Added: 1 year ago
From: BereanBeacon
Views: 3,109
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (613)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • They already look like morons

  • You can't win against creationists because:

    1. They deny the evidence> fossils, dating methods, DNA, humans are apes.

    2. They don't know what evolution is, they will move the goal posts to the Big Bang Theory.

    3. They will change the subject to religion, sin and God, calling you and Atheist.

    4. They are brainwashed and will never change their minds.

  • Where are these ''Evolutionists''???

  • ...or don't want to hear it. I believe it was Hitler who stated that its easier to argue facts than beliefs.

  • To answer the question in the video,They already did. You just weren't paying attention. ^^^

  • the Christian churches own outright many schools. The Catholic church is by no means poor. The creationists get millions a year from private donors.

  • For all of you online "scientists" criticizing him: why don't YOU take the challenge?

  • @pixelsword Because Evolution was accepted 150 years ago and you missed it.

  • Creationism is made to look moronic - not just by the actual scientists, but by the creationists themselves. Creationism is irrelevant. It's already been shown to be de facto religious a court of law.

    From Edwards v Aguillard - 'The Act impermissibly endorses religion by advancing the religious belief that a supernatural being created humankind. The legislative history demonstrates that the term "creation science," as contemplated by the state legislature, embraces this religious teaching.'

  • @TheFallibleFiend Note that supporting evolution and denouncing creationism were 72 nobel laureates, but of course that's irrelevant compared to the incomparable genius of "Doctor" Mastropaolo!

  • Comment removed

  • New Ape apparently is merely another brass and bluff chicken.

    Pity.

  • @josephmastropaolo The evidence that I have put forward strongly supports the view that the brass and buff chicken is you, Joseph Mastropaolo. But in addition that it is you who is purposefully malevolent and a liar.

  • 12-12-11

    Dear New Ape (eosimias),

    Let's do a mini-trial and make the issue whether or not I have published 22 science articles in peer reviewed science journals.

    Vow that you have your $10,000 ready to hand the judge and you will abide by the rules, then I'll start to make the arrangements.

    Well New Ape, let's see if you are ready to come out from behind your nom de peur and put your money where your mouth is.

    Joseph Mastropaolo

  • @josephmastropaolo Hello Joseph, the more correct scientific term for ape is "pithecus" not "simian". Simians refer to all groups of higher primates, including new world monkeys (Platyrrhini) and old world monkeys (Catarrhini). Finally, "eo" does not just mean "new", but also "early" or "dawn". Thus "eosimias" stands for "dawn monkey", not "new ape".

  • @josephmastropaolo You are playing with words in order to deceit and inflate your credentials. When you state that "I have published 22 science articles in peer reviewed science journals, one of which was entitled, An objective ancestry test for fossil bones. The Physiologist 45 (4): 343, 2002', the implication is that the 22 articles were themselves peer reviewed. This is clearly not the case. Your supposed article in The Physiologist is nothing more than the title.

  • @josephmastropaolo Anyone can see for themselves that your supposed article is nothing but title, which you have stated and nothing more. It does not even contain an ABSTRACT! This is all that was published in the journal: 31.2 An objective ancestry test for fossil bones. J.A. Mastropaolo. California State Univ., Huntington Beach. Anyone can download it at: w w w.the-aps.org/publications/tph­ys/medals/images/tphys8x02.pdf This is a farce, Joseph!

  • @eosimias1 This Mastropaolo has long since gone beyond irrelevant and has entered into the realm of the pathetic... he is resorting to a wager... his issues go further than his hapless defense of creationism..

  • @josephmastropaolo Only five of your publications are listed in PubMed. w w.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term­=Mastropaolo%20JA and the Web of Science only has 8 items listed under your name. Your H index is 3, which is dismally poor (especially for someone who has already retired, as older scientist naturally have higher H index than younger ones). If you are going to prove that your have published 22 peer reviewed articles, you will need to show the reviewers comments for each.

  • @eosimias1 What kind of scholar attempts a bet at such a thing instead of just providing his c.v. ?

  • @TheFallibleFiend Someone who is a false scholar.

  • Comment removed

  • All atheists are in Full Denial of the truth of God and Jesus Christ.

    Sorry if i offended anyone but that's the TRUTH.

  • @xxearthbull Christ or Messiah simply means one anointed or lathered in perfumed liquid. I'm pretty sure there are Mexicans named Jesus who've had baths and used cologne. As for God, there was an Italian singer named Dio, which is Italian for God. So Jesus Christ and God exist (although not like you said). What does that have to do with evolution?

  • @TheBlitMaster But they didnt say that they were God the creator and have the power to forgive sins and acceptance would bring eternity in heaven rejection eternal damnation... which Jesus Christ did :)

  • Evolutionary biologists exist but, outside of slang, so-called 'evolutionists' do not, because 'Evolutionism' does not, and insisting that it does will not make it so.

    No scientist, or group of scientists, controls either media or universities; nor does any scientist, or group of scientists, control public schools. Public schools are controlled by school districts represented by elected members of the community whose mandate it is to establish academic policy freely

    cont...

  • why is the scale in balance ? surely genesis outweighs the other side.

    If the creations offer is honest.

    How come humans dont adapt to their environment ? My family has lived in Minnesota for many generations. Not 1 sign that we are adapting to the cold.

  • @SqueakerAlpha What do you mean you haven't adapted? Do you mean you feel cold and need to wear a coat? That doesn't mean you haven't adapted to survive the cold, and mutations like that don't happen because you want too. Creationists aren't honest either, one watch of "Way of The Master" or "Expelled! No Intelligence Allowed" by ID young Terran creationists expose their dishonesty, or you could just watch DonExodus' videos exposing their dishonesty if you want the easy path to their dishonesty.

  • "they could make us look like morons""??????yep you said it man .

  • The "rules" of this prize don't make any sense, and even if we were to prove it according to your rules, you wouldn't buy it. You simply want an easy answer, and nothing is a lot easier than "Jesus!!!!". You know that evolution basically disproves Genesis, and consequently a large chunk of the bible, and that means that you might not go to heaven, as if the bible isn't true, then Heaven wouldn't exist. You are a coward.

  • How about something funnier?

    Mastropaolo, Joseph. An objective ancestry test for fossil bones.

    TJ, The In-Depth Journal of Creation 16(3): 84-88, 2002.

    Krupa, Donna. Discovery Of The Oldest Human Ancestor Is (again) Called Into Question. Press release by the American Physiological Society Intersociety Meeting, The Power of Comparative Physiology, 2002.

    Mastropaolo, Joseph. An objective ancestry test for fossil bones.

    The Physiologist 45 (4): 343, 2002.

    Pity poor eosimias1.

  • @josephmastropaolo You are a liar, Joseph. But actually I do not think it is funny. You demean the peer review process when you suggest that you have published 22 peer reviewed article and include an abstract to a poster as one of them. You know full well that abstracts for posters at meetings do not go through a peer review process. You should be ashamed of yourself!

  • You want to hear the funniest thing? I decided to look up the only citation that the "more info" has on Joseph Mastropaolo's "22 science articles in peer reviewed journals: Physiologist 45 (4): 343, 2002" and it is for a POSTER presentation at a meeting! Poster presentations at meetings DO NOT require peer review, nor do they count as a publication. Is this a joke?

  • @eosimias1 well done.. this mastropaolo is a joke.. masquerading as a research scientist.. kudos.

  • @daNDayati I stand by what I say. When Joseph Mastropaolo states that he has published 22 science articles in peer reviewed science journals, one of which was entitled, An objective ancestry test for fossil bones. The Physiologist 45 (4): 343, 2002. And then he goes on to suggest that others in the scientific community are purposefully malevolent (from the video info), he himself is being deceitful and an outright liar. This publication was NOT peer reviewed.

  • @eosimias1 outright liar and a fraud... again, well done..

  • @daNDayati You may be interested in reading my responses to Joseph's "challenge".

  • they did

  • You have been brought to embarrassing halt in pretty much every court case involving you.

  • Ok, just saying, they already pretty much have shut down the creationist theory, and have backed it up with proof. Creationist's haven't. Besides, when was the last time you have seen something just poof into existance? Evolution isn't something you can just sit back and watch, it something that takes hundreds of lifetimes. I'm not saying that god doesn't exist, I'm saying that maybe you are not understanding how he controls the universe. Which isn't a bad thing. Nobody can say they do.

  • WTF is an Evolutionist? Who are these people?

  • @gregrutz

    They are folks who hold to the religion of evolution.

  • We don't shut creationist down because you can't debate with people that do not fallow logic. and you can't shut down brainwashing. you won't find to many people that start believing in creation at 40. you were taught it in preschool when your mind was easy to mold. you trusted the people that were in charge of you to tell you the truth. They failed you. not because they wanted to. but because the same thing happened to them. they didn't know better. you already look like morons, no help needed.

  • this is a troll video against creationists right?

  • @teedonster2 Nope, there is not one single evidence that proves that one kind of animal can evolve to another. Sure, they can adapt, but if they'll go any further (genetically speaking) they'll end up retarded and dead. You really have to be extremely blind, or in complete denial, not to see intelligent design within every life-form.

  • @PirateXzibit do you accept creatures adapt and evolve depending on their enviroment, yes or no?

  • @teedonster2 Adapt, yes, that has been scientifically proven. Evolve, no, that's pseudo-science.

  • @PirateXzibit you you believe god made dogs and wolves seperately?

    rather than wolves evolving into dogs? is that what your saying?

  • @teedonster2 No, I believe some kind of wolf came first. Natural selection took care of the rest. Dogs and wolves are still the same kind, just as horses and zebras.

  • @PirateXzibit did you know dogs evolved to eat at regular times instead of fasting like wolves? you telling me that isnt evolution?

  • @teedonster2 They are still the same kind of animal, so I don't see how that is evolution...? Animals and humans have the extraordinary ability to adapt to their environment, but they don't "adapt" to other kinds of animals, that's pure religion.

  • @PirateXzibit if stephen hawking and other top scientists say evolution happens, i believe it. any reason why i shouldnt? whats some inbred bible bashing redneck got to bring to the table?

  • @teedonster2 Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Any reason you shouldn't? Yes, don't follow a religion with no evidence whatsoever. Evolution is all faith.

    And by the way, being a Christian doesn't make you an inbred redneck. It doesn't make you stupid. The best minds in human history has been Christians.

    To sum this up; this issue has nothing to do with human intelligence, only humbleness. (Using stereotypes to defame people isn't very humble.)

  • @PirateXzibit you just said "don't follow a religion with no evidence whatsoever" then say your a christian? you realise theres not a scrap of evidence to prove jesus was a demi-god right?

    you also realise the earth, our solar system and our milky way formed itself right? along with other galaxies?

    you do realise this right? if not i cant continue debating the uneducated

  • @teedonster2 Uneducated? Wow, dude, you never cease to amaze me. Please, I love science and to study biology on my free-time, aswell as the evolution-theory. I can tell you with 100% accuracy that there is not a single evidence for either Big Bang or macro-evolution, only philosophical arguments. It's pure fiction. There's a whole science about Star Wars, but it doesn't make it true.

    Alright, I've said everything I wanted now, thanks for the discussion, have a great life. ;) Peace

  • @PirateXzibit answer do you accept the milky way and other galaxies in the universe formed themselves, yes or no?

  • @PirateXzibi ''not a single evidence for m. evolution..'' HERE IS ONE, now stop lying. ERVs are lingering remnants of failed viral infection, which occurred in an ancestor's sex cell and got propagated in its offspring. The viral insertion site is completely random and finding one in the same location in two individuals indicates they each had that same ancestor. Humans and chimps have 98,000 ERV locations in common. Common ancestor?

  • @PirateXzibit Have you ever heard of the Lenski Experiments? Wikipedia has a nice summary (with references to the experiment at the bottom) at (wiki address)/wiki/E._coli_long-ter­m_evolution_experiment

    The main website for the experiments is at myxo(dot)css(dot)msu(dot)edu/e­coli/

    The website has a rather extensive description of the experiment, including strain catalogues and abstracts of all papers (and some full ones) related to the experiment. It's a pretty big deal among "evolutionists"

  • @PirateXzibit But that drawl DOES STRONGLY SUGGEST (like that evidence for evolution you seem to be ignoring) that the narrator is a redneck, which are, in certain U.S. states, rumored to have incestuous relationships habitually, without protection because of religious beliefs (the "without protection" part, not the "incest" part). The top scientists HAVE presented the evidence: "The Greatest Show on Earth", "Why Evolution is True", and pretty much all medicine, among others. What's he have?

  • To clarify:[No government or agency acting for a government] can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can it force force to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance." Everson v. Board of Education (1947) Hugo Black

  • pontecanis calls me a dimwit, yet he is too dense to understand the clear implications of this video (not to mention his pitiful grasp of the US Constitution).

    If the LSP is a fraud--why not get 1000 true belivers in evolutionism to kick in 10 bucks each and prove that Dr. Mastroapolo has no evidence?

    That will not happen, because evolutionists have no real evidence.

    I don't have time for feeding the Internet chickens, so pontecanis can cluck to his/her heart's content.

  • @theinsectmanofwv ~The mini trial will never happen as no court in the US will take on an issue wherein the Court must rule on the validity of a religion. The money is a grandiose smoke screen by Mastropaolo and is completely irrelevent, although it might deter some willing to take this pathetic narcissist on. The reason scientists are not responding to the challenge is not that there is no evidence for evolution, but that people recognize that Mastropaolo is not entirely rational and have no..

  • desire to participate in the ridiculous charade into which he intends to drag them in his usual manipulative manner. Most people are too busy to devote a considerable amount of time to mendacious and irrational persuits such as the so-called mini-trial. And as stated previously, no Superior Court will allow itself to be involved in such a manipulative scam.

  • You write like you were confined for those 35 years and hallucinated yourself a mental heath professional.

    You write like you haven't read the book, Originality Throughout the Universe.

    You also write like you would not know a traffic court trial from a mini-trial.

    Get well soon.

  • @josephmastropaolo ~Thank you for convincingly proving my point. It is very interesting that a large number of YouTube creatobibliolators demonstrate very highly similar personality traits and very similar deficits in intellectual functioning. I am resolved to do a paper on the subject which ought to be informative and somewhat amusing; of course creatobibliolators will be unhappy about it, but those are the breaks.

  • If Pontecanis recommends that the book, Originality Throughout the Universe, not be bought and read, then any normal person will find that a strong recommendation to buy and read it. The reason evolutionists must rail against it is because Originality disposes of atheism and evolution. And anyone hallucinating that atheism and evolution are reality is fulfilling the definition of psychosis.

    Pontecanis, seek medical attention.

    Get well soon.

    P.S. The mini-trial is valid. $10,000 says so.

  • @josephmastropaolo ~Having been a mental health professional for more than 35 years, it is fair for me to state you wouldn't know a hallucination from a barn door. The book Originality Throughout the Universe is riddled with errors, distortions, dissembling, and outright lies--it is a waste ofmoney and time, being filled with every time-worn creatobibliolator cliche to be found, and then some. It is a total waste of time. BTW, the minitrial is CRAPOLA--no court in the US would allow it .

  • Having the experience that I do, earned the hard way via providing hands-on treatment in one of the busiest Mental Health Departments in N. America (seeing more people than Belleview in NYC), I do recognize the signs of a Narcissistic Personality Disorder when I see them, as well as Dunning-Kruger Syndrome. This seems to be a pattern within a segment of the creatobibliolator movement: authoritarian, antidemocratic,belittling of others, assumption of special abilities, irrational entitlement.

  • If pontecanis hs anything other than Internet hot air--he/she can win 10 grand. Listen carefully to what I say during this video.

    It is simple.

    We have the goods--evolutionists hide in the woods.

  • @theinsectmanofwv ~ONLY ONE PROBLEM, dimwit. The challenge is a fraud. How do I know this? The 1st Amendment of the US Constitution forbids any branch of government from enacting any law or making any ruling seen to be an endorsement of any given religion. No court in the US will accept a case requiring it to decide the legitimacy or illegitimacy of any religion. Since the "Life-Science" challenge requires just that, it will NEVER be heard in any court as it is unconstitutional. It is a hoax.

  • This book out to be entitled "Disinformation Throughout the Universe--Lies, distortions, dissembling and complete nonsense" by former Physical Education Professor Joseph Mastropaolo, author of the Life-Science Prize Hoax. The Prof is so ill-informed that he cannot distinguish Cosmology from evolution, much less anything else. Absolutely hopeless, without validity in any way.

  • @pontecanis Joseph Mastropaplo

    I have published 22 science articles in peer reviewed science journals, one of which was entitled, An objective ancestry test for fossil bones. The Physiologist 45 (4): 343, 2002.

    That you advocate a 340-year-old superstition suggests that you are the ignorant or purposely malevolent party. Do you have any science credentials to the contrary?

    Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D.

    Professor Emeritus

    California State University, Long Beach

  • Comment removed

  • noone has to make you look like a moron... you've got that under control all on your own

  • Hitler was not a Christain according to the way he lived, but his actions were based on his belief in evolutionism.

    Cluck, cluck.

  • ''The Dover decision was by a judge who was NOT a scientist ''

    IF it was by a judge that was a scientist,

    1. You would have cried even harder about the judge.

    2. The trial would have been much, much shorter.

  • We don't do it because you don't need us to make you look like idiots, ya'll can handle that one on your own.

  • @TheInfamousBojangles Cluck, cluck.

  • troll and your got to be kidding because its been proven though out the ages

  • Awesome video!

  • Your Dover dodge is just more Net hot air and bluff.

    Hitler was an evolutionist.

    If you have any science--go for the Life Science Prize offered by Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo.

  • @theinsectmanofwv Hitler was also a christian. You can't win a strawman argument or prize.

  • Creationism -- it failed in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and it failed in Edwards v. Aguillard.

    Of course, creationists will probably play the conspiracy card on this one; "THE EVILUTIONISTS CONTROL THE COURTS!"

    Didn't Nazis say the same thing about courts and rule of law whenever it impeded their totalitarian agenda to subvert the whole of civil society to their totalitarianism?

    Christian fundamentalists-- 21st century fascists, ideologically identical to their Islamic terrorist cousins

  • @multiplemugs LOL and thank you!

  • What is an Evolutionist?

    They did make you look like morons, why do people laugh at creationsits.

  • lol media?! your joking right?

  • I wonder why scientists have "all this power?" Maybe, because they actually are benefitial to society?

  • sounds like a nascar fan

  • Hey, pontecaris, federal law once said that blacks were not equal. Now it says prborn babies are not hmans.

    Bring your science and your federal layyers and win the LSP.

    Otherwise, just cluck, cluck, cluck, on th e Net.

  • @theinsectmanofwv

    Wasn't your Bible used to justify the slavery... which is, more/less, the basis of those former laws.

    (We'll leave out the bible's use in justifying witch-burning, wife-beating, child killing... etc, etc, etc.)

  • @MrNobodyWV

    -Just to name a few ;-]

  • Comment removed

  • Oh Dear...the "Life Science" prize has already been resolved. It is United States Federal Law that creationism/intelligent design is religion, and evolution is science. In a series of court cases, creationists have lost every single decision. Now, they are attempting to pull a fast one again by denying funding to Planned Parenthood---discrimination on the basis of religion, another violation of the Constitution. It is a good thing the Constitution protects the public from antidemocratic...

  • creatobibliolators who willingly break the laws of the country in order to force their own misbegotten agenda on the rest of society. The attitude of creationists seems to be no lie is too big, no distortion too outlandish, no dissemblance too dishonest, no fabrication too sleazy, no law needs to be respected, no minority rights need to be protected. Thus a brutal theocratic dictatorship: the bigotry and contempt inherent in this supposed ideal is nauseating and depraved.

  • If it fortifies your courage, bring all of the Dover guys and the judge and as many other true believers you want and win the Life Science Prize. Otherwise all you have is Internet hot air. We have called you out. Keep clucking. the world is watching for you to evolve.

  • If Dover fortifies your courage—bring all of the Dover evolutionists and the judge and win the $10K of the Life Science Prize.

  • @theinsectmanofwv

    You understand that you lost that case in Dover for a reason right? Not just barely lost either but were destroyed in the most humilating public manner possible. Basically creationists complained about the supposed holes in evolution which is actually their lack of understanding and tried to create special rules for their own God of the Gaps argument.

  • further debate is unnecessary. Creation 'science' had its chance at the Dover trial. They opted to offer NO REBUTTAL to evolution's claims and no case of their own for intelligent design. Creationism is done and over with.

  • @DieFatorLiveThin repent jesus loves you. he can save you.

  • Well, the education system has been destroyed for sure. The problem, is the top of the hierarchy know we are from the creator, but they prefer that their "cattle" are dumbed down as far as they can smash us. The elite live a different reality than what we've been allowed.  Studens of the Evolution theory don't even realize how they're used. Less knowledge, more control. The old saying..."knowledge is power," has been used since the beginning, in every disapline, in every area of our lives.

  • It will be a wonderful day, and much will change when Scientists and Creationists work together and meet in the middle. I don't believe either of you are wrong, totally, and neither are right, totally. That's why you need each other. It is why evolutionists will never find the last several missing links, and why creationists can not discount our relationship to the Archaic Homo sapiens. Neither side can win independent of one another.

  • @Fesheca The godless evolutionists have destroyed the education in America and turn students into drooling zombies. You can meet them half way as most "Christians" are doing, but we are in a war, so come out of your closet if you are a Christian and fight for Jesus Christ. If you are not sure you are saved, then repent and ask Jesus to save you.

  • Scientists have offered over a million dollars to creationists who can come up with any evidence for creation. Still waiting.

  • Have control?  You mean scientists have spread the TRUTH.

  • What a crock of crap. An impossible challenge cannot be contended for. Creationists have to be disingenuous, as their position is ludicrous. Besides, if there were a debate, the old fool's position would be exposed for the fraud that it is.

    Dawkins answered this challenge & exposed the fraud.

  • @CamW30 Cluck

  • @BereanBeacon1 Do you think that a prosecutor would be a coward if he didn't submit his legal case for a ruling to a biologist?

  • @BereanBeacon1 - Why only $10,000? I spent more than 4 times that much on my last trip to Disneyworld. I'd debate the old fart for $1,000,000; but only if my lawyers were allowed to oversee the method.

    I only ask one stipulation; if either party is disingenuous, or being deceitful, they will have to forfeit the money they put up.

    Put forward my proposal & PM me. I will have my lawyers contact their lawyers.

    BETTER YET

    How about you, BB, debate me for any amount of money that you can raise.

  • @CamW30 - the problem with people like BB is that they don't like debates where things are written down and recorded. It makes them nervous to think someone can check up on them

    Your money is safe because the stipulations that the typical Creto wants are the little things, like making a universe, forming galaxies, etc

    They need to produce the designers have them come on down and say, "Yeah we did it. Want to apologize for the human eye, back, etc. We gave you guys to our village idiot", to win

  • @sol3a1 - Thanks sol; much appreciated!

  • Seems like you missed the memo, but creationism was brought to an embarrassing halt about 150 years ago. The only trouble is you STILL look like morons...

    The "life science prize" is a joke. If he wants a legal judge to scientific evidence (WTFLOL?) then the closest thing to that which would even be accepted as a valid legal case has allready been settled in court - first in McLean v. Arkansas adn then later in Kitzmiller v. Dover then under the guise of "intelligent design".

  • @TheStigma Cluck

  • @BereanBeacon1 Thanks for that response. Given that its at about the same level as you would see in a fight between two kids in kindergarten - I believe it speaks volumes about how sincere you actually are. If you think that putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "poopypants! poopypants!" at me is in some way enough to antagonize me then you are worse off than I though and you have my sympathies.

  • Nobody is going to take this challenge because the judge is biased. You don't bet on a crooked game. As the rules of the game are biased against science, no scientist is going to stake his credibility (let alone his money, as the challenge dictates) on a contest with results guaranteed to be meaningless.

  • @notthecheatr Cluck

  • @BereanBeacon1 Regarding the 'Life Science Prize' challenge

    Let's say you contracted a rare and deadly infection and there are only two medications which could possibly cure it. They completely counteract each other if you take both.

    1: Has been developed by a team of epidemiologists and submitted to a wide array of epidemiologists for further testing.

    2: Has been developed by a kinesiologist and submitted only to the local circuit court judge for approval.

    Which would you take?

  • @TheScienceFoundation and as a follow-up, is it considered "being a chicken" to choose the 1st option as opposed to the second?

    As BereanBeacon1's entire approach to debate seems to be typing "cluck" to everyone who disagrees with him, I doubt you'll be able to accomplish much here - aside from showing what kind of person he actually is.

  • @notthecheatr Well exposing him as an ignorant question dodger is sufficient for me. I wonder if he thinks civil/legal cases should be ruled on by biologists.

  • @BereanBeacon1 Is it cowardice not to go to Casinos and gamble knowing that the games are all biased in favor of the house and the house always wins? Or is it just being smart?

  • @garyzenuf On the contrary, knowledge IS power! :)

  • "They could make us look like morons". There's no need - you do that for yourselves.

  • The fact that evolutionary genetics and microbiology exist at all - and the peer reviewed, objective, testable framework in which it is developed - is all the proof any rational minded person needs. But I suppose that's why you guys put your hands over your ears and start clucking.

    I await your proof of creation to a reputable scientific journal.

  • @foxhole8063 All evolutionists have is hot air on the mostly anonymous Internet. We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize. You can evolve from a chicken and win the prize or make cowardly remarks on websites until you ultimately die and become a creationists after it's too late. My last remark to you is something that everyone understands: CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK. BTW, we are still waiting for Dr. Dawkins to submit a science paper for peer review.

  • @BereanBeacon1 As I have repeatedly said: the burden of proof is on you, since evolutionary theory has been established via objective, repeatable, and peer-reviewed science. It's not the fault of the "evolutionists" if you ignore it or are unwilling to understand it.

    If you have something that turns current theory on its head and somehow "proves" your Christian god in the process, then by all means we're waiting. 2,000 years and still clucking.

  • You should really learn what the term evolution means. You don't stone your unruly teenager, nor a woman who is not a virgin before marriage. That is because Christianity (and all religions) have evolved for the very same reason life has evolved... to survive. I'm sure you would not put your own child to death for working Sunday yet you support the creationist concept from the very same book which demands you do so.

  • @ansmerek The OT is an historical account of how God dealt with his children and has nothing to do with you or me. Please read the Gospel of John and if you don't find the love of God, I will burn my Bible. BTW why don't you enlighten the Muslims of today around the world where they are in control. Bible believing Christians don't react with threats to criticism but you wouldn't last very long in a Muslim nation. As for your evolution, just more clucking.

  • @BereanBeacon1 I like how you pick and chose what to believe and what not to. According to the bible God is jealous, insane, and cannot forgive. Forcing his own son to bear the penalty for all sin shows he cannot forgive. Did God create cancer? Did he create germs that harm us, then create our immune system? Then create AIDS? Science and evolution are a means to explain these things. Your bible and creation myth cannot, and each day more and more evidence builds against these old myths

  • @BereanBeacon1 Yes, Christians have been forced to modernize their techniques by the development of western SECULAR civilization. Christians were not so different from the Muslims in less civilized countries today a couple hundred years ago. It was the secular state of the United States of America (and enlightenment in Europe) which helped bring THAT change about. Thank our secular founding fathers for that!

  • This is a joke right? Because I'm laughing my butt off.

  • @SanguineBullet667 When you stop laughing come over to The Life Science Prize and be the "Joker" defending evolution. All you people do is hide out making comment here and then return to your hen house. The debate dodgers list grows longer everyday. Cluck, cluck.

  • Evolutionists have to follow the rules!

    1. Evolution is not science.

    2. Only science can be used.

    3. You don't have any evidence, fossils only mean something died.

    4. God does not lie so we win.

  • There is no such thing as an evolutionist; it is a propaganda term.

    No one is interested in attempting to gain from a prize in science where the proponents make their living ignoring evidence.

  • @umbraemilitos Your comment is equivalent to a feathered creature pecking in the dirt.

  • @BereanBeacon1

    I'm not sure if your idiom has a purpose, but it did make me laugh.

    Kudos.

  • @BereanBeacon1

    If creationism is to be taught in schools at all, it should only be in abnormal psychology classes where it is made clear that it is a serious mental disorder.

  • @BereanBeacon1 You mean like a feathered dinosaur?

  • People who accept evolution -- geologists, biologists, zoologists, horticulturalists, animal breeders, archaeologists, all other scientists, doctors, professors,

    People who deny evolution -- vacuum cleaner salesmen, cross-eyed buck-toothed preachers and their uneducated hick-town bible-belt parishioners, anonymous inbred trailer trash retards on youtube, neo-Nazi groups, George W Bush, all serial killers, rapists and Islamic terrorists.

    The facts speak for themselves.

  • @DocReasonable Just more clucking. Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2Timothy 3:7

  • @BereanBeacon1

    1 Thessalonians 5 21 PROVE all things, hold fast that which is good.

    Your OWN BIBLE tells you to PROVE ALL THINGS! Hurry up then, start PROVING your crap or get ready for Hell.

  • From Answers in Genesis.

    Back in 1992, Wyatt’s ‘Noah’s Ark’ claim was subject to a thorough investigative exposé in our magazine. The report told of how this ministry had checked the claims, even ringing the lab staff that had done the analyses, for instance. Sadly, though we would have been delighted if this really were the Ark, we found the specific claims to be untrue and/or misleading.

  • LOL!!!

  • I think the people on that site don't even know what evolution is. Not to mention the terms they've chosen to use give them leeway to dismiss any evidence they don't like, regardless of its relevance. As for your claim that the prize is open to all, the 10,000 dollar buy-in does not make it open to all. It's a classic trick. If you can't pay, you can't play, and they're the winners because they have no 'challengers'. Anyone who can't argue on their terms are dismissed and/or ridiculed.

  • You still have no prove of creation apart from an old book written by man who do not know any better. Come on prove it because I know you cannot show me any evidence of it !