@onefourdelta No one who actually UNDERSTANDS evolution would ever make a claim like "we know it doesn't work but we'll use it anyway." The only people who reject the scientifically established process of evolution are the ones who don't understand it or don't want to understand it.
You believe as a 5 year old (Santa Clause) you no understanding of the scientific method and/ or phraseology, and expect me to believe that you hold a degree in one of the scientific disciplines. Ok?? Then you break the first rule of debate, NEVER flaunt degrees or education. It brings nothing to your case and makes you look like a self-important ass, but since you brought up the subject my education allows me to add three letters after my name.
You couldn't prove him false, if you could you would point out the mistakes, instead you use common evolutionism tactics of belittling and not showing any facts....well done. You show the world how much faith in nothing it takes to be an evolutionist.
@apathy7170 All a reply like this shows is your ignorance. To be fair I understand that you must follow a poorly written book that instills a fear of critical thinking and knowledge. I recommend before you open your mouth please open a book. First try a dictionary and look up the definition of “theory” in relation to science.. At this point you stand at a cross roads you can either remain silent, and have everyone think that you are an idiot, or you can open your mouth again and remove ALL doubt
I must say that you do not understand the difference between an hypothesis and a theory, you really should study a bit more. I have read more peer reviews against my stance than for, and attended a myriad of peer seminars and lectures. You may believe that evolution has any truth to it...but the disciplines do not agree, and they refer to each other as if the other discipline has the answers. Believe as you will, in your own myopic ignorance. Enjoy it.
@apathy7170Furthermore if you indeed do hold that degree it is unimaginable that after the years of work and expense decanted to obtaining a degree that you would support people like this guy and Kent Hovind who play dress up to and call them selves “professor and or Doctor”. They have proven them selves to be liars and thieves but yet you support them. Please explain how you as an "educated" individual can justify supporting such outright deception. Wouldn't your god disapprove?
@apathy7170 Furthermore if you indeed do hold that degree it is unimaginable that after the years of work and expense decanted to obtaining a degree that you would support people like this guy and Kent Hovind who play dress up and call them selves “professor and or Doctor”. They have proven them selves to be liars and thieves but yet you support them. Nice values your religion instills in its followers.
@apathy7170You base your life around a laughable fairy-tail but you say I am the one that is ignorant? LOL!!! You did a decent job using grownup words in your last response but still seem unable to understand the word theory. t would seem you have the ability to use a dictionary so try this look up "critical thinking". Apply that concept to your religion and see what happens or choose remaine a JOKE along with most of the evangelical brainwashed sheep in this world.
You need to understand science better. I have degrees from secular universities in science....you are believing a lie, a lie based on faith not fact or science. Trying to make any of the disciplines of science agree from the singularity to biogenesis to gradualism or punctuated equilibrium...there are no viable mechanisms of change. Cosmology, chemically, geologically, biologically; evolutionism fails in each discipline. Creationism explains what we see much more accurately.
@apathy7170You believe as a 5 year old (Santa Clause) you no understanding of the scientific method and/ or phraseology, and expect me to believe that you hold a degree in one of the scientific disciplines. Ok?? Then you break the first rule of debate, NEVER flaunt degrees or education. It brings nothing to your case and makes you look like a self-important ass, but since you brought up the subject my education allows me to add three letters after my name. Please stick to the question.
These are excellent videos, that show how easily falsifiable, completely irrational and mathematically incalculable the faith of evolutionism is and how it relies on faulty and false methodologies and reasoning.
Has anyone found ANY scientific credentials for this so called "expert"? Also please research his "findings" for yourself. Genuine science is very clear in how ALL this is explained by various straightforward logical methodologies.
Science cannot explain any of it...it is theory and conjecture. No one can prove the past, it is all theory. Only a blind person would follow the evolutionists lie and conform to their faith...which does not use science. Science must be testable and demonstrable, evolutionism does not meet those requirements not can it.
For Christians, the bible is a software license, just scroll down and don't read it and just click I agree. They have no idea what the fuck is in that fucking book. Its full of crazy people who think god is coming to save the world. LMFAO
You're an idiot, MR Juby. I just watch LithodidMan rip your crap to shreds. Aboriginal Pygmies? As an Australian, I find your lack of knowledge of our original inhabitants insulting and pathetic.
Myths have a basis in reality, so medusa has some fact to the story? Thor has some basis in fact. One thing I will say is that the virgin birth and mesia is a stolen myth from older religions like Horis and the hundreds of other myths that predate the Jesus myth. The jews stold myth to create the stories of the OT and the Christians stole and built on those plagiarized myths to give us eventualy the bastardized version we see today. What a load of shit. JUST SAY NO TO GOD
Ian Juby, a fellow-traveler of Kent Hovind! An authority on ignorance, superstition, and denial of reality. Anyone who believes any of his prposterous spew is not only an utter fool, but a stupid one at that...Juby is a good example of the Dunning-Kruger Syndrome in action...a person so inept he is incapable of recognizing he is inept.
@edteach2u~ As a practising non-philatelist of many decades myself, I understand completely! I do know a guy who just recently took up stamp collecting; I guess that makes him a Johnny-come-philately !!! HAR HAR!! = ; > }
@edteach2u Hey, don't quibble with me. Atheists went to court and won. You see how they are? They can make an arguement for anything. They wanted religious status and argued enough in court to convince a jury. It is a religion. a false one I might add. So someone is lying here. All Atheist do is lie, even to themselves.
@easymoney4ever Idiot, if Atheism is a religion than not collecting stamps is a hobby. You have yet to give any empirical evidence for god, any god. Your as dumb as they come jesus boy.
@Eaglewing17 Atheism is not a beliefe system. It is a conclusion based on facts and the lack of evidence of the positive or proof for a god. If it were a religion based on your sophmoric conclusion than not beleiving the moon is made of green cheese is a religion. You have a very poor grasp of reality.
Wow! It's like Galileo against the Church all over again! Why do they keep making fools of themselves? It's sad, pathetic and God would be ashamed to have them as representatives of his greatness. Don't they know the origins of the book they get this stuff from?
i was wondering how you could even use niagra falls to date the earth. it was not made at the start we had pangia and sutch i would think that all that this dates is the age of niagra falls. and maby not even that becuase if it started as a smaller or larger river it would have a variable erosion rate.
I love the retarded christian statement you came from a rock hahahahaha ... wait a minute your Holy Babble said you was made from dirt???? and gawd made everything from nothing, space was void of anything. where did it get all the stuff to make the entire univers if it came from a void??????????????
Why is it that both cannot be discussed with finger pointing. Both sides point fingers and call names. Basically acting like morons on both sides of the argument. When someone can actually speak with sense, and stop acting like 4 year olds I will listen.
I love it when Creationists talk about Evolution. It shows their lack of knowledge about Evolutionary Biology and atheism. On a side note: don't watch this, he's a complete moron using the same arguments all creationists use.
What "forces" are they? If they do not direct, then they are random chance "forces". You cannot have it both ways. You said it was not chance, but "forces"... what? guided it? or not... if not, then random. Selection is "stasis" not mutational. I cannot believe that you r using such silly arguments. Yes, I have science degrees & certs; do you? Shall we get into genome transposons, genetic drift, stratigraphy, heavier elements, or perhaps reproduction, or biopoiesis? or...?
I'm sorry did you say "THE FORCE THAT SELECTS THEM"? What force is that?Nature is full of random variables which nature cannot control, the fittest might not have warmth or food or a mate...etc. Oh, but the "Force" of nature controls that! Sounds like that nature is a thinking, rational, foresight seeing entity, mmm? can't get past that, no evolutionist is able too. Sorry but non life is non life, it cannot do any other, and protein/nucleotide chance is not even calculable.
Not only have I heard of them, I have studied them at secular universities. I know all of these arguments, that is why they prove creation. And an open or closed system is ridiculous; study it. We believe things to be true in a closed system, theoretically; but we have only seen them in an open system and they hold absolutely true in that open system. Also, just because our galaxy is theoretically open it lies within a closed universe which again refutes the argument.
It is ignorant of you to make a statement that I do not know natural laws, the laws that the universe obeys are quite well known, rational and obvious. The problem lies in two areas 1, Evolutionism must defy natural laws and what we observe today. 2. You seem to feel that instead of a valid argument you can use a common evolutionists' tool; ridicule. Just try to belittle an opponent when you do not have an argument and hope they back down. Neither is scholarly or rational.
Oh, yes evolutionism is random, why do we have order and symmetry and non chaotic laws controlling all life and planetary issues. And how did a hyrax become a sea lion, slight modifications? Darwin had to remove his bear to whale hypothesis because even evolutionists couldn't believe that one. Did you know that certain publications of "Origin of Species" have parts left in or out?
Excuse me? Just because immaterial laws that all matter obeys and were set in place before matter existed, that is just random? That is a non sequitur. Besides, I guess that nothing created natural laws outside of the natural world nothing controls, because nothing is a thinking being. Oh, wait, that is what non directive, random chance, mutated evolution believes. Oh, what beneficial mutations do we see?, and if bacterial why so environmentally static?
If making a statement that I am ignorant on evolutionism, speciation, cosmic, stellar, biological, macro...etc., makes you feel better go ahead, albeit how untrue. Perhaps you should study a little probability theory at the atomic level, the genome level, the stellar level and the geological level, then see how the little theory of slight modifications over time holds up. P.S. Speciation is within a species, not evolution, again, not evolution. Also, it is genome loss not gain.
Not at all, biology does not by any means need evolution, it stands on it's own. Mutations within the genome is analogous to design not to beneficial mutational advancement over time. We do not see fruit flies or bacterial with it being unicellular so reproductively advantageous being anything but what it has always been. With asexual reproductive rates and capacities of bacterium that should be the most evolved organism in the universe.
Unifying truth? Define gravity, how does it exist? Define how the stars formed when we have never seen 1 form, ever! Think of this, the Laws of the Universe had to be set in place outside of the universe for them to be obeyed. The laws affect matter but are not material themselves, how can that be? How does all material obey non material laws and the laws had to be in place before the material, hmm? Why would we have any uniformity if evo and random non directed events occurred?
Speciation is micro evolution or variation within a genus, that is not macro evolution and evolutionism must have entirely new genus' forming, not just variation within the genome of a species.
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating.
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating.
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating. (cont)
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating.
Biology. yes that I believe is helpful, evolutionary biology, no. That is farcical, I have several biologist colleagues and we all agree that biology is amazing and is the building blocks of life, but it is not evolutionary it is created and done miraculously.Why we study it to be evolutionary is strange, when you study and say; oh! this just randomly occurred you have to slap yourself and say, huh! who are they kidding, the intricacies are phenomenal and designed incredibly,
@ryanfard: You're a molecular researcher who can't spell "variance" - a word that would of necessity appear in almost everything molecular researchers read and write? Hmmmm....
You said that you use the "fact of evolutionary biology" in your studies. Of course, tbh macroevolution isn't harnassed in this field, but intelligently designed and guided mutations on the molecular level are utilized - microevolution in other words.
Is there a fact in this video presentation you can refute?
There is none so blind as he that will not see, that is you, with your worldly blinders of lies on. Evolutionism is a false consensual but not empirical hypothesis, that has failed.
In 2 sentences amaiDT has done a tremendous honor to all of us with his stunningly profound critique. He has wisdom far beyond the sages. He is an authority onto himself. Listen to him - you cannot ignore the endless facts he has presented, facts that cannot be refuted!
Creation is right, but it should be taught the way it really happened. God blew his bad breath(no toothpaste yet) over a clump of mud and, voila, it came alive and upright and all was well. Question remains, did Adam have a penis ? Because Eve was only created when Adam felt lonely and complained to god about it. Suppose god had given Adam a computer, and he had never felt lonely again, what would have happened. ? I leave this question for the theologians.
@JoeBible Talking snakes, global floods, men living in fish bellys, and god giving hemroids to citys, jesus cursing trees for not producing figs and men burning thier children for god giving them victorys, great religion, it is a shit religion to a evil god. Fuck you and fuck your sick fuck god. and fuck jesus.
@edteach2u (I just saw this) you are an embarrassment. I'm an Atheist. My user-name is a joke. Do your homework before you spew your vitriol. You make the rest of us look bad.
@JoeBible You are as much of an Atheist as Pat Roberson. If you want to make a point make a point and quit Whining about others. My vitriol is based on fact. I you were really an Atheist you would rant against the vitriol coming from the mind numb idiots who do not know or deny the geologic column that shows there never was a global flood, or that Trex walked the earth with man and Noah rode a triceratops. If you want to see vitriol here it is, go fuck your self in the most expeditious way.
@JoeBible Alien creation is a copout because where did the aliens come from, but where did your fucked up god come from? Its the same copout fat fuck.
@Bristecom There is no evidence that god exists, no evidence that a higher power exists and this is an attempt to twist the real evidence of geology that clearly points to a world the evolved on its own. And even if there were evidence that god existed what god? The Jesus myth is nothing but a take of the Jewish religion that clearly stole most of its content from older religions like the Horus virgins birth that is much older than the jewish one. Its a myth, sheep herders explained the world
@edteach2u Watch the rest of the 12 hour long series. He presents PLENTY of evidence that seems falsify an old earth and verify a young earth. And no, the stories were not stolen; the reason they are all similar is because they are all based on the same history. But you can believe what you want. Nobody is trying to convert you. This just points out the fatal flaws with the evolutoinary theory and shows off significant evidence that suggests the bible is accurate. :)
@Bristecom The time line for stories like Horus is much older then athe Jewish myth, the Chinese have writen documentation of their culture that goes back over 12k years, the fossile evidence where simple life is on the bottom strata and more comples life is increasing the higher in the stratua you go all show and support evolution. There is no support for god or the bible account of talking snakes. If you want to believe that shit its up to you, You can believe in green men from mars also.
@edteach2u Yes, the stories were written about Horus before the books of the bible. But that doesn't nullify what the bible says. In fact, the bible talks about the fallen angels which these people worshiped as gods. The stories in the bible explain the other stories quite well. And again, I'm not going to talk about geology here because he talks about them in later parts of this series. I recommend you watch the rest of this to get the answers.
@Bristecom There are no answers here, this idiot twists facts to try to make them fit some 2k year old book that was put togeather by the coucil of Nicea and the bishops of Constintine, He is one of a very few so called geologists that try to spin the facts to support a 6k year old earth. Fossils from extinct plants and animals that existed before man and you gulp it down and ask for more because the "Jesus is coming" myth give you a warm feeling of not having to worry about tomrrow. Its Shit.
@Bristecom I never said I know everything, but it does not take that to know that talking snakes is just stupid. The eividence is on the side of science not the pseudo science nonsense crap this idiot is trying to spin. He would be laughed out of any respictable science lecture hall. Talking gibberish and impression those who want to believe at any cost is not a reflection on how this guy has it right, its a reflection on how stupid Christians and all religions are. God is only pretend get it?
@edteach2u Understand that he is not talking about the "science of talking snakes" here. Miracles that happened in the bible showed all those that witnessed that God was really God and thru him, all things are possible. That's why they were special and called miracles. Here he is simply going over actual observable evidence from today. His evidence is credible and you can do your own research to verify it (as I have). And he is also open to questions if you doubt anything. Keep watching please!!
@Bristecom I did watch and any second year geology student can destroy him. He is the UFO/9-11 consperiacy nut of geology and people like you how desperatly want to believe in talking snakes and men living in fish for three days will gulp down any kool aid to try to reinforce your factless beliefe system. God is not real and is only pretend.
@Bristecom Like any amount of evidence could dislodge the idea in you that this guy in the sky loves everyone so much that he wants them to live in kaos just to porve they are willing to believe and love a dead beat dad. Your emotional feeling you get from this unfounded beleif is most likely to strong to be over come by any reason. There is no evidence for god any god. I can not prove he does not exist but you can not prove there is not a tea pot orbiting the sun.
@LegendarySkyKing By that statment it makes it clear you have never studied anything more than the religion your mom and dad gave you. Even if you jump the canyon and say OK there is a supreme being, What one? Your YHWH the jew god, or the gods that came before that the Jews stole their beliefs from? Or Alah? Or Vishneu? You believe because it is a religion that is familiar to you. There is no evidence that any god created anything. And this video trys to prove the earth is only 6k YO? FUCK
@edteach2u Uh, You seem to ignore 30 years of archaeological advancement. Hebrew is the oldest. Remember the 10 thousand year old pyramids? The Atheist lie was debunked as usual. The age is now at 35 hundred and declining. Funny how you guys tell us about our ignorance, but all the news about The bogus ages seems to linger before they are forced to let go the old lies. To be acting like a foul mouthed child, makes you look ignorant and hateful. No one should believe you are being sincere.
@easymoney4ever The pyramids were built some 5200 Years ago or 3200 BCE. The geological recored does not lie and it shows exactly what Darwin predicted, that life would start out simple working to more complex forms. If you christians had the truth you would not work so fucking hard to bend facts to try to cram them so as to fit bible mythology.
@jehovah1975 Bible is history. You are behind the latest news my man. Atheists need the Bible now to find the places in the Bible, so they have a better chance and getting their 15 minutes.. But is a myth, in your dogmatic view.
@easymoney4ever What a load of crap. Its people like you who want to find any small thing to try to support the bibe. The fact is that just because troy was found does not mean that Medusa lived and turned people to stone. So to if a city exists in the bible does not mean that Jesus walked on water. The bible is full of myth and contradictions, people like Jephthah sacraficing his daughter for god and a lot of other sick shit that god seems to love. This god of yours is a sick fuck.
@jehovah1975 Hmm, insulting your creator without actually knowing he is not there. We all know the romans were lyers. It's been proven. The hebrews writings are verified. You have been convinced by ideological liars to deny your own history. I don't get angry when chlidren think I don't know what I am talking about. I tell them they will see for themselves. That says a lot about how you are my man.
@jehovah1975 Sounds like you have nothing to say. Myth? Even if it is. The path of genocide the Atjeists leave is beyond counting now. Exterminators of anyone not with the right mind. The most evil religion the world has ever know. Atheism is evil and it makes its believers evil. Just look at the posts. Atheists are mean spirited name callers.
@easymoney4ever Typical Christian full of shit and short of facts. If it don't fit into the myth of the bible you put your head in the sand and go LALALALA I cant hear you.
@easymoney4ever As far as foul mouthed child, fuck is only a word. If you are not a big enough person to look past a word and argue against the argument than that just further shows your ignorance.
@jehovah1975 If I am wrong then why have you reduced your insults in this reply? :) We are all ignorant to the realities of the world. Even you. Now if you ask me something respectfully, i'll reply with an answer. If you curse and act like a craphead, I'll focus on that to show where your philosophy has led you. bad philosophy, bad science.
@easymoney4ever The bad philosophy is yours, as David Hume said, which is more probable, that the whole natural order fo things should be suspened or that a jewish minx should tell a lie? Me things that the jewish minx lied her ass off. LOL
@jehovah1975 The way I see it is like this: Atheism is amoral, lying is a neccessary to convince the ignorant and though they know they can't prove it, are confident it isn't evil because they KNOW what they can't prove. Gees, those climategate e-mails say just that. or believe the hebrew historical account of the world? In my opinion the hebrews have more credibility as we are digging up places in the Bible left and right. The Atheists keep saying trust us we know. Yea right. Climate E-mails.
@easymoney4ever First off the emails are a not a refudiation of Global Climate change, but let’s say the are in fact what you claim. By that stupid logic I could claim that all church leaders and their dogma was garbage because Jimmy Swaggart got his knob blown by a hooker or that ted haggard got his knob polished by a boy toys ass hole. Funny how all the Christians are the closet homosexuals or child molesters. LOL.Your logic is ridiculously sophomoric.
@jehovah1975 E-mail were sent and received by a whole lot of people man. And none of them had a problem with it. They all lie cause they have no proof. Hmm but you would be right if you said that about Atheists. Mambla are a bunch of Atheists. I even have seen you people eat human waste. Atheist are amoral by proxy. What are you hiding from the world? I am sure you support their right to make love to children. What about the Atheists keeping score of the under age catholic girls they raped?
@easymoney4ever The ignorant are people like you who do not care what the facts are but only want to believe that talking snakes made a woman made of a rib from a man who was made of mud eat fruit from a tree that gave out knowledge of good and evil. LMFAO anyone who would buy that has a serious lack of brain cells. And then the creator came down as his own son but was the same person and got nailed to a tree to die for the sin of the woman and along the way turned water to wine. LMFAO ROTF.
@jehovah1975 Better than not being able to prove anything and acting like you know everything. Atheists always say they know things they couldn't possibly know. That is why no one is believing them anymore. We got them on camera now. Go ahead folks. search about reducing world populations and listen to these things they say they MUST do. Better a fairytale than an Iron hammer.
Hahaha, I love the explanation of how earth formed. The big bang resulted in a bunch of "molten material" floating around space which eventually compressed and cooled forming earth. Wow, that's some breathtaking ignorance. Miss a few steps, Ian? Like star formation? Star death? You shouldn't give lectures on topics that you don't understand.
He doesn't care, so long as he rakes in the money. I'm really tempted to write a creationist book, fill it with biblical nonsense and Bible verses, and see how much it sells.
@apathy7170 "Goddidit". Expand that to 300+ pages, sell it for $19.99. Who cares about "truth"? Creationists certainly don't; as long as it agrees with their beliefs, the "truth" behind something doesn't matter. Look at all the quote mining that goes on in creationist arguments and you'll see what I mean.
That is the falsehood, it is the evolutions who thru truth out for consensus without empiricism. The believe in evoluitionism is based on lies perpetuated in textbooks of myths that have been proven false or easily disputed or just plain silly. The creationist' enjoy the comfort of not relying on randomness, time and pseudo selective non directed hopeful wishful thinking to deny any accountability to what is obviously the easiest thing for any thinking person to see; if only to look.
@apathy7170 My Biology textbook is full of "myths that have been proven false or easily disputed or just plain silly"? So can you show me the research disproving cell theory, animal physiology, ecology, and germ theory of disease? The rest of your post is pretty much a strawman. Overall, evolution is not random, thanks to natural selection. If this thing that you mention is so obvious, where's the evidence? You can possibly reconvert me on the spot if you show me this "obvious evidence".
Not at all, I have textbooks that still use outright proven lies to promote evolutionism, it uses conjecture and the old adage, "since we can't not find it not to be not true, then it is true". Animal physiology is prove of design, germ theory of disease, that is adaptation with variation, ecology; how do mean? cell theory is a changing science, interesting yes, prove of miraculous design yes, prove of evo, no! If u r unable to see it in all that is, I am sorry. Evidence is everywhere.
@apathy7170 I don't know what textbook you're using, but mine uses relatively up-to-date information to demonstrate that evolution occurs. Animal physiology is evidence for non-design. Creatures are far from being designed; look at a whale's pelvic remnant, or our appendix. "Adaptation with variation" is evolution. Ecology is basically the study of organisms and their relationship with the environment. Everything in cell theory can be shown to have evolved, no creator needed.
@apathy7170 Also, the burden of proof is on you, not me, to show whatever this "thing" is. If you can't even define whatever the heck you're mentioning (God? Velociraptors? Sentient chili peppers?), what good is telling me I can't see it?
"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption . .
The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom. "— *Aldous Huxley, "Confessions of a Professed Atheist,"
@amaiDT You can't make money. That is probably why you are an Atheist. Atheists leech off our systems. The producers are never Atheists. It's incredible. It seems to me Atheism is a symtom of people who hate capitalism, they then become Atheists.
1. Ok, so he explains why evolution is supernatural because "life emerged from a rock". But what isn't supernatural about a good man in the sky creating Earth and life in 6 days and taking a day off so we can have a 7-day week?
2. If Raelians are wrong to believe that aliens created humans because aliens don't have an origin, why does only god's origin NOT need to be justified?
@suinohana "what isn't supernatural about a good man in the sky creating Earth"
Theists don't have a problem with the supernatural, only materialists do. And God is not a "good man in the sky", he is an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent being who is eternal. If you're going to build a strawman, at least build one that looks a LITTLE bit like the model you attempt to ridicule.
Ok, I admit, I'm guilty of commenting without having watched the whole video, but he seems to contradict himself 3 times within the first 5 minutes or so. Maybe he explains them later... but he's off to a bad start. So enlighten me on the matter: (the rest will follow)
You should read the other side of the argument, and maybe take a college Bio course. You'll find out that almost every creationist like this Ian guy is essentially lying to you.
If you did study the sciences at a college level, as I have you would see that it is full of holes and secular evolutionary biology, astronomy, anthropology and oceanography are very misguided and blind to what we see happening around us everyday, they scream it took millions of years, when the same event occurs in a couple of days right before their eyes. College professors are the same people who sat next to you in grade school, don't give them so much credit.
@apathy7170 A fish net is full of holes, but it works just fine. Ask the fish :) In all seriousness, what holes are you talking about? What events took place in a couple of days, that scientists say took millions of years?
@apathy7170 Rapid deposition has quite a few meanings, from creationists trying to crap all over geology and paleontology, to some molecular biology processes, to even some chemical processes. So I don't try and talk about something you didn't refer to in the first place, care to enlighten me as to which one you're talking about? Thank you.
I was referring to geology in that statement. As you might know the evo's have a new rise of Neo Catastrophists', quite interesting really. It is because not only do we see it, it explains stratigraphy and fossilization better. We have never seen millions of years deposition but we have seen rapid and isn't that better science? Of course it is! We have never seen macro-evolution, stellar or chemical, we have seen the opposite, which science is better what we see or what is just hoped 4.
@apathy7170 It's not even science; I can't find it in any scientific literature. We have seen macro-evolution: look up the London Underground mosquito. That's a new species. Chemicals "evolve" all the time; that's what nuclear fusion and fission are :) Stellar evolution is too slow to watch, but one can deduce it quite easily. Your last question presents a false dichotomy, since there's only one type of science (in a broad meaning), which involves using the scientific method.
The underground mosquito is your "proof" of macro evolution? Is it not a mosquito? a type which by the way is found all over the world, not just Enlgand. Its' allele frequencies are more proof that it is just a variation within its' genus. That is micro evolution, just like the peppered moth, it had dark and light wings before the industrial revolution and still had them after. Many animals adapt to environments marine being most profound, nothing new, definitely no macro-evolution
@apathy7170 Now you're moving the goal post, a typical dishonest creationist tactic. Macroevolution basically means changes AT or ABOVE the species level, which is what this mosquito did. The peppered moth is a fine example of microevolution, because at the end of the experiment, the moths could still interbreed, and thus they're still considered the same species. If you want, I can give you some papers showing genus evolution, but not if you're gonna move the goal post again.
I have done no such thing. Macro evolution is a change from one genus to another genus, that is no speciation, do not accuse me of trying to sideswipe the issue or lying or not understanding evolution. You do not like to be hit with the truth that we do not see macro evolution so you try to shift blame to honest creationists' who say "show me" and you can't so you say we do not understand the meaning.
@apathy7170 Alright, I'll play with your definitions then, although you should get your definitions right: macroevolution can be specifically one species changing into two distinct populations, also called speciation. We actually have a rather clear view of how species have changed not only at the genus level, but the class level. I'll send you a link via PM, I encourage you to look at it, read it thoroughly, and tell me what you think.
@apathy7170 Well, I disagree with your definitions, but that's fine. As I said, I'll use your definitions, I have no problem doing so. Here's a video showing the transition from fish to amphibians, as well as amphibians to reptiles. watch?v=O4GdZOlPrX8 You seem like a pretty reasonable person, so I urge to to look at the things I've presented with an open mind :)
There is only microevolution in this sense. The steps are always small, a dog will always give birth to a (slightly different) dog. Only over many generations, and when a population is divided, this leads to individuals so different, that it's obvious for us.
Think about it as a rainbow gradient on your computer screen. An adjacent pixel of a given color always has basically the same color.
But in the end you go blue blue to red, with micro steps.
What a waste of time.. I'll let God deal with you from here. All knees shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord. That includes you, my friend.
Perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark; that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleontology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about, but that is heresy.Dr. David Pilbeam, Professor of Anthropology at Yale University American Scientist, , .379, June 78
I wonder if everything was bigger in the past - i.e. a small dragon fly was five feet - how big was pre-flood man? I've heard of 16 tall people being dug up! How about if Noah's cubit was bigger by a factor of ten - instead of looking for an ark of 135m - we should be looking for an ark of 1.5 km!!! - Instead of looking on a mountain we should be looking for a boat that is a mountain. I know some will argue that a timber ship can not be this big it will fall apart - but pre-flood timber?
the big bang is not about evolution. Evolution is the changes and adaption of life by natural selection. The creation of new breeds of dogs, is an example of evolution. The mutation of a virus is an example of evolution, get your facts straight. you sound like a man teaching Santa with science.
he easily say about only 2 ways (creation and evolution) whit no poof thats the only right way to look for, and proof that evolution is not right so creation is fact. I dont like that way arguments, it is streechy-way.
Actually @ 8 min, it does not exhaust all other possibilities. It is possible that Aliens evolved, and then genetically manipulated us, thus we would have been created by aliens, while the only evolved creatures would be those around us and the aliens who created us. Would make a good book anyway,, lol.
It seems like these creationists get all their ideas ideas from the same place! lol!
jackofalltrades884 1 month ago in playlist Complete Creation, Second edition
Fantastically informative and presented. Great job Ian.
AndyG792 2 months ago
Time: 7:39-8:28: This point applies to god as well - intellectual cop-out...
---
The amount of sophistry in this video is amazing... Well, blended misrepresentations and truism associations...
MyContext 4 months ago
evo says "we know it dousn't work but we'll keep on using it til we have a better theory"
ok fine but when you make up fake stories to explain things you don't understand we have a word for that. its mythology. by definition.
onefourdelta 6 months ago
Comment removed
Faustaao 6 months ago
@onefourdelta No one who actually UNDERSTANDS evolution would ever make a claim like "we know it doesn't work but we'll use it anyway." The only people who reject the scientifically established process of evolution are the ones who don't understand it or don't want to understand it.
Faustaao 6 months ago
You believe as a 5 year old (Santa Clause) you no understanding of the scientific method and/ or phraseology, and expect me to believe that you hold a degree in one of the scientific disciplines. Ok?? Then you break the first rule of debate, NEVER flaunt degrees or education. It brings nothing to your case and makes you look like a self-important ass, but since you brought up the subject my education allows me to add three letters after my name.
NEGATIONofP 10 months ago
@B2dmfG
You couldn't prove him false, if you could you would point out the mistakes, instead you use common evolutionism tactics of belittling and not showing any facts....well done. You show the world how much faith in nothing it takes to be an evolutionist.
apathy7170 10 months ago 2
@apathy7170 All a reply like this shows is your ignorance. To be fair I understand that you must follow a poorly written book that instills a fear of critical thinking and knowledge. I recommend before you open your mouth please open a book. First try a dictionary and look up the definition of “theory” in relation to science.. At this point you stand at a cross roads you can either remain silent, and have everyone think that you are an idiot, or you can open your mouth again and remove ALL doubt
NEGATIONofP 10 months ago
@NEGATIONofP
I must say that you do not understand the difference between an hypothesis and a theory, you really should study a bit more. I have read more peer reviews against my stance than for, and attended a myriad of peer seminars and lectures. You may believe that evolution has any truth to it...but the disciplines do not agree, and they refer to each other as if the other discipline has the answers. Believe as you will, in your own myopic ignorance. Enjoy it.
apathy7170 10 months ago
@apathy7170Furthermore if you indeed do hold that degree it is unimaginable that after the years of work and expense decanted to obtaining a degree that you would support people like this guy and Kent Hovind who play dress up to and call them selves “professor and or Doctor”. They have proven them selves to be liars and thieves but yet you support them. Please explain how you as an "educated" individual can justify supporting such outright deception. Wouldn't your god disapprove?
NEGATIONofP 10 months ago
@apathy7170 Furthermore if you indeed do hold that degree it is unimaginable that after the years of work and expense decanted to obtaining a degree that you would support people like this guy and Kent Hovind who play dress up and call them selves “professor and or Doctor”. They have proven them selves to be liars and thieves but yet you support them. Nice values your religion instills in its followers.
NEGATIONofP 10 months ago
@apathy7170You base your life around a laughable fairy-tail but you say I am the one that is ignorant? LOL!!! You did a decent job using grownup words in your last response but still seem unable to understand the word theory. t would seem you have the ability to use a dictionary so try this look up "critical thinking". Apply that concept to your religion and see what happens or choose remaine a JOKE along with most of the evangelical brainwashed sheep in this world.
NEGATIONofP 10 months ago
@NEGATIONofP
You need to understand science better. I have degrees from secular universities in science....you are believing a lie, a lie based on faith not fact or science. Trying to make any of the disciplines of science agree from the singularity to biogenesis to gradualism or punctuated equilibrium...there are no viable mechanisms of change. Cosmology, chemically, geologically, biologically; evolutionism fails in each discipline. Creationism explains what we see much more accurately.
apathy7170 10 months ago
@apathy7170You believe as a 5 year old (Santa Clause) you no understanding of the scientific method and/ or phraseology, and expect me to believe that you hold a degree in one of the scientific disciplines. Ok?? Then you break the first rule of debate, NEVER flaunt degrees or education. It brings nothing to your case and makes you look like a self-important ass, but since you brought up the subject my education allows me to add three letters after my name. Please stick to the question.
NEGATIONofP 10 months ago
haha ha hahahaha, haa ha ha!
HA hahahah ha
...oh, wait, this guy's serious???
elguapoooooo 10 months ago
These are excellent videos, that show how easily falsifiable, completely irrational and mathematically incalculable the faith of evolutionism is and how it relies on faulty and false methodologies and reasoning.
apathy7170 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Has anyone found ANY scientific credentials for this so called "expert"? Also please research his "findings" for yourself. Genuine science is very clear in how ALL this is explained by various straightforward logical methodologies.
NEGATIONofP 11 months ago
@NEGATIONofP
Science cannot explain any of it...it is theory and conjecture. No one can prove the past, it is all theory. Only a blind person would follow the evolutionists lie and conform to their faith...which does not use science. Science must be testable and demonstrable, evolutionism does not meet those requirements not can it.
apathy7170 10 months ago
Wow this is horribly bad...
Delinexwow 11 months ago
@Delinexwow i agree...especially the vishnu bit, lolz....
supersymbiotic 2 months ago
Great!!!
xchris1800 11 months ago
He sounds like Kent Hovind LIGHT... The Complete CRAP!!! xD
HerrDerDinge 11 months ago
In Texas and Kentucky, they make their kids watch the Flintstones as a history lesson. See Dino lived with Humans. LMFAO rubes and idiots.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 what? why is yo name jehova? u arn't christian.
Eaglewing17 1 year ago
@Eaglewing17 Thats the dumbest statement ever
ERICBOBCAT 1 year ago
@ERICBOBCAT sorta i guess. but still
Eaglewing17 1 year ago
For Christians, the bible is a software license, just scroll down and don't read it and just click I agree. They have no idea what the fuck is in that fucking book. Its full of crazy people who think god is coming to save the world. LMFAO
jehovah1975 1 year ago
You're an idiot, MR Juby. I just watch LithodidMan rip your crap to shreds. Aboriginal Pygmies? As an Australian, I find your lack of knowledge of our original inhabitants insulting and pathetic.
AuntieDiluvian 1 year ago
Myths have a basis in reality, so medusa has some fact to the story? Thor has some basis in fact. One thing I will say is that the virgin birth and mesia is a stolen myth from older religions like Horis and the hundreds of other myths that predate the Jesus myth. The jews stold myth to create the stories of the OT and the Christians stole and built on those plagiarized myths to give us eventualy the bastardized version we see today. What a load of shit. JUST SAY NO TO GOD
edteach2u 1 year ago
Anyone notice how none of the detractors have any actual facts or specific rebuttals.
havoc092 1 year ago
You know what ...at least the owner of this channel supports free speech.
axe863 1 year ago
Comment removed
axe863 1 year ago
This guy needs to learn elementary level science. This individual's arguments are completely ridiculous.
axe863 1 year ago
I enjoyed the presentation of Creation. Which was held at the Christian Reform Church in Fairview Alberta.
larryskoreyko 1 year ago
Hey all the evolutionists out there try to go to church or actually learn our side of the argument
awesomelyme17 1 year ago
@awesomelyme17
We did. It's stupid and wrong.
bamcis17 1 year ago
Ian Juby, a fellow-traveler of Kent Hovind! An authority on ignorance, superstition, and denial of reality. Anyone who believes any of his prposterous spew is not only an utter fool, but a stupid one at that...Juby is a good example of the Dunning-Kruger Syndrome in action...a person so inept he is incapable of recognizing he is inept.
pontecanis 1 year ago
@pontecanis If atheisum is a religion not collecting stamps is a hobby.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u~ As a practising non-philatelist of many decades myself, I understand completely! I do know a guy who just recently took up stamp collecting; I guess that makes him a Johnny-come-philately !!! HAR HAR!! = ; > }
pontecanis 1 year ago
@edteach2u Hey, don't quibble with me. Atheists went to court and won. You see how they are? They can make an arguement for anything. They wanted religious status and argued enough in court to convince a jury. It is a religion. a false one I might add. So someone is lying here. All Atheist do is lie, even to themselves.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever Idiot, if Atheism is a religion than not collecting stamps is a hobby. You have yet to give any empirical evidence for god, any god. Your as dumb as they come jesus boy.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u a religion is a set of beleifs based on a doctrine. atheism is just that. is that enough empirical evidence?
Eaglewing17 1 year ago
@Eaglewing17 Atheism is not a beliefe system. It is a conclusion based on facts and the lack of evidence of the positive or proof for a god. If it were a religion based on your sophmoric conclusion than not beleiving the moon is made of green cheese is a religion. You have a very poor grasp of reality.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975
you totally rock! xD
HerrDerDinge 11 months ago
Wow! It's like Galileo against the Church all over again! Why do they keep making fools of themselves? It's sad, pathetic and God would be ashamed to have them as representatives of his greatness. Don't they know the origins of the book they get this stuff from?
Killjeser 1 year ago
It's funny to hear otherwise intelligent people try to defend something as stupid as creationism.
tillnow67 1 year ago
i was wondering how you could even use niagra falls to date the earth. it was not made at the start we had pangia and sutch i would think that all that this dates is the age of niagra falls. and maby not even that becuase if it started as a smaller or larger river it would have a variable erosion rate.
stinkpuppyohno 1 year ago
This shit is stupid at best. Fuck, fuck, fuck that shit.
hyperseauton 1 year ago
I love the retarded christian statement you came from a rock hahahahaha ... wait a minute your Holy Babble said you was made from dirt???? and gawd made everything from nothing, space was void of anything. where did it get all the stuff to make the entire univers if it came from a void??????????????
sage0857 1 year ago
@sage0857 Being created from dirt or evolving from a pool of Precambrian sludge...what's the difference?
strangewierding 1 year ago
Why is it that both cannot be discussed with finger pointing. Both sides point fingers and call names. Basically acting like morons on both sides of the argument. When someone can actually speak with sense, and stop acting like 4 year olds I will listen.
carnage70 1 year ago
still 1000 years off your guess
HeshMetalhead 1 year ago
I love it when Creationists talk about Evolution. It shows their lack of knowledge about Evolutionary Biology and atheism. On a side note: don't watch this, he's a complete moron using the same arguments all creationists use.
TheMindMathematical 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheMindMathematical 1 year ago
@ryanfard
What "forces" are they? If they do not direct, then they are random chance "forces". You cannot have it both ways. You said it was not chance, but "forces"... what? guided it? or not... if not, then random. Selection is "stasis" not mutational. I cannot believe that you r using such silly arguments. Yes, I have science degrees & certs; do you? Shall we get into genome transposons, genetic drift, stratigraphy, heavier elements, or perhaps reproduction, or biopoiesis? or...?
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
I'm sorry did you say "THE FORCE THAT SELECTS THEM"? What force is that?Nature is full of random variables which nature cannot control, the fittest might not have warmth or food or a mate...etc. Oh, but the "Force" of nature controls that! Sounds like that nature is a thinking, rational, foresight seeing entity, mmm? can't get past that, no evolutionist is able too. Sorry but non life is non life, it cannot do any other, and protein/nucleotide chance is not even calculable.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Not only have I heard of them, I have studied them at secular universities. I know all of these arguments, that is why they prove creation. And an open or closed system is ridiculous; study it. We believe things to be true in a closed system, theoretically; but we have only seen them in an open system and they hold absolutely true in that open system. Also, just because our galaxy is theoretically open it lies within a closed universe which again refutes the argument.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
It is ignorant of you to make a statement that I do not know natural laws, the laws that the universe obeys are quite well known, rational and obvious. The problem lies in two areas 1, Evolutionism must defy natural laws and what we observe today. 2. You seem to feel that instead of a valid argument you can use a common evolutionists' tool; ridicule. Just try to belittle an opponent when you do not have an argument and hope they back down. Neither is scholarly or rational.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Oh, yes evolutionism is random, why do we have order and symmetry and non chaotic laws controlling all life and planetary issues. And how did a hyrax become a sea lion, slight modifications? Darwin had to remove his bear to whale hypothesis because even evolutionists couldn't believe that one. Did you know that certain publications of "Origin of Species" have parts left in or out?
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Excuse me? Just because immaterial laws that all matter obeys and were set in place before matter existed, that is just random? That is a non sequitur. Besides, I guess that nothing created natural laws outside of the natural world nothing controls, because nothing is a thinking being. Oh, wait, that is what non directive, random chance, mutated evolution believes. Oh, what beneficial mutations do we see?, and if bacterial why so environmentally static?
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
If making a statement that I am ignorant on evolutionism, speciation, cosmic, stellar, biological, macro...etc., makes you feel better go ahead, albeit how untrue. Perhaps you should study a little probability theory at the atomic level, the genome level, the stellar level and the geological level, then see how the little theory of slight modifications over time holds up. P.S. Speciation is within a species, not evolution, again, not evolution. Also, it is genome loss not gain.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Not at all, biology does not by any means need evolution, it stands on it's own. Mutations within the genome is analogous to design not to beneficial mutational advancement over time. We do not see fruit flies or bacterial with it being unicellular so reproductively advantageous being anything but what it has always been. With asexual reproductive rates and capacities of bacterium that should be the most evolved organism in the universe.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Unifying truth? Define gravity, how does it exist? Define how the stars formed when we have never seen 1 form, ever! Think of this, the Laws of the Universe had to be set in place outside of the universe for them to be obeyed. The laws affect matter but are not material themselves, how can that be? How does all material obey non material laws and the laws had to be in place before the material, hmm? Why would we have any uniformity if evo and random non directed events occurred?
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Speciation is micro evolution or variation within a genus, that is not macro evolution and evolutionism must have entirely new genus' forming, not just variation within the genome of a species.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating.
apathy7170 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryanfard
@ryanfard
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating.
apathy7170 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryanfard
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating. (cont)
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
I realize that all things have common features of biology and homology, that alone removes the idea of anything random; the uniformity and symmetry of life sets the limits of chance being affected by time; biological probability theory. Many are poor due to genome replication degeneration, that is correct, if we were evolving they would be improving not degenerating.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
I am proud of my stand for truth, if you are too ignorant to see the glaring obvious facts that right in front of you, I am sorry for you.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard
Biology. yes that I believe is helpful, evolutionary biology, no. That is farcical, I have several biologist colleagues and we all agree that biology is amazing and is the building blocks of life, but it is not evolutionary it is created and done miraculously.Why we study it to be evolutionary is strange, when you study and say; oh! this just randomly occurred you have to slap yourself and say, huh! who are they kidding, the intricacies are phenomenal and designed incredibly,
apathy7170 1 year ago
@ryanfard: You're a molecular researcher who can't spell "variance" - a word that would of necessity appear in almost everything molecular researchers read and write? Hmmmm....
You said that you use the "fact of evolutionary biology" in your studies. Of course, tbh macroevolution isn't harnassed in this field, but intelligently designed and guided mutations on the molecular level are utilized - microevolution in other words.
Is there a fact in this video presentation you can refute?
boan000 1 year ago
@ryanfard
There is none so blind as he that will not see, that is you, with your worldly blinders of lies on. Evolutionism is a false consensual but not empirical hypothesis, that has failed.
apathy7170 1 year ago
In 2 sentences amaiDT has done a tremendous honor to all of us with his stunningly profound critique. He has wisdom far beyond the sages. He is an authority onto himself. Listen to him - you cannot ignore the endless facts he has presented, facts that cannot be refuted!
ushouldbelieve 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Creation is right, but it should be taught the way it really happened. God blew his bad breath(no toothpaste yet) over a clump of mud and, voila, it came alive and upright and all was well. Question remains, did Adam have a penis ? Because Eve was only created when Adam felt lonely and complained to god about it. Suppose god had given Adam a computer, and he had never felt lonely again, what would have happened. ? I leave this question for the theologians.
lizazoon 1 year ago
He even throws in a touch of pascal's wager. How about these people speak at colleges instead of just churches
mbouw21 1 year ago
what a joke
Pinage 2 years ago
I very much enjoyed looking at this video and Mr. Ian Juby brings everything into perspective
sangstar1 2 years ago
This video is mind-numbing. I can't believe I actually watched it.
JoeBible 2 years ago 4
@JoeBible Talking snakes, global floods, men living in fish bellys, and god giving hemroids to citys, jesus cursing trees for not producing figs and men burning thier children for god giving them victorys, great religion, it is a shit religion to a evil god. Fuck you and fuck your sick fuck god. and fuck jesus.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u (I just saw this) you are an embarrassment. I'm an Atheist. My user-name is a joke. Do your homework before you spew your vitriol. You make the rest of us look bad.
JoeBible 1 year ago
@JoeBible You are as much of an Atheist as Pat Roberson. If you want to make a point make a point and quit Whining about others. My vitriol is based on fact. I you were really an Atheist you would rant against the vitriol coming from the mind numb idiots who do not know or deny the geologic column that shows there never was a global flood, or that Trex walked the earth with man and Noah rode a triceratops. If you want to see vitriol here it is, go fuck your self in the most expeditious way.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@JoeBible Alien creation is a copout because where did the aliens come from, but where did your fucked up god come from? Its the same copout fat fuck.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u No it's not. He explains this later in the series. God is very clearly different from aliens.
Bristecom 1 year ago
@Bristecom There is no evidence that god exists, no evidence that a higher power exists and this is an attempt to twist the real evidence of geology that clearly points to a world the evolved on its own. And even if there were evidence that god existed what god? The Jesus myth is nothing but a take of the Jewish religion that clearly stole most of its content from older religions like the Horus virgins birth that is much older than the jewish one. Its a myth, sheep herders explained the world
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Watch the rest of the 12 hour long series. He presents PLENTY of evidence that seems falsify an old earth and verify a young earth. And no, the stories were not stolen; the reason they are all similar is because they are all based on the same history. But you can believe what you want. Nobody is trying to convert you. This just points out the fatal flaws with the evolutoinary theory and shows off significant evidence that suggests the bible is accurate. :)
Bristecom 1 year ago
@Bristecom The time line for stories like Horus is much older then athe Jewish myth, the Chinese have writen documentation of their culture that goes back over 12k years, the fossile evidence where simple life is on the bottom strata and more comples life is increasing the higher in the stratua you go all show and support evolution. There is no support for god or the bible account of talking snakes. If you want to believe that shit its up to you, You can believe in green men from mars also.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Yes, the stories were written about Horus before the books of the bible. But that doesn't nullify what the bible says. In fact, the bible talks about the fallen angels which these people worshiped as gods. The stories in the bible explain the other stories quite well. And again, I'm not going to talk about geology here because he talks about them in later parts of this series. I recommend you watch the rest of this to get the answers.
Bristecom 1 year ago
@Bristecom There are no answers here, this idiot twists facts to try to make them fit some 2k year old book that was put togeather by the coucil of Nicea and the bishops of Constintine, He is one of a very few so called geologists that try to spin the facts to support a 6k year old earth. Fossils from extinct plants and animals that existed before man and you gulp it down and ask for more because the "Jesus is coming" myth give you a warm feeling of not having to worry about tomrrow. Its Shit.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Well it sounds like you already know everything and you've made up your mind about not watching the videos so... whatever.
Bristecom 1 year ago
@Bristecom I never said I know everything, but it does not take that to know that talking snakes is just stupid. The eividence is on the side of science not the pseudo science nonsense crap this idiot is trying to spin. He would be laughed out of any respictable science lecture hall. Talking gibberish and impression those who want to believe at any cost is not a reflection on how this guy has it right, its a reflection on how stupid Christians and all religions are. God is only pretend get it?
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Understand that he is not talking about the "science of talking snakes" here. Miracles that happened in the bible showed all those that witnessed that God was really God and thru him, all things are possible. That's why they were special and called miracles. Here he is simply going over actual observable evidence from today. His evidence is credible and you can do your own research to verify it (as I have). And he is also open to questions if you doubt anything. Keep watching please!!
Bristecom 1 year ago
@Bristecom I did watch and any second year geology student can destroy him. He is the UFO/9-11 consperiacy nut of geology and people like you how desperatly want to believe in talking snakes and men living in fish for three days will gulp down any kool aid to try to reinforce your factless beliefe system. God is not real and is only pretend.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Oh ok... You win. I lose. Congrats.
Bristecom 1 year ago
@Bristecom Like any amount of evidence could dislodge the idea in you that this guy in the sky loves everyone so much that he wants them to live in kaos just to porve they are willing to believe and love a dead beat dad. Your emotional feeling you get from this unfounded beleif is most likely to strong to be over come by any reason. There is no evidence for god any god. I can not prove he does not exist but you can not prove there is not a tea pot orbiting the sun.
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Actually I have a teapot right here. It's on earth which is orbiting the sun. Therefore there is a teapot orbiting the sun.
LegendarySkyKing 1 year ago
@LegendarySkyKing So that makes the tea pot theory true, but the god one is still a myth. LOL
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Myth? Maybe. But I definitely find it more believable than your ad hoc claims and that complexity of creation can result from explosions.
LegendarySkyKing 1 year ago
@LegendarySkyKing By that statment it makes it clear you have never studied anything more than the religion your mom and dad gave you. Even if you jump the canyon and say OK there is a supreme being, What one? Your YHWH the jew god, or the gods that came before that the Jews stole their beliefs from? Or Alah? Or Vishneu? You believe because it is a religion that is familiar to you. There is no evidence that any god created anything. And this video trys to prove the earth is only 6k YO? FUCK
edteach2u 1 year ago
@edteach2u Uh, You seem to ignore 30 years of archaeological advancement. Hebrew is the oldest. Remember the 10 thousand year old pyramids? The Atheist lie was debunked as usual. The age is now at 35 hundred and declining. Funny how you guys tell us about our ignorance, but all the news about The bogus ages seems to linger before they are forced to let go the old lies. To be acting like a foul mouthed child, makes you look ignorant and hateful. No one should believe you are being sincere.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever The pyramids were built some 5200 Years ago or 3200 BCE. The geological recored does not lie and it shows exactly what Darwin predicted, that life would start out simple working to more complex forms. If you christians had the truth you would not work so fucking hard to bend facts to try to cram them so as to fit bible mythology.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 Bible is history. You are behind the latest news my man. Atheists need the Bible now to find the places in the Bible, so they have a better chance and getting their 15 minutes.. But is a myth, in your dogmatic view.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever What a load of crap. Its people like you who want to find any small thing to try to support the bibe. The fact is that just because troy was found does not mean that Medusa lived and turned people to stone. So to if a city exists in the bible does not mean that Jesus walked on water. The bible is full of myth and contradictions, people like Jephthah sacraficing his daughter for god and a lot of other sick shit that god seems to love. This god of yours is a sick fuck.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 Hmm, insulting your creator without actually knowing he is not there. We all know the romans were lyers. It's been proven. The hebrews writings are verified. You have been convinced by ideological liars to deny your own history. I don't get angry when chlidren think I don't know what I am talking about. I tell them they will see for themselves. That says a lot about how you are my man.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever a non existant creator is not my creator, nor yours. Myth is myth and you are gulping down the kool aid.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 Sounds like you have nothing to say. Myth? Even if it is. The path of genocide the Atjeists leave is beyond counting now. Exterminators of anyone not with the right mind. The most evil religion the world has ever know. Atheism is evil and it makes its believers evil. Just look at the posts. Atheists are mean spirited name callers.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever Typical Christian full of shit and short of facts. If it don't fit into the myth of the bible you put your head in the sand and go LALALALA I cant hear you.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever As far as foul mouthed child, fuck is only a word. If you are not a big enough person to look past a word and argue against the argument than that just further shows your ignorance.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 If I am wrong then why have you reduced your insults in this reply? :) We are all ignorant to the realities of the world. Even you. Now if you ask me something respectfully, i'll reply with an answer. If you curse and act like a craphead, I'll focus on that to show where your philosophy has led you. bad philosophy, bad science.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever The bad philosophy is yours, as David Hume said, which is more probable, that the whole natural order fo things should be suspened or that a jewish minx should tell a lie? Me things that the jewish minx lied her ass off. LOL
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 The way I see it is like this: Atheism is amoral, lying is a neccessary to convince the ignorant and though they know they can't prove it, are confident it isn't evil because they KNOW what they can't prove. Gees, those climategate e-mails say just that. or believe the hebrew historical account of the world? In my opinion the hebrews have more credibility as we are digging up places in the Bible left and right. The Atheists keep saying trust us we know. Yea right. Climate E-mails.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever First off the emails are a not a refudiation of Global Climate change, but let’s say the are in fact what you claim. By that stupid logic I could claim that all church leaders and their dogma was garbage because Jimmy Swaggart got his knob blown by a hooker or that ted haggard got his knob polished by a boy toys ass hole. Funny how all the Christians are the closet homosexuals or child molesters. LOL.Your logic is ridiculously sophomoric.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 E-mail were sent and received by a whole lot of people man. And none of them had a problem with it. They all lie cause they have no proof. Hmm but you would be right if you said that about Atheists. Mambla are a bunch of Atheists. I even have seen you people eat human waste. Atheist are amoral by proxy. What are you hiding from the world? I am sure you support their right to make love to children. What about the Atheists keeping score of the under age catholic girls they raped?
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever The ignorant are people like you who do not care what the facts are but only want to believe that talking snakes made a woman made of a rib from a man who was made of mud eat fruit from a tree that gave out knowledge of good and evil. LMFAO anyone who would buy that has a serious lack of brain cells. And then the creator came down as his own son but was the same person and got nailed to a tree to die for the sin of the woman and along the way turned water to wine. LMFAO ROTF.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 Better than not being able to prove anything and acting like you know everything. Atheists always say they know things they couldn't possibly know. That is why no one is believing them anymore. We got them on camera now. Go ahead folks. search about reducing world populations and listen to these things they say they MUST do. Better a fairytale than an Iron hammer.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@easymoney4ever And you think evolution has holes? That bible is not called holy for nothing. Religion the opium of the masses.
jehovah1975 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 holes. evolution is an hypothesis. Bible is history. I believe the jews. You believe the Atheists. lol Good luck.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
@jehovah1975 and atheism is the center of hatred
Eaglewing17 1 year ago
Hahaha, I love the explanation of how earth formed. The big bang resulted in a bunch of "molten material" floating around space which eventually compressed and cooled forming earth. Wow, that's some breathtaking ignorance. Miss a few steps, Ian? Like star formation? Star death? You shouldn't give lectures on topics that you don't understand.
Daytimeofnight 2 years ago
He doesn't care, so long as he rakes in the money. I'm really tempted to write a creationist book, fill it with biblical nonsense and Bible verses, and see how much it sells.
amaiDT 1 year ago
Such intelligent, cogent, comments. You convinced me!
ushouldbelieve 1 year ago
@amaiDT
You don't understand obvious truth, how could you write a book about it when you do not understand truth yourself.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 "Goddidit". Expand that to 300+ pages, sell it for $19.99. Who cares about "truth"? Creationists certainly don't; as long as it agrees with their beliefs, the "truth" behind something doesn't matter. Look at all the quote mining that goes on in creationist arguments and you'll see what I mean.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
That is the falsehood, it is the evolutions who thru truth out for consensus without empiricism. The believe in evoluitionism is based on lies perpetuated in textbooks of myths that have been proven false or easily disputed or just plain silly. The creationist' enjoy the comfort of not relying on randomness, time and pseudo selective non directed hopeful wishful thinking to deny any accountability to what is obviously the easiest thing for any thinking person to see; if only to look.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 My Biology textbook is full of "myths that have been proven false or easily disputed or just plain silly"? So can you show me the research disproving cell theory, animal physiology, ecology, and germ theory of disease? The rest of your post is pretty much a strawman. Overall, evolution is not random, thanks to natural selection. If this thing that you mention is so obvious, where's the evidence? You can possibly reconvert me on the spot if you show me this "obvious evidence".
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
Not at all, I have textbooks that still use outright proven lies to promote evolutionism, it uses conjecture and the old adage, "since we can't not find it not to be not true, then it is true". Animal physiology is prove of design, germ theory of disease, that is adaptation with variation, ecology; how do mean? cell theory is a changing science, interesting yes, prove of miraculous design yes, prove of evo, no! If u r unable to see it in all that is, I am sorry. Evidence is everywhere.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 I don't know what textbook you're using, but mine uses relatively up-to-date information to demonstrate that evolution occurs. Animal physiology is evidence for non-design. Creatures are far from being designed; look at a whale's pelvic remnant, or our appendix. "Adaptation with variation" is evolution. Ecology is basically the study of organisms and their relationship with the environment. Everything in cell theory can be shown to have evolved, no creator needed.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@apathy7170 Also, the burden of proof is on you, not me, to show whatever this "thing" is. If you can't even define whatever the heck you're mentioning (God? Velociraptors? Sentient chili peppers?), what good is telling me I can't see it?
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption . .
The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom. "— *Aldous Huxley, "Confessions of a Professed Atheist,"
apathy7170 1 year ago
@amaiDT You can't make money. That is probably why you are an Atheist. Atheists leech off our systems. The producers are never Atheists. It's incredible. It seems to me Atheism is a symtom of people who hate capitalism, they then become Atheists.
easymoney4ever 1 year ago
(and the end)
3. And he says Atheists are angry at god... logically you can't be "angry" at something you don't believe exists...
suinohana 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@suinohana "logically you can't be "angry" at something you don't believe exists... "
Precisely, that's just one of the many reasons atheism is so illogical.
boan000 1 year ago
(and the rest follows)
1. Ok, so he explains why evolution is supernatural because "life emerged from a rock". But what isn't supernatural about a good man in the sky creating Earth and life in 6 days and taking a day off so we can have a 7-day week?
2. If Raelians are wrong to believe that aliens created humans because aliens don't have an origin, why does only god's origin NOT need to be justified?
suinohana 2 years ago
@suinohana "what isn't supernatural about a good man in the sky creating Earth"
Theists don't have a problem with the supernatural, only materialists do. And God is not a "good man in the sky", he is an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent being who is eternal. If you're going to build a strawman, at least build one that looks a LITTLE bit like the model you attempt to ridicule.
boan000 1 year ago
Ok, I admit, I'm guilty of commenting without having watched the whole video, but he seems to contradict himself 3 times within the first 5 minutes or so. Maybe he explains them later... but he's off to a bad start. So enlighten me on the matter: (the rest will follow)
suinohana 2 years ago
Love it Ian! Keep bringing it!
9pt9 2 years ago
this guy is great, he bursts a lot of atheist and evolutionist balloons and with great humpr too.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
How? He sure hasn't burst mine yet... I'm even more convinced of my beliefs after listening to him.
suinohana 2 years ago
You should read the other side of the argument, and maybe take a college Bio course. You'll find out that almost every creationist like this Ian guy is essentially lying to you.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
If you did study the sciences at a college level, as I have you would see that it is full of holes and secular evolutionary biology, astronomy, anthropology and oceanography are very misguided and blind to what we see happening around us everyday, they scream it took millions of years, when the same event occurs in a couple of days right before their eyes. College professors are the same people who sat next to you in grade school, don't give them so much credit.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 A fish net is full of holes, but it works just fine. Ask the fish :) In all seriousness, what holes are you talking about? What events took place in a couple of days, that scientists say took millions of years?
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
I was referring to rapid deposition.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 Rapid deposition has quite a few meanings, from creationists trying to crap all over geology and paleontology, to some molecular biology processes, to even some chemical processes. So I don't try and talk about something you didn't refer to in the first place, care to enlighten me as to which one you're talking about? Thank you.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
I was referring to geology in that statement. As you might know the evo's have a new rise of Neo Catastrophists', quite interesting really. It is because not only do we see it, it explains stratigraphy and fossilization better. We have never seen millions of years deposition but we have seen rapid and isn't that better science? Of course it is! We have never seen macro-evolution, stellar or chemical, we have seen the opposite, which science is better what we see or what is just hoped 4.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 It's not even science; I can't find it in any scientific literature. We have seen macro-evolution: look up the London Underground mosquito. That's a new species. Chemicals "evolve" all the time; that's what nuclear fusion and fission are :) Stellar evolution is too slow to watch, but one can deduce it quite easily. Your last question presents a false dichotomy, since there's only one type of science (in a broad meaning), which involves using the scientific method.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
The underground mosquito is your "proof" of macro evolution? Is it not a mosquito? a type which by the way is found all over the world, not just Enlgand. Its' allele frequencies are more proof that it is just a variation within its' genus. That is micro evolution, just like the peppered moth, it had dark and light wings before the industrial revolution and still had them after. Many animals adapt to environments marine being most profound, nothing new, definitely no macro-evolution
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 Now you're moving the goal post, a typical dishonest creationist tactic. Macroevolution basically means changes AT or ABOVE the species level, which is what this mosquito did. The peppered moth is a fine example of microevolution, because at the end of the experiment, the moths could still interbreed, and thus they're still considered the same species. If you want, I can give you some papers showing genus evolution, but not if you're gonna move the goal post again.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
I have done no such thing. Macro evolution is a change from one genus to another genus, that is no speciation, do not accuse me of trying to sideswipe the issue or lying or not understanding evolution. You do not like to be hit with the truth that we do not see macro evolution so you try to shift blame to honest creationists' who say "show me" and you can't so you say we do not understand the meaning.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 Alright, I'll play with your definitions then, although you should get your definitions right: macroevolution can be specifically one species changing into two distinct populations, also called speciation. We actually have a rather clear view of how species have changed not only at the genus level, but the class level. I'll send you a link via PM, I encourage you to look at it, read it thoroughly, and tell me what you think.
amaiDT 1 year ago
@amaiDT
I'm sorry but that is not macroevolution. Speciation is micro or variation within a genus. Macro is bear to whale etc...
I will look at the clip when I have a moment....thanks.
apathy7170 1 year ago
@apathy7170 Well, I disagree with your definitions, but that's fine. As I said, I'll use your definitions, I have no problem doing so. Here's a video showing the transition from fish to amphibians, as well as amphibians to reptiles. watch?v=O4GdZOlPrX8 You seem like a pretty reasonable person, so I urge to to look at the things I've presented with an open mind :)
amaiDT 1 year ago
@apathy7170 >"Macro is bear to whale etc..."
There is only microevolution in this sense. The steps are always small, a dog will always give birth to a (slightly different) dog. Only over many generations, and when a population is divided, this leads to individuals so different, that it's obvious for us.
Think about it as a rainbow gradient on your computer screen. An adjacent pixel of a given color always has basically the same color.
But in the end you go blue blue to red, with micro steps.
smarthandsomeguy 1 year ago
@apathy7170
See - watch?v=Of0PjoZY4L0
TheStraightFacts 1 year ago
This guy can't be serious... Why isn't ANYONE in the audience telling him that he's wrong about four times in every sentence??
ErikeRKK 2 years ago
Because he's right..
MiniCHAMP7 2 years ago
About what?
I take it you don't know much about science nor reality either...
ErikeRKK 2 years ago
And I take it you didn't ACTUALLY watch this video, probably peeked at it, didn't want it to disprove what you believe, made a comment and left.
MiniCHAMP7 2 years ago
According to all logic that means you actually agree to not know much about reality.
I did see it (this part atleast). And I did find it amusing.
Do you mean he suddenly becomes informed in the second part, or what?
ErikeRKK 2 years ago
What a waste of time.. I'll let God deal with you from here. All knees shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord. That includes you, my friend.
-SAVATS
MiniCHAMP7 2 years ago
Embarrassing.
Do you fear sceptisism or are you just as ignorant as you seem? Embarrassing either way.
ErikeRKK 2 years ago
Comment removed
suinohana 2 years ago
Perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark; that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleontology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about, but that is heresy.Dr. David Pilbeam, Professor of Anthropology at Yale University American Scientist, , .379, June 78
camaroontree 2 years ago
Excuse me, what?
ErikeRKK 2 years ago
I wonder if everything was bigger in the past - i.e. a small dragon fly was five feet - how big was pre-flood man? I've heard of 16 tall people being dug up! How about if Noah's cubit was bigger by a factor of ten - instead of looking for an ark of 135m - we should be looking for an ark of 1.5 km!!! - Instead of looking on a mountain we should be looking for a boat that is a mountain. I know some will argue that a timber ship can not be this big it will fall apart - but pre-flood timber?
alstar70 2 years ago
great video ian,keep stickin it to the evolutionist
qwuad61 2 years ago 2
at church this guy came as a volonteer guest spearker!!! hes awesome
JesusFreak123123123 2 years ago 7
the big bang is not about evolution. Evolution is the changes and adaption of life by natural selection. The creation of new breeds of dogs, is an example of evolution. The mutation of a virus is an example of evolution, get your facts straight. you sound like a man teaching Santa with science.
realoldguy1969 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"if you can't disprove it it must be true that is one of the main principles of science"
holy mutha fakking hell is the guy that much of a total idiot?? how can something be true if it hasn't been demonstrated to be valid?? :O
mrlovespread2006 2 years ago
he easily say about only 2 ways (creation and evolution) whit no poof thats the only right way to look for, and proof that evolution is not right so creation is fact. I dont like that way arguments, it is streechy-way.
plomien1234 2 years ago
Actually @ 8 min, it does not exhaust all other possibilities. It is possible that Aliens evolved, and then genetically manipulated us, thus we would have been created by aliens, while the only evolved creatures would be those around us and the aliens who created us. Would make a good book anyway,, lol.
FUNCLEJ0E 2 years ago