Many Republican candidates and Republican supporters seek stupidity and ignorance as though they were virtues. Evolution is called a theory because in science it has to be scrutinized, tested and peer reviewed in order to be accepted by the scientific community. That is why you have Einstein’s theory of relativity, Newton’s theory of Gravity.
Evolution has withstood this test for 150 years and in fact many other scientific breakthroughs have supported evolution, DNA to name one. Expelled is based on lies and not one of these people in the video has written anything that can be tested by the scientific community and like all those who have tried to “expel” evolution it is based on lies. Watch Expelled Debunk-Flunked on Youtube.
Evolution is a theory my friend not a fact, you will find that there is lots of other theories on how we came to be, why don't you EDUCATE yourself by researching outside the bubble you appear to live in ! A good place to start would be with the documentary by the name of Expelled !
Also politicians will say anything to get votes, if they felt the favourable majority was Christian or religious based then they would choose to believe or disbelieve, in order to keep the voters voting !!
@DontRepYourCity Democrats are pretend friends of gays, especially since Democrats are anti-Israel and support Hamas and other Muslim groups who kill people for being gay. You Democrats want to control people's lives. You advocate food bans, bottled water bans, chocolate milk bans, Happy Meal bans. You want to tell people what to drive and advocate "blasphemy laws" that would prosecute anyone who criticizes suicide bombers.
your stupid dude evolution is a bunch of bull shit ive been educated in it and its stupid there wasnt some how just out of no where humans were born god is the only reason your here.
maybe those three candidates went to private christian schools i don't know why does what theories that they believe in affect the ways they run an administration come on really. RFK once said "when you teach a man that he is a lesser man because of the policies that he pursues then the whole country is degraded." why do we have to judge them on if they believe in God or evolution why is someone automatically stupid if they are a christian?
Have you ever spared a thought about the possibility, as you call yourself an atheist, that it's you - like so many others nowadays - who has never understood what faith is & really means? (No offense, but I can't strand thesises like yours anymore! And I am no Evangelical nor Catholic or Mormon, but have studied Biology ;-)
i can tell you why we don't like evolution a republican is someone who hold traditional values (like christianity) dearly and also most republicans are christianity.
also we were found by christians for christians we are a nation found under God
we should feel lucky, to vote under the articles of confederation we would have to be white, land owning, PROTESTANT, males.
America is not a christian nation, our founders were deists and free thinkers. I founders now would be rolling in there grave to se what america has become, if america was strictly a christian country then, jewish people and outher people of deforent religions would be extradited, people would have no rights at all.
@pbrskater26 well people who are Jewish, let me tell you something Judaism is a religion that is the oldest to believe in God ,if a religion believes in God it's fine but America was found on the sole purpose of religious tolerance so your statement is not true except Americas moral standards are declining rapidly and most teenagers are having sex and trying drugs i'm fourteen and what i'm doing is praying rosary's so yeah Americas ethics are horrible right now.
So let me git this streight, you think that if everyone thinks like you and conforms to your religion they are a good person. Those who dont, who think for them selves, understands things threw a scientific stand point ( evolution) they are haritics and doomed to hell? As for morality, I'm a good person, I dont go along with religious morals, I belive morals are a trait that was past down to us from our evolutinary ancesters. Sex, is just a normal biological thing.
@pbrskater26 no premarital sex is immoral i never said you had to be a good person to conform your religion you could be the worst person in the world and be catholic and you could be the nicest person in the world and be an atheist that is judging a book by it's cover and we have been taught better than to do that it's just not what i'm saying and it is just not true. you don't have to get along with my morals i just ask that you accept and respect my morals and i will do the same for yours.
I'm not saying all christians are bad, I grew up in a christian family, I just went a deforent path when I got older because I relaised that creationism did not add up scientificly, when I started questioning the bible, the church I used to go to were giving me shit saying if I dont belive the bible litteraly then i'm not a true christian, guys like pat robertson, kirk camoren and ray comfort who reject science for religious authority. There are christians who except evolution!
@pbrskater26 and i'm not saying all atheists are bad what i notice is a lot of atheists usually come from catholic families yeah bill o'reily believes in evolution but believes it was taken on by a higher power. i simply think that the human mind and body structure is to complex to have been created by a stroke of chance and a fish forming into a monkey or however the whole evolutionary process happens. the only thing i don't like about atheists is that they say all christians are stupid.
Bill O' Reily from GOP (FOX) News dose not support evolution. But, guys like Pat Robertson of 700 club do give christians a bad name, so do bannana man Ray Comfort with his bull shit introduction on his supposed 150th anniversery of Charles Darwins Origions Of Species, all it is is psudointellectual psycobable and poor understanding of what evolution is. I have a hard time with the utlimate reason of things, it just complicates science, like with Intelligent design!
What do we get with bushy in office for 8 fucking horrible years?... 10's of trillions in debt from a war that killed many Americans and now republicans want to cut back on spending these hypocrites are dumb as fuck!
this idiot is clearly uneducated about politics otherwise he wuld no EVOLUTION IS A THEORY AND DOESNT HAVE TO BE ACCEPTED IN ORDER TO BE A POLITIC freedom of religion its communists like this asshole that r ruining r country
speaking as an independent....both of your parties are retarted. and evolution is a THEROY. and total BS btw...and im NOT a republican OR a christian i just think its tottal crap..
They don't believe evolution because it is not in the BIBLE. Republicans are the biggest set back to progress ever and people just are starting to hand them controll again. So I will say this i'm 32 years old .When I was around 13 I remember going to Disney and they talked about all the advancements we would have if we had got a democratic president. We did when Clinton became president we are now. From 200 to 2008 it was mostly a dead zone why? A republican fuck republicans!
I believe in evolution. I think the republicans are going backwards. I predict Glenn beck starts throwing his feces at his next rally. way to go. valid point, I think republicans have reached their all time zenith of ignorance.
@wilsonjacobs What I don't understand is how they are getting so many damn votes. I can't wait untill november usually I look at each candidate as a individual. Not this time I will just punch Democrate for everything. They can do all the poll bull shit they want but people will vote in privacy then we will see if the republicans will be bragging when there party goes extinct like the dinosaurs.
Evolution-we cam from monkeys that throw shit at each other that lived on planet that "100s of millions years old" created by a random "Big bang"?
Christianity-Created by a higher power that exists throughout r souls who we hav proof that sacrificed his own flesh and blood to save us from what we hav become as people i myself hav witnessed several miracles only God culdve done o and THERES A FUCKING BOOK THAT PROVES THIS ALL WHEN JUDGEMENT DAY COMES YOUwillBURNinHELL
Actually, it's Christians who hate elolution, science and truth. Personally, i'm definately a bit more conservative (depending on the topic), but an athiest.
Over the course of the next 10 to 15 years, you're going to notice a dramatic drop in the stigma that "liberals are athiests" and "conservatives are christian". Especially after having Obama in office. I guarentee it (which is a GOOD thing, as religion has NO PLACE in politics)
@jjrants FOX NEWS puts religion in polotics and every single conservative lies about Obama with fear mongering shit. Truth we are not that far in debt, social sercurity is not even close within the next 100 years of becoming broke, Obama has a birth certifacate, He is not muslim, and most of the bailout is paid back, and nobody is forced to use the healthcare, welfare is not hurting the economy, unemployment is not causing debt. The patriot act will end in Nov. United states is fine!
My immediate response is that it is not from ignorance, I believe that they know exactly what they are doing. They use religion to further their own political agenda, because they know that their target AUDIENCE is ignorant therefore they have to appeal to their target market and lie about evolution. They are far more manipulative than they are ignorant.
Evolution doesn't prove that we came from single-celled organisms. Let me tell you something; when a person dies, you can't be an atheist and believe that our souls are a result of evolution; it's not possible at all. 90% of the USA is Christian, so that tells you something. If humans and monkeys were 100% identical in traits, then it proves that evolution is truth. But we are ONLY 99% identical to those fucking ass sniffers. That final 1% seperates us from the monkeys. Evolution=False Belief.
a) atheists don't believe in a soul, so there's no contradiction. when you die, that's it.
b) the fact that humans don't share 100% of their genome with chimps is a prediction of evolution. if we did share 100% of our genome with chimps that would present a huge problem for evolution; if our genomes were identical, then what is it that makes us develop differently?
The fact that we are a little different genetically is evidence that we are close relatives of chimps
@adr150 Is that supposed to try and nudge me in the atheist direction? Not all atheists don't believe in souls. A friend of mine is an atheist, and she believes in spirits and souls. Why she does regarding her scientific beliefs is beyond me. I do respect your theory of how human life began, because I almost believed it myself when I was in high school. I do know the right way of how we came into being, but I won't argue about it as it starts flame wars that never end. Later.
@BloodySawBlade uh, I said atheists don't believe in souls (your friend not withstanding). I don't think that qualifies as an attempt to convert you; that's a statement of fact.
Secondly, I find it incredibly cowardly that you come to my video, claim that "Evolution=False Belief." and then run away when you're confronted with your delusional fantasies. Grow a pair. Defend your position or don't solicit it.
@BloodySawBlade So because I assert that you refuse to defend your own claims constitutes me starting a flame war? That's rubbish (excuse my language). Put up or shut up.
@BloodySawBlade So you can't help but post "So I guess there isn't any reasoning with you? Whatever. Limey Jack-tar." Then you delete it before I can respond. You must know that I get emails whenever someone replies to my videos. You're on the verge of being blocked.
If you have any evidence to support your claim that "Evolution=False Belief" present it. Otherwise, get stuffed.
@adr150 You know I would say the bible, but in the eyes of atheists (such as you), that isn't good enough, and you pretty much backed me into a corner that's hard to escape from. You doing that alone denies me my right to even start backing up my claim. My friend did the same thing. How you want me to go about backing up my position regarding what I stand for on the creation of human life is beyond me.
We've seen it before. Flat earth advocates. Natural weather phenomena were punishments from God. Conservatives have fought every piece of progressive legislation starting with slavery. They also fight science. It is incredibly closed-minded and is slowing the progress of our country and the world.
I know plenty of educated people who believe that God created man. Our country was designed with God in mind... "In God we trust" and "One Nation Under God"...these men were educated, they drafted the greatest documents known to mankind.
You might want to look up the origins of these phrases. Neither was the conception of the founding fathers. They were products of mid 20th century politics.
Quite a far cry from the founders of the country.
Where as the title of this video is an exaggeration, there can be not doubt the GOP are not the party of Evolution or Science,68 percent of Republicans tended to favour the idea that humans were created in their present form about 10,000 years and only 3% of scientists are republican would seem confirming this opinion. Even with out this knowledge its interesting that you came to the conclusion adr150 is a moron when you had the 4 in 10 GOP nominees to point at
i don't agree with republicans, but i don't think that they all hate science and are idiots, they just have some beliefs of how our country should be run that are ineffective. that doesn't make them stupid.
Intelligent design is not a scientific theory, but creationism masquerading as such. Federal district court judge John Jones ruled in 2005 that "ID (intelligent design) is an interesting theological argument, but that it is not science,
It should be noted that said Judge was a conservative republican appointed by G.W. Bush, and an expressed creationist. The fact that testimony from several knowledgeable biologists was able to sway his beliefs (as if evolution theory is something that can be believed in), shows that the issue in this country is poor science education
Fuck you, idiot. Get over that just because your human perception of things can them seem beautiful or mysterious, there just has to be a higher power, just for you. You're smart if you realize that beyond empirical existence, there is only a complete void. Nothing. Not endless black space or anything like that. Just nothing. You're not a fool if you realize that empirical existence is the way it is completely by accident. Get over any notion of purpose or meaning outside of the context of your
hey lets not judge all republicans im republican and i believe in the evolution theory but this is america and and everyone has there own beliefs so ya.
i hear ya and realize not all reps are kooks. but its more a commentary on the political leaders who have aligned themselves and the party with the religious right
ya lol most of my friends are democrats lol i just think people shouldnt hate people over different political views u know most extreme christians dont except other people or evolution lol
I believe in creationism because the production of the right amino acids for the forming of even the most simple prokariotic bacteia cells through the combining of gases is impossible. Even if it could produce the right kind of amino acids they would not be able to survive because of their instability in an oxygen-rich enviorment. This is just the tip of the spear for the gaps that evolution cannot explain. I can continue for those who disagree and would like further information.
Firstly, the early Earth was not "oxygen rich" but composed of an atmosphere with far less Nitrogen and Oxygen than is seen now. Secondly, abiogenesis is very possible according to recent tests (go to newscientist.c om and look up Abiogenesis). At the same time, answers for how Ribose fused to chemicals to form RNA are coming to light all the time.
I would not like more information from you because you're information is incorrect and I prefer real knowledge to strange creationist propaganda.
Any disproof of one thing is never an automatic proof of something else. Talk of "equal time" to present an 'alternative' ID theory is false rhetoric- such suggestions must be met also with the presenting of dozens of other lesser-known theories. The "equal time" argument is made only as a self-serving attempt to 'counterbalance' and push forward an isolated agenda. It is not out of egalitarian concerns.
They present evolution because it is so firmly established by evidence. It is observation.
um, I hate to tell you this, but you dont have to go to school to be an elected official. Heck, as far as I know I am not sure that you cant be an elected offial while in a coma.
seriously, what if the bible included a list of everything that existed, so that these hysterical blind faith fools could have permission to believe in fucking dinosaurs and shit. that would be a really long book.
we have elephants evolving today. tuskless elephants were quite rare, but are growing percantagewise, because pochers have no reason to likk them. evolution, its in all our faces, some people just choose to keep their heads up their ass, so all they see is their own tiny world of shit
i am not a christian, but am agnostic. i believe something is out there bigger than us, and "alive"
there is no real reason that a christian cand believe in evolution, because the bible is a book basicly written to guide behavior. and to take every word seriously, is foolish, as it was written by man, just dictated by god, and translated countless times before any american got their hands on it.
can you immagine if the bible had an itemised list of everything that existed?
im athiest haha science and evolution beats a damn fictional book that was written and changed over a thousand times to fit the rules of kings and rulers. ha
When stupid politicians speak it helps us all to know where not to move because the people who put them in office must be idiots too and that's not where I want to live.
Evolution. Yeah, several exact species of man just appeared, one black, one white, one asian, one arab, one hindu, one spanish, one german, one ect. etc. etc. We are still evolving...at least some of us. Great Vid by the way!
What's funny is if you figure out who the gods are in the bible you'll find that the Old Testament god is the EL, the planet saturn, satan, set... he's a liar that claims he created the universe... he represents tyrannical authority, Christians claim he created the world lmao
I'm an atheist, I worship Jesus, the serpent, which represents knowledge. I can argue the bible with the biggest bible thumper there is. The bible is a collection of ancient paganistic tales of astrology, astronomy, and becoming your own God, your own authority through psychedelic enlightenment (shamanism.) They don't even understand their own stories. There is some wisdom buried in those ancient tales, but sadly Christians haven't found any of it.
It's also a big leap of faith to assume that over time it becomes a new species. I'm just saying, most evolutionists claim they don't believe in God because they can't see or touch him. Well I'm just raising the same argument. Your assuming something happens without witnessing it. Plus, people have been convicted for murder who were innocent.
"It's also a big leap of faith to assume that over time it becomes a new species."
Why?
There's literally nothing to stop it from happening. - We know variations occur in the genome, and we know that there are no limits to the variations, so the longer the variations have to occur in, the more variations will happen, taking the two split species further apart, until they are no longer similar.
And MANY people believe in god AND accept evolution.
We can't prove the existence or god, but we can't disprove it either. But I do agree with you there are plenty evidence of evolution. And in heart, I do hate republicans for putting creativism above evolution.
A decent idea, as god's immediate displeasure towards the sins of the human race is apparent in the bible. A lot of conservative dipshits take the bible word for word, however. It says god created the universe. Does this mean that he just snapped his fingers and then it was there? No way! It means he made the big bang happen and create the universe slowly. Its the same thing with humans. He first created smaller life and let it evolve, indirectly, slowly, but nonetheless effectively creating us.
"people have been convicted for murder who were innocent."
Oh, I agree. But how do we find out that they were innocent after all? New evidence.
If I'm asked to believe that someone isn't a murderer, even though the evidence says he is... I'm going with the evidence.
If I'm asked to believe that a god created life as we see it today, even though the evidence clearly says it evolved from simpler states... I'm going with the evidence.
perhaps you came from a monkey but I know for sure I did not !!
Scripture says
"The Fool says in his heart there is no God"
You atheists/evolutionists are '0 a penny'.... like 90%+ of the population all spouting precicely the same stupid state secular educational scrip thinking they are wise or free thinkers lol.... pathetic and so pitifull really !!
"perhaps you came from a monkey but I know for sure I did not"
Good for you. You are indeed correct.
You did not come from a monkey.
But humankind DID evolve from a branch of the primate tree. We DO share a common ancestor with the great apes (those are NOT monkeys, by the way. Different species).
As for the education... I suggest you get one.
Evolution is supported by more evidence than any other scientific theory.
As an engineer, I love science and mathematics and hate Lies (Evolution, Atheism, overdependence on the Scientific Method, thinking that science with its VERY limited body of knowledge is sufficiently and entirely trustworthy).
Not that im defending them or anything, you can be taught something, and not believe it. You can be taught creationism and not believe it (i personally dont) i just believe that people are entitled to their opinions
SHUT up science cann't solve all problems. Evolution is stupid. Woo we found a monkey and they do stuff we do so that must mean that we come from monkeys. That is abunch of bull shit atheism.REPUBS ALL THE WAY.
Seeing that the body of science is extremely limited and your placing your entire trust in such limitation, I would say that your mind and body of knowledge is extremely limited and daresay ignorant.
so what do you place your entire trust in, people graduate degrees overwhelmingly believe in evolution, if thats not how we were created then how were we, was it the literal meaning of the Bible, hey just FYI this is separation of church and state so you can't force that on others, I'm a Christian but what someone believes regarding the supernatural is their choice no one else's
Then explain how ANYTHING CAN "solve all problems".
»Evolution is stupid. Woo we found a monkey and they do stuff we do so that must mean that we come from monkeys. That is abunch of bull shit atheism.REPUBS ALL THE WAY.«
If that was how science works, then yes. It would be stupid. Fortunately, that is NOT how science works.
there is evidence of course for microevolution (which is, changes in the EXISTING species). Liberals like you try to coinside that with macroevolution (the origin of NEW species which there is no evidence yet for that)
Hopefully in your research of evolution, you will realize that distinctions between "micro" and "macro" are meaningless. There is only "evolution". Consider the sequoia, which can live over 2,000 years and reach heights of nearly 400 feet. We can observe small changes over years and decades, but no single person has observed the full life cycle of the tree. However, we can infer that a full grown sequoia was once a sapling based on our current observations of growth.
adr150 distinctions between micro and macro are full of meaning just like we have classification systems in the animals. Zebras and dogs are really different. Chickens and Apes are really different. Dogs and wolves although different they are not that different. Dogs and wolves, for example, are able to bring forth.
That is an unscientific notion until you can tell us WHAT prevents one species from turning into another over thousands of generations.
WHAT?
There must be some natural mechanism that prevents the genetic drift, DNA errors and random mutations from accumulating. Something that stops them from making the organism too different from it's ... what, "base form"?!
Unscientific gibberish or wishful thinking.
There is no such mechanism.
Mutations do not know of "species". It's a human definition.
I have no idea what prevents species to perform "macro-evolution". Don't shift the burden of proof. How am I obligated to show something ("macro-evolution") that doesn't exist. It is up to you to prove macro-evolution occurs. You are guilty of unscientific gibberish and wishful thinking.
»I have no idea what prevents species to perform "macro-evolution". Don't shift the burden of proof. How am I obligated to show something ("macro-evolution") that doesn't exist.«
Because you present it's existence as fact, when you claim that "macro-evolution" doesn't happen.
"It is up to you to prove macro-evolution occurs."
Why? There's no such thing as "macro-evolution". Only Evolution. That's my point.
Macro-evolution is a concept invented by creationists to muddy the waters, so they can claim that it's not clear enough to see properly. It is not a scientific concept.
There is no macro-evolution in science, only evolution.
If you want only "micro-evolution", you'll need a mechanism that prevents mutations from building up. Where is it? The burden of proof IS on you. You made the claim.
Don't give me these websites, I'm not your babysitter. If evolution is fact it is up to you to provide evidence that it exists. You prove to me that it works--simple.
Anyway, the websites will convince you. That is why I present them. They present the evidence. Something that I couldn't possibly do in a YouTube comment. If you thought that was possible, it would explain a few things.
Science is not simple. It does not rest purely on common sense. You need a lot of knowledge. The websites will present it in the best possible way.
Lazy you believe evolution is a fact. I didn't subscribe to that except micro-evolution is true. If you want to refer to it as evolution. I don't see micro-evolution as evolution it just changes within the species.
And how do you guarantee that the mutations will not accumulate?
We've seen examples of this in nature, as well as laboratories. Eventually, the different 'versions' of the animal will no longer be able to breed with eachother, and will grow more and more different. Eventually we then label them as different species.
This is how evolution works, and you have provided nothing that can stop it from happening.
More mutations --> more changes --> The further the animal will be from it's original.
How can I show something (macro-evolution) that doesn't exist? It's up to you to show that macro-evolution exists. One animal becoming a completely different type of animal. Darwin stated that the plants and the animals are related. How is the human being related to the frog? and most importantly The Evidence?
»How can I show something (macro-evolution) that doesn't exist?«
I'm not asking you to prove that it exists. I'm asking you to provide evidence of the mechanism that prevents it's existence. A mechanism that prevents mutations from accumulating. Such a mechanism must exist for macro-evolution to be impossible.
»It's up to you to show that macro-evolution exists.«
Evolution is real. Macroevolution is a natural consequence of evolution. Just as 1+1=2 and 2+2=4 and 4+4=8, mutations accumulate.
»One animal becoming a completely different type of animal.«
As the mutations accumulate, there will be more and more physical differences in the animal, and it will be less and less like it's "original". This is evolution 101. Gradual changes over time. Not major instantaneous leaps, but tiny genetic changes, past on to the offspring, which itself mutates. Darwin stated that the plants and the animals are related. How is the human being related to the frog? and most importantly The Evidence?
»Darwin stated that the plants and the animals are related.«
Correct.
»How is the human being related to the frog?
Both are tetrapods. Four-limbed lifeforms. But where mammals (that's us) are amniotes, amphibians (frogs) are egg-layers. So they branched away from us between 365 mio years ago (first tetrapods) and 340 years ago (first amniotes).
In a sense, we are closer related to the Dinosaurs, than we are to the frogs.
*Correction: "340 years ago" should of course be "340 mio years ago".
»The Evidence?«
That's part of it. We find no amphibians prior to the first tetrapod, and no amniotic amphibians. Conclusion: They branched off at that point in time. The tetrapods simply evolved in different directions due to mutations.
Prediction: This should be verifiable by DNA matching.
Verification: It is.
Two different methods giving the same re-testable result.
But there is much more. Try and find out yourself.
Lazy 1. Humans and frogs are tetrapods (good observation) 2. That proves that we were once frogs (bad conclusion). How about this? God made us similar to but different than a frog because he chose to.
Let's try this 1. bicycles and motorcycles have two wheels (good observation)2. that proves they came from a scooter 350 million years ago (bad conclusion)
»1. Humans and frogs are tetrapods (good observation) 2. That proves that we were once frogs (bad conclusion).«
Agreed. Bad conclusion. Where did you get that from?
All I stated was that we share a common ancestor with amphibians. And our DNA supports this fact. It's not just a conclusion drawn on the fossil record, it provides testable predictions, which all corroborate the theory.
There is no record whatsoever that we come from frogs. We have similar Dna with other animals (good observation) that proves that we came from them (bad conclusion)
»There is no record whatsoever that we come from frogs.«
No one has stated that we evolved from frogs.
That is just as incorrect as stating that we evolved from monkeys or even apes.
It shows a lack of understanding.
»We have similar Dna with other animals (good observation) that proves that we came from them (bad conclusion)«
Agreed. That is a very poor conclusion. It takes a lot more to make that conclusion. Fortunately, we DO have more. A lot more. Tons more. From different fields.
lazy just want to let you know one pertinent fact. All animals produce after their kind. Never been proven otherwise, I know you evolutionist like to overlook these pertinent facts.
»lazy just want to let you know one pertinent fact. All animals produce after their kind. Never been proven otherwise, I know you evolutionist like to overlook these pertinent facts.«
This is an oooold misleading creationist argument.
Evolution does not happen in ONE birth.
Each generation has slight differences in the DNA, due to mutations, genetic drift, etc. They pass these on to their off-spring, who has further changes of their own. So the changes become more and more. They accumulate.
and how did everything come from nothing? think of it u think particuls just CAMe ou of no where and u think that the earth cam from a boom u do realize that exposions and implostions destroy things right?there is no way u can or ever will prove evolution. so fuck off go fuck algor or somthing.
"there is no way u can or ever will prove evolution."
Or gravitation. Or atomic theory. Or cell theory, quantum field theory or tectonic plate theory.
We know. Science does not use proofs.
Scientific theories cannot be proven.
But they can be disproved, which hasn't happened, they can be documented through observations, repeated tests and experiments, and verifiable predictions.
And we have done that. And we have massive amounts of evidence.
"dude u cant disprove or prove it. it would take billions of years and its preicted that we will be gone by then."
Evolution is observable in nature. It is testable and verified in laboratories. We can make predictions based on the theory, and then go verify the predictions through new observations.
Evolution is supported by evidence from several independent scientific fields.
It is the most documented and supported scientific theory of all.
We have actually seen speciation, which is the first step in creatures becoming other creatures. And once speciation has occured, biologists have no knowledge of anything to prevent the animal from becoming a new animal, over time.
Once a speciation event has occurred, the animals have split into two groups, that no longer interacts, genetically. So each mutation/variation will take them further apart from each other, giving rise to 2 seperate types of animals over time.
As you can hopefully understand, "one animal turning into another" is not the way it happens. That's a misunderstood idea birthed by creationists, and has nothing to do with evolution.
1. Stephen Jay Gould is not the alpha and omega of evolution, although many creationists have this strange idea that he is. He is but ONE scientist in the field.
2. The point is that there is no difference between macro- and microevolution. The mechanisms involved are the same. The only difference is the factor of time.
Good question. Evolution spans billions of years, and we have yet to have a true billion-year test case to know with certainty that evolution is true. Evolution is still just a hypothesis and is misnomered a Theory. Simply, Evolution is not true and is haphazardly concocted by the feeble mind of man. I am with you mandlbreed.
u guys think u can prove that the earth was created by evolution? its IMPOSSIBLE there is no way to prove it. and saying u believe in evolution is the same as saying u believe in god there is no way to prove eather of them but i will go with the one where i can go somewhere after i die so i can go to heaven.
I'm not sure that that is true. Do you have any references?
I found references to a 1998 survey (although not the actual survey itself) that was published in Nature which according to [see links in info section], less than 10% of 'leading' scientists hold religious beliefs.
Its also kind of interesting how the creationist site tries to spin a 1991 Gallup poll which demonstrated that,
"higher education, and belief in evolution over millions of years as the source of human existence were concurrent. From these statistics it would appear that higher education, and particularly specialization in the natural sciences will indoctrinate students into a naturalistic or atheistic view of the world."
They almost explicitly argue that higher education is BAD!
They seem to be somewhat current as they have references to 2005 documents. So its interesting that the hard core creationists are citing scientific studies to argue against evolution, which seems to be the MO of IDers. Of course both get it woefully wrong, but to assert that atheism is the basis of higher education and not even acknowledge the possibility of opposite causal relationship is utterly ignorant.
BTW, thanks Lazy for such voracity in engaging all creationist/ID loons as they come. I would do it but I find it gets tiresome as the same tired arguments are trotted out.
And thanks to all the fools who are happily ignorant and without education for giving me entertainment.
I'm not so sure about this one since it includes social scientists like political scientists. I think a sampling of natural scientists is more appropriate when talking about 'scientists', especially in the context of this video - social scientists are not held to the standards of the Scientific Method
"Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God."
Indeed there is a lower percentage of believers among the higher educated, and a MUCH lower fundamental following among the higher educated, than there is among the general populace.
The reasons for this are not as simple as the creationists would spin it, I agree.
»How about this? God made us similar to but different than a frog because he chose to.«
Ah, the deceptive god argument.
The kind of god who would place tons of false hints in the anatomy of all beings, in the ground, create the geological coloumn, the right age of each fossil finding, and in the DNA of all living things.
Sorry, but I agree with Ken Miller. That's deceitful. Why honor a god like that? Does that even fit with your own image of him/her/it?
"I do not feel obliged to believe that that same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo Galilei
»1. bicycles and motorcycles have two wheels (good observation)2. that proves they came from a scooter 350 million years ago (bad conclusion)«
Agreed. Since we know of no way for scooters to reproduce, nor to evolve in any way, and it contradicts all datings of all findings of scooters.
I agree there have been minor changes in the animals, new breeds forming for example. There is nothing to support the leap required for macro-evolution to occur.
»I agree there have been minor changes in the animals, new breeds forming for example. There is nothing to support the leap required for macro-evolution to occur.«
No one leap is required. Just a buttload of minor successive leaps. That will take you far enough. And that is what our observations support. Nothing has ever been observed to prevent mutations from accumulating.
Lazy Jones So far, all animals produce after their own kind. There has never been any exceptions to this rule. Macroevolution doesn't happen, it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary
»Lazy Jones So far, all animals produce after their own kind.«
This is true.
»There has never been any exceptions to this rule.«
This is true.
»Macroevolution doesn't happen«
This is not true.
As I've said repeatedly, macroevolution is merely the accumulation of thousands and thousands of tiny mutations.
The more genetic changes we get, the more different the animal will be from the "original". Eventually, looking back thousands of generations, you will be able to see macroevolution.
»it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary«
Nope.
My statement is true: Macroevolution is what happens when a species has gone through enough changes in DNA to be considered a new species.
You are the one who claims that there is some unknown mechanism to prevent the accumulation of these mutations/genetic changes, despite what the scientific community agrees on.
Until you can prove the existence of this mysterious mechanism, it's simply wishful thinking. Mutations WILL accumulate.
Wheres the facts? Wheres the missing link? If evolution existed when did it start? Why do we still have apes? If evolution existed than the cycle would continue hence, continuous evolving. And if evolution existed why are there so many different races of people. Shouldnt we all of evolved into the same. Republicans believe in something greater that. Its called God. What i hate more than liberals are unintellegent liberals.
clearly, you have not even begun to grasp the the very basic concepts put forth by evolution. Seriously, read the wikipedia entry on evolution if for no other reason than to understand what it is you are arguing against.
and then a monkey-fish-frog had butt sex with another monkey, and that monkey had a mutant retard baby who screwed another retard monkey and that made you. So there you go, your the retarded offspring of five monkey's having butt sex with a fish-squirrel. Congratulations.
In the beginning we were all fish, ok, swimming around in the water, and then one day a couple of fish had a retard baby, and the retard baby was different so it got to live. So retard fish goes on to make more retard babies and then one day a retard baby fish crawled out of the ocean with it's mutant fish hands and it had butt sex with a squirrel and made retard-frog-squirrel, and then that had a retard baby which was a monkey-fish-frog,
StoogeWatcher stop writing on here you are so stupid it's painful!
streicherify 1 week ago
Many Republican candidates and Republican supporters seek stupidity and ignorance as though they were virtues. Evolution is called a theory because in science it has to be scrutinized, tested and peer reviewed in order to be accepted by the scientific community. That is why you have Einstein’s theory of relativity, Newton’s theory of Gravity.
streicherify 1 week ago
Evolution has withstood this test for 150 years and in fact many other scientific breakthroughs have supported evolution, DNA to name one. Expelled is based on lies and not one of these people in the video has written anything that can be tested by the scientific community and like all those who have tried to “expel” evolution it is based on lies. Watch Expelled Debunk-Flunked on Youtube.
streicherify 1 week ago
Evolution is a theory my friend not a fact, you will find that there is lots of other theories on how we came to be, why don't you EDUCATE yourself by researching outside the bubble you appear to live in ! A good place to start would be with the documentary by the name of Expelled !
Also politicians will say anything to get votes, if they felt the favourable majority was Christian or religious based then they would choose to believe or disbelieve, in order to keep the voters voting !!
Solomon1330 3 weeks ago
Democrats support animal rights extremists who firebomb research labs.
StoogeWatcher 6 months ago
@StoogeWatcher Republicans support anti-gay extremists who want to control other people's lives.
DontRepYourCity 6 months ago
@DontRepYourCity Democrats are pretend friends of gays, especially since Democrats are anti-Israel and support Hamas and other Muslim groups who kill people for being gay. You Democrats want to control people's lives. You advocate food bans, bottled water bans, chocolate milk bans, Happy Meal bans. You want to tell people what to drive and advocate "blasphemy laws" that would prosecute anyone who criticizes suicide bombers.
StoogeWatcher 6 months ago
your stupid dude evolution is a bunch of bull shit ive been educated in it and its stupid there wasnt some how just out of no where humans were born god is the only reason your here.
XGRIZl 6 months ago
both of you are stupid
there i solved it
tubub 7 months ago
honestly a man is an idiot because of the path of religion he pursues? that makes you an even bigger idiot for judging someone by that one factor.
sgtmjames 7 months ago
maybe those three candidates went to private christian schools i don't know why does what theories that they believe in affect the ways they run an administration come on really. RFK once said "when you teach a man that he is a lesser man because of the policies that he pursues then the whole country is degraded." why do we have to judge them on if they believe in God or evolution why is someone automatically stupid if they are a christian?
sgtmjames 7 months ago
Have you ever spared a thought about the possibility, as you call yourself an atheist, that it's you - like so many others nowadays - who has never understood what faith is & really means? (No offense, but I can't strand thesises like yours anymore! And I am no Evangelical nor Catholic or Mormon, but have studied Biology ;-)
muellkoerbchen 8 months ago
i can tell you why we don't like evolution a republican is someone who hold traditional values (like christianity) dearly and also most republicans are christianity.
also we were found by christians for christians we are a nation found under God
we should feel lucky, to vote under the articles of confederation we would have to be white, land owning, PROTESTANT, males.
sgtmjames 8 months ago
@sgtmjames
America is not a christian nation, our founders were deists and free thinkers. I founders now would be rolling in there grave to se what america has become, if america was strictly a christian country then, jewish people and outher people of deforent religions would be extradited, people would have no rights at all.
pbrskater26 7 months ago
@pbrskater26 well people who are Jewish, let me tell you something Judaism is a religion that is the oldest to believe in God ,if a religion believes in God it's fine but America was found on the sole purpose of religious tolerance so your statement is not true except Americas moral standards are declining rapidly and most teenagers are having sex and trying drugs i'm fourteen and what i'm doing is praying rosary's so yeah Americas ethics are horrible right now.
sgtmjames 7 months ago
@sgtmjames
So let me git this streight, you think that if everyone thinks like you and conforms to your religion they are a good person. Those who dont, who think for them selves, understands things threw a scientific stand point ( evolution) they are haritics and doomed to hell? As for morality, I'm a good person, I dont go along with religious morals, I belive morals are a trait that was past down to us from our evolutinary ancesters. Sex, is just a normal biological thing.
pbrskater26 7 months ago
@pbrskater26 no premarital sex is immoral i never said you had to be a good person to conform your religion you could be the worst person in the world and be catholic and you could be the nicest person in the world and be an atheist that is judging a book by it's cover and we have been taught better than to do that it's just not what i'm saying and it is just not true. you don't have to get along with my morals i just ask that you accept and respect my morals and i will do the same for yours.
sgtmjames 7 months ago
@sgtmjames
I'm not saying all christians are bad, I grew up in a christian family, I just went a deforent path when I got older because I relaised that creationism did not add up scientificly, when I started questioning the bible, the church I used to go to were giving me shit saying if I dont belive the bible litteraly then i'm not a true christian, guys like pat robertson, kirk camoren and ray comfort who reject science for religious authority. There are christians who except evolution!
pbrskater26 7 months ago
@pbrskater26 and i'm not saying all atheists are bad what i notice is a lot of atheists usually come from catholic families yeah bill o'reily believes in evolution but believes it was taken on by a higher power. i simply think that the human mind and body structure is to complex to have been created by a stroke of chance and a fish forming into a monkey or however the whole evolutionary process happens. the only thing i don't like about atheists is that they say all christians are stupid.
sgtmjames 7 months ago
@sgtmjames
Bill O' Reily from GOP (FOX) News dose not support evolution. But, guys like Pat Robertson of 700 club do give christians a bad name, so do bannana man Ray Comfort with his bull shit introduction on his supposed 150th anniversery of Charles Darwins Origions Of Species, all it is is psudointellectual psycobable and poor understanding of what evolution is. I have a hard time with the utlimate reason of things, it just complicates science, like with Intelligent design!
pbrskater26 7 months ago
I also support democratic women! God Bless them as well!
padude64 11 months ago
All of a sudden, I see republicans no longer talking about religion! What is up with that????????????
padude64 11 months ago
The Democratic party's support for science is a marriage of convenience.
NYerintransit 1 year ago
What do we get with bushy in office for 8 fucking horrible years?... 10's of trillions in debt from a war that killed many Americans and now republicans want to cut back on spending these hypocrites are dumb as fuck!
TheKkmusic09 1 year ago
this idiot is clearly uneducated about politics otherwise he wuld no EVOLUTION IS A THEORY AND DOESNT HAVE TO BE ACCEPTED IN ORDER TO BE A POLITIC freedom of religion its communists like this asshole that r ruining r country
LiVeXAnDXLeTXDy 1 year ago
@LiVeXAnDXLeTXDy
Do you not believe in gravity either?After all, that is just a theory as well.
colplaya7 7 months ago
speaking as an independent....both of your parties are retarted. and evolution is a THEROY. and total BS btw...and im NOT a republican OR a christian i just think its tottal crap..
casanovakid55 1 year ago
They don't believe evolution because it is not in the BIBLE. Republicans are the biggest set back to progress ever and people just are starting to hand them controll again. So I will say this i'm 32 years old .When I was around 13 I remember going to Disney and they talked about all the advancements we would have if we had got a democratic president. We did when Clinton became president we are now. From 200 to 2008 it was mostly a dead zone why? A republican fuck republicans!
carnypimp 1 year ago
I believe in evolution. I think the republicans are going backwards. I predict Glenn beck starts throwing his feces at his next rally. way to go. valid point, I think republicans have reached their all time zenith of ignorance.
wilsonjacobs 1 year ago 2
@wilsonjacobs What I don't understand is how they are getting so many damn votes. I can't wait untill november usually I look at each candidate as a individual. Not this time I will just punch Democrate for everything. They can do all the poll bull shit they want but people will vote in privacy then we will see if the republicans will be bragging when there party goes extinct like the dinosaurs.
carnypimp 1 year ago
lets compare shall we:
Evolution-we cam from monkeys that throw shit at each other that lived on planet that "100s of millions years old" created by a random "Big bang"?
Christianity-Created by a higher power that exists throughout r souls who we hav proof that sacrificed his own flesh and blood to save us from what we hav become as people i myself hav witnessed several miracles only God culdve done o and THERES A FUCKING BOOK THAT PROVES THIS ALL WHEN JUDGEMENT DAY COMES YOUwillBURNinHELL
LiVeXAnDXLeTXDy 1 year ago
@LiVeXAnDXLeTXDy Yeah, which one sounds more valid to you.
wilsonjacobs 1 year ago
@LiVeXAnDXLeTXDy Are you kidding?
Caboose117111218 1 year ago
Actually, it's Christians who hate elolution, science and truth. Personally, i'm definately a bit more conservative (depending on the topic), but an athiest.
Over the course of the next 10 to 15 years, you're going to notice a dramatic drop in the stigma that "liberals are athiests" and "conservatives are christian". Especially after having Obama in office. I guarentee it (which is a GOOD thing, as religion has NO PLACE in politics)
jjrants 1 year ago 4
@jjrants I hope you're right
adr150 1 year ago
@jjrants FOX NEWS puts religion in polotics and every single conservative lies about Obama with fear mongering shit. Truth we are not that far in debt, social sercurity is not even close within the next 100 years of becoming broke, Obama has a birth certifacate, He is not muslim, and most of the bailout is paid back, and nobody is forced to use the healthcare, welfare is not hurting the economy, unemployment is not causing debt. The patriot act will end in Nov. United states is fine!
carnypimp 1 year ago
My immediate response is that it is not from ignorance, I believe that they know exactly what they are doing. They use religion to further their own political agenda, because they know that their target AUDIENCE is ignorant therefore they have to appeal to their target market and lie about evolution. They are far more manipulative than they are ignorant.
jtking2504 1 year ago
Evolution doesn't prove that we came from single-celled organisms. Let me tell you something; when a person dies, you can't be an atheist and believe that our souls are a result of evolution; it's not possible at all. 90% of the USA is Christian, so that tells you something. If humans and monkeys were 100% identical in traits, then it proves that evolution is truth. But we are ONLY 99% identical to those fucking ass sniffers. That final 1% seperates us from the monkeys. Evolution=False Belief.
BloodySawBlade 1 year ago
@BloodySawBlade
a) atheists don't believe in a soul, so there's no contradiction. when you die, that's it.
b) the fact that humans don't share 100% of their genome with chimps is a prediction of evolution. if we did share 100% of our genome with chimps that would present a huge problem for evolution; if our genomes were identical, then what is it that makes us develop differently?
The fact that we are a little different genetically is evidence that we are close relatives of chimps
adr150 1 year ago
@adr150 Is that supposed to try and nudge me in the atheist direction? Not all atheists don't believe in souls. A friend of mine is an atheist, and she believes in spirits and souls. Why she does regarding her scientific beliefs is beyond me. I do respect your theory of how human life began, because I almost believed it myself when I was in high school. I do know the right way of how we came into being, but I won't argue about it as it starts flame wars that never end. Later.
BloodySawBlade 1 year ago
@BloodySawBlade uh, I said atheists don't believe in souls (your friend not withstanding). I don't think that qualifies as an attempt to convert you; that's a statement of fact.
Secondly, I find it incredibly cowardly that you come to my video, claim that "Evolution=False Belief." and then run away when you're confronted with your delusional fantasies. Grow a pair. Defend your position or don't solicit it.
adr150 1 year ago
@adr150 See? You're on the verge of starting a flame war. Don't try it. I've been nice, but no coward as you claim. I do whatever I please.
BloodySawBlade 1 year ago
@BloodySawBlade So because I assert that you refuse to defend your own claims constitutes me starting a flame war? That's rubbish (excuse my language). Put up or shut up.
adr150 1 year ago
@adr150 So I guess there isn't any reasoning with you? Whatever. Limey Jack-tar.
BloodySawBlade 1 year ago
@BloodySawBlade So you can't help but post "So I guess there isn't any reasoning with you? Whatever. Limey Jack-tar." Then you delete it before I can respond. You must know that I get emails whenever someone replies to my videos. You're on the verge of being blocked.
If you have any evidence to support your claim that "Evolution=False Belief" present it. Otherwise, get stuffed.
adr150 1 year ago 2
@adr150 You know I would say the bible, but in the eyes of atheists (such as you), that isn't good enough, and you pretty much backed me into a corner that's hard to escape from. You doing that alone denies me my right to even start backing up my claim. My friend did the same thing. How you want me to go about backing up my position regarding what I stand for on the creation of human life is beyond me.
BloodySawBlade 1 year ago
@BloodySawBlade I think you're upset because hes right and you refuse to believe the truth.
wilsonjacobs 1 year ago
@wilsonjacobs I'm done arguing about this issue. I'll believe whatever the fuck I want, and you're not going to tell me different.
BloodySawBlade 1 year ago
Comment removed
carnypimp 1 year ago
We've seen it before. Flat earth advocates. Natural weather phenomena were punishments from God. Conservatives have fought every piece of progressive legislation starting with slavery. They also fight science. It is incredibly closed-minded and is slowing the progress of our country and the world.
jdmasta289 1 year ago
I know plenty of educated people who believe that God created man. Our country was designed with God in mind... "In God we trust" and "One Nation Under God"...these men were educated, they drafted the greatest documents known to mankind.
42CONS 2 years ago
You might want to look up the origins of these phrases. Neither was the conception of the founding fathers. They were products of mid 20th century politics.
Quite a far cry from the founders of the country.
adr150 1 year ago
religious indoctrination is much more powerful than you think.
the repub s tend to be reality-denying
on most issues.
thegoochieguy 2 years ago
I am Republican.
I love Science.
I believe in evolution.
And I think adr150 is a moron
InformationalLife 2 years ago 2
Where as the title of this video is an exaggeration, there can be not doubt the GOP are not the party of Evolution or Science,68 percent of Republicans tended to favour the idea that humans were created in their present form about 10,000 years and only 3% of scientists are republican would seem confirming this opinion. Even with out this knowledge its interesting that you came to the conclusion adr150 is a moron when you had the 4 in 10 GOP nominees to point at
MUDSHARK111 2 years ago
InformationalLife, you are a rare Republican, good for you.
Eric8542009 2 years ago
i don't agree with republicans, but i don't think that they all hate science and are idiots, they just have some beliefs of how our country should be run that are ineffective. that doesn't make them stupid.
nickcervantes 2 years ago
Do you think when Middle-Eastern countries say God did it that they are insulting us all?
RyanLeeParis 2 years ago
Look at where they are from. That's why.
JCpatriots 2 years ago
Intelligent design is not a scientific theory, but creationism masquerading as such. Federal district court judge John Jones ruled in 2005 that "ID (intelligent design) is an interesting theological argument, but that it is not science,
argetfalcon 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It should be noted that said Judge was a conservative republican appointed by G.W. Bush, and an expressed creationist. The fact that testimony from several knowledgeable biologists was able to sway his beliefs (as if evolution theory is something that can be believed in), shows that the issue in this country is poor science education
argetfalcon 2 years ago 3
If we are going to cast insults based on belief, lets start with bipartisan politics.
sergeantRC 3 years ago
There has to be a higher power. Dude think about it.
Bigshot85 3 years ago
Fuck you, idiot. Get over that just because your human perception of things can them seem beautiful or mysterious, there just has to be a higher power, just for you. You're smart if you realize that beyond empirical existence, there is only a complete void. Nothing. Not endless black space or anything like that. Just nothing. You're not a fool if you realize that empirical existence is the way it is completely by accident. Get over any notion of purpose or meaning outside of the context of your
totenkopf35 2 years ago
own life, history, science, art, etc.
totenkopf35 2 years ago
hey lets not judge all republicans im republican and i believe in the evolution theory but this is america and and everyone has there own beliefs so ya.
marilynmansonfreak93 3 years ago
i hear ya and realize not all reps are kooks. but its more a commentary on the political leaders who have aligned themselves and the party with the religious right
adr150 3 years ago
ya lol most of my friends are democrats lol i just think people shouldnt hate people over different political views u know most extreme christians dont except other people or evolution lol
marilynmansonfreak93 3 years ago
I believe in creationism because the production of the right amino acids for the forming of even the most simple prokariotic bacteia cells through the combining of gases is impossible. Even if it could produce the right kind of amino acids they would not be able to survive because of their instability in an oxygen-rich enviorment. This is just the tip of the spear for the gaps that evolution cannot explain. I can continue for those who disagree and would like further information.
walkanator1 3 years ago
Firstly, the early Earth was not "oxygen rich" but composed of an atmosphere with far less Nitrogen and Oxygen than is seen now. Secondly, abiogenesis is very possible according to recent tests (go to newscientist.c om and look up Abiogenesis). At the same time, answers for how Ribose fused to chemicals to form RNA are coming to light all the time.
I would not like more information from you because you're information is incorrect and I prefer real knowledge to strange creationist propaganda.
VivekisV 3 years ago
Any disproof of one thing is never an automatic proof of something else. Talk of "equal time" to present an 'alternative' ID theory is false rhetoric- such suggestions must be met also with the presenting of dozens of other lesser-known theories. The "equal time" argument is made only as a self-serving attempt to 'counterbalance' and push forward an isolated agenda. It is not out of egalitarian concerns.
They present evolution because it is so firmly established by evidence. It is observation.
abyssquick 3 years ago
um, I hate to tell you this, but you dont have to go to school to be an elected official. Heck, as far as I know I am not sure that you cant be an elected offial while in a coma.
gothi1 3 years ago
seriously, what if the bible included a list of everything that existed, so that these hysterical blind faith fools could have permission to believe in fucking dinosaurs and shit. that would be a really long book.
we have elephants evolving today. tuskless elephants were quite rare, but are growing percantagewise, because pochers have no reason to likk them. evolution, its in all our faces, some people just choose to keep their heads up their ass, so all they see is their own tiny world of shit
voidbloodyvoid 3 years ago
i am not a christian, but am agnostic. i believe something is out there bigger than us, and "alive"
there is no real reason that a christian cand believe in evolution, because the bible is a book basicly written to guide behavior. and to take every word seriously, is foolish, as it was written by man, just dictated by god, and translated countless times before any american got their hands on it.
can you immagine if the bible had an itemised list of everything that existed?
voidbloodyvoid 3 years ago
ya fuck you to
smokndarasta 3 years ago
thank you for such a rational, well reasoned response. Now I can accept your argument.
adr150 3 years ago
im athiest haha science and evolution beats a damn fictional book that was written and changed over a thousand times to fit the rules of kings and rulers. ha
gamerman001 3 years ago
i believe in a god, and to discount fucking reality is like believing in harry potter, and fassioning youre life around it.
voidbloodyvoid 3 years ago
When stupid politicians speak it helps us all to know where not to move because the people who put them in office must be idiots too and that's not where I want to live.
Manx36 3 years ago 2
Evolution. Yeah, several exact species of man just appeared, one black, one white, one asian, one arab, one hindu, one spanish, one german, one ect. etc. etc. We are still evolving...at least some of us. Great Vid by the way!
joesl8 3 years ago 2
What's funny is if you figure out who the gods are in the bible you'll find that the Old Testament god is the EL, the planet saturn, satan, set... he's a liar that claims he created the universe... he represents tyrannical authority, Christians claim he created the world lmao
badjesus666 3 years ago
so ur athiest or satanist. im athist
gamerman001 3 years ago
I'm an atheist, I worship Jesus, the serpent, which represents knowledge. I can argue the bible with the biggest bible thumper there is. The bible is a collection of ancient paganistic tales of astrology, astronomy, and becoming your own God, your own authority through psychedelic enlightenment (shamanism.) They don't even understand their own stories. There is some wisdom buried in those ancient tales, but sadly Christians haven't found any of it.
badjesus666 3 years ago
It's also a big leap of faith to assume that over time it becomes a new species. I'm just saying, most evolutionists claim they don't believe in God because they can't see or touch him. Well I'm just raising the same argument. Your assuming something happens without witnessing it. Plus, people have been convicted for murder who were innocent.
guinealifter 3 years ago
"It's also a big leap of faith to assume that over time it becomes a new species."
Why?
There's literally nothing to stop it from happening. - We know variations occur in the genome, and we know that there are no limits to the variations, so the longer the variations have to occur in, the more variations will happen, taking the two split species further apart, until they are no longer similar.
And MANY people believe in god AND accept evolution.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
i believe god created somethin', than he abandoned it. And during the time, it evolved.
TalkingDogBrian 3 years ago
Well, we can't prove that god created it, but there is certainly plenty of evidence for evolution, so you are 1 for 2.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
We can't prove the existence or god, but we can't disprove it either. But I do agree with you there are plenty evidence of evolution. And in heart, I do hate republicans for putting creativism above evolution.
TalkingDogBrian 3 years ago
A decent idea, as god's immediate displeasure towards the sins of the human race is apparent in the bible. A lot of conservative dipshits take the bible word for word, however. It says god created the universe. Does this mean that he just snapped his fingers and then it was there? No way! It means he made the big bang happen and create the universe slowly. Its the same thing with humans. He first created smaller life and let it evolve, indirectly, slowly, but nonetheless effectively creating us.
Woahmatrix 3 years ago
i dont beleive in god or satan i gowith the science theory. its more logical than a damn fictional book
gamerman001 3 years ago
"people have been convicted for murder who were innocent."
Oh, I agree. But how do we find out that they were innocent after all? New evidence.
If I'm asked to believe that someone isn't a murderer, even though the evidence says he is... I'm going with the evidence.
If I'm asked to believe that a god created life as we see it today, even though the evidence clearly says it evolved from simpler states... I'm going with the evidence.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
evolution . berkeley . edu
LazyJones1 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
perhaps you came from a monkey but I know for sure I did not !!
Scripture says
"The Fool says in his heart there is no God"
You atheists/evolutionists are '0 a penny'.... like 90%+ of the population all spouting precicely the same stupid state secular educational scrip thinking they are wise or free thinkers lol.... pathetic and so pitifull really !!
bigcoolviking 3 years ago
"perhaps you came from a monkey but I know for sure I did not"
Good for you. You are indeed correct.
You did not come from a monkey.
But humankind DID evolve from a branch of the primate tree. We DO share a common ancestor with the great apes (those are NOT monkeys, by the way. Different species).
As for the education... I suggest you get one.
Evolution is supported by more evidence than any other scientific theory.
"Scripture says"
Of course it does.
But how do you know it's the truth?
LazyJones1 3 years ago
As an engineer, I love science and mathematics and hate Lies (Evolution, Atheism, overdependence on the Scientific Method, thinking that science with its VERY limited body of knowledge is sufficiently and entirely trustworthy).
wr1830 3 years ago
Not that im defending them or anything, you can be taught something, and not believe it. You can be taught creationism and not believe it (i personally dont) i just believe that people are entitled to their opinions
Splitter94 3 years ago
SHUT up science cann't solve all problems. Evolution is stupid. Woo we found a monkey and they do stuff we do so that must mean that we come from monkeys. That is abunch of bull shit atheism.REPUBS ALL THE WAY.
daaaaaaaaa123 3 years ago
fuck you your ignorant
renegadeace1 3 years ago
Seeing that the body of science is extremely limited and your placing your entire trust in such limitation, I would say that your mind and body of knowledge is extremely limited and daresay ignorant.
wr1830 3 years ago
so what do you place your entire trust in, people graduate degrees overwhelmingly believe in evolution, if thats not how we were created then how were we, was it the literal meaning of the Bible, hey just FYI this is separation of church and state so you can't force that on others, I'm a Christian but what someone believes regarding the supernatural is their choice no one else's
renegadeace1 3 years ago
»SHUT up science cann't solve all problems.«
Explain the relevance of this statement.
Then explain how ANYTHING CAN "solve all problems".
»Evolution is stupid. Woo we found a monkey and they do stuff we do so that must mean that we come from monkeys. That is abunch of bull shit atheism.REPUBS ALL THE WAY.«
If that was how science works, then yes. It would be stupid. Fortunately, that is NOT how science works.
You need more education.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
there is evidence of course for microevolution (which is, changes in the EXISTING species). Liberals like you try to coinside that with macroevolution (the origin of NEW species which there is no evidence yet for that)
Mleon0011 3 years ago
Hopefully in your research of evolution, you will realize that distinctions between "micro" and "macro" are meaningless. There is only "evolution". Consider the sequoia, which can live over 2,000 years and reach heights of nearly 400 feet. We can observe small changes over years and decades, but no single person has observed the full life cycle of the tree. However, we can infer that a full grown sequoia was once a sapling based on our current observations of growth.
adr150 3 years ago
adr150 distinctions between micro and macro are full of meaning just like we have classification systems in the animals. Zebras and dogs are really different. Chickens and Apes are really different. Dogs and wolves although different they are not that different. Dogs and wolves, for example, are able to bring forth.
mandlreed 3 years ago
That is an unscientific notion until you can tell us WHAT prevents one species from turning into another over thousands of generations.
WHAT?
There must be some natural mechanism that prevents the genetic drift, DNA errors and random mutations from accumulating. Something that stops them from making the organism too different from it's ... what, "base form"?!
Unscientific gibberish or wishful thinking.
There is no such mechanism.
Mutations do not know of "species". It's a human definition.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
I have no idea what prevents species to perform "macro-evolution". Don't shift the burden of proof. How am I obligated to show something ("macro-evolution") that doesn't exist. It is up to you to prove macro-evolution occurs. You are guilty of unscientific gibberish and wishful thinking.
mandlreed 3 years ago
»I have no idea what prevents species to perform "macro-evolution". Don't shift the burden of proof. How am I obligated to show something ("macro-evolution") that doesn't exist.«
Because you present it's existence as fact, when you claim that "macro-evolution" doesn't happen.
"It is up to you to prove macro-evolution occurs."
Why? There's no such thing as "macro-evolution". Only Evolution. That's my point.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Macro-evolution is a concept invented by creationists to muddy the waters, so they can claim that it's not clear enough to see properly. It is not a scientific concept.
There is no macro-evolution in science, only evolution.
If you want only "micro-evolution", you'll need a mechanism that prevents mutations from building up. Where is it? The burden of proof IS on you. You made the claim.
Besides:
tinyurl . com / 64a57x
talkorigins . org /faqs/comdesc/
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Don't give me these websites, I'm not your babysitter. If evolution is fact it is up to you to provide evidence that it exists. You prove to me that it works--simple.
mandlreed 3 years ago
Are you now denouncing EVOLUTION?
I thought we already established that as fact.
Anyway, the websites will convince you. That is why I present them. They present the evidence. Something that I couldn't possibly do in a YouTube comment. If you thought that was possible, it would explain a few things.
Science is not simple. It does not rest purely on common sense. You need a lot of knowledge. The websites will present it in the best possible way.
evolution . berkeley . edu
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Lazy you believe evolution is a fact. I didn't subscribe to that except micro-evolution is true. If you want to refer to it as evolution. I don't see micro-evolution as evolution it just changes within the species.
mandlreed 3 years ago
And how do you guarantee that the mutations will not accumulate?
We've seen examples of this in nature, as well as laboratories. Eventually, the different 'versions' of the animal will no longer be able to breed with eachother, and will grow more and more different. Eventually we then label them as different species.
This is how evolution works, and you have provided nothing that can stop it from happening.
More mutations --> more changes --> The further the animal will be from it's original.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
How can I show something (macro-evolution) that doesn't exist? It's up to you to show that macro-evolution exists. One animal becoming a completely different type of animal. Darwin stated that the plants and the animals are related. How is the human being related to the frog? and most importantly The Evidence?
mandlreed 3 years ago
»How can I show something (macro-evolution) that doesn't exist?«
I'm not asking you to prove that it exists. I'm asking you to provide evidence of the mechanism that prevents it's existence. A mechanism that prevents mutations from accumulating. Such a mechanism must exist for macro-evolution to be impossible.
»It's up to you to show that macro-evolution exists.«
Evolution is real. Macroevolution is a natural consequence of evolution. Just as 1+1=2 and 2+2=4 and 4+4=8, mutations accumulate.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
»One animal becoming a completely different type of animal.«
As the mutations accumulate, there will be more and more physical differences in the animal, and it will be less and less like it's "original". This is evolution 101. Gradual changes over time. Not major instantaneous leaps, but tiny genetic changes, past on to the offspring, which itself mutates. Darwin stated that the plants and the animals are related. How is the human being related to the frog? and most importantly The Evidence?
LazyJones1 3 years ago
»Darwin stated that the plants and the animals are related.«
Correct.
»How is the human being related to the frog?
Both are tetrapods. Four-limbed lifeforms. But where mammals (that's us) are amniotes, amphibians (frogs) are egg-layers. So they branched away from us between 365 mio years ago (first tetrapods) and 340 years ago (first amniotes).
In a sense, we are closer related to the Dinosaurs, than we are to the frogs.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
*Correction: "340 years ago" should of course be "340 mio years ago".
»The Evidence?«
That's part of it. We find no amphibians prior to the first tetrapod, and no amniotic amphibians. Conclusion: They branched off at that point in time. The tetrapods simply evolved in different directions due to mutations.
Prediction: This should be verifiable by DNA matching.
Verification: It is.
Two different methods giving the same re-testable result.
But there is much more. Try and find out yourself.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Lazy How do we know that we find no amphibians prior to the first tetrapod?
mandlreed 3 years ago
»How do we know that we find no amphibians prior to the first tetrapod?«
Because we don't (find any amphibians prior to the first tetrapod).
Not a single amphibian fossil has been found, that dates back prior to the first tetrapod.
And for actual frogs, it's an even shorter history. They didn't appear until some 150 mio years after the first amphibians.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Lazy 1. Humans and frogs are tetrapods (good observation) 2. That proves that we were once frogs (bad conclusion). How about this? God made us similar to but different than a frog because he chose to.
Let's try this 1. bicycles and motorcycles have two wheels (good observation)2. that proves they came from a scooter 350 million years ago (bad conclusion)
mandlreed 3 years ago
»1. Humans and frogs are tetrapods (good observation) 2. That proves that we were once frogs (bad conclusion).«
Agreed. Bad conclusion. Where did you get that from?
All I stated was that we share a common ancestor with amphibians. And our DNA supports this fact. It's not just a conclusion drawn on the fossil record, it provides testable predictions, which all corroborate the theory.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
There is no record whatsoever that we come from frogs. We have similar Dna with other animals (good observation) that proves that we came from them (bad conclusion)
mandlreed 3 years ago
»There is no record whatsoever that we come from frogs.«
No one has stated that we evolved from frogs.
That is just as incorrect as stating that we evolved from monkeys or even apes.
It shows a lack of understanding.
»We have similar Dna with other animals (good observation) that proves that we came from them (bad conclusion)«
Agreed. That is a very poor conclusion. It takes a lot more to make that conclusion. Fortunately, we DO have more. A lot more. Tons more. From different fields.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Lazy you KNOW we came from a common ancestor with amphibians?
mandlreed 3 years ago
»Lazy you KNOW we came from a common ancestor with amphibians?«
As close as you can be to knowing.
There's too much data to ignore.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
lazy just want to let you know one pertinent fact. All animals produce after their kind. Never been proven otherwise, I know you evolutionist like to overlook these pertinent facts.
mandlreed 3 years ago
»lazy just want to let you know one pertinent fact. All animals produce after their kind. Never been proven otherwise, I know you evolutionist like to overlook these pertinent facts.«
This is an oooold misleading creationist argument.
Evolution does not happen in ONE birth.
Each generation has slight differences in the DNA, due to mutations, genetic drift, etc. They pass these on to their off-spring, who has further changes of their own. So the changes become more and more. They accumulate.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Eventually, the difference when looking over hundreds of generations is so big, that we have to label it as a new species.
Species produce after their kind, with slight differences. These differences are passed on, and more differences are added.
It's not difficult to see, that eventually we will have a very different animal.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
That so full of logical fallacy that I will even begin to give a reply to that. It is not difficult to see that what you assert is not true.
wr1830 3 years ago
"That so full of logical fallacy that I will even begin to give a reply to that. It is not difficult to see that what you assert is not true."
The losers argument.
You are in fact saying, that you have no argument.
1. Mutations, genetic drift and variation in the genes DO occur.
2. These are given to the offspring, which also experiences these changes to their DNA.
3. Given time, the DNA, and thereby the very creature, will be completely different from the original.
It's quite simple.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
and how did everything come from nothing? think of it u think particuls just CAMe ou of no where and u think that the earth cam from a boom u do realize that exposions and implostions destroy things right?there is no way u can or ever will prove evolution. so fuck off go fuck algor or somthing.
phill198 3 years ago
"and how did everything come from nothing?"
That's what the bible claims, NOT what science claims.
"think of it u think particuls just CAMe ou of no where"
Nope.
"and u think that the earth cam from a boom"
Wrong again.
"u do realize that exposions and implostions destroy things right?"
Your point? The big bang was neither of those.
LazyJones1 3 years ago 2
ok so where did the particules com from?
phill198 3 years ago
"ok so where did the particules com from?"
They formed some time after the big bang, according to the theory of the big bang.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
"there is no way u can or ever will prove evolution."
Or gravitation. Or atomic theory. Or cell theory, quantum field theory or tectonic plate theory.
We know. Science does not use proofs.
Scientific theories cannot be proven.
But they can be disproved, which hasn't happened, they can be documented through observations, repeated tests and experiments, and verifiable predictions.
And we have done that. And we have massive amounts of evidence.
Evolution is undeniable.
LazyJones1 3 years ago 2
dude u cant disprove or prove it. it would take billions of years and its preicted that we will be gone by then.
phill198 3 years ago
"dude u cant disprove or prove it. it would take billions of years and its preicted that we will be gone by then."
Evolution is observable in nature. It is testable and verified in laboratories. We can make predictions based on the theory, and then go verify the predictions through new observations.
Evolution is supported by evidence from several independent scientific fields.
It is the most documented and supported scientific theory of all.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
So you have witnessed one animal turn into another?? I don't think so
guinealifter 3 years ago
"So you have witnessed one animal turn into another?? I don't think so"
First of all, we do not need to, with all the other evidence. Witnessing such an event, would simply be the dot over the i.
It is NOT a prerequisite required in order to accept the theory, as some creationists try to make it seem.
Think of it this way: We do not need to actually SEE a murder, in order to sentence the killer. The evidence speaks for itself.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Second:
We have actually seen speciation, which is the first step in creatures becoming other creatures. And once speciation has occured, biologists have no knowledge of anything to prevent the animal from becoming a new animal, over time.
Once a speciation event has occurred, the animals have split into two groups, that no longer interacts, genetically. So each mutation/variation will take them further apart from each other, giving rise to 2 seperate types of animals over time.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Third:
As you can hopefully understand, "one animal turning into another" is not the way it happens. That's a misunderstood idea birthed by creationists, and has nothing to do with evolution.
Evolution witnessed while in progress:
tinyurl . com / 44bqro
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Lazy this is microevolution not macroevolution. Stephen Jay Gould does refer to macroevolution so it's not as if its not scientific.
mandlreed 3 years ago
1. Stephen Jay Gould is not the alpha and omega of evolution, although many creationists have this strange idea that he is. He is but ONE scientist in the field.
2. The point is that there is no difference between macro- and microevolution. The mechanisms involved are the same. The only difference is the factor of time.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Good question. Evolution spans billions of years, and we have yet to have a true billion-year test case to know with certainty that evolution is true. Evolution is still just a hypothesis and is misnomered a Theory. Simply, Evolution is not true and is haphazardly concocted by the feeble mind of man. I am with you mandlbreed.
wr1830 3 years ago
"Evolution is still just a hypothesis and is misnomered a Theory"
That's not up to you to decide.
The scientific community is overwhelmingly in agreement on that one. What you think, is 100% irrelevant.
LazyJones1 3 years ago 2
lazy this is a fallactious argument in violation of argumentum ad populum and verecundiam (appeal to authority)
mandlreed 3 years ago
Those are philosophical terms, not applicable to science. Science is not dictated by logic, the way those arguments are.
The evidence is the basis of the conclusions, not the oratory skills, nor the rhetorics employed, by the scientists.
THAT is why the scientific community agrees.
THAT is why your opinion is irrelevant.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
u guys think u can prove that the earth was created by evolution? its IMPOSSIBLE there is no way to prove it. and saying u believe in evolution is the same as saying u believe in god there is no way to prove eather of them but i will go with the one where i can go somewhere after i die so i can go to heaven.
phill198 3 years ago
"u guys think u can prove that the earth was created by evolution?"
No. That would be silly. The earth cannot reproduce, cannot mutate, doesn't have any DNA...
"saying u believe in evolution is the same as saying u believe in god there is no way to prove eather of them"
God cannot be proven, nor disproven.
Evolution can be tested, verified, and disproven. Evolution is science. God if pure faith.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
"but i will go with the one where i can go somewhere after i die so i can go to heaven."
Most scientists belive in god.
And it also goes the other way around, many believers accept evolution.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Here's 11.000+ clergy members who accept evolution:
tinyurl . com / ywx5yv
Even the pope is on board, being smart enough to accept that the evidence is undeniable. As was his two predecessors.
The church has no issue with evolution.
Only creationists do.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
"Most scientists belive in god."
I'm not sure that that is true. Do you have any references?
I found references to a 1998 survey (although not the actual survey itself) that was published in Nature which according to [see links in info section], less than 10% of 'leading' scientists hold religious beliefs.
adr150 3 years ago
Its also kind of interesting how the creationist site tries to spin a 1991 Gallup poll which demonstrated that,
"higher education, and belief in evolution over millions of years as the source of human existence were concurrent. From these statistics it would appear that higher education, and particularly specialization in the natural sciences will indoctrinate students into a naturalistic or atheistic view of the world."
They almost explicitly argue that higher education is BAD!
adr150 3 years ago
They seem to be somewhat current as they have references to 2005 documents. So its interesting that the hard core creationists are citing scientific studies to argue against evolution, which seems to be the MO of IDers. Of course both get it woefully wrong, but to assert that atheism is the basis of higher education and not even acknowledge the possibility of opposite causal relationship is utterly ignorant.
adr150 3 years ago
BTW, thanks Lazy for such voracity in engaging all creationist/ID loons as they come. I would do it but I find it gets tiresome as the same tired arguments are trotted out.
And thanks to all the fools who are happily ignorant and without education for giving me entertainment.
adr150 3 years ago
Here we go:
"About two thirds of scientists believe"
tinyurl . com / 2nzqxa
LazyJones1 3 years ago
I'm not so sure about this one since it includes social scientists like political scientists. I think a sampling of natural scientists is more appropriate when talking about 'scientists', especially in the context of this video - social scientists are not held to the standards of the Scientific Method
"Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God."
adr150 3 years ago
I remember seeing something like 68% somewhere.
I can't locate it, though.
Indeed there is a lower percentage of believers among the higher educated, and a MUCH lower fundamental following among the higher educated, than there is among the general populace.
The reasons for this are not as simple as the creationists would spin it, I agree.
physorg . com / news102700045 . html
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Interesting, I'll include the link in the info
adr150 3 years ago
wr1830 glad to hear it.
mandlreed 3 years ago
»How about this? God made us similar to but different than a frog because he chose to.«
Ah, the deceptive god argument.
The kind of god who would place tons of false hints in the anatomy of all beings, in the ground, create the geological coloumn, the right age of each fossil finding, and in the DNA of all living things.
Sorry, but I agree with Ken Miller. That's deceitful. Why honor a god like that? Does that even fit with your own image of him/her/it?
LazyJones1 3 years ago
"I do not feel obliged to believe that that same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo Galilei
»1. bicycles and motorcycles have two wheels (good observation)2. that proves they came from a scooter 350 million years ago (bad conclusion)«
Agreed. Since we know of no way for scooters to reproduce, nor to evolve in any way, and it contradicts all datings of all findings of scooters.
Life reproduces, evolves and is dateable.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
I agree there have been minor changes in the animals, new breeds forming for example. There is nothing to support the leap required for macro-evolution to occur.
mandlreed 3 years ago
»I agree there have been minor changes in the animals, new breeds forming for example. There is nothing to support the leap required for macro-evolution to occur.«
No one leap is required. Just a buttload of minor successive leaps. That will take you far enough. And that is what our observations support. Nothing has ever been observed to prevent mutations from accumulating.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Lazy Jones So far, all animals produce after their own kind. There has never been any exceptions to this rule. Macroevolution doesn't happen, it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary
mandlreed 3 years ago
»Lazy Jones So far, all animals produce after their own kind.«
This is true.
»There has never been any exceptions to this rule.«
This is true.
»Macroevolution doesn't happen«
This is not true.
As I've said repeatedly, macroevolution is merely the accumulation of thousands and thousands of tiny mutations.
The more genetic changes we get, the more different the animal will be from the "original". Eventually, looking back thousands of generations, you will be able to see macroevolution.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
»it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary«
Nope.
My statement is true: Macroevolution is what happens when a species has gone through enough changes in DNA to be considered a new species.
You are the one who claims that there is some unknown mechanism to prevent the accumulation of these mutations/genetic changes, despite what the scientific community agrees on.
Until you can prove the existence of this mysterious mechanism, it's simply wishful thinking. Mutations WILL accumulate.
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Wheres the facts? Wheres the missing link? If evolution existed when did it start? Why do we still have apes? If evolution existed than the cycle would continue hence, continuous evolving. And if evolution existed why are there so many different races of people. Shouldnt we all of evolved into the same. Republicans believe in something greater that. Its called God. What i hate more than liberals are unintellegent liberals.
Mleon0011 3 years ago
clearly, you have not even begun to grasp the the very basic concepts put forth by evolution. Seriously, read the wikipedia entry on evolution if for no other reason than to understand what it is you are arguing against.
adr150 3 years ago
and then a monkey-fish-frog had butt sex with another monkey, and that monkey had a mutant retard baby who screwed another retard monkey and that made you. So there you go, your the retarded offspring of five monkey's having butt sex with a fish-squirrel. Congratulations.
christopherhalk 3 years ago
your argument countered in one word:
"strawman"
LazyJones1 3 years ago
Evolution in a nutshell.
In the beginning we were all fish, ok, swimming around in the water, and then one day a couple of fish had a retard baby, and the retard baby was different so it got to live. So retard fish goes on to make more retard babies and then one day a retard baby fish crawled out of the ocean with it's mutant fish hands and it had butt sex with a squirrel and made retard-frog-squirrel, and then that had a retard baby which was a monkey-fish-frog,
christopherhalk 3 years ago