I agree with your videos and your opinions on other topics. But this video seems to make the same broad assumptions as your opponents.
You're debunking creationist conclusions about how a flood may have affected geology, and their reverse logic. But your next conclusion is just as reaching as theirs, saying 'because they were wrong I must be right'.
Disproving A does not prove B. You're using the same poor methods and reverse logic as your opponents. Not good scientific method.
@gregrutz I've actually studied, not just read, a number of advanced scientific and mathematical topics that required application of proper scientific method and an open mind to truly understand them. Don't assume just because someone doesn't agree with your interpretation of theory that they are uneducated.
My original argument stands unanswered: His focus on disproving / showing another party's errors does not equal proof of his theory/views.
@maddogfarg0 He isn't saying that because creationists are wrong, science is right. Science is right, because science is right, it's literally that simple. He's just saying creationists (like every other religion) are wrong. Everything in this video is 100% fact, we know all of this is the truth, thousands and thousands of tests have been done over time on every little thing that is involved in such things, and it all fits together perfectly.
It is such a shame that atheist/agnostics have to go through such lengths to prove these legends are false when common sense and logic tell us otherwise anyway.
@HoBustinJopson Yes, believing 2 or 14 of everything on land fit in a boat built by 8 people, one of whom was over 600 years old, is just common sense!
esoriano. wordpress. com search: The Truth About Noah and the Worl Wide Flood
A very enlightening information as well! ;D
The bible does not say it was GLOBAL rather, held only in a certain place on Earth.. the atheists debunked information which is they themselves were ignorant of.
Nowadays some Christian theologists theorize that maybe the flood was a local flood specific to the area of what is now Turkey instead of a global flood. Admittedly there might be something to that theory since there is evidence an area of Turkey may have suffered a major flood thousands of years ago when the last Ice Age ended.
@A86 Well there were floods all the time during history, that doesn't prove that the specific flood mentioned in the Bible ever happened. Proving A does not automatically prove B.
@dutchbb1979 - That depends on whether or not the flood in the Bible was a global one. According to the original language of the Bible it may not have been.
@Londron - I know, I'm just saying some stories in the Old Testament are based on actual events but the authors attribute them to divine miracles. Similar to how in medieval times people thought comets and eclipses were caused by the gods.
@A86 It stretches it to global flood that is impossible to have occured. Could have been a local flood though.
But what bothers us is the time wasted to say it is true. No one defends that Romulus was the son of a god and was brought up by wolves and created Rome in a short period of time.
@1234yersiman - Had we lived in Roman times I'm sure some scientists did try to prove that back then. XD It's because Christianity is the predominant religion in the West, thus Western scientists spend an inordinate amount of time investigating and arguing with it.
Though I do think that more scientists should take Carl Sagan's advice and be more open-minded and test claims of supernatural phenomena just like they test almost all other things.
@1234yersiman - Well, the stories and myths fall under the realm of religion. They don't talk about the theology aspects but they do investigate some of the stories. By "test claims of supernatural phenomena" I mean I think scientists should start investigating things like claims of near death experiences, hauntings, encounters with non-human entities, etc. Whether or not one thinks anything "supernatural" is behind it or not there are a lot of widespread experiences that warrant investigation.
@1234yersiman - There's still so much we don't know about the world around us, and part of it is because some of us are convinced we know so much that there couldn't possibly be phenomena on our very own planet we haven't discovered.
Some creationists have claimed all animals were vegetarians before Noah's Farce, Genesis 1, verse 30, but sometimes fossilized carnivores are found with prey inside their stomachs.
@hydrogenpi16 Actually when it comes to evolution they did push the idea that god or Satan(I forget which one) put the dinosaur fossils in the earth to test their faith.
Cocolithophores are near-surface dwelling photosynthesisers. I can't help wondering how the detritus from the "flood", not to mention their own sudden "gigantic population growth", would impact on the amount of light available. From a cocolithophore's pov, the "flood" looks more like a mass extinction event.
@oldsynner Dumping more water in ocean would not work, calcium carbonate hardens as it releases 11,290 joules per gram. The Imaginary Flood would boil.
All you had to do is point out that salt water and sea water combined can kill anything. Meaning, there wouldnt be any fishes, and this is impossible because no fish is immune to the combination.
Excellent video! Thanks for putting this up. It's amazing how the gullible religious cling to their bible stories in the face of science and research.
Mankind really needs to grow up. Hey religious! Please do us all a favor, drop religion and go with reality!
If Noah's story was true, then Noah is a fucking dick!
Scientists are dedicating their lives to keep on finding new species in all kingdoms of living organisms, while Noah had all of them on one boat and just had to write the names down to save these amounts of time and money we are putting in that search :P
you CANNOT argue with creationists. they'll just spout two arguments: "The bible is empirical evidence etc, etc.." and the all knowledgeable "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU."
it's always fun to argue with them, though. i always get my dose of monthly (not daily) laughs out of them..
As a american I am sorry that 64% of us believe the that the story of Noah's Ark is true I don't, you have understand from the time we were born they hit us with the religious books and stories before we even knew who we were so in all fairness I say this is no fault of our own, It was those people on the knocking on our door's every saturday morning wanting to share a bible verse because they knew we were home watching cartoon's all day , So please give us a break we will try to catch up.
@TheBenjaminVrenko He is a comedian, except the joke was on his gullible audience. Made a good living at it too, 'cept he forgot that old "render unto Caesar" bit.
If I recall correctly there was a considerably large flood in ancient Mesopotamia a few thousand years back, and a local merchant did stockpile a significant amount of provisions on his boat to survive the flood, so in all likelyhood the Noah story is taken from that event, or at least something like it.
@2karriizman I hope you realize for something to be a fossil it has to be at least 10,000 years old. I'm pretty sure @ZShogan laughed at you and ignored the rest of your posts. He/she is right. You are referring to something else such as a psuedo fossils or concretions
i can't believe 64% believe its true ...until i see that study n how they asked the survey question myself i refuse to except that. Yes i am always embarrased by us American's but 64%? now that is unforgivable.
"Red riding hood" is a nice tale, but it takes a lot of willful ignorance to actually believe a grandma and his grandaughter were eaten and then rescued alive from inside a wolf that talked. This isn't different at all.
haha speaking of living in a stomach...the story of Jonah. Do people that actually believe this have the walt disney stomach idea here? look at Pinocchio and the whale...tons of room, a candle...aw so cute.
take bio in HS and you see why a stomach IS NOT the place where you want to set up camp.
of course...when dealing with this is like that game "I WIN" no matter what cards you have..maybe all them....it doesnt matter... 2,4,9,twee....I WIN! (god didit!)
I could watch Potholer54 videos all day (and have done so several times). :)
The combination of a very interesting scientific narrative, great tone of voice and the quirky humour makes for addictive viewing. I often have to rewind after the satirical humour parts because I miss things with LMAO so much.
If you got a boiling tube and added tinctures of David Attenborough, David Bellamy and Dr Magnus Pyke then added a few drops of, essence of Monty Python, you get Potholer54. :D
@Zed1967 It's the first time i watch a video he(i think) made and it's great.However similar humor and not only has on his channel The Thinking Atheist. This is by no means an advertisement of some sort! Just a suggestion! :)
CLEARLY THE LORD WIPED HIS HARD DRIVE TO PREVENT THIS HERESY FROM REACHING HIS SUBJECTS AND DAMNING THEIR SOULS.
Seriously though, loving it. Been laughing at creationist/anti-atheist videos on YouTube for a while, so finding these is like adding actual, irrefutable facts to my fact-inspired opinion that the lunatics preaching their archaic beliefs really need to actually study the relevant sciences before they can effectively refute it.
Noah: :"Hhmmm. I've got billions of different species on this boat ok were do I start. I'll drop the hippos off in Africa, the marsupials in Australia, the polar bears in the artic......but what do I do with this damn T-rex?!!"
@braytex Not to mention the other three arks he had to build for the three couples of Argentinosaurus he saved... It really wasn't Noah's Ark, more like Noah's Flotilla...
you cant discovered Noah's Ark with a pile of dirts and rocks in a bucket. because you got pride in you and not Humble. see for yourself the Answers in the Mounts of Ararat again, & again. but without wisdom and humbleness, and submission to His rebuked you wont get full success. your works remain as well speculations.
The earth is in constant flux .The highest mountian in the world is layered with limestone therefore it has been raised from a sea. Earthquakes ,volcanic eruptions,erosion and the great flood makes it impossible to tell how old rock layers are .Fossils can form at any point in time and are being formed constantly.This vidieo does in no way show the great flood did not happen.
@ZShogan Petrified Water Wheel | Photo Western Australia google fossil bowler hat new zealand. You will never see volcanic eruptions earthquakes or floods in a tub of muddy water .Fossils are formed rapidly due to catastrophic events.Most fossils are found in mass graveyards .Fossils are not rare if you know where to look for them i had a good collection of fossils when i was at school.His voice isn't muffled His logic and experiment is stupid.
That's not fossilization, that's concretion. The material has only been encased in minerals, not replaced by minerals. The experiment proves the flood didn't happen because a single flood can only form a single layer of graded material, not a complex column of limestones, shales, sandstones, and other sedimentary rocks. The flood would mix all the materials together and deposit them as a single layer.
@ZShogan The wheel is replaced by minerals and is fossil many fossils are formed this way and dont take long to form.The earth is in flux the great flood is not the only flood this earth has ever experienced .When floods occur material is graded and low and behold you find limestone on top of mt Everest.This planet is like a cake mix in a bowl being constantly mixed."The flood would mix all the materials together and deposit them as a single layer"That layer is graded therefore many layers form
science get the idea and knowledge, to study the Facts and Truths and Laws and Commands from the Bible. it is a complete Books of All the Knowledge of Facts & Truth, the History and Geographical Events of the people and the Past. Find a verse that it doesnt explain that Bible had Mathematics?
The Bible says that the sky is a dome (Gen. 1:6-7), that demons are responsible for disease (Matt 17:14-20, Matt 10:5-8), that the value of pi is 3 (1 Kings 7:23), that hares and rabbits chew their cud (Lev. 11:5-6), that killing birds cures leprosy (Lev. 14) that clouds are dust made by God's feet (Nahum 1:3), and that the earth is stationary (Job 38:4-6, Jeremiah 31:37). The bible is a myth.
@ZShogan > if the Bible is a myth then you and scientists is a myth? because science took knowledge from the Bible, and science took pride that claim greatest than the one foretold its increase, or fame. ungrateful is it. the tool mocked the maker. screwdriver screwed his inventor.
If "science took knowledge from the Bible", we would believe that the sky is a dome (Gen. 1:6-7), that demons are responsible for disease (Matt 17:14-20, Matt 10:5-8), that the value of pi is 3 (1 Kings 7:23), that hares and rabbits chew their cud (Lev. 11:5-6), that killing birds cures leprosy (Lev. 14) that clouds are dust made by God's feet (Nahum 1:3), and that the earth is stationary (Job 38:4-6, Jeremiah 31:37). Since all of these are false, the bible is false.
@ZShogan Christian Scientists actually believe that illness is caused by demons, so they try to heal it praying, and the REFUSE medical attention for any disease.
@LesPaul2006 that's not technically correct: Christian Scientists are a kind of Gnostics, who believe illness is caused by bad, impure, or defective thought (gnosis - knowledge) -- the few I've run across reject belief in demons, angels, or other supernatural beings, except god and Jesus who is sort of super-psychiatrist who helps take away bad thoughts so that people don't get sick and die .... like Mary Baker Eddy, founder of Christian Science ...
@StarTrekLivz I do agree some ailments and illnesses are amplified, some even provoked by emotional distress. But asking some invisible presence to "take away bad thoughts" is not only stupid, is quite cowardly.
That is true, however their are many Christians who accept that microorganisms, not demons, cause disease, while still claiming that the bible is inerrant. This means either they don't know about these verses, which is ignorant, or they do know, but lie to us by still claiming that the bible is flawless. I don't know whether it's the former or the latter, but neither one would really surprise me.
Evolution is change over time but it happens very slowly and it only happens when surivual becomes primialy for organisms will naturaly change humans did come from evolution we all adapt and devlop over time
The Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis are wrong. Wrong in the sense that there was a catastrophic global flood over the entire planet and that Earth is merely 1000s of years old.
Reasons to Believe gets it right. Knowing the point of reference in Genesis chapter 1 explains nearly everything in order, scientifically. The Earth is old and there was a flood but it was local to the middle east region.
@danielbsmith But that is not what genesis describes & therefore is pointless. If there was a flood in the middle east, so what? All myths have some basis in truth. But the bible is supposed to be 'Gospel' truth and the word of God. If it is inaccurate at all, then that is blown out of the water. if the bible says that one man made a boat hundreds of thousands of miles square so that millions of species could fit on it with the food needed to feed them, then that is supposed to be true isn't it?
Did you know that the phrase "the heavens and the earth" in genesis 1:1 is the ancient hebrew way of describing the universe? They didn't have a single word for universe so they used "the heavens and the earth" as a compound noun. Similar issues plague the proper interpretations and have for centuries.
The flood account uses phrases that indicate a world-wide flood, but the people could not possibly see the whole Earth like we can with satellites.
@danielbsmith I understand that "Heavens" refers to the observations in the night sky. And that "Heavens and the earth" would refer to the whole of observable universe. But the bible states that the sky is a huge dome and that the earth is a flat plane. They had no idea of the universe as we know it and even through classical philosophy the "Heavens" are described in this way. I have a philosophy degree from the UEA in England.
@TacticalHub (continuing) So, what did they mean? It makes sense from a language point of view that they meant their world. Everything they knew and loved would be destroyed. But that is not equivalent to our modern notion of the whole planet. In common speech we still use phrases like this - my children are my whole world, and my job is my life, etc. This is common.
So, I think the flood should be taken literally but with the common sense that comes from translating ancient words into our own.
@TacticalHub One other note, the animals that went on the ark were essentially farm animals - creatures necessary for human civilization. The iconography we use today with giraffes and elephants is simply wrong. Some of the animals they ate along the way and some they preserved to keep the species alive.
Anyway, if you begin to account for these issues - the vocabulary deficiencies and the point of view - then everything quickly falls into place even by scientific standards. reasons dot org
@danielbsmith The Noahs ark myth is based on a previously existing tale of a samarian king who rode up river during a middle eastern flood with cattle and grain, providing food for the stricken people.
If the species on the ark were limited to a small group of domestic animals then there has been a huge amount of evolution unaccounted for in a short amount of time and therefore the fossil record completely refutes this. went to reasons.org and I find it more wet than answersingenesis .
I have more respect for fundementalist christians than I do weak apologetics. If you are going to adopt the christian worldview then you have to take it as gospel truth. When you start to have to make allowances and integrate modern science into the bible and assume that they meant to say certain things. You dilute the bible into a pointless historical reference of peoples ideas. Which is valuable of course, but not divine or any sort of truth.
@TacticalHub Well, we have one thing in common. We both dislike the tactics of some (not all) young-earth creationists.
You couldn't debunk my apologetics so you decided to turn this into a personal attack, huh. Who ever said the bible wasn't or couldn't be a historical record of scientific facts? In other words, on what basis do you make your claim that my argument is pointless?
@danielbsmith It was not a personal attack, and I don't have the will to debate in youtube comments. But I will say this last thing. If there was a big flood in the middle east, what does that say about the bible? That it is full of inaccurate and overblown myths based on pre-existing stories from the pre-classical?
And the fact that the bible is NOT an accurate documentation of scientific fact is evident in its pages. It revealed nothing about the universe. we would not need science if it did
@TacticalHub Yes, you did attack me rather than deal with the points I raised.
The bible is not flawed, but flawed people have interpreted it incorrectly. You're also mistaken about it not being scientific - it just isn't science as we moderns recognize it today. Understanding it on the basis of who wrote it and when it was written reveals a remarkable knowledge of the world.
I wish you peace and blessings. Thanks for indulging me in our conversation.
@danielbsmith The Bible is not scientific in any way. It may be historical to a degree, but it cannot be said to be scientific. The very fact that no significant event - and by that I mean miracles etc - can not be verified by any other source means that it is not scientific by definition. It fails on the double blind which is a fundament of science. And there is knowledge and lessons to be learned from the bible. But the same is true of many philosophers and novelists.
@TacticalHub I have to disagree. As Dr. Ross of RTB discovered, and I agree with, the bible is an amazing book and does contain scientific principles and describe things in scientific terms.
Genesis chapter 1 is widely misinterpreted. The secret is verse 2 which identifies the POV and the context. It is the surface of the earth. Earth is empty, dark, and covered in water - no soup. God's "Let there be light" was transforming earth's early atmosphere from opaque to transparent. And so on...
@danielbsmith With respect. That is not what the book of genesis describes and it is inference to assume it. The book of genesis describes the earth as a flat plane and the sky as being a dome. This was the belief of the time, and many pre-socratic philosophers wrote of the same thing. Democritus, the famous Atheist philosopher even predicted the existence of atoms prior to the bibles writing. Would you assume that he was divinely inspired?
@TacticalHub That is in Job, not Genesis. So, how should it have been described? As Arthur C. Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Surely, the bible was meant to be understood by people of that time period. So how else could it have been written?
As far as Democritus goes, I am unfamiliar. But it doesn't shake my faith a bit. I believe the bible is inspired, but that doesn't exclude the possibility that there can't be any truth outside its pages.
@danielbsmith I mentioned democritus as an example of some1 who not only would not have claimed to be divinely inspired, but predicted the existence of something that has only recently been confirmed. You underestimate the abilities of mankind and the knowledge that they had at the time of the bibles writing. (other presocratics predicted the existence of other planets and other universes and Thales made discoveries similar to Newtonian laws before we had the methodology to confirm them)
@danielbsmith I have spoken to many Christians who seem to believe that man lived as barbaric and ignorant nomads until suddenly god revealed his will to moses and everything changed. But the ten commandments are not original in any way (The code of Hammurabi seems to have been the source of these laws and predates them by many many years). The classical world was incredibly civilised and learned especially the Greeks. The bible was not very inspired at all if you know your philosophy.
@TacticalHub I think God specially created humans in their modern form. No evolution required. We began as intelligent, curious creatures and that hasn't changed. Archaeology bears this out since no missing links have been found and all that have been proposed have been debunked.
I think the inspiration in the bible is subtle by design. Furthermore, I believe there is strong evidence to think that the book of Job was written first. It certainly seems to contain the most ancient concepts.
@danielbsmith Then there is not much point in continuing this conversation. One of the reasons I don't get into debates with Christians or any1 religious is because of that sort of statement. "Where are the missing links" etc. It is a meme that does the rounds and actually has no meaning and shows a lack of understanding of evolution and biology. The fossil record actually proves evolution beyond any reasonable doubt. What would u call an unbroken chain of fossils going from simple to complex?
@TacticalHub I call that a pipe dream. Show me this chain. Do you have a URL? Draw your evolutionary tree for me. Most evolutionary trees require the anatomy of the eye to evolve independently and simultaneously along multiple branches.
The fossil record is broken and by no means proves evolution. Neanderthal DNA excludes them from being our ancestor. A. ramidus, A. anamensis, and A. afarensis all lived in wooded areas which removes environmental pressures to become bipedal and stand erect.
@danielbsmith I encourage you to do some more research. The Fossil record is not broken, it is just incomplete. Fossilisation is rare and there can never be a continuous chain of every creature who have ever lived. So there will always be holes in the record. But the fact that creatures go from primitive to complex in an unbroken succession is enough to demonstrate evolution. thankfully the fossil record is a small part of the evidence. Molecular genetics provides the most compelling evidence.
@TacticalHub Well, you can continue to have faith that the fossil record is incomplete. I'll continue to have faith in my God. I can't disprove it any more than you can prove to me that similar features indicate evolution and not a common set of templates used by a creator. The interpretation is all in the eye of the beholder.
I leave with one very compelling observation: you cannot explain your worldview without falling back on some kind of faith. I think that validates mine and not your own.
@danielbsmith As much as fundies want to think that, it is not true. Evolution is an objective reality and can be demonstrated using a number of Scientific methodologies. That is why it is the central theory of biology and has never been falsified and continues to be confirmed by research in genetics, molecular genetics, geology, physics ,chemistry, and maybe most importantly, mathematics. evolutionary models have been used to programme AI and realistic character animations in video games.
@danielbsmith If we were to use the fossil record and only the fossil record then how do YOU explain animals going from primitive single celled organisms to complex creatures over time. The further we go back in time through the geological strata the less and less complicated animals become. And we also find transitional features such as with the eye and breathing apparatus. We also have vestigial limbs and features in modern animals. How do you explain that?
@danielbsmith And actually you CAN disprove evolution if it were false. It would be easy. Scientists all over the world seek to falsify theories every year. That is an important part of scientific methodology. If we had a human are modern world animal in amongst Cretaceous strata, evolution would be falsified. And that is what we would see if evolution was false. We would have no succession of complexity throughout the strata. fossils would have no order or pattern whatsoever.
@danielbsmith As for the request to "Draw me an evolutionary tree" and "Show me this chain"... I don't need to.. You can go to anyone who is a geologist and ask them. Go see for yourself. Go and study geology. It is not a pipe dream, it is a fact. The lower down you go through the strata, the further back in time you are going. Fossils become less and less complex the further you go down. To the point where we only see single celled organisms. simple, obvious, confirmation.
@TacticalHub Actually, my point was that they're all different. There is no single evolutionary tree that all evolutionary biologists subscribe to. The reasons include several intractable problems like the simultaneous development of the eye mentioned earlier.
Actual geology isn't so straight-forward. Geology books oversimplify. Layers can get mixed up, eroded and replaced by newer layers, etc. It's quite messy. A lot can happen over millions of years. It's hardly confirmation of evolution.
@danielbsmith Sure. But Newtonian physics continues 2 b reformed and refined today. Does that mean that Newtonian physics is fundamentally wrong? Of course not. Evolution also is under constant reform. differing hypothesis exist as 2 what si the primary force for evolutionary change. But that evolutionary change is an obvious and undeniable reality is uncontested. And geology is of course more complicated. Mountain formation can push layers above younger layers. But the order remains the same.
@TacticalHub I never said I didn't agree with evolution. I agree that things do "change over time". I disagree that a purely natural explanation can account for our existence.
I'm here because I disagree with your video attempting to debunk the flood. It's a straw argument. You've chosen to debunk the young-earth interpretation because it isn't scientifically sound. But the integrated, old-earth interpretation from Reasons that I hold to *is* scientifically sound. I suggest you look into it.
@gardengxc I didn't know Gates gave money to DI. Holy shit. Well I'm beyond nearly sickend that any money i've pumped into MS went to DI. Personally I prefer fedora/gentoo/ubuntu over OSX. I'm not one to rag on someone because of their preferred OS. Had a teacher who would be really condescending if he met anyone who used anything but OpenBSD. Sad to see that cults have their grips into everything. There is even a bullshit confessional app for iphone. I'd sooner like a harry potter wiki app.
@gardengxc Umm what? I just thought that a creationist using something named after Darwin and the mascot after Thomas Henry Huxley (though someone fubard the name and reason) is ironic. Unless you meant less creationist there than in the U.S. Sadly I'd never would move to Australia. Nice looking place, but I'm not parting with my CCW.
I wonder how fast creationist would discontinue using their mac if they knew osx is a flavor of BSD/Unix called Darwin. That alone makes me want to buy another macbook. Everytime I type a function or hit ctrl + space, I'm really typing "Go fuck yourself Creationist!"
"We're capable of thinking, and finding out for ourselves" (10:00)
Well I'm sorry, but this is a classic case of a scientific hypothesis which creationists have clearly demonstrated is false. I don't see how I can trust anything potholer54 says when this totally in context statement is obviously incorrect.
If we are capable of thinking and finding out for ourselves, how do you explain the existence of creationists? Haha, your whole 'theory' has fallen apart!
Babylonians, Australian Aboriginals, and dozens of other ancient cultures all preserved accounts of a global deluge. Sure the Noah story is taken from ancient accounts but the story of a Great Flood is by far the most commonly shared legend among ancient civilizations. Those who reject it happened need to explain its appearance in the legends of so many diverse and often isolated cultures .
@ezeeskank they also describe mythical beasts that never existed. Sure different culture describes different beasts, just like different culture describes different flood. If they all had tons of similarities in details that would be a better story. Same applies to religion - they believed in different gods, but does that make a notion of god more plausible? No.
@bbphnix ohhhhh i meant to reply to a guy i was talking to.. ha and i was sorry that he felt. idk, he was cussing me out. so i said sorry you feel that way
Thank you potholer54 for a very amusing video, I was having a nice chuckle to it until I realised that there is 64% Americans (and other fools worldwide) who believe in ‘The Floods’ of Noah.
You could always swap US for UK and become a majority, but watch out for the trappings of watching back-to-back episodes of mind numbing Coronation Street, Eastenders and reading the Daily Mail (sorry pothholer54, but it is a really bad paper).
I agree ignorance hurts. Thats why i face constant struggles sometimes and have to press through, but its not creationalist museum, but the creation museum. there aren't any tour guides. i didnt see any at least, and i went through the whole thing. ha but i understand
@lordlandraid yeahhh, but i didnt get to listen to this all the way through cause i dont wanna wake my family up but this may show you something. not sure. ill message you it
yeah it did. grr i forget though. ill have to visit back there and just write stuff down. ha its a great time. You should think about going there sometime. its on the kentucky ohio border. Close to cincinnatti
@Cwizzy2012 The whole grand canyon proof issue was debunked a while ago. I'd rather not go to the creationist museum, I've seen the guy who runs the place. I'd probably end up yelling at the tour guides more often then look at the stuff around the place due to the logical fallacies I'll end up running into. I yell at my computer screen half the time when I read arguments regarding this, yelling why he's wrong and ending up not reading the comments anymore cause the ignorance huuuurrrrtttssss...
yeah ive looked into natural selection and all that, but it just doesnt make sense. and he's not really a guy, but you just asked with what? but if there is no god as many believe, then the entire universe would be made not by a man without magic as you say, but randomly out of nothing at all. all of the sudden, boom. matter. it just doesnt make sense broskie. but believing is a lot more than saying i need to see in every which way how this is proven
@Cwizzy2012: Well...when biologists say 'random', they actually mean "historical contingency of genetic changes and morphological changes", which is [of course] restricted by the chemical and physical factors that [as far as we know] apply to the universe, which includes life on Earth.
@Cwizzy2012: The thing is this: the random changes in the DNA sequence arises from entirely natural causes, like high-energy gamma rays and particular types of proteins. The randomness arises from the equally-likely probability of any of these physical processes hitting any part of the DNA sequence. Once these changes occur, the organism may end up with a reduced probability of reaching the age of reproduction, which lowers the chance their genes get passed onto the next generation.
@CathySander so earlier you werent talking about natural selection at all? and well not to me, but hey it makes sense kinda. But its not just sticking in God for me. Its just all i hear is science science science. its overwhelming sometimes. But at the same time, science cannot prove itself
@Cwizzy2012: The universe doesn't act randomly in the absence of any supervisor. It does move. What sorts of evidence do you have for a god [besides the universe existing, that is]?
I agree with your videos and your opinions on other topics. But this video seems to make the same broad assumptions as your opponents.
You're debunking creationist conclusions about how a flood may have affected geology, and their reverse logic. But your next conclusion is just as reaching as theirs, saying 'because they were wrong I must be right'.
Disproving A does not prove B. You're using the same poor methods and reverse logic as your opponents. Not good scientific method.
maddogfarg0 2 months ago
@maddogfarg0 He just proved there was no flood and Kent is lying, try reading a Geology book.
gregrutz 2 months ago
@gregrutz I've actually studied, not just read, a number of advanced scientific and mathematical topics that required application of proper scientific method and an open mind to truly understand them. Don't assume just because someone doesn't agree with your interpretation of theory that they are uneducated.
My original argument stands unanswered: His focus on disproving / showing another party's errors does not equal proof of his theory/views.
That's personal agenda, not sound logic.
maddogfarg0 2 months ago
@maddogfarg0 He isn't saying that because creationists are wrong, science is right. Science is right, because science is right, it's literally that simple. He's just saying creationists (like every other religion) are wrong. Everything in this video is 100% fact, we know all of this is the truth, thousands and thousands of tests have been done over time on every little thing that is involved in such things, and it all fits together perfectly.
oBLACKIECHANoo 1 week ago
It is such a shame that atheist/agnostics have to go through such lengths to prove these legends are false when common sense and logic tell us otherwise anyway.
HoBustinJopson 2 months ago
@HoBustinJopson Yes, believing 2 or 14 of everything on land fit in a boat built by 8 people, one of whom was over 600 years old, is just common sense!
InternetDarkLord 2 months ago in playlist Favorite videos
This has been flagged as spam show
Please do visit..
esoriano. wordpress. com search: The Truth About Noah and the Worl Wide Flood
A very enlightening information as well! ;D
The bible does not say it was GLOBAL rather, held only in a certain place on Earth.. the atheists debunked information which is they themselves were ignorant of.
kratos3443 3 months ago
why i want to eat cake now!god dammit layers!
schattenfaust 4 months ago
DUN DUN DAH DAH DAH DAH DUN DUN DAH DAH
0ntology 5 months ago
Nowadays some Christian theologists theorize that maybe the flood was a local flood specific to the area of what is now Turkey instead of a global flood. Admittedly there might be something to that theory since there is evidence an area of Turkey may have suffered a major flood thousands of years ago when the last Ice Age ended.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Well there were floods all the time during history, that doesn't prove that the specific flood mentioned in the Bible ever happened. Proving A does not automatically prove B.
dutchbb1979 5 months ago
@dutchbb1979 - That depends on whether or not the flood in the Bible was a global one. According to the original language of the Bible it may not have been.
A86 5 months ago
@A86
It's the God concept people are against, not the flood part.
Londron 5 months ago
@Londron - I know, I'm just saying some stories in the Old Testament are based on actual events but the authors attribute them to divine miracles. Similar to how in medieval times people thought comets and eclipses were caused by the gods.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 It stretches it to global flood that is impossible to have occured. Could have been a local flood though.
But what bothers us is the time wasted to say it is true. No one defends that Romulus was the son of a god and was brought up by wolves and created Rome in a short period of time.
1234yersiman 3 months ago 2
@1234yersiman - Had we lived in Roman times I'm sure some scientists did try to prove that back then. XD It's because Christianity is the predominant religion in the West, thus Western scientists spend an inordinate amount of time investigating and arguing with it.
Though I do think that more scientists should take Carl Sagan's advice and be more open-minded and test claims of supernatural phenomena just like they test almost all other things.
A86 3 months ago
@A86 Actually modern scientists do not talk about religion. They just go by the evidence. It is only creationists that argue the biblical myths.
1234yersiman 3 months ago
@1234yersiman - Well, the stories and myths fall under the realm of religion. They don't talk about the theology aspects but they do investigate some of the stories. By "test claims of supernatural phenomena" I mean I think scientists should start investigating things like claims of near death experiences, hauntings, encounters with non-human entities, etc. Whether or not one thinks anything "supernatural" is behind it or not there are a lot of widespread experiences that warrant investigation.
A86 3 months ago
@1234yersiman - There's still so much we don't know about the world around us, and part of it is because some of us are convinced we know so much that there couldn't possibly be phenomena on our very own planet we haven't discovered.
A86 3 months ago
Some creationists have claimed all animals were vegetarians before Noah's Farce, Genesis 1, verse 30, but sometimes fossilized carnivores are found with prey inside their stomachs.
InternetDarkLord 7 months ago
@InternetDarkLord They probably say, THE DEVIL CREATED THAT EVIDENCE.
BEGIN THE EXERSISM!!!!!!!!
Stupid creationists.
hydrogenpi16 6 months ago 12
@hydrogenpi16 Actually when it comes to evolution they did push the idea that god or Satan(I forget which one) put the dinosaur fossils in the earth to test their faith.
Moh5Itachi1 3 months ago 2
Cocolithophores are near-surface dwelling photosynthesisers. I can't help wondering how the detritus from the "flood", not to mention their own sudden "gigantic population growth", would impact on the amount of light available. From a cocolithophore's pov, the "flood" looks more like a mass extinction event.
oldsynner 7 months ago
@oldsynner Dumping more water in ocean would not work, calcium carbonate hardens as it releases 11,290 joules per gram. The Imaginary Flood would boil.
InternetDarkLord 7 months ago
Because Hovind is a lying piece of shit, serving time in a U.S. Federal Prison for tax fraud and other crimes.
jrwilson98 7 months ago 2
You didnt have to do this lol.
All you had to do is point out that salt water and sea water combined can kill anything. Meaning, there wouldnt be any fishes, and this is impossible because no fish is immune to the combination.
MaxBlight 7 months ago
Also: Genesis says the pairs were 1 for unclean animals, 4 for humans and 7 for clean, "male and female."
1. Some animals don't have male and female genders.
2. Everything would inbreed, unclean 7 times as badly as clean.
3. People would be more inbred than clean animals LOL!
InternetDarkLord 8 months ago
"I don't understand science so...god!"
sebz661 8 months ago 4
Excellent video! Thanks for putting this up. It's amazing how the gullible religious cling to their bible stories in the face of science and research.
Mankind really needs to grow up. Hey religious! Please do us all a favor, drop religion and go with reality!
ExperienceTheJesus 8 months ago
great vid
psycho3968 8 months ago
I lauged so hard at 4:45
IKilledKenny72 8 months ago 2
hahaha, liked this video at 2:07...
cypeapplejuice 8 months ago
If Noah's story was true, then Noah is a fucking dick!
Scientists are dedicating their lives to keep on finding new species in all kingdoms of living organisms, while Noah had all of them on one boat and just had to write the names down to save these amounts of time and money we are putting in that search :P
Shyn0h 8 months ago 3
LMAO...lets count the layers ........one, ..
kekejojo1212 8 months ago
you CANNOT argue with creationists. they'll just spout two arguments: "The bible is empirical evidence etc, etc.." and the all knowledgeable "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU."
it's always fun to argue with them, though. i always get my dose of monthly (not daily) laughs out of them..
uselessSomeone 8 months ago
But it seemed so plausible.
xNickTheBrickx 8 months ago
Why do I keep thinking that Hovind is like Mystery Science Theatre 3000 without the comedy?
StarTrekLivz 8 months ago
Study shows the lowest IQs comes from the most religious devout.
HatterMadigan 8 months ago
@HatterMadigan Dude, they believe the Flood was real. I mean... PERIOD.
LesPaul2006 8 months ago
As a american I am sorry that 64% of us believe the that the story of Noah's Ark is true I don't, you have understand from the time we were born they hit us with the religious books and stories before we even knew who we were so in all fairness I say this is no fault of our own, It was those people on the knocking on our door's every saturday morning wanting to share a bible verse because they knew we were home watching cartoon's all day , So please give us a break we will try to catch up.
kwolf43 8 months ago
When I saw Hovind for the first time, I thought he was a comedian
TheBenjaminVrenko 8 months ago 72
@TheBenjaminVrenko he isnt? :O
NoSz4 8 months ago
@NoSz4 not sure nevertheless :D
TheBenjaminVrenko 8 months ago
@TheBenjaminVrenko it's funny because he is :D
IKilledKenny72 8 months ago
@TheBenjaminVrenko Me to, lol
4FunPlayin 7 months ago
@TheBenjaminVrenko He wasn't? Of course Kent Hovind is where now? I guess he know about as much about the the natural world as he does the tax codes.
Richardisdorky 5 months ago
@TheBenjaminVrenko He is a comedian, except the joke was on his gullible audience. Made a good living at it too, 'cept he forgot that old "render unto Caesar" bit.
NorthForkFisherman 2 months ago
Comment removed
TheBenjaminVrenko 8 months ago
Lets count the layers.....1.......
FearGreenHaze93 8 months ago
"Any Idea which relies on the exsistance of common sence has no real world application."
jackthemapper 8 months ago
@jackthemapper uh, what?!?!
isaachaze1 8 months ago
If I recall correctly there was a considerably large flood in ancient Mesopotamia a few thousand years back, and a local merchant did stockpile a significant amount of provisions on his boat to survive the flood, so in all likelyhood the Noah story is taken from that event, or at least something like it.
YNot1989 8 months ago
@2karriizman I hope you realize for something to be a fossil it has to be at least 10,000 years old. I'm pretty sure @ZShogan laughed at you and ignored the rest of your posts. He/she is right. You are referring to something else such as a psuedo fossils or concretions
JadeChaos 8 months ago
debunk this shit?
hitterbrehm 8 months ago
@hitterbrehm debunk the noah's arc story? uh, i think that's what he's sort of doing...
isaachaze1 8 months ago
i can't believe 64% believe its true ...until i see that study n how they asked the survey question myself i refuse to except that. Yes i am always embarrased by us American's but 64%? now that is unforgivable.
slimdeala4life 8 months ago 3
"Red riding hood" is a nice tale, but it takes a lot of willful ignorance to actually believe a grandma and his grandaughter were eaten and then rescued alive from inside a wolf that talked. This isn't different at all.
badkluster 8 months ago 3
@badkluster
haha speaking of living in a stomach...the story of Jonah. Do people that actually believe this have the walt disney stomach idea here? look at Pinocchio and the whale...tons of room, a candle...aw so cute.
take bio in HS and you see why a stomach IS NOT the place where you want to set up camp.
of course...when dealing with this is like that game "I WIN" no matter what cards you have..maybe all them....it doesnt matter... 2,4,9,twee....I WIN! (god didit!)
destin325 8 months ago
I could watch Potholer54 videos all day (and have done so several times). :)
The combination of a very interesting scientific narrative, great tone of voice and the quirky humour makes for addictive viewing. I often have to rewind after the satirical humour parts because I miss things with LMAO so much.
If you got a boiling tube and added tinctures of David Attenborough, David Bellamy and Dr Magnus Pyke then added a few drops of, essence of Monty Python, you get Potholer54. :D
Zed1967 8 months ago
@Zed1967 It's the first time i watch a video he(i think) made and it's great.However similar humor and not only has on his channel The Thinking Atheist. This is by no means an advertisement of some sort! Just a suggestion! :)
ViktoriaILiana 8 months ago
@ViktoriaILiana
Thanks for the suggestion Viktoria but I'm already ahead of you. I'm subscribed to The Thinking Atheist already. It's a great channel. :)
Zed1967 8 months ago
"Catastrophic judgement" of what...trilobites?
teufelstaub 8 months ago
for a moment I thought I heard you say 'Arses in Genisis' and for a moment life seemed more beautiful.... :-D
scarletharlot69 8 months ago
CLEARLY THE LORD WIPED HIS HARD DRIVE TO PREVENT THIS HERESY FROM REACHING HIS SUBJECTS AND DAMNING THEIR SOULS.
Seriously though, loving it. Been laughing at creationist/anti-atheist videos on YouTube for a while, so finding these is like adding actual, irrefutable facts to my fact-inspired opinion that the lunatics preaching their archaic beliefs really need to actually study the relevant sciences before they can effectively refute it.
TehScat 8 months ago
HAHAHA!!! I LOVE you Peter Hadfield!
"duh duh duuuhhhh duhhhh!" to Kent Hovind's introduction
b( ^ ー ^ )d
TAz69x 8 months ago
TY for your last experiment, it fits perfectly with a flood longer than a day that depends on enviromental conditions just like a global one.
Oh, and the volcanic explanation for several thin layers is gold!
this is being Downloaded :)
IloveYOUviruses 8 months ago
You have such a demanding job and still post great videos - Thanks :)
mehja1 8 months ago
At least it's good that Kent Hovind won't be realeased from prison until 2015!:)
winterstellar 9 months ago
Anyone help me in arguing against Flamegurl06 on Kent Hovind vs Infidelguy?
her ignorance is painful :L
floisheremuch 9 months ago
"Let's count the layers. One. . ." LOL
zecnobot 9 months ago 2
Potholer,Debonking' will you Debunk the Quake in Japan & NZ using your Bucket full of Dirt pls. come on. dont be shy.
AngelofLoveOne 9 months ago
Noah: :"Hhmmm. I've got billions of different species on this boat ok were do I start. I'll drop the hippos off in Africa, the marsupials in Australia, the polar bears in the artic......but what do I do with this damn T-rex?!!"
braytex 10 months ago 88
@braytex > tell the T-rex to chase potholer in the Park.
AngelofLoveOne 9 months ago
@braytex Not to mention the other three arks he had to build for the three couples of Argentinosaurus he saved... It really wasn't Noah's Ark, more like Noah's Flotilla...
LesPaul2006 8 months ago
@braytex you put the T-Rex next to the Unicorns, of course
StarTrekLivz 8 months ago
@braytex Well, obviously we put that dangerous bastard under the ground lol
mercifulkyle 8 months ago
you cant discovered Noah's Ark with a pile of dirts and rocks in a bucket. because you got pride in you and not Humble. see for yourself the Answers in the Mounts of Ararat again, & again. but without wisdom and humbleness, and submission to His rebuked you wont get full success. your works remain as well speculations.
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
@AngelofLoveOne you've got to be joking
bbphnix 9 months ago
The earth is in constant flux .The highest mountian in the world is layered with limestone therefore it has been raised from a sea. Earthquakes ,volcanic eruptions,erosion and the great flood makes it impossible to tell how old rock layers are .Fossils can form at any point in time and are being formed constantly.This vidieo does in no way show the great flood did not happen.
2karriizman 10 months ago
@2karriizman
"Earthquakes ,volcanic eruptions,erosion and the great flood makes it impossible to tell how old rock layers are"
How?
"Fossils can form at any point in time and are being formed constantly"
Wrong, fossilization is rare.
"This vidieo does in no way show the great flood did not happen."
Yes it does, pull your head out of your ass so his voice isn't muffled and listen carefully.
ZShogan 10 months ago
@ZShogan Petrified Water Wheel | Photo Western Australia google fossil bowler hat new zealand. You will never see volcanic eruptions earthquakes or floods in a tub of muddy water .Fossils are formed rapidly due to catastrophic events.Most fossils are found in mass graveyards .Fossils are not rare if you know where to look for them i had a good collection of fossils when i was at school.His voice isn't muffled His logic and experiment is stupid.
2karriizman 10 months ago
@2karriizman
That's not fossilization, that's concretion. The material has only been encased in minerals, not replaced by minerals. The experiment proves the flood didn't happen because a single flood can only form a single layer of graded material, not a complex column of limestones, shales, sandstones, and other sedimentary rocks. The flood would mix all the materials together and deposit them as a single layer.
ZShogan 10 months ago
@ZShogan The wheel is replaced by minerals and is fossil many fossils are formed this way and dont take long to form.The earth is in flux the great flood is not the only flood this earth has ever experienced .When floods occur material is graded and low and behold you find limestone on top of mt Everest.This planet is like a cake mix in a bowl being constantly mixed."The flood would mix all the materials together and deposit them as a single layer"That layer is graded therefore many layers form
2karriizman 10 months ago
science get the idea and knowledge, to study the Facts and Truths and Laws and Commands from the Bible. it is a complete Books of All the Knowledge of Facts & Truth, the History and Geographical Events of the people and the Past. Find a verse that it doesnt explain that Bible had Mathematics?
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
@AngelofLoveOne
The Bible says that the sky is a dome (Gen. 1:6-7), that demons are responsible for disease (Matt 17:14-20, Matt 10:5-8), that the value of pi is 3 (1 Kings 7:23), that hares and rabbits chew their cud (Lev. 11:5-6), that killing birds cures leprosy (Lev. 14) that clouds are dust made by God's feet (Nahum 1:3), and that the earth is stationary (Job 38:4-6, Jeremiah 31:37). The bible is a myth.
ZShogan 10 months ago
@ZShogan > if the Bible is a myth then you and scientists is a myth? because science took knowledge from the Bible, and science took pride that claim greatest than the one foretold its increase, or fame. ungrateful is it. the tool mocked the maker. screwdriver screwed his inventor.
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
@AngelofLoveOne
If "science took knowledge from the Bible", we would believe that the sky is a dome (Gen. 1:6-7), that demons are responsible for disease (Matt 17:14-20, Matt 10:5-8), that the value of pi is 3 (1 Kings 7:23), that hares and rabbits chew their cud (Lev. 11:5-6), that killing birds cures leprosy (Lev. 14) that clouds are dust made by God's feet (Nahum 1:3), and that the earth is stationary (Job 38:4-6, Jeremiah 31:37). Since all of these are false, the bible is false.
ZShogan 10 months ago
@ZShogan Christian Scientists actually believe that illness is caused by demons, so they try to heal it praying, and the REFUSE medical attention for any disease.
LesPaul2006 8 months ago
@LesPaul2006 that's not technically correct: Christian Scientists are a kind of Gnostics, who believe illness is caused by bad, impure, or defective thought (gnosis - knowledge) -- the few I've run across reject belief in demons, angels, or other supernatural beings, except god and Jesus who is sort of super-psychiatrist who helps take away bad thoughts so that people don't get sick and die .... like Mary Baker Eddy, founder of Christian Science ...
StarTrekLivz 8 months ago
@StarTrekLivz I do agree some ailments and illnesses are amplified, some even provoked by emotional distress. But asking some invisible presence to "take away bad thoughts" is not only stupid, is quite cowardly.
LesPaul2006 8 months ago
@LesPaul2006
That is true, however their are many Christians who accept that microorganisms, not demons, cause disease, while still claiming that the bible is inerrant. This means either they don't know about these verses, which is ignorant, or they do know, but lie to us by still claiming that the bible is flawless. I don't know whether it's the former or the latter, but neither one would really surprise me.
ZShogan 8 months ago
@ZShogan > well then your works are All False.
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
have you try to speak to HIM in spirit (prayer with humbleness) without pride in you' an honest wish to lead you where? try it next time.
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
@AngelofLoveOne
Have you tried writing in proper english?
ZShogan 10 months ago
@ZShogan >>> Nahum 1:3
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
Comment removed
AngelofLoveOne 10 months ago
@AngelofLoveOne have you tried even for one second, thinking outside of your doctrine?
bbphnix 9 months ago
I'm not sure if its possible to convince the creationists of a false Noah's flood
one question
I seem to see modern animals in the ark like a giraffe how high does the ark need to be to house these extremely tall animals
getanaccount4me 10 months ago
Evolution is change over time but it happens very slowly and it only happens when surivual becomes primialy for organisms will naturaly change humans did come from evolution we all adapt and devlop over time
only2nocrew 10 months ago
You can say evolution is a change over ti
only2nocrew 10 months ago
The Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis are wrong. Wrong in the sense that there was a catastrophic global flood over the entire planet and that Earth is merely 1000s of years old.
Reasons to Believe gets it right. Knowing the point of reference in Genesis chapter 1 explains nearly everything in order, scientifically. The Earth is old and there was a flood but it was local to the middle east region.
reasons dot org
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith But that is not what genesis describes & therefore is pointless. If there was a flood in the middle east, so what? All myths have some basis in truth. But the bible is supposed to be 'Gospel' truth and the word of God. If it is inaccurate at all, then that is blown out of the water. if the bible says that one man made a boat hundreds of thousands of miles square so that millions of species could fit on it with the food needed to feed them, then that is supposed to be true isn't it?
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub Yes, it does and yes, it does.
Did you know that the phrase "the heavens and the earth" in genesis 1:1 is the ancient hebrew way of describing the universe? They didn't have a single word for universe so they used "the heavens and the earth" as a compound noun. Similar issues plague the proper interpretations and have for centuries.
The flood account uses phrases that indicate a world-wide flood, but the people could not possibly see the whole Earth like we can with satellites.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith I understand that "Heavens" refers to the observations in the night sky. And that "Heavens and the earth" would refer to the whole of observable universe. But the bible states that the sky is a huge dome and that the earth is a flat plane. They had no idea of the universe as we know it and even through classical philosophy the "Heavens" are described in this way. I have a philosophy degree from the UEA in England.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub (continuing) So, what did they mean? It makes sense from a language point of view that they meant their world. Everything they knew and loved would be destroyed. But that is not equivalent to our modern notion of the whole planet. In common speech we still use phrases like this - my children are my whole world, and my job is my life, etc. This is common.
So, I think the flood should be taken literally but with the common sense that comes from translating ancient words into our own.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@TacticalHub One other note, the animals that went on the ark were essentially farm animals - creatures necessary for human civilization. The iconography we use today with giraffes and elephants is simply wrong. Some of the animals they ate along the way and some they preserved to keep the species alive.
Anyway, if you begin to account for these issues - the vocabulary deficiencies and the point of view - then everything quickly falls into place even by scientific standards. reasons dot org
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith The Noahs ark myth is based on a previously existing tale of a samarian king who rode up river during a middle eastern flood with cattle and grain, providing food for the stricken people.
If the species on the ark were limited to a small group of domestic animals then there has been a huge amount of evolution unaccounted for in a short amount of time and therefore the fossil record completely refutes this. went to reasons.org and I find it more wet than answersingenesis .
TacticalHub 11 months ago
I have more respect for fundementalist christians than I do weak apologetics. If you are going to adopt the christian worldview then you have to take it as gospel truth. When you start to have to make allowances and integrate modern science into the bible and assume that they meant to say certain things. You dilute the bible into a pointless historical reference of peoples ideas. Which is valuable of course, but not divine or any sort of truth.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub Well, we have one thing in common. We both dislike the tactics of some (not all) young-earth creationists.
You couldn't debunk my apologetics so you decided to turn this into a personal attack, huh. Who ever said the bible wasn't or couldn't be a historical record of scientific facts? In other words, on what basis do you make your claim that my argument is pointless?
Q: Where does darkness dwell? (Job 38:19)
A: Dark Matter and Dark Energy (Theorized in the 1930s. See wikipedia.)
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith It was not a personal attack, and I don't have the will to debate in youtube comments. But I will say this last thing. If there was a big flood in the middle east, what does that say about the bible? That it is full of inaccurate and overblown myths based on pre-existing stories from the pre-classical?
And the fact that the bible is NOT an accurate documentation of scientific fact is evident in its pages. It revealed nothing about the universe. we would not need science if it did
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub Yes, you did attack me rather than deal with the points I raised.
The bible is not flawed, but flawed people have interpreted it incorrectly. You're also mistaken about it not being scientific - it just isn't science as we moderns recognize it today. Understanding it on the basis of who wrote it and when it was written reveals a remarkable knowledge of the world.
I wish you peace and blessings. Thanks for indulging me in our conversation.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith The Bible is not scientific in any way. It may be historical to a degree, but it cannot be said to be scientific. The very fact that no significant event - and by that I mean miracles etc - can not be verified by any other source means that it is not scientific by definition. It fails on the double blind which is a fundament of science. And there is knowledge and lessons to be learned from the bible. But the same is true of many philosophers and novelists.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub I have to disagree. As Dr. Ross of RTB discovered, and I agree with, the bible is an amazing book and does contain scientific principles and describe things in scientific terms.
Genesis chapter 1 is widely misinterpreted. The secret is verse 2 which identifies the POV and the context. It is the surface of the earth. Earth is empty, dark, and covered in water - no soup. God's "Let there be light" was transforming earth's early atmosphere from opaque to transparent. And so on...
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith With respect. That is not what the book of genesis describes and it is inference to assume it. The book of genesis describes the earth as a flat plane and the sky as being a dome. This was the belief of the time, and many pre-socratic philosophers wrote of the same thing. Democritus, the famous Atheist philosopher even predicted the existence of atoms prior to the bibles writing. Would you assume that he was divinely inspired?
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub That is in Job, not Genesis. So, how should it have been described? As Arthur C. Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Surely, the bible was meant to be understood by people of that time period. So how else could it have been written?
As far as Democritus goes, I am unfamiliar. But it doesn't shake my faith a bit. I believe the bible is inspired, but that doesn't exclude the possibility that there can't be any truth outside its pages.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith I mentioned democritus as an example of some1 who not only would not have claimed to be divinely inspired, but predicted the existence of something that has only recently been confirmed. You underestimate the abilities of mankind and the knowledge that they had at the time of the bibles writing. (other presocratics predicted the existence of other planets and other universes and Thales made discoveries similar to Newtonian laws before we had the methodology to confirm them)
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@danielbsmith I have spoken to many Christians who seem to believe that man lived as barbaric and ignorant nomads until suddenly god revealed his will to moses and everything changed. But the ten commandments are not original in any way (The code of Hammurabi seems to have been the source of these laws and predates them by many many years). The classical world was incredibly civilised and learned especially the Greeks. The bible was not very inspired at all if you know your philosophy.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub I think God specially created humans in their modern form. No evolution required. We began as intelligent, curious creatures and that hasn't changed. Archaeology bears this out since no missing links have been found and all that have been proposed have been debunked.
I think the inspiration in the bible is subtle by design. Furthermore, I believe there is strong evidence to think that the book of Job was written first. It certainly seems to contain the most ancient concepts.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith Then there is not much point in continuing this conversation. One of the reasons I don't get into debates with Christians or any1 religious is because of that sort of statement. "Where are the missing links" etc. It is a meme that does the rounds and actually has no meaning and shows a lack of understanding of evolution and biology. The fossil record actually proves evolution beyond any reasonable doubt. What would u call an unbroken chain of fossils going from simple to complex?
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub I call that a pipe dream. Show me this chain. Do you have a URL? Draw your evolutionary tree for me. Most evolutionary trees require the anatomy of the eye to evolve independently and simultaneously along multiple branches.
The fossil record is broken and by no means proves evolution. Neanderthal DNA excludes them from being our ancestor. A. ramidus, A. anamensis, and A. afarensis all lived in wooded areas which removes environmental pressures to become bipedal and stand erect.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith I encourage you to do some more research. The Fossil record is not broken, it is just incomplete. Fossilisation is rare and there can never be a continuous chain of every creature who have ever lived. So there will always be holes in the record. But the fact that creatures go from primitive to complex in an unbroken succession is enough to demonstrate evolution. thankfully the fossil record is a small part of the evidence. Molecular genetics provides the most compelling evidence.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub Well, you can continue to have faith that the fossil record is incomplete. I'll continue to have faith in my God. I can't disprove it any more than you can prove to me that similar features indicate evolution and not a common set of templates used by a creator. The interpretation is all in the eye of the beholder.
I leave with one very compelling observation: you cannot explain your worldview without falling back on some kind of faith. I think that validates mine and not your own.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith As much as fundies want to think that, it is not true. Evolution is an objective reality and can be demonstrated using a number of Scientific methodologies. That is why it is the central theory of biology and has never been falsified and continues to be confirmed by research in genetics, molecular genetics, geology, physics ,chemistry, and maybe most importantly, mathematics. evolutionary models have been used to programme AI and realistic character animations in video games.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@danielbsmith If we were to use the fossil record and only the fossil record then how do YOU explain animals going from primitive single celled organisms to complex creatures over time. The further we go back in time through the geological strata the less and less complicated animals become. And we also find transitional features such as with the eye and breathing apparatus. We also have vestigial limbs and features in modern animals. How do you explain that?
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@danielbsmith And actually you CAN disprove evolution if it were false. It would be easy. Scientists all over the world seek to falsify theories every year. That is an important part of scientific methodology. If we had a human are modern world animal in amongst Cretaceous strata, evolution would be falsified. And that is what we would see if evolution was false. We would have no succession of complexity throughout the strata. fossils would have no order or pattern whatsoever.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@danielbsmith As for the request to "Draw me an evolutionary tree" and "Show me this chain"... I don't need to.. You can go to anyone who is a geologist and ask them. Go see for yourself. Go and study geology. It is not a pipe dream, it is a fact. The lower down you go through the strata, the further back in time you are going. Fossils become less and less complex the further you go down. To the point where we only see single celled organisms. simple, obvious, confirmation.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub Actually, my point was that they're all different. There is no single evolutionary tree that all evolutionary biologists subscribe to. The reasons include several intractable problems like the simultaneous development of the eye mentioned earlier.
Actual geology isn't so straight-forward. Geology books oversimplify. Layers can get mixed up, eroded and replaced by newer layers, etc. It's quite messy. A lot can happen over millions of years. It's hardly confirmation of evolution.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
@danielbsmith Sure. But Newtonian physics continues 2 b reformed and refined today. Does that mean that Newtonian physics is fundamentally wrong? Of course not. Evolution also is under constant reform. differing hypothesis exist as 2 what si the primary force for evolutionary change. But that evolutionary change is an obvious and undeniable reality is uncontested. And geology is of course more complicated. Mountain formation can push layers above younger layers. But the order remains the same.
TacticalHub 11 months ago
@TacticalHub I never said I didn't agree with evolution. I agree that things do "change over time". I disagree that a purely natural explanation can account for our existence.
I'm here because I disagree with your video attempting to debunk the flood. It's a straw argument. You've chosen to debunk the young-earth interpretation because it isn't scientifically sound. But the integrated, old-earth interpretation from Reasons that I hold to *is* scientifically sound. I suggest you look into it.
danielbsmith 11 months ago
Comment removed
danielbsmith 11 months ago
Comment removed
danielbsmith 11 months ago
This is literally Geology 101... Hovind is an idiot. And worse, willfully ignorant.
BillHicks420 1 year ago 29
@gardengxc I didn't know Gates gave money to DI. Holy shit. Well I'm beyond nearly sickend that any money i've pumped into MS went to DI. Personally I prefer fedora/gentoo/ubuntu over OSX. I'm not one to rag on someone because of their preferred OS. Had a teacher who would be really condescending if he met anyone who used anything but OpenBSD. Sad to see that cults have their grips into everything. There is even a bullshit confessional app for iphone. I'd sooner like a harry potter wiki app.
mistereveready 1 year ago
@gardengxc Umm what? I just thought that a creationist using something named after Darwin and the mascot after Thomas Henry Huxley (though someone fubard the name and reason) is ironic. Unless you meant less creationist there than in the U.S. Sadly I'd never would move to Australia. Nice looking place, but I'm not parting with my CCW.
mistereveready 1 year ago
I wonder how fast creationist would discontinue using their mac if they knew osx is a flavor of BSD/Unix called Darwin. That alone makes me want to buy another macbook. Everytime I type a function or hit ctrl + space, I'm really typing "Go fuck yourself Creationist!"
mistereveready 1 year ago
Neph says there are hardly any distorted fossils... Well yeah, that's because those are usually not shown in exhibit....
TearsOfWar1 1 year ago
It doesn't matter how eloquently and professionally you lie. You are still lying.
MunkyDrag0n 1 year ago
"We're capable of thinking, and finding out for ourselves" (10:00)
Well I'm sorry, but this is a classic case of a scientific hypothesis which creationists have clearly demonstrated is false. I don't see how I can trust anything potholer54 says when this totally in context statement is obviously incorrect.
If we are capable of thinking and finding out for ourselves, how do you explain the existence of creationists? Haha, your whole 'theory' has fallen apart!
um1imo 1 year ago 3
@um1imo Clearly it's obviously obvious and clearly simple. We need morons to appreciate intelligent people. Clearly.
What exactly beside their ignorance stupidity and immunity to facts have the creationists clearly and obviously demonstrated?
sf200425997 10 months ago
It's sad that claptrap like this actually NEEDS to be debunked in this day and age.
I dismissed Noah's flood when I was seven and religion three years later.
TheNamelessCharacter 1 year ago
Babylonians, Australian Aboriginals, and dozens of other ancient cultures all preserved accounts of a global deluge. Sure the Noah story is taken from ancient accounts but the story of a Great Flood is by far the most commonly shared legend among ancient civilizations. Those who reject it happened need to explain its appearance in the legends of so many diverse and often isolated cultures .
ezeeskank 1 year ago
@ezeeskank The commonality of an idea does not prove that it is true in the slightest, all it shows is that floods occur all over the world.
stupetify 1 year ago
@ezeeskank they also describe mythical beasts that never existed. Sure different culture describes different beasts, just like different culture describes different flood. If they all had tons of similarities in details that would be a better story. Same applies to religion - they believed in different gods, but does that make a notion of god more plausible? No.
eleminatus 1 year ago
im sorry you feel that way..ill pray for you.
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012 you're being sarcastic right?
bbphnix 9 months ago
@bbphnix no, why?
Cwizzy2012 9 months ago
@Cwizzy2012 are you saying you'll pray for potholer? and that you're sorry... sorry for what?
bbphnix 9 months ago
@bbphnix ohhhhh i meant to reply to a guy i was talking to.. ha and i was sorry that he felt. idk, he was cussing me out. so i said sorry you feel that way
Cwizzy2012 9 months ago
Thank you potholer54 for a very amusing video, I was having a nice chuckle to it until I realised that there is 64% Americans (and other fools worldwide) who believe in ‘The Floods’ of Noah.
ParkSouthSW11 1 year ago
I would like to speak for other 36% of Americans when I say... "Help"
HFUstoreit1 1 year ago 32
@HFUstoreit1 - "Help"
You could always swap US for UK and become a majority, but watch out for the trappings of watching back-to-back episodes of mind numbing Coronation Street, Eastenders and reading the Daily Mail (sorry pothholer54, but it is a really bad paper).
ParkSouthSW11 1 year ago
I agree ignorance hurts. Thats why i face constant struggles sometimes and have to press through, but its not creationalist museum, but the creation museum. there aren't any tour guides. i didnt see any at least, and i went through the whole thing. ha but i understand
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012 fair enough
lordlandraid 1 year ago
@lordlandraid yeahhh, but i didnt get to listen to this all the way through cause i dont wanna wake my family up but this may show you something. not sure. ill message you it
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
yeah it did. grr i forget though. ill have to visit back there and just write stuff down. ha its a great time. You should think about going there sometime. its on the kentucky ohio border. Close to cincinnatti
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012 The whole grand canyon proof issue was debunked a while ago. I'd rather not go to the creationist museum, I've seen the guy who runs the place. I'd probably end up yelling at the tour guides more often then look at the stuff around the place due to the logical fallacies I'll end up running into. I yell at my computer screen half the time when I read arguments regarding this, yelling why he's wrong and ending up not reading the comments anymore cause the ignorance huuuurrrrtttssss...
lordlandraid 1 year ago
yeah ive looked into natural selection and all that, but it just doesnt make sense. and he's not really a guy, but you just asked with what? but if there is no god as many believe, then the entire universe would be made not by a man without magic as you say, but randomly out of nothing at all. all of the sudden, boom. matter. it just doesnt make sense broskie. but believing is a lot more than saying i need to see in every which way how this is proven
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012: Well...when biologists say 'random', they actually mean "historical contingency of genetic changes and morphological changes", which is [of course] restricted by the chemical and physical factors that [as far as we know] apply to the universe, which includes life on Earth.
CathySander 1 year ago
@CathySander im trying to figure out what youre saying
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012: The thing is this: the random changes in the DNA sequence arises from entirely natural causes, like high-energy gamma rays and particular types of proteins. The randomness arises from the equally-likely probability of any of these physical processes hitting any part of the DNA sequence. Once these changes occur, the organism may end up with a reduced probability of reaching the age of reproduction, which lowers the chance their genes get passed onto the next generation.
CathySander 1 year ago
@CathySander are you getting to natural selection or something?
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012: Well...what do you think? Does it sound plausible to you?
CathySander 1 year ago
@CathySander so earlier you werent talking about natural selection at all? and well not to me, but hey it makes sense kinda. But its not just sticking in God for me. Its just all i hear is science science science. its overwhelming sometimes. But at the same time, science cannot prove itself
Cwizzy2012 1 year ago
@Cwizzy2012: The universe doesn't act randomly in the absence of any supervisor. It does move. What sorts of evidence do you have for a god [besides the universe existing, that is]?
CathySander 1 year ago