even without the bible nailing it shut.
@9pt9 It's kind of pitiful the closest you come to appear to having an understanding of biology is when you think you're being sarcastic with an appeal to consequence.
@TheScienceFoundation You are dumb enough to believe that only origin "scientists" know, have a right to know the origin of life, what a dummy you are!
@TheScienceFoundation Why does nearly 100% of the fossil record show species appear fully formed with no precursors and without changing for (supoosed) millions of years?
@9pt9 What are you expecting, a fossil that morphs from a fish to a tetrapod before our very eyes? Tiktaalik was its own species, but it was also constituted of characteristics which were quite literally half fish half tetrapod. Archaeopteryx itself was a fully formed species, but it still had feathers while also having a bony tail and conical teeth.
@TheScienceFoundation Given what evolution theory says happened there should be hundreds of millions of transitional fossils. And Still the best you can come up with is tiktaalic whose hind quarter never even found and archaeopteryx who has zero precursors ever found. Presently there seems to be no evolution occurring.
What the fossils actually show loud and clear is creatures appearing fully formed. Believe what you want but science supports creation so far.
@TheScienceFoundation I'm glad you hang out on these vids. It's great to know that some one who claims to know lots about science can't even defend the evolution myth!
@TheScienceFoundation Again....so? Scientifically prove that Tiktaalik even had any offspring! Archaeopteryx has been proven a bird, and there are birds to this day that have teeth, big deal, and lizards that don't, big deal. Thats the facts of scientific investigation. How does that prove evolution? It just shows us an extinct bird with teeth..
You are just adding fairy tales to observable facts. You have been brainwashed, and you will feel very dumb when you realize this, if you ever think..
@9pt9 Again you're confusing you not understanding or wanting to accept it.
'How about a mechanism for vascular plant speciation using evolutionary theory.'
Not different than any other speciation events, there are a number of ways it can occur. Allopatric speciation is the most common, a population is divided geographically or via some other means in which time mutations occur specific to either lineage.
@9pt9 This is an example of supposed irreducible complexity, but what is ignored is the fact that in the systems which comprise the HPA axis serve other functions in the body and could serve them independently of the other two.
@TheScienceFoundation ...So..your point is...God is so much more complex than you ever thought, and He limits information on purpose...as in darwinian evolution...who is Darwin anyway? What did he know?....nothing! Now it has rubbed off on gullible people like you, what a fool that follows childish things instead of growing up and fearing God so that they would have His knowledge in their hands...
@TheScienceFoundation There you go pretending to see things that aren't there in order to perpetuate a fake science.
I'd expect the fossils to appear exactly as you wish they'd appear. With fossils changing over hundreds of millions of years not staying exactly the same and also abundant obvious transitionals.
@9pt9 But your argument was that the fossils themselves don't change, now you're saying that you'd accept a series of transitional characteristics in separate fossils? Could you give an example of a sequence of specific characteristics would you consider transitional between, say, fish and tetrapods or theropod dinosaurs and birds?
Why is the narrator speaking to me as if i don't fucking understand english.
VEVOemployee 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
"Does modern science disprove what the scripture says?"
Yes.
Thank you for asking.
LordShplane 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Video Title: "Neo Darwinism: destroyed in 5-SECONDS FLAT"
Video Length = 1:31
Failure this epic can ONLY be accomplished by the sort of stupidity that generates creationists.
azdgariarada 2 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@azdgariarada seriously. Five seconds is not 1:31 minutes, I know, I checked.
SweetMustacheFilms 1 week ago
Funny how Darwin didn't know about mutations and still showed how evolution works.
gregrutz 2 months ago
Thanks for your video. I can now take comfort in my ignorance. I'm tired of those experts thinking they know more them me.
b991228 8 months ago
@b991228
Anyone can learn this stuff. Gene duplication is the answer most evolutionary biologists will give because this video is absolutely right. Genetic mutations can lend to adaptation, but they nearly always break genes in the process. Unfortunately gene duplication doesn't really work either because it must be assumed that the existing gene is preserved while the copy is free to dramatically mutate. Somehow the gene expression system incorporates the new function. Yeah, not impressive.
circusOFprecision 6 months ago
@circusOFprecision Not only is gene duplication in and of itself impressive, but we've actually observed mutation of a duplicate gene add over 2300 bits of functional information to a genome.
TheScienceFoundation 4 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation
Yeah it happens in plants quite frequently. And then gene expression makes more plants. It happens in bacteria too. And then more bacteria are produced. But even if it does lead to evolution, you can't simply say it's a mutation or a copying error. Bacteria can do all sorts of radical things with their genomes. So as is typical with Darwinian thought, a genetic change is automatically assumed to be an evolutionary change towards increasing complexity.
circusOFprecision 4 months ago
@circusOFprecision 'And then more bacteria are produced'
And you completely miss the point. The individual frame reading error, or whatever the mutation might be, was never claimed to cause major phylogenetic change in a single event. The point was that mechanisms do indeed exist that can simultaneously increase information and complexity. This is not assumed, we've observed them.
TheScienceFoundation 4 months ago
@circusOFprecision
"increasing complexity" is not the definition of evolution.
If you don't understand what evolution is, why do you think you are able to show it doesn't happen?
odinata 4 months ago
Have you just said farming doesn't work?
martincrotty 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LIAR. Sue me you fraud.
Niall646 9 months ago
You know whats so funny, Russ? That they believe a fish would teach itself to breath out of water. How stupid is that? How would they survive that? And what would be their reason? They are surviving just fine being a fish, they don't have the capacity to think about anything else but being a fish! Nature has even less of a brain! Thats scientific fact! I am beginning to believe fish may be smarter and wiser than some of our "modern" scientists today who believe in such fairytale philosophies.
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 'That they believe a fish would teach itself to breath out of water. How stupid is that?'
That's so stupid that creationists use to strawman the actual process of fish-tetrapod evolution. Evolution is not directional or goal oriented, it's certainly not a will of action. That's more along the lines of Lamarckian evolution, the idea that traits are acquired during the life of the organism and passed on.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago 3
@Cacterpus We believe in copying what is already there also! Or can't you reason that far?
cathy356 9 months ago
Has anyone else noticed how evolutionists have to think and talk in circles, and have to accuse their opponents of doing what they are doing? Seems like I've heard of that before...hmmm...who else does that?...
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 Thanks for your input. You have hit the nail on the head. He is fervently defending his religious belief, though he may not realize Darwinism is a belief. He's very zealous. I can respect the fact that he's a true beliver in Darwinism & is standing up for his faith. I wish more Christians would do the same & help us get the religious philosophies of Darwinism & "millions of years" out of the schools
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries I'm still waiting on that source for C-14 being found evenly in all layers, Russ.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Right. I'm still waiting for you to identify those granite layers among the strata layers in Grand Canyon; a source showing how life began on its own; one kind of creature "evolving" into another; etc. The C-14 in the same range of amounts through all fossil-bearing strata, though refuting old-earth beliefs and Darwinism in the process, should be the least of your worries as genetic research continues to reveal the impossibility of goo-to-you change
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries The Zoroaster granite is at the base of the grand canyon, abiogenetic study has only progressed towards supporting a simple beginning of life, and you still haven't sufficiently defined 'kind'
There are no worries for evolution/old earth, your ignorant and inability to actually source your claims still doesn't constitute an argument.
So, do you have that source for your C-14 claim of it being found even in all layers, yes or no?
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation The Zoraster granite, which is mixed in the the various schists in the bottom of the Canyon, are below the sedimentary layers, not within them. Nice to know that scientists, building on millions of other researchers efforts, with billions of $'s & computers thrown in, are progressing toward revealing that only massive amounts of intelligent design can even attempt to explain how life could've started - let us know when they discover God's Word was right from Gen 1:1
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries Yes, it's at the base of the sediment which is not at all mixed according to its property in water.
It's called operational science, employing constant certain variables. The tests done are replications of natural settings. You've set it up in your mind to reject it either way "scientists haven't come close to producing life from non-life"
"Oh they have? Well it took intelligent scientists to do it"
Just one of the many reasons no one of consequence takes you seriously
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation "..no one of consequence.." I must break my rule & call you a pompous bag of hot air. Speaking of which, why can't you just say you were wrong about the granite? I'm glad you know what operational science is - you must realize origin of life issues are about historical science & aren't testable. One must have faith in what they believe. Until scientists show how life could viably form on its own (which they can't do) I don't need to say anything
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries I was never wrong because I never said the granite was anywhere but at the base of the strata. Why can't you just admit you completely made up the claim regarding C-14 being found in all layers? It's an operational study on a historical event, the past 60 years of molecular biology has only supported the notion of abiogenesis while absolutely nothing has been done to support creationism.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
Comment removed
don142128 9 months ago
Well, honestly, I wasn't commenting to you. Secondly, No...no jokes intended. Not everybody believes your religion. Some actually do believe the truth. But, thanks for your comment anyway.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 Well it was a joke whether you intended it to be or not, because no one who hasn't risked drowning while drinking a glass of water actually believes the crap Russ is selling, you're probably either trolling or Russ on a sock account trying to boost moral on your own debunked videos.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Maybe you could trick more unsuspecting people if you would practice the garbage that you spew out. Allow me to quote YOU in an earlier comment. "Have you noticed that you have nothing but personal insults against people correcting the creationists here? I don't suspect you have but pay attention from here on out, no creationist will bring a single valid point to any discussion, but only dodge questions and employ personal attacks."
TheScienceFoundation23 hours ago
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 You mean I could educate more christians if they weren't so indoctrinated and set on rejecting anything that doesn't confirm their bias.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation No...I think you know exactly what I meant. But in case you don't know, I'll gladly explain it to you...you fell into your own trap. There, so simple that even an evolutionist could understand it...atleast I think an evol. could understand it??? So now, it's time for you to defend the comment that you made about the "no valid points, personal attacks, " etc. that we use against you and your religion...after spewing your venom about creationists.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 I know what you meant, it's just that you're wrong. I've already demonstrated that you have nothing legitimate supporting your/Russ' claims. I've been asking Russ for a source on one of his claims he made a month ago with absolutely no reply at all. Ask him yourself about his claim that C-14 is found evenly in all layers because thus far all it's been is his bare assertion with no support.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation I know you know what I meant. Don't you see what you're doing? You're falling into a trap that YOU are setting. If you have any shred of honesty in you, you'll have to admit that you are accusing creationists of doing EXACTLY what evolutionists do. It's in almost every comment that you've posted. Just read your monitor's screen, it's all there. Doesn't that tell you that maybe something isn't right with your worldview?
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 Yes, I know what you thought you meant but again, it's just the matter of you being wrong. All I've done thus far is demonstrate that you have nothing to support your position, which is why you're dodging now.
Try asking Russ for that C-14 source, if you're not going to, don't pretend you interested in who is trying to make accurate claims and who is not.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation You just CAN'T do it. Well, all sarcasm and witticisms aside, one day soon you will have to answer for your unbelief and willful ignorance. And you will realize how wrong you were. Unfortunately it will be too late. All the hatred, anger, pride and filthy self-righteousness that you cling to now will mean nothing to you on that day. I'll close by asking you one more time, to please accept Christ as your Savior now, before that fearsome day arrives.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 I just did, notice how Russ didn't even try to answer my question regarding his C-14 claim, but instead dodged?
That's convenient that 'I'll be proven wrong' when there's absolutely nothing demonstrable that can be presented and that you can't do it now, with actual evidence.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation There is more than ample evidence of Creation that has been shown to you. But since your an Infidel, you CAN'T admit the truth. Your false pseudo-science/religion has forced you to play the willful ignorance game. That's the reason why ALL evolutionists MUST dodge the questions, and deny the true evidence. Again, you can either believe now, or wait until it's too late. But either way, you WILL be a believer. All sinners WILL believe one day.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 No, absolutely no evidence of creation has been shown, just fallacies, such as invalid inferences based on erroneous analogies and in Russ' case, outright fabication such as C-14 being found evenly in all layers.
I've answered all of your questions thus far and you've presented nothing but the same recycle fallacy in response.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation How terrible to be spiritually dead and stuck in a fantasy world of make believe, from which you CAN'T escape.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 I'm fine with reality as it is, I don't have to persist in a delusion to feel comfortable.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation See, I took your advice and payed CLOSE attention to what YOU said. "Oh what a tangled web we weave..." LOL! YOU'RE the only one trying to tell us jokes...dirty jokes at that, on here. Again, thank you for commenting.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 No, you've really just rejected everything I've presented in favor of Russ' fallacy.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
Russ, just wanted to let you know that I gave the Creation message, and your dvds to a co-worker. She had never heard the truth of the Gospel, and she had been fully indoctrinated into the false evolutionary belief system. When she did hear the truth, and saw it in God's Word, she said it opened her eyes to reality, and that "everything made sense now..". She also told her daughters. They BOTH want to know more! Thanks for these postings.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 Now I know you're joking, it's obvious to anyone with an IQ higher than their shoe size that everything Russ says is pure garbage.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@don142128 Thank you for using our DVDs to help them! Things do make a lot of sense when seen through the correct biblical worldview. May God continue to bless your efforts and their growing faith
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
Thanks for these short clips here on youtube CreationMinistries! Good someone is showing real science and speaking the truth. I use info from these clips for myself and for friends who also appreciate them. Thanks Mr Russ Miller! (To many people, or maybe the same people? writing negativ criticism, undeserved) ;-)
bambuskaktusa 9 months ago
@bambuskaktusa 'Good someone is showing real science and speaking the truth.'
Yes, me, cacterpus and the like are.
Don't forget to also show your friends who appreciate it the round refutations of the garbage in these videos.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@Cacterpus
Please start such tales with "Once upon a time...."
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries More like "According to these thousands of peer reviewed articles"
pubmed(.)gov search : hox gene mutations
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
HOX genes are control genes which guide where genetic data places the well designed parts of an organism. A mutation in a HOX gene leads to monstrocities, like a frog with its left leg jutting out of its right shoulder. The leg is useless, not having the muscles or nervous system to control it. Most HOX mutation victims are quickly removed by Selection - much like I point out in this 90-second video....boom...roasted.
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
These well indoctrinated children who are sitting in the evolutionary training centers today, will in fact be in the government and society of tomorrow. Satan's goal has always been to try and destroy God's Creation. He, and his minions WILL fail. They already have.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 These well educated children who are actually learning real biology are almost certainly going to reject ignorance in the form of fundamentalist christianity.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Fundamental Christianity is what has kept marxism and communism from destroying our country till now. The reason evolution is pushed so much on our children is to actually brainwash them into thinking like a communist and not have a real purpose in this world. You have already grown up into this realm and are thinking exactly as they want you to think. You are in bondage, and a robot. You are controlled. We are free, we think critical, Russ is a "hero" and Christ wins!
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 No, evolution is taught because it's a fact and creationism is not because it's not.
'You have already grown up into this realm and are thinking exactly as they want you to think.'
I would also direct you to the page regarding psychological projection.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation No, you are wrong, Mr. "science man", don't presuppose my past, you are dumb for using that! Shows how brainwashed you are. You apply fairy tales to scientific facts, we call it "bait and switch." You see, you have to explain your fairytales using the biblical "kind" we all can see and understand logically, then you switch it to "sci-fi"; you might as well give the pelican credit for your delivery into this world..because that's as far as your "science" seems to go..
cathy356 9 months ago
Respond to this video...I already know all about your psychological projection. I don't need to read other pages about it. ..Look at your own knowledge, it is a missing chain, let alone a missing link. The thing that is the saddest is that you know better. You just want to wish your darwinistic idea as true, because you are afraid to face yourself before God and everyone. I don't blame you in your case...
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 You're certainly aware of your projection being used to assert that I'm projecting. The missing links aren't missing, and you should try applying 1% of the scrutiny to your views that you apply to actual science. Then maybe you'd realize how ridiculous you sound.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@cathy356 Try approaching subjects with a mind unclouded by political and dogmatic misconceptions and you will begin to be rewarded with understanding. It is a persistent and obstinate dogmatic interpretation often found within fundamentalism of all creeds which easily leads to conceptual barriers. It is disheartening to see those who are eager to erect their own prisons so that they may shout "freedom!" at barren walls.
RoGhrianadh 9 months ago
@RoGhrianadh You are speaking to yourself, I could out knowledge you any day and turn your own logic inside out. But it would help if you had some of your own to begin with.
cathy356 9 months ago
Respond to this video...I am not politically correct about anything, and I'm more knowledgable by it! You on the other hand, have to be, because the opposite is God fearing.
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 How on earth do you think you can be objective about anything if you admit you're starting from the position of believing in god no matter what?
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago 3
The Infidels that control the public indoctrination system have an agenda. It is their goal to "evolutionize" society so they can have the godless, anarchical society that we are increasingly seeing today. It's what the Infidels have been hoping for since they came up with the scheme of a public "education" system, as they have stated in their Communist Manifesto. If you want to destroy something, you start from the inside, at the heart of it. That's EXACTLY what they've done.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 The only 'agenda' they have is teaching real science (evolution) to the exclusion of non-science (creationism)
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation You...AGAIN! I thought maybe you would have magically evolved yourself a new friend from a rock, or a hunk of Play Doh... or something, so you could have someone to argue with and preach your evo. belief system too! LOL! Just kidding of course. I'm sad to see that you're STILL denying reality. BUT...atleast you're NOT arguing the fact that Infidels and other wicked fools DO INDEED control the "education" system, and they DO have an agenda. That's a start!
don142128 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@don142128 No but you could try magically creating something with your strawman there.
'I'm sad to see that you're STILL denying reality '
en.wikipedia(.)org/wiki/Psychological_projection
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@don142128 They aren't intelligent enough to look ahead and accept wisdom, they settled for monkey thoughts in the "past" instead, now they don't realize that they are being controlled politically, mentally and that they will perish, they might even volunteer for it!
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 Thank you for commenting. YES...the unsaved WILL VOLUNTARILY accept being controlled. They are unsaved and trapped in their wicked, lustful, spiritually dead human nature. To the unsaved, sin is just a normal way of life. That's a BIG part of why the evolutionists cling to such a flawed, mystical belief system. That's why no matter how much evidence we show them, and there is an abundance of true evidence, and no matter what we say, it WON'T mean a thing to the Infidels.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 You mean the non-brainwashed will understand real science as opposed to the creationist ignorance such as what is touted here.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@cathy356 It takes a "special" kind of wicked fool to believe in the mythological, mystical worldview that is called evolution. The self-righteous, wicked fools who believe and preach the myth of evolution do so because they have an agenda. Their goal is to destroy EVERYTHING that God has created. Teaching TRUE science IS NOT what the fools have in mind. Because true science reveals God's Glory thru His Creation.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 those are persuasive facts. no, they don't come close to a logical explanation. evolution is something we observe, what you just wrote is you opinion and your belief. you go into a point that these people try to smear religion, yet refer to them as wicked, thus effectively(in your eyes) smearing them. you have an agenda here. your goal to to stop people from building something people put trust in outside of religion. and your ignorant to think evolution is a world view.
MayhemMan1000 1 month ago
@don142128 believe and preach that's te basis of faith not science like how a priest preaches and the flock believes his word everything you put there is not facts or counter facts just what nonsensical bashing of evolution which in no way dissolves the consistancy of science and the facts which observations have brought to the table. you aren't making points you spewing emotions and blind faith that bear no reason.
MayhemMan1000 1 month ago
It's kind of sad how you actually think this is an argument.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
"falsely teaches that mutations add new beneficial genetic data"
Again, being ignorant of processes that add information doesn't mean they don't exist.
This is the kind of retardation that is turning 85% of kids off of the christian faith by the time they leave for college, because your nonsense claims are refuted by anyone interested in the facts with a search of the data in 5 seconds flat.
This is a video detailing the observed addition of a new gene with a new function /watch?v=gJVjTh98aHU
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation (you here again?) Fact1. Kids dont care about real science. THATS WY kids believe in Darwinism. I know many people believing Evolution, they say it is because school teaching it, so it must be true. But they dont know why, and dont care. As long as God is out of the picture.. Why are you still fighting God?
bambuskaktusa 9 months ago
@bambuskaktusa You have that the wrong way around, kids have an inherently inquisitive nature generally unaffected by dogma. Everyone I know that accepts evolution pretty reasonably understands how it's the only scientific explanation for the diversity of life on earth.
I'm not fighting god as you can't fight an imaginary figure, I'm fighting people selling pseudo-science under the guise of his word
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Ok. Good when people fight "false prophets" I just dont think Russ Miller is one of them...
bambuskaktusa 9 months ago
@bambuskaktusa You wouldn't, he's telling you what you want to hear
The facts however do show him to be demonstrably wrong about literally everything he says.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation You are a Darwinian prophet...betting all your eggs, or is that chickens..?.. not sure which you believe 'evolved' first....on the refuted belief in Darwinism. You are desparately trying to cling to what is already refuted yet still taught in public schools. Very sad to see how much time you spend on my sites which you claim are so false. Gene Depletion + Selection makes your belief a refuted fairy tale
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries No I'm just a guy that actually understands biology, including how you very apparently don't.
I have to spend so much time here because you spout so much demonstrably wrong garbage.
Gene duplication + mutation makes your 'destroyed in 5-seconds flat' argument obvious retardation.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Yeah, you're a legend in your own mind.
Duplicating already existing genetic data is not the creation of new & beneficial data. This has nothing to do with meeting Darwinian needs. Thanks for allowing folks to see you have nothing but smoke & mirrors...oh yeah, and HOX gene mutations... (-:
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries Duplicating existing genetic data increases the net quantity of material for mutations to act upon, then one copy can maintain original function while the other is free to mutate and take on novel function.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Once upon a time....
Mutations do not lead a bacteria cell to turn into a biology professor = whether the professor believes he mutated his way from a bacterium is another issue
CreationMinistries 9 months ago 2
@CreationMinistries Ignorance of actual biology does not affect evolutions standing as the only scientific explanation for biodiversity. Whether creationists believe their ignorance actually constitutes an argument is another story.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Then strangely enough, if we have no argument, why are you arguing with us? Why are you wasting your time? And why in the world would you care, if you are so right? If you are right, and telling the truth, no one would find evidence against your story, but sadly ALL evidence is against your story, thats why we argue with you, you are spreading lies to our children. They get enough lies around CHRISTmas and EASTer! That too is turning the truth into lies!
cathy356 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation LOL your still here getting embarrassed. Please provide a plausible mechanism of how male and female sexual organs evolved. (hint: you can't :D)
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 I'm still here correcting Russ' ignorance of biology.
As far as sexual evolution, certain hermaphroditic species can swap gametes, and this is beneficial because it increases variation.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation That's a real non answer. Why would a hermaphroditic species evolve in the first place? provide a plausible mechanism for the evolution of male and female sex organs. What type of environmental pressures would cause such mutations to be selected for? Any scenario you create is absurd.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 No, that's a perfectly valid answer. 'Why' is a pointless question, as evolution is not directional. Any orifice by which gametes can be exchanged can serve as a primitive sex organ. The pressures that would select for sexual reproduction are the fact that it produces higher variation, any scenario I posit is perfectly plausible to anyone with any working knowledge of biology.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Notice you cant provide an evolutionary scenario. Simply because it's absurd. NS would have to "know" exacty how far along the penis in one organism and the vagina in the other was progressing in order to be ready once they are done evolving. Impossible is the only word to
Describe it for anybody with a working knowledge of biology. Provide a scenario or you must denounce evolution right now.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 Notice I've already pointed out that there are hermaphrodites that can demonstrably sexually reproduce and that you seem to think ignoring that fact means it goes away. Natural selection doesn't have to know anything, existing traits which allow a certain organism to live longer and reproduce more is passed on at a higher frequency.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation The existence of hermaphrodites proves how male and female sex organs evolved? You must be joking. How could a penis evolve wo "knowing" exactly how the vagina is progressing since that is where it's use will be? Scenarios like this are a death blow to evolution but your faith will prevent you from facing it.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 The existence of hermaphrodites that can swap gametes prove that sexual reproduction can evolve. Not joking, but then again I'm not the one continually failing to understand that natural selection doesn't have to know anything.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@9pt9 By your own logic, you must provide a single actual testable mechanism for creationism or denounce it right now.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation There is no testable mechanism for creation. It's already been created.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 That's the claim that creationists keep making without ever supporting it.
Also, just because it's supposedly already happened doesn't mean you can't hypothesize a mechanism.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation One thing we know for sure is that evolution didn't do it. God is the best scientific inference to the best explanation. The actual mechanism is : God spoke.....
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 No, one thing creationists have to remain ignorant of is the fact that evolution did do it. There is no inference to god doing anything, all you have is assertion
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation You have just described your own religion of pre-suppostition "evolution" brought together with imaginary billions of years which can't be tested either! But at least our religion is fact based on what we see and know about the world around us as it exists now, under a microscope or in our back yard. What we see and understand always points to our Creator; where we have our foundations intact & unchangable for 6K yrs: not some old fashioned "dreamer" from the recent past
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 No, I've explained the projection employed by creationists and their assumption that ignorance of science actually constitutes an argument.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Evolution is actually a red herring. If there was any real evidence that RMNS could create all the complex biosystems we observe I'd accept it and chalk it up to God. Why do you really want to not believe in God? What a pointless existence. Science will never disprove Gods existence.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 'I'd accept it and chalk it up to God.'
So you admit that no matter what we find and no matter what I show you, you're going to accredit it to what amounts to invisible magic.
Science doesn't have to disprove god, science is an inductive methodology, that means you have to have actual positive evidence for your positive claim, and you have none for god, just bias.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation "invisible magic" lol, you forget that there is an infallible bible that has never been refuted and Jesus who has come back from the dead both proof positive of Gods existence.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 Yes, invisible magic. There is no demonstrable difference between what you're claiming and invisible magic. The bible has been refuted, christians unwillingness to accept it doesn't mean it isn't so, and the only 'evidence' of jesus' resurrection is the bible, so that's entirely circular logic.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Wow, I can't believe you use Christian logic from the Bible to assert your claim that the Bible isn't logical! Hahaha! Typical. Your belief in even the morals you claim to have, come from the Bible's teaching. You could not even know that you exist, if it weren't for the Word of God and the knowledge He has set before us. Start using the logic from the brain He has given you. Thank God that you were created to think, in the first place!
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 Where are you getting, other than your assumption, that logic is inherently biblical logic?
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
Respond to this video.....oh and alot you know, you listen to secular gossip, instead of real truth. Search, you have to search for the truth, no one will put it on a platter for you to just eat. God made honest people to have to search away from the majority that swallows anything. Thats what you have been fed, right off a platter to your mouth! Thats how lies are so easily digested.
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 I've asked hundreds of theists to present cases for their positive claims, no one thus far has presented anything but fallacy.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@cathy356 Don't bother with the non-science foundation guy. He commits more fallacies than almost anyone...esp. the fallacy of invincible ignorance..no matter how much evidence you show him, he refuses to change. He's only interested in denying science to support atheism and it's efforts to censor all rival evidence and distort and falsely malign what he's prejudiced against. Btw, my channel has ~200 creation science videos that are also helpful.
TruthIsLife7 8 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 'He commits more fallacies than almost anyone'
I'd love to see you point out even one.
TheScienceFoundation 8 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Also, what evidence have you shown?
TheScienceFoundation 8 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 I'm still waiting on which part of Pasteur's experiments only dealing with modern life you're not understanding.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation = evoTARD extremo
evoTARDSareINSANE 6 months ago
@evoTARDSareINSANE Ask Russ, the guy that uploaded this video, what he thinks about people that use personal attacks instead of addressing someones point.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TruthIsLife7
Why haven't you pointed out even one single fallacy?
odinata 4 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Just wondering, do you yet understand that Pasteur's work had nothing to do with the biochemical origin of life?
PhantomOfChaosSkin 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PhantomOfChaosSkin You consistently fail to understand how science works.Processes we see operating now are assumed to operate the same in history in general (there are a few exceptions, but not many). Without this, universal common descent has not a shred of basis in science. Neither does the Big Bang and many other things in forensic and historical science. Your delusions are only evidence for me to use in my university classes to demonstrate that atheism makes people stupid about science.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@cathy356 catholics used to sell tickets to gain entrance to Heaven.
MayhemMan1000 1 month ago
@TheScienceFoundation Invisible magic? lol try blatantly obvious creative force.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 No, try the invocation of invisible magic based on a complete ignorance of natural forces.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation blah blah.."fallacies and question begging", the same exact thing could be said about evolution that is never seen happening and pure conjecture. Try "the inference to the best explanation". It's the same old crap from you brainlocked evolutionauts. You guys are so sad.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 Except that we aren't claiming it happened only in the past via a completely unknown and by definition unknowable mechanism, so no the same couldn't be said about evolution unless you want to keep sounding ignorant. The same processes we observe today drove evolution in the past
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Haha! Again, so what! How does that tell us that we (humans) were hermaphroditic? Use scientific observation if you please, the kind of knowledge that we can see and understand, (like "kinds" producing their own "kinds") (we have billions of examples of knowledge of that)..thanks..
cathy356 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cathy356 'How does that tell us that we (humans) were hermaphroditic' Shifting the goalposts, the question was how sexual reproduction can evolve, this shows exactly how.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation How can you increase variations that are already there? How would you even know you are increasing them? You know nothing of simple genes in a gene pool? You must be an amateur "darwinist." You should try science sometime.
cathy356 9 months ago
@cathy356 'How can you increase variations that are already there?'
Genetic information can be added, this is a known observed fact in molecular biology.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@9pt9 Go easy on him, he thinks that his ancestors are volcanic rocks, that dinosaurs now have wings and eat out of our birdfeeders, and that he is very well educated. :D We laugh about it, but it's really no laughing matter. These are victims of years of evolutionary indoctrination and conditioning programs.
don142128 9 months ago
@don142128 Have you noticed that you have nothing but personal insults against people correcting the creationists here? I don't suspect you have but pay attention from here on out, no creationist will bring a single valid point to any discussion, but only dodge questions and employ personal attacks.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Does the term "hypocrite" mean anything to you? By the way, new studies on DNA mutation rates, coupled with Gene Depletion, are putting the final nails into the coffin of Neo-Darwinism. While you employ cheap insults and refuted and biased Darwinian "studies" real science is a Christian's best friend
CreationMinistries 9 months ago
@CreationMinistries Actually modern mutation rates are even more evidence for evolution, bearing in mind that remaining ignorant of processes that add information doesn't mean they don't exist. We're about 4% different than chimps, we have 3 billion base pairs and we've been diverging for about 7 million years with an average generation time of 15 years.
Do the math and it perfectly lines up.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation The brain dead Infidel fools on here have been shown AMPLE evidence of the truth. But they have CHOSEN to deny it all because they choose to be WILLFULLY ignorant and they DO NOT WANT God to exist. Therefore I will continue to demonstrate how foolish these fools are. So please...continue making fools and liars out of yourselves. It's helping people realize that your evolutionary belief system is truly a false religion and has NOTHING to do with true science.
don142128 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@don142128 'The brain dead Infidel fools on here have been shown AMPLE evidence of the truth'
Such as what? You keep claiming this evidence exists but never seem to be able to present it.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Youre too brainlocked by "only what you can measure" philosophy. Where did it all come from? Where did all the organization come from? Your worldview loses and will always lose. Why? It offers nothing to anybody exept dark hopelessness.
It's PERFECTLY logical to assume God did it even without the bible nailing it shut.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 That's not brainlocked, that's only being willing to accept what is evidenced. 'Where did all the organization come from? '
Organization compared to what?
'Your worldview loses and will always lose. Why? It offers nothing to anybody exept dark hopelessness.'
That's an appeal to emotion/consequence, another fallacy.
'It's PERFECTLY logical to assume God'
No it's not, that's completely circular logic in the form of begging the question.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Of course it did. You have been sucked into the evolution vortex and
There is no escape for you. Mutations did it all with no purpose!
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 It's kind of pitiful the closest you come to appear to having an understanding of biology is when you think you're being sarcastic with an appeal to consequence.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation You are dumb enough to believe that only origin "scientists" know, have a right to know the origin of life, what a dummy you are!
cathy356 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Why does nearly 100% of the fossil record show species appear fully formed with no precursors and without changing for (supoosed) millions of years?
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 What are you expecting, a fossil that morphs from a fish to a tetrapod before our very eyes? Tiktaalik was its own species, but it was also constituted of characteristics which were quite literally half fish half tetrapod. Archaeopteryx itself was a fully formed species, but it still had feathers while also having a bony tail and conical teeth.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Given what evolution theory says happened there should be hundreds of millions of transitional fossils. And Still the best you can come up with is tiktaalic whose hind quarter never even found and archaeopteryx who has zero precursors ever found. Presently there seems to be no evolution occurring.
What the fossils actually show loud and clear is creatures appearing fully formed. Believe what you want but science supports creation so far.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 There are, you keep confusing you not wanting to accept transitional fossils with the fossils not existing.
'What the fossils actually show loud and clear is creatures appearing fully formed.'
Again, how else are they supposed to appear?
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation I'm glad you hang out on these vids. It's great to know that some one who claims to know lots about science can't even defend the evolution myth!
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 Yet again you confuse you not understanding me for me not being correct.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Again....so? Scientifically prove that Tiktaalik even had any offspring! Archaeopteryx has been proven a bird, and there are birds to this day that have teeth, big deal, and lizards that don't, big deal. Thats the facts of scientific investigation. How does that prove evolution? It just shows us an extinct bird with teeth..
You are just adding fairy tales to observable facts. You have been brainwashed, and you will feel very dumb when you realize this, if you ever think..
cathy356 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Ridiculous. How about a mechanism for vascular plant speciation using evolutionary theory.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 Again you're confusing you not understanding or wanting to accept it.
'How about a mechanism for vascular plant speciation using evolutionary theory.'
Not different than any other speciation events, there are a number of ways it can occur. Allopatric speciation is the most common, a population is divided geographically or via some other means in which time mutations occur specific to either lineage.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Where's my mechanism for how RMNS evolved the hypothalamic-pituitary axis?
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 This is an example of supposed irreducible complexity, but what is ignored is the fact that in the systems which comprise the HPA axis serve other functions in the body and could serve them independently of the other two.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation ...So..your point is...God is so much more complex than you ever thought, and He limits information on purpose...as in darwinian evolution...who is Darwin anyway? What did he know?....nothing! Now it has rubbed off on gullible people like you, what a fool that follows childish things instead of growing up and fearing God so that they would have His knowledge in their hands...
"The wisest man on earth is foolishness to God"
cathy356 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation There you go pretending to see things that aren't there in order to perpetuate a fake science.
I'd expect the fossils to appear exactly as you wish they'd appear. With fossils changing over hundreds of millions of years not staying exactly the same and also abundant obvious transitionals.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 But your argument was that the fossils themselves don't change, now you're saying that you'd accept a series of transitional characteristics in separate fossils? Could you give an example of a sequence of specific characteristics would you consider transitional between, say, fish and tetrapods or theropod dinosaurs and birds?
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation that's not my argument, that's precisely what the fossil record looks like and its horrible news for evolution.
Fish>tetrapods: fossil record should show MILLIONS of fossils showing fish in the varying stages of fin to claw/legs , gill to lung etc.
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 Your argument is that the fossils are complete species, of course they're complete species who ever said they weren't?
What would a million fossils of one species show that 5 or 10 fossils wouldn't?
You're purposely setting up a completely unreasonable request. You should try applying 1/100th this scrutiny and skepticism to your own claims.
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Where's my mechanism for the evolution of male and female reproductive systems?
9pt9 9 months ago
@9pt9 I already gave it to you, they're called simultaneous hermaphrodites. Asexually reproducing organisms that can also swap gametes
TheScienceFoundation 9 months ago