As I arrive here, there are 448 comments before me and I suspect that whatever I have to say on the subject has already been said - without the laborious task of reading them all, which I will do once I have concluded here.
I MUST refer you to the Dover, Pennsylvania, trial outcome and the destruction of the irreducible complexity flagellum plea, of intelligent design as a whole and of Michael Behe in particular.
Quick translation: she (along with the whole I.D. "movement") wants emotional bias to be placed on an equal footing with verifiable evidence in the classrom. I hope she one day realizes that a logical next step is for it to be considered valid in the courtroom.
Earth is not perfect for life. Life is perfect for Earth.
Also you say because we haven't found another planet within our own solar system that supports life there exists no other planet which can possibly support life. Are you nuts! You're looking at 8 planets and making that statement. Did you forget about the BILLIONS of stars within our own galaxy and the BILLIONS of other galaxies containing their own stars? It's obvious from the numbers the 8 planets don't have much statistical standing.
We should be teaching more logic classes in schools. Maybe then people will realize that Intelligent Design is just a really long Argument from Ignorance. "We don't know, therefore God... er, an unknown designer did it" is not a valid argument.
This is where you don't understand what Academic Freedom is, lets say that I.R. is true and organism cannot evolve what does this prove? Well that organism did not evolve, what it doesn't demonstrate is intelligent design because you are using a negative to prove a positive and that goes against basic logic.
The truth is that you do have academic freedom but you don't have the right to change the rules in order to push your agenda.
And in response to an earlier comment, if you haven't found "one shred of evidence" to support evolution, it would appear you have selected to keep your mind closed to said evidence.
Re: the "irreducible complexity" of the flagellum, this has been addressed by many biologists and found to not be irreducibly complex--seek out a biology text by someone other than Behe or Ham and find out for yourself.
This is a well done vid, but your understanding of the scientific process is disheartening.
(Cont) Once the ecosystem changed, and the ratio or oxygen declined, large arthropod species died out, and species more suited to the atmosphere, i.e. smaller arthropods, reptiles and the predecessors to mammals went on to take their place.
The enviornment wasn't made for us. Species, through natural selection have, adapted to their enviorment--those that didn't died out.
a minute into the video, you speak of how the blend of oxygen, nitrogen and other gasses is "just right" to support life. You are putting the cart before the horse.
Life today is just well enough adapted to these conditions to continue living and passing on their characteristics to their offspring. 300 million years ago, the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere was much higher, allowing for the very large arthropods we find in the fossil record.
The Scientific Method, for as long as it has existed, works because notions of 'equal time' and appeals to 'freedom of speech' do not exist within it.
A theory does not survive because a scientific consensus cannot be reached. Einstein did not create a movement to teach relativity in High School. He and Eddington saw light rays being bent with their own eyes.
You want to appeal to fairness, for ID to skip all these steps and get a free ride into public schools. How fair is that?
All I would recommend is that when you go to college you take some courses on biology and realize that science and more specifically biology are good fields that they have lots of proof and that they shouldn't be feared. Just keep an open mind.
@kaleighm12 If you speak of Evolution as Common descent, then we have a lot of evidence... But, if you speak of it as Darwinian Evolution, that's Chance and Random Mutations are what runs the show in Biology, then Evolution just collapses... The evidence for Design in our universe is just overwhelming...
Dear Kaleigh: It's excellent to question things. A careful science is in agreement with the primeval truth of everything according to its "Genos"; I'm interested in the 'Intelligent Design To Generate Biodiversity'. Study how if an organism has the same number of genes and is able to do homologous recombination with another, the willingness or unwillingness to mate is irrelevant to their genetic compatibility; i.e. 'Research on Intelligent Design: The Dog Variation', by Fernando Castro-Chavez.
That's the one positive thing I've heard this whole time! I don't even bother reading the other comments. They all say the same thing. Ha ha!
And yeah, I thought about the visuals after the video was done. I'm continuing my education in the case for ID and also learning more and more about the philosophical dangers of evolution! :)
You presented some very good arguments, but it would have been better if some visuals had been presented too, so that the concepts would easier to understand. But keep up the good work!
hmmz, so your argument comes down to "if things were different, things were different"? -Yes our atmosphere is supporting the life WE KNOW OF. But you could have different compositions that would support life.
-Btw: NOT all life requires oxygen. Our atmosphere is NOT perfect. If it were different, differetn lifeforms would have evolved, better adepted to whatever it would be.
-And...the flagellum has allready been shown reducable, look up Kenneth Miller on YT.
This is not freedom of religion. This is madness. If America will produce a new generation of mentally retards like this we are doom: Islam will rule the world.
science isn't a democracy. it's based on evidence and will be reevaluated as new models of the world emerge.
the bible is an iron age myth whose followers subjectively accept as literal. If we left science up to the Christians, we would still think believe that the sun revolved around the earth. If the bible is a divine book , how come there is no mention of anything relating to our era, no electricity, explanation of flight. no plans for the printing press to make copys of your myth.
We will be glad to --- Just as soon as you do something respectable.
There has been absolutely zero peer-reviewed literature produced in support of "Intellegent Design".
When you successfully produce evidence(<-- important word) then we will "Just give you respect". Until then, you will get the respect that you deserve.
So you want ID taught in schools? That opens the chance that hypotheses from other religions should be taught too. Why shouldn't the Flying Spaghetti Monster hypothesis be taught? The multiple God hypothesis as thought of by Polytheists? Greek god hypothesis? It's been proven, by the discovery of written documents that the people who came up with ID deliberately changed from "creationism". Creationism = Religion. Even though this is a free country - we also have a separation of church and state.
When you actually find a case of "irreducible complexity" let the world know. Virtually every scientist in the field acknowledges that if "irreducible complexity" is found, then the theory of evolution is in trouble. The "bacterial flagellum", however, has been refuted many times.
Tippy - you are wasting your time. These people have heard the arguments, how can they have not? They refuse to acknowledge it. They quote the same bad information over and over again. This girl won't look at anything that wasn't produced by a christian.
1. "The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession." - Abraham Lincoln
2. Look at Mars for possible evidence of life, not Titan.
3. Behe believes astrology is science, and he had his posterior handed to him at the Dover trials. I wouldn't use him as a credible source of information to back up your argument.
4. As for the flagellum, you might want to read "Only a Theory," by Ken Miller.
Evolution is not a fact. It is a useful theory, but the day may come when something even more reliable replaces it. What that might be is impossible to determine until it appears. Perhaps ID is a step along the path to the critical review of evolution that will bring us this new paradigm.
Where are the intermediate forms between the modern Chimpanzee and the point where humans and chimps diverged?
I'm not saying creationism is more valid, or even equal to, evolution as a scientific basis for experimentation and explanation. Not at all.
Evolution is a solid, well-supported scientific theory. However, that is not the same as a scientific fact. A bone, a rock, a consistent transitional phase (water to ice or vapor), these are facts.
The 150 year history of evolution does not suddenly mean it's a fact, only that it is still useful.
Brotoi:Evolution is a solid, well-supported scientific theory. However, that is not the same as a scientific fact.
Me: So you didn't watch the video then.
Just to précis the video. Evolution is a fact AND a theory. Life evolves(FACT). We can observe it evolving and we have the evidence of past evolution. Why does life evolve? That's the THEORY. And the theory is by the process of Natural Selection. Germ theory explains why we get diseases from germs.
"Where are the intermediate forms between the modern Chimpanzee and the point where humans and chimps diverged? "
Humans and modern chimps share a common ancestor, we diverged from what became the modern chimp hundreds of thousands of years ago. Where are the intermediate forms? Go to a natural history museum and you will see for yourself.
"Evolution is not a fact. It is a useful theory"
No, evolution is both a fact AND a theory, please learn what these words mean.
"Where are the intermediate forms? Go to a natural history museum and you will see for yourself."
Intermediate forms for man, but not for the chimp. As far as I know, not single bone has been found that could be wholly attributed to an intermediate, pre-modern chimp.
Those pretty pictures at the museum are pure fantasy.
"Evolution has been reviewed critically for over 150 years, it's not going anywhere."
That is not a very scientific attitude, my friend. Assumption that an established theory is the same as an unchanging fact violates the very principle of free investigation.
If evolution cannot be challenged then it has reverted to the same kind of dogmatic belief as the ones you profess to disagree with.
Has complete dependence on evolution brought about a new scientific dark age? That is the question.
You are welcome to challenge evolution all you like!
Take into account that the wisdom gained from modern genetics confirm evolutionary facts and It just so happens that none of the challenges from the ID lobby hold any water but are merely a rather poorly disguised creation myth.
If you have a valid challenge I would be intrigued to hear it!(But I won't hold my breath!)
If ID forms any part of your challenge then you simply join the ranks of the nut bag creationist!
"You are welcome to challenge evolution all you like!"
I no more interested in disproving evolution than I am in disproving Genesis. I oppose the fascist assumption, often unrecognized as such, that every individual must adhere to a single world view, a single moral code, and a single value system.
It is good that we have evolution. It is good that we have Genesis. Freedom of choice is fundamental to our ability to find and realize our personal potential.
"You daft prick I actually thought you might have had a decent point to make!"
Kill the messenger, eh? Is that really the best you can do?
Find an intermediate form between the divergent human/chimpanzee link and a modern chimpanzee. Better yet, find one solid, irrefutable example of a common ancestor that does not link to every primate, only to humans and chimpanzees.
Where are the bones? Not pretty pictures, not genetic speculation, real bones.
So showing that chimp chromosome #13 not only proves evolution, but shows us exactly how we lost a chromosome during our own evolution is not enough for you, you require a fossil that might not exist, since it is impossible to find every transitional from.
Just because you cannot find a certain fossil, you want to denounce every other SOLID EVIDENCE of evolution taking place.
This twit did not even address my rather astute Genisis insight.(I like Phil Collins as much as next person but my point still stands!)
Willful ignorance of the highest order!
Perhaps he was just too busy marvelling at the magnificence of the bacterial flagellum to respond. Who knows what goes on in the head of a lunatic.......
Goodness! Is your case so weak you can offer nothing but empty assertions and personal attacks?
C'mon. I've given you a simple task: present me with a single real-world representative of chimp evolution. Chromosome #13 applies to the human-chimp divergence. It proves nothing concerning chimp evolution.
Tens of thousands of bones from ancient humans but not a single bone from our closest cousin?
Scientific inquiry doesn't "prove" anything, it shows evidence through testing.
"but not a single bone from our closest cousin"
LIE
"These fossils, from the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya, show that representatives of Pan were present in the East African Rift Valley during the Middle Pleistocene, where they were contemporary with an extinct species of Homo."
Genetic speculation. It "proves" nothing. It supports the possibility, but even now it is being challenged by others.
Besides, it tells us nothing about how chimps have evolved. I've asked for you and DaveODrisc to show me some real evidence concerning how chimps evolved.
Isn't it strange that there is so much evidence for human evolution and so little for our cousins?
It's not, if you believe it is, cite your peer review literature.
"so little for our cousins"
Homonid taxonomy is fairly well researched, not by you of course, or you would know this.
"how chimps evolved"
There has been plenty of research in this field, do ANY kind of research on homonid taxonomy you wouldn't be changing the goalposts whenever you see fit.
Your insistence on this chimp fossil point, is like someone saying that because every fragment of a crashed airliner cannot be found it is impossible to determine why the aircraft crashed. We have fossils aplenty for many species showing evolutionary morphological changes, but the strongest evidence comes from genetics. If you were genuinely interested in knowing what constitutes reality and what is untrue you would not be arguing the toss over chimp fossils. continued ...
Perhaps the most compelling evidence in support of evolution is the occurrence of Endogenous Retro-Viruses shared in the genomes of animals which precisely match the evolutionary nested hierarchy. The "same designer, same genes" cannot account for this.
So, I suggest you educate yourself on this point. For a start you can watch the video at watch?v=dbbh1P6DW5I and then watch?v=-uNCDm-4tiQ and then come back and say how it could be anything other than evolution at work.
There you were claiming to being all impartial open minded and seeing both sides of the argument then you go and expose yourself as a crack pot creationist with your little attempt at a chimp insight!
Look I trust scientific method and science understands evolution to be a clear fact!
Who should I trust?
You with your rather iffy"genetic speculation" concepts or good old fashioned science with it's sound methods?
Kaleigh, I am sure you are very well-meaning, but you are grossly mistaken. I am a pre-med major at Lehigh University, home of the most well-known ID advocate, Dr. Michael Behe. He has failed to demonstrate, in a scientific, peer-reviewed paper, how his ideas are genuinely scientific.
I would suggest learning about evolution from those in the scientific community who work with it. I would suggest Dr. Ken Miller's "Finding Darwin's God." Miller is both a Catholic and cell biologist.
You have been caught out propagating unsubstantiated scientific claims and plain flat out lying!
Have you no shame?
I can only guess that you have either been brainwashed by indoctrination and lies or you are purposfully deluding yourself because the truth upsets your fantasy of how you would like the world/universe to be.
I'm sorry that the truth is often unpleasant but lies are contemptable and dangerous!!!
The truth is, like many people, she is afraid to die, and this fear manifests in a hope for an afterlife.
There is no evidence to support the premise she supports, she has made an emotional choice, not a logical one. Arguing using logic against an emotional choice is an exercise in futility.
Until she is ready to make logical choices instead of emotional ones, she will never have a free mind and will continue to shroud herself in the ignorance of her religion.
"We now know each step depends on the previous step being correct and on time. Many of the chemical reactions happen in a millionth of a second; billions of reactions happen simultaneously. If one domino, especially an early one (a precursor), falls the wrong way (a mutation perhaps?), it may adversely impact the entire configuration. And note that mistakes will typically result in a damaged or aborted fetus, never a newer, improved version or a changed species."
Evolution evidence fails. It cannot explain tiny molecular machines like, bacteria flagellum, DNA, etc. They try, but neo Darwinisits simply cannot. You try and stifle our arguments as being "superstitious" with no scientific background. Which is not what ID scientists are. Just give us respect. Even Darwin did that. I will not recant.
Stop trying to define evolution by your strawman definition.
Evolution
noun
3. Biology. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
can you tell me who these ID scientists are? behe is a run of the mill biology lecturer who has done enough real work to get tenure (none with anything to do with ID) the stuff he's known for has been pounded into the dust by his peers. who else? given the huge $ they receive from the religious right why has no actual research been done? they have an "institute" in seattle which has produced NO results, fake "journals" that have published nothing in years. who are these scientists?
You know, for evolution being an undeniable fact, home come there have been so many lies to cover up evolution? Gluing dead moths to bark to prove the point of natural selection, Ernst Heckel's fetus drawings, Biochemical Predestinations, etc..
I will never recant in my worldview or the idea of ID. Because it is right. Call me an uneducated, ignorant liar for all I care!
kaleighm12 "I will never recant in my worldview or the idea of ID. Because it is right. Call me an uneducated, ignorant liar for all I care!"
Believing something without proof is called faith.
We don't teach faith in science class.
Fakes are exposed whether they are in science or faith.
Ron Wyatts fakes include Noah's ark, the grave markers of Noah, the tower of babel, the Ark of The Covenant, the orginal stones of the Ten Commandments.
For the last time and because your celebration of your own ignorance has grown extreamly tiresome!
The onus of proof lays with those who make extaordinary claims without the slightest bit of real evidence to back it up!
"I will never recant in my worldview or the idea of ID. Because it is right."
This clearly translates as -I don't care about the facts or the truth I just want to believe in something that I find comforting regardless of the mountain of evidence to the contrary.
If you will never recant your worldview, how do you ever expect to learn? I have pity for you Miss, learning is the most important thing we can do as humans, and the most interesting. Chaining yourself to unsubstantiated myths, when empirical evidence to the contrary is all around you, is insanity.
Again I say reason is wasted on this poor deluded young lady!
She obviously recoils from anything(including fact)that does not fit her misguided world veiw and sadly the hope of deprogramming her and the rest of the ID/Creationist mob from their respective insanity is slim!
Due to lack of understanding and total pigheaded ignorance these people submit to wishthinking and replace truth with blatant superstition!
You can't even have a decent discussion without them spouting falsehoods and lies!
Oh goodness, all of you coming from your social Darwinist worldviews thinking you have the most fair and reasonable way. Open up your eyes! You're just as biased, judgmental, and religious towards evolution as Christians are towards creationism. I stood up for what I believed in, and I don't care of the ridicule. You're sneers and derision only make the ID proponents stronger.
No one cares what you believe. What matters is what can be proven using the scientific method, and thus Evolution by Natural Selection has been shown to be absolutely true.
There is no point in trying to reason with these idiots!
The intelligent design lobby will ignore plain fact and will flat out lie in an attempt to validate their deluded belief in fairytales!
The moment anybody mentions so called intelligent design with a strait face you can be sure that mind numbing stupidity,superstition and astounding ignorance will follow!
A few paragraphs from the book Total Truth by Nancy Pearcy (page 172)
Duane Gish, a Creationist, was having a discussion with Michael Ruse, an evolutionist.
" 'The trouble with you evolutionists is that you just don't play fair.' Gish told him [Michael Ruse]. 'You accuse us of teaching a religious view,' he said, 'you evolutionists are just as religious in your way. Christianity tells us where we came from, where we're going, and what we should do on the way...
The comment rankled Ruse, and he couldn't get it out of his mind. Eventually, he decided that Gish was right - that evolution really is 'more than mere science,' as he put in a recent article, 'Evolution came into being as a kind of secular ideology, and explicit substitute for Christianity.' Even today, it 'is a promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion - a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality.' "
kaleighm12 " Even today, it 'is a promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion - a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality.' "
Evolution doesn't give us meaning or morality, it's not a religion.
You do kow there are theistic evolutionists. Do you not? Even C.S. Lewis was one. They still accept God as creator but view evolution as the explanation of HOW he did it.
I'm not saying it's theistic evolution. Evolutionists try and say that evolution is purely science. What about Darwin's book, Descent of Man? Where everything he talked about was his "scientific theory" as a worldview. You cannot separate the two.
The only difference is that evolution is true and ID/creationism is not.!
You are displaying a very narrow minded outlook here!
You pretty much back up my claims that you CREATIONISTS & ID SUBSCRIBERS are very small minded and you just ignore plain truths that don't fit in with the way you hope for the world/universe to work!
Surely what is true (no matter how messed up that may be)is way better than obvious delusion!
"You're just as biased, judgmental, and religious towards evolution as Christians are towards creationism"
Firstly you expose yourself as being biased and judgmental with this enlightening remark!
You are also judging people(who ask nothing more than to have a few facts with their science)by your own very poor delusive standards!
You do realize that you are basically saying that you don't care what is true or factual as long as you can have comforting little superstitions to cling onto!
They aren't superstitions. And I never said I wasn't judgmental or looking through biases. Obviously I have my worldview that leads to ID, and you have your worldview that leads to evolution. My point is, is that evolution has become just as much of a religion as any of the others out there. It's not fair to say that you guys are unbiased and the most reasonable.
I'm sorry Kaleighm12 but it is only fair to say that us guys(believers in scientific method) are fair and unbiased(by definition!)
We require firm evidence for our beliefs!
We want our facts checked and double checked by multiple independent sources and if a mistake has been made we want it to be exposed reflected upon and ultimately learnt from!
You however embrace falsehood as if it were a virtue and your reasoning is laughable and born of ignorance!
Abiogenesis>simple proteins>simple organisms>complex organisms>man taking place over millions upon millions of years, and going through millions of mutations, brought about by the needs of the organisms and natural selection. No design about this, intelligent or otherwise, simply a hit and miss proposition at the beginning, that transformed into life as we know it.
This not only makes the most sense, but is supported by empirical evidence. What don't people understand about this?
They don't in every instance. We humans are one of many genetic mutations of the great ape family. Our DNA, compared to theirs, proves this. When a mutation is adaptive, it makes the organism stronger out of necessity. This is a simple fact, and has been observed countless times. Hell, you can observe it between my Rottweiler and my Dachshund. Both are genetic mutations of a common ancestor, bred to be stronger in their own ways.
This isn't rocket science Miss, but it is common sense.
"Then how come genetic mutations only weaken animals instead of making them stronger?"
They don't!
You have a simplistic view of what a mutation is. You posses something like 150 minor mutations in your genome that were not present in your parents genes.
Everyone who comments this video is talking about how ID is wrong and making personal attacks against me. Which calling me an uneducated, deluded liar does nothing for evolution. Not saying you said that..but just based on the comments I've been receiving. But very few have given me evidence of evolution.
k12, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Snowflake designs are formed as the result of the cosequences of unthinking physical law. If someone is going to claim that the designs produced by evolution are produced by some extraordinary cause other than a result of the cosequences of unthinking physical law, they are going to need to show the extraordinary evidence for that. Bias has to be with the simplest explanation unless the extraordinary evidence is shown.
k12, If the bias isn't with the simplest explanation, then one would have to accept leprechauns, or vishnu or the spaghetti monster as equally valid to your proposition of your god being the designer. I hope that you can see the necessity for the simplest explanation bias. Theologically speaking, your intelligent designer god theory is based only on your interpretive choice of taking the bible literally. Why do you interpret the bible literally?
k12, Since you do acknowledge that ID and Christian creationism are one in the same, and it is a matter of faith not science, you'll have to agree with the Dover decision that ID can't be taught in science classes as science because it isn't science.
I can't believe this horseshit is supposed to constitute an argument. Intelligent Design is not science, talk about it in Sunday school where you won't contaminate the children of the parents who never wanted their young defenseless minds exposed to this tripe.
It makes me sad to hear Explosions in the Sky played to Intelligent design propaganda. Yes, it is possible that we are more than dumb particles performing simple functions like a machine, but that doesn't mean that the universe is suddenly under the jurisdiction of some intelligent god.
Also, it's extremely unlikely that intelligent aliens planted the seed of humanity thousands to billions of years ago and even if they did....they aren't here anymore.
I am going to make a prediction and my fellow atheists better give me credit this time but this chick will fast become the female version of VFX. Also they will soon find each other and become the new powerhouse version of the Bakers. MARK MY WORDS!
The whole academic freedom angle is a straw man argument. ID isn't allowed in science classes because it isn't science not because of oppression. Science needs to be testable and predictive. ID isn't. Of course your going to raised eyebrows if you try to insert ID into science classes just the same as you'd get from trying to insert astrology. Trying to claim that there aren't legitimate reasons to leave ID out & ur oppressed is incredibly insulting as well as just plain wrong. ID isn't science.
Kaleigh, this video is so sad. Who put you up to this? You can't understand the issues yourself if you used BeHe's irreducibly complex flagellum example. Did you see Nova's "ID on trial?" They showed how the flagella was not irreducibly complex by showing a different bacterial structure that had a few less parts than the flagella but was still useful to that bacteria. You have to check out the Nova video /watch?v=z_UcpERqadc&feature=channel_page
a sad display of ignorance and regurgitation of propaganda.the unsupported assertion that the universe is irreducibly complex ,the repeating of the long since debunked bacterial flagellum example,the list goes on.academic freedom has never ceased to exist,it just remains a meritocracy and not a democracy.until ID demonstrates some merit,it gets the same treatment as the"gods wrath theory" of disease transmission and lightning guidance.
As for ID, have a look at Ken Miller's work. He's as Christian as they come but doesn't fall for simplistic notions of creation. Bacterial Flagellum was taken apart at Dover. As for galaxies, stars, plannets etc. They're very reducable, mostly to relativistic physics, electromagnetism, gravity, nuclear forces etc.
Also you can believe in a god if you like but there's nothing intellectually disrespectful in not believing in one.
well this video proves that this entire "academic free day" and the academic freedom act is nothing but a shame, an abuse of science, an pathetic play to being a victim - in other words, all the halmarks of backwater creationism.
Young lady you need to stay up to date. Behe was debunked and admitted, under oath, that astrology would be considered science if ID is science. You are playing a victim's role because you were told to be one.
Oh, Michael Behe testified that the bacterial flagellum could have evolved through natural processes.
The argument of IR boils down to the idea that if you remove a component from the system the system has no function thus cannot evolve. The problem is this is not true of the flagellum. It can have a function, just not as a flagellum. Additionally even if this were the case, it could be formed from a larger structure and parts could have been lost, or multiple parts could form and merge.
It's simple, Alternate2GOP. You, and we, know all the arguments and all the refutations to all the arguments and you are playing the superior arrogant prig. You are a "button pusher" with some cryptic motivation whereby you can get the other side so frustrated they give up in disgust, thus allowing you to crow "I am your better". Why you feel the need to do this is not relevent. What your ulterior motivation is, is also irrelevent. What the answers are here is also, apparently, irrelevent.
I'm afraid you won't get anywhere with Alternate2GOP, infinity730. He's good at spouting the AiG line, but will not stop asking irrelevant questions to distract from any given line or tack you take and will keep moving his goalposts as soon as you get close to answering him. This is a "Contest ad Babel" now.
Yes, I've answered you're question of "who designed the designer, and how did they do it" by pointing out that we can create an infinite regression out of just about anything, and also by pointing out that how a designer did it is not relevant to concluding that something is designed.
"I have caught you lying, dodging questions, and showing your ignorance.. any more bullshit before I rightfully take my place as your better?"
What are quarks made of, and how did the things that quarks are made of come into being? Are you willing to deny atomic theory based on your reasoning?
"Super strings, vibrating in 10 dimensional reality."
And what are those made out of?
"Quantum Dynamism at the Planck Scale."
And what started this process?
"Atomic Theory is just that, a solid theory, grounded fairly well."
So you agree that even though it cannot explain the origins of the things it describes, it is not invalid. Good. The same applies to ID and the designer if any.
Answer my questions or this is over and you have conceded. I can keep answering yours, but until you answer mine you have given up defending yourself and have FAILED horribly and been crushed under your own bullshit.
Hey, can we be friends? I like Critical thinkers like you! Can we be internet friends?
omarzellal 6 months ago
Kaleigh, I want to kiss your feet and live inside of your socks.
YourFootSlave616 6 months ago 7
A good try but a failure on so many levels.
As I arrive here, there are 448 comments before me and I suspect that whatever I have to say on the subject has already been said - without the laborious task of reading them all, which I will do once I have concluded here.
I MUST refer you to the Dover, Pennsylvania, trial outcome and the destruction of the irreducible complexity flagellum plea, of intelligent design as a whole and of Michael Behe in particular.
ALL gods are imaginary .
draagon66 2 years ago
Quick translation: she (along with the whole I.D. "movement") wants emotional bias to be placed on an equal footing with verifiable evidence in the classrom. I hope she one day realizes that a logical next step is for it to be considered valid in the courtroom.
stealthbadger 2 years ago
Earth is not perfect for life. Life is perfect for Earth.
Also you say because we haven't found another planet within our own solar system that supports life there exists no other planet which can possibly support life. Are you nuts! You're looking at 8 planets and making that statement. Did you forget about the BILLIONS of stars within our own galaxy and the BILLIONS of other galaxies containing their own stars? It's obvious from the numbers the 8 planets don't have much statistical standing.
psychovamp 2 years ago
We should be teaching more logic classes in schools. Maybe then people will realize that Intelligent Design is just a really long Argument from Ignorance. "We don't know, therefore God... er, an unknown designer did it" is not a valid argument.
jablair51 2 years ago 4
"...I still have not found one shred of evidence supporting it. "
Maybe you should examine human chromsome #2.
Ode2thedamned 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ode2thedamned
That's evidence for Common Descent, not for Evolution!
omarzellal 6 months ago
"Our universe is irreducibly complex"
This is where you don't understand what Academic Freedom is, lets say that I.R. is true and organism cannot evolve what does this prove? Well that organism did not evolve, what it doesn't demonstrate is intelligent design because you are using a negative to prove a positive and that goes against basic logic.
The truth is that you do have academic freedom but you don't have the right to change the rules in order to push your agenda.
sweatytoothmadman 2 years ago 2
And in response to an earlier comment, if you haven't found "one shred of evidence" to support evolution, it would appear you have selected to keep your mind closed to said evidence.
Re: the "irreducible complexity" of the flagellum, this has been addressed by many biologists and found to not be irreducibly complex--seek out a biology text by someone other than Behe or Ham and find out for yourself.
This is a well done vid, but your understanding of the scientific process is disheartening.
Phreemunny 2 years ago 3
(Cont) Once the ecosystem changed, and the ratio or oxygen declined, large arthropod species died out, and species more suited to the atmosphere, i.e. smaller arthropods, reptiles and the predecessors to mammals went on to take their place.
The enviornment wasn't made for us. Species, through natural selection have, adapted to their enviorment--those that didn't died out.
None of this is "random," as you state.
Phreemunny 2 years ago 4
a minute into the video, you speak of how the blend of oxygen, nitrogen and other gasses is "just right" to support life. You are putting the cart before the horse.
Life today is just well enough adapted to these conditions to continue living and passing on their characteristics to their offspring. 300 million years ago, the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere was much higher, allowing for the very large arthropods we find in the fossil record.
Phreemunny 2 years ago 3
The Scientific Method, for as long as it has existed, works because notions of 'equal time' and appeals to 'freedom of speech' do not exist within it.
A theory does not survive because a scientific consensus cannot be reached. Einstein did not create a movement to teach relativity in High School. He and Eddington saw light rays being bent with their own eyes.
You want to appeal to fairness, for ID to skip all these steps and get a free ride into public schools. How fair is that?
thealchemist1111 2 years ago 3
You are a very hot girl.
All I would recommend is that when you go to college you take some courses on biology and realize that science and more specifically biology are good fields that they have lots of proof and that they shouldn't be feared. Just keep an open mind.
bigfilmhat 2 years ago 2
Thanks, bigfilmhat. I actually plan to minor in biology.
But in continuing my research on evolution, I still have not found one shred of evidence supporting it.
kaleighm12 2 years ago
How do you think vaccines are created?
bonangusacdc 2 years ago
I love you.
Alternate2GOP 2 years ago
@kaleighm12 If you speak of Evolution as Common descent, then we have a lot of evidence... But, if you speak of it as Darwinian Evolution, that's Chance and Random Mutations are what runs the show in Biology, then Evolution just collapses... The evidence for Design in our universe is just overwhelming...
Can we be friends, sister?
omarzellal 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dear Kaleigh: It's excellent to question things. A careful science is in agreement with the primeval truth of everything according to its "Genos"; I'm interested in the 'Intelligent Design To Generate Biodiversity'. Study how if an organism has the same number of genes and is able to do homologous recombination with another, the willingness or unwillingness to mate is irrelevant to their genetic compatibility; i.e. 'Research on Intelligent Design: The Dog Variation', by Fernando Castro-Chavez.
vallartando 2 years ago
Comment removed
vallartando 2 years ago
ps: you look good on camera. ;)
Ariel007master 2 years ago
Thanks, Ariel007master.
That's the one positive thing I've heard this whole time! I don't even bother reading the other comments. They all say the same thing. Ha ha!
And yeah, I thought about the visuals after the video was done. I'm continuing my education in the case for ID and also learning more and more about the philosophical dangers of evolution! :)
kaleighm12 2 years ago
You presented some very good arguments, but it would have been better if some visuals had been presented too, so that the concepts would easier to understand. But keep up the good work!
Ariel007master 2 years ago
hmmz, so your argument comes down to "if things were different, things were different"? -Yes our atmosphere is supporting the life WE KNOW OF. But you could have different compositions that would support life.
-Btw: NOT all life requires oxygen. Our atmosphere is NOT perfect. If it were different, differetn lifeforms would have evolved, better adepted to whatever it would be.
-And...the flagellum has allready been shown reducable, look up Kenneth Miller on YT.
-Complexity doesnt equal design!
jzuidema 2 years ago 4
"-Complexity doesnt equal design! " :)
If complexity needs a designer.
God is complex
therefore god was designed.
who designed god?
justintempler 2 years ago 3
This is not freedom of religion. This is madness. If America will produce a new generation of mentally retards like this we are doom: Islam will rule the world.
aman57 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
science isn't a democracy. it's based on evidence and will be reevaluated as new models of the world emerge.
the bible is an iron age myth whose followers subjectively accept as literal. If we left science up to the Christians, we would still think believe that the sun revolved around the earth. If the bible is a divine book , how come there is no mention of anything relating to our era, no electricity, explanation of flight. no plans for the printing press to make copys of your myth.
GODLUBE 2 years ago
Comment removed
GODLUBE 2 years ago
if you say the world is irreducibly complex why do you reduce it down to "god" made it
GODLUBE 2 years ago 2
kaleighm12 --- "Just give us respect."
We will be glad to --- Just as soon as you do something respectable.
There has been absolutely zero peer-reviewed literature produced in support of "Intellegent Design".
When you successfully produce evidence(<-- important word) then we will "Just give you respect". Until then, you will get the respect that you deserve.
TippyCando 2 years ago 4
This video was very well made.
I agree with her 100%. The universe is so perfectly made for life that it is hard to not believe that there is a creator.
Colorado0802 2 years ago
"The universe is so perfectly made for life"
99.99999999% of the universe is uninhabitable for ANY human life... how could you possibly say this statement other than pure ignorance?
infinity730 2 years ago 6
Colorado0802 "The universe is so perfectly made for life"
I'd bet the millions of people that starve to death because of famine, or millions that die from diseases might have another viewpoint.
justintempler 2 years ago
Colorado0802
Joined: February 14, 2009
Last Sign In: 13 hours ago
Videos Watched: 0
Subscribers: 0
Channel Views: 2
sock account?
justintempler 2 years ago 2
I enjoy the fact that you are selling snake-oil. Sadly I'm not in the market.
Sarahon06 2 years ago
"it tells us nothing about how"
"it"?
Define "it".
infinity730 3 years ago
So if no chimp fossil had ever been found, that means GOD DID IT?
AHAHAHAHAH
Too bad they have been, in Kenya.
You lose.
infinity730 3 years ago
So you want ID taught in schools? That opens the chance that hypotheses from other religions should be taught too. Why shouldn't the Flying Spaghetti Monster hypothesis be taught? The multiple God hypothesis as thought of by Polytheists? Greek god hypothesis? It's been proven, by the discovery of written documents that the people who came up with ID deliberately changed from "creationism". Creationism = Religion. Even though this is a free country - we also have a separation of church and state.
MagnumDB 3 years ago 2
It would be interesting to see Muslim and Hindu creationism taught at a Christian universities.
justintempler 3 years ago
It would be almost worth it just to see that particular spanner thrown into the creationists conceptual works!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
When you actually find a case of "irreducible complexity" let the world know. Virtually every scientist in the field acknowledges that if "irreducible complexity" is found, then the theory of evolution is in trouble. The "bacterial flagellum", however, has been refuted many times.
TippyCando 3 years ago 3
Tippy - you are wasting your time. These people have heard the arguments, how can they have not? They refuse to acknowledge it. They quote the same bad information over and over again. This girl won't look at anything that wasn't produced by a christian.
Zaimoren 3 years ago
notjustatheory . com/
infinity730 3 years ago
youtube . com/watch?v=COBiG_LKW8Q
infinity730 3 years ago
How is evolution "Random". There is evidence everywhere. I'm sorry i forgot the bible is %110 truth.
Humanweapon43 3 years ago
i love how people get so defensive over something no one is forcing them to watch or believe.
haha
i liked it kaleigh!!!
ily :]
adrilovesyouu 3 years ago
You seem like a very intelligent person, however:
1. "The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession." - Abraham Lincoln
2. Look at Mars for possible evidence of life, not Titan.
3. Behe believes astrology is science, and he had his posterior handed to him at the Dover trials. I wouldn't use him as a credible source of information to back up your argument.
4. As for the flagellum, you might want to read "Only a Theory," by Ken Miller.
5. Academic Freedom = indoctrination.
mlr2112 3 years ago 2
Evolution is not a fact. It is a useful theory, but the day may come when something even more reliable replaces it. What that might be is impossible to determine until it appears. Perhaps ID is a step along the path to the critical review of evolution that will bring us this new paradigm.
Where are the intermediate forms between the modern Chimpanzee and the point where humans and chimps diverged?
Brotoi 3 years ago
You should watch watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0
Minttzz 3 years ago
"You should watch watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0"
I'm not saying creationism is more valid, or even equal to, evolution as a scientific basis for experimentation and explanation. Not at all.
Evolution is a solid, well-supported scientific theory. However, that is not the same as a scientific fact. A bone, a rock, a consistent transitional phase (water to ice or vapor), these are facts.
The 150 year history of evolution does not suddenly mean it's a fact, only that it is still useful.
Brotoi 3 years ago
It is not just merely useful and it is(as far as any theory goes)as close to fact as it is possible to be!
The only people who don't accept it's validity are the mind numbingly stupid creationist crackpots!
Again I'll ask- if you know something that I have maybe overlooked or not been privy to then please enlighten me!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
Right.
So you didn't watch the video then.
Minttzz 3 years ago
me:You should watch watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0
Brotoi:Evolution is a solid, well-supported scientific theory. However, that is not the same as a scientific fact.
Me: So you didn't watch the video then.
Just to précis the video. Evolution is a fact AND a theory. Life evolves(FACT). We can observe it evolving and we have the evidence of past evolution. Why does life evolve? That's the THEORY. And the theory is by the process of Natural Selection. Germ theory explains why we get diseases from germs.
Minttzz 3 years ago 2
"Where are the intermediate forms between the modern Chimpanzee and the point where humans and chimps diverged? "
Humans and modern chimps share a common ancestor, we diverged from what became the modern chimp hundreds of thousands of years ago. Where are the intermediate forms? Go to a natural history museum and you will see for yourself.
"Evolution is not a fact. It is a useful theory"
No, evolution is both a fact AND a theory, please learn what these words mean.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
"Where are the intermediate forms? Go to a natural history museum and you will see for yourself."
Intermediate forms for man, but not for the chimp. As far as I know, not single bone has been found that could be wholly attributed to an intermediate, pre-modern chimp.
Those pretty pictures at the museum are pure fantasy.
Brotoi 3 years ago
"As far as I know, not single bone has been found that could be wholly attributed to an intermediate, pre-modern chimp."
You aren't looking hard enough, a 1 minute search on google and I can name several.
tin yurl . c om/d8meul
origins . swau . edu/papers/man/hominid/default . html
infinity730 3 years ago 3
Your links don't work for me. What search terms did you use?
Brotoi 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Take out the spaces in my links.
infinity730 3 years ago
"Take out the spaces in my links."
I did.
It's a simple request: what search terms did you use?
Brotoi 3 years ago
"Perhaps ID is a step along the path"
It's a step back into the dark ages.
"critical review of evolution"
Evolution has been reviewed critically for over 150 years, it's not going anywhere.
youtube . com/watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0
infinity730 3 years ago 3
"Evolution has been reviewed critically for over 150 years, it's not going anywhere."
That is not a very scientific attitude, my friend. Assumption that an established theory is the same as an unchanging fact violates the very principle of free investigation.
If evolution cannot be challenged then it has reverted to the same kind of dogmatic belief as the ones you profess to disagree with.
Has complete dependence on evolution brought about a new scientific dark age? That is the question.
Brotoi 3 years ago
You are welcome to challenge evolution all you like!
Take into account that the wisdom gained from modern genetics confirm evolutionary facts and It just so happens that none of the challenges from the ID lobby hold any water but are merely a rather poorly disguised creation myth.
If you have a valid challenge I would be intrigued to hear it!(But I won't hold my breath!)
If ID forms any part of your challenge then you simply join the ranks of the nut bag creationist!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
"You are welcome to challenge evolution all you like!"
I no more interested in disproving evolution than I am in disproving Genesis. I oppose the fascist assumption, often unrecognized as such, that every individual must adhere to a single world view, a single moral code, and a single value system.
It is good that we have evolution. It is good that we have Genesis. Freedom of choice is fundamental to our ability to find and realize our personal potential.
Individuals have a right to choose.
Brotoi 3 years ago
I was hoping for something a bit more... well!
What the fuck are you talking about?
You daft prick I actually thought you might have had a decent point to make!
How do you manage to use a keybourd whilst wearing a fucking strait jacket?
You remind me of one of Eric idles charactors in the life of Brian who although a man wishes to have the right to have babies!
I do agree that it is good we have Genesis but I don't think they have been quite as creative since the departure of Peter Gabrial!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
"You daft prick I actually thought you might have had a decent point to make!"
Kill the messenger, eh? Is that really the best you can do?
Find an intermediate form between the divergent human/chimpanzee link and a modern chimpanzee. Better yet, find one solid, irrefutable example of a common ancestor that does not link to every primate, only to humans and chimpanzees.
Where are the bones? Not pretty pictures, not genetic speculation, real bones.
Brotoi 3 years ago
"not genetic speculation, real bones"
So showing that chimp chromosome #13 not only proves evolution, but shows us exactly how we lost a chromosome during our own evolution is not enough for you, you require a fossil that might not exist, since it is impossible to find every transitional from.
Just because you cannot find a certain fossil, you want to denounce every other SOLID EVIDENCE of evolution taking place.
Willful ignorance. Plain and simple.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
This twit did not even address my rather astute Genisis insight.(I like Phil Collins as much as next person but my point still stands!)
Willful ignorance of the highest order!
Perhaps he was just too busy marvelling at the magnificence of the bacterial flagellum to respond. Who knows what goes on in the head of a lunatic.......
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
"This twit ..."
Goodness! Is your case so weak you can offer nothing but empty assertions and personal attacks?
C'mon. I've given you a simple task: present me with a single real-world representative of chimp evolution. Chromosome #13 applies to the human-chimp divergence. It proves nothing concerning chimp evolution.
Tens of thousands of bones from ancient humans but not a single bone from our closest cousin?
Brotoi 3 years ago
"It proves nothing"
Scientific inquiry doesn't "prove" anything, it shows evidence through testing.
"but not a single bone from our closest cousin"
LIE
"These fossils, from the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya, show that representatives of Pan were present in the East African Rift Valley during the Middle Pleistocene, where they were contemporary with an extinct species of Homo."
Care to try again?
infinity730 3 years ago
Case so weak?
Look my case is clear ID is obvious creationist bullshit! Simple!
Evolution is a clear fact!
Ok you got me I'm not a chimp bone expert .
Others who seem to be more clued up than me(and definately you) on this subject say you are full of it on this point also!
I don't trust any of your information because you've already ignored obvious truths!
What is your point exactly?
Are you saying that ID is true and that God did it all?
If so you are as I suspected a twit!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
"chimp chromosome #13 not only proves evolution"
Genetic speculation. It "proves" nothing. It supports the possibility, but even now it is being challenged by others.
Besides, it tells us nothing about how chimps have evolved. I've asked for you and DaveODrisc to show me some real evidence concerning how chimps evolved.
Isn't it strange that there is so much evidence for human evolution and so little for our cousins?
Willful ignorance or willful misidentification?
Brotoi 3 years ago
"it is being challenged by others"
It's not, if you believe it is, cite your peer review literature.
"so little for our cousins"
Homonid taxonomy is fairly well researched, not by you of course, or you would know this.
"how chimps evolved"
There has been plenty of research in this field, do ANY kind of research on homonid taxonomy you wouldn't be changing the goalposts whenever you see fit.
Endogenous Retroviral DNA
Look it up.
infinity730 3 years ago
1 of 2..
Your insistence on this chimp fossil point, is like someone saying that because every fragment of a crashed airliner cannot be found it is impossible to determine why the aircraft crashed. We have fossils aplenty for many species showing evolutionary morphological changes, but the strongest evidence comes from genetics. If you were genuinely interested in knowing what constitutes reality and what is untrue you would not be arguing the toss over chimp fossils. continued ...
Minttzz 3 years ago
.. 2 of 2
Perhaps the most compelling evidence in support of evolution is the occurrence of Endogenous Retro-Viruses shared in the genomes of animals which precisely match the evolutionary nested hierarchy. The "same designer, same genes" cannot account for this.
So, I suggest you educate yourself on this point. For a start you can watch the video at watch?v=dbbh1P6DW5I and then watch?v=-uNCDm-4tiQ and then come back and say how it could be anything other than evolution at work.
Minttzz 3 years ago
Go to the BBC website and use the search term "First chimpanzee fossils found".
It has long been understood that Chimp and Gorilla habitats are not good fossil producing environments.
hilbert54 3 years ago
Brotoi, while you are on the BBC website search "'Original' great ape discovered"
hilbert54 3 years ago
Brotoi, also search "Fossils belong to new great ape".
hilbert54 3 years ago
I suspected as much!
There you were claiming to being all impartial open minded and seeing both sides of the argument then you go and expose yourself as a crack pot creationist with your little attempt at a chimp insight!
Look I trust scientific method and science understands evolution to be a clear fact!
Who should I trust?
You with your rather iffy"genetic speculation" concepts or good old fashioned science with it's sound methods?
What exactly is it you believe?
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
Freedom in the classroom?
So there should be no standards?
Teachers should be able to teach anything in any class regardless of validity?
Atriviality 3 years ago
Kaleigh, I am sure you are very well-meaning, but you are grossly mistaken. I am a pre-med major at Lehigh University, home of the most well-known ID advocate, Dr. Michael Behe. He has failed to demonstrate, in a scientific, peer-reviewed paper, how his ideas are genuinely scientific.
I would suggest learning about evolution from those in the scientific community who work with it. I would suggest Dr. Ken Miller's "Finding Darwin's God." Miller is both a Catholic and cell biologist.
Enjoy!
pyropakman 3 years ago 5
kaleighm12.
You have been caught out propagating unsubstantiated scientific claims and plain flat out lying!
Have you no shame?
I can only guess that you have either been brainwashed by indoctrination and lies or you are purposfully deluding yourself because the truth upsets your fantasy of how you would like the world/universe to be.
I'm sorry that the truth is often unpleasant but lies are contemptable and dangerous!!!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago 3
Comment removed
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
The truth is, like many people, she is afraid to die, and this fear manifests in a hope for an afterlife.
There is no evidence to support the premise she supports, she has made an emotional choice, not a logical one. Arguing using logic against an emotional choice is an exercise in futility.
Until she is ready to make logical choices instead of emotional ones, she will never have a free mind and will continue to shroud herself in the ignorance of her religion.
infinity730 3 years ago
I think that's a fair appraisal.
At 13 years of age I was still a believing Catholic(although by this time my belief in a God was well on it's way out!)
Catholics admit that evolution is true which was partly the reason I found it impossible to take seriously.
I do recall how troubled I was to finaly realise and admit to myself that there was clearly no God and all the implications of this..
Now I'm glad it's not true because I think it's in many ways a rather nasty proposition!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
I've got a really strong feeling the comments on this vid will just confirm what she's already said.....
GOPpersona 3 years ago
In talking about reproduction...
"We now know each step depends on the previous step being correct and on time. Many of the chemical reactions happen in a millionth of a second; billions of reactions happen simultaneously. If one domino, especially an early one (a precursor), falls the wrong way (a mutation perhaps?), it may adversely impact the entire configuration. And note that mistakes will typically result in a damaged or aborted fetus, never a newer, improved version or a changed species."
kaleighm12 3 years ago
Evolution evidence fails. It cannot explain tiny molecular machines like, bacteria flagellum, DNA, etc. They try, but neo Darwinisits simply cannot. You try and stifle our arguments as being "superstitious" with no scientific background. Which is not what ID scientists are. Just give us respect. Even Darwin did that. I will not recant.
kaleighm12 3 years ago
kaleighm12 "Evolution evidence fails. It cannot explain tiny molecular machines like, bacteria flagellum, DNA, etc."
Stop trying to define evolution by your strawman definition.
Evolution
noun
3. Biology. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
justintempler 3 years ago
@kaleighm12
can you tell me who these ID scientists are? behe is a run of the mill biology lecturer who has done enough real work to get tenure (none with anything to do with ID) the stuff he's known for has been pounded into the dust by his peers. who else? given the huge $ they receive from the religious right why has no actual research been done? they have an "institute" in seattle which has produced NO results, fake "journals" that have published nothing in years. who are these scientists?
mcmanustony 8 months ago
kaleighm12 ,
" And note that mistakes will typically result in a damaged or aborted fetus,"
TRUE
"never a newer, improved version or a changed species."
WRONG
explain
watch?v=Uu7Db5On00U
justintempler 3 years ago
You lost, get over it.
infinity730 3 years ago
Appeal to authority, good job, spouting more fallacies.
infinity730 3 years ago
You know, for evolution being an undeniable fact, home come there have been so many lies to cover up evolution? Gluing dead moths to bark to prove the point of natural selection, Ernst Heckel's fetus drawings, Biochemical Predestinations, etc..
I will never recant in my worldview or the idea of ID. Because it is right. Call me an uneducated, ignorant liar for all I care!
Have a good day, all! :)
kaleighm12 3 years ago
kaleighm12 "I will never recant in my worldview or the idea of ID. Because it is right. Call me an uneducated, ignorant liar for all I care!"
Believing something without proof is called faith.
We don't teach faith in science class.
Fakes are exposed whether they are in science or faith.
Ron Wyatts fakes include Noah's ark, the grave markers of Noah, the tower of babel, the Ark of The Covenant, the orginal stones of the Ten Commandments.
plus many more..
& that's just one person..
justintempler 3 years ago 3
For the last time and because your celebration of your own ignorance has grown extreamly tiresome!
The onus of proof lays with those who make extaordinary claims without the slightest bit of real evidence to back it up!
"I will never recant in my worldview or the idea of ID. Because it is right."
This clearly translates as -I don't care about the facts or the truth I just want to believe in something that I find comforting regardless of the mountain of evidence to the contrary.
Good day 2U !
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
If you will never recant your worldview, how do you ever expect to learn? I have pity for you Miss, learning is the most important thing we can do as humans, and the most interesting. Chaining yourself to unsubstantiated myths, when empirical evidence to the contrary is all around you, is insanity.
xxxchaindrive 3 years ago
A lot of this is just untrue. not sure if she is trying to mislead or just lying.
michael2649 3 years ago
Again I say reason is wasted on this poor deluded young lady!
She obviously recoils from anything(including fact)that does not fit her misguided world veiw and sadly the hope of deprogramming her and the rest of the ID/Creationist mob from their respective insanity is slim!
Due to lack of understanding and total pigheaded ignorance these people submit to wishthinking and replace truth with blatant superstition!
You can't even have a decent discussion without them spouting falsehoods and lies!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
Oh goodness, all of you coming from your social Darwinist worldviews thinking you have the most fair and reasonable way. Open up your eyes! You're just as biased, judgmental, and religious towards evolution as Christians are towards creationism. I stood up for what I believed in, and I don't care of the ridicule. You're sneers and derision only make the ID proponents stronger.
kaleighm12 3 years ago
"social Darwinist worldviews"
Social Darwinism has nothing to do with the scientific theory of evolution, it is sociology, not science.
"You're just as biased, judgmental, and religious"
Reality is bias toward naturalism.
Religion requires tenets and dogma, accepting science is not a religion.
You are presenting a false dichotomy, look it up.
"only make the ID proponents stronger"
So, debunking their arguments thoroughly makes them stronger.. their ignorance must grow stronger to adapt.
infinity730 3 years ago 3
"I stood up for what I believed in"
No one cares what you believe. What matters is what can be proven using the scientific method, and thus Evolution by Natural Selection has been shown to be absolutely true.
You lost in Dover, and just wont accept it.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
There is no point in trying to reason with these idiots!
The intelligent design lobby will ignore plain fact and will flat out lie in an attempt to validate their deluded belief in fairytales!
The moment anybody mentions so called intelligent design with a strait face you can be sure that mind numbing stupidity,superstition and astounding ignorance will follow!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
A few paragraphs from the book Total Truth by Nancy Pearcy (page 172)
Duane Gish, a Creationist, was having a discussion with Michael Ruse, an evolutionist.
" 'The trouble with you evolutionists is that you just don't play fair.' Gish told him [Michael Ruse]. 'You accuse us of teaching a religious view,' he said, 'you evolutionists are just as religious in your way. Christianity tells us where we came from, where we're going, and what we should do on the way...
kaleighm12 3 years ago
I defy you to show any difference with evolution. It tells you where you came from, where you're going, and what you should do on the way.'
kaleighm12 3 years ago
The comment rankled Ruse, and he couldn't get it out of his mind. Eventually, he decided that Gish was right - that evolution really is 'more than mere science,' as he put in a recent article, 'Evolution came into being as a kind of secular ideology, and explicit substitute for Christianity.' Even today, it 'is a promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion - a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality.' "
kaleighm12 3 years ago
kaleighm12 " Even today, it 'is a promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion - a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality.' "
Evolution doesn't give us meaning or morality, it's not a religion.
You do kow there are theistic evolutionists. Do you not? Even C.S. Lewis was one. They still accept God as creator but view evolution as the explanation of HOW he did it.
justintempler 3 years ago
I'm not saying it's theistic evolution. Evolutionists try and say that evolution is purely science. What about Darwin's book, Descent of Man? Where everything he talked about was his "scientific theory" as a worldview. You cannot separate the two.
kaleighm12 3 years ago
kaleighm12, "What about Darwin's book, Descent of Man? Where everything he talked about was his "scientific theory" as a worldview"
Excuse me, in that book , the word "worldview" is never mentioned once, neither is the phrase "scientific theory"
If you are going to make that claim, please provide something to back it up.
It's available on google books in "full view" mode so you shouldn't have any problem finding the quotations to back up your statement.
justintempler 3 years ago
The only difference is that evolution is true and ID/creationism is not.!
You are displaying a very narrow minded outlook here!
You pretty much back up my claims that you CREATIONISTS & ID SUBSCRIBERS are very small minded and you just ignore plain truths that don't fit in with the way you hope for the world/universe to work!
Surely what is true (no matter how messed up that may be)is way better than obvious delusion!
Just be honest that's not much to ask!
DaveODrisc 2 years ago 6
"You're just as biased, judgmental, and religious towards evolution as Christians are towards creationism"
Firstly you expose yourself as being biased and judgmental with this enlightening remark!
You are also judging people(who ask nothing more than to have a few facts with their science)by your own very poor delusive standards!
You do realize that you are basically saying that you don't care what is true or factual as long as you can have comforting little superstitions to cling onto!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
They aren't superstitions. And I never said I wasn't judgmental or looking through biases. Obviously I have my worldview that leads to ID, and you have your worldview that leads to evolution. My point is, is that evolution has become just as much of a religion as any of the others out there. It's not fair to say that you guys are unbiased and the most reasonable.
kaleighm12 3 years ago
I'm sorry Kaleighm12 but it is only fair to say that us guys(believers in scientific method) are fair and unbiased(by definition!)
We require firm evidence for our beliefs!
We want our facts checked and double checked by multiple independent sources and if a mistake has been made we want it to be exposed reflected upon and ultimately learnt from!
You however embrace falsehood as if it were a virtue and your reasoning is laughable and born of ignorance!
Your worldview has no logical validity!
DaveODrisc 3 years ago
Abiogenesis>simple proteins>simple organisms>complex organisms>man taking place over millions upon millions of years, and going through millions of mutations, brought about by the needs of the organisms and natural selection. No design about this, intelligent or otherwise, simply a hit and miss proposition at the beginning, that transformed into life as we know it.
This not only makes the most sense, but is supported by empirical evidence. What don't people understand about this?
xxxchaindrive 3 years ago 2
Then how come genetic mutations only weaken animals instead of making them stronger?
kaleighm12 3 years ago
kaleighm12 "Then how come genetic mutations only weaken animals instead of making them stronger?"
They don't....
I just posted a video on my channel yesterday that is prool they don't.
A little boy that was born with 6 perfect fingers on each hand and six perfect toes on each foot.
justintempler 3 years ago
They don't in every instance. We humans are one of many genetic mutations of the great ape family. Our DNA, compared to theirs, proves this. When a mutation is adaptive, it makes the organism stronger out of necessity. This is a simple fact, and has been observed countless times. Hell, you can observe it between my Rottweiler and my Dachshund. Both are genetic mutations of a common ancestor, bred to be stronger in their own ways.
This isn't rocket science Miss, but it is common sense.
xxxchaindrive 3 years ago 2
"Then how come genetic mutations only weaken animals instead of making them stronger?"
They don't!
You have a simplistic view of what a mutation is. You posses something like 150 minor mutations in your genome that were not present in your parents genes.
Watch this video - watch?v=TU-7d06HJSs
Minttzz 3 years ago
kaleighm12 "I stood up for what I believed in, and I don't care of the ridicule. You're sneers and derision only make the ID proponents stronger."
Science isn't taught based on beliefs.
Neither example you gave:
The fine tuning argument
nor
the bacterial flagellum
can be used as evidence, both fail to make the case for ID.
You can't teach ID in a science class until you have some science to support it.
justintempler 3 years ago
Give me some science to back up evolution.
Everyone who comments this video is talking about how ID is wrong and making personal attacks against me. Which calling me an uneducated, deluded liar does nothing for evolution. Not saying you said that..but just based on the comments I've been receiving. But very few have given me evidence of evolution.
kaleighm12 3 years ago
start here:
pbs . org/wgbh/evolution/
or
do a search on pubmed for
DNA frameshift mutations
there are over 5,000 published peer reviewed papers.
Frameshift mutations are the mechanism DNA replication allows for new "information" to be created.
mutation + selective pressures from the enviorement + time = evolution
justintempler 3 years ago
k12, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Snowflake designs are formed as the result of the cosequences of unthinking physical law. If someone is going to claim that the designs produced by evolution are produced by some extraordinary cause other than a result of the cosequences of unthinking physical law, they are going to need to show the extraordinary evidence for that. Bias has to be with the simplest explanation unless the extraordinary evidence is shown.
bizzee1 3 years ago
k12, If the bias isn't with the simplest explanation, then one would have to accept leprechauns, or vishnu or the spaghetti monster as equally valid to your proposition of your god being the designer. I hope that you can see the necessity for the simplest explanation bias. Theologically speaking, your intelligent designer god theory is based only on your interpretive choice of taking the bible literally. Why do you interpret the bible literally?
bizzee1 3 years ago
k12, Since you do acknowledge that ID and Christian creationism are one in the same, and it is a matter of faith not science, you'll have to agree with the Dover decision that ID can't be taught in science classes as science because it isn't science.
bizzee1 3 years ago
Ever heared of the Dover trails and Ken Miller?
Google it.
DeletedDelusion 3 years ago
I can't believe this horseshit is supposed to constitute an argument. Intelligent Design is not science, talk about it in Sunday school where you won't contaminate the children of the parents who never wanted their young defenseless minds exposed to this tripe.
holyhell5050 3 years ago 3
Existence exists. God doesn't. It's either one accepts the self-evident facts of reality or one doesn't.
Signofthedollar 3 years ago
It makes me sad to hear Explosions in the Sky played to Intelligent design propaganda. Yes, it is possible that we are more than dumb particles performing simple functions like a machine, but that doesn't mean that the universe is suddenly under the jurisdiction of some intelligent god.
Also, it's extremely unlikely that intelligent aliens planted the seed of humanity thousands to billions of years ago and even if they did....they aren't here anymore.
We are on our own.
loneskeptic 3 years ago 3
A god? A? There's no way of knowing if there is zero, one, two, three ... trillions.
Everything points to religion being man made. Societies that have less religion are better off in general.
If there is a deity or deities, they're at best incompetent.
Hirnlego999 3 years ago 2
I am going to make a prediction and my fellow atheists better give me credit this time but this chick will fast become the female version of VFX. Also they will soon find each other and become the new powerhouse version of the Bakers. MARK MY WORDS!
shaybshay 3 years ago
The amazing display of ignorance about evolution is about how it works.....
How can you have the academic freedom to dismiss something you have no understanding of?
We all know ID is about teaching the possibillity that goddunit. What get's me is the amount of lying Christians do to pretend it's not.
Is that what Christianity is about? Lying your way into Heaven?
justintempler 3 years ago 4
The whole academic freedom angle is a straw man argument. ID isn't allowed in science classes because it isn't science not because of oppression. Science needs to be testable and predictive. ID isn't. Of course your going to raised eyebrows if you try to insert ID into science classes just the same as you'd get from trying to insert astrology. Trying to claim that there aren't legitimate reasons to leave ID out & ur oppressed is incredibly insulting as well as just plain wrong. ID isn't science.
bizzee1 3 years ago 3
Kaleigh, this video is so sad. Who put you up to this? You can't understand the issues yourself if you used BeHe's irreducibly complex flagellum example. Did you see Nova's "ID on trial?" They showed how the flagella was not irreducibly complex by showing a different bacterial structure that had a few less parts than the flagella but was still useful to that bacteria. You have to check out the Nova video /watch?v=z_UcpERqadc&feature=channel_page
bizzee1 3 years ago 2
a sad display of ignorance and regurgitation of propaganda.the unsupported assertion that the universe is irreducibly complex ,the repeating of the long since debunked bacterial flagellum example,the list goes on.academic freedom has never ceased to exist,it just remains a meritocracy and not a democracy.until ID demonstrates some merit,it gets the same treatment as the"gods wrath theory" of disease transmission and lightning guidance.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago 3
The girl is really not ugly. But a little dumb!
GermanAirborne272 3 years ago
Cool Video, what editor do you use?
As for ID, have a look at Ken Miller's work. He's as Christian as they come but doesn't fall for simplistic notions of creation. Bacterial Flagellum was taken apart at Dover. As for galaxies, stars, plannets etc. They're very reducable, mostly to relativistic physics, electromagnetism, gravity, nuclear forces etc.
Also you can believe in a god if you like but there's nothing intellectually disrespectful in not believing in one.
have a good one
^_^
thorungal 3 years ago 3
well this video proves that this entire "academic free day" and the academic freedom act is nothing but a shame, an abuse of science, an pathetic play to being a victim - in other words, all the halmarks of backwater creationism.
Young lady you need to stay up to date. Behe was debunked and admitted, under oath, that astrology would be considered science if ID is science. You are playing a victim's role because you were told to be one.
FREE YOUR MIND.
CapeandCowl 3 years ago 5
Oh, Michael Behe testified that the bacterial flagellum could have evolved through natural processes.
The argument of IR boils down to the idea that if you remove a component from the system the system has no function thus cannot evolve. The problem is this is not true of the flagellum. It can have a function, just not as a flagellum. Additionally even if this were the case, it could be formed from a larger structure and parts could have been lost, or multiple parts could form and merge.
Xorinite 3 years ago 4
It's simple, Alternate2GOP. You, and we, know all the arguments and all the refutations to all the arguments and you are playing the superior arrogant prig. You are a "button pusher" with some cryptic motivation whereby you can get the other side so frustrated they give up in disgust, thus allowing you to crow "I am your better". Why you feel the need to do this is not relevent. What your ulterior motivation is, is also irrelevent. What the answers are here is also, apparently, irrelevent.
RyuDarragh 3 years ago 5
All you are doing is begging the question now.. great job..
We are not here to educate you, you require an education.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
"Am I just too smart for him?"&"If you're talking about Infinity730, you're right."
Incredulity and Projecting faults.. I expected no less.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
PWNED
infinity730 3 years ago 2
Yeah, it was only a matter of time before you did that to yourself. XD
Just find a Panda's draft that says god created everything out of nothing in less than a week. Something at least.
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
"something at least. "
DOING THIS IS COMMITTING A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, PLEASE LEARN TO DEBATE, THANKS
infinity730 3 years ago 2
"Just find a Panda's draft that says god created everything out of nothing"
Sorry, how does that address anything which I have said?
Xorinite 3 years ago 2
@
Alternate2GOP
I have caught you lying, dodging questions, and showing your ignorance.. any more bullshit before I rightfully take my place as your better?
infinity730 3 years ago 2
I'm afraid you won't get anywhere with Alternate2GOP, infinity730. He's good at spouting the AiG line, but will not stop asking irrelevant questions to distract from any given line or tack you take and will keep moving his goalposts as soon as you get close to answering him. This is a "Contest ad Babel" now.
RyuDarragh 3 years ago 3
"I'm afraid you won't get anywhere with Alternate2GOP, infinity730."
Am I just too smart for him?
"He's good at spouting the AiG line,"
What's the "AiG line?"
"but will not stop asking irrelevant questions to distract from any given line or tack you take"
If you're talking about Infinity730, you're right.
"will keep moving his goalposts as soon as you get close to answering him."
Like when?
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
Whales have the genes for legs. Chickens have the genes for teeth.
Why do all birds even running birds like the ostrich have pneumatic bones, which are poor at weight baring?
Why do all mammals even flying ones like bats have solid bones, which are poor for flight?
Why do human eyes have a blind spot, while octopus eyes do not. Why are human eyes susceptible to detached retina while octopus eyes are not.
Is this designer an octopus, or something that looks similar (his noodleyness?)
Xorinite 3 years ago 3
How was life designed, and how does it continue to be designed without any evidence of a designer?
Explain the process by which the designer created his designing mechanism.
Explain the process in which the designer came into being.
Explain the process by which you intend on proving this data to be true and accurate.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
None of this is needed to conclude something is designed. If the opposite is true, then explain why.
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
ID will never qualify as a theory becasue there is no way to prove there was not a designer.
Your theory needs to falsifiable.
Doing it for Evolution is easy, just show us a cat giving birth to a dog. or the existence of a "crocoduck"
justintempler 3 years ago 2
So I take it since you cannot answer my questions, you concede?
infinity730 3 years ago 2
I've already answered them. Any more questions?
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
You did not.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
Yes, I've answered you're question of "who designed the designer, and how did they do it" by pointing out that we can create an infinite regression out of just about anything, and also by pointing out that how a designer did it is not relevant to concluding that something is designed.
"I have caught you lying, dodging questions, and showing your ignorance.. any more bullshit before I rightfully take my place as your better?"
When did I lie, or dodge questions?
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
"When did I lie"
If you don't know then you are part of the problem on this planet. Remove yourself from it please.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
Now answer my questions.
infinity730 3 years ago
The origin of the designer is no more relevant to ID then the origin of the first living cell is to Darwin. Anything else?
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
Now you're confusing evolution with abiogenesis.
Evolution makes no claims on how life began.
justintempler 3 years ago
Who designed the designer? And how did the designer of designers come into being?
infinity730 3 years ago 3
What are quarks made of, and how did the things that quarks are made of come into being? Are you willing to deny atomic theory based on your reasoning?
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
"What are quarks made of"
Super strings, vibrating in 10 dimensional reality.
"how did the things that quarks are made of come into being"
Quantum Dynamism at the Planck Scale.
"Are you willing to deny atomic theory based on your reasoning?"
Atomic Theory is just that, a solid theory, grounded fairly well.
infinity730 3 years ago 3
"Super strings, vibrating in 10 dimensional reality."
And what are those made out of?
"Quantum Dynamism at the Planck Scale."
And what started this process?
"Atomic Theory is just that, a solid theory, grounded fairly well."
So you agree that even though it cannot explain the origins of the things it describes, it is not invalid. Good. The same applies to ID and the designer if any.
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
Answer my questions or this is over and you have conceded. I can keep answering yours, but until you answer mine you have given up defending yourself and have FAILED horribly and been crushed under your own bullshit.
infinity730 3 years ago 2
I've already answered them.
"I can keep answering yours,"
Then do so.
"but until you answer mine you have given up defending yourself and have FAILED horribly and been crushed under your own bullshit."
I've already answered them. Any further questions?
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
Alternate2GOP "The same applies to ID and the designer if any."
if any?????????
Huh, come again.
ID without a designer,
would mean
Intellignetly Dead
justintempler 3 years ago
How was life designed, and how does it continue to be designed without any evidence of a designer?
Explain the process by which the designer created his designing mechanism.
Explain the process in which the designer came into being.
Explain the process by which you intend on proving this data to be true and accurate.
infinity730 3 years ago 2