this movie looks pretty fun, based on evolution vs. creation, I like the fact that just 2 brothers made the entire thing, called EVOLUTION CREEK, look it up!
wanna see a "transitional" species that's still around today? Look at the cassowary. To me it looks very much like its dinosaur ancestors--1/2 dinosaur, 1/2 bird, and possessing the necessary skills to survive in a world of vicious predators.
This idea that scientists have no clue how life began is ridiculous. If anything, there are TOO MANY theories on how it began. Once you've got a planet like earth, where the conditions are right, it's actually possible for organic compounds to form under several different circumstances. Clay theory, primordial soup, Darwin's "warm little pond," extreme heat, and extreme cold. And those are just the ones people have thought of.
try that with an open mind... see if you can still keep up this culturally implanted madness in the face of so much evidence. If you can deny it you have more then a cultural problem, you are actually mentally incapable of discerning truth from falsehoods. If that is the case then trying to teach you the art of thinking is probably a lost cause.
You know, thinking about you actually makes me sad.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
@Mogley52 I really feel like giving a serious response to you, but I am affraid it wont do any good. I am affraid you are to caught up in you're own believes to even question them. So what would be the point of my responding to you? Best to just leave you be in you're silly little monolog
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn't mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete, living cell then the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell naturally originate when no directing code/mechanisms existed in nature?
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select" traits, not produce them. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION (Google this title to access the site). The site presents a collage of evidences from science supporting creation. Also read my Internet article, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH! According to a Newsweek article quoting a NASA scientist, in the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (now meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil.
Christianity is dwindling world wide. The rise of Christian fundamentalism in the United States has done more for Atheism then we could ever hope to accomplish on our own. Only Catholicism and Baptists currently out number atheists. Atheism FTW!
@Kursinphists You think the earth is less that 12,000-years-old. That's all anyone needs to know about you. It's all anyone needs to know in order to see that you are seriously insane.
@Kursinphists "Everyone knows about fossils; they're just skeletons from creatures who have died at least recently to at least twelve thousand years."
You can't be this stupid. Do you think jesus rode a dinosaur to work?
@Kursinphists You wouldn't know the truth if someone hit you over the head with a fossil. Remember fossils? Those things you think satan planted. Fool!
@Kursinphists Truth? That is bloody hysterical. Your truth is no more valid than the truth the Vikings had of Odin, or the truth the Egyptians found in Ra and Horus. The best part about people like you is that if you were born in India to Hindu parents you'd be in here preaching about how the Vedas were the absolute truth.
Typical fundie tripe. I'll say a prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster for you in my pirate garb.
@Kursinphists " Evolution is not a fact because it keeps being disproved."
Where is your evidence of this? You like to make blanket statements as if they were true but you never produce evidence. It's ok. We all know you can't. You're just a delusional cretin with a personality disorder.
@Kursinphists Hardly. Just read the comments. Everyone thinks you're an idiot. Because you are. And you're too fat for words. You really need to slow down on the cheeseburgers.
@Kursinphists "then one must tell a lie a hundred times until it becomes truth"
Actually we have physical evidence. You don't. We have the scientific community of the entire world backing us. You don't. We have logic, reason and education on our side. You don't. You're just a loser, troll fuckwad. And btw what does your imaginary friend say about judging others? Can you spell hypocrite? roflol.
@Kursinphists The human genome project reports recent evolution by natural selection is widespread across the human genome. This is from a team of some of the world's best minds. But kursinphists says evolution doesn't exist.. Who are you going to believe? The worlds best thinkers or an inbred, trailer park, psychotic, half-wit? Nothing you can say is going to help your cause dumbass! We all can see you're just a clueless moron with a serious personality disorder.
@Kursinphists Literally everyone here thinks you are an ass. If you're not a troll you're a sociopath. Either way you're the scum of the earth. Just a low-life cretin with no job, no education and no occupied point. It's obvious that your only social life is trolling on youtube. You're a sad, fat, pathetic excuse for humanity. And anyone who doesn't believe in the facts of evolution is dumber than a bucket of wet hair.
@Kursinphists I dont wanna argue, but there is no, I repeat no, evidence for a young earth. Everything we have ever observed and calculated is compressed into science, and it is constanty improving. Evolution is a fact, because we have observed it and confirmed that it is occuring. There is no reason to beleive it is untrue. Evolution is not psuedo science, it has been proven over and over again for over 150 years.
@Kursinphists " Your lack of manners wouldn't entertain wolverines in the fall"
Well that sucks because that's exactly what I've been working towards. I've read that most YE creationists are home-schooled. Are you home-schooled there at the trailer park? Is your mother also your sister?
@Kursinphists You have no evidence. If so then stop claiming you have it and provide it. Good luck. We both know you'll never find evidence of your imaginary friend. Because he is just that - imaginary. Deal with it.
@sybite You have to be careful with that 'E' word around creationists. Remember, Feelings are evidence to these people. You can take just about any link from what Kursinphists gave and chances are it is answered in >one sentence< in many places from many people. They are just the same shit brought up over and over that has been shot down time and time again, but written fancy-style. Timothy Wallace is like a defense lawyer, muddle up shit and then just assert creationism.
@Arcexey I know. I've noticed that when a YE creationist can string several words together without weird punctuation it's been plagiarized from one of their ludicrous web sites. That's all they have. And no amount of debate or evidence will ever sink in because they are programmed and they live with cognitive dissonance. It's best to just make fun of them and let their own rhetoric take them down. When anyone is ignorant enough to think the earth is only 6000-years-old they are their own enemy.
@sybite When we first heard the 'teach the controversy' propaganda, a part of us all was curious. After seeing it was just pseudoscience, a part of us was still greatly willing to contest and debate these people. I've realized now that these people should be treated the same as the people that say Tom Hanks is really a space lizard that is mind controlling us all through our Xboxs: ignored or made fun of. Kursinphists knows his campaign is down with the space lizardists and has tantrums.
@Kursinphists "So, a creationist who disagrees with evolution is suddenly an idiot, but an evolutionist who disagrees with the existence of God is right?"
@Kursinphists Never said anything about a German dictionary, try rereading the comment... And congrats on using Webster to give you information that was also in the aforementioned comment... You should see other definitions of the word(I assume you do know how to use a dictionary), that will still point out your misconception about the meaning of words....
@Kursinphists Funny you could have at least taken the time to learn the proper definition of the word "Blitz" ...... In its proper form German it means "Lighting" .... It first came to the American lexicon during Hitlers famous 'blitzkrieg' style attack which means 'lightning war'. These were fast attacks that razed their targets. Something being "Blitz'd" was a slang term used to describe the attacks in short, not actual meaning of the word. As for your name, I dont care.
@TheMrgoku1985 Feed the troll! Remember that Kursinphists is only hurting his/her campaign by looking stupid/delusional/purposefully ignorant in front of those that are on the fence.
Matching endogenous retro-viral sequences between the grate apes and humans,
recessive genes,
tail muscle in humans,
Progressive patterns in comparative
genes,
Junk DNA,
Single strain DNA.+multiple dating methods that agree with each other with an extremely low % margin of error proving the earth is old enough for the time needed for macro change and
Ring species
nylon eating bacteria(example of new information created from a mutation).
Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus sediba, Australopithecus aethiopicus, Australopithecus robustus, Australopithecus boisei, Homo habilis, Homo georgicus, Homo erectus,, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, Homo sapiens
No you never watched any of these videos all the way tho and admitted you know nothing of this tested fact but still want it removed from our school?
You are dishonest and care nothing about your own 9th commandment :)
You have a right to an opinion on this just like one has the right to the opinion the earth is flat but just like the flat earthier you have no right to remove facts from our class rooms.They SHOW there work. Where is your tested data SHOWING creationism?
@Kursinphists I'm not nice to people who have a tendency to lie for their own agenda, sorry. I'm gonna assume you didn't even watch not 5 mins of the very video you're posting comments about, huh? People like you don't know anything about the theory of evolution yet feel like tearing it down because it disagrees with the bible. Even worse, you feel the need to feel like victims and literally force your belief into the school system regardless of lack of scientific research.
@alias100 So instead of assuming that those books have "disproven" evolution, ask yourself HOW do they disprove evolution. How about looking OUTSIDE creationist websites or creationist media and actually pay attention to some of the most basic scientific theories taught in high school. After all, would you doubt gravity exists just because it's the "Theory of gravity"?
@Kursinphists There's a reason there was a court case, it wasn't a joke, ID decided to take itself seriously and they failed to present any findings against the endless amounts of research supporting evolution; how is that the COURT's fault?
The reason why not even other creationists cite books as their sources is BECAUSE anyone can make a book. You don't just write and pretend it's truth, you research and cite sources and/or get it tested by other scientists.
@alias100 Also, what the hell would you know about a legit science journal? Go research universities with their own scientific journals to see what they really are, and then we'll talk...unless you wanna keep making stuff up like every other creationist does.
@Kursinphists 1. Creationists can't find holes in a theory THEY do not understand. And that STILL does not support Creationism.
2. Yes, because there is a Church of Evolution where we all praise and pray and have other senseless rituals and gatherings like all other religions, btw no such thing as Evolution extremist lol.
3.And the process of Evolution has been around since before modern humans, what's your point? Do I need to remind you that ID couldn't be defended in court?
@Kursinphists 1. A creationist who disagrees with evolution has NO evidence to support creationism.
2. "Evolutionists" are not exclusively atheists, as there are even christians/catholics out there (pointed out in this very video) who are scientists in support of evolution.
3. Creationists don't HAVE ANY PROOF, the only thing they do is question everything about evolution without providing their own evidence.
@CRoadwarrior Then point them out. I dont see them. Neither does 509 other people who liked this video. Hmmmm. My guess is you cant actually point any out or you will just turn to logical fallacies yourself. Please for the sake of my brain needing knowledge, explain to me the parts that are logically fallacious. Because my rational mind does not see it in this video
"Most people who believe in Evolution believe in {insert list of stuff here}"
"But to believe in Creationism, you don't have to know anything"
This is where I stopped. Because it doesn't make sense, you don't have to know anything to believe Evolution. I've met extremely ignorant people who just believe Evolution because their parents tell them to, and don't know squat about it. And Creationism has a large study behind it, so there's a lot to know.
@khoraski "This is where I stopped. Because it doesn't make sense, you don't have to know anything to believe Evolution" really? One doesn't "believe" in Evolution. Evolution is a field of science. As science is self correcting, one might take it for granted that science knows what it's talking about. That's called "reasonable expectations"
"believe Evolution because their parents tell them to" you lost it here. Parents don't "tell their kids to believe" but teach them science instead
@khoraski "and don't know squat about it" almost everyone who "doesn't know squat" is a creationist as it goes with the territory
"And Creationism has a large study behind it" another misrepresentation of the facts. There is nothing to back up creation at all save whatever holy book you want to believe
"so there's a lot to know" such as? Please be specific as there is nothing in the way of research or study behind Creationism, just holy books that Aron Ra takes apart
@sol3a1 "almost everyone who 'doesn't know squat' is a creationist as it goes with the territory"
False. I know tons of Evolutionists who don't understand it, but believe it because they are told it's right. That is very common, you know.
"nothing to back it up" There's a lot of scientific tests to back many parts up, but you are looking for proof. You will not find proof in Evolution either. Yes, Creationism is not proven.
The book is taken apart incorrectly. What part do you wish to discuss?
@khoraski "False. I know tons of Evolutionists who don't understand it, but believe it because they are told it's right. That is very common, you know" and again that is not what I see. If there are those who really don't know about Evolution yet "feel it is correct" then that is due to how science works. I'll bet that those people are actually well educate in other fields
But honestly, I think you're blowing smoke there as those that don't understand evolution are almost all YECs
@sol3a1 No they are children who belief what they are told, or complete no-lifes.
And now, now you are completely wrong. I am not saying people who don't understand Evolution are almost all "YECs." I never stated that once. Don't twist my words. I simply stated that there are just as much Christians that don't know squat about Christianity and believe it as there are Evolutionists who do the same.
@khoraski "No they are children who belief what they are told, or complete no-lifes" which are also known as religious types as every scientifically literate parent I've ever seen presents the evidence
"I am not saying people who don't understand Evolution are almost all "YECs." I never stated that once" I did
"I simply stated that there are just as much Christians that don't know squat about Christianity and believe it as there are Evolutionists who do the same" and you'd be wrong
@khoraski "There's a lot of scientific tests to back many parts up, but you are looking for proof" absolutely not. There is no such thing as "proof" in science. Science deals in evidence
Like I've said before, "proof" is in "Law, Math and Alcohol" let's see the evidence for Creationism. I won't hold my breath but expect more non sequiturs from you
"You will not find proof in Evolution either" just more evidence than you can handle. What would you like to see first?
@sol3a1 Science deals with evidence, but you are still looking for proof.
Now again, you insult me because you can't support your own position,
Now, I'm done with you. You completely disrespect my position, insult my intelligence, and I am done with you. You don't understand squat about Creationism, and you attack it for unjust purposes.
I am done with you. I wish you a long, happy life, and hope you do not act this way in real life. Don't bother replying, I won't read it.
@khoraski "Science deals with evidence, but you are still looking for proof" not at all. I even did a video on it. Science deals with evidence
Where's the evidence for creationism?
"Now, I'm done with you. You completely disrespect my position, insult my intelligence" bye bye weasel. Of course I have no respect for your position, god and religion, it's utter crap
When you decide you want to produce evidence, talk to me
"I am done with you. I wish you a long, happy life" go away
@ILYIAB and law. Court as you may well know is part of law, therefore something can be 'proven' in a court of law. "only ignorant people dont know that" :-p
@ILYIAB Uh...none? I was only pointing out your mistake (didnt know which side you were on, and it didnt matter). If you really watch Ra's videos; how have you not gotten the take home message that when you make a mistake the most honorable thing to do is to openly and honestly admit to it, rather than deflecting. I get this deflecting tactic all the time from creationists, and I have to say I am extremely disappointed to be hearing it from a person on my side.
@ILYIAB Also, even if I were a creationist, I was totally polite in my rebuttle. You should wait til the creationist acts like a dick before treating him like one.
"Creationism has a large study behind it, so there's a lot to know."
I'm curious about this too. I would very much like to know what facts you have which positively indicate a particular creation myth. If you would please start by telling me which creation story you think is directly indicated by the evidence, and then tell me what evidence you have which directly supports it. And how would we come to this conclusion in a way not Dependant on knowing the story itself?
@Landslide464 "It most certanly is a faithbased religion and one of the most dangerous,dogmatic in producing converts if not by persuasive methods then by force" which is what religions and theists do far too often
@sol3a1 No not talking about science,I was responding to the video and the person who uploded it an atheist trying to use evolotion (a theory) to prove the non exsistance of God.
@Landslide464 "No not talking about science" Evolution is a science and one of the most supported theories science has today
"I was responding to the video and the person who uploded it an atheist trying to use evolotion (a theory)" do you have any idea what a theory is and isn't? Theories aren't ideas or guesses. They explain what we see and make testable predictions
"to prove the non exsistance of God" can't "prove a negative". You can show the absolute lack of evidence though
Many people believe in evolution without knowing chemistry, biology, etc. A lot of people dont know how evolution works but believe in it anyway out of spite of religion. Ask your common person what is a transitional form, or how dose natural selection works. They probably wont know what your talking about. But theyll say their athiest, but they havnt even researched what they believe. If you believe in evolution, and you dont even know how it works, you have a belief. A faith based belief.
@Froish Then its not faith based because you have researched and came to a conclusion based off evidence and not hear say. That dosnt necessarily mean your right, but the evidence provided that you have researched has been found sufficient enough for you to believe in evolution. So if you are basing your assumption off the evidence then no its not faith. But if you say evolution is true, and you no nothing about it, you are religious.
@ScholarVisual "Many people believe in evolution without knowing chemistry, biology, etc" no because they can go and check it out and see that it actually makes an impact in our lives
"Ask your common person what is a transitional form, or how dose natural selection works" that's more an indictment of schools having to water down the real science of Evolution due to Creationists "A faith based belief" evolution is not. It's testable science with observation and experimentation
They are retards who blieve letters in a book over lab tested data.
Note they are sending each other links. I wander if people will blieve in Spider-man 2000 years from now after excavating the remains of Old New York.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital structures, organs, reproductive system were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
"JUNK DNA" ISN'T JUNK: Recent research shows that these segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There's no room for random mutations to operate safely. Random mutations, from radiation, are destructive. For every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, causing extinction, not upward evolution. Most variations are from new combinations of already existing genes, not mutations.
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.
Stitching all of these smaller videos together is a bit much. I like what AronRa has to say. I suspect this much data at this pitch and at this duration is nearly impossible to digest. It feels, frankly, like I'm being subjected to a 2-hour sermon.
The charge that the Bible is hostile to science is basically an inaccurate notion. Historian Carl Becker, in his book The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth-Century Philosophers, shows that philosophers such as Voltaire, Condorcet, Hume, Montesquieu and Gibbon intentionally endeavoured to discredit Christianity by portraying it as an enemy of science.
"you have not read what all those great philosopher wrote about religion have you? and appeal to authority is a logical fallacy"
- So if I've read what all those great philosophers wrote and quote them against religion, would I also be appealing to authority and committing logical fallacy?
@astujest no sir the problem is you have to understand in which context those philosophers said what they said , he cited Voltaire and Montesquieu who became very anti religious in their later writings so citing their early writtings does not make a point.
Indeed Voltaire and the rest I mentioned were very anti-religious and so they had tried to paint a picture of religion as being anti-science, which is inaccurate. That was my point.
Science deals with the natural world and natural processes, but does not and cannot disprove God in any way. The Bible teaches that the universe and the natural order is God's creation, not part of God himself and therefore, as science historian R Hooykaas said, Judeo-Christianity 'un-deified' nature, an essential condition for the endeavour of modern science to exist.
"because the bible says that, that means it has validity"
- Indeed what the Bible says about nature being ordered and precise has validity because it has been borne out by science that the natural world IS precise and can be described by mathematical equations.
@astujest yet the same bible talks about a talking snake and donkey , magic, unicorns , global flood , zombies also whales and bats being fish ...that has also been confirmed by science? i personally find harry potter more of a reliable source than that.
- You mean to say 'whales as fish' and 'bats as birds. BUT SERIOUSLY, you think the Bible should use mammals to describe 'whales and bats'?? I believe the Linnean taxonomy was NOT INVENTED YET when the Bible was written. Do you know that before there was the Linnean taxonomy, animals were classified according to their mode of movement???
@astujest do you believe God inspired the bible? do you believe God is perfect? if you do,then your apologetic ideas are just pitiful . archeology clearly shows how the bible was invented by people who were trying to unite the Israelite and gain power . most of stories in the bible are exaggerated , or simply created. there is nothing Godly in the bible.
Archaeology has NOT clearly shown that the Bible was invented by people to unite the Israelites and gain power. Archaelogy is not able to do that. If archaeological dig uncovers a pillar with the name of a king on it, does it tell us anything about the conquest of the king, etc? No! All it does is to confirm that such a king existed though you may try to construct a story around it.
@astujest will you at least admit that most of the stories in the old testament are exaggerated? some of them are just myths , there sure are some historical facts in the bible but that book is far from being accurate or even "trust-able" . we have text that are mostly anonymous . why?
The Bible has been translated into many languages, so we can expect errors in them like copyist errors and translation errors and such. On the whole these errors do not interfere with the central message of the Bible. The Prophetic books are named after their authors, Moses is the author of the Torah etc. So it is not the case that texts are mostly anonymous though people who want to discredit the Bible have made various claims without evidence/basis.
@astujest "The Bible has been translated into many languages, so we can expect errors in them like copyist errors and translation errors and such"
yes that's what you will be expecting but its not only translation errors it's about adding and removing stuff from the original copy (the new testament is renowned for that) for example according to many biblical sholars the account for jesus resurection was added later, by scribes who copied from early manuscribs.
"The Prophetic books are named after their authors, Moses is the author of the Torah etc." no sir those books were ascribed to those people later . moses if he existed only wrote one part of the torah there are evidence that suggest that the torah was written by at least 5 different authors between 9 BCE to 7 BCE. if moses wrote the torah , how could he have written about his own death in deteuronomy? if you think i'm making things up can send you a link if you want.
Yes, I'm interested to read, so please do send me the link. But my guess is that you're referring to the Documentary Hypothesis, otherwise known as the JEDP Hypothesis.
People want evidence of God, but reject 'miracles' because they defy laws of nature. So you are caught in a web like this: First God is unnecessary for anything that has a natural explanation. Then you reject miracles because you'd decided anything that defy laws of nature cannot happen. Then you ask for evidence of God, that evidence apparently must be something without a natural explanation for if it has a natural explanation, then God is unnecessary.
@astujest "People want evidence of God, but reject 'miracles' because they defy laws of nature" i don't reject miracles the problem is we always end up finding a natural explanation for the miraculous claims out there . I'm a PhD candidate in neurology i have patients that claim miracles on daily basis and we study those things . but till now anything miraculous so far , why is that?
Everything will eventually have a natural explanation as knowledge progresses. So we would expect that most miracles will also eventually have an explanation. God is not the God of the gap. He does not exist only because there is something we cannot explain and then disappears when that something has an explanation.
When you think of unicorns, don't imagine a horse with a horn on its head. It does not exist. The Bible describes the unicorn as an animal with great strength which cannot be tamed. Have you heard of the Indian Rhinoceros whose scientific name is Rhinoceros UNICORNIS? It has got one horn on its head. It weighs betw 1600 to 3500kg and is the fourth or fifth largest land animal.
Talking donkey - When you read the account of Balaam and the talking donkey (i.e if you had actually read the account), you notice that Balaam was not even a wee bit surprised that the donkey 'replied' to him. And Balaam talked to the donkey!! So what does this tell us about the mental state of the man? Either he was dreaming or he was terribly confused because of the mission ahead of him. Really, there wasn't a literal talking donkey.
There was no global flood. The 'whole world' that was flooded was the whole world or ALL the land known to the people then. Just like when you are caught in a flood and you say 'everywhere was flooded', you don't necessary mean the whole planet. There are no zombies in the Bible. Zombies are atheists' invention. The Bible did not say resurrected people behaved like zombies.
@astujest "ALL the land known to the people then" Genesis 7:19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
This has been flagged as spam show
this movie looks pretty fun, based on evolution vs. creation, I like the fact that just 2 brothers made the entire thing, called EVOLUTION CREEK, look it up!
chauncyhead 1 day ago
Comment removed
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 5 days ago in playlist Favorite videos
If I could choose ONE series of videos to show to everyone in the world, it'd be this series of videos.
Faustaao 1 week ago 3
wanna see a "transitional" species that's still around today? Look at the cassowary. To me it looks very much like its dinosaur ancestors--1/2 dinosaur, 1/2 bird, and possessing the necessary skills to survive in a world of vicious predators.
YourDogIsDeadHAHA 1 week ago
This idea that scientists have no clue how life began is ridiculous. If anything, there are TOO MANY theories on how it began. Once you've got a planet like earth, where the conditions are right, it's actually possible for organic compounds to form under several different circumstances. Clay theory, primordial soup, Darwin's "warm little pond," extreme heat, and extreme cold. And those are just the ones people have thought of.
YourDogIsDeadHAHA 1 week ago
@Kursinphists talkorigins(dot)org
try that with an open mind... see if you can still keep up this culturally implanted madness in the face of so much evidence. If you can deny it you have more then a cultural problem, you are actually mentally incapable of discerning truth from falsehoods. If that is the case then trying to teach you the art of thinking is probably a lost cause.
You know, thinking about you actually makes me sad.
Amsterdamned33 1 week ago
@Kursinphists how loving! A true christian at work here ladies and gentlemen...
Now turn you're other cheek and let me verbally bitchslap you there with you're own ridiculous shit as well :)
Amsterdamned33 1 week ago
Seven idiots disliked this video.
tligon 2 weeks ago
@tligon
7 more idiots that admit they have not read the bible.
VideoAudioDisco09 2 weeks ago
@tligon Maybe they didn't like the edition or the sightly decompressed audio :/
It's not good or productive to jump to conclusions.
Ebvardh 11 hours ago
The black plague gave 10 % of white Europeans immunity to HIV, lucky.
hotwhire 2 weeks ago
@hotwhire its actually more something between 2 and 3%
Amsterdamned33 1 week ago
This is where America fails, its government justifies everything with religion. Mainly fox..
"this war is Gods war" Sarah Palin
hotwhire 2 weeks ago
@hotwhire
This is what the Crusaders said...
And the Islamic empire as well..
VideoAudioDisco09 2 weeks ago
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
@Mogley52 I really feel like giving a serious response to you, but I am affraid it wont do any good. I am affraid you are to caught up in you're own believes to even question them. So what would be the point of my responding to you? Best to just leave you be in you're silly little monolog
Amsterdamned33 1 week ago
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn't mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete, living cell then the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell naturally originate when no directing code/mechanisms existed in nature?
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select" traits, not produce them. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION (Google this title to access the site). The site presents a collage of evidences from science supporting creation. Also read my Internet article, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH! According to a Newsweek article quoting a NASA scientist, in the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (now meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil.
Mogley52 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Christianity is dwindling world wide. The rise of Christian fundamentalism in the United States has done more for Atheism then we could ever hope to accomplish on our own. Only Catholicism and Baptists currently out number atheists. Atheism FTW!
scotttebben 2 weeks ago in playlist Creationist Bullshit
This has been flagged as spam show
based on the battle between evolution and creation, check out our new sci fi movie EVOLUTION CREEK decide for yourself!
chauncyhead 2 weeks ago
Science doesn't ask the question "Who did it?" It asks and answers the question "How did i happen?" Big difference there.
YourDogIsDeadHAHA 2 weeks ago
Great video, thanks for putting them all together to 1 vid
NaturalSelection101 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists "The time of the end certainly is here."
Good luck with that. You'll need it.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists You think the earth is less that 12,000-years-old. That's all anyone needs to know about you. It's all anyone needs to know in order to see that you are seriously insane.
sybite 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists "Everyone knows about fossils; they're just skeletons from creatures who have died at least recently to at least twelve thousand years."
You can't be this stupid. Do you think jesus rode a dinosaur to work?
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists You wouldn't know the truth if someone hit you over the head with a fossil. Remember fossils? Those things you think satan planted. Fool!
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " I'll say no prayer for you"
You do that. We'll still THINK for you. Somebody has to. Idiot!
sybite 3 weeks ago 2
@Kursinphists Truth? That is bloody hysterical. Your truth is no more valid than the truth the Vikings had of Odin, or the truth the Egyptians found in Ra and Horus. The best part about people like you is that if you were born in India to Hindu parents you'd be in here preaching about how the Vedas were the absolute truth.
Typical fundie tripe. I'll say a prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster for you in my pirate garb.
LTSRPerkunas 3 weeks ago 2
@Kursinphists It's sad to know that there are people who can read and still subscribe to Bronze Age fairy tales.
LTSRPerkunas 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Sorry I'd rather read educational books on science and history rather than listen to bible thumping idiots like you.
GhostlyRebellion 3 weeks ago
Hey Creationists try watch the whole video before you start arguing...seriously
GhostlyRebellion 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists ""Who am I going to believe? I believe God"
That's because you're dumber than a bucket of wet hair.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " there is evidence for a Young Earth."
What is it?
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " Evolution is not a fact because it keeps being disproved."
Where is your evidence of this? You like to make blanket statements as if they were true but you never produce evidence. It's ok. We all know you can't. You're just a delusional cretin with a personality disorder.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " I do have physical evidence"
What is it?
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists "Some of the best minds also say evolution is bullshit."
Oh really? Name one! Dumbass!
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Hardly. Just read the comments. Everyone thinks you're an idiot. Because you are. And you're too fat for words. You really need to slow down on the cheeseburgers.
sybite 3 weeks ago
"Most christians accept evolution and some atheists do not" Which atheist does not accept evolution???( quote somewhere around 46:00)
GhostlyRebellion 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists "then one must tell a lie a hundred times until it becomes truth"
Actually we have physical evidence. You don't. We have the scientific community of the entire world backing us. You don't. We have logic, reason and education on our side. You don't. You're just a loser, troll fuckwad. And btw what does your imaginary friend say about judging others? Can you spell hypocrite? roflol.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists The human genome project reports recent evolution by natural selection is widespread across the human genome. This is from a team of some of the world's best minds. But kursinphists says evolution doesn't exist.. Who are you going to believe? The worlds best thinkers or an inbred, trailer park, psychotic, half-wit? Nothing you can say is going to help your cause dumbass! We all can see you're just a clueless moron with a serious personality disorder.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Literally everyone here thinks you are an ass. If you're not a troll you're a sociopath. Either way you're the scum of the earth. Just a low-life cretin with no job, no education and no occupied point. It's obvious that your only social life is trolling on youtube. You're a sad, fat, pathetic excuse for humanity. And anyone who doesn't believe in the facts of evolution is dumber than a bucket of wet hair.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists I dont wanna argue, but there is no, I repeat no, evidence for a young earth. Everything we have ever observed and calculated is compressed into science, and it is constanty improving. Evolution is a fact, because we have observed it and confirmed that it is occuring. There is no reason to beleive it is untrue. Evolution is not psuedo science, it has been proven over and over again for over 150 years.
Vidk1ng 3 weeks ago
@Vidk1ng Careful using that logic and evidence stuff around here.
Arcexey 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Watch the video before commenting.
Vidk1ng 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists " It isn't ignorance to believe the Earth might be a little over 10,000 years old"
You're right. It's worse than that. It's ignorance on such a grand scale it has a new name - kursinphists.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " Your lack of manners wouldn't entertain wolverines in the fall"
Well that sucks because that's exactly what I've been working towards. I've read that most YE creationists are home-schooled. Are you home-schooled there at the trailer park? Is your mother also your sister?
sybite 3 weeks ago
Thank you! Evolution is a fact!
Vidk1ng 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Young-earth creationism can be refuted in a 4th grade biology book. You need to go back to grade-school.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@sybite I hope they allow tin foil hats in class at that level.
Arcexey 3 weeks ago
@Arcexey They're going to need a dunce cap to cover kursinphists pin head.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists You have no evidence. If so then stop claiming you have it and provide it. Good luck. We both know you'll never find evidence of your imaginary friend. Because he is just that - imaginary. Deal with it.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@sybite You have to be careful with that 'E' word around creationists. Remember, Feelings are evidence to these people. You can take just about any link from what Kursinphists gave and chances are it is answered in >one sentence< in many places from many people. They are just the same shit brought up over and over that has been shot down time and time again, but written fancy-style. Timothy Wallace is like a defense lawyer, muddle up shit and then just assert creationism.
Arcexey 3 weeks ago
@Arcexey I know. I've noticed that when a YE creationist can string several words together without weird punctuation it's been plagiarized from one of their ludicrous web sites. That's all they have. And no amount of debate or evidence will ever sink in because they are programmed and they live with cognitive dissonance. It's best to just make fun of them and let their own rhetoric take them down. When anyone is ignorant enough to think the earth is only 6000-years-old they are their own enemy.
sybite 3 weeks ago
@sybite When we first heard the 'teach the controversy' propaganda, a part of us all was curious. After seeing it was just pseudoscience, a part of us was still greatly willing to contest and debate these people. I've realized now that these people should be treated the same as the people that say Tom Hanks is really a space lizard that is mind controlling us all through our Xboxs: ignored or made fun of. Kursinphists knows his campaign is down with the space lizardists and has tantrums.
Arcexey 3 weeks ago
This should be published as an educational documentary.
GhostlyRebellion 4 weeks ago
@Kursinphists We have evidence. You don't. Deal with it.
sybite 4 weeks ago
@Kursinphists "So, a creationist who disagrees with evolution is suddenly an idiot, but an evolutionist who disagrees with the existence of God is right?"
Correct. Deal with it.
sybite 4 weeks ago
@Kursinphists It is glorious isn't it!!
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists Oh NOES!!!!! I have fallen into your masterful trap.... GADZOOKS!!!!!
Come on kid, I can dance all day....
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists Never said anything about a German dictionary, try rereading the comment... And congrats on using Webster to give you information that was also in the aforementioned comment... You should see other definitions of the word(I assume you do know how to use a dictionary), that will still point out your misconception about the meaning of words....
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists Funny you could have at least taken the time to learn the proper definition of the word "Blitz" ...... In its proper form German it means "Lighting" .... It first came to the American lexicon during Hitlers famous 'blitzkrieg' style attack which means 'lightning war'. These were fast attacks that razed their targets. Something being "Blitz'd" was a slang term used to describe the attacks in short, not actual meaning of the word. As for your name, I dont care.
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists Your going to have to do better then that.... I mean if your going to quote Dirty Harry, its really one of those in person things...
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists But they are funny, and you misunderstand... I was suggesting your the joke....
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists Teacher's pet? Really is that the best you can do?
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists
Stop smoking pot and move out of your parents basement...
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists
Your either trolling, or you were neglected a decent education as a child...
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists Not tested???? your joking right?
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
Hot damm 3 hours....
BlitzNeko 1 month ago
@Kursinphists
9th commandment not amendment
Commandment 9: Do not deceive, lie or frame the innocent.
You obviously did NOT watch any links I sent and said you did this is a lie.
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@Kursinphists
Tested
V
V
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@TheMrgoku1985 Feed the troll! Remember that Kursinphists is only hurting his/her campaign by looking stupid/delusional/purposefully ignorant in front of those that are on the fence.
Arcexey 3 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Human chromosome 2,
Matching endogenous retro-viral sequences between the grate apes and humans,
recessive genes,
tail muscle in humans,
Progressive patterns in comparative
genes,
Junk DNA,
Single strain DNA.+multiple dating methods that agree with each other with an extremely low % margin of error proving the earth is old enough for the time needed for macro change and
Ring species
nylon eating bacteria(example of new information created from a mutation).
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists watch?v=S9am3mfaE6U
Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus sediba, Australopithecus aethiopicus, Australopithecus robustus, Australopithecus boisei, Homo habilis, Homo georgicus, Homo erectus,, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, Homo sapiens
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@Kursinphists
No you never watched any of these videos all the way tho and admitted you know nothing of this tested fact but still want it removed from our school?
You are dishonest and care nothing about your own 9th commandment :)
You have a right to an opinion on this just like one has the right to the opinion the earth is flat but just like the flat earthier you have no right to remove facts from our class rooms.They SHOW there work. Where is your tested data SHOWING creationism?
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@Kursinphists
watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg
TheMrgoku1985 1 month ago
@Kursinphists I'm not nice to people who have a tendency to lie for their own agenda, sorry. I'm gonna assume you didn't even watch not 5 mins of the very video you're posting comments about, huh? People like you don't know anything about the theory of evolution yet feel like tearing it down because it disagrees with the bible. Even worse, you feel the need to feel like victims and literally force your belief into the school system regardless of lack of scientific research.
alias100 1 month ago
@alias100 So instead of assuming that those books have "disproven" evolution, ask yourself HOW do they disprove evolution. How about looking OUTSIDE creationist websites or creationist media and actually pay attention to some of the most basic scientific theories taught in high school. After all, would you doubt gravity exists just because it's the "Theory of gravity"?
alias100 1 month ago
@Kursinphists There's a reason there was a court case, it wasn't a joke, ID decided to take itself seriously and they failed to present any findings against the endless amounts of research supporting evolution; how is that the COURT's fault?
The reason why not even other creationists cite books as their sources is BECAUSE anyone can make a book. You don't just write and pretend it's truth, you research and cite sources and/or get it tested by other scientists.
alias100 1 month ago
@alias100 Also, what the hell would you know about a legit science journal? Go research universities with their own scientific journals to see what they really are, and then we'll talk...unless you wanna keep making stuff up like every other creationist does.
alias100 1 month ago
@Kursinphists 3. Cont. Creationism's own proclaimed "experts" couldn't defend it in court.
4. I still don't see a legit Scientific peer reviewed article posted here, and books don't count cuz any idiot with a publisher can make a book.
5. You would, except you don't have the slightest idea of what a science journal is...
alias100 1 month ago
@Kursinphists 1. Creationists can't find holes in a theory THEY do not understand. And that STILL does not support Creationism.
2. Yes, because there is a Church of Evolution where we all praise and pray and have other senseless rituals and gatherings like all other religions, btw no such thing as Evolution extremist lol.
3.And the process of Evolution has been around since before modern humans, what's your point? Do I need to remind you that ID couldn't be defended in court?
alias100 1 month ago
@Kursinphists 1. Opposing evolution =/= supporting creationism, you bring your facts, not try to poke holes, as that is ALL creationists do.
2. Evolution has NOTHING to do with religion, so that's just an old strawman fallacy on your part.
3. Creation "scientists" couldn't defend Creationism (actually they had to name it Intelligent Design) in US court, what proof?
4. I'd love for you to name a single one.
5. I'll take your outdated scriptures and raise you science journals.
alias100 1 month ago
@Kursinphists 1. A creationist who disagrees with evolution has NO evidence to support creationism.
2. "Evolutionists" are not exclusively atheists, as there are even christians/catholics out there (pointed out in this very video) who are scientists in support of evolution.
3. Creationists don't HAVE ANY PROOF, the only thing they do is question everything about evolution without providing their own evidence.
4. Scientific peer reviewed journals > Your book.
alias100 1 month ago
This is pathetic special pleading and a whole host of other logical fallacious argumentation in video form.
CRoadwarrior 1 month ago in playlist Theological
@CRoadwarrior Then point them out. I dont see them. Neither does 509 other people who liked this video. Hmmmm. My guess is you cant actually point any out or you will just turn to logical fallacies yourself. Please for the sake of my brain needing knowledge, explain to me the parts that are logically fallacious. Because my rational mind does not see it in this video
seanturpin01 1 month ago
@CRoadwarrior
Look up the definition or pleading you moron
DarkReaperZer0 1 month ago
Okay, Christopher, let me just say something.
"Most people who believe in Evolution believe in {insert list of stuff here}"
"But to believe in Creationism, you don't have to know anything"
This is where I stopped. Because it doesn't make sense, you don't have to know anything to believe Evolution. I've met extremely ignorant people who just believe Evolution because their parents tell them to, and don't know squat about it. And Creationism has a large study behind it, so there's a lot to know.
khoraski 1 month ago
@khoraski "This is where I stopped. Because it doesn't make sense, you don't have to know anything to believe Evolution" really? One doesn't "believe" in Evolution. Evolution is a field of science. As science is self correcting, one might take it for granted that science knows what it's talking about. That's called "reasonable expectations"
"believe Evolution because their parents tell them to" you lost it here. Parents don't "tell their kids to believe" but teach them science instead
sol3a1 1 month ago
@khoraski "and don't know squat about it" almost everyone who "doesn't know squat" is a creationist as it goes with the territory
"And Creationism has a large study behind it" another misrepresentation of the facts. There is nothing to back up creation at all save whatever holy book you want to believe
"so there's a lot to know" such as? Please be specific as there is nothing in the way of research or study behind Creationism, just holy books that Aron Ra takes apart
Watch the vid
sol3a1 1 month ago
@sol3a1 "almost everyone who 'doesn't know squat' is a creationist as it goes with the territory"
False. I know tons of Evolutionists who don't understand it, but believe it because they are told it's right. That is very common, you know.
"nothing to back it up" There's a lot of scientific tests to back many parts up, but you are looking for proof. You will not find proof in Evolution either. Yes, Creationism is not proven.
The book is taken apart incorrectly. What part do you wish to discuss?
khoraski 1 month ago
@khoraski "False. I know tons of Evolutionists who don't understand it, but believe it because they are told it's right. That is very common, you know" and again that is not what I see. If there are those who really don't know about Evolution yet "feel it is correct" then that is due to how science works. I'll bet that those people are actually well educate in other fields
But honestly, I think you're blowing smoke there as those that don't understand evolution are almost all YECs
sol3a1 1 month ago
@sol3a1 No they are children who belief what they are told, or complete no-lifes.
And now, now you are completely wrong. I am not saying people who don't understand Evolution are almost all "YECs." I never stated that once. Don't twist my words. I simply stated that there are just as much Christians that don't know squat about Christianity and believe it as there are Evolutionists who do the same.
khoraski 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@khoraski "No they are children who belief what they are told, or complete no-lifes" which are also known as religious types as every scientifically literate parent I've ever seen presents the evidence
"I am not saying people who don't understand Evolution are almost all "YECs." I never stated that once" I did
"I simply stated that there are just as much Christians that don't know squat about Christianity and believe it as there are Evolutionists who do the same" and you'd be wrong
sol3a1 1 month ago
@khoraski "There's a lot of scientific tests to back many parts up, but you are looking for proof" absolutely not. There is no such thing as "proof" in science. Science deals in evidence
Like I've said before, "proof" is in "Law, Math and Alcohol" let's see the evidence for Creationism. I won't hold my breath but expect more non sequiturs from you
"You will not find proof in Evolution either" just more evidence than you can handle. What would you like to see first?
your god's a joke
sol3a1 1 month ago
@sol3a1 Science deals with evidence, but you are still looking for proof.
Now again, you insult me because you can't support your own position,
Now, I'm done with you. You completely disrespect my position, insult my intelligence, and I am done with you. You don't understand squat about Creationism, and you attack it for unjust purposes.
I am done with you. I wish you a long, happy life, and hope you do not act this way in real life. Don't bother replying, I won't read it.
khoraski 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@khoraski "Science deals with evidence, but you are still looking for proof" not at all. I even did a video on it. Science deals with evidence
Where's the evidence for creationism?
"Now, I'm done with you. You completely disrespect my position, insult my intelligence" bye bye weasel. Of course I have no respect for your position, god and religion, it's utter crap
When you decide you want to produce evidence, talk to me
"I am done with you. I wish you a long, happy life" go away
sol3a1 1 month ago
@khoraski Creationism is bunk. It has been proven so in court.
"Proof"? - Only ignorant ppl talk about that. It's only found in math.
ILYIAB 1 month ago 3
@ILYIAB and law. Court as you may well know is part of law, therefore something can be 'proven' in a court of law. "only ignorant people dont know that" :-p
Oh also in logic.
GallusSapien 1 month ago
@GallusSapien "Oh also in logic" and alcohol
sol3a1 1 month ago
@GallusSapien So what argument or evidence do you want to provide in favor of creotardism?
ILYIAB 1 month ago
@ILYIAB Uh...none? I was only pointing out your mistake (didnt know which side you were on, and it didnt matter). If you really watch Ra's videos; how have you not gotten the take home message that when you make a mistake the most honorable thing to do is to openly and honestly admit to it, rather than deflecting. I get this deflecting tactic all the time from creationists, and I have to say I am extremely disappointed to be hearing it from a person on my side.
GallusSapien 1 month ago
@ILYIAB Also, even if I were a creationist, I was totally polite in my rebuttle. You should wait til the creationist acts like a dick before treating him like one.
GallusSapien 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GallusSapien This was my comment "So what argument or evidence do you want to provide in favor of creotardism?" What's impolite about that?
By the way, why attack the manner and not the substance? Where's you argument and evidence?
ILYIAB 1 month ago
@khoraski
"Creationism has a large study behind it, so there's a lot to know."
I'm curious about this too. I would very much like to know what facts you have which positively indicate a particular creation myth. If you would please start by telling me which creation story you think is directly indicated by the evidence, and then tell me what evidence you have which directly supports it. And how would we come to this conclusion in a way not Dependant on knowing the story itself?
GallusSapien 1 month ago
SCIENCE RULES!!!!
Thinkdeep420 2 months ago 2
It most certanly is a faithbased religion and one of the most dangerous,dogmatic in producing converts if not by persuasive methods then by force.
Landslide464 2 months ago
@Landslide464
What is?
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
@Landslide464 "It most certanly is a faithbased religion and one of the most dangerous,dogmatic in producing converts if not by persuasive methods then by force" which is what religions and theists do far too often
If you mean science, you're way off the mark
sol3a1 1 month ago
@sol3a1 No not talking about science,I was responding to the video and the person who uploded it an atheist trying to use evolotion (a theory) to prove the non exsistance of God.
Landslide464 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Landslide464 "No not talking about science" Evolution is a science and one of the most supported theories science has today
"I was responding to the video and the person who uploded it an atheist trying to use evolotion (a theory)" do you have any idea what a theory is and isn't? Theories aren't ideas or guesses. They explain what we see and make testable predictions
"to prove the non exsistance of God" can't "prove a negative". You can show the absolute lack of evidence though
sol3a1 1 month ago
Many people believe in evolution without knowing chemistry, biology, etc. A lot of people dont know how evolution works but believe in it anyway out of spite of religion. Ask your common person what is a transitional form, or how dose natural selection works. They probably wont know what your talking about. But theyll say their athiest, but they havnt even researched what they believe. If you believe in evolution, and you dont even know how it works, you have a belief. A faith based belief.
ScholarVisual 2 months ago
@ScholarVisual And if you do know about all of those things and can see that all the evidence points to evolution being true what then?
Froish 2 months ago
@Froish Then its not faith based because you have researched and came to a conclusion based off evidence and not hear say. That dosnt necessarily mean your right, but the evidence provided that you have researched has been found sufficient enough for you to believe in evolution. So if you are basing your assumption off the evidence then no its not faith. But if you say evolution is true, and you no nothing about it, you are religious.
ScholarVisual 2 months ago
@ScholarVisual Fair enough
Froish 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ScholarVisual "Many people believe in evolution without knowing chemistry, biology, etc" no because they can go and check it out and see that it actually makes an impact in our lives
"Ask your common person what is a transitional form, or how dose natural selection works" that's more an indictment of schools having to water down the real science of Evolution due to Creationists "A faith based belief" evolution is not. It's testable science with observation and experimentation
sol3a1 1 month ago
I like how theirs people posting on this video actually using arguments that have been thoroughly destroyed in this very video.
Its pretty sad that they are blind and deaf to facts. But seeing them reuse the same arguments over and over is pretty funny.
infinity730 2 months ago
@infinity730
They are retards who blieve letters in a book over lab tested data.
Note they are sending each other links. I wander if people will blieve in Spider-man 2000 years from now after excavating the remains of Old New York.
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 2 months ago
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital structures, organs, reproductive system were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 2 months ago
"JUNK DNA" ISN'T JUNK: Recent research shows that these segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There's no room for random mutations to operate safely. Random mutations, from radiation, are destructive. For every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, causing extinction, not upward evolution. Most variations are from new combinations of already existing genes, not mutations.
Mogley52 2 months ago
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 2 months ago
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.
Mogley52 2 months ago
@Mogley52 you again? come on . why are you doing this? lying in the name of Jesus again ?
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
Stitching all of these smaller videos together is a bit much. I like what AronRa has to say. I suspect this much data at this pitch and at this duration is nearly impossible to digest. It feels, frankly, like I'm being subjected to a 2-hour sermon.
gr33nman 2 months ago
The charge that the Bible is hostile to science is basically an inaccurate notion. Historian Carl Becker, in his book The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth-Century Philosophers, shows that philosophers such as Voltaire, Condorcet, Hume, Montesquieu and Gibbon intentionally endeavoured to discredit Christianity by portraying it as an enemy of science.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest you have not read what all those great philosopher wrote about religion have you? and appeal to authority is a logical fallacy .
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
"you have not read what all those great philosopher wrote about religion have you? and appeal to authority is a logical fallacy"
- So if I've read what all those great philosophers wrote and quote them against religion, would I also be appealing to authority and committing logical fallacy?
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest no sir the problem is you have to understand in which context those philosophers said what they said , he cited Voltaire and Montesquieu who became very anti religious in their later writings so citing their early writtings does not make a point.
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
Indeed Voltaire and the rest I mentioned were very anti-religious and so they had tried to paint a picture of religion as being anti-science, which is inaccurate. That was my point.
astujest 2 months ago
Science deals with the natural world and natural processes, but does not and cannot disprove God in any way. The Bible teaches that the universe and the natural order is God's creation, not part of God himself and therefore, as science historian R Hooykaas said, Judeo-Christianity 'un-deified' nature, an essential condition for the endeavour of modern science to exist.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest so because the bible says that , that means it has some validity? keep dreaming!
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
"because the bible says that, that means it has validity"
- Indeed what the Bible says about nature being ordered and precise has validity because it has been borne out by science that the natural world IS precise and can be described by mathematical equations.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest yet the same bible talks about a talking snake and donkey , magic, unicorns , global flood , zombies also whales and bats being fish ...that has also been confirmed by science? i personally find harry potter more of a reliable source than that.
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
'whales and bats being fish'
- You mean to say 'whales as fish' and 'bats as birds. BUT SERIOUSLY, you think the Bible should use mammals to describe 'whales and bats'?? I believe the Linnean taxonomy was NOT INVENTED YET when the Bible was written. Do you know that before there was the Linnean taxonomy, animals were classified according to their mode of movement???
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest do you believe God inspired the bible? do you believe God is perfect? if you do,then your apologetic ideas are just pitiful . archeology clearly shows how the bible was invented by people who were trying to unite the Israelite and gain power . most of stories in the bible are exaggerated , or simply created. there is nothing Godly in the bible.
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
Archaeology has NOT clearly shown that the Bible was invented by people to unite the Israelites and gain power. Archaelogy is not able to do that. If archaeological dig uncovers a pillar with the name of a king on it, does it tell us anything about the conquest of the king, etc? No! All it does is to confirm that such a king existed though you may try to construct a story around it.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest will you at least admit that most of the stories in the old testament are exaggerated? some of them are just myths , there sure are some historical facts in the bible but that book is far from being accurate or even "trust-able" . we have text that are mostly anonymous . why?
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
The Bible has been translated into many languages, so we can expect errors in them like copyist errors and translation errors and such. On the whole these errors do not interfere with the central message of the Bible. The Prophetic books are named after their authors, Moses is the author of the Torah etc. So it is not the case that texts are mostly anonymous though people who want to discredit the Bible have made various claims without evidence/basis.
astujest 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@astujest "The Bible has been translated into many languages, so we can expect errors in them like copyist errors and translation errors and such"
yes that's what you will be expecting but its not only translation errors it's about adding and removing stuff from the original copy (the new testament is renowned for that) for example according to many biblical sholars the account for jesus resurection was added later, by scribes who copied from early manuscribs.
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@astujest
"The Prophetic books are named after their authors, Moses is the author of the Torah etc." no sir those books were ascribed to those people later . moses if he existed only wrote one part of the torah there are evidence that suggest that the torah was written by at least 5 different authors between 9 BCE to 7 BCE. if moses wrote the torah , how could he have written about his own death in deteuronomy? if you think i'm making things up can send you a link if you want.
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
Yes, I'm interested to read, so please do send me the link. But my guess is that you're referring to the Documentary Hypothesis, otherwise known as the JEDP Hypothesis.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest watch?v=Oz_dtSYRL6E. that's on documentary made by one of those who were sent to prove the validity of the bible by David Ben Gurion .
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
Thank you for the link. I'll have a look at it.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest
u r welcome
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
People want evidence of God, but reject 'miracles' because they defy laws of nature. So you are caught in a web like this: First God is unnecessary for anything that has a natural explanation. Then you reject miracles because you'd decided anything that defy laws of nature cannot happen. Then you ask for evidence of God, that evidence apparently must be something without a natural explanation for if it has a natural explanation, then God is unnecessary.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest "People want evidence of God, but reject 'miracles' because they defy laws of nature" i don't reject miracles the problem is we always end up finding a natural explanation for the miraculous claims out there . I'm a PhD candidate in neurology i have patients that claim miracles on daily basis and we study those things . but till now anything miraculous so far , why is that?
MrTheblackmessenger 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
Everything will eventually have a natural explanation as knowledge progresses. So we would expect that most miracles will also eventually have an explanation. God is not the God of the gap. He does not exist only because there is something we cannot explain and then disappears when that something has an explanation.
astujest 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
When you think of unicorns, don't imagine a horse with a horn on its head. It does not exist. The Bible describes the unicorn as an animal with great strength which cannot be tamed. Have you heard of the Indian Rhinoceros whose scientific name is Rhinoceros UNICORNIS? It has got one horn on its head. It weighs betw 1600 to 3500kg and is the fourth or fifth largest land animal.
The talking snake in Genesis is a metaphor.
astujest 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
Talking donkey - When you read the account of Balaam and the talking donkey (i.e if you had actually read the account), you notice that Balaam was not even a wee bit surprised that the donkey 'replied' to him. And Balaam talked to the donkey!! So what does this tell us about the mental state of the man? Either he was dreaming or he was terribly confused because of the mission ahead of him. Really, there wasn't a literal talking donkey.
astujest 2 months ago
@MrTheblackmessenger
There was no global flood. The 'whole world' that was flooded was the whole world or ALL the land known to the people then. Just like when you are caught in a flood and you say 'everywhere was flooded', you don't necessary mean the whole planet. There are no zombies in the Bible. Zombies are atheists' invention. The Bible did not say resurrected people behaved like zombies.
astujest 2 months ago
@astujest "ALL the land known to the people then" Genesis 7:19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
"There are no zombies in the Bible."
Matthew 27:53?
infinity730 2 months ago