oh boy. every single creature ever lived is a transitional form, because everything is CONSTANTLY evolving. Look in the mirror. YOU are a transitional form. Modern humans are changing.
@bigglyguy No actually its true I can find a turd that longer then the human body and name it whatever i want. Does that prove thats the original name..? Just like fossils. THEY ASSUME its a bone from a common ancestor but they werent there so they simply dont know. and never will. EVOLUTION is a lie.
@bigglyguy The fact is and still remains.. YOU WERENT THERE SO YOU DONT KNOW 100% ITS A TRANSITIONAL FORM.. OR ANYTHING. Romans 1:21-25 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. (EVOLUTION)
@jbooks888 As someone as already pointed out, EVERY fossil is transitional. Evolution is (usually) a gradual process. We don't expect to see "crocoducks", we expect exactly that which we have been finding for the last 150 years or so. Also, read up on that lovely substance we call "DNA", which proved evolution correct quite some time ago. Now if you want to keep your mind closed that's fine, as long as you close your mouth to go with it...
@jbooks888 Oh, you're ignorant. OK. See, when we describe it as "programming" or "language" or whatever, that's just a manner of speech. It's not really programmed or written, it's a fecking chemical, see? As for how it's "language" is understood, again it's just a chemical reaction, molocules locking onto each other and stuff. It's not a written down language. Are you starting to get it yet?
@bigglyguy When "we" describe it - so you're some kind of scientist are you? LOL.
Found through google:
Specific sections of DNA carry the instructions to make other molecules, usually proteins. These lengths of DNA are called genes. To interpret the DNA code, the cell first makes a copy of the DNA segment to be read. The copy then travels to another part of the cell, where the code is used to assemble a chain of protein subunits.
@bigglyguy You see words like interpret and code? THIS is what I'm talking about. And NO it's not just a chemical reaction - not that a chemical reaction is a trivial thing. It is a reaction to a specific instruction so that the right outcomes can be produced. NOW - how did this convenient arrangement come about all by itself, with no outside input or design? If you think evolution did it by 'selection; you are one seriously deluded fool.
This video is not explaining evolution at all correctly. I have to ask if this person is being satirical, cause otherwise they're a complete moron. The evidence is everywhere. Speciation has in fact been observed, and there are "transitional" fossils and living species. This is really another case and point of "Lalalalala, I can't Hear You!" And frankly that's annoying and bullshit because frankly we need research to go on yet religious dogmatics persist in trying to kill it at every turn. Ugh!
Very funny video. Well done! Although it seems you accidentally labeled it as a Science & Technology vid. It should clearly be categorized as humor. You might mislead people into thinking you were serious.
Quite funny that you include Straw Man in the tags. Because that's all this is. =)
Oh, another vacuuous vid from neveratruthseeker: can't figure out that cosmology is not related to evolution. Astrophysics is not biology, dimbulb! Still don't realize that abiogenesis is not evolution, as it had to happen PRIOR to any evolution. Nothing like the invincibility of utter ignorance, that's for sure! This reads like the Answers in Genesis list of arguments never to use against evolution as they are all wrong.
@jbooks888 Yep, in light of your vapid comment. A singularity expanded and after about 9 billion years and plenty of fits and starts, unicellular life began on Earth. Thimbleminded bible idolator!
Evolution is a lie. DNA alone...proves it a lie. Talk about fairy tales...evolution is just such a fairy tale of long, long, ago...and far, far, away...LOL
@jbooks888 Gotta love a response with no evidence or examples to back up a point. As stated previously, read a basic biology book for children. You seem like someone who would prefer one with pop up pictures no? :) Happy holidays
@jbooks888 (comment 3) If you meant the comment "below," A reply like that to the comment i sent you pretty much sends your own message flying back in your face. If my statement contradicted itself, yet you didn't explain how or why, then by no means did you counter my statement. You're merely contradicting yourself.
I know it's hard for you as a creationist dumb fuck to think, but please do try a little harder.
ANYONE: If you see no response to some posters below they know they are on ignore for tings like name calling & personal insults - which make true debate impossible. Though I would love to dispel disinformation that I see, I debate only with those who are civil & objective.
@max2right point is , They can't prove anything wrong about Science till now , They haven't proved anything , They just keep trying , like an evil cult -_- Man ,I don't get these people
@mastela88 Unbelievably, you're the first to wake up to this! While I do believe that creation is evidence for God, I must admit I'm a little trollish. But it's such great value, who could resist? For every ten word comment I post I get about two thousand words in vitriolic response. It's like teasing a tank full of piranhas!
@jbooks888 BTW, you're the one who started with "that tone." Look it up mate. I told you that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, then your reply was to call me a "neuroturd." Then you act all surprised at my response. You will learn that if you're polite with me then i would be polite back, but i do fight fire with fire and rage with greater rage.
@jbooks888 Oh and look, sends comments to peoples profile pages but can't send him one, what a fucking coward. You call me homosexual on my page, read my response.
"I'm straight, married with 2 kids. There are gay believers too you know. Besides, your profile description gives a much more positive assertion about your sexuality. Read this:
"I love Jesus with all my heart - and I love my fellow Christian brothers and sisters, especially Shawn!"
@jbooks888 Besides the invisible comment, your page states you're the good "friend of shawn." would this happen to be the same Shawn, alternatively known as VFX or PCS? Judging by this shit you watch you're a really deluded individual. Debate me and you WILL lose big time little man. Or otherwise, go ahead and give us a laugh at your own expense. Whilst you're at it, you can pray to your invisible skydaddy for comfort as you shit is put to rest.
@01101100d OK, here's the comment reposted for you -
Unbelievably, you're the first to wake up to this! While I do believe that creation is evidence for God, I must admit I'm a little trollish. But it's such great value, who could resist? For every ten word comment I post I get about two thousand words in vitriolic response. It's like teasing a tank full of piranhas!
Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a women with lust you have committed adultery with here in your heart?
If God judge’s u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty? Does this concern you? The Bible says despise the value of your eye compared to the value of your soul. would u sell your i for a million dollars? And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. needgod.com
True, the arguments are bogus. 4:58 "It demonstrates all kinds of intermediate species..." 1st, it doesn't demonstrate any such thing. We are just told that Fossil A had descendants that led to Fossil B, C, etc. tho there is 0 way to know if it had any descendants significantly different from itself. 2nd you need more than speciation to get up that "Tree of Life." And btw there have been 0 new phyla since the so called 1st, "Cambrian", explosion of life so why isn't evo doing it's stuff?
evolution isn't some precise formula..if change is demanded, change occurs..if change isn't demanded, it usually won't occur..some species have been so nicely suited to their environments for so long, they have changed very little..how can u seriously believe in creationism when there are golden moles from Africa that are 100% blind?..they have eyes, but their eyes are covered by a thick layer of skin..why on earth would u believe that an intelligent designer made such a design?
@microbe "you have got to be american to be this stupid, the rest of the world laughs at you." <- Yes. Something tells me that it may takes decades to get out of the current situation. But things may be moving slowly in the right direction; it seems that more and more people become non-religious in the USA, and young people have access to the internet and can learn about science, reason, and modern biology/evolution, even if it was censored when they went to grade school/college.
As soon as you hear a stupid fucking Christian start with the existence of the universe and the big bang when TRYING to disprove one of the most proven theories in the world, namely Evolution, you know they are a moron who has gotten everything mixed up. Creation and Evolution are two different things you imbecile!
Rarely do i feel the need to respond to videos on youtube here goes though...
One day, lets say 6000 earth years ago, there was an omnipotent being, who decided to create every thing we can observe because he was bored. Not just humans and bacteria but a cosmos with more stars than all the grains of sand on the earth....your incredulity is not proof that evolution is not valid,just your opinion.
@EndtimeElijah No sir, examination of those names will reveal lawyers, park rangers, teachers (gym, math, social studies), mathematicians, and staticisians. Further more, many actual scientists listed have requested their names be removed from said list because it was falsely presented to them in a manner that would becon every scientist to sign off on it due to the wording as scientists by their very nature are skeptical of everything.
For the record, google Project Steve. Third link down.
I posted the “600 scientists quote” in all Good Faith, however, if what you say is correct, then I would gladly, if it were possible, remove that particular post.
If you want to believe that your ancestor was a “Fish” which is a "Hindu doctrine," that is fine, just do not ask me to believe such NONSENSE !!!
@EndtimeElijah I accept the theory of evolution as the mechanism to explain the diversity of life on earth, not believe it. In order to outright reject Evolution on the whole and believe Creationism you have to reject DNA sequencing, Cosmology, radiometric dating, speed of light, almost all medicines made today, the history of dogs, geological records, and the scientific method itself. Evolution is the most well supported scientific finding because of evidence for it. Not because of belief.
You have been sold a “Lie” which is actually a “Hindu” doctrine.
PART ONE.
“Why do geologists and archeologists still spend their scarce money on costly radiocarbon determinations? They do so because occasional dates appear to be useful.
While the method cannot be counted on to give good, unequivocal results, the number do impress people, and save them the trouble of thinking excessively.
Expressed in what look like precise calendar years, figures seem somehow better ... 'Absolute' dates determined by a laboratory carry a lot of weight, and are extremely helpful in bolstering weak arguments.
No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates.
This whole bless thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read.”
Robert E. Lee, "Radiocarbon: ages in error." Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol.19(3), 1981, pp.9-29. Reprinted in the Creation Research Society Quarterly, vol. 19(2), September 1982, pp. 117-127 (quotes from pp. 123 and 125)
@EndtimeElijah Unfortunately for you the truth does not conform to this. Hundreds of thousands of radiometric dating procedures have been done and they're all conclusive. The instances you hear about mistakes in dating are often done as research to show what might throw off the dating, not something that they actually dated thinking it would come out accurately. There are at minimum 20 different methods of dating that all come to the same conclusion.
The body of a seal that had been dead for 30 years was carbon dated, and the results stated that the seal had died 4,600 years ago! ("The Illustrated Origins Answer Book" by Paul Taylor)
Only 4,570 years out !!!
Further examples can be found at:
The Bible and Radiometric dating, the Problem with Carbon 14 and other dating methods.
@EndtimeElijah The "Resevoir Effect" also known as the "Marine Effect" is a known and understood problem with dating marine animals using carbon dating due to the types of isotopes of carbon found in marine environments. Not knowing this, and using an example from someone who also clearly doesn't know this, does not lend any credence to your position.
@EndtimeElijah So instead of accepting that your source is demonstrably ignorant of known and understood weaknesses in certain types of dating techniques, you give another example from the same source in an attempt to have us ignore that your source is demonstrably ignorant of the material it claims to be "teaching" you? I can assume that this particular "problem" is due to the fact that the fossil sent was covered in shellac which is made from carbon, causing problems its carbon dating.
@EndtimeElijah Some of us that know what's actually going on rather than thinking they know everything by reading a single website about one groups view on a topic often find that most people are painfully ignorant of the things they claim to "know" You are only digging yourself a larger hole trying to discuss things you clearly know nothing about. Knowlege is power, it is there for you to take if you want it. All you have to do is learn.
@EndtimeElijah I know you are mentally retarded, so I'll treat you gently.. I am an Atheist, so don't subscribe to any religion.
The point I was trying to make to your enormously retarded slow and thick mind, is that you make threats that your God will reap vengeance on those who did not prostrate themselves to him, but you are SO STUPID, that you forget there are THOUSANDS OF GODS! Basically what you are proposing is pascals wager... I know you won't understand that because you are DUMB!
Well yes if you completely strawman evolution it sounds ridiculous. Is this surprising? Do you think your religion would seem anything but ludicrous if WE satirized it?
I would be greatly embarrassed if I thought that my ancestor was a “Fish” how ridiculous that would be.
The greatest irony of all is that you are actually believing a “Hindu doctrine” the major difference between you and the Hindu, is that you do not, (as far as I know) believe in reincarnation.
You reject the word of God, and then you promote a Hindu doctrine, and you think that is clever.
@EndtimeElijah "I would be greatly embarrassed if I thought that my ancestor was a “Fish”
Well time to be greatly embarrassed then. It's a fact!
But you should be MORE embarrassed denying Evolution! It's the cornerstone of modern Biology and was proven over 40 years ago. If Evolution wasn't right, then nothing would work. We wouldn't need new antibiotics all the time, everything would have died out in the first ice age and life would still be a bunch of amino acids floating around in the sea.
First of all, there's nothing Evil about Science. Science is a search for truth without bias.
And if you think Evolution is nonsense then it shouldn't be very hard to write a paper about why it's wrong and submit it to a Scientific journal for peer review. You think in 150 years no one's tried to disprove it? Of course they have and it's bullet proof! Saying you don't believe it just indicates brainwashing and a lack of education.
I have posted statements from “Top evolutionists” who openly state that evolution is a “False science.”
There are many learned men who flatly reject the nonsense of evolution.......
"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of IMAGINATION."
You have fallen into the trap of believing that as a man teaches “X” that he must therefore believe “X” this is NOT always the case.
This quote is from a staunch evolutionist::
“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on FAITH alone, exactly the same sort of FAITH which it is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion.”
Louis Trenchard More, The Dogma of Evolution (1925).
You are welcome to “Your opinion” however, you must keep in mind that it is only, “Your opinion.”
Again, you told by an evolutionist that it is a false belief......
"In spite of the examples, it remains true (as every paleontologist knows) that most new species, genera and families appear in the record suddenly, and are not led up to by known, gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences."
George Gaylord Simpson, Harvard high priest of evolution.
Even one of the top evolutionists doesn`t believe that nonsense, so why do you ?
“It results from this expose that the theory of evolution is impossible.....Evolution is a sort of dogma in which the priests no longer believe, but they maintain for their people.”
Dr. Paul Lemoine, an evolutionist.
As he said, "A sort of Dogma". you must be one of the people for whom they maintain the dogma.
What One Famous Scientist Said About Evolution.....
"One morning I woke up and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this evolution stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it.
That's quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled so long. Either there was something wrong with me or there was something wrong with evolutionary theory.
The question is: Can you tell me anything you KNOW about Evolution? Any one thing? Any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence.
I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of Evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time, and eventually one person said, “I do know one thing - it ought not to be taught in high school.”
Part of a keynote address given at the American Museum of Natural History by Dr Colin Patterson (Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London) in 1981. Unpublished transcript.
"As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of being, as we see them, well defined species?"
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distance, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
You state, “We see transitional fossils all the time, the world abounds with them.”
On the contrary, even evolutionists themselves do NOT agree which is and which is not a “Transitional form,” this, then is NOT a science, rather it is a case of “Personal choice.”
Just another blatant misrepresentation of science by people who are either ignorant of it or are willfully lying. JustATruthSeeker you should be ashamed both for lying and weakening the position of religious individuals through dishonesty.
I wonder if this girl is pissed for all that stupid shit you made her say......I mean your to embarrassed to attach your face to it. rightly so.....I especially like the part where she asked ,if everything came from nothing where did nothing come from?
In the final analysis, Charles Darwin did NOT believe that any species become another species:
“When we descend to details, we cannot prove that no one species has changed. That is, we cannot prove that a single species has changed.” “Not one change of species into another is on record. We cannot prove that a single species has been changed into another.”
You say microevolution is possible because scientists have witnessed it, and then you go off and say macroevolution isnnt possible because we havent witnessed it? All macroevolution is, is microevolution on a grander scale.
1. Something cannot come from nothing, but your God is just as something as anything else. Matter can be as eternal as your God.
2. Evolution did not CREATE life. It altered life to fit into many environments. Abiogenesis created life.
3. Crick was many years before our time and did not have our present knowledge, the same way the Catholic church had no knowledge the current priests would be child molesters.
4. Some species of fish adapted to partial life on land. See lungfish and mudskipper.
If you believe that evolution should show that one species evolved into a completely different one, the first cells "learned" to divide, and that aquatic creatures just "decided" to move on to land..... you have no idea how evolution works. If you really want to know how it works. Go to find a college near you that has a professor with a degree in biology and have them explain it to you. Then you can come back here and try and refute evolution.
Wow, if anybody should watch this video as an attempt to learn something, it should be to learn how to use a Straw man fallacy. Good job on that! Otherwise, this video just represents how certain extreme religious nuts such as yourself will oppose something that they know nothing about. The fish "decided" to leave water? Oh man. That says it all. Open up a book other than the Bible sometime, and educate yourself before refuting something so vehemently and ignorantly.
@KiwisWorld11 Seems like you know a lot about the theory of evolution. Not trying to be sarcastic here, but if you enlighten me as to the scientific reason/evidence for an aquatic organism's reasoning for going to land? I've studied evolution and have learned tremendous amounts, though I do know that there are few holes in it here and there.
Pure ignorance, I can think of many transitional forms. Also I bet that the atheists watching this are the only ones who know anything about palaeontology.
This is the weirdest video I have ever seen on youtube. Why the fuck did you choose to have that girl give us a survey of evolutionary theory with a robot voice?
Oh, by the way, nice democracy there Dorothy. Open voting for one positive vote, and claim that 100% approval crown beloved of the religious right. You should be ashamed of the gross misrepresentation of evolutionary and abiogenesis theory you have cobbled together and presented here. Aren't Christians meant to tell the truth? I thought there was a commandment about that.
This video is a classic strawman. You don't understand evolution, or can't refute it, so you make up some crazy assertions and call THAT evolution, so that you can refute that. This is what happens when anybody can say anything. I'm ALMOST inclined to say fuck free speech in favor of some kind of bullshit suppression control so that people like you will stop lying to the youth.
@WTU208 You're wrong in assuming the sun always is and always has been shrinking .
Research the Helmholtz (or Kelvin-Helmholtz) contraction and neutrino loss. Between 1981-1988 the radius was measured at 695,508 ± 26 km, with no shrinkage at all occurring during this time period. Brown & Christensen-Dalsgaard (1998).
What creationists forget is that the sun produces some neutrinos during fusion and doesn't just use them. Something your creationist friends forgot to consider.
@tafftastic If you really believe that an object can burn without loss of matter, then you will believe anything.
The scientists will say black is white if it proves their thesis. They are all in the same lodge and have no moral fibre or scruples whatsoever. They waste billions on things like the hadron collider failing to prove the big bang.
@WTU208 I didn't say a thing about loss of matter.
Einstein's famous equation, E=mc2 says that mass is proportional to energy, so the mass the mass decays into kinetic energy carried away by the decay products.
Please tell me this is satire
crabbit101 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JustATruthSeeker Even the Catholic church accepts evolution, with the addition that it was a process designed and guided by God.
MrSitemaster2 2 weeks ago
oh boy. every single creature ever lived is a transitional form, because everything is CONSTANTLY evolving. Look in the mirror. YOU are a transitional form. Modern humans are changing.
Mojack001 1 month ago
"The fossil record shows no transitional forms, just separate, distinct, extinct creatures" False. Do your homework.
bigglyguy 1 month ago
@bigglyguy No actually its true I can find a turd that longer then the human body and name it whatever i want. Does that prove thats the original name..? Just like fossils. THEY ASSUME its a bone from a common ancestor but they werent there so they simply dont know. and never will. EVOLUTION is a lie.
1xThreeDaysGrace1x 1 month ago
@1xThreeDaysGrace1x Meet my little friend, Mr Platypus. He's not a fossil, though perhaps invisible to the closed mind? /watch?v=XnzyupjTy4Y&feature
bigglyguy 1 month ago
@bigglyguy The fact is and still remains.. YOU WERENT THERE SO YOU DONT KNOW 100% ITS A TRANSITIONAL FORM.. OR ANYTHING. Romans 1:21-25 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. (EVOLUTION)
1xThreeDaysGrace1x 1 month ago
@bigglyguy EXCUSE ME! This is not false - there are no credible transitional fossils - you do your homework!
jbooks888 4 days ago
@jbooks888 As someone as already pointed out, EVERY fossil is transitional. Evolution is (usually) a gradual process. We don't expect to see "crocoducks", we expect exactly that which we have been finding for the last 150 years or so. Also, read up on that lovely substance we call "DNA", which proved evolution correct quite some time ago. Now if you want to keep your mind closed that's fine, as long as you close your mouth to go with it...
bigglyguy 3 days ago
@bigglyguy How did the DNA get programmed? And how is its language understood? THIS is where evolution finally fails.
jbooks888 3 days ago
@jbooks888 Oh, you're ignorant. OK. See, when we describe it as "programming" or "language" or whatever, that's just a manner of speech. It's not really programmed or written, it's a fecking chemical, see? As for how it's "language" is understood, again it's just a chemical reaction, molocules locking onto each other and stuff. It's not a written down language. Are you starting to get it yet?
bigglyguy 1 day ago
@bigglyguy When "we" describe it - so you're some kind of scientist are you? LOL.
Found through google:
Specific sections of DNA carry the instructions to make other molecules, usually proteins. These lengths of DNA are called genes. To interpret the DNA code, the cell first makes a copy of the DNA segment to be read. The copy then travels to another part of the cell, where the code is used to assemble a chain of protein subunits.
You'd do well to look further into DNA.
jbooks888 1 day ago
@bigglyguy Instruction = programming... look into it further, genius - it took me about 30 seconds to find that quote from the net.
jbooks888 1 day ago
@bigglyguy I'm ignorant? Pity you can't spell molecule. Obviously you're just another cut-n-paste intellectual. Rock on baby!!
jbooks888 1 day ago
@bigglyguy You see words like interpret and code? THIS is what I'm talking about. And NO it's not just a chemical reaction - not that a chemical reaction is a trivial thing. It is a reaction to a specific instruction so that the right outcomes can be produced. NOW - how did this convenient arrangement come about all by itself, with no outside input or design? If you think evolution did it by 'selection; you are one seriously deluded fool.
jbooks888 1 day ago
This video is not explaining evolution at all correctly. I have to ask if this person is being satirical, cause otherwise they're a complete moron. The evidence is everywhere. Speciation has in fact been observed, and there are "transitional" fossils and living species. This is really another case and point of "Lalalalala, I can't Hear You!" And frankly that's annoying and bullshit because frankly we need research to go on yet religious dogmatics persist in trying to kill it at every turn. Ugh!
KiraNirvanna 1 month ago
@jbooks888 do you have anything remotely intelligent or interesting to say?
scienceandhiphop2011 2 months ago
GOD DUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
XboxDCG 2 months ago
I hate when people attempt to explain evolution they immediately begin with big bang theory..
WakingLife55 3 months ago 2
I dislike this video
fistfulofknowledge 3 months ago
And of course ratings are disabled. XD
Trampadoo 4 months ago 2
The moment I saw the title of the video I just knew the ratings must be disabled. I had to click it just to know if I'm right, and guess what?
I'm clairvoyant.
TheBarelyExisting 4 months ago 2
Very funny video. Well done! Although it seems you accidentally labeled it as a Science & Technology vid. It should clearly be categorized as humor. You might mislead people into thinking you were serious.
Quite funny that you include Straw Man in the tags. Because that's all this is. =)
L00NGB00W 4 months ago
Comment removed
SpellboundSolution 4 months ago
Oh, another vacuuous vid from neveratruthseeker: can't figure out that cosmology is not related to evolution. Astrophysics is not biology, dimbulb! Still don't realize that abiogenesis is not evolution, as it had to happen PRIOR to any evolution. Nothing like the invincibility of utter ignorance, that's for sure! This reads like the Answers in Genesis list of arguments never to use against evolution as they are all wrong.
TixeYlno0069 4 months ago
@TixeYlno0069 Nothing exploded then life just began! And you have the nerve to talk about utter ignorance.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 Yep, in light of your vapid comment. A singularity expanded and after about 9 billion years and plenty of fits and starts, unicellular life began on Earth. Thimbleminded bible idolator!
TixeYlno0069 2 months ago
Evolution is a lie. DNA alone...proves it a lie. Talk about fairy tales...evolution is just such a fairy tale of long, long, ago...and far, far, away...LOL
mdr22315 4 months ago
@mdr22315 Read a basic biology book for pre teens and maybe you will start understanding how life works
scienceandhiphop2011 4 months ago
@scienceandhiphop2011 Biology books are full of lies.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 Gotta love a response with no evidence or examples to back up a point. As stated previously, read a basic biology book for children. You seem like someone who would prefer one with pop up pictures no? :) Happy holidays
scienceandhiphop2011 2 months ago
@scienceandhiphop2011 And as replied previously, text books are full of lies.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 No, they're not. See how easy that was to counter your statement?
scienceandhiphop2011 2 months ago
@scienceandhiphop2011 By no means did you counter my statement. You merely contradicted it.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 (comment 3) If you meant the comment "below," A reply like that to the comment i sent you pretty much sends your own message flying back in your face. If my statement contradicted itself, yet you didn't explain how or why, then by no means did you counter my statement. You're merely contradicting yourself.
I know it's hard for you as a creationist dumb fuck to think, but please do try a little harder.
01101100d 2 months ago
ANYONE: If you see no response to some posters below they know they are on ignore for tings like name calling & personal insults - which make true debate impossible. Though I would love to dispel disinformation that I see, I debate only with those who are civil & objective.
LoricaLady 4 months ago
If everything science knows about the universe and life turns out to be wrong still there would be no evidence that god exists.
max2right 5 months ago 13
@max2right point is , They can't prove anything wrong about Science till now , They haven't proved anything , They just keep trying , like an evil cult -_- Man ,I don't get these people
djay00009 5 months ago
@max2right Creation is perfect evidence that God exists.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 lol stop trolling, this video is enough retardardation for all of us to deal with already we dun need more.
mastela88 2 months ago
@mastela88 Unbelievably, you're the first to wake up to this! While I do believe that creation is evidence for God, I must admit I'm a little trollish. But it's such great value, who could resist? For every ten word comment I post I get about two thousand words in vitriolic response. It's like teasing a tank full of piranhas!
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 There is no evidence for creation, so how can you have proof for God. The absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
01101100d 2 months ago
@01101100d Read the above comment, neuroturd.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 What above comment you dumb idiotic creatard.
01101100d 2 months ago
@01101100d I wonder, would you speak to me in that tone face to face? I doubt it.
jbooks888 2 months ago
@jbooks888 Hahaha, You got it pal. Do you have skype?
01101100d 2 months ago
@jbooks888 BTW, you're the one who started with "that tone." Look it up mate. I told you that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, then your reply was to call me a "neuroturd." Then you act all surprised at my response. You will learn that if you're polite with me then i would be polite back, but i do fight fire with fire and rage with greater rage.
Let me know if you have skype.
01101100d 2 months ago
@jbooks888 Oh and look, sends comments to peoples profile pages but can't send him one, what a fucking coward. You call me homosexual on my page, read my response.
"I'm straight, married with 2 kids. There are gay believers too you know. Besides, your profile description gives a much more positive assertion about your sexuality. Read this:
"I love Jesus with all my heart - and I love my fellow Christian brothers and sisters, especially Shawn!"
What could be more gay than that dude?
01101100d 2 months ago
@jbooks888 Last comment i promise, don't get too upset. Look at my latest video, a special public invitation to you sir. I call you out!
01101100d 2 months ago
@jbooks888 Besides the invisible comment, your page states you're the good "friend of shawn." would this happen to be the same Shawn, alternatively known as VFX or PCS? Judging by this shit you watch you're a really deluded individual. Debate me and you WILL lose big time little man. Or otherwise, go ahead and give us a laugh at your own expense. Whilst you're at it, you can pray to your invisible skydaddy for comfort as you shit is put to rest.
01101100d 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@01101100d OK, here's the comment reposted for you -
Unbelievably, you're the first to wake up to this! While I do believe that creation is evidence for God, I must admit I'm a little trollish. But it's such great value, who could resist? For every ten word comment I post I get about two thousand words in vitriolic response. It's like teasing a tank full of piranhas!
jbooks888 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Are you ready?
Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a women with lust you have committed adultery with here in your heart?
If God judge’s u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty? Does this concern you? The Bible says despise the value of your eye compared to the value of your soul. would u sell your i for a million dollars? And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. needgod.com
standingontruth1 5 months ago
You fail.Goodbye.
Stevoukos 5 months ago
Either master troll, or down right retarded (no ofence intended to the mentally disabled):
1.- Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of the universe, that's cosmollogy and, life from nothingness that's abiogenesis
2.- Your example is just...a theory, your theory actually, you mashed up a bunch of theorys and tried to sense it out...
3.- who is your "latest" source that says organisms came from the ocean?
4.- WTF!!! is wrong with your brain?! (4:00-4:35) (5:30-5:51)
KevsterJester42 5 months ago
Comment removed
KevsterJester42 5 months ago
Comment removed
KevsterJester42 5 months ago
True, the arguments are bogus. 4:58 "It demonstrates all kinds of intermediate species..." 1st, it doesn't demonstrate any such thing. We are just told that Fossil A had descendants that led to Fossil B, C, etc. tho there is 0 way to know if it had any descendants significantly different from itself. 2nd you need more than speciation to get up that "Tree of Life." And btw there have been 0 new phyla since the so called 1st, "Cambrian", explosion of life so why isn't evo doing it's stuff?
LoricaLady 5 months ago
@LoricaLady
evolution isn't some precise formula..if change is demanded, change occurs..if change isn't demanded, it usually won't occur..some species have been so nicely suited to their environments for so long, they have changed very little..how can u seriously believe in creationism when there are golden moles from Africa that are 100% blind?..they have eyes, but their eyes are covered by a thick layer of skin..why on earth would u believe that an intelligent designer made such a design?
itzahazylife 4 months ago
you have got to be american to be this stupid, the rest of the world laughs at you.
microbe 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@microbe "you have got to be american to be this stupid, the rest of the world laughs at you." <- Yes. Something tells me that it may takes decades to get out of the current situation. But things may be moving slowly in the right direction; it seems that more and more people become non-religious in the USA, and young people have access to the internet and can learn about science, reason, and modern biology/evolution, even if it was censored when they went to grade school/college.
0debug 2 months ago
How can the fact that foxes are related to dogs be a hoax?
odinata 6 months ago
Wow.... what a load of nonsense at every scientific level. An amazing blither of half-fact and utter fantasy.
SolofTarsus5 6 months ago
Even Darwin admitted there must be a creative force that started life.
So does Christopher Hitchens who is now dying of cancer cell mutations
the very magical mutation process he claimed created life as we know it.
Wheelie9341 6 months ago
This video creeps me out like you wouldn't believe
deisenga 6 months ago
As soon as you hear a stupid fucking Christian start with the existence of the universe and the big bang when TRYING to disprove one of the most proven theories in the world, namely Evolution, you know they are a moron who has gotten everything mixed up. Creation and Evolution are two different things you imbecile!
xNoReligionx 7 months ago
Rarely do i feel the need to respond to videos on youtube here goes though...
One day, lets say 6000 earth years ago, there was an omnipotent being, who decided to create every thing we can observe because he was bored. Not just humans and bacteria but a cosmos with more stars than all the grains of sand on the earth....your incredulity is not proof that evolution is not valid,just your opinion.
chunkytoe 7 months ago
haha, you use the computer to read instead of reading yourself? Why ? What are you afraid of?
MrBrational 7 months ago
lol ratings disabled... no cited sources, no professors, just microsoft sarah or whatever with pictures. LOOLOLOLOl
gregory06 8 months ago
@gregory06 It's satire.
HimesInu 8 months ago
Over 600 scientists from around the world have signed the following statement, first published in 2001:
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.
Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EndtimeElijah Yeah, I looked at the names on that paper. Only eleven were actual Biologist.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah No sir, examination of those names will reveal lawyers, park rangers, teachers (gym, math, social studies), mathematicians, and staticisians. Further more, many actual scientists listed have requested their names be removed from said list because it was falsely presented to them in a manner that would becon every scientist to sign off on it due to the wording as scientists by their very nature are skeptical of everything.
For the record, google Project Steve. Third link down.
MysteriousAya 7 months ago
@MysteriousAya
I posted the “600 scientists quote” in all Good Faith, however, if what you say is correct, then I would gladly, if it were possible, remove that particular post.
If you want to believe that your ancestor was a “Fish” which is a "Hindu doctrine," that is fine, just do not ask me to believe such NONSENSE !!!
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah I accept the theory of evolution as the mechanism to explain the diversity of life on earth, not believe it. In order to outright reject Evolution on the whole and believe Creationism you have to reject DNA sequencing, Cosmology, radiometric dating, speed of light, almost all medicines made today, the history of dogs, geological records, and the scientific method itself. Evolution is the most well supported scientific finding because of evidence for it. Not because of belief.
MysteriousAya 7 months ago
@MysteriousAya
You have been sold a “Lie” which is actually a “Hindu” doctrine.
PART ONE.
“Why do geologists and archeologists still spend their scarce money on costly radiocarbon determinations? They do so because occasional dates appear to be useful.
While the method cannot be counted on to give good, unequivocal results, the number do impress people, and save them the trouble of thinking excessively.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah
PART TWO.
Expressed in what look like precise calendar years, figures seem somehow better ... 'Absolute' dates determined by a laboratory carry a lot of weight, and are extremely helpful in bolstering weak arguments.
No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah
PART THREE.
This whole bless thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read.”
Robert E. Lee, "Radiocarbon: ages in error." Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol.19(3), 1981, pp.9-29. Reprinted in the Creation Research Society Quarterly, vol. 19(2), September 1982, pp. 117-127 (quotes from pp. 123 and 125)
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah Unfortunately for you the truth does not conform to this. Hundreds of thousands of radiometric dating procedures have been done and they're all conclusive. The instances you hear about mistakes in dating are often done as research to show what might throw off the dating, not something that they actually dated thinking it would come out accurately. There are at minimum 20 different methods of dating that all come to the same conclusion.
MysteriousAya 7 months ago
@MysteriousAya
You are believing a “Hindu” doctrine.
Inacurate dating techniques:
The body of a seal that had been dead for 30 years was carbon dated, and the results stated that the seal had died 4,600 years ago! ("The Illustrated Origins Answer Book" by Paul Taylor)
Only 4,570 years out !!!
Further examples can be found at:
The Bible and Radiometric dating, the Problem with Carbon 14 and other dating methods.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah The "Resevoir Effect" also known as the "Marine Effect" is a known and understood problem with dating marine animals using carbon dating due to the types of isotopes of carbon found in marine environments. Not knowing this, and using an example from someone who also clearly doesn't know this, does not lend any credence to your position.
TheWeizOne 7 months ago
@TheWeizOne
An Allosaurus bone that was sent to The University of Arizona to be carbon dated.
The results were 9,890 +/- 60 years and 16,120 +/- 220 years.
We didn't tell them that the bones they were dating were dinosaur bones. The result was sample B at 16,120 years.
The Allosaurus dinosaur was supposed to be around 140,000,000 years.
Read more at: The Bible and Radiometric dating, the Problem with Carbon 14 and other dating methods.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah So instead of accepting that your source is demonstrably ignorant of known and understood weaknesses in certain types of dating techniques, you give another example from the same source in an attempt to have us ignore that your source is demonstrably ignorant of the material it claims to be "teaching" you? I can assume that this particular "problem" is due to the fact that the fossil sent was covered in shellac which is made from carbon, causing problems its carbon dating.
TheWeizOne 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah Some of us that know what's actually going on rather than thinking they know everything by reading a single website about one groups view on a topic often find that most people are painfully ignorant of the things they claim to "know" You are only digging yourself a larger hole trying to discuss things you clearly know nothing about. Knowlege is power, it is there for you to take if you want it. All you have to do is learn.
TheWeizOne 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah You FAIL!
xNoReligionx 7 months ago
@xNoReligionx
There is not long left, I will see you at the White Throne Judgement.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah Ah the usual threat from the ignorant!
And at that White Throne, what will you do if Zeus, or Thor, or Shiva stands there instead of the God you prey too?
You'll be as deeply in the shit as me, only I can say I was intellectually honest, something you can't claim!
xNoReligionx 7 months ago
@xNoReligionx
The biggest joke of all is that you are actually believing a "Hindu" doctrine, dressed up as science.
As the Lord Jesus Christ stated.....
Mark 10:6.
But from the beginning of the CREATION God made them male and female.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah I know you are mentally retarded, so I'll treat you gently.. I am an Atheist, so don't subscribe to any religion.
The point I was trying to make to your enormously retarded slow and thick mind, is that you make threats that your God will reap vengeance on those who did not prostrate themselves to him, but you are SO STUPID, that you forget there are THOUSANDS OF GODS! Basically what you are proposing is pascals wager... I know you won't understand that because you are DUMB!
xNoReligionx 7 months ago
@xNoReligionx
According to you there are “THOUSANDS OF GODS!” in fact there is only One, and I have met Him.
Keep believing your Hindu doctrine of evolution.
Philippians 2:10 + 11.
10. That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11. And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
EndtimeElijah 7 months ago
@EndtimeElijah "According to you there are “THOUSANDS OF GODS!” in fact there is only One, and I have met Him."
OK we need go no further, if you have seen God, then you are clinically INSANE!
Bye bye
xNoReligionx 7 months ago
@xNoReligionx But what if she even heard "His" voice. That would be cool.
Wow. So cool.
Or maybe just batshit fucking nuts.
hairyreasoner 6 months ago
Well yes if you completely strawman evolution it sounds ridiculous. Is this surprising? Do you think your religion would seem anything but ludicrous if WE satirized it?
mrdarkevilme 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Macro Evolution has been observed and proven:
watch?v=1RnygS7opCA&feature=digest
warren52nz 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
Where did I mention the word, "Hell ?"
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
I will see you at the White Throne Judgement, where you will answer for:
1. Everything that you did.
2. Everything that you said.
3. Every thought that you had.
Bring your evolution \ Hindu doctrine book with you, so that we can all have a “Big laugh !!!”
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
I would be greatly embarrassed if I thought that my ancestor was a “Fish” how ridiculous that would be.
The greatest irony of all is that you are actually believing a “Hindu doctrine” the major difference between you and the Hindu, is that you do not, (as far as I know) believe in reincarnation.
You reject the word of God, and then you promote a Hindu doctrine, and you think that is clever.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah "I would be greatly embarrassed if I thought that my ancestor was a “Fish”
Well time to be greatly embarrassed then. It's a fact!
But you should be MORE embarrassed denying Evolution! It's the cornerstone of modern Biology and was proven over 40 years ago. If Evolution wasn't right, then nothing would work. We wouldn't need new antibiotics all the time, everything would have died out in the first ice age and life would still be a bunch of amino acids floating around in the sea.
warren52nz 8 months ago
@warren52nz
You are believing a “Hindu doctrine”
Evil - ution is absolute nonsense.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah "Evil - ution is absolute nonsense."
First of all, there's nothing Evil about Science. Science is a search for truth without bias.
And if you think Evolution is nonsense then it shouldn't be very hard to write a paper about why it's wrong and submit it to a Scientific journal for peer review. You think in 150 years no one's tried to disprove it? Of course they have and it's bullet proof! Saying you don't believe it just indicates brainwashing and a lack of education.
warren52nz 8 months ago
@warren52nz
I have posted statements from “Top evolutionists” who openly state that evolution is a “False science.”
There are many learned men who flatly reject the nonsense of evolution.......
"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of IMAGINATION."
Professor Fleischmann, a modern zoologist.
I repeat, "IMAGINATION."
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah WOW! You've got this delusion disease worse than most. Evolution is 100% FACT!
Post some of your references.
warren52nz 8 months ago
@warren52nz
"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone."
"The evidence from paleontology is for discontinuity; only by FAITH and IMAGINATION is there continuity of variation."
Dr. Louis T. Moore, Professor of Paleontology, Princeton University, an evolutionist.
Did you read what the evoluitionist said, "Faith and imagination."
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah How about posting a reference for a paper that was written more recently than 85 years ago?
warren52nz 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah How can you be a "top Evolutionist" if you don't believe in Evolution?
See how easy debunking you is???
8^D
warren52nz 8 months ago
@warren52nz
You have fallen into the trap of believing that as a man teaches “X” that he must therefore believe “X” this is NOT always the case.
This quote is from a staunch evolutionist::
“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on FAITH alone, exactly the same sort of FAITH which it is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion.”
Louis Trenchard More, The Dogma of Evolution (1925).
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
Do you believe that an Ant evolved from a fish ? If you do, you need to have a talk with yourself.
Do you believe that a spider evolved from a fish ? Again, if you do you need to have a talk with yourself.
Who gave the spider the insinct to spin a web ?
You are following a false science.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
“Every seed produces of it`s own kind”
It really is this simple......
Elephants produce elephants.
Crocodiles produce crocodiles.
Mice produce mice.
Ants produce ants.
Zebras produce zebras.
....and on and on and on, and they always did.
You could NOT make is easier than that !!!!
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
Oh my god... SOOO much fail in this description of evolution.
sk8erBG 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
You are welcome to “Your opinion” however, you must keep in mind that it is only, “Your opinion.”
Again, you told by an evolutionist that it is a false belief......
"In spite of the examples, it remains true (as every paleontologist knows) that most new species, genera and families appear in the record suddenly, and are not led up to by known, gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences."
George Gaylord Simpson, Harvard high priest of evolution.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
Even one of the top evolutionists doesn`t believe that nonsense, so why do you ?
“It results from this expose that the theory of evolution is impossible.....Evolution is a sort of dogma in which the priests no longer believe, but they maintain for their people.”
Dr. Paul Lemoine, an evolutionist.
As he said, "A sort of Dogma". you must be one of the people for whom they maintain the dogma.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
Yes, indeed, you do believe that your ancestor was a “Fish.”
As I am “A son of God” and Adam was the original “Son of God” I am a descendant of Adam.
Yes, the woman was taken out of the man, the word “Woman” means “Taken out of man.”
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
Use whatever terminology you wish, you do believe that your ancestor was a "Fish"
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
As you believe in evolution, you must believe that your ancestor was a “Fish” you can call that science, I call it “Nonsense.”
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
This is one of my favourites.......
Part One.
What One Famous Scientist Said About Evolution.....
"One morning I woke up and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this evolution stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it.
That's quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled so long. Either there was something wrong with me or there was something wrong with evolutionary theory.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah
Part Two.
Naturally, I know there is nothing wrong with me.
The question is: Can you tell me anything you KNOW about Evolution? Any one thing? Any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah
Part Three.
I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of Evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time, and eventually one person said, “I do know one thing - it ought not to be taught in high school.”
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah
Part Four.
Part of a keynote address given at the American Museum of Natural History by Dr Colin Patterson (Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London) in 1981. Unpublished transcript.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
What transitional forms ?????
"As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of being, as we see them, well defined species?"
H. Enoch.
Evolution or Creation, (1966), p. 139.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
Charles Darwin also stated:
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distance, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@DataJackOne
You state, “We see transitional fossils all the time, the world abounds with them.”
On the contrary, even evolutionists themselves do NOT agree which is and which is not a “Transitional form,” this, then is NOT a science, rather it is a case of “Personal choice.”
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
*YAWN* Read a fucking science book.
LondonIrishRover 8 months ago
You'd get your answers if you'd read a science book.
evelsteev 8 months ago
Just another blatant misrepresentation of science by people who are either ignorant of it or are willfully lying. JustATruthSeeker you should be ashamed both for lying and weakening the position of religious individuals through dishonesty.
wkrepelin 8 months ago
I wonder if this girl is pissed for all that stupid shit you made her say......I mean your to embarrassed to attach your face to it. rightly so.....I especially like the part where she asked ,if everything came from nothing where did nothing come from?
yourfullofsheite 8 months ago
This is SO dumb and SO boring! Every single one of those parroted creationist questions have been answered thousands of times on YouTube.: (
winterstellar 9 months ago
It's quite the coincidence that the people who deny evolution have no idea how it works.
Ryan1468 10 months ago
yawn. poke me when something interesting turns up...
Homoloquenslibidinus 10 months ago
In the final analysis, Charles Darwin did NOT believe that any species become another species:
“When we descend to details, we cannot prove that no one species has changed. That is, we cannot prove that a single species has changed.” “Not one change of species into another is on record. We cannot prove that a single species has been changed into another.”
Charles Darwin.
My Life and Letters.
EndtimeElijah 10 months ago
@EndtimeElijah More creationist lies.
Now, what does the very next paragraph says?
Liar.
johnycannuk 8 months ago
@johnycannuk
Some more from Charles Darwin:
Charles Darwin states that there are NO transitional links.
The distinctions of specific forms and their not being blended together by innumerable transitional links is a very obvious difficulty.
Charles Darwin,
The Origin of Species, (6th ed., 1927), p. 322.
EndtimeElijah 8 months ago
@EndtimeElijah Again, you dishonest twat, read the very next paragraph....
Oh my, you don't even own a copy of the book do you? You are cutting and pasting this from Kent Hovind.
In the 150 years since this was written innumerable transitional fossils have been found. So what Darwin wrote in 1859 might be a tad out of date
(ps Archeopteryx was discovered 5 years after that was written...)
johnycannuk 8 months ago
You say microevolution is possible because scientists have witnessed it, and then you go off and say macroevolution isnnt possible because we havent witnessed it? All macroevolution is, is microevolution on a grander scale.
carlsm95 11 months ago
I don't need to see a video of someone who is so SCARED of public opinion and disables ratings. You are a coward. And this video sucks.
marco171180 11 months ago 15
@marco171180 indeed
legolasgreenleaff 6 months ago 6
You do know that Cosmology and Biology are diffrent sciences right?
wowamonn 11 months ago
the evolution of cosmology
1SavageDragon1 11 months ago
This is either a poe or one of the most willfully ignorant people ever
bantam700 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1. Something cannot come from nothing, but your God is just as something as anything else. Matter can be as eternal as your God.
2. Evolution did not CREATE life. It altered life to fit into many environments. Abiogenesis created life.
3. Crick was many years before our time and did not have our present knowledge, the same way the Catholic church had no knowledge the current priests would be child molesters.
4. Some species of fish adapted to partial life on land. See lungfish and mudskipper.
MunkyDrag0n 1 year ago
this is a joke right?
Hemmersfield1 1 year ago
Dishonest rating disabling coward....
BalloonDeflator 1 year ago 17
HAHAHA!!! HILARIOUS. Thank you
osr0 1 year ago
If you believe that evolution should show that one species evolved into a completely different one, the first cells "learned" to divide, and that aquatic creatures just "decided" to move on to land..... you have no idea how evolution works. If you really want to know how it works. Go to find a college near you that has a professor with a degree in biology and have them explain it to you. Then you can come back here and try and refute evolution.
Ondrix 1 year ago 2
JustATwatCuntHeadUpJebusBumHole
Rockster969 1 year ago
Wow, if anybody should watch this video as an attempt to learn something, it should be to learn how to use a Straw man fallacy. Good job on that! Otherwise, this video just represents how certain extreme religious nuts such as yourself will oppose something that they know nothing about. The fish "decided" to leave water? Oh man. That says it all. Open up a book other than the Bible sometime, and educate yourself before refuting something so vehemently and ignorantly.
KiwisWorld11 1 year ago
@KiwisWorld11 Seems like you know a lot about the theory of evolution. Not trying to be sarcastic here, but if you enlighten me as to the scientific reason/evidence for an aquatic organism's reasoning for going to land? I've studied evolution and have learned tremendous amounts, though I do know that there are few holes in it here and there.
iamspid3rman 1 year ago
Evolution has been seen over and over. I hope this is a joke.
This is why we need more schools.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
Pure ignorance, I can think of many transitional forms. Also I bet that the atheists watching this are the only ones who know anything about palaeontology.
Aspongeinmauve 1 year ago
This is the weirdest video I have ever seen on youtube. Why the fuck did you choose to have that girl give us a survey of evolutionary theory with a robot voice?
DrWinstonRelthford 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh my GOD!! Get your feet off that couch!!
bradtgradytube 1 year ago
Oh my GOD!! Get you feet off that couch!!
bradtgradytube 1 year ago
Wow, lots of simplifications.
truevoiceofsanity 1 year ago
that is scary...
inoout 1 year ago
Yeah man, if people come from monkeys, why are there still monkeys!? Huh? Like, if dogs came from wolves... THERE should be no wolves man~!
ksniveegirl 1 year ago
@ksniveegirl Agreed. If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans
TheKilgoretrout 9 months ago
Oh, by the way, nice democracy there Dorothy. Open voting for one positive vote, and claim that 100% approval crown beloved of the religious right. You should be ashamed of the gross misrepresentation of evolutionary and abiogenesis theory you have cobbled together and presented here. Aren't Christians meant to tell the truth? I thought there was a commandment about that.
HydrogenAlpha 1 year ago
The silly bint on the couch should call herself Dorothy, and take a trip with the straw men she just created and go ask Oz for a brain.
HydrogenAlpha 1 year ago 2
@HydrogenAlpha That's pretty hysterical.
DrWinstonRelthford 1 year ago
This video is a classic strawman. You don't understand evolution, or can't refute it, so you make up some crazy assertions and call THAT evolution, so that you can refute that. This is what happens when anybody can say anything. I'm ALMOST inclined to say fuck free speech in favor of some kind of bullshit suppression control so that people like you will stop lying to the youth.
DarkMatter2525 1 year ago 2
This makes no sense. I'm not even going to argue with some one that's this stubborn.
HardheadzNL 1 year ago
This video made NO SENSE!
Loustrikesagain 1 year ago
I heard "aliens" then turned it off
JADSKA 1 year ago
The Sun shrinks 5 feet per hour. Fact.
11 million years ago the Sun would touch the Earth. Fact.
WTU208 1 year ago
@WTU208 You're wrong in assuming the sun always is and always has been shrinking .
Research the Helmholtz (or Kelvin-Helmholtz) contraction and neutrino loss. Between 1981-1988 the radius was measured at 695,508 ± 26 km, with no shrinkage at all occurring during this time period. Brown & Christensen-Dalsgaard (1998).
What creationists forget is that the sun produces some neutrinos during fusion and doesn't just use them. Something your creationist friends forgot to consider.
tafftastic 1 year ago
@tafftastic If you really believe that an object can burn without loss of matter, then you will believe anything.
The scientists will say black is white if it proves their thesis. They are all in the same lodge and have no moral fibre or scruples whatsoever. They waste billions on things like the hadron collider failing to prove the big bang.
WTU208 1 year ago
@WTU208 I didn't say a thing about loss of matter.
Einstein's famous equation, E=mc2 says that mass is proportional to energy, so the mass the mass decays into kinetic energy carried away by the decay products.
And you get a suntan.
tafftastic