Evolution or Creationism Debate

[1927Norma]

Bud sadly this guy alleged defending the Bible or anything in that regard is about as useful as tits on a bull....yes they exists but useless!!!

[1927Norma]

And the the world wide flood which occurred......the smaller and or adolescent of their kind would be lower in the strata..they coudln't have made it so far so we would see larger specimens higher up...now there is a shock...of course its only a myth.

[1927Norma]

no one asked real questions...the earlier (horses) could easily be argued to be smaller...we see that today ponies or Shetlands and or they were juvenile specimens found not yet who reached adulthood...these defenders of their opposite issue are very weak defenders.

[1927Norma]

The curator wont shut up long enough to allow without interruption the other person...and gets to shut the story...all was typically limited.

[AFGHANinSANDALS]

SUMERIAN CREATION EPIC. thats the real deal

[aaronstephman]

So again close minded christians overriding the point of view of others ending with how their 'debates' always end - ignorant and pretentious confidence in their beliefs based on a few hundred bits of paper.

[aaronstephman]

So again close minded christians overriding the point of view of others ending with how theyr 'debates' always end - ignorant and pretentious confidence in their beliefs based on a few hundred bits of paper.

[Mdebacle]

Ken Miller has already shown us how to disprove evolution.

/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk

If two species have different chromosome numbers that fusions and fissions cannot account for,

then "evolution is wrong"

Do cats (2n=38) and dogs (2n=78) have 20 fusions or fissions ?

Could anyone in their right mind believe all animals have fissions and fusions that point back to a common ancestor ?

[purbrookian]

God of the gaps argument, warmed over. Tripe.

[yedrow]

Okay, Barry Lynn is a wretched sophist. I've seen him interviewed many times and he is a man of deceit and, I suspect, deep malice. In any event, the moderator failed utterly in allowing the churlish Atheist speak over the dissenter. This a theme with Atheists sadly. They rose up out of the rabble and shall always be rabble and shall only ever pursue the lowest of human aspirations.

[LennonLives4Ever]

hehe creationists are smart. they know how to cover their trails with a "but god is real" and if he wanted to he could have been the reason why evolution exists. there is no great way to disagree without claiming god doesnt exist. so imma try something new. I have an invisible monkey that helps me cheat on tests by looking at other people's tests. He promises that as long as i believe he exists and use my own logic when guessing he will improve my chances of being right. =] fun, now disprove plz

[luker4459]

That was an excellent closing argument for the evolution side. Did the guy say his name was barry lynn?

[gregrutz]

It is not a question I can answer.......

of course not, Dr. Butinski doen't know shit.

[paspax]

There can be no "debate" between creationists & scientists.

Reason...

Scientists are qualified to discuss this topic. Creationists are simply religious extremists with no credentials.

End of discussion.

[Narwal88]

paspax, I agree.

And Butinski (or whatever his name is) is too smart to claim to be a creationist and present evidence for it, because he knows he'd be demolished.

All he says is: 'I'm not convinced." Hard to argue with that, and he knows it. So, he things, he's safe.

But, in fact, he still comes across as a fool (to me anyway).

[Jukinju]

@paspax

John C. Sanford, you can view his credentials with an easy internet search. They are similar in nature to Kenneth Miller. Other points of interest are that he actually used his knowledge to invent a "gene gun" which has enabled him to retire from the sale. He started out as an evolutionist and is currently a young earth creationist.

Scientists with reputable credentials who subscribe to creation are the minority but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

[04gtstang]

The creationists in this debate were a joke....almost seemed like the whole thing was a joke. If they got some real creationists in there that actually knew what the heck they were talking about, the evolutionists would have been blown away.

The evolutionists arguments were retarded and easily explainable, but the "creationists" acted like they were stumped with these 2nd grade arguments.

This vid is a setup. or they picked a bunch of newbs to debate.

[anttibra]

All creationist are joke, but please, tell me who are these "real creationists". Kent Hovind? Ken Ham? Kirk Cameron or Ray Comfort????????

And even if evolutionists arguments were retarded, it`s nothing to compare creationists arguments.

[paspax]

Go away, fool.

[MonstersNightmare]

Pakman52, I think you hit the nail on the head, the situation with Creationists is that they don't have a set-system. I think what they hope to have is evidence without a natural explanation which would have people go "Yay! See! No natural explanation showing a creator!" But as a Christian, why I am at least an evolution accepting Intelligent Design believer is because God would also need the laws for the microsystems.

[WolYou]

Nothing intelligent in the design of life I could see. Not even a design. Everything coming out of nature is botch. Nature is not beautiful, its ugly, disgusting, stinking stuff. Just quit cleaning your appartment or house and you will see what I mean. That we think nature is "beauty" is just a delusion to escape the hard facts about it.

[Imaginefree69]

Which version of Creation in the Bible do you like best?

Chapter one,

which has the same developmental sequence

as Evolutionary theory teaches?

Or chapter two, in which man was created before plants and animals?

Chapter one,

in which Adam and Eve were created at the same time?

Or chapter two,

in which Eve was created after all the animals?

[Mathaius833]

lol creationism is such a joke and so is anyone who believes in it.

[AshNekoBoy]

everyone go play Spore, it's fun =3

[psantoki]

Yeah, evolution is a lie!  and the theory of a round earth is a lie!

[04gtstang]

Round earth is not a theory....its proven and seen every day.

Evolution is a theory that is no where near being proven and cannot and has not been tested or observed.

[wootbeans]

This is why religion is looked down upon theists.

[draagon66]

04gtstang

"Evolution is a theory that is no where near being proven and cannot and has not been tested or observed."

So wrong on so many levels. Your lack of understanding and ignorance is revealed.

This is why the enlightened and educated treat theists with such ridicule.

[k87jury]

Nylonase

Italian Wall Lizard

[Ulubattlihasan]

I come from Adem and Eve NOT from a Monkey

[tglad]

no one came from monkeys. monkeys and humans evolved from a common ancestor. please don't make statements about subjects you do not understand.

[Ulubattlihasan]

Evolution is a lie

[bonangusacdc]

This is embarrassing. Even most Christians find the North American phenomena of Creationism deeply offensive and a national disgrace.

[wildreams]

Agreed.

[JDtheMusicMan]

Even though the evolutionist was a rude A-hole and interrupting many times, the other fellow was a gentleman and tried to teach him something. There is variety in design of horses from the past, but variety does not mean that one evolved into another. There are at least a hundred breeds of dogs today.

[leeyoung1991]

In fact, you yourself is a damn bloody stupid A-hole in evolution.

[AshNekoBoy]

that were bred from wolves o.o;

[gskolbjorn]

Actually, that is generally how these debates go. Both interrupted the other. Also, they were each trying to clarify the points. Had there been a serious violation the moderator would have noted it.

[ccheng21]

what this creationist wants Dr. Ken Miller to show, is example of an ape-like ancestor of human kind or the link between horses and elephants...within its own lifetime, to evolve into another species.

That doesn't happen in evolution which is why evolution takes such a long time. Homoerectus doesn't change into homosapien in its own lifetime, that doesn't happen but its what this creationist is looking for.

[Englishdosser86]

Berlinski has stated explicitly in another video that he will not be convinced by fossil evidence until EVERY transitional form, showing every single morphological change of a species before he'll believe in it. For example, he estimated that there are 50,000 changes between a grazing mammal and a whale, so will not be convinced until 50,000 fossils of the transitional forms are found. It is ludicrous.

[Seekmosttoprophesy]

God could have taken any amount of time to do anything. The problem is that there is evidence that would indicate more of an instantaneous Creation of the heavens and the earth. If you need millions of years, that could have taken place before the first day was counted when God made light to shine on the earth for the first time when each rotation of the earth was counted for the first six days. Still, don't be surprised if it is soon proven to have been an instantaneous creation of everything.

[dlhitch2007]

I can't believe an otherwise intelligent person like Buckley subscribes to this creationist nonsense.

[bigalisme]

"Smart people are very good at rationalizing things they came to believe for non smart reasons." - Michael Shermer... ain't he kickass?

[xxmonickkkkaxx]

Because he wants to control people with this bullshit.

[Hamish27]

or maybe Jesus Christ was just talking symbolism and some power mongering asshole decided to try and get followers so as to have power over people and fucked up what Jesus said. The bible is full of many good morals, morals that everyone should follow, yet no one does. Even Christians don't follow them.

[DeadFishFactory]

Yes. The bible has many good morals. I wholeheartedly agree! Let's name a few:

If a woman is raped, she shall be put to death along with the rapist. Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB

Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT

Kill homosexuals. Leviticus 20:13 NAB

Kill anyone who worships the "wrong religion." Exodus 22:19 NAB

Kill any women who are not virgins before marriage. Rape is not a valid excuse. Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB

[Dreammotive]

Well you turned out to be an absolute liar. What a pathetic asshole you are. I would welcome any arguments against the bible for discussion but the lowest shame is lying to make your opposition look bad. You're obviously very insecure. Deut. 22:23 says the girl is to be killed only if she did not cry out, meaning it was not rape. Verses 25-27 specify that a raped girl is not to be killed.

Perhaps someone told you the bible said that but you didn't read it for yourself.

[DeadFishFactory]

"the girl is to be killed only if she did not cry out."

And this is a valid justification for good morals... how? What if she was being held at knife-point? Your morality sucks as much as your religion you fucking sick weirdo.

[Dreammotive]

I didn't say that this verse is the basis for morality, nor did I claim to be apart of any religion, I was just calling out your lie.

[Giovanni8874]

that guy is such an idiot.. that would be micro-evolution.. the argument should be about macro-evolution. we all know that micro-evolution has happened but thats it. and if kent hovind was there he would of made mush out of that guy.

[ReligiouslyAtheist]

Actually Miller has debated and crushed Hovind, and micro and macro evolution are creationist terms, besides, the man showed you and entirely new species forming, just what would you consider evidence of 'macro' evolution

[dlhitch2007]

Kent Hovind is a fake scientist and just about everything that comes out of his mouth on science is FLAWED.

[gamesbok]

Hovind couldn't be there. He's in prison.

[oggleman]

Lol Ken Miller totally pwned that guy he looked so embarassed!

[DonExodus2]

WOAH, thats Ken Miller!

[holysaturnius]

I dont see how believing in the evolutionry process is incombatable with believing in God.Its obvious to anyone with half a brain that Genesis is using symbolism.God is the why,evolution is the how.Its inconcievable to me that an eternal God would only start "creating"around 6000 years ago.

[GustafSjoblom]

I agree.

I feel that the argument that accepting evolution leads to atheism is rather silly, since it reads as "knowledge of reality leads to atheism".

In effect, that argument is only true if there really is no God. In other words, if someone says this it really suggests that they really have a rather weak belief in God. They are so afraid of reality disproving their faith.

[JDtheMusicMan]

Holysaturnius: You got it right that God is the "why". But if God is eternal as you say, and I agree, what is the difference between 6,000 yrs and 100 billion yrs? IF, God has ALWAYS existed, even a hundred billion trillion years ago. Time is no factor to God, time is only a factor to mortal mankind who are on a limited lifespan and think in terms of time. Time is a measurement, and God is beyond time because He is eternal as you rightly observed.

[rickelmonoggin]

I don't get these creationists who seem to know lots about science. They must know that creationism is a load of cobblers-why would they waste all their knowledge by being in denial?

[Devoted4]

Honestly, it has a lot to do with money. Many of them know it is not valid, but they know they can make a lot more money working for a creation museum, or traveling the country giving talks to ignorant Christians.

[emkawaha]

I disagree. Most creationists seem very sincere when they oppose evolution. They know that with the theory of evolution there is no need for a creator. They equate morality in the world with a creator and it scares them becasuse they think morality would disappear if their fairy tale wasn't true. Ignorance is bliss, and they hope to keep everyone "blissful".

[chukmaty]

There is always a need for a creator at the point of creation. There is a significant argument between the monists, deists, and theists which is metaphysical in nature.

Also, having only possible horse elephant and dog whale connections after a long search for transitionals is pretty pathetic and seems like straining to confirm a bias.

[JDtheMusicMan]

Scientists and science professors are bought and paid for by the atheist systems they work for. Take away the money and a lot more of them would be honest and admit that the evolution theory is the biggest hoax ever put over on the American people. God, not Sagan, Dawkins or Hitchens, made everything... including all life at every level. The best that atheist evolutionists on the school system's payroll can say is that we all evolved from ocean slime that "just happened".

[lordbyrne]

lol, you are such a joke, and i pity u man, i really do. how bout u do some actual research. O, and ps, where did your god come from?

[gamesbok]

JD, you're deeply stupid. Given the mechanisms that we know exist evolution is logically inevitable. It isn't a biological theory, it's logically inevitable.  Got that?

[qabala]

What the hell was Kinsley doing during this debate?

Why are they able to talk over each other?

He must be the worst mediator of all time.

[SKYSPLASH]

Youll see he had a cold and was under the weather .

[qabala]

He should have called in sick, then.

[warwickchild]

check out this video; Inherit the Wind scene, creationism vs. evolution

great verbal joust from a true event

[1ToNJaB]

How come animals have to evolve over time? What is changing in the enviroment that makes them HAVE TO change and adabt? Why can't a Lion be a Lion forever, why will it evolve?

[Edeinawc]

What isn't? Weather changes, we pass trought glacial and heat ages, population changes too, food changes...everything changes. Animals have to adapt constantly.

[1ToNJaB]

Do you believe "global warmering" is part of this natural occuring change in the planet... not man made.

[qabala]

Global warming is definitely a natural occurrance. It has played a part in numerous mass extinctions in the past. It can't all be blamed on industry.

However, in earths history, changes in climate have never occurred at this speed. It is a rate which COINCIDES (specific word usage) with CO2 increase since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

But, there is no amount of American legislation that will change the contributions to this problem made by other countries.

[1ToNJaB]

I feel the same way about this subject. So many different things can wipe this planet out... I wonder when the Sun decides to Super Nova.

[DNAunion]

Kenneth Miller is a Creaionist's worst nightmare!

[Rafaelpicc]

What a great argument from Dr.Miller. :)

[Jason84575]

The creationist's conclusion did not sum up any evidence. He asked everyone to choose do you think we came from angels or apes.

Of course most people would want to believe we came from Angels.

Most people would want to believe that there is life after death.

Most would want to believe that all injustices will be rectified.

That thinking simply boils down to wishful thinking.

[marcleno1]

most people would like to believe there is no God, and no punishment, that too my friend is a wishful dream.

[Jason84575]

Yea its too bad God does not punish poeple for slavery.

Please show me a verse in the new or old testement that condemns slavery.

Just so you know I am willing to qutoe every verse in the Bible that permits slavery.

[nightwind321]

there's a reason God permitted slavery, along with wars, murders, etc. He still does. Unfortunately, it's not an easy question to and and frankly, nothing I say will change your mind, so let me just say this. You already know the answer. If you truly think about it and honestly ask God why he would allow these things and you really want to know, I am certain you at least partially come to understand it. I only partially understand as well. That's the best I can do

[Jason84575]

God did permit war, in fact at one time he command the Jews to commit genocide on the cannonites. Although Jesus condemn war by saying we should not use the weapons of man.

God never permits murder, Thou shall not kill.

God and Jesus nevers condemns slavery, in fact thier are rules that regulate it.

What I mean by permit is that God does not make any rules that objects to slavery. If Bible is the book of morality then slavery in not a sin.

[nightwind321]

The new testament says... if you know something is wrong and you do it anyway, for you, it is sin. Paul told slaves to accept their lot, but to seek freedom if at all possible. Paul said we are slaves to christ. Slavery is still here to this day. God is not condemning it, because of the spiritual implications involving it, but slavery of 1 person over another is obviously wrong. Your own conscious should tell you so

[Jason84575]

Yes my conscious says slavery is worng.

My conscious also says murder is wrong, yet God condmens that as well as thieft and rape. God condemns all these obvious sins yet not slavery.

"spiritual implications"

God could have condemn slavery between humans, or the slavery of a single race. But NO he did not, and guess what Christian nations did to Africa in the 18Th centruy.

Slavery turned out to be a very important sin to clarify.

[olavka]

It is not a wishful dream, it would be irrational to include a God in ones reality when NO religion is able to show that their God does ANYTHING to affect reality.

(For example, prayer has been shown to have no effect in a multitude of studies)

This does not mean that God does not exist, but wishful dream? Hardly. Not more than you have wishful dreams about Santaclaus not existing.

[Jason84575]

My argument with nightwind is obivously about the exisitance of the Christian God.

But as far a beleiving in No Gods at all, I would ask why a god. Most likey what created the universe what ever it is .....will be something we have not defined.

[TeflonMaster]

oops, i mean ken miller

[TeflonMaster]

Jeff Miller is awesome.

[FinnHawk]

Do you know how ridiculously HUGE the universe is? I just don't see how even God could have created ALL the planets, all the stars (each of which is a sun), and how everything in the universe could have miraculously appeared in a week and is less than ten thousand years old. It is MUCH easier to believe that it has taken BILLIONS of years for everything to EVOLVE! Do you know how long that is? It almost seems infinite to us humans. That's PLENTY of time to everything to EVOLVE!

[SKYSPLASH]

Check out my site I have the entire debate plus other things on evolution. And As A Christian it is stated in the bible How can clay (US) under stand the Potter ( Jesus-God) who formed him.

[Rafaelpicc]

On what part of your website can we find the entire debate?

[thrufaithalone]

FinnHawk - "That's PLENTY of time to everything to EVOLVE!"

From nothing?

[macman13]

"From nothing?"

I smell straw.

[abominablesnowball]

Life did not evolve from nothing. It had the ideal conditions, proper matierials, and the laws of the universe on its side.

[thrufaithalone]

"It had the ideal conditions, proper matierials, and the laws of the universe on its side."

Such as?

[FinnHawk]

So then God came into existence from nothing? Either way (God or no god), the true answer is probably far too complicated for us humans to imagine.

In my opinion, we as humans might not fully understand the concept of time. Time may not be linear with a beginning and an end as we perceive it. It may be much more complicated than that.

[antierratum]

O-W-N-E-D. Go team evidence!

[SKYSPLASH]

Be sure to check out my other vids and the complete debate.

[Violetmoss]

This video only shows speciation, there is still no proof for macro-evolution. The organisms did not grow more complex. If you start from the cellular level, evolution is cancelled out. It is simply not possible.

[SKYSPLASH]

Check out my other video clips on this subject I have the entire debate on my site.

[Kabane52]

Are you serious. Speciation IS macro evolution. And why is it impossible?

[Censeo]

There is signs in macro evolution that favor the the theory of evolution of species, which wouldn't even be fundamental as evidence for evolution. It is as fundamental to evolution theory as cells themselves would be questioned to exist if they could not be explained through the study of molecules (which they can't). But you believe in cells right?

[Erech01]

so is it not possible tht prts of the DNA r more light sensitive thn others, thi can thn go on2 form an eye if the right mutations r made, say a pit, nw the lght snsitive cells cpy thmslevs around ths pit, afew 1000 years l8r a mutation occrs and these cells spit mucus of sum srt ovr tme this hards, ta da a crde lens, this lens givin the ability 2 c is bttr thn not 2 c at all so i bcoms a dominat gene wthin the early spcies whch wnt on2 frm all life usin the same prinicple of mutation as the eye

[hanzo138]

Ken Miller ROCKS!

[C0ct0pus]

i love when creationists post these videos...only makes me more atheist.

[SKYSPLASH]

Are you sure it does not make you more Evolutionist.

[SKYSPLASH]

Germs and Diseases Dont evolve into Creatures. And yes they have DNA and Design. Eventually I will Post the whole debate little by little. And check out the rest of my Vids THEY MAKE A GOOD SPIN ON OTHER TOPICS.

[RushFan4ever]

No, they don't evolve into creatures....they just DESTROY CREATURES that are already EVOLVED.

[RushFan4ever]

So, at the same time your wonderful God was cooking up people on one side of the stove, on the other side he had all the ways to DESTROY them brewing....why? just in case he fucked up and needed to wipe 'em out?

[SKYSPLASH]

I posted the whole Debate check it out.

[Erech01]

so is it not possible tht prts of the DNA r more light sensitive thn others, thi can thn go on2 form an eye if the right mutations r made, say a pit, nw the lght snsitive cells cpy thmslevs around ths pit, afew 1000 years l8r a mutation occrs and these cells spit mucus of sum srt ovr tme this hards, ta da a crde lens, this lens givin the ability 2 c is bttr thn not 2 c at all so i bcoms a dominat gene wthin the early spcies whch wnt on2 frm all life usin the same prinicple of mutation as the eye

[RushFan4ever]

Creationists use the argument of "look at an eye. It's so PERFECT." How could that just 'evolve' from nothing? Somebody planned it!" Yes - then that "somebody" also PLANNED germs, diseases, viruses, malformations, sickness, etc etc etc - but they don't bring that into the argument, or have a good response when a scientist DOES.

[C0ct0pus]

brilliantly put

[oscaxed]

Very, very intelligent. Very, very right. Good point.

[EvoLIEtion]

Where can I find the entire debate?

[SKYSPLASH]

I have most of it I'll post more of it. in parts I recorded it awhile back.

[SKYSPLASH]

Im downloading first 7 clips from former Evolutionist called Unlocking the mysteries of life then Ill Do the Entire Debate that will be about 7 clips also.

[IgWannA2]

lol he keeps refusing to argue the evolutionist's perfectly good points, even though that's the whole reason he went to that debate. what a chump.

[DerSchnurrbart]

Notice how the Creationists refuse to take a firm position on anything. Dr. Berlinski(?) wouldn't even admit to being an ID proponent! They are always "skeptical" (meaning they will rationalize-away anything that contradicts their ideas) and are very careful to not take any positive position that might be testable (at least in this clip).

[SKYSPLASH]

I posted the whole debate check it out.

[Desertphile]

The debate ended over 100 years ago: Superstition lost, science won.