This man is racist and clinically retarded. I was in shock while watching this. Those people's foot deformity is because of sin? This guy is an idiot. In every sense of the word.
I know how to solve this evolution vs creationist argument once and for all. All we have to do is convince all the "Christians" to let this clown make all their medications. He is a "chemist" after all. I'm sure with his BS degree he can meet all their needs. I'm sure they wouldn't want their medications coming from the "scientific minority" when they can just go to this guy. I'm sure they'd be happy to give up anything in their lives that was created by scientists and move back into caves.
Wow, the thing about the eye. Darwin sure made this statement, but on the next pages he explained, how it could evolve. And today it is proven, that an ey can evolve from lower stages. It has been tested, observed, done again and veryfied. The whole thing about complexity is like saying I don't get it therefor it must be the flying unicorn with starsprinkles or god. Whatever even if there is a "god", why has it to be that christian god?
Yeah, but that's the problem with some people who intepret too much in the bible. And so if you take this book literally...you got a problem with evolution. For me this is no problem. I am myself a catholic, but as u see not a really good one;)
@Bleakillusion How do you reconcile the Genesis account with evolution? Metaphor? If so, then what's it meaning? Maturity and responsibility? Since I'm an atheist, I've always been curious. I'm not being hostile but genuinely curious. Furthermore, I agree with gastarbeiter's statement that some Christians put too much emphasize on the bible without acknowledging that the bible is a creation of god and shouldn't be held in comparison to their god, an entity separate from their book.
@TheResurgamAdvent well the great thing about Catholicism vs Protestantism is that Catholics don't believe that every single word in the bible should be taken literally (because that is impossible and at points even contradicts itself) its about the message not literal interpretation this is why Jesus spoke in parables and metaphors and tried to talk people out of taking everything out of context (e.g. the whole "working on the sabbath" that by by his time the jews had taking so extreme)
From conception it is already determined what that person will be. Gender, color of eyes, hair and skin, resistance and predisposition to other diseases, mental and physical capacity
Gender is determined after the eight cell stage, which happens sometime after conception.
Mental and physical capacities are determined long after birth depending on environmental conditions, diet, education and a number of other factors.
Evolution does not state that members of one species give birth to another.
Evolution, as well, does not claim that all mutations are beneficial.
Also, assuming that all humanity is descended from Adam and Eve, and that mutations are due to their sin, shouldn't everyone have such unfortunate deformities?
He later asserts in his book that if intermediary stages of the eye were found, then natural selection would be able to procure such an organ. And indeed, we have found such stages: Flat worms have light sensitive tissues.
More advanced animals have these tissues, but curved to sense light and direction. These cells could secrete mucous, as in several annelids, causing blurry images to form. This mucous could harden to form a lens like in an octopus.
In all seriousness though, evolutionary theory states that mutation - minor recombinations in the DNA between generations - plays an extremely minor role in the overall change in life. Most of the changes which do happen are due to the inheritance of traits which already existed in the previous generation.
this guy is just retarded, they dont always loose information when they loose features, chickens have had the gene for teeth reativated, and you get chicken with teeth, not lost information.
It is good that you speak my beloved brother and let not the folly of man hinder you from the truth of God, yea, you are hardpressed on all sides, from atheists on the one and those whom presume brothers in faith on the other. Well as one whom presides in the household of faith I esteem you my beloved brother. Our Lord said,
"There is nothing covered that will not be revealed and nothing hidden that will not be known."
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Behold He comes with darkness at His feet. Assuredly you each are as fools, uttering soundless swelling words and insults, scoffing and mocking digging for yourselves a pit and it is no wonder in a world in which are valued and esteemed by how low you can bring somebody, you are each like the bullies at school only verifying your folly. You are each like a great genetic mutation to humanity, your words and concepts do not strengthen us but hinder us, you know nothing and your tongues condemn u.
A crocodile lays and egg and a bird hatches from the egg? What? What scientific literature have you been reading? No scientist worth his/her qualifications would ever state such a thing as fact. Change is gradual. Also, this guy stated that 'in mutation information is lost'. This simply isnt true. Genetic information is conserved very highly between related species.
Okay. The eye. You can see the evolution of the eye in many different species on our planet. There are several different eye variations, and they all opperate on the same principles of light detecting chemicals. But some of the eyes are better adapted than others. The Human eye is by no means the best eye in existance. If God was creating us in his own (perfect) image, why not give us the best possible eye? (in fact the Human eye is very fallable, as anyone with a stigmatism will know).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Re Dawkins' quote at 20:17, Dawkins contradicts himself in saying the small changes in offspring are chance improvements, but overall his whole evolutionary process is not.
Actually all events need causes and those causes effect things in logical step by step ways. What we think of as random is not scientifically feasable or logical.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
can you remember every detail in a 30 minute text instantly i don't think so, he forgot a minor detail and it took a little to to remember it, it doesn't mean he sucks ass that's just him being a normal human being...
first of all, he's got a sheet where he's got his whole speech prepared.
Then, the wolf gene? I'm sorry, but if he wants to prove he's a scientist, maybe he should come up with the right term, and not a term any non-scientist would have come up with.
Doesn't have anything to do with memory, but knowledge.
I thought that can happen if u take a female human egg or any other female egg and mutate it with another animal example: a fish sperm, other mammal sperm, bird sperm, or reptilian sperm all from males .
And doesn't mutations also happen if Human blood comes into contact with nuclear waste.
No, punctuated equilibrium says nothing about missing links... it just tries to explain why there are short times of rapid change interspersed by long times of little change. If you're going to explain what something is at least make sure the explanation fits somewhat with the textbook definition
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
T-rex blood cells are evidence that Dinos did not die out before man came. Carvings of dinos by ancient humans. Figurines of dinos predate dino excavation. carved in ancient buildings, human with dino footprints, etc. And with some parts of the world still uninhabited, how could anyone state empirically all dinos are extinct. It's not a fact, it's your belief, but your too propagandized to believe the truth lies with your belief, for you think it's science.
illness in breads of dog is caused by inbreading its got sod all to do with anything else. breading dogs for show and not giving a damb about there health or how long they live has caused illness and desease. (we did this by forcing them to inbread on our ideas and what we wanted to look nice. not to be healthy and reproduce). something they would not have done in nature if they had the choice. got sod all to do with evolution as being the caus of illness. or cloning for that matter.
wow how wrong can you get about understanding cloning. cloning already happens in nature. there is no need at all for sex or anything like it. its everywhere. humans and sheep are build on reproducing by sex. we dont use cloning of ourselves in nature. on wolves to poodles. erm. you lose information in DNA so they are ill. no you dont. a dog has the same number of chromosoms. it does not lose anything. it is ill becasue we bread it that way to look cute and cauing inbreading. meaning.....
No no no. You are wrong Mr. Chemist. Those people are proof of Evolution. The next stage of Evolution is turning into ostrich. Can't you Creationists get that through your thick skull.
We will grow wings and fly like birds. Hello, that is the next level in the line of intelligence, becoming birds that look like ostriches that think like humans but sound like mice. DUH!!!
2:34 - This clown actually quote mines Darwin. This tired canard keeps getting posted by creationists. What they don't bother with is the REST OF THE PARAGRAPH!!! Here is the rest...
Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist;
if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated
but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound.
You are assuming they are gradations of an organ passed through common ancestry. Darwin said "several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light..." He didn't have any proof, just a suspicion, just like your assumption that causes you to see connections that aren't necessarily there.
Well that was mildly entertaining. So do you have any videos of real scientists? Or just self-accredited ones, that wear a lab coat while giving seminars. It really makes him look professional. But then he opens his mouth and promptly dispels that notion.
I've just started looking at his videos, but just to play devil's advocate with you. Does a man need to be a mathematician to be able to tell a person going around saying 2+2=7 that it's wrong? So what?? The goal is that is his research and observations valid. Is the information he offering worthy of reproof?
I concede that his credentials (or lack of them) do not handicap his ability to make arguments. (Not that I find many of his arguments valid) However; he introduces himself as "chemist John Pendleton" not "auto mechanic john Pendleton" or "missionary John Pendleton). This seems innocuous to me. He obviously takes the title of chemist because people will grant him more authority on matters of science.
Attacking his credentials is a waste of time. I have studied Biology at university and i find most Lecturers to be liars and brainwash the students with lies and innaccuracies. Trust me HUGE efforts are made by them to coverup the truth.
I have a masters in biochemistry from a university... there are some unexplained phenomenon but no intentional inacuraccuracies. I also teach biochemistry at a CC. i make no attempt to cover up the truth.
I am speaking of my experience with the biology department. They are hypocrites. They dont like any of their theories being questioned and expect everybody to blindly believe what ever they show on their Powerpoint presentations.
Strange that we share dna with monkeys, pigs, rats etc. basically with a lot of mammals. Which is why these animals serve as good Guinea Pigs, though Guinea Pigs serve as better Guinea Pigs... Not that I condone animal research in a time when stem cell research is starting, along with other things. And I think I'm getting thumbs downs because you guys reject the evolutionary theory about those thumbs.
I agree.....i think he needs to go to school and earn that degree he claims to have....and maybe he should finish that quote from Darwins book
"yet in the case of any organ, if we know of a long series of gradations in complexity, each good for its possessor, then, under changing conditions of life, there is no logical impossibility in the acquirement of any conceivable degree of perfection through natural selection."
1. evolution isn't the same as abiogenesis or the big bang
2. don't use arguments from 150 years ago like the Darwin eye ball example, it has been shown in the las 50 years that the eye can come from evolution
3. manipulating corn genes to produce superior
strains of corn isn't evolution? why? because it's still corn? evolution is gradual! gradual
4. it's true that 99% of mutations arent beneficial and thats why evolution takes millions of years to accomplish large tasks. You want people to show examples of macro evolution, something that took billions of years, by finding examples from our lifetime? are you thick?
ps: nice outfit man, specially like the little universe tie and the pink id badge
i'm not defending this guys video, just have a word on your point 3. in the theories of evolution puntuated equilibria is gaining force. gradualism not so much..
I believe in this mans convictions.I also believe that evolutionary scientists are justifying the existance of their beliefs,other wise they would be unemployed.Besides name one positive thing that has come from these studies.
This is the most stupid video ever, it is almost too painful to watch. I know he is wearing a lab coat, but has this man had any science training at all. He is talking rubbish, he seems to base his science training on headlines from tabloid newspapers.
As a biochemistry student i am insulted and appalled that some people would consider a looser like that a "scientist." He's a bible basher pretending to be a scientist so he wont be ignored.
poor excuse for a scientist, if he is one at all. The eye was designed by nothing more than natural selection from photosensitive cells, over billions of years. Dipshits like him only have trouble believing in evolution because they don't understand simple statistics, or the concept of natural selection.
My thoughts also SqrJames ... I find people who argue about Evolution the most are ones who fail to grasp an understanding of it. It's all about education.
Oh no, as soon as he pulled out the 'SIN' word I realised this guy is a full blown bible basher... He's trying to de-bunk evolution but expects people to believe AN INSISIBLE MAN IN THE SKY... LOOOL Loser
I give him some credit for his research. However, he doesn't have a real passion for science. He also presents no evidence for a creator. The bible is hardly a scientific document. If there is a creator then science will end and in it's stead will be people searching for the human stereo instruction left by god.
Also he said all life evolved from amoebas, even bacteria, which is false, since bacteria are much smaller and less complicated than an amoeba. His comment only goes to show you how ignorant he is about the taxonomy of living things.
Remember the part about Darwin saying he thinks the eye cannot have evolved. The quote continues as follows: "Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist, -- then the difficulty of
believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
Part 2 of "Out of Context Theater." Darwin did not think the eye could not have evolved. He confessed his amazement at the eye, as only those eloquent wirters of yore could. Sadly, reading on, his statement lacks any mention of a creator or elf or pixie or other supernatural being that creationists try to hint at.
As soon as you admit genes change at all, you've lost the argument against evolution. Religion needs to stick to examining the question of how people are to treat each other (an area where it has value), rather than how the universe works (an area where is has no value).
You're forgetting about cross breeding idiot. There is some mutation but it isn't the whole thing. And by the way, where did he get that Darwin quote. Was it origion of the species, a paper, a pamphlet?
This video looks like it was made by amatuers. The speaker has horrible voice & diction and pauses at nearly every word. And what is "POSILBE"? Any good points made by this guy are juxtaposed with elementary errors and presumptions about God.
If we have made it to this page we have probably watched a few of that Crackpot Pendleton's videos out of curiosity. If you are interested in seeing a decent debate about this go to google video and search for "Bower Pendleton." This is a debate brought to a Texas university by two organizations at that school. The "Atheist Agenda" and "Campus Crusade for Christ" 2.5 hours long, but if you want both arguments presented intelectually (except Pendleton maybe)I would look at this.
I dont get it. Thing in the bible only apply to our own social structure and therefor is impossible to apply to all other intelligent life. I dont go to church because im afraid i could end up like this poor brainwashed guy.
Verily, they themselves have never walked on the carpets of knowledge. Of gaps was the spirit of these redeemers made up; but into every gap they put their delusion, their stopgap, which they called God. -Nietzche 1873
A theory is something that has been supported by many many scientific experiments and studies and is accepted by the scientific community.
Creationism isn't a theory. It's a Hypothesis! An Hypothesis with NO supporting evidence or experiments! That's why Creationism ISN'T equal or even valid in debate vs. Evolution.
This guy isn't a scientist, his terminolgy proves it. He's arguments are just chalk full of Non sequitur that uneducated christians can't see.
Yeah...lets see him write his thesis on dinosaurs being 3,000 years old...or maybe on talking snakes. He's lucky to have attained a bachelors in science.
They went to Mexico to fnd this looser? His tie LOL-But he is a "mutation" he speaks out his ass. Wadlow died of a simple blood infection. - LIAR. - SIN? what gene is that? Why isn't a bible built in? Uh Oh - where in the bible does it even mention molecular genetics and cloning. God has killed many unborn HUMAN babies, in and out of the womb - read the Bible!
Why are creationists and intelligent(?) such idiots that they believe a book that goes back to the bronze age nothing in it is scientific. When will they come up whit proof, if they are so convinced of what they are saying, this would not be difficult.
Alough this author seems a little different than your typical speaker, His words are truth. You cannot deny the fact there is no missing link, none. If the earth is billions of years old, wouldn't we find one? God bless you all.
The problem with looking for every missing link is that, the more you find, the more missing links you develop. But thats the point of science I guess to continue searching for the truth. But just because we are missing one piece it does not debunk the whole theory.
I find it odd that God created predators with intricately designed abilities and strategies with the intentional purpose of catching prey which, in turn, are intricately designed to avoid and defend themselves against the intricately designed predators.
Wow! Scientists having to destroy their mistakes in mass numbers? I haven't heard of such evil practices since I don't know when; could it be the last time I heard of this such practice was when God did it himself?
As the World's ever tallest man, Robert Wadlow's height was attributed to an over active pituary gland, which produced much higher than normal levels of growth hormone. Today's medical science can compensate for such problems - but in the 1920s there was no therapy available.
Robert Pershing Wadlow died of an infection caused by the inability to get shoes to fit his ever growing feet. He continued to grow until the time of his death.
Pendleton actually gave some evidence I needed to research in this one. He still parrots bad research that has been parroted by others before him. Quoting people out of context is till everpresent here. For a guy who claims to be a scientist, he sure is unaware of scientific protocol. How could he have missed this in obtaining a BS degree?
Maybe he isn't a chemist at all. Or maybe he is, but is just adept at compartmentalizing. It hardly matters either way. Pushing antiscientifice hokum does not magically become science just because the one doing it is a scientist, just as raking leaves does not magically become dentistry just because the one wielding the rake is a dentist.
He quotes Dawkins out of context. Dawkins thesis was that evolution occurs on a step-by-step basis by chance, but cumulative selection is anything but random.
The Chicago conference was not to debate the validity of evolution, but the mechanisms that drive it - Roger Lewin wrote his article out of ignorance.
With the postulation of instinct, he destroys his thesis on Peacocks. A peahens attraction to a large tail is because it indicates the overall health of the peacock.
His idea of punctuated equilibrium is off. It is an observation that certain species evolve and become successful and don't tend to change much. Then for some reason, they start changing a little again until they become stable in another evolutionary step.
The arrival of the fittest is easily seen in people that are just born extraordinary.
Evolutionary scientists are not "afraid" to answer the question of the origin of life, they have the humility to admit that they don't have the answer yet.
He calls his conferences "powerful". Toot your own horn much?
He quotes Darwin on the eye from 160 years ago as if Darwin was an authority. Every single transitional stage from eyespot to human eye is present in nature.
Interesting mutations. What do they prove?
Mutations are caused by sin? Is he serious?
Gitts work was based on a complete misunderstanding of Shannons work.
Mr. Pendleton possesses the logic reasoning of a 2 year old...or a hardcore christian. "If I didn't turn of my computer, then God must have turned it off."
Either Mr. Pendelton was aware of the context of the quote, or he was not. The former does not bode well for his integrity. The latter does not bode well for his competence as a scientist. Either way, he is not one to be regarded as a reliable source of information.
continued ... "and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
The conveniently ommitted remainder of the Darwin quote about the eye: "Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; ....
This man is racist and clinically retarded. I was in shock while watching this. Those people's foot deformity is because of sin? This guy is an idiot. In every sense of the word.
Taraalcar 1 month ago
"Hey, John, you want to go through the script once before we start rolling? We got a lot of big words in this video."
"Nah, I got this."
dorsk188 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
He's wrong 8% of your DNA is ERV's
Fishingbirb 2 months ago
No mistakes in the bible? Get your head out of your ass and read it again, I'm sure you missed a few hundred pages.
killthemwithfirelol 6 months ago
Why hello Tom Hanks
teetertoter3 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I know how to solve this evolution vs creationist argument once and for all. All we have to do is convince all the "Christians" to let this clown make all their medications. He is a "chemist" after all. I'm sure with his BS degree he can meet all their needs. I'm sure they wouldn't want their medications coming from the "scientific minority" when they can just go to this guy. I'm sure they'd be happy to give up anything in their lives that was created by scientists and move back into caves.
MasterOfSparks 9 months ago
in your last mutation thing you spend half an hour saying mutations dont happen
Bleakillusion 11 months ago
Wow, the thing about the eye. Darwin sure made this statement, but on the next pages he explained, how it could evolve. And today it is proven, that an ey can evolve from lower stages. It has been tested, observed, done again and veryfied. The whole thing about complexity is like saying I don't get it therefor it must be the flying unicorn with starsprinkles or god. Whatever even if there is a "god", why has it to be that christian god?
gastarbeiter1 11 months ago
@gastarbeiter1 and even if the christian god is real why does that automatically mean evolution cant work
Bleakillusion 11 months ago
@Bleakillusion
Yeah, but that's the problem with some people who intepret too much in the bible. And so if you take this book literally...you got a problem with evolution. For me this is no problem. I am myself a catholic, but as u see not a really good one;)
gastarbeiter1 11 months ago
@gastarbeiter1 i am also catholic and i have no problem with the idea of evolution
Bleakillusion 11 months ago
@Bleakillusion
Me either, but there are many that have. They are too close to the words as it seems.
gastarbeiter1 11 months ago
@Bleakillusion How do you reconcile the Genesis account with evolution? Metaphor? If so, then what's it meaning? Maturity and responsibility? Since I'm an atheist, I've always been curious. I'm not being hostile but genuinely curious. Furthermore, I agree with gastarbeiter's statement that some Christians put too much emphasize on the bible without acknowledging that the bible is a creation of god and shouldn't be held in comparison to their god, an entity separate from their book.
TheResurgamAdvent 11 months ago
@TheResurgamAdvent well the great thing about Catholicism vs Protestantism is that Catholics don't believe that every single word in the bible should be taken literally (because that is impossible and at points even contradicts itself) its about the message not literal interpretation this is why Jesus spoke in parables and metaphors and tried to talk people out of taking everything out of context (e.g. the whole "working on the sabbath" that by by his time the jews had taking so extreme)
Bleakillusion 11 months ago
The statement that punctuated equilibrium means that "a crocodile lays and egg and out comes a bird" is criminally ignorant.
pupsenok 11 months ago
Mutations are indeed 99% useless/harmful, and that is why it plays such a minor role in evolution.
marocon60 1 year ago
New species do not come forth instantly, it takes millions of years of gametic isolation to induce speciation.
marocon60 1 year ago
Evolution does not try to explain abiogenesis.
marocon60 1 year ago
Genesis 3:16!
marocon60 1 year ago
Evolution does not claim that mutations necessarily decrease or increase the amount of genetic information.
marocon60 1 year ago
From conception it is already determined what that person will be. Gender, color of eyes, hair and skin, resistance and predisposition to other diseases, mental and physical capacity
Gender is determined after the eight cell stage, which happens sometime after conception.
Mental and physical capacities are determined long after birth depending on environmental conditions, diet, education and a number of other factors.
Evolution does not state that members of one species give birth to another.
marocon60 1 year ago
Evolution, as well, does not claim that all mutations are beneficial.
Also, assuming that all humanity is descended from Adam and Eve, and that mutations are due to their sin, shouldn't everyone have such unfortunate deformities?
marocon60 1 year ago
You creatin...
you just quote-mined Chuck D!
He later asserts in his book that if intermediary stages of the eye were found, then natural selection would be able to procure such an organ. And indeed, we have found such stages: Flat worms have light sensitive tissues.
More advanced animals have these tissues, but curved to sense light and direction. These cells could secrete mucous, as in several annelids, causing blurry images to form. This mucous could harden to form a lens like in an octopus.
marocon60 1 year ago
In all seriousness though, evolutionary theory states that mutation - minor recombinations in the DNA between generations - plays an extremely minor role in the overall change in life. Most of the changes which do happen are due to the inheritance of traits which already existed in the previous generation.
marocon60 1 year ago
The six kingdoms:
Animals
Plants
Insects
Bacteria
Viruses
People
marocon60 1 year ago
Somebody please revoke this guy's Phake Degree (Ph.D).
729pete 1 year ago
those last words were such a great testimony
MsRadomness 1 year ago
This guy knows how dumb people are. He knows all he has to do is dress like someone who knows something and say anything.
jawzmuzik 1 year ago
Thunderfoot please expose this creatard!
TheEruditepolymath 1 year ago
this guy is just retarded, they dont always loose information when they loose features, chickens have had the gene for teeth reativated, and you get chicken with teeth, not lost information.
zillatamer 1 year ago
oh no, please, not the human eye quote mine, please, NOOOOO!!!
i have seen that spewed and debunked so many times it's stupid. Just keep reading you moron!!!!!!!
Strikesnake1994 1 year ago
There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.
Yes this is true, but where did that information come from?
ferdnerkel 2 years ago
Oh Noooooo! Mr Billllllll!!
It's time for more Christian Buffoonery!!
Starring A.S.E. Decertified auto mechanic John Pendleton!! annnnnnd his imaginary friennnnnd!!
B33nTh3r3D0n3That 2 years ago 14
Take the lab coat off, you're NOT a scientist. You're a moron, and an intellectual criminal.
sevven1 2 years ago 20
This guy is no more intelligent than a retard
Paumonsu 2 years ago 18
This has been flagged as spam show
john pendelton is the shit! darwin is nothing but a lunatic fucktard of a geezer
ponkadolz 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is good that you speak my beloved brother and let not the folly of man hinder you from the truth of God, yea, you are hardpressed on all sides, from atheists on the one and those whom presume brothers in faith on the other. Well as one whom presides in the household of faith I esteem you my beloved brother. Our Lord said,
"There is nothing covered that will not be revealed and nothing hidden that will not be known."
You verify that.
I love you.
sowaseedoflove 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Behold He comes with darkness at His feet. Assuredly you each are as fools, uttering soundless swelling words and insults, scoffing and mocking digging for yourselves a pit and it is no wonder in a world in which are valued and esteemed by how low you can bring somebody, you are each like the bullies at school only verifying your folly. You are each like a great genetic mutation to humanity, your words and concepts do not strengthen us but hinder us, you know nothing and your tongues condemn u.
sowaseedoflove 2 years ago
A crocodile lays and egg and a bird hatches from the egg? What? What scientific literature have you been reading? No scientist worth his/her qualifications would ever state such a thing as fact. Change is gradual. Also, this guy stated that 'in mutation information is lost'. This simply isnt true. Genetic information is conserved very highly between related species.
perydwyn 2 years ago 9
Okay. The eye. You can see the evolution of the eye in many different species on our planet. There are several different eye variations, and they all opperate on the same principles of light detecting chemicals. But some of the eyes are better adapted than others. The Human eye is by no means the best eye in existance. If God was creating us in his own (perfect) image, why not give us the best possible eye? (in fact the Human eye is very fallable, as anyone with a stigmatism will know).
perydwyn 2 years ago 8
10:35 spelling error Possilbe
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Re Dawkins' quote at 20:17, Dawkins contradicts himself in saying the small changes in offspring are chance improvements, but overall his whole evolutionary process is not.
Actually all events need causes and those causes effect things in logical step by step ways. What we think of as random is not scientifically feasable or logical.
Pulsar205 2 years ago
What a fucking jackass!
salar911 2 years ago 5
This guy quotes Darwin when it is convenient.
curt941 2 years ago 4
ya he said about the peacock, Darwin can't see the purpose of beauty in nature!
but I've read his books, he speaks at great length of the role of colorful plumage in bird sexual selection.
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 years ago 4
This guy is so funny, this has to be like Borat or something. Is this guy a comedian who is doing this for publicity?
curt941 2 years ago 6
his parents sin and he was born with out a brain
AcidEdge13 2 years ago 5
Telomeres.
TheBigChowMein2 2 years ago 5
"Twinchers" are a result of "sin"?
omg.
anderseb2007 3 years ago 4
02:50 he sucks so much ass XD : we have what we call the... uh...uhm... hum... wolf gene.
what an amazing scientist XD
NoelMcConnor 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
can you remember every detail in a 30 minute text instantly i don't think so, he forgot a minor detail and it took a little to to remember it, it doesn't mean he sucks ass that's just him being a normal human being...
6037084 2 years ago
first of all, he's got a sheet where he's got his whole speech prepared.
Then, the wolf gene? I'm sorry, but if he wants to prove he's a scientist, maybe he should come up with the right term, and not a term any non-scientist would have come up with.
Doesn't have anything to do with memory, but knowledge.
Fact is: he doesn't know shit.
NoelMcConnor 2 years ago 5
24:39
I thought that can happen if u take a female human egg or any other female egg and mutate it with another animal example: a fish sperm, other mammal sperm, bird sperm, or reptilian sperm all from males .
And doesn't mutations also happen if Human blood comes into contact with nuclear waste.
jango3 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
who here believes in punctuated equilibrium?
easymoney4ever 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I think it's only an explain tryout for the lack of missing links in "fossil record".
Nacluw 3 years ago
No, punctuated equilibrium says nothing about missing links... it just tries to explain why there are short times of rapid change interspersed by long times of little change. If you're going to explain what something is at least make sure the explanation fits somewhat with the textbook definition
anderseb2007 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
T-rex blood cells are evidence that Dinos did not die out before man came. Carvings of dinos by ancient humans. Figurines of dinos predate dino excavation. carved in ancient buildings, human with dino footprints, etc. And with some parts of the world still uninhabited, how could anyone state empirically all dinos are extinct. It's not a fact, it's your belief, but your too propagandized to believe the truth lies with your belief, for you think it's science.
easymoney4ever 3 years ago
illness in breads of dog is caused by inbreading its got sod all to do with anything else. breading dogs for show and not giving a damb about there health or how long they live has caused illness and desease. (we did this by forcing them to inbread on our ideas and what we wanted to look nice. not to be healthy and reproduce). something they would not have done in nature if they had the choice. got sod all to do with evolution as being the caus of illness. or cloning for that matter.
moggyEm 3 years ago 4
wow how wrong can you get about understanding cloning. cloning already happens in nature. there is no need at all for sex or anything like it. its everywhere. humans and sheep are build on reproducing by sex. we dont use cloning of ourselves in nature. on wolves to poodles. erm. you lose information in DNA so they are ill. no you dont. a dog has the same number of chromosoms. it does not lose anything. it is ill becasue we bread it that way to look cute and cauing inbreading. meaning.....
moggyEm 3 years ago 3
prove it
that is all i have to say
T1av1s 3 years ago 4
Besides,
Why go to all the trouble?
According to your video "Dinosaurs Alive Today" we can just go out any ol' time and wrangle one up!
It's LIARS like you, without a shred of honesty or moral fortitude, that make me wish there was a hell!
TheHatefulDead 3 years ago 3
Cloning a dinosaur "in the next 20, 30, 50 years"!?
Pendleton, we don't have that kinda time!
JEEBUS IS COMING!!
JEEBUS IS COMING!!
TheHatefulDead 3 years ago 5
No no no. You are wrong Mr. Chemist. Those people are proof of Evolution. The next stage of Evolution is turning into ostrich. Can't you Creationists get that through your thick skull.
We will grow wings and fly like birds. Hello, that is the next level in the line of intelligence, becoming birds that look like ostriches that think like humans but sound like mice. DUH!!!
strongvine 3 years ago 3
"Um, uh, um, uh" Yea, exactly. It's quite obvious that this man is unfamiliar with any real science.
aladinsane242 3 years ago 4
2:34 - This clown actually quote mines Darwin. This tired canard keeps getting posted by creationists. What they don't bother with is the REST OF THE PARAGRAPH!!! Here is the rest...
Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist;
Schmoikel 3 years ago 2
if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated
Schmoikel 3 years ago 2
but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound.
Schmoikel 3 years ago 2
And guess what. We have found several gradations that exist today. Flatworms, nautilus, squid.....
Any questions now creationists?
Schmoikel 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
You are assuming they are gradations of an organ passed through common ancestry. Darwin said "several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light..." He didn't have any proof, just a suspicion, just like your assumption that causes you to see connections that aren't necessarily there.
filmowl 3 years ago
"You are assuming they are gradations of an organ passed through common ancestry."
I assume nothing. It's just what the evidence reveals.
"He didn't have any proof, just a suspicion,"
And yet it turns out he was right. Ever hear of phototransduction? What about opsin protein?
And my original point is still valid. The pseudo scientist quote mines Darwin. Did you even bother to read the ENTIRE passage from Darwin?
Schmoikel 3 years ago 3
Well that was mildly entertaining. So do you have any videos of real scientists? Or just self-accredited ones, that wear a lab coat while giving seminars. It really makes him look professional. But then he opens his mouth and promptly dispels that notion.
Neelo5000 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nice job. Keep those videos coming.
ProverbialBootStraps 3 years ago
John Pendleton, you are the dumbest idiot I have seen in a long time.
magichandpuppet 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
you are what you say
Bogzy1989 3 years ago
whatever, loser.
magichandpuppet 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
you are what you say
Bogzy1989 3 years ago
The Creationist: "...there are mutations that happen and they cause variety within a species..."
'Dr.' John Pendleton
Mutations, Cloning and Creationism
1:03, youtube
Definition of Evolution: Evolution explains the variation of a species through natural selection and mutation.
In either in error or stating the fact, 'Dr.' Pendleton in just the first minute of the video states that evolution is fact.
Wow, these are your 'experts', creationists.
Truly pathetic.
whitefox998 3 years ago 3
lol @ his stupid laugh after he says, "what's that? a female dinosaur" @ 10:27... lmfao
kzsteele 3 years ago 3
youtube(dot)com/watch?v=EHgCBN7mlTA
youtube(dot)com/view_play_list?p=75A9C5177D393ACD
A4AgnstcFndmntlst 3 years ago
It is unfortunate that this man has to bring Christianity and religion into this.
sonofthedestroyer 3 years ago 3
take a look at the first one of these videos where this guy explains his "credentials"....
THIS GUY IS AN AUTO MECHANIC IN MEXICO!
he does have a bachelors in chemistry from a US university but he is not a research chemist.
ianandjames83 3 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
I've just started looking at his videos, but just to play devil's advocate with you. Does a man need to be a mathematician to be able to tell a person going around saying 2+2=7 that it's wrong? So what?? The goal is that is his research and observations valid. Is the information he offering worthy of reproof?
MSage3842 3 years ago
I concede that his credentials (or lack of them) do not handicap his ability to make arguments. (Not that I find many of his arguments valid) However; he introduces himself as "chemist John Pendleton" not "auto mechanic john Pendleton" or "missionary John Pendleton). This seems innocuous to me. He obviously takes the title of chemist because people will grant him more authority on matters of science.
ianandjames83 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Attacking his credentials is a waste of time. I have studied Biology at university and i find most Lecturers to be liars and brainwash the students with lies and innaccuracies. Trust me HUGE efforts are made by them to coverup the truth.
sonofthedestroyer 3 years ago
I have a masters in biochemistry from a university... there are some unexplained phenomenon but no intentional inacuraccuracies. I also teach biochemistry at a CC. i make no attempt to cover up the truth.
ianandjames83 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I am speaking of my experience with the biology department. They are hypocrites. They dont like any of their theories being questioned and expect everybody to blindly believe what ever they show on their Powerpoint presentations.
sonofthedestroyer 3 years ago
I am sure they don't waste their time debating fairy tales told in the bible.
magichandpuppet 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
People didnt know about cloning, so the bible doesnt say anything on it.
TheBigGameHunter1 3 years ago
Heh. I can't believe this guy is being serious. This is the saddest piece of comedy I have seen in years! :D
Kayin79 4 years ago
John Pendleton.. probably making a shed load of money from this..what a wanker
cianmurtagh 4 years ago
You remind me of Lenny in Of Mice and Men.
1d10cy 4 years ago 3
Strange that we share dna with monkeys, pigs, rats etc. basically with a lot of mammals. Which is why these animals serve as good Guinea Pigs, though Guinea Pigs serve as better Guinea Pigs... Not that I condone animal research in a time when stem cell research is starting, along with other things. And I think I'm getting thumbs downs because you guys reject the evolutionary theory about those thumbs.
1d10cy 4 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Because what you said is untrue and the theory of evolution is a lie. Nothing more than that - a lie.
EmilyGreene1984 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
nice vid very true
puckupob 4 years ago
you must have the IQ of a tooth brush
1d10cy 4 years ago 2
I agree.....i think he needs to go to school and earn that degree he claims to have....and maybe he should finish that quote from Darwins book
"yet in the case of any organ, if we know of a long series of gradations in complexity, each good for its possessor, then, under changing conditions of life, there is no logical impossibility in the acquirement of any conceivable degree of perfection through natural selection."
o0opalmtreeo0o 4 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the correct terminology is evolutionism and creation.
goodshorts 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution is for monkeys.HAH.
Ephesians24 4 years ago
um.....
1. evolution isn't the same as abiogenesis or the big bang
2. don't use arguments from 150 years ago like the Darwin eye ball example, it has been shown in the las 50 years that the eye can come from evolution
3. manipulating corn genes to produce superior
strains of corn isn't evolution? why? because it's still corn? evolution is gradual! gradual
changes!
AbyssGuitars 4 years ago 5
4. it's true that 99% of mutations arent beneficial and thats why evolution takes millions of years to accomplish large tasks. You want people to show examples of macro evolution, something that took billions of years, by finding examples from our lifetime? are you thick?
ps: nice outfit man, specially like the little universe tie and the pink id badge
AbyssGuitars 4 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
i'm not defending this guys video, just have a word on your point 3. in the theories of evolution puntuated equilibria is gaining force. gradualism not so much..
pig880906 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I believe in this mans convictions.I also believe that evolutionary scientists are justifying the existance of their beliefs,other wise they would be unemployed.Besides name one positive thing that has come from these studies.
RHELTON63 4 years ago
This is the most stupid video ever, it is almost too painful to watch. I know he is wearing a lab coat, but has this man had any science training at all. He is talking rubbish, he seems to base his science training on headlines from tabloid newspapers.
marmotacagnac 4 years ago 2
He's only wearing the lab coat because the guys studying him went for a coffee break.
They're making a scientific video on why some highly advanced monkey's still have a primitive grasp of intellectual problems.
1d10cy 4 years ago 2
As a biochemistry student i am insulted and appalled that some people would consider a looser like that a "scientist." He's a bible basher pretending to be a scientist so he wont be ignored.
SqrJames 4 years ago 3
poor excuse for a scientist, if he is one at all. The eye was designed by nothing more than natural selection from photosensitive cells, over billions of years. Dipshits like him only have trouble believing in evolution because they don't understand simple statistics, or the concept of natural selection.
SqrJames 4 years ago 3
My thoughts also SqrJames ... I find people who argue about Evolution the most are ones who fail to grasp an understanding of it. It's all about education.
waynebw 4 years ago 2
lol having a hard time reading ur pre-writen script there doc,
nohj1000000 4 years ago 2
Oh no, as soon as he pulled out the 'SIN' word I realised this guy is a full blown bible basher... He's trying to de-bunk evolution but expects people to believe AN INSISIBLE MAN IN THE SKY... LOOOL Loser
waynebw 4 years ago 2
hehehe, so many misstakes this guy makes...
edwincorp 4 years ago 2
What an absolute load of superficial,ignorant,contrived and laughable rubbish
arryhuk 4 years ago 4
I give him some credit for his research. However, he doesn't have a real passion for science. He also presents no evidence for a creator. The bible is hardly a scientific document. If there is a creator then science will end and in it's stead will be people searching for the human stereo instruction left by god.
bpope123 4 years ago 4
The depth of this man's ignorance of the scientific ideas he is dismissing is a testament the failure of the "ideas" he espouses.
gorgulax 4 years ago 3
Also he said all life evolved from amoebas, even bacteria, which is false, since bacteria are much smaller and less complicated than an amoeba. His comment only goes to show you how ignorant he is about the taxonomy of living things.
psevdhome 4 years ago 3
Again I posted a comment and didn't proof read it. I meant that Pendelton made the claim about amoebas, not Darwin.
psevdhome 4 years ago
Remember the part about Darwin saying he thinks the eye cannot have evolved. The quote continues as follows: "Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist, -- then the difficulty of
believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
psevdhome 4 years ago 2
Part 2 of "Out of Context Theater." Darwin did not think the eye could not have evolved. He confessed his amazement at the eye, as only those eloquent wirters of yore could. Sadly, reading on, his statement lacks any mention of a creator or elf or pixie or other supernatural being that creationists try to hint at.
among01 4 years ago 3
That's what the quote says. "it's not difficult to imagine the eye has evolved", Sorry about the misunderstanding, I ran out of characters.
psevdhome 4 years ago 2
As soon as you admit genes change at all, you've lost the argument against evolution. Religion needs to stick to examining the question of how people are to treat each other (an area where it has value), rather than how the universe works (an area where is has no value).
jergsden 4 years ago 4
Well said.
among01 4 years ago 2
I agree.
psevdhome 4 years ago 3
What are this guy's credentials? Does he even have a degree from a nationally accredited institution?
mistamustard 4 years ago 4
credentials, mistamustard? He doesn't need them, he has a nice white lab coat.
Chaffinch4 4 years ago 4
he has a BS in chemistry from U of Wisconsin, he also is an automechanic and a christian missionary. he also hunts pterodactyls in mexico.
thebigjankowski 4 years ago 4
Hee hee.
mistamustard 4 years ago 3
You're forgetting about cross breeding idiot. There is some mutation but it isn't the whole thing. And by the way, where did he get that Darwin quote. Was it origion of the species, a paper, a pamphlet?
jac4020 4 years ago 4
This video looks like it was made by amatuers. The speaker has horrible voice & diction and pauses at nearly every word. And what is "POSILBE"? Any good points made by this guy are juxtaposed with elementary errors and presumptions about God.
lordofyourmind 4 years ago 4
If we have made it to this page we have probably watched a few of that Crackpot Pendleton's videos out of curiosity. If you are interested in seeing a decent debate about this go to google video and search for "Bower Pendleton." This is a debate brought to a Texas university by two organizations at that school. The "Atheist Agenda" and "Campus Crusade for Christ" 2.5 hours long, but if you want both arguments presented intelectually (except Pendleton maybe)I would look at this.
Clayleyva 5 years ago 2
I dont get it. Thing in the bible only apply to our own social structure and therefor is impossible to apply to all other intelligent life. I dont go to church because im afraid i could end up like this poor brainwashed guy.
techkid409 5 years ago 3
Verily, they themselves have never walked on the carpets of knowledge. Of gaps was the spirit of these redeemers made up; but into every gap they put their delusion, their stopgap, which they called God. -Nietzche 1873
SIP100 5 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Nietzche died in stark terror, because he knew he would finally feel the wrath of the God he denied!
CBALLEN 4 years ago
Did you ask him about this personally?
qabala 4 years ago 6
A theory is something that has been supported by many many scientific experiments and studies and is accepted by the scientific community.
Creationism isn't a theory. It's a Hypothesis! An Hypothesis with NO supporting evidence or experiments! That's why Creationism ISN'T equal or even valid in debate vs. Evolution.
This guy isn't a scientist, his terminolgy proves it. He's arguments are just chalk full of Non sequitur that uneducated christians can't see.
GBVenkman 5 years ago 3
if he had a phD he would say Dr. not "Scientist" lol...
laguna117 4 years ago 3
Yeah...lets see him write his thesis on dinosaurs being 3,000 years old...or maybe on talking snakes. He's lucky to have attained a bachelors in science.
iamnlck 4 years ago 4
They went to Mexico to fnd this looser? His tie LOL-But he is a "mutation" he speaks out his ass. Wadlow died of a simple blood infection. - LIAR. - SIN? what gene is that? Why isn't a bible built in? Uh Oh - where in the bible does it even mention molecular genetics and cloning. God has killed many unborn HUMAN babies, in and out of the womb - read the Bible!
oldcow69 5 years ago 3
Why are creationists and intelligent(?) such idiots that they believe a book that goes back to the bronze age nothing in it is scientific. When will they come up whit proof, if they are so convinced of what they are saying, this would not be difficult.
BACTERIOFAAG 5 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Alough this author seems a little different than your typical speaker, His words are truth. You cannot deny the fact there is no missing link, none. If the earth is billions of years old, wouldn't we find one? God bless you all.
newcovenantoflove 5 years ago
The problem with looking for every missing link is that, the more you find, the more missing links you develop. But thats the point of science I guess to continue searching for the truth. But just because we are missing one piece it does not debunk the whole theory.
Clayleyva 5 years ago 4
I find it odd that God created predators with intricately designed abilities and strategies with the intentional purpose of catching prey which, in turn, are intricately designed to avoid and defend themselves against the intricately designed predators.
BenjaminBattington 5 years ago 3
i need that tie!! rofl
Loge0701 5 years ago 3
And that kid will have a very happy girl friend!
Migwelion 5 years ago 3
I bet that kid with 12 fingers is a beneficial mutation. In this I.T. age, I bet he type fast as hell.
Deanballoonatic 5 years ago 4
Wow! Scientists having to destroy their mistakes in mass numbers? I haven't heard of such evil practices since I don't know when; could it be the last time I heard of this such practice was when God did it himself?
Deanballoonatic 5 years ago 4
"...there is no knownlaw of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter"
Fine, Great!!! Tell me where God came from then!!
Deanballoonatic 5 years ago 4
As the World's ever tallest man, Robert Wadlow's height was attributed to an over active pituary gland, which produced much higher than normal levels of growth hormone. Today's medical science can compensate for such problems - but in the 1920s there was no therapy available.
Deanballoonatic 5 years ago 4
Robert Pershing Wadlow died of an infection caused by the inability to get shoes to fit his ever growing feet. He continued to grow until the time of his death.
Deanballoonatic 5 years ago 4
Pendleton actually gave some evidence I needed to research in this one. He still parrots bad research that has been parroted by others before him. Quoting people out of context is till everpresent here. For a guy who claims to be a scientist, he sure is unaware of scientific protocol. How could he have missed this in obtaining a BS degree?
qabala 5 years ago 4
Maybe he isn't a chemist at all. Or maybe he is, but is just adept at compartmentalizing. It hardly matters either way. Pushing antiscientifice hokum does not magically become science just because the one doing it is a scientist, just as raking leaves does not magically become dentistry just because the one wielding the rake is a dentist.
tuberspud 5 years ago 4
Beneficial mutations that have been witnessed:
1983 - Chlorella pyrenoidosa to Chlorella Vulgaris (Single celled creature became multi-cellular)
1960 - present - Several bacteria develop new metabolic pathways and structures to digest nylon.
1981 - present - Mutation of CCR5 gene in some humans causes immunity to HIV
qabala 5 years ago 3
He quotes Dawkins out of context. Dawkins thesis was that evolution occurs on a step-by-step basis by chance, but cumulative selection is anything but random.
The Chicago conference was not to debate the validity of evolution, but the mechanisms that drive it - Roger Lewin wrote his article out of ignorance.
With the postulation of instinct, he destroys his thesis on Peacocks. A peahens attraction to a large tail is because it indicates the overall health of the peacock.
qabala 5 years ago 3
His idea of punctuated equilibrium is off. It is an observation that certain species evolve and become successful and don't tend to change much. Then for some reason, they start changing a little again until they become stable in another evolutionary step.
The arrival of the fittest is easily seen in people that are just born extraordinary.
Evolutionary scientists are not "afraid" to answer the question of the origin of life, they have the humility to admit that they don't have the answer yet.
qabala 5 years ago 2
He needs to learn how to pronounce "Spetner".
Spetners work does not take into account recessive mutations and genetic recombination. He apparently doesn't take sex into account.
So cloning isn't perfected yet.
Do we need to clone complete people or can we just grow body parts in a petree dish?
The potato plague had nothing to do with cloning.
I suggest he rehearse a little before doing these presentations. It looks bad if you don't know what you're talking about.
qabala 5 years ago
He calls his conferences "powerful". Toot your own horn much?
He quotes Darwin on the eye from 160 years ago as if Darwin was an authority. Every single transitional stage from eyespot to human eye is present in nature.
Interesting mutations. What do they prove?
Mutations are caused by sin? Is he serious?
Gitts work was based on a complete misunderstanding of Shannons work.
qabala 5 years ago
blabla, blabla... Yes, Mr.P., you are the scientist...
could anyone help this poor guy, please?
dennis1381 5 years ago
Mr. Pendleton possesses the logic reasoning of a 2 year old...or a hardcore christian. "If I didn't turn of my computer, then God must have turned it off."
powerstone2 5 years ago
Either Mr. Pendelton was aware of the context of the quote, or he was not. The former does not bode well for his integrity. The latter does not bode well for his competence as a scientist. Either way, he is not one to be regarded as a reliable source of information.
tuberspud 5 years ago
continued ... "and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
tuberspud 5 years ago
The conveniently ommitted remainder of the Darwin quote about the eye: "Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; ....
tuberspud 5 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Bible is the only proof and not once has it been wrong
mojohookbarb 5 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Not once has it been proven right, EVER!
jonny311CHIMPO 5 years ago