Added: 4 years ago
From: ExtantDodo
Views: 36,223
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (738)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I face palmed through this entire video

  • might want to put a note or something in the video about new neanderthal research- maybe a pop up thing?

  • @dakenpo even if Newton were to state his idea of gravity was completely wrong it would discredit the facts about Newtonian Physics. A scientific theory stands apart from it founder. Try again.

  • Dude even Darwin later on said it didn't work. Only Adaptive Evolution, that speical theory evolution doesn't. This is known in the scientific community . Try agian

  • Tool use isn't even limited to primates: birds can be observed using tools. One of the clips used in the Galapagos segment in part 1 showed a finch using a twig to dig for grubs.

  • holly shit lol not crazy lady again...i made it through the first slide then saw here and bailed lol

  • We've secretly replaced tonight's blend with Janet Folger's bullshit:

    You can almost taste the aroma.

  • Pwned

  • Get back in the kitchen bitch.

  • well done!.. Folger and the rest of the uneducated creationists go beyond being deceitful.. (hard to imagine I guess).. Bear faced lies... Lying for jesus...

  • Atheista know that evolution doesn't prove a god doesnt exist ..We also know that religion doesnt prove a god does exist . Evolution is a law of nature , but only a part of nature , so it is not an explanation of creation, that is why we call it evolution. Religious people dont seem to get that, the implications offend them..

  • remember, words....have meaning

    lmao

  • What makes me laugh is that every Christian church apart from those in the US bible belt excepts Evolution. Even the RCs! A god that uses Evolution has gotta be more clever...

  • Janet Folger has the annoying vocal style of a Faux News reporter.

  • Hey, did everyone here know that Sir Isaac Newton repented on his deathbed and admitted that gravity was a hoax? That means that gravity doesn't exist. I mean, who are you to argue against Sir Isaac Newton?

    Lol, I just LOVE it when creationists use deathbed confessions.

  • @califoniania This is part of why I like what Christopher Hitchen's did. He, on national television, announced that if he were lucid he would not be asking for mercy from any god and only in a fit of paranoid insanity where his mind is nearly gone would he admit to there being a god. Its brilliant because then a "death bed confession" is no longer an issue and he doesn't have to worry about a decaying lucidity.

  • @MysteriousAya- Yeah, I agree 100%. But we all know creationists would be quoting (read: quote mining) him like crazy anyway.

  • 17:36

    Which continues to baffle me;

    I don't know much about evolution, but shouldn't the fact that it's the foundation of biology and used for frickin medicines and such, mean that the scientists are NOT lying and that there is no evolution conspiracy against god?

    All the stuff they're making for cures and to fight disease and viruses are based on lies?

  • dude the australophithecus could just be some ancient guy with some kind of retardation (like evolutionists) . and all the other fossils and "missing link"and "proof" could just be ancient animals that are now extinct. evolution is a huge epic fail ^_^

  • @prdude1234 You have never even looked at a fossil, how would you know, IDiot.

  • the only people that are descendants from monkeys are evolutionists because they are to retarded (like monkeys) to see that is fake and that is nonsense

    evolutionism === epic fail

  • @prdude1234 Ah, the typical Creationist argument. Plugging the ears and shutting the eyes to references of scientific journals, peer reviewed studies, and critical research while loudly yelling "I am right, I am right." with no evidence to back up the claim.

    If you're going to call us retarded, you at least need to state how it is accepting the scientific theory of evolution makes us as such. You've gone from A to D without using B and C to get there.

  • @MysteriousAya dude all the "evidence" that ppl like u have gathered always fail somewhere. there is NO EVIDENCE OF A TRANSITIONAL FORM FROM APE TO HUMAN, nor from one animal to another, there is no evidence that a ape became a human, there no fossils of a transitional creature. it is a retarded a nonsense theory.

    so evolutionism = epic fail ^_^

  • @prdude1234 .... You're REALLY attempting to pass that bullshit on THIS video that goes through extensive lengths to display that there is a showing of transitional fossils, not only that but stating that fossils aren't even necessary for the theory of evolution to be correct? You truly are not even worth the time it takes to type this out and I am doing it merely out of a courtesy response at this point because you are not even taking time to look at the arguments presented. Don't expect more.

  • @MysteriousAya ooo yea i remember that scientists have find their "missing links" by just finding a small teeth or piece of bone...like the nebraska man.there is no evidence of a half-ape half-man or from a half-velociraptor and a half-ostrich, there is no evidence.ONLY SOMEONE (GOD) COULD HAVE CREATE A UNIVERSE SO PERFECT,THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE TO BE A CAUSALITY.please tell me the evidence of transitional forms of one animal evolving to another,could this retarded being tell me? i dont think so!

  • @prdude1234 My god you are stupid. Just so... so stupid. Nebraska man wasn't accepted by the scientific community, and like the video says if you EVER bothered to watch it "words have meaning." They aren't "Missing" anymore because they're found. Holy crap on a stick batman could you be any more thick? You're like the parody version of creationists arguments, which is horrifying because they're already incredibly laughable.

  • @MysteriousAya what is the evidence?i small piece of bone? or a small piece of teeth? so if i go out to my house and i find a small piece of bone then i found the "missing link" without knowing from where is it(like evolutionists)?they cant prove it, it is a retarded and absurd idea. AND IM STILL WAITING FOR YOU (YEA YOU) TO TELL ME THE DAMN EVIDENCE.i asked you to tell me the evidence 3 days ago, and im still waiting

    *yawn* when you find some real evidence please come and reply to my comments.

  • @prdude1234 Real Advice: WATCH THE FUCKING VIDEO YOU'RE TRYING TO REFUTE.

  • @MysteriousAya wow i just saw "proof"? all that bullshit could just be old extinct animals.like the "nebraka man"was just and extinct pig. i had to quit watching it because of its huge rate of retardation. also why fossils are NOT BEING MADE IN THIS DAYS? NOR PETROLEUM OR GASES OR OTHER MINERAL RESOURCES ARE NOT BEING MADE IN THIS DAYS? from where animals go their instinct? from where the chicken learn to lay and from where the birds learned to migrate? give some proof please.

  • @prdude1234 I have come to the conclusion that you're either a parody of creationist arguments in troll form or you're unteachable in the form of evolutionary biology. Either way you're not someone my arguments aren't going to get through to and I'm not going to run in circles trying to constantly hit a moving goal post.

  • @MysteriousAya so that's what you say when you don't know what to say or don't have the answers? you are just proving my theory that evolutionism = epic fail ^_^

  • @MysteriousAya hey thanks for proving that evolutionism = epic fail ! ^_^ now go to read "monkey book" by doctor monkey, 1st banana edition ^_^

  • @gregrutz "can you explain why you are an APE?" XD because we both look a little like and they are a little intelligent? if i am walking in the beach and i see a manta ray and i notice that they have "wings" does it mean they evolved from birds? or a banana evolved from gold because they are both yellow? and black people evolved from mud because they are both black? well i think i evolved from Hershey chocolate-milk bar because i have white-dark skin...

    p.s my cockatiel evolved from silver

  • @prdude1234 Are you home schooled? Dinosaurs had feathers, not manta rays.

    Why do you think chimps are closer to humans than gorillas? Or have 98.6% the same DNA as humans?

    Watch the video you are spamming, you might learn something.

  • @prdude1234 the only "huge rate of retardation" in this video came from the ICR. and fossils ARE being made. the rest of your comment doesn't really make enough sense to reply to...maybe take an english class or two?

  • @DHFHades *yawn* who the hell told you that fossils are being made today? If i see a rat rotting im am watching a fossil been made? fossils are not being made today, they were made by be flood. Why are they not being made today? because for a fossil to be made it MUST BE BURY INSTANTLY AFTER THE ANIMALS DEATH, or the BACTERIA AND FUNGI WILL DESTROY THE BONES, MEAT BLOOD ETC. And THE INCREDIBLE FORCE NEED TO FOSSILIZE THEM IS NOT PRESENT TODAY. Now go and learn something retarded pagan. ^_^

  • @prdude1234 What Flood?

    Fossils need rapid burial, not water logged.

    What was the name of the flood mud layer with all the dead bodies??

  • @gregrutz hummm the rapid burial must be in less than 3 days (or decompostion will start) or the body will rot, and i dont think that caveman were digging and burying dead animals.

    p.s many layers were created by the flood, no just 1 ;)

  • @prdude1234 IF BIG IF Floods could make many layers, why are dinosaur fossils only in the middle layers. Cambrian animals only in old rock with no modern animals or plants with them? How do lava layers get in the middle or limestone layers? How did the flood make chalk layers? slow growing corals? Can't wait to find out.

    BTW cave men did not bury them, men had not evolved yet.

  • @gregrutz well simple animals (most which were abyss dwelling creatures) like the trilobites could not scape the waters and the sediment nor simple plants, complex animals will had probably climbed to higher places to try to scape the flood waters ( like some fossils in [i will search the info soon] a river in france) the volcano could have erupted because of the huge amount of pressure made by the waters

    p.s there is limestone in mount everest,strange, isn't it?

  • @prdude1234 What if they lived in Kansas where there are no hills for the dinosaurs to walk half way up. Wouldn't we find a bunny fossils with the dinosaur fossils? We don't.

    Limestone is proof the land was raised up over millions of years, not strange if you study plate tectonics or geology, try it.

  • @prdude1234 Bones destroyed by fungus and bacteria if they are not buried immediately?

    Have you never seen a skeleton?

  • @okristian1 i recommend you to learn some biology ;)

  • @prdude1234 When did you learn some biology?

  • @prdude1234 You should watch the video you are spamming, you might not look so stupid.

    Nebraska man was correctly Identified by the second person to look at it.

    Everything you think of as bird like, dinosaurs evolved: hollow bones, feathers, oval eggs in nests, warm blood, etc. So grow up.

  • @gregrutz so if a fish have eight eyes it then means it evolved from a spider? if a animal have a dry skin then all the other animals with dry skin evolved from it? dude the reason that two animals have same characteristics does not means that one evolved from another. same with mutations, MUTATIONS DONT CREATE NEW SPECIES OF ANIMALS, no transitional fossil have every been found also.

    p.s earth magnetism 1 millions years ago was like 30 or 40 times more than todays magnetism ;)

  • @prdude1234 No, but if you have four limbs you are tetrapod. If you are a chimp, gorilla or a human you are an ape.

    There are many transitional fossils, dinosaurs with feathers, fish with necks, primates the walked upright.

    Mutation don't make new species, evolution does.

    The earth magnetic field is not changing in one direction for millions of years, it flips. That fact plus the mid atlantic ridge proved plate tectonics in the 1950's

  • @gregrutz well i have heard scientists say that new species of animals were "created" by mutations, evolution is fake, like the nebraska man is fake, and yea, earth magnetism gets weaker, earth magnetism decreases .5 every 1,400 years, if we calculate back 1 million years ago earth magnetism will be hundreds of times more than today, strange,isn't it?

    p.s today i was walking and i saw a house building itself alone,im still puzzled by that sight. can u tell me what i saw from a scientific view?

  • @prdude1234 There is a little more to evolution than mutation, in fact Darwin did not even know what a mutation is and he showed how evolution works.

    The magnetic field flips, it does not just keep getting weaker or stronger.

    Houses are made complete by a designer.

  • @gregrutz as earths cores cools downs and slows its magnetic field gets weaker, and why a house (something so simple and stupid) cannot build it self alone but the universe (something so complex and extraordinary) can build itself alone?

    p.s earth was pancake shaped a few million years ago and strangely comets still orbiting around the sun ( hmmm strange isn't it?)

  • @prdude1234 The magnetic field flips, proven.

    If we don't know where comets come from proves nothing.

    Why don't you look at the facts we know instead of making up excusses.

    Look at the fossils and not the gaps.

    Look at the rocks the Grand Canyon exposes, not the void.

  • @gregrutz XD if the sun was all those billion years old you say there will be no comets or meteors, why a house can not build itself but the universe can???

  • @prdude1234 This video answers your question: /watch?v=Xxn3WEGFaxE

  • @SephieRothe I dont even know to what of my comment your replied (Nor what it said) since my comments are over a year old. All I can tell you is I have gathered more knowledge and found out the evolution theory is even more failish than a year ago.

  • @prdude1234 My comment had nothing to do with the theory of evolution but rather your questioning why a house can not build itself but the universe can.

  • @SephieRothe So it is possible for the universe to create itself alone, but it is impossible for a simple house to build itself alone? Yeah, and I am Santa Claus.

  • @prdude1234 What a moronic argument. If a house is simple compared to the universe, then the universe is simple compared to a God. Yet you think that this God can create itself but the universe can't. Fucktard.

    And don't give me any bullshit that God does not need to be created. If a God doesn't need to be created, then the universe doesn't, either (the universe may have existed in a form that is different from the one we know of it now).

  • @DeadFishFactory Well, it is all an act of faith, even evolution is an act of faith.

  • @DeadFishFactory Well, it is all an act of faith, even believing in evolution needs an act of faith.

  • In general I dislike such type of presentation. You use a video and insert your counter arguments. It is unfair as the video can't argue back . Get into a real debate.

  • This is insane! This woman has a straigh face while saying this?

    She should be denied any healthcare since she denies modern biology, which stands upon evolutionary biology!

  • Unles the oigins of life is determined then this vid is speculation. Unles 1 no's the origins of life then 1 doesn't know that these haven't been created w/simularities. These simularities that r be'n called evidence. There must be a foundation inwhich it's built upon. W/out the origins of life there is no foundation. 1 can't start build'n at 75% complete as TofE is try'n to do. It states it is not about origins rather the change of life from 1 species 2 another. Bldg w/out foundation.

  • 5:27 Possesses characteristics, this is simularities. TorE is base'n it's theory on no more then simularities. How do u know that God didn't create such w/simularities?

    7:40 If these are transitional fossils that have changed over the time, then y are there not live specimens that 1 can see w/the naked eye. Today we should have these transitionals that can be observed n yet the transition should be complete to witnes for all to see. The platypus has been here for how many yrs?

  • Where are these many transitional fossils that have been found? Just say'n so don't make it so. Darwins big mistake. 1:40 But fossil records are the ultimate evidence w/out which all else is speculation. These fossil records that are mention here have been found to be fake. If u r use'n the platypus as ur evidence, then in the many yrs they have been here then why have they not completed their change as of yet? In the mil of yrs or so there should be many more then the platypus n few others.

  • the fossils dont prove that, it takes millions of years to a fossil be made, but the bacteria fungi and other things destroy it long before its able to become a fossil

  • I am sorry. It has been quite some time since I watched this video. As I remember it the lady made an argument against Darwin's Darwinian-ism and he debates present day Darwin. It's like being in a debate and someone telling you your sister is ugly.  The two don't have anything to do with one another.

    Try some research yourself and pay attention.

  • you forgot something the platypus is endothermic but its blood temp is lower than all mammals but higher than all reptiles

  • 17:44 ROFL!!

    Well, it's anarchy for liars like Janet Folger at least. No wonder legitimate scientists ignore people like her.

    Unfortunately, if her message gets through to too many sub-laymen in this country, public funding for sane science might hit a roadblock.

  • Okay I am only through 1:45 of this video and I am already annoyed with this snob. Is he even listening to the same video he is commenting on? I mean really his brain isn't centered right or something. The lady is mentioning historical Darwin argument and he is mentioning the present day argument. The voice over snobbish commentator is an idiot. Not bothered by the rules of common human interaction. Should I even continue?

  • @DavidESpooner you mean about the fossils? if so that was many years ago he was right they didnt have many fossils but now we have many MANY fossils go get educated

  • "We are little more than inbred mutant apes that are balding" HAHA! best, and most accurate, comparison of humans to other apes EVER.

  • 17:44 You're right.

    With the crap this chick is handing out, it's enough to make any rational person's head explode.

  • Quick point. Archaeopteryx was a dinosaur, not a reptile. Reptiles are cold blooded, dinosaurs are warm blooded. But it doesn't matter, because birds didn't evolve from reptiles, so saying that there should be fossils of reptiles with wings is a straw man. This video kind of made a straw army. With which, they could have fed the mounted cavalry of a real army.

  • @aaronacrabtree actually dinosaurs were probably coldblooded since birds are also coldblooded

  • I love the platypus, that weird thing

  • I love the deadpan approach.

  • LOL no, I think he just doesn't have a personality

  • Wha-? Really? Thanks.

  • Word salad.

  • Your turning things around. If evolution was true, we would find these fossils. You see, evolution predicts them. Creation says nothing about the fossil record.

    Also evolution predicts where we should find them and where we shouldn't find them. We should not find human bones under in permian layers. We should find fossils with fish and tetrapod features in the late devonian.

    With evolution we get these fossils because we know where to look.

    The irrefutable evidence of evolution comes from DNA.

  • Straw man argument, fallacy. Try again.

  • Did you learn that from Kent Hovind? lol

  • @narupiece you may be right they cant know if they had children unless they check there pelvic bones for the damage from pregnancy lol and there is a pattern there is never one out of place EVER

  • theres a difference between lying and ignorance FOOL!

  • I love how you guys correct Ham at every thing he says when he's describing the platypus. =)

  • Snorfest

  • I went to school at CWU in Ellensburg (home of the famous chimp Washoe - the chimp that used ASL). Dr. Fouts, the head researcher, talked about how ants use tools. They would cut out leaves and carry water on them back to their ant hill. The years might have distorted the details (I'm really old!) so don't quote me on that. Can anyone confirm this for sure? Yet another example of non-human tools. Would my dog pulling all dirty clothes in a pile to create a bed count as tool use?

  • All of those examples, while they don't necessarily count as "tool use", do demonstrate the ability of these creatures to utilise their surrounding environment. That does take a certain level of intelligence.

  • "Give me the #1 proof that darwinism has ever happened. The all time favorite, that I can go see somewhere on this planet! Do you realize what this means, if you have this proof?"

    The only thing that will happen if I show evidence is that I will prove that I'm educated on the subject and you're not.

    Theres no #1 evidence for evo theory just like theres no #1 evidence for atomic theory. There has to be multiple lines of evidence. And both theories have lots of evidence. Sorry to disappoint you.

  • "Graduate students are spontaneously combustion"

    I saw that happen, once. The smell in the theology classroom afterward was bad.

  • How do you know that there are no mutations? Did you sequence the genomes of animals to prove that?

    If there is no new information in selective breeding, then why is there such great diversity in dogs? Where did the information for different coat colors, shapes, sizes, eye colors, nutritional needs, etc. come from? Don't tell me all the wolves where dogs descended from already had all those alleles!

    And, yes, science books give evidence. Read college level biology books

  • there is no god

  • So if there is no God, is everyone good or evil?

  • now i have read your whole debate with everyone, and, frankly, i couldn't care less about anyone's views on the matter. i would like to point out that Dawkins is an atheist. for clarity's sake, this is the definition found in the dictionary : " the doctrine or belief that there is no God; a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods"

    or, in other words: DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD. that single comment shows how you seem to ignore a need for research, and that doesn't really help your cause

  • Why is it, everytime someone says to me; "There is no evidence for God, or Creation, it's a fairy tale! Anyone that believes in something that is not proven, tested,or observed; evidence, is dumb and delusional, and I don't know anything about science?" Then when I ask them for proven, tested, observed, scientific evidence of just ONE thing that is proof for their belief, they won't answer? They suddenly stop replying, or they ignor the question. Whats up, a religious bias? Thats what I think!

  • Because when you ask them to answer at midnight on a work night, they may have gone to bed already.

    Did you watch the video that we're "commenting" on? The fossil record, coupled with DNA evidence shows evidence for the evolution of every living species. We can use fossils to show that species change over very long periods of time. Fossils deposit in geologic strata that allow scientists to accurately date the fossils. Fossils act like a time line of evolution. That's one set of evidence.

  • Secondly, the relatively recent field of molecular biology, with its ability to observe the similarities and differences between species. When Darwin developed natural selection theory, there was no molecular biology and we had no idea what genetics was. Mendel first observed genetic traits being passed and modified in the next generation. This partially proved the evolution happens. Then molecular biology showed the relationship between all living things. We can determine how they are related..

  • ...and approximately when the various species diverged. For example, genetically, ferns are more related to pine trees than they are to humans. Chimpanzees share 99% of our DNA, but they are not human. We had a common ancestor with them approximately 15-20 million years ago. If molecular biology had shown that Darwin was wrong, natural selection would have been questionable. Molecular biology showed that natural selection theory is correct. Without natural selection, there is no modern biology.

  • I'd love to keep talking about this, but I will leave it to the experts, if you're interested. There is a great book by a now deceased Harvard professor called "What Evolution Is". The author is Ernst Mayr. It gives a nice, clear explanation of how life evolved and how natural selection theory explains it.

    This is not a copout on my part. I have taken about 40 credits of biology courses, which of course, all depend on natural selection theory, but I'm a quantum chemist. Mayr was an expert.

  • So from just this little bit of fact, where is your evidence? What 0.25% of the entire fossil record are you using for evidence that everything is transitional? Or is it the 0.0025% of that, thats being used? So your theory is based on a couple fossils that MAY have gone extinct? How is this tested science? How did this branch of science get to know the unknowable from a few fossils of pieces of animals that still exist today? And they found them all in the so-called Cambrian rock! They lie!

  • One more comment. I hope that it has not seemed that I have been using natural selection theory in an attempt show that there is not god. Natural selection theory makes no comment about god. No science does, since we can't test for the presence or absence of a god.

    I don't believe in any gods, because I see no evidence to support their existence, anymore than I see evidence for any super natural phenomena.

  • You did not give me one piece of evidence that darwinism exists. All you have talked about is micro-adaptation which God stated 10 times in Genesis as true. (observable) He made everything similar because everything shares nutrition, etc. on this earth! (very observed)The only proof we came from apes are proven frauds still in textbooks, and museums.(very known and observed)You have still not offered how you, OR THEY know what happened exactly 3.5 billion years ago?(never observed by anyone!)

  • That's all for me Kathy. You, like all super naturalists, like your beliefs. You can have your beliefs, but you can't make your own facts. You will probably survive, quite well thanks to science, so you can remain ignorant about science and reality. Ignorance is one unfortunate luxury of our time. I sincerely hope that you have a good life.

  • You proved absolutely nothing. You showed that I was not willing to give you a several year's worth of free education about the biological sciences via an online forum.. If you were truly interested in science, you would go study it. Youtube is a silly format for this. Thanks for wishing me to "hell"; that's very, actually very Christian of you.

  • There you go, presupposing again! I'm going to be happy in eternity too! In heaven with the awesome living God! Gee thanks for the offer of free lessons, but I have studied it all for myself and have gone as far as science can take me in that area, which is not very far.Only what God has created is here and validated, and real. Anything that is outside of science, is a religion. Isnt that what you tell me? I can prove what God said in Genesis very easily. Anyone can!So where does that leave you?

  • The thing is that there are more muslims than Christians and more Catholics than any other form of Christian. More forms of Christianity agree with evolution, so taking all of that into account makes it incredibly difficult to see how your very selective interpretation of a poor translation (I assume you are using the king James bible) is right in comparison. Please go take a look at DonExodus and his vids to get the answers people don't want to try and parse into 500 words or less.

  • God gives wisdom and understanding, not you or Don whoever! Most fools can't understand the word of God. They want God to be their genie or slave. As soon as you humble yourself, you will know more than most. That's just the way God works, He's the one who Reigns, and you can't save yourself, so don't waste MY time convincing yourself. I wasn't talking to you anyway. Do you mind?

  • You were actually. I was trying to show you that I had read all of your comments and those of other debates you have been in before replying to your reply from yesterday. However if Christianity says you should be incredibly rude than that's fine. Don Exodus is a Christian scientist I thought you might like. Your statement shows that you in fact have no humility as you claim is required to be Christian or Jewish or Pagan or whatever you claim to be. You are why people think Christians are jerks.

  • Excuse me?Are you a christian?Even Christ called the religious blasphemers hypocrites and snakes! Because they were liars and liked to think they were authorities on the scriptures! I dont appreciate this,especially when they cant open their eyes and look around nor read about whats around them! Even Richard Dawkins believes in God, but the bias world would rather lie to our children and bring them up without hope, than to admit their own deliberate frauds!This is a big problem to honest people!

  • Wrong again!

    Richard Dawkins does not belive in a god. He said that for their logicly to be an inteligent designer, it would more likley be aliens and there would be obviouse evidence. And since there isn't, that statment is just a "What if?"

    You are the hypocritical snake here. Scripture presents no evidence what-so-ever. Science has provided mountains of irriffutable evidence. No matter how much you ignor it.

  • I agree with you, science has provided mountains of evidence that is not scientific! The Bible was also written to be refuted, but when tested historically and scientifically, it stands up all by itself. Compared to just one of Dawkins statements: "It is as if the human brain were specifically designed to misunderstand Darwinism, and to find it hard to believe." This statement is biblical! God reveals himself through science, nature, the heavens, and created us to see Him! We havent any excuse!

  • How can the bible be taken seriously as a scientific document when the bible states that Pi is exactly 3. We know that a closer approximation of Pi is 3.14.

  • You are the one being unscientific here. You are talking about a discription of Solomon's Temple? I Kings 7:23. I certainly don't have the room to write about it here. But the Bible will invariably be found, on closer examination by science, to have accurate scientific insights. If you'er up for it, I will print it in your message box. Let me know. For God knows what He is doing. God said that Man thinks he is wise, but he becomes a fool.

  • Accurate insights? So you mean...talking donkeys, vanishing water, magical cloud beings...

  • So you can accuse and be arrogant, but if I offer an answer, well, sounds like you aren't interested. Typical! In the meantime 2 other people answer with cheap insults, and name calling. Again typical. You people don't have nothing.

  • You should check out cdk007's channel and watch two series:

    Evidence for evolution and creationism

    Origins the Series

  • Are you the one that made an accusation about the Bible being off mathematically for Pi 3.14? What happened? Did you decide just to ignor the answer or evidence? Thats not a very wise or scientific thing to do for anyone. You may be regreting the opportunities you've had, some day.

  • Kings 7:23-26 describes Pi as being exactly 3. This is of course wrong and any attempt to salvage this passage has produced only an approximation based on pure assumption regarding Hebrew units. If the bible was truly the inspired word of god, it should have had a chapter dedicated to printing Pi exactly to its millionth place. This would have been a calculation far beyond the intellectual limits of the authors of the bible and would have been reasonable evidence for some form of great....

  • ....intelligence. If that value of Pi could only be calculated by todays modern standards of technology and it matched the biblical version, then you would have an argument. However, having an answer which approximates Pi to 3.14 or claiming an inner diameter of ten cubits and a thickness of two hand breadths to give an approximate value of ~3.15 does not demonstrate divine knowledge whatsoever, because it is not Pi.

  • You sure are arrogant, for some reason. Are you the all wise?

  • Currently finishing a Master's Degree in Aero-Mechanical Engineering. That means I understand basic mathematics such as the correct value of Pi and how it is calculated and should be stated.

  • Very good, wish you were here in the U.S, we need more like you.

  • I'm in Iowa right now. I'm finishing up my Master's Degree at the UoIowa, although I done the Bachelor's in the UK.

  • lmao you're soooooo damn arrogant for knowing your shit >_>

  • I know, right? It kind of ruins the fun of just making shit up when you actually have reality on your side. I continued my argument with her in PM form and I basically broke her down to effectively calling me a tool of Satan.

  • Dawkins is obsessed with God! All he is doing is rejecting Him, like many before him.There have been many Anti-Christs, and many more will come. Dawkins isn't doing anything new. But he will die also, and he doesn't know anything about his afterlife, no matter what he believes in his own mind. There is plenty of scripture about Richard Dawkins, and many like him.Thats exactly why you and people like Dawkins should read it. If it were a lie, it wouldn't have out-lived every generation.

  • Do you believe in Hell? You must feel conviction! You were condemning yourself.

  • "Dr." Marvin Lubenow actually has a master or theology "degree" from christian Heritage "College". Sorry for the quotes, but he's not a doctor, theology is not a real discipline, and christian schools are not real colleges.

  • Boy, don't you wish.

  • There's no reason to wish. He is not a doctor, of any sort.

    I should have qualified my last statement. Christian schools, if they adopt a secular curriculum, are fine. But bible schools that teach lies like intelligent design (ID) are not really schools.

    An ID "biologist" is to a real biologist as a mentally retarded person is to medical doctor. No offense to mentally retarded people, but they would not make good M.D.s.

  • Ha, ha, you seem to be critically decieved by the lack of information that is purposely kept from you. I see it all the time. 1% actually find out for themselves. They are the wise ones. 99% of the rest float along on an intertube with a leak in it. They won't listen to you when you tell them they have a leak....thats the world today, and those 99% will either fall off the edge of a waterfall, or drown before they get there. Good luck, you'll need it.

  • Oh, and by the way, There's alot of difference between I.D. and Creation, but you wouldn't know that.

  • Many people know that. However the ID movement employs many of the same tactics and information sources the creationists use and ignores refutations of their positions in the same ay. Until the ID movement publishes something actually scientific, there is no obvious difference. The ID founders have admitted it was creationism with a twist, like pink lemonade is still lemonade.

    Why not share this truth you have found with everyone if you are so sure of it?

  • What do you mean share it with everyone? The evidence is overwhelming against darwinism! Especially the frauds! If it weren't for the frauds, you wouldn't have any "proof" Im not going to list them all! You know they're out there! If you don't, your so called scientists do, but they aren't going to tell you! Actually,all you have to do is look at a highschool science textbook. There are for sure the old proven frauds after 100 years still being pushed as facts for evolution! This is really sad.

  • "If it weren't for the frauds, you wouldn't have any "proof""

    So you're saying that DNA similarity, homologous genes, homologous structures, protein domains, domain shuffling, mutations, gene duplication, DNA segment shuffling, observed speciation, natural selection, the fossil record and selective breeding are ALL frauds?

    The only real fraud is piltdown man. Nebraska man was an honest mistake. Archaeoraptor was a mistake, too.

  • Of course not! You talking about fruit flies? Bacteria or insecticide resistance? You are looking at true scientific micro adaptation that has been proven long before you were thought of and beyond! The fossils are true too. The only fraud is the personal views that the secular atheist scientist have put on these fossils. We all find fossils and see things under a microscope, but thats as far as science can go. It can't prove it's offspring or any million, billion year old ancestry, thats false.

  • I gave you various OBSERVED MECHANISMS and EVIDENCE of MACROEVOLUTION yet you still claim that it's microevolution. What would it take you to believe that macroevolution is true? What evidence do you want to see?

    "In the past, bones from pigs, monkeys, alligators, horses, a dolphin, and even an elephant have been reconstructed into missing links between human and some imaginary apelike creatures."

    Wow! Give me one example please?

  • So why has this fraud been used for evidence for ape/man evolution to this day? Recent study has still proven him, Heidelberg man, Cro-magnon, are all human! Homo Habilis is bits and pieces of many different creatures and never existed! Austrolopithecines, are apes! Java man was based on a skull fragment and leg bone found 39' apart! Ramapithecus was a handful of teeth and jaw fragments that were pieced together incorrectly to resemble a human jaw, it's still in the text books, as another name!

  • Neanderthals are not Human. Genome sequences show that they are a different species of Homo.

    Heidelberg man is not human. Cro-Magnon is human. No scientist denies this. Yes, Australopithecines are apes. What's your point?

    The significant part of Java man is the skull. Scientists are not sure if the leg is from the same specimen or not. Scientists no longer think that Ramapithecus is an ancestor of humans.

  • If anyone has to resort to ANY fraud, it is out of desparation, and lack of truth.Real evidence doesn't lie, and doesn't have to. In fact it's impossible to fraud the truth, unless you are hiding it. In the past, bones from pigs, monkeys, alligators, horses, a dolphin, and even an elephant have been reconstructed into missing links between human and some imaginary apelike creatures. Almost any bone that is even slightly outside of the norm is assumed to be proof of some kind of transformation!

  • "If anyone has to resort to ANY fraud, it is out of desparation, and lack of truth.Real evidence doesn't lie, and doesn't have to. In fact it's impossible to fraud the truth, unless you are hiding it."

    Do you know how Piltdown man was exposed? Scientists suspected that it was a fraud because it did not fit the EVOLUTIONARY tree of life. Evolutionary scientists, themselves, exposed it as a fraud, not creationists.

  • Who's talking creationists finding the fraud? Is this more bias surfacing? I know thats all you have...Nebraska man was used as evidence of ape/human evolution in the scopes "monkey trial." If this was a mistake, there must be alot more out there, cause they don't use science to determine this outcome in the first place, because it fooled people for 100 years! Neanderthal is human, with a "condition." This was proven by a reknown paleontologist way back in 1872 when all this fraud began!

  • "Who's talking creationists finding the fraud?"

    No one. But you're claiming that Evolutionary scientists are dishonest. They are not. If they find out something is fake, they immediately expose it.

    "Nebraska man was used as evidence..."

    No. It wasn't accepted by the scientific community.

    "Neanderthal is human, with a "condition.""

    No, it isn't. It is a side lineage.

    You really should stop repeating creationist lies and instead start reading science books.

  • Then theres Lucy! Tell me,if there is so much evidence that we came from apes, why keep all the frauds?Science has proven that it is impossible for an ape to change itself to human! Many scientific reasons why! Why would you believe fraud and not science? And quit talking about the scientific community! They aren't magic! They are bias atheists in an influencial job!You think atheists are all honest? You don't know its an elite group of control freaks? Do you ignor their goals and bias cruelity?

  • There are no frauds used as evidence.

    Of course it is impossible for apes to change into people. That would be magic. Thankfully, evolution doesn't suggest anything like that.

    Yes, there are biases and dishonest acts in scientific work. However, it is minimized by peer review. Science is a self-correcting process. Every claim is tested and re-tested for assurance. If you know how peer review works, you'll understand.

  • You are using the same old tired dogma, that scientists without evidence have used ever since they presuppositioned this theory 200 plus years ago, with still no progress in the scientific world. The more we use science, the more it is disproved! Get real! Use your head, think for yourself, get rid of all the defense mechanisms they hand you and the unsuspecting public! Since when is it sciences job to prove God doesn't exist? Since when is it their job to set moral values, and undermine God?

  • I don't know if you know this but science never tried to disprove God. Science can't say anything about God because He is outside observable reality. We cannot scientifically test His existence. Evolution does not disprove God. It simply says that magic is not needed to make new species.

    Evolutionary biology has greatly improved modern medicine. It helped scientists discover the functions of many proteins. It helped explain drug resistance and many defects in the human body.

  • Yes,exactly,this is MICRO evolution and disease causing mutations! Not something adding something to completely change one creature into another! Thats Macro,or Darwinism,or an ancient accult and yes,thats science trying to disprove God, because they know there is overwhelming evidence for creation.What great advances are accredited to macro evolution?And why do they cut down creation science,when they know Louis Pasteur,among others, was a creationist? He studied micro-not macro, hasnt changed.

  • I already told you how evolutionary theory has improved modern medicine. It also improved biotechnology. All of modern biology would not make sense if evolution is false.

    There is no evidence for creation. If the earth is 6000 years old, radiometric dating would show that. If animals did not share common ancestry, we shouldn't find orthologs and homologous structures. But scientific evidence says otherwise.

  • And what you say,doesnt float. You have no foundation or scientific evidence against God, or FOR darwinism. Your right, you cant prove God, but you CAN prove His creation, His spoken Words, and the birth, life, death, and ressurection of Jesus Christ who is God. You can also prove his fulfilled prophesies down to the details, especially through the Hebrew nation of Israel, and trace his lineage back to Adam. So,what do you have? Darwin's book? Dawkin's book? Or a fact and fiction science book?

  • Of course I have no evidence against God. Like I said, His existence cannot be tested.

    Is ignorance your biggest ally? You've been ignoring the OBSERVED MECHANISMS and EVIDENCE that I have already posted twice.

    Yes, I believe that the Bible has historical basis. I'm a Christian, myself. I also believe that God created us, using evolution. Saying He did it magically cannot be tested or observed.

  • You claim to be a christian, and you don't believe God? You cannot be a christian and compromise with something that calls God a liar. Are you calling God a liar? Do you believe Jesus Christ came from an ape? Or do you believe Jesus Christ created the universe? Can't believe both, they butt heads. So are you a Christian or a hypocrite like the ones that crucified Him?

  • Yes

  • Where did I say I do not believe in God? The Pope supports evolution, too. By your logic, he doesn't believe in God O_o

  • LOL this