The Bible says in Genesis 1:24-31 that all land animals (so that includes dinosaurs) and people were created on the same day. The geologic record shows that the large dinosaurs died out at least 65 million years before humans showed up on the planet. Figure it out. The Bible is just old myths and legends, not truth. Religion is like history class - without the facts.
What amuses me is how those who believe in unverifiable god beings convince themselves that scientists are practicing their own religion, and that biologists don't dare question the ideas of Darwin out of some dogmatic refusal to upset the status quo and challenge their own beliefs. Nothing could be further from the truth.
It's an odd form of projection where the religious project their own jealous defense of irrational beliefs on anyone standing in opposition to them. Sorry, we're not playing.
@GermanChocolateCake if you knew all the Answers to All Mans problems ,but nobody listened to you ! , it wouldn't matter what you know because if "People" won't "Listen" there is no way you can solve their problems ! at anytime in Biblical History till now.....there have allways been scoffers and there allways will be "People" such as "You"....who think they are right ! , no matter what the Evidence to contrary..."The Bible" calls the people "God Haters"..! but in the end "EVERY KNEE WILL BOW !
@robbypjr I'm betting there's a mile long distance between what you and I call evidence. Yes there will always be scoffers because there will always be unsubstantiated, unsupported, irrational assertions. The rational mind, by default, is skeptical of claims that fall way outside of observable reality. And there will most certainly always be people like you who attempt side-step that basic rationality in favor of your preferred belief, for any number of personal reasons.
@GermanChocolateCake sidestep this G.C.C. how did we all get here planet earth ? and don't tell me big bang theory.and is there a purpose to "MAN" according to "Your Science"...not mine. and "WHY" does "Everything" Produce after its "Own Kind" ? no evolution from 1 thing to another thing !, same things produce same things...and If "You" had Absolute proof of where everything came from. and I and others wouldn't "Listen" what would anyone call those who won't listen to the TRUTH to Our Origin ?
@GermanChocolateCake and another just because you whent to alot of School's and studied different forms of education and have a bigger vocaberuary does not make you smarter or even wiser but maybe it helps lend "Credance" to what "God" has told us all along..."He is the Alpha and Omega" Begining and the End"..."when He Created everything you and me included don't you think he "KNEW" we would be having this "Conversation".and would eventually provide the Answers to all that we would talk about ?
@robbypjr Actually my education does indeed make me smarter than average. That's the point of an education.
If god made me, and knew everything that would transpire for me, and knew I wouldn't believe in gods, and knows that without any sufficient evidence for his existence I won't believe, then why doesn't he provide evidence sufficient to change my mind? Could it be that he isn't interested in changing my mind? Or perhaps the simpler explanation is that no god exists TO change my mind.
@robbypjr And he'll give me a straight answer that way? But wait, if he's god and he's real, he already knows what I expect and need in order to believe in him, so he should be able to provide it without any input from me right? Why should he require a specific mode of address to engage me in communication. Perhaps he's just being obtuse, stubborn, or fussy.
But hey, let's try an experiment. God, in the name of Jesus Christ I beg thee manifest a bacon-cheeseburger spontaneously on my desk!
@GermanChocolateCake "He" will prove he exists ! , but the (requirement is) you have to "Ask Him with all your Heart to do so"...just ask him to prove he exists to "you" and be patient and wait and see...
@GermanChocolateCake { " PROSPERITY MESSAGE A LIE , DECEPTION " }.... THE ONES GETTING RICH ARE FALSE PROPHETS OF GOD , DECEPTION EVERYWHERE IN PROSTATE CHURCH OF TODAY , BUT YOU AND I CAN NOT GO WRONG READING AND PRACTICING WHAT THE BIBLE TRULY SAYS...." AMEN "
@robbypjr " LIKE I SAID BEFORE " EVERY KNEE " WILL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE " CONFESS " THAT "JESUS CHRIST " IS " LORD " so in the end ready or not "YOU" will "PLAY"...AND IT WON'T BE "A GAME "..! BESIDES YOU SAID "YOU" WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE IS REALLY A "GOD" ...."JUST ASK HIM IN "JESUS CHRIST NAME "...AND SEE WHAT HE SAYS....." UNLESS OF COURSE YOUR AFRAID". THERE REALLY IS " A GOD"...AND HIS NAME IS "JESUS CHRIST"...."TRINITY" 1. FATHER 2. SON 3. HOLY GHOST "..ALL READY TO " CONVINCE YOU "!
@robbypjr { " JESUS CHRIST " IS COMING BACK SOON , AND I WILL NOT SUGAR COAT IT EVERYTHING GOING ON IN USA NATURAL DISASTERS AND OTHER BAD THINGS ARE A SIGN TO US CHRISTIANS JESUS IS COMING BACK SOON , LIKE VERY SOON , AND I PROMISE IF YOU AND OTHERS WILL NOR REPENT " GOD WILL " DESTROY " ALL OF YOU JUST AS IN THE DAYS OF NOAH...TAKE HEED MY DEAR FRIENDS OF THE HUMAN RACE , " EVERY KNEE WILL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE WILL CONFESS " JESUS CHRIST " IS LORD" { " REPENT AND EXCEPT THE LORD JESUS " } !!!
I read this on Behe's blog: behe[dot]uncommondescent[dot]com/2009/10/new-work-by-richard-lenski/.
But again, my primary issue is with the extrapolation. 1 in 12 populations of e.coli--after 31,000 generations--began digesting citrates through RM and NS....THEREFORE...RM and NS have sufficient power to account for all biological complexity on the planet and skepticism is unjustified.
First, I understand why my previous comment sounded as if I was denying speciation; however I did not intend to. I was referring specifically to artificial breeding where breeders do seem to run into a mutation wall (I'm not asserting that the wall really IS at the level of species; I'm only saying that as far as I'm aware, breeders (specifically) have yet to cross even that miniscule threshold). However I did not intend to nor do I deny speciation as a whole. (cont'd)
(cont'd #1) What I have issue with is the extrapolation from the evidence of speciation that one is unjustified in even being skeptical that THEREFORE RM and NS account for ALL biological complexity. You must understand what a breathtaking extrapolation this is. To say that one is not even justified in being SKEPTICAL goes so far beyond the evidence as to be absurd. And yet, this is precisely the state of affairs we find ourselves in...skeptics be damned. (con'd)
(cont'd #2) The issue with the e.coli and drug resistant examples lies precisely in the fact that we can study so many mutations. If there is anywhere we ought to find evidence of the power of RM and NS, it's here where trillions of mutations from 100s of thousands of generations can be studied in such a short period of time. However, despite all the adaptive mutations we’ve observed, we have yet to find evidence of any significant biochemical changes in these life forms at all. (cont'd )
(cont'd #3) More than that, the beneficial mutations we do see are often degenerative in nature. They result from a LOSS of genetic information or the LOSS of protein function. I’m not aware of any evidence that RM and NS have the ability to produce new complex machinery. But that is precisely what Darwinism theorizes they did. In fact, ALL of life is supposed to have developed this way from prokaryotes that you say have very good reasons NOT to develop further (end).
Second, there are some things that resaonably suggest limits to RM and NS:
Breeders have never even been able to cross the species barrier in the animal kindom...much less the genus barrier etc. There's seems to be a limit to what even the most highly skilled INTELLIGENT selector can do.
The studies on drug resistance and e. coli also seem to demonstrate a limit. In spite of simple adaptive mutations, nothing suggests these life forms were on the way to build new complex systems.
Again, the extrapolation is monstrous. Species adapt to their environment through RM and NS THEREFORE RM and NS produced homosapiens from a single celled organism.
Why is skepticism of this unjustified? More than that, why is it villified?
As for evidence of a barrier:
First, if Person X asserts that A did B; Person X needs to provide the evidence. Person Y does not have to demonstrate that A CANNOT do B in order to justify skepticism of the claim (cont'd).
This is the issue with calling everything "evolution." It's enormously equivocal. One can call part of the theory into question without questioning everything.
People believed in common ancestry long before Darwin. What Darwin contributed was the mechanism (RM and NS). And yet the evidence that his mechanisms can do what he theorized is enormously wanting.
I'm questioning the latter. Only your fourth piece of evidence (speciation) would serve as evidence of the power of RM and NS, but would still require a mammoth extrapolation. (i.e. Because RM and NS can produce two kinds of fruitflies that won't mate THEREFORE they produced everything.)
I'm still waiting for the evidence that demonstrates my skepticism to be unjustified.
1 in 12 populations of e.coli--after 31,000 generations--developed the trait for digesting citrates through RM and NS....THEREFORE...RM and NS have sufficient power to account for all biological complexity on the planet and skepticism of this extrapolation is unjustified.
Do all your other examples require the same leap? Just because RM and NS can do something doesn't demonstrate they did everything.
@MissingChurchill You tend to ingore the fact that biologists generally don't go around calling themselves Darwinists and claiming they practice Darwinism. More importantly, you seem to be ignorant of the fact that some of Darwin's conclusions have proven false, that scientists recognize that and will tell you so, and most importantly that the theory of evolution has developed so much more from its roots in Darwin's ideas.
We'll well past the point of relying purely on the works of Darwin.
I tend to ignore nothing my friend. Rather you tend to not understand my line of questioning. I'm referring to the heart of Darwin's contribution to evolutionary theory--a contribution that continues to provide a bedrock assumption of all evolutionary thought--namely; random mutation and natural selection are the two mechanisms that account for all of biological complexity.
It is this precise contribution for which I am asking the evidence.
@MissingChurchill Well there's evolution dot berkeley dot edu, you can google ENSI/SENSI, or any number of hard science sources on the web. Better yet, enroll in courses in you local college. Quit listening to what the creationist websites and propagandists tell you and get an education in the hard sciences.
I'm not asking to have the theory explained to me. I'm asking for the EVIDENCE for a particular part of the theory; namely, the creative power of random mutation and natural selection. I'm well familiar with the standard lines of evidence: e.coli, drug resistance, drosophila, peppered moth, etc.
I've yet to encouter any evidence that RM and NS have the power to develop new complex machinery. Unless you can point some out for me.
@MissingChurchill And I'm encouraging you to get a solid education in the topic from an accredited college on the subject (assuming you don't have one of course). You'll find out far more that way than trying to learn from me on a youtube commentary.
My question is not genuine inquiry from one who doesn't understand the subject. Of course I'm willing to be corrected if said evidence is presented, but my question is primarily rhetorical. It' a less assertive way of implying that said evidence does not exist and the fundamental premise of Darwinian evolutionary theory is unsubstantiated (meanwhile, skepticism is demonized as fundamentalism).
Assuming you've had the education you recommend, feel free to correct me.
@MissingChurchill Don't really need to. There are volumes of websites, research, scientific papers, and scores of prefessors and research scientists that can do that for me. You also seem to be stuck on Darwin's work as the core of modern evolutionary understanding. He was the seed, science has grown well beyond his work and even contradicted some of it. You'd know this if you genuinely studied the subject instead of relying on the rhetoric of creationist sources to inform you.
I can't help but think that you don't well understand modern evolutionary theory. Darwin's main contribution--random mution and natural selection as the mechanisms of evolution--IS at the core of modern evolutionary theory. The fact that much of what he's said otherwise has been dismissed is entirely irrelevant.
Which websites/papers do you have in mind? Point me to the evidence that convinces you I'm just a creationist parrot and my skepticism is unwarranted?
@MissingChurchill Google evolution and beyond Darwin. Plenty out there to read. I don't need to do your homework for you. It took me just a couple of minutes to find numerous articles on the subject, and what Dawrin presumed and what modern science has learned beyond or in contradiction to his assumptions. Do some reading.
And yes, I do tend to believe you're a creationist, but not to make assumptions too boldly, why don't you tell me what you think the origins of life and speciation are.
1. There is no clear evidence that random mutation and natural selection have the ability to create new complex biological machinery. You've found no articles providing clear evidence of this claim (contradicting me would be as sending me the link).
2. You continue to raise irrelevancies about how not everything Darwin said was true.
3. My thoughts on the origin of life have nothing at all to do with whether there is evidence for the creative power of RM and NS.
@MissingChurchill You're dodging the question. Clearly you must have some alternate explanation for the existence of complex biological life if you think current evolutionary models do not have explanatory power. So, what is your alternate explanation?
There is nothing irrelevant about how far evolutionary science has developed beyond Darwin's original premise. In fact, it is VERY relevant that science has developed beyond his ideas. DNA science is opening up doors Darwin couldn't imagine.
@MissingChurchill Besids, your creationist rhetoric is a well known straw-man. I need not address the straw-man as others have done it for me. Google "Allen Macneil rm ns" for a decent response.
An excerpt blowing your cover:
"RM & NS is held up by creationists and IDers as the core of evolutionary biology, and are then attacked as insufficient to explain the diversity of life and (in the case of some IDers) its origin and evolution as well."
Thanks for actually pointing me to an article, but you'll need to provide another. MacNeil's point is merely semantic. When I say "random mutation" I'm referring to everything he calls the "engines of evolution" (EOV). If you prefer, I'll reword my point like so: There is no clear evidence that EOV and NS have the ability to create new complex biological machinery. MacNeil doesn't even ATTEMPT to provide any...his point is semantical trivia. (cont'd)
(cont'd) Here's my only assertion: Science does not [yet?] HAVE a sufficient explanation for biological complexity--the accepted explanation is unsubstantiated. I think that ID remains a viable option, but I don't know that ID can be demonstrated scientifically. I would only say that it's perfectly viable given the absense of a naturalistic explanation. One need not have the correct explanation in order to assert that a proposed explanation (i.e. EOV and NS) is unsubstantiated.
@MissingChurchill I'll grant you that science still has a long way to go to have a robust explanation of biological origins. There's a lot of evidence providing factors that could have lead to the development of carbon based life. We've seen self-replicating RNA chains in the lab for instance. The point remains that there is still a great deal left to discover, which is fine, that's the whole point of science.
However, in order to begin to posit ID, you MUST have some evidence of a designer.
Surely you see that my point is not about "biological origins" (which science has no explanation of at all). I'm questioning "biological complexity" which science CLAIMS to exlain but which I assert it absolutely does not.
Again, my thesis is simply that one of the most confident assumptions in the field of biology today is hockus pockus, and contradicting me would be as easy as pointing me to the evidence.
@MissingChurchill "contradicting me would be as easy as pointing me to the evidence". I already have, there is a wealth of information on the web, and far superior information to be found in formal education. I recommend you seek both. Especially the formal education, as the web is a breeding ground for false premises and biased information all too often.
However, I'd say that there is far more evidence in current scientific endeavor regarding the complexity of
Clearly we've reached the end of your competence in the matter. I've asked you to point me to one article, one paper, one study that demonstrates the sufficiently creative power of EOV and NS. The two specific links you've suggested fail to provide anything of the sort.
Presumably you're familiar with the evidence for which I'm asking given that you're so confident in the theory...and certainly you wouldn't be so confident in the absence of evidence, would you?
@MissingChurchill The only thing we've reached the end of is my willingness to be a professor for you on youtube. I'm not going to teach you. I'm expecting you to have the integrity and intellectual honesty to study yourself. I simply don't have room to write a dissertation here, nor the time or patience. If you can't be bothered to get an actual education in the subject you are trying to discredit (using biased unscientific sources), then you really don't have an academic leg to stand on.
You seem to think our conversation began when I said, "Hey GCC, will you teach me?"
YOU began the conversation, my friend, because you disagreed with what I was implying. You assert that the evidence DOES exist...you just don't seem to know where.
I'm not raising the question because I haven't studied but because I've looked much deeper than my undegraduate. And my studies exposed this massive deficiency in the evidence.
For the fifth or sixth time, feel free to correct me.
@MissingChurchill But let me posit this another way. What is YOUR hypothesis regarding the origin of life, and what evidence do you submit to back it up?
@robbypjr and DON'T LISTEN TO ANYONE "WHO SAYS" THEY KNOW THE DAY TIME OR "HOUR" BECAUSE THE "BIBLE CLEARLY SAYS NOBODY KNOWS"..! SOMETHING HAS TO HAPPEN TO KNOCK THE USA OUT OF COMMISION BECAUSE WE ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHOI CAN PROTECT "ISRAEL" SO FOR THE NATION'S TO COME AGAINST "ISRAEL" MAGOG, KINGS OF THE EAST AND ISLAM COUNTRIES, "WE WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THE "PICTURE"...WHAT CAN THAT BE ? ECONOMIC COLLASPE, NUCLEAR BOMB WHAT ?
@robbypjr "Jesus Christ" his second coming soon...if you aren't a "Believer' you will be sent a "Strong Delusion" to "Believe in a Lie"...write it down for later reference...
So much of Miller's defense of Darwinism is based on the assumption that IF there were any good reasons to be skeptical of Darwinism, the scientific community would WELCOME such evidence.
That's just bologna. The scientific community will accept skepticism on virtually everything EXCEPT Darwinism. Darwinism is the most untouchable dogma in science; evidence be damned.
ID may not have an established scientific theory, but skepticism of Darwinism is easily justified via science.
no i didn't watch the "whole thing"."sorry".because us "Christians" remained silent so long , that's why I believe our "Country" is in the "mess its in , so i "Wittness" every chance i get". signed "Silent no More"...
@robbypjr: If you're saying that the country "moved away from christianity" and that is why we're in the mess we're in, I say bull shit. The last really, truly,found jesus (from the bottom of a bottle and a mirror after he snorted the coke off of it) president we had, Bush the Lesser #43 is the reason why we are in this mess.
@robbypjr Science is open to anything for which there is evidence. Therefore, provide evidence that Jesus Christ is lord (or even existed, and remember to define what you mean by lord) and science will be willing to engage you on the topic. use that evidence to form a testable, repeatable, demonstrable hypothesis, and you may be well on your way to a valid theory.
Fail to do that, and all you are doing is shouting your opinion at people who have better uses for their time (like doing science).
@GermanChocolateCake "I Will only use Bible Scripture to Answer, since anything else would be adding too,and the Bible Strictly Prohibit's that" ! ,1.Isaiah 42:8 "I'am The "Lord" That is My Name: and My "Glory" I Will Not Give To Another"..! , Isaiah 43:10,11 "You are My Wittnesses" says the "LORD" and My Servant Whom I Have Chosen,that "You" May Know and BelieveMe",and "Understand that I am He. Before Me there was "No God Formed",Nor Shall there be after "Me". I , even I am the "LORD" .....
@robbypjr "There Might be No Help for You" Except Jesus Christ"....."So Remember This One Thing (Verse) ..."All Who Call Upon The Name of The "Lord will Be Saved" ..."Like Calling On "Jesus Christ" when "You" Really "Need Help"....("REMEMBER")
@GermanChocolateCake and besides "Me" there is "No Savior"..! , Jeremiah 29:13 And "You" will seek me and "Find Me" When You Search for "Me" With "All Your Heart". Proverbs 2:4,5 IF You ...Search...As For "Hidden Treasures: Then You Eill..."Find The "Knowledge Of God"...Matthew7:7 "Ask and it will be given to "You": "Seek", and "You" Will Find": "Knock" and It Will Be "Open To "You". Hebrews 11:6 But without Faithout Faith it is "Impossible: to "Please Him",for "He" Who Comes To "God" Must Must
@GermanChocolateCake Hebrews 11:6 Believe that "He Is",and that "He" is a "Rewarder of "Those Who "Diligently Seek Him"...Proverbs 8:17 "I Love Those Who Love Me" and "Those Who Seek Me "Diligently" Will "Find Me" ! , Lamentations 3:25 "The "LORD" is "Good" to "Those" Who "Wait For Him", To The "Soul Who "Seeks Him"..! , Micah 6:8 And What does the "LORD" REQUIRE OF "YOU" but to do Justly, to "LOVE MERCY,AND WALK HUMBLY WITH "YOUR GOD"Leviticus 19:2 "You" Shall Be Holy,For "I" The LORD AM HOLY".
@GermanChocolateCake "Revelation 3:20 "Behold" "I" Stand At The "Door" And "Knock". IF Anyone "Hears" My "Voice" And "Opens" The "Door", "I" Will "Come In To "Him" And "Dine" With "Him" And "He With" Me"...John 20:2216:24 Receive The "Holy Spirit". "Ask" And "You" Will Receive", That "Your "Joy" May Be "Full"....Romans 10"9 IF "You "Confess" with "Your Mouth" "THE "LORD JESUS" AND "BELIEVE IN YOUR "HEART" THAT "GOD" HAS RAISED "HIM" FROM THE "DEAD" "YOU" WILL BE "SAVED"..!...( "SAVED FOREVER")
@robbypjr Save us from what? Science has saved us from several things already. Louis Pasteur, for example, developed some exceptionally important vaccinations and processes to save mankind from some rather nasty things. You can read his history at your leisure. Anyone can benefit from said vaccinations. Anyone drinking pasteurized milk is already benefiting from Pasteur's science.
@GermanChocolateCake "Who Do You Think Invented Science" ?////Yes it was "GOD JESUS CHRIST"...SO YES HE HELPS PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE NOT EVEN AWARE "HE IS HELPING THEM"...THIS IS ALSO "TRUE"...WHEN HE IS "ALLOWING" NAGATIVE THINGS TO HAPPEN TO THEM"...BECAUSE THEY ARE "OUTSIDE HIS "LAWS" , LIKE "HOMOSEXUALITY"...PUNISHED BY "AIDS"....SOME "CANCER'S ATTRITUBED TO "ABORTION"...AS IN BREAST CANCER IN "WOMEN" WHO HAD "ABORTION'S"...NOW THEY EVEN "LINK" "ORAL SEX" TO "CANCER" IN "MEN" AT THIS TIME"!
I think man invented scientific method as a logical outgrowth of rational thought and an effective framework for learning the mechanisms of the natural world (i.e. reality) around us.
If aids is a punishment for homosexuality, why do heterosexuals contract it? Why are there many forms of cancers that afflict people of all ages, genders, and lifestyles?
How do you demonstrate that what you consider immoral behavior is the cause of those diseases?
@GermanChocolateCake "Immorality" in general results in nagative response "Beastality" is what really caused "AID'S" , "Man and Green Monkey DNA "..."GOD" Sets forth Desired and Undesired Behavior" and if "We Go Outside His Law's" ...There is a "Consequence"...."Why Sraight People got "AID'S"...a Gay man for instance goes home to his wife after an affair and she get's it...maybe has a affair herself with another man etc.."Women" in Modern America' go to "SPERM BANK'S to get Impreganted "AIDS"
@GermanChocolateCake like i've tried to tell you over and over if "YOU" would "LISTEN"......."tell the Lord Jesus Christ" to prove he is real and "MEAN IT WITH ALL YOUR HEART"....AND HE WILL"......! oh Jeff Hagen
@GermanChocolateCake " I Bet You Didn't Know "Louis Pasteur:..Was A "Christian" ?...."GOD JESUS CHRIST"..USES MANY "CHRISTIAN'S" IN THIS MANNER...Some of the "Greatest Mind's" Were "Christian".."Such as "Einstien" for "Example" ....He can also use a non "Christian",..."Science Itself" is Constantly" proving the "Existance of "GOD".., Archeology is "Alway's Proving or at "Least" Finding Possible "Fact's"...Such as "THE SHROUD OF TURIN" "JESUS CHRIST" BURIAL CLOTH" , It is now "PROVEN" TRUE"....
@robbypjr Indeed I do (I was expecting this argument from you), but his spiritual views have little to do with his scientific achievements gained through rigorous application of scientific method. That's no argument for divinely inspired knowledge when you haven't even demonstrated concrete evidence for the existence of the divine. You might just as well claim that Xenu telepathically educated the great minds of our time.
Science doesn't "prove" things, it seeks testable explanations of things.
@GermanChocolateCake "Here's the Way it is "God Jesus Christ" is Coming back "Soon" ..and if your name is "Not Written"in "THE LAMB'S BOOK OF LIFE" YOU WILL NOT GO WITH HIM"...AND "THE BIBLE" IS "CLEAR"..."EVERYONE" WHO DOSEN'T EXCEPT "JESUS CHRIST"..."WILL BE SENT A "STRONG DELUSSION" TO BELIEVE IN A "LIE" AND THAT "LIE" IS "ANYTHING OTHER THAN "JESUS CHRIST" ..AND "I" BELIEVE THE "LIE" IS TO "EXCEPT THE "ANTI-CHRIST"..."THERE ISN'T MUCH "TIME" LEFT"...THE "BIBLE SAYS THERE WILL BE "SCOFFER'S"
@GermanChocolateCake "IN THE "LAST DAY'S" WHO WILL SAY WHERE IS THE "PROMISE OF HIS "COMING" ? AND THEN "JUST AS IN "THE DAY'S OF "NOAH" THE WORLD WILL BE "DESTROYED" !!!, WILL HOW WAS IT IN THE "DAY'S OF "NOAH" ? "PRETTY MUCH LIKE THEY ARE NOW...PEOPLE WILL BE GIVING IN "MARRIAGE AND "IMMORALITY" WILL BE "OFF THE CHART'S" "GAY MARRIAGE" AND ABORTION" AND "ANTI-GOD" SENAMENT'S" .."HAVE BROUGHT US TO THIS "POINT" "FASTER " THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN "HISTORY" ."ALL "IMMORALITY" REPENT & BE "BAPTIZED"
@robbypjr Hey great, you are able to observe that there are plenty of people doing things you don't like. You are able to make claims about the "end of days". You are able to do what people have been doing for millenia. Good for you. Doesn't mean they are wrong for doing what you don't like. Doesn't mean the world is actually coming to an end. Just means you're stating your opinions.
You type in all caps, which I don't like. Does that mean you're going to hell? Better not chance it.
@GermanChocolateCake Jesus Christ said I'm the Way the Truth and the Life no Man Comes to the Father but by Me..!....I can only Speak What The BIBLE Say's"....Its not "Opinion" "However."You" Think its a "FAIRY TALE"...AND THE BIBLE SAYS THAT ONE "DAY" "EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW AND "EVERY TONGUE "CONFESS" THAT "JESUS CHRIST" IS "LORD"..!!!!!!.....BECAUSE THAT'S HIS NAME, THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION ON "LORD" AND REPEADED RESULT'S ARE "EVERYONE CAN BE "SAVED" .."GOD" DOES NOT "WANT "ONE" TO PARISH !
@robbypjr "I can only Speak What The BIBLE says..."
Well see there, that's the tragedy. You are so saturated with bible superstition that your ability to think for yourself has been crippled.
However, you say it's not opinion, and I challenge that. What if I told you that I worship Odin, the All-father? What if I told you your unbelief and cowardice will deny you Valhalla, and that your god is false, would you agree that I am right? If you don't, then you've exercised opinion on the matter.
@GermanChocolateCake 'I'VE ALLREAD TOLD YOU "IT IS ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN TO ADD TO OR TAKE AWAY FROM "BIBLE SCRIPTURE'S"...but I can have a Opinion...."and My Opinion is....
@robbypjr ...No but really this is never going to be Solved by anyone if they are "ABSOLUTELY AGAINST A "GOD" OF ANY KIND".....I Believe "You" and alot of people do not want to be "Held Accountable" for "Your Actions"....but no matter because all will be "ACCOUNTABLE" TO "GOD" "JESUS CHRIST" One Day..and That "INCREDIABLE DAY ..is "VERY VERY NEAR...IN FACT IT'S ALMOST HERE"...BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH TO FEAR AS IT GIVES US ALOT OF "HOPE" IN ETERNAL "LIFE" AND NO MORE SUFFERING AND "HELL" ON EARTH"
@GermanChocolateCake Why would a Intelligent Person"..Reject Something that is absolutely "TRUE" and can be "Proven" if they would only "Stop" being so "Hard Headed" "Long Enought".to try and see if what I and "Million's around the "World" are saying is "Absolutely True".'There is a "GOD" and his name is "JESUS CHRIS.Knock and it shall be open to "YOU" "SIR" "Seek and "YOU" Shall Find" "Don't be a "GOD HATER"or "Someone" that "Says" How Can I hate "Something that Dosen't Exist" "EXPERIEMENT" !
@robbypjr Just because you and/or millions around the world say it's true doesn't make it so. Millions thought the world was flat, or that people would never visit the moon, and we see how that worked out.
You've done absolutely nothing to demonstrate it is true and can be proven. You've only said it is, and I've got exactly zero reason to take you at your word.
@GermanChocolateCake "You Remind "Me" of All the Million's how still don't believe we whent to the "Moon" or All the "Million's who at the "Time didn't believe the "Earth was "Proven Round"..."Just like so many differen't thing's it takes some getting used too ! , but as "I" Previously stated ..."All Knee's Shall Bow"..and "All Tongues Confess "Jesus Christ" is "Lord"...."Tell Me" .."Why would I or so many other's spend so much time on something like "Christianty" if it was not "REAL" ?...
@robbypjr Simple, because as Tommy Lee Jones put it: "Humans, for the most part, don't have a clue. Don't want or need one. They're happy. They think they have a good bead on things. A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals…and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago, everybody KNEW the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody KNEW the Earth was flat."
A comfortable lie is often taken over an uncomfortable truth, hence religion.
@GermanChocolateCake I'[M not wasting my time because "Jesus Christ" Loves "You" as much as me or anyone else Check-out "CREATION EVIDENCE MUSEUM"...on youtube..."JUST WATCH A FEW VIDEOS THERE ARE SO VERY MANY AND THEN "TELL ME WHAT "YOU" REALLY THINK" ?
@robbypjr What I really think about every creation "science" video I've seen is that they are heavy on the creation and very light on the science. I.E. rubbish.
And Jesus, assuming he ever actually lived, is at least 2000 years dead. Pretty doubtful he's loving much of anything these days.
@GermanChocolateCake "Go to Christian Evidance Museum" website see what Science and Christianity have uncovered working togeather and then tell me "GOD IS A FANTASY"..! PS CARBON DATING IS NOT RELIABLE AT ALL THE EARTH AND EVERYTHING IN IT IS ABOUT 9 ,OR 10, THOUSAND YEARS OLD 1 DAY AS THOUSAND YRS 6 DAYS TO MAKE THE EARTH AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND THEN "GOD" RESTED...AND WE HAVE 3 THOUSAND YEARS RECORDED HISTORY" DON'T BELIEVE ME ! GO TO THE "CHRISTIAN EVIDANCE MUSEUM" AND ASK THEM" !
@robbypjr If you are referring to the creation science museum, it is a known fraud with little to nothing in the way of actual scientific research and investigation to back up some of the demonstrably absurd claims the museum makes. Also, there are many methods of radiometric dating beyond carbon, and the reason they are useful tools is the corroborating accuracy multiple methods generate when applied to the same test subject. Nine or more methods giving the same general date is evidence of age.
@robbypjr The point being, you've taken the creationist propaganda hook, line, and sinker. I suggest getting an actual physics or biology (especially biology) degree at an accredited school, and then comparing what you learn from actual scientists and professors to the claims of creationsim. My guess is you'll come out of the experience realizing just how foggy your current perspective really is. I hope you do. Education is one of the most important endeavors of our species.
@robbypjr "Please just check it out and "Tell me what you think"..! after seeing what actual Science is really doing ! and not the LIES that have been perpatraded on most of the "World" ...Really Check it out and then tell me what you think watch some dvd's read some books watch their telacast on TBN channel 21 phx az its really worth while ! you can find many things to "Ridicule Christians" about even more maybe then you allready have if thats possible....I Can't wait to Hear what "YOU" THINK ?
@robbypjr I did, and what I saw made me laugh with amused resignation. Let me know when you fellas find dinosaur bones in the same strata as human bones and human archaeological samples.
@GermanChocolateCake "Your the one that's hilarious the "Truth" slaps "You" upside the head and "You" still don't see it....now thats really "FUNNY"..Look a little "Closer next time"......and "Pay Attention"..!
@robbypjr No matter how hard you try, you can never make believing in something for which you have no evidence and have to rely purely on faith sound like a rational belief.
If I said I believe with all of my heart that leprechauns exist at the end of rainbows, and that you can only know that I'm right through faith in leprechauns, most people would (justifiably) tell me I'm being absurd and irrational. It's precisely the same mechanism and justifiable reaction regarding god(s).
@GermanChocolateCake well "Jeff Hagen" "Loves German Chocolate Cake"..I was his best friend I know...because you talk just like him...."completely Brain Washed"....check-out Evolution Dirty Little Secret...on youtube...tell me then why you believe what "You" believe....and why can't people see your channel...are "You" "Paranoid" ?
@robbypjr Nope, just have no interest in sharing much with the youtube community, and for the record Evolution's Dirty Little Secret has so little grounding in actual current scientific fact it's laughable. It is, however, a cute propaganda film. The rest of your statement is speculation and ad hominem.
If you consider actually reading the bible and studying science, then comparing the two as "brain washed" I have to wonder what you consider impartial education.
@GermanChocolateCake there isn't time to consider impartial education "Jesus" is coming real soon ! , today for some people "people die everyday , and meet their maker ready or not , and the bible says if your not right with "The Lord'....then "Your Wrong".......
Considering that people have been saying that for at least a couple thousand years now, I'd say your definition of soon and mine are probably vastly different.
And I'm not really moved at all that a book of collected Hebrew fables claims I'm "wrong". You're wasting your time trying to convince me to believe as you do.
@GermanChocolateCake I would like to be around when "YOU" COME TO THE REALIZATION THAT "GOD" "JESUS CHRIST" IS REAL.....BUT "FORTUNATLY" "I" WILL BE "GONE" IN "THE RAPTURE" !
@robbypjr Thank you for saving me time trying to prove religious people are slightly retarded. I almost wanna pay street preachers money to keep doing what they are doing! 匕卄丹れＫち
@lthrlover "NO" that would be "Wrong"..because this "Country" was "Founded on "Christian" "Princeipal's Only"...."Nothing Else"..read all about it in any "Public Library" .Benjamin Franklin...Thomas Jefferson ..and so many other "Founding Fathers" and don't be so "Critical" of them...pointing out their "Mistakes" like Slavery'...."Yes" Slavery" is in the "Bible" is it "OK" ? absolutely not..but "GOD" Knew there would be slaves..not only in "Biblical Times" but "Modern Times as well" ...
@lthrlover "We All Have "Reaped" the "Good Fortunes" of "AMERICA" and We all should realize that wasn't a "Mistake"...but "GOD JESUS CHRIST"..."ORDAINED"..and "You and I and "Everyone up till now Have Reaped Riches Wealth Comfort Security'."Everything" from "AMERICA" "because of "Great People" Who" Followed 'Biblical Principal's"..."NOW DON'T DESTROY ANY LONGER WHAT OTHER'S FOUGHT AND DIED FOR"...AND SERVED OUR COUNTRY"...For "You and Me" and "Everyone"."Seek" and Ye "Shall Find"."EXPERIEMENT" !
ID theorist are now being published in peer review journals, and the consensus has grown ten fold since 2001. Unfortunately some of Millers own textbooks had to be revised because of pressure from his own peers. He was still using Haeckels embryos and got called on it. Miller is a liar. No one has advocated lesson plans to be taught on ID or textbooks until peer review process is complete and accepted. The video should be entitled the Collapse of Ken Millers argument.
@jymbo1969 They said that IDers would never get scientist to sign their Dissent from Darwin list which is now 800 strong and growing, They said ID theorist would never get published in Science Journals, and now they are. The former famous British atheist Anthony Flew, never thought he would believe in God, but after reading Behe's books and learning about ID, he renounced atheism as ignorance and became a Deist. Needles to say Richard Dawkins is not to happy about it, never say never.
@benthemiester I'm pretty sure it still isn't published in science journals. Can you name a few? Are the 800 signees legitimate scientists, or christian-funded sycophants? And naming a famous atheist that converted adds no strength to your argument. The fact is, ID has zero scientific backing. It also adds no new information to what we have, but rather removes it one step. Some intelligent being did this? What created the being? Etc. Evolution provides real, testable evidence.
@DirectInjected Would you like me to send you citations. As for the Dissent list many if not most on the list are not religious. There may be some Christians, Jews & Muslims but a large percent of signers are agnostic or atheist. What does a persons personal beliefs have to do with it? If you are a professional could you imagine some one disqualifying your opinion because your an atheist or agnostic? Its really very silly to me to even think like that, but what ever floats your boat.
@benthemiester I'll reply in reverse order. A professional being disqualified because of atheism or agnosticism? President of the US. Done, what's for lunch?
As far as the dissent list actually goes, I researched it. And found a deeper investigation into the signees. And found that of the 800 signees, something like 4 of them qualified as scientists who did not believe in evolution. The 800 number has been padded by non-scientists, creation scientists under investigation for fraud, etc.
@DirectInjected CONT.... and just on the first page alone I was able to easily verify their credentials. Everyone believes in some form of evolution. Thats not the point. Again, it is the assumptions of the modern Darwinian synthesis thats being questioned. (Molecule to man) (Common decent) Cambrian phyla to man assumptions with out scientific evidence in the fossil record or with in phylogenetic tree building. I don't think you quite understand the subject or the dispute.
@DirectInjected Please send your detailed findings. If your going to make these types of public accusations then I'm sure producing these findings wouldn't' be to much to ask for. There are some very prominent scientist on this list that deserve at least that much.
@benthemiester you can start with donexodus2's work here: watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM&feature=channel
Which public accusations have I made? Be very careful.
And the list itself is supposedly scientists who do not believe darwinian evolution could have brought life from single-celled organisms to what it is today. The cambrian phyla issue has already been resolved considering cyanobacteria's role. I think I do know the subject and dispute. I don't quite know what you're driving at though.
@DirectInjected I have already debated Don & his minions over this. I have shown him the errors he made when posting video from original list of one hundred. Funny thing happened since the first list of 1 hundred, and that is, list has grown 8 fold since then. Officially one person asked his name to be taken off. Don never mentions the names of other supposed signers who he says are angry because he knows people like me would actually research it. U said that u did research now your saying DON.
@benthemiester Unfortunately, spewing Discovery Institute crap does not constitute an argument. Even if the list did grow 8 fold, even if we assume that ALL 800 scientists believe in the list they signed, that still represents an insignificant number. 800 out of the hundreds of thousands of scientists? Wow, strong group you've got. The list is composed of random people, creationists, and scientists in other fields. Not worthy of anyone's time. Evolution is the most vindicated theory in history.
@DirectInjected Creationists and IDers categorically do not! I may be using evolution loosely, but you're simply using it WRONG."
Do yourself and I a big favor and look up the term the "evolutionary modern synthesis" and study it. This is different from the general usage of the word evolution wich can mean many different things or simply change over time. I can not give you a crash course on the modern synthesis. After you have taken the time to understand it then come back and talk to me.
@benthemiester It would be nice if you used the terms properly. It's modern evolutionary synthesis. And again, the elements which compose the modern evolutionary synthesis have little to do with the beliefs of IDers or creationists. Since this is something I've already mentioned, and a theory I already understand, I take this to mean that you have no new arguments. In such a case, goodbye. Because you have lost.
@DirectInjected Is that your way of telling me you didn't do any research at all but simply parroted Don X? This is what always happens when you ask for the so called evidence. You cant seem to cite anything. Simply saying its on the internet is a very weak response. I keep all my research data because I never want to be caught with my pants down when making claims. You made a claim and and could not produce data when challenged. It is you who have wasted my time. Your emperor wears no clothes.
@DirectInjected Please produce your findings. All you have to do is copy and paste from your files. I would like to know were you get the criteria for stating that only 4 are actually scientist that don't believe in evolution . Please back up what your'e saying (fraud etc) As far as I know everyone believes in some type of evolutionary process including creationist and IDers. Please learn what the evolutionary modern synthesis says. Again your using the term evolution in a fast and loose way.
@benthemiester Notice how I said, "something like 4". It means, "I'm not sure of the exact number, but it's extremely small." As far as you know, everyone believes in evolutionary processes? Are you smoking crack? Creationists and IDers categorically do not! I may be using evolution loosely, but you're simply using it WRONG.
@DirectInjected Everyone believes in micro evolution or adaptation, if u dont know the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution then I suggest u go go to google scholar and key in these terms. The scientific literature is filled with these constructs, hypothesis and facts. Jay Gould helped popularize these terms 30 years ago. Please cite an IDer or creationist who dosent believe in micro evolution. Please back up what your saying. So far u have made statements that u cant back up.
@DirectInjected Everyone believes in micro evolution or adaptation, if u dont know the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution then I suggest u research these terms. The scientific literature is filled with these constructs, hypothesis and facts. Jay Gould helped popularize these terms 30 years ago. Please cite an IDer or creationist who dosent believe in micro evolution. Please back up what your saying. So far u have made statements that u cant back up.
@benthemiester Micro evolution vs. macro evolution is like saying, I can walk to the park, but I can't walk into town. It's a matter of repetition of the first. Micro evolution leads to speciation, and this is beyond contestation. If you simply deny this, the debate is over, because you're lying.
@DirectInjected "As far as the dissent list actually goes, I researched it. And found a deeper investigation into the signees. And found that of the 800 signees, something like 4 of them qualified as scientists who did not believe in evolution"
"The list is composed of random people, creationists, & scientists in other fields. Not worthy of anyone's time" Now your saying its not worthy of anyones time. Cite your findings. This is what typically happens when u ask for evidence to be cited.
@benthemiester A 20 second google is all that's required to see that those who have signed the list are not in the position to contribute a valid opinion on evolution. I can't quite cite the internet, but between Don's work on the initial list, the multiple articles on google, and the fact that creationists will LIE to advance their position, mean I am convinced. The list is not worthy of anyone's time. It's a political move, full of lies and deceptions. Not worthy of anyone's time.
@benthemiester A 20 second google is all that's required to see that those who have signed the list are not in the position to contribute a valid opinion on evolution. I can't quite cite the internet, but between Don's work on the initial list, the multiple articles on google, and the fact that creationists will LIE to advance their position, mean I am convinced. The list is not worthy of anyone's time. It's a political move, full of lies and deceptions. Not worthy of anyone's time.
@benthemiester A 20 second google is all that's required to see that those who have signed the list are not in the position to contribute a valid opinion on evolution. I can't quite cite the internet, but between Don's work on the initial list, the multiple articles on google, and the fact that creationists will LIE to advance their position, mean I am convinced. The list is not worthy of anyone's time. It's a political move, full of lies and deceptions. Not worthy of anyone's time.
@DirectInjected Everyone believes in micro evolution or adaptation, if u dont know the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution then I suggest u go go to google scholar and key in these terms. The scientific literature is filled with these constructs, hypothesis and facts. Jay Gould helped popularize these terms 30 years ago. Please cite an IDer or creationist who dosent believe in micro evolution. Please back up what your saying. So far u have made statements that u cant back up.
@DirectInjected@DirectInjected As far as the dissent list actually goes, I researched it. And found a deeper investigation into the signees. And found that of the 800 signees, something like 4 of them qualified as scientists who did not believe in evolution"
I suggest u research a little more thoroughly. One day I took the time out to research as many names as I could.....................
Some people say that the beauty and complexity of Nature proves there must be a Creator. It is clear to me that nature is far too beautiful and subtle and complex for YHWH to have made it. He's so simple minded: This sin? Kill 'em! That sin? Kill 'em! Worship the wrong god? Kill 'em! Belong to the wrong tribe? Kill 'em! What a one-track mind. No creativity or complexity there.
Oh yeah! He did use his "conversations with a Berkeley professor" as one of his focal points in his cre-tarded presentation! Lol! The irony is so sweet!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Miller is a theist. And this is interesting, because Michael Ruse admitted that a majority of darwinism is philosophy and its secrets are hidden from the public. He confessed that most of it is propaganda spat out my intellectual elites ever since it began. I'm not a creationist, but I think both sides of this are interesting.
Don, I noticed your comment that you like Ken are a catholic. Given your obvious understanding of scientific ideas, I was wondering if you could try to give a definition of your idea of god in a way that a scientifically minded person might understand. I've heard many definitions before, but nothing that I really understand. Is it a deistic type of belief, that god started the universe and didn't interfere afterwards, or is it a more traditional type of personal god, or somewhere inbetween?
How did you come up with that idea? Certainly not from the bible. It is my opinion that the only way God is legitimate is if his "word" is true. Since we know the bible is not true in many respects and that is the only knowledge of the Christian God that we have, how can you say that he did this or that even though the bible doesn't say so? I'm not tryin to attack you, I'm just curious. Reply to this or message me with your answer, I am very interested. Also, I love your videos.
I just mean that I don't understand how people can say "Well, maybe God guided the evolution process" when the bible doesn't suggest that in the slightest. The bible is pretty clear about what God did and didn't do, and evolution isn't in there anywhere even thought we know evolution happened. Therefore, God's word is wrong and holds no authority over anything. It has no more facts than the Harry Potter series.
Robbypjr is apparently a freakin nutcase
msugarpants 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Bible says in Genesis 1:24-31 that all land animals (so that includes dinosaurs) and people were created on the same day. The geologic record shows that the large dinosaurs died out at least 65 million years before humans showed up on the planet. Figure it out. The Bible is just old myths and legends, not truth. Religion is like history class - without the facts.
ndrthrdr1 6 months ago
What amuses me is how those who believe in unverifiable god beings convince themselves that scientists are practicing their own religion, and that biologists don't dare question the ideas of Darwin out of some dogmatic refusal to upset the status quo and challenge their own beliefs. Nothing could be further from the truth.
It's an odd form of projection where the religious project their own jealous defense of irrational beliefs on anyone standing in opposition to them. Sorry, we're not playing.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake if you knew all the Answers to All Mans problems ,but nobody listened to you ! , it wouldn't matter what you know because if "People" won't "Listen" there is no way you can solve their problems ! at anytime in Biblical History till now.....there have allways been scoffers and there allways will be "People" such as "You"....who think they are right ! , no matter what the Evidence to contrary..."The Bible" calls the people "God Haters"..! but in the end "EVERY KNEE WILL BOW !
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr I'm betting there's a mile long distance between what you and I call evidence. Yes there will always be scoffers because there will always be unsubstantiated, unsupported, irrational assertions. The rational mind, by default, is skeptical of claims that fall way outside of observable reality. And there will most certainly always be people like you who attempt side-step that basic rationality in favor of your preferred belief, for any number of personal reasons.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake sidestep this G.C.C. how did we all get here planet earth ? and don't tell me big bang theory.and is there a purpose to "MAN" according to "Your Science"...not mine. and "WHY" does "Everything" Produce after its "Own Kind" ? no evolution from 1 thing to another thing !, same things produce same things...and If "You" had Absolute proof of where everything came from. and I and others wouldn't "Listen" what would anyone call those who won't listen to the TRUTH to Our Origin ?
robbypjr 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake and another just because you whent to alot of School's and studied different forms of education and have a bigger vocaberuary does not make you smarter or even wiser but maybe it helps lend "Credance" to what "God" has told us all along..."He is the Alpha and Omega" Begining and the End"..."when He Created everything you and me included don't you think he "KNEW" we would be having this "Conversation".and would eventually provide the Answers to all that we would talk about ?
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr Actually my education does indeed make me smarter than average. That's the point of an education.
If god made me, and knew everything that would transpire for me, and knew I wouldn't believe in gods, and knows that without any sufficient evidence for his existence I won't believe, then why doesn't he provide evidence sufficient to change my mind? Could it be that he isn't interested in changing my mind? Or perhaps the simpler explanation is that no god exists TO change my mind.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake oh ask him in Jesus Christ name....sorry..it comes naturally for me to ask this way..!
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr And he'll give me a straight answer that way? But wait, if he's god and he's real, he already knows what I expect and need in order to believe in him, so he should be able to provide it without any input from me right? Why should he require a specific mode of address to engage me in communication. Perhaps he's just being obtuse, stubborn, or fussy.
But hey, let's try an experiment. God, in the name of Jesus Christ I beg thee manifest a bacon-cheeseburger spontaneously on my desk!
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake { " FEAR OF " GOD " IS THE BEGINNING OF WISDOM " }
robbypjr 4 months ago
@robbypjr And the start of church profits. Funny that...prophet's profits.
GermanChocolateCake 4 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "He" will prove he exists ! , but the (requirement is) you have to "Ask Him with all your Heart to do so"...just ask him to prove he exists to "you" and be patient and wait and see...
robbypjr 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake { " PROSPERITY MESSAGE A LIE , DECEPTION " }.... THE ONES GETTING RICH ARE FALSE PROPHETS OF GOD , DECEPTION EVERYWHERE IN PROSTATE CHURCH OF TODAY , BUT YOU AND I CAN NOT GO WRONG READING AND PRACTICING WHAT THE BIBLE TRULY SAYS...." AMEN "
robbypjr 4 months ago
@robbypjr " LIKE I SAID BEFORE " EVERY KNEE " WILL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE " CONFESS " THAT "JESUS CHRIST " IS " LORD " so in the end ready or not "YOU" will "PLAY"...AND IT WON'T BE "A GAME "..! BESIDES YOU SAID "YOU" WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE IS REALLY A "GOD" ...."JUST ASK HIM IN "JESUS CHRIST NAME "...AND SEE WHAT HE SAYS....." UNLESS OF COURSE YOUR AFRAID". THERE REALLY IS " A GOD"...AND HIS NAME IS "JESUS CHRIST"...."TRINITY" 1. FATHER 2. SON 3. HOLY GHOST "..ALL READY TO " CONVINCE YOU "!
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr { " JESUS CHRIST " IS COMING BACK SOON , AND I WILL NOT SUGAR COAT IT EVERYTHING GOING ON IN USA NATURAL DISASTERS AND OTHER BAD THINGS ARE A SIGN TO US CHRISTIANS JESUS IS COMING BACK SOON , LIKE VERY SOON , AND I PROMISE IF YOU AND OTHERS WILL NOR REPENT " GOD WILL " DESTROY " ALL OF YOU JUST AS IN THE DAYS OF NOAH...TAKE HEED MY DEAR FRIENDS OF THE HUMAN RACE , " EVERY KNEE WILL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE WILL CONFESS " JESUS CHRIST " IS LORD" { " REPENT AND EXCEPT THE LORD JESUS " } !!!
robbypjr 4 months ago
check out "CREATION EVIDANCE MUSEUM" ON YOUTUBE
robbypjr 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Largenton25
I read this on Behe's blog: behe[dot]uncommondescent[dot]com/2009/10/new-work-by-richard-lenski/.
But again, my primary issue is with the extrapolation. 1 in 12 populations of e.coli--after 31,000 generations--began digesting citrates through RM and NS....THEREFORE...RM and NS have sufficient power to account for all biological complexity on the planet and skepticism is unjustified.
The logic leaves me confounded.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
@Largenton25
First, I understand why my previous comment sounded as if I was denying speciation; however I did not intend to. I was referring specifically to artificial breeding where breeders do seem to run into a mutation wall (I'm not asserting that the wall really IS at the level of species; I'm only saying that as far as I'm aware, breeders (specifically) have yet to cross even that miniscule threshold). However I did not intend to nor do I deny speciation as a whole. (cont'd)
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
(cont'd #1) What I have issue with is the extrapolation from the evidence of speciation that one is unjustified in even being skeptical that THEREFORE RM and NS account for ALL biological complexity. You must understand what a breathtaking extrapolation this is. To say that one is not even justified in being SKEPTICAL goes so far beyond the evidence as to be absurd. And yet, this is precisely the state of affairs we find ourselves in...skeptics be damned. (con'd)
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
(cont'd #2) The issue with the e.coli and drug resistant examples lies precisely in the fact that we can study so many mutations. If there is anywhere we ought to find evidence of the power of RM and NS, it's here where trillions of mutations from 100s of thousands of generations can be studied in such a short period of time. However, despite all the adaptive mutations we’ve observed, we have yet to find evidence of any significant biochemical changes in these life forms at all. (cont'd )
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
(cont'd #3) More than that, the beneficial mutations we do see are often degenerative in nature. They result from a LOSS of genetic information or the LOSS of protein function. I’m not aware of any evidence that RM and NS have the ability to produce new complex machinery. But that is precisely what Darwinism theorizes they did. In fact, ALL of life is supposed to have developed this way from prokaryotes that you say have very good reasons NOT to develop further (end).
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
(cont'd)
Second, there are some things that resaonably suggest limits to RM and NS:
Breeders have never even been able to cross the species barrier in the animal kindom...much less the genus barrier etc. There's seems to be a limit to what even the most highly skilled INTELLIGENT selector can do.
The studies on drug resistance and e. coli also seem to demonstrate a limit. In spite of simple adaptive mutations, nothing suggests these life forms were on the way to build new complex systems.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
@Largenton25
Again, the extrapolation is monstrous. Species adapt to their environment through RM and NS THEREFORE RM and NS produced homosapiens from a single celled organism.
Why is skepticism of this unjustified? More than that, why is it villified?
As for evidence of a barrier:
First, if Person X asserts that A did B; Person X needs to provide the evidence. Person Y does not have to demonstrate that A CANNOT do B in order to justify skepticism of the claim (cont'd).
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
(cont'd)
This is the issue with calling everything "evolution." It's enormously equivocal. One can call part of the theory into question without questioning everything.
People believed in common ancestry long before Darwin. What Darwin contributed was the mechanism (RM and NS). And yet the evidence that his mechanisms can do what he theorized is enormously wanting.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
@Largenton25
Evolutionary theory makes two important claims.
1. Common Ancestry.
2. RM and NS explain all complexity.
I'm questioning the latter. Only your fourth piece of evidence (speciation) would serve as evidence of the power of RM and NS, but would still require a mammoth extrapolation. (i.e. Because RM and NS can produce two kinds of fruitflies that won't mate THEREFORE they produced everything.)
I'm still waiting for the evidence that demonstrates my skepticism to be unjustified.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
@Largenton25
Let's see if I'm tracking with you:
1 in 12 populations of e.coli--after 31,000 generations--developed the trait for digesting citrates through RM and NS....THEREFORE...RM and NS have sufficient power to account for all biological complexity on the planet and skepticism of this extrapolation is unjustified.
Do all your other examples require the same leap? Just because RM and NS can do something doesn't demonstrate they did everything.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
@Largenton25
The lack of evidence for the power of random mutation and natural selection to account for what Darwin's theory asserts they must.
Skepticism of claims based on enormous extrapolations is not only justified...it is one of the required virtues of science.
Unless of course you have the evidence.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
@MissingChurchill You tend to ingore the fact that biologists generally don't go around calling themselves Darwinists and claiming they practice Darwinism. More importantly, you seem to be ignorant of the fact that some of Darwin's conclusions have proven false, that scientists recognize that and will tell you so, and most importantly that the theory of evolution has developed so much more from its roots in Darwin's ideas.
We'll well past the point of relying purely on the works of Darwin.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake we're*
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
I tend to ignore nothing my friend. Rather you tend to not understand my line of questioning. I'm referring to the heart of Darwin's contribution to evolutionary theory--a contribution that continues to provide a bedrock assumption of all evolutionary thought--namely; random mutation and natural selection are the two mechanisms that account for all of biological complexity.
It is this precise contribution for which I am asking the evidence.
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill Well there's evolution dot berkeley dot edu, you can google ENSI/SENSI, or any number of hard science sources on the web. Better yet, enroll in courses in you local college. Quit listening to what the creationist websites and propagandists tell you and get an education in the hard sciences.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
@GermanChocolateCake
I'm not asking to have the theory explained to me. I'm asking for the EVIDENCE for a particular part of the theory; namely, the creative power of random mutation and natural selection. I'm well familiar with the standard lines of evidence: e.coli, drug resistance, drosophila, peppered moth, etc.
I've yet to encouter any evidence that RM and NS have the power to develop new complex machinery. Unless you can point some out for me.
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill And I'm encouraging you to get a solid education in the topic from an accredited college on the subject (assuming you don't have one of course). You'll find out far more that way than trying to learn from me on a youtube commentary.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
My question is not genuine inquiry from one who doesn't understand the subject. Of course I'm willing to be corrected if said evidence is presented, but my question is primarily rhetorical. It' a less assertive way of implying that said evidence does not exist and the fundamental premise of Darwinian evolutionary theory is unsubstantiated (meanwhile, skepticism is demonized as fundamentalism).
Assuming you've had the education you recommend, feel free to correct me.
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill Don't really need to. There are volumes of websites, research, scientific papers, and scores of prefessors and research scientists that can do that for me. You also seem to be stuck on Darwin's work as the core of modern evolutionary understanding. He was the seed, science has grown well beyond his work and even contradicted some of it. You'd know this if you genuinely studied the subject instead of relying on the rhetoric of creationist sources to inform you.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
I can't help but think that you don't well understand modern evolutionary theory. Darwin's main contribution--random mution and natural selection as the mechanisms of evolution--IS at the core of modern evolutionary theory. The fact that much of what he's said otherwise has been dismissed is entirely irrelevant.
Which websites/papers do you have in mind? Point me to the evidence that convinces you I'm just a creationist parrot and my skepticism is unwarranted?
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill Google evolution and beyond Darwin. Plenty out there to read. I don't need to do your homework for you. It took me just a couple of minutes to find numerous articles on the subject, and what Dawrin presumed and what modern science has learned beyond or in contradiction to his assumptions. Do some reading.
And yes, I do tend to believe you're a creationist, but not to make assumptions too boldly, why don't you tell me what you think the origins of life and speciation are.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
1. There is no clear evidence that random mutation and natural selection have the ability to create new complex biological machinery. You've found no articles providing clear evidence of this claim (contradicting me would be as sending me the link).
2. You continue to raise irrelevancies about how not everything Darwin said was true.
3. My thoughts on the origin of life have nothing at all to do with whether there is evidence for the creative power of RM and NS.
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill You're dodging the question. Clearly you must have some alternate explanation for the existence of complex biological life if you think current evolutionary models do not have explanatory power. So, what is your alternate explanation?
There is nothing irrelevant about how far evolutionary science has developed beyond Darwin's original premise. In fact, it is VERY relevant that science has developed beyond his ideas. DNA science is opening up doors Darwin couldn't imagine.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill Besids, your creationist rhetoric is a well known straw-man. I need not address the straw-man as others have done it for me. Google "Allen Macneil rm ns" for a decent response.
An excerpt blowing your cover:
"RM & NS is held up by creationists and IDers as the core of evolutionary biology, and are then attacked as insufficient to explain the diversity of life and (in the case of some IDers) its origin and evolution as well."
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
Thanks for actually pointing me to an article, but you'll need to provide another. MacNeil's point is merely semantic. When I say "random mutation" I'm referring to everything he calls the "engines of evolution" (EOV). If you prefer, I'll reword my point like so: There is no clear evidence that EOV and NS have the ability to create new complex biological machinery. MacNeil doesn't even ATTEMPT to provide any...his point is semantical trivia. (cont'd)
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
(cont'd) Here's my only assertion: Science does not [yet?] HAVE a sufficient explanation for biological complexity--the accepted explanation is unsubstantiated. I think that ID remains a viable option, but I don't know that ID can be demonstrated scientifically. I would only say that it's perfectly viable given the absense of a naturalistic explanation. One need not have the correct explanation in order to assert that a proposed explanation (i.e. EOV and NS) is unsubstantiated.
MissingChurchill 6 months ago
@MissingChurchill I'll grant you that science still has a long way to go to have a robust explanation of biological origins. There's a lot of evidence providing factors that could have lead to the development of carbon based life. We've seen self-replicating RNA chains in the lab for instance. The point remains that there is still a great deal left to discover, which is fine, that's the whole point of science.
However, in order to begin to posit ID, you MUST have some evidence of a designer.
GermanChocolateCake 5 months ago
Comment removed
MissingChurchill 5 months ago
@German
Surely you see that my point is not about "biological origins" (which science has no explanation of at all). I'm questioning "biological complexity" which science CLAIMS to exlain but which I assert it absolutely does not.
Again, my thesis is simply that one of the most confident assumptions in the field of biology today is hockus pockus, and contradicting me would be as easy as pointing me to the evidence.
MissingChurchill 5 months ago
@MissingChurchill "contradicting me would be as easy as pointing me to the evidence". I already have, there is a wealth of information on the web, and far superior information to be found in formal education. I recommend you seek both. Especially the formal education, as the web is a breeding ground for false premises and biased information all too often.
However, I'd say that there is far more evidence in current scientific endeavor regarding the complexity of
life than for its origins.
GermanChocolateCake 5 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake
Clearly we've reached the end of your competence in the matter. I've asked you to point me to one article, one paper, one study that demonstrates the sufficiently creative power of EOV and NS. The two specific links you've suggested fail to provide anything of the sort.
Presumably you're familiar with the evidence for which I'm asking given that you're so confident in the theory...and certainly you wouldn't be so confident in the absence of evidence, would you?
MissingChurchill 5 months ago
@MissingChurchill The only thing we've reached the end of is my willingness to be a professor for you on youtube. I'm not going to teach you. I'm expecting you to have the integrity and intellectual honesty to study yourself. I simply don't have room to write a dissertation here, nor the time or patience. If you can't be bothered to get an actual education in the subject you are trying to discredit (using biased unscientific sources), then you really don't have an academic leg to stand on.
GermanChocolateCake 5 months ago 2
@German,
You seem to think our conversation began when I said, "Hey GCC, will you teach me?"
YOU began the conversation, my friend, because you disagreed with what I was implying. You assert that the evidence DOES exist...you just don't seem to know where.
I'm not raising the question because I haven't studied but because I've looked much deeper than my undegraduate. And my studies exposed this massive deficiency in the evidence.
For the fifth or sixth time, feel free to correct me.
MissingChurchill 5 months ago
@MissingChurchill But let me posit this another way. What is YOUR hypothesis regarding the origin of life, and what evidence do you submit to back it up?
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Don't look now but "Jesus Christ" is about to Come"..!....not to much longer...
robbypjr 8 months ago
@robbypjr and DON'T LISTEN TO ANYONE "WHO SAYS" THEY KNOW THE DAY TIME OR "HOUR" BECAUSE THE "BIBLE CLEARLY SAYS NOBODY KNOWS"..! SOMETHING HAS TO HAPPEN TO KNOCK THE USA OUT OF COMMISION BECAUSE WE ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHOI CAN PROTECT "ISRAEL" SO FOR THE NATION'S TO COME AGAINST "ISRAEL" MAGOG, KINGS OF THE EAST AND ISLAM COUNTRIES, "WE WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THE "PICTURE"...WHAT CAN THAT BE ? ECONOMIC COLLASPE, NUCLEAR BOMB WHAT ?
robbypjr 7 months ago
@robbypjr "Jesus Christ" his second coming soon...if you aren't a "Believer' you will be sent a "Strong Delusion" to "Believe in a Lie"...write it down for later reference...
robbypjr 6 months ago
So much of Miller's defense of Darwinism is based on the assumption that IF there were any good reasons to be skeptical of Darwinism, the scientific community would WELCOME such evidence.
That's just bologna. The scientific community will accept skepticism on virtually everything EXCEPT Darwinism. Darwinism is the most untouchable dogma in science; evidence be damned.
ID may not have an established scientific theory, but skepticism of Darwinism is easily justified via science.
MissingChurchill 8 months ago
I.D. movement founder admits ''It's not science''
Pope Benedict XVI confesses ''I'm a Catholic''
Bear owns up '' I defecate in wooded areas''
al3699 10 months ago
no i didn't watch the "whole thing"."sorry".because us "Christians" remained silent so long , that's why I believe our "Country" is in the "mess its in , so i "Wittness" every chance i get". signed "Silent no More"...
robbypjr 1 year ago
@robbypjr: If you're saying that the country "moved away from christianity" and that is why we're in the mess we're in, I say bull shit. The last really, truly,found jesus (from the bottom of a bottle and a mirror after he snorted the coke off of it) president we had, Bush the Lesser #43 is the reason why we are in this mess.
sol3a1 1 year ago
Science needs to open it self up to whatever the "Truth" is "PERIOD"..WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF ?..."JESUS CHRIST"..IS "LORD"..!
robbypjr 1 year ago
@robbypjr Did you watch the video? Did you hear the words?
"GOD DID IT!" is NOT an answer to ANYTHING!!!!!
acme181169 1 year ago
@robbypjr: There is no truth nor "trooth" (tm applied for by "troo christians" in your jesus nor your buy-bull
sol3a1 1 year ago
@robbypjr Science is open to anything for which there is evidence. Therefore, provide evidence that Jesus Christ is lord (or even existed, and remember to define what you mean by lord) and science will be willing to engage you on the topic. use that evidence to form a testable, repeatable, demonstrable hypothesis, and you may be well on your way to a valid theory.
Fail to do that, and all you are doing is shouting your opinion at people who have better uses for their time (like doing science).
GermanChocolateCake 10 months ago 2
@GermanChocolateCake "I Will only use Bible Scripture to Answer, since anything else would be adding too,and the Bible Strictly Prohibit's that" ! ,1.Isaiah 42:8 "I'am The "Lord" That is My Name: and My "Glory" I Will Not Give To Another"..! , Isaiah 43:10,11 "You are My Wittnesses" says the "LORD" and My Servant Whom I Have Chosen,that "You" May Know and BelieveMe",and "Understand that I am He. Before Me there was "No God Formed",Nor Shall there be after "Me". I , even I am the "LORD" .....
robbypjr 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@robbypjr "There Might be No Help for You" Except Jesus Christ"....."So Remember This One Thing (Verse) ..."All Who Call Upon The Name of The "Lord will Be Saved" ..."Like Calling On "Jesus Christ" when "You" Really "Need Help"....("REMEMBER")
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr
robbypjr 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake and besides "Me" there is "No Savior"..! , Jeremiah 29:13 And "You" will seek me and "Find Me" When You Search for "Me" With "All Your Heart". Proverbs 2:4,5 IF You ...Search...As For "Hidden Treasures: Then You Eill..."Find The "Knowledge Of God"...Matthew7:7 "Ask and it will be given to "You": "Seek", and "You" Will Find": "Knock" and It Will Be "Open To "You". Hebrews 11:6 But without Faithout Faith it is "Impossible: to "Please Him",for "He" Who Comes To "God" Must Must
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake Hebrews 11:6 Believe that "He Is",and that "He" is a "Rewarder of "Those Who "Diligently Seek Him"...Proverbs 8:17 "I Love Those Who Love Me" and "Those Who Seek Me "Diligently" Will "Find Me" ! , Lamentations 3:25 "The "LORD" is "Good" to "Those" Who "Wait For Him", To The "Soul Who "Seeks Him"..! , Micah 6:8 And What does the "LORD" REQUIRE OF "YOU" but to do Justly, to "LOVE MERCY,AND WALK HUMBLY WITH "YOUR GOD"Leviticus 19:2 "You" Shall Be Holy,For "I" The LORD AM HOLY".
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Revelation 3:20 "Behold" "I" Stand At The "Door" And "Knock". IF Anyone "Hears" My "Voice" And "Opens" The "Door", "I" Will "Come In To "Him" And "Dine" With "Him" And "He With" Me"...John 20:22 16:24 Receive The "Holy Spirit". "Ask" And "You" Will Receive", That "Your "Joy" May Be "Full"....Romans 10"9 IF "You "Confess" with "Your Mouth" "THE "LORD JESUS" AND "BELIEVE IN YOUR "HEART" THAT "GOD" HAS RAISED "HIM" FROM THE "DEAD" "YOU" WILL BE "SAVED"..!...( "SAVED FOREVER")
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake ( NOW CAN SCIENCE DO THAT "SAVE YOU" AND ME" AND ANYONE WHO ASKS" ?)
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr Save us from what? Science has saved us from several things already. Louis Pasteur, for example, developed some exceptionally important vaccinations and processes to save mankind from some rather nasty things. You can read his history at your leisure. Anyone can benefit from said vaccinations. Anyone drinking pasteurized milk is already benefiting from Pasteur's science.
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GermanChocolateCake Dont forget... Chicken Pox, Diphtheria, Invasive H. Flu, Malaria, Measles, Pertussis, Pneumococcal Disease, Polio, Tetanus, Typhoid Fever, Yellow Fever and Smallpox. Science #FTW Religion = #FAIL
HighPoweredLasers 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Who Do You Think Invented Science" ?////Yes it was "GOD JESUS CHRIST"...SO YES HE HELPS PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE NOT EVEN AWARE "HE IS HELPING THEM"...THIS IS ALSO "TRUE"...WHEN HE IS "ALLOWING" NAGATIVE THINGS TO HAPPEN TO THEM"...BECAUSE THEY ARE "OUTSIDE HIS "LAWS" , LIKE "HOMOSEXUALITY"...PUNISHED BY "AIDS"....SOME "CANCER'S ATTRITUBED TO "ABORTION"...AS IN BREAST CANCER IN "WOMEN" WHO HAD "ABORTION'S"...NOW THEY EVEN "LINK" "ORAL SEX" TO "CANCER" IN "MEN" AT THIS TIME"!
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr All caps makes it true?
I think man invented scientific method as a logical outgrowth of rational thought and an effective framework for learning the mechanisms of the natural world (i.e. reality) around us.
If aids is a punishment for homosexuality, why do heterosexuals contract it? Why are there many forms of cancers that afflict people of all ages, genders, and lifestyles?
How do you demonstrate that what you consider immoral behavior is the cause of those diseases?
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Immorality" in general results in nagative response "Beastality" is what really caused "AID'S" , "Man and Green Monkey DNA "..."GOD" Sets forth Desired and Undesired Behavior" and if "We Go Outside His Law's" ...There is a "Consequence"...."Why Sraight People got "AID'S"...a Gay man for instance goes home to his wife after an affair and she get's it...maybe has a affair herself with another man etc.."Women" in Modern America' go to "SPERM BANK'S to get Impreganted "AIDS"
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake like i've tried to tell you over and over if "YOU" would "LISTEN"......."tell the Lord Jesus Christ" to prove he is real and "MEAN IT WITH ALL YOUR HEART"....AND HE WILL"......! oh Jeff Hagen
robbypjr 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake " I Bet You Didn't Know "Louis Pasteur:..Was A "Christian" ?...."GOD JESUS CHRIST"..USES MANY "CHRISTIAN'S" IN THIS MANNER...Some of the "Greatest Mind's" Were "Christian".."Such as "Einstien" for "Example" ....He can also use a non "Christian",..."Science Itself" is Constantly" proving the "Existance of "GOD".., Archeology is "Alway's Proving or at "Least" Finding Possible "Fact's"...Such as "THE SHROUD OF TURIN" "JESUS CHRIST" BURIAL CLOTH" , It is now "PROVEN" TRUE"....
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr Indeed I do (I was expecting this argument from you), but his spiritual views have little to do with his scientific achievements gained through rigorous application of scientific method. That's no argument for divinely inspired knowledge when you haven't even demonstrated concrete evidence for the existence of the divine. You might just as well claim that Xenu telepathically educated the great minds of our time.
Science doesn't "prove" things, it seeks testable explanations of things.
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Here's the Way it is "God Jesus Christ" is Coming back "Soon" ..and if your name is "Not Written"in "THE LAMB'S BOOK OF LIFE" YOU WILL NOT GO WITH HIM"...AND "THE BIBLE" IS "CLEAR"..."EVERYONE" WHO DOSEN'T EXCEPT "JESUS CHRIST"..."WILL BE SENT A "STRONG DELUSSION" TO BELIEVE IN A "LIE" AND THAT "LIE" IS "ANYTHING OTHER THAN "JESUS CHRIST" ..AND "I" BELIEVE THE "LIE" IS TO "EXCEPT THE "ANTI-CHRIST"..."THERE ISN'T MUCH "TIME" LEFT"...THE "BIBLE SAYS THERE WILL BE "SCOFFER'S"
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "IN THE "LAST DAY'S" WHO WILL SAY WHERE IS THE "PROMISE OF HIS "COMING" ? AND THEN "JUST AS IN "THE DAY'S OF "NOAH" THE WORLD WILL BE "DESTROYED" !!!, WILL HOW WAS IT IN THE "DAY'S OF "NOAH" ? "PRETTY MUCH LIKE THEY ARE NOW...PEOPLE WILL BE GIVING IN "MARRIAGE AND "IMMORALITY" WILL BE "OFF THE CHART'S" "GAY MARRIAGE" AND ABORTION" AND "ANTI-GOD" SENAMENT'S" .."HAVE BROUGHT US TO THIS "POINT" "FASTER " THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN "HISTORY" ."ALL "IMMORALITY" REPENT & BE "BAPTIZED"
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr Hey great, you are able to observe that there are plenty of people doing things you don't like. You are able to make claims about the "end of days". You are able to do what people have been doing for millenia. Good for you. Doesn't mean they are wrong for doing what you don't like. Doesn't mean the world is actually coming to an end. Just means you're stating your opinions.
You type in all caps, which I don't like. Does that mean you're going to hell? Better not chance it.
(facepalm)
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake Jesus Christ said I'm the Way the Truth and the Life no Man Comes to the Father but by Me..!....I can only Speak What The BIBLE Say's"....Its not "Opinion" "However."You" Think its a "FAIRY TALE"...AND THE BIBLE SAYS THAT ONE "DAY" "EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW AND "EVERY TONGUE "CONFESS" THAT "JESUS CHRIST" IS "LORD"..!!!!!!.....BECAUSE THAT'S HIS NAME, THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION ON "LORD" AND REPEADED RESULT'S ARE "EVERYONE CAN BE "SAVED" .."GOD" DOES NOT "WANT "ONE" TO PARISH !
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr "I can only Speak What The BIBLE says..."
Well see there, that's the tragedy. You are so saturated with bible superstition that your ability to think for yourself has been crippled.
However, you say it's not opinion, and I challenge that. What if I told you that I worship Odin, the All-father? What if I told you your unbelief and cowardice will deny you Valhalla, and that your god is false, would you agree that I am right? If you don't, then you've exercised opinion on the matter.
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake 'I'VE ALLREAD TOLD YOU "IT IS ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN TO ADD TO OR TAKE AWAY FROM "BIBLE SCRIPTURE'S"...but I can have a Opinion...."and My Opinion is....
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr ...No but really this is never going to be Solved by anyone if they are "ABSOLUTELY AGAINST A "GOD" OF ANY KIND".....I Believe "You" and alot of people do not want to be "Held Accountable" for "Your Actions"....but no matter because all will be "ACCOUNTABLE" TO "GOD" "JESUS CHRIST" One Day..and That "INCREDIABLE DAY ..is "VERY VERY NEAR...IN FACT IT'S ALMOST HERE"...BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH TO FEAR AS IT GIVES US ALOT OF "HOPE" IN ETERNAL "LIFE" AND NO MORE SUFFERING AND "HELL" ON EARTH"
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake Why would a Intelligent Person"..Reject Something that is absolutely "TRUE" and can be "Proven" if they would only "Stop" being so "Hard Headed" "Long Enought".to try and see if what I and "Million's around the "World" are saying is "Absolutely True".'There is a "GOD" and his name is "JESUS CHRIS.Knock and it shall be open to "YOU" "SIR" "Seek and "YOU" Shall Find" "Don't be a "GOD HATER"or "Someone" that "Says" How Can I hate "Something that Dosen't Exist" "EXPERIEMENT" !
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr Just because you and/or millions around the world say it's true doesn't make it so. Millions thought the world was flat, or that people would never visit the moon, and we see how that worked out.
You've done absolutely nothing to demonstrate it is true and can be proven. You've only said it is, and I've got exactly zero reason to take you at your word.
Where is your evidence?
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake 'My Evidance" is in "The Pudding"..."German Chocolate Cake".....
robbypjr 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "You Remind "Me" of All the Million's how still don't believe we whent to the "Moon" or All the "Million's who at the "Time didn't believe the "Earth was "Proven Round"..."Just like so many differen't thing's it takes some getting used too ! , but as "I" Previously stated ..."All Knee's Shall Bow"..and "All Tongues Confess "Jesus Christ" is "Lord"...."Tell Me" .."Why would I or so many other's spend so much time on something like "Christianty" if it was not "REAL" ?...
robbypjr 9 months ago
@robbypjr Simple, because as Tommy Lee Jones put it: "Humans, for the most part, don't have a clue. Don't want or need one. They're happy. They think they have a good bead on things. A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals…and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago, everybody KNEW the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody KNEW the Earth was flat."
A comfortable lie is often taken over an uncomfortable truth, hence religion.
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago 5
@GermanChocolateCake I'[M not wasting my time because "Jesus Christ" Loves "You" as much as me or anyone else Check-out "CREATION EVIDENCE MUSEUM"...on youtube..."JUST WATCH A FEW VIDEOS THERE ARE SO VERY MANY AND THEN "TELL ME WHAT "YOU" REALLY THINK" ?
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr What I really think about every creation "science" video I've seen is that they are heavy on the creation and very light on the science. I.E. rubbish.
And Jesus, assuming he ever actually lived, is at least 2000 years dead. Pretty doubtful he's loving much of anything these days.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Go to Christian Evidance Museum" website see what Science and Christianity have uncovered working togeather and then tell me "GOD IS A FANTASY"..! PS CARBON DATING IS NOT RELIABLE AT ALL THE EARTH AND EVERYTHING IN IT IS ABOUT 9 ,OR 10, THOUSAND YEARS OLD 1 DAY AS THOUSAND YRS 6 DAYS TO MAKE THE EARTH AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND THEN "GOD" RESTED...AND WE HAVE 3 THOUSAND YEARS RECORDED HISTORY" DON'T BELIEVE ME ! GO TO THE "CHRISTIAN EVIDANCE MUSEUM" AND ASK THEM" !
robbypjr 7 months ago
@robbypjr If you are referring to the creation science museum, it is a known fraud with little to nothing in the way of actual scientific research and investigation to back up some of the demonstrably absurd claims the museum makes. Also, there are many methods of radiometric dating beyond carbon, and the reason they are useful tools is the corroborating accuracy multiple methods generate when applied to the same test subject. Nine or more methods giving the same general date is evidence of age.
GermanChocolateCake 7 months ago
@robbypjr The point being, you've taken the creationist propaganda hook, line, and sinker. I suggest getting an actual physics or biology (especially biology) degree at an accredited school, and then comparing what you learn from actual scientists and professors to the claims of creationsim. My guess is you'll come out of the experience realizing just how foggy your current perspective really is. I hope you do. Education is one of the most important endeavors of our species.
GermanChocolateCake 7 months ago
@robbypjr "Please just check it out and "Tell me what you think"..! after seeing what actual Science is really doing ! and not the LIES that have been perpatraded on most of the "World" ...Really Check it out and then tell me what you think watch some dvd's read some books watch their telacast on TBN channel 21 phx az its really worth while ! you can find many things to "Ridicule Christians" about even more maybe then you allready have if thats possible....I Can't wait to Hear what "YOU" THINK ?
robbypjr 7 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Check out"...."Creation Evidance Museum"..! Google it..!
robbypjr 7 months ago
@robbypjr I did, and what I saw made me laugh with amused resignation. Let me know when you fellas find dinosaur bones in the same strata as human bones and human archaeological samples.
GermanChocolateCake 7 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake "Your the one that's hilarious the "Truth" slaps "You" upside the head and "You" still don't see it....now thats really "FUNNY"..Look a little "Closer next time"......and "Pay Attention"..!
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr No matter how hard you try, you can never make believing in something for which you have no evidence and have to rely purely on faith sound like a rational belief.
If I said I believe with all of my heart that leprechauns exist at the end of rainbows, and that you can only know that I'm right through faith in leprechauns, most people would (justifiably) tell me I'm being absurd and irrational. It's precisely the same mechanism and justifiable reaction regarding god(s).
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake HOW COME I CAN'T VIEW YOUR CHANNEL ? IS YOUR NAME "JEFF HAGEN ?
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr No it's not, and I have my profile locked down. There's nothing to see there anyway.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
Comment removed
robbypjr 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake well "Jeff Hagen" "Loves German Chocolate Cake"..I was his best friend I know...because you talk just like him...."completely Brain Washed"....check-out Evolution Dirty Little Secret...on youtube...tell me then why you believe what "You" believe....and why can't people see your channel...are "You" "Paranoid" ?
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr Nope, just have no interest in sharing much with the youtube community, and for the record Evolution's Dirty Little Secret has so little grounding in actual current scientific fact it's laughable. It is, however, a cute propaganda film. The rest of your statement is speculation and ad hominem.
If you consider actually reading the bible and studying science, then comparing the two as "brain washed" I have to wonder what you consider impartial education.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake there isn't time to consider impartial education "Jesus" is coming real soon ! , today for some people "people die everyday , and meet their maker ready or not , and the bible says if your not right with "The Lord'....then "Your Wrong".......
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr "Jesus is coming real soon!"
Considering that people have been saying that for at least a couple thousand years now, I'd say your definition of soon and mine are probably vastly different.
And I'm not really moved at all that a book of collected Hebrew fables claims I'm "wrong". You're wasting your time trying to convince me to believe as you do.
GermanChocolateCake 6 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake I would like to be around when "YOU" COME TO THE REALIZATION THAT "GOD" "JESUS CHRIST" IS REAL.....BUT "FORTUNATLY" "I" WILL BE "GONE" IN "THE RAPTURE" !
robbypjr 6 months ago
@robbypjr Thank you for saving me time trying to prove religious people are slightly retarded. I almost wanna pay street preachers money to keep doing what they are doing! 匕卄丹れＫち
HighPoweredLasers 9 months ago
See the movie free on PBS.com NOVA | Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial
pchtermino 1 year ago
One thing I'd like to ask proponents of Intelligent Design is " If they are
going to teach creationism in schools are they only going to teach the
Judeo-Christian-Islamic version, or are they going to be open minded
enough to teach about the creation stories of other religions?"
lthrlover 1 year ago
@lthrlover "NO" that would be "Wrong"..because this "Country" was "Founded on "Christian" "Princeipal's Only"...."Nothing Else"..read all about it in any "Public Library" .Benjamin Franklin...Thomas Jefferson ..and so many other "Founding Fathers" and don't be so "Critical" of them...pointing out their "Mistakes" like Slavery'...."Yes" Slavery" is in the "Bible" is it "OK" ? absolutely not..but "GOD" Knew there would be slaves..not only in "Biblical Times" but "Modern Times as well" ...
robbypjr 9 months ago
@lthrlover "We All Have "Reaped" the "Good Fortunes" of "AMERICA" and We all should realize that wasn't a "Mistake"...but "GOD JESUS CHRIST"..."ORDAINED"..and "You and I and "Everyone up till now Have Reaped Riches Wealth Comfort Security'."Everything" from "AMERICA" "because of "Great People" Who" Followed 'Biblical Principal's"..."NOW DON'T DESTROY ANY LONGER WHAT OTHER'S FOUGHT AND DIED FOR"...AND SERVED OUR COUNTRY"...For "You and Me" and "Everyone"."Seek" and Ye "Shall Find"."EXPERIEMENT" !
robbypjr 9 months ago
ID theorist are now being published in peer review journals, and the consensus has grown ten fold since 2001. Unfortunately some of Millers own textbooks had to be revised because of pressure from his own peers. He was still using Haeckels embryos and got called on it. Miller is a liar. No one has advocated lesson plans to be taught on ID or textbooks until peer review process is complete and accepted. The video should be entitled the Collapse of Ken Millers argument.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester No. You're wrong. ID will never be taught in public schools. Never. And that's a good thing, because it's a bankrupt philosophy.
jymbo1969 1 year ago
@jymbo1969 They said that IDers would never get scientist to sign their Dissent from Darwin list which is now 800 strong and growing, They said ID theorist would never get published in Science Journals, and now they are. The former famous British atheist Anthony Flew, never thought he would believe in God, but after reading Behe's books and learning about ID, he renounced atheism as ignorance and became a Deist. Needles to say Richard Dawkins is not to happy about it, never say never.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester I'm pretty sure it still isn't published in science journals. Can you name a few? Are the 800 signees legitimate scientists, or christian-funded sycophants? And naming a famous atheist that converted adds no strength to your argument. The fact is, ID has zero scientific backing. It also adds no new information to what we have, but rather removes it one step. Some intelligent being did this? What created the being? Etc. Evolution provides real, testable evidence.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Would you like me to send you citations. As for the Dissent list many if not most on the list are not religious. There may be some Christians, Jews & Muslims but a large percent of signers are agnostic or atheist. What does a persons personal beliefs have to do with it? If you are a professional could you imagine some one disqualifying your opinion because your an atheist or agnostic? Its really very silly to me to even think like that, but what ever floats your boat.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester I'll reply in reverse order. A professional being disqualified because of atheism or agnosticism? President of the US. Done, what's for lunch?
As far as the dissent list actually goes, I researched it. And found a deeper investigation into the signees. And found that of the 800 signees, something like 4 of them qualified as scientists who did not believe in evolution. The 800 number has been padded by non-scientists, creation scientists under investigation for fraud, etc.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected CONT.... and just on the first page alone I was able to easily verify their credentials. Everyone believes in some form of evolution. Thats not the point. Again, it is the assumptions of the modern Darwinian synthesis thats being questioned. (Molecule to man) (Common decent) Cambrian phyla to man assumptions with out scientific evidence in the fossil record or with in phylogenetic tree building. I don't think you quite understand the subject or the dispute.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Please send your detailed findings. If your going to make these types of public accusations then I'm sure producing these findings wouldn't' be to much to ask for. There are some very prominent scientist on this list that deserve at least that much.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester you can start with donexodus2's work here: watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM&feature=channel
Which public accusations have I made? Be very careful.
And the list itself is supposedly scientists who do not believe darwinian evolution could have brought life from single-celled organisms to what it is today. The cambrian phyla issue has already been resolved considering cyanobacteria's role. I think I do know the subject and dispute. I don't quite know what you're driving at though.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected I have already debated Don & his minions over this. I have shown him the errors he made when posting video from original list of one hundred. Funny thing happened since the first list of 1 hundred, and that is, list has grown 8 fold since then. Officially one person asked his name to be taken off. Don never mentions the names of other supposed signers who he says are angry because he knows people like me would actually research it. U said that u did research now your saying DON.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester Unfortunately, spewing Discovery Institute crap does not constitute an argument. Even if the list did grow 8 fold, even if we assume that ALL 800 scientists believe in the list they signed, that still represents an insignificant number. 800 out of the hundreds of thousands of scientists? Wow, strong group you've got. The list is composed of random people, creationists, and scientists in other fields. Not worthy of anyone's time. Evolution is the most vindicated theory in history.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Creationists and IDers categorically do not! I may be using evolution loosely, but you're simply using it WRONG."
Do yourself and I a big favor and look up the term the "evolutionary modern synthesis" and study it. This is different from the general usage of the word evolution wich can mean many different things or simply change over time. I can not give you a crash course on the modern synthesis. After you have taken the time to understand it then come back and talk to me.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester It would be nice if you used the terms properly. It's modern evolutionary synthesis. And again, the elements which compose the modern evolutionary synthesis have little to do with the beliefs of IDers or creationists. Since this is something I've already mentioned, and a theory I already understand, I take this to mean that you have no new arguments. In such a case, goodbye. Because you have lost.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Is that your way of telling me you didn't do any research at all but simply parroted Don X? This is what always happens when you ask for the so called evidence. You cant seem to cite anything. Simply saying its on the internet is a very weak response. I keep all my research data because I never want to be caught with my pants down when making claims. You made a claim and and could not produce data when challenged. It is you who have wasted my time. Your emperor wears no clothes.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Please produce your findings. All you have to do is copy and paste from your files. I would like to know were you get the criteria for stating that only 4 are actually scientist that don't believe in evolution . Please back up what your'e saying (fraud etc) As far as I know everyone believes in some type of evolutionary process including creationist and IDers. Please learn what the evolutionary modern synthesis says. Again your using the term evolution in a fast and loose way.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester Notice how I said, "something like 4". It means, "I'm not sure of the exact number, but it's extremely small." As far as you know, everyone believes in evolutionary processes? Are you smoking crack? Creationists and IDers categorically do not! I may be using evolution loosely, but you're simply using it WRONG.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DirectInjected Everyone believes in micro evolution or adaptation, if u dont know the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution then I suggest u go go to google scholar and key in these terms. The scientific literature is filled with these constructs, hypothesis and facts. Jay Gould helped popularize these terms 30 years ago. Please cite an IDer or creationist who dosent believe in micro evolution. Please back up what your saying. So far u have made statements that u cant back up.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Everyone believes in micro evolution or adaptation, if u dont know the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution then I suggest u research these terms. The scientific literature is filled with these constructs, hypothesis and facts. Jay Gould helped popularize these terms 30 years ago. Please cite an IDer or creationist who dosent believe in micro evolution. Please back up what your saying. So far u have made statements that u cant back up.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester Micro evolution vs. macro evolution is like saying, I can walk to the park, but I can't walk into town. It's a matter of repetition of the first. Micro evolution leads to speciation, and this is beyond contestation. If you simply deny this, the debate is over, because you're lying.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected "As far as the dissent list actually goes, I researched it. And found a deeper investigation into the signees. And found that of the 800 signees, something like 4 of them qualified as scientists who did not believe in evolution"
"The list is composed of random people, creationists, & scientists in other fields. Not worthy of anyone's time" Now your saying its not worthy of anyones time. Cite your findings. This is what typically happens when u ask for evidence to be cited.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester A 20 second google is all that's required to see that those who have signed the list are not in the position to contribute a valid opinion on evolution. I can't quite cite the internet, but between Don's work on the initial list, the multiple articles on google, and the fact that creationists will LIE to advance their position, mean I am convinced. The list is not worthy of anyone's time. It's a political move, full of lies and deceptions. Not worthy of anyone's time.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@benthemiester A 20 second google is all that's required to see that those who have signed the list are not in the position to contribute a valid opinion on evolution. I can't quite cite the internet, but between Don's work on the initial list, the multiple articles on google, and the fact that creationists will LIE to advance their position, mean I am convinced. The list is not worthy of anyone's time. It's a political move, full of lies and deceptions. Not worthy of anyone's time.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@benthemiester A 20 second google is all that's required to see that those who have signed the list are not in the position to contribute a valid opinion on evolution. I can't quite cite the internet, but between Don's work on the initial list, the multiple articles on google, and the fact that creationists will LIE to advance their position, mean I am convinced. The list is not worthy of anyone's time. It's a political move, full of lies and deceptions. Not worthy of anyone's time.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Everyone believes in micro evolution or adaptation, if u dont know the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution then I suggest u go go to google scholar and key in these terms. The scientific literature is filled with these constructs, hypothesis and facts. Jay Gould helped popularize these terms 30 years ago. Please cite an IDer or creationist who dosent believe in micro evolution. Please back up what your saying. So far u have made statements that u cant back up.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@DirectInjected @DirectInjected As far as the dissent list actually goes, I researched it. And found a deeper investigation into the signees. And found that of the 800 signees, something like 4 of them qualified as scientists who did not believe in evolution"
I suggest u research a little more thoroughly. One day I took the time out to research as many names as I could.....................
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester ID is creationism repackaged.
See the movie free from PBS NOVA | Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial
pchtermino 1 year ago
where's the rest of the presentation , shame for pushing half truth.
rocamik 2 years ago
The right wing has me all verklempt! I'll give you a topic: Intelligent Design is neither intelligent nor design...discuss.
timmmahhhh 2 years ago 6
since there no god, "intelligent Design" does not work...period
BoldlySpeakOut 2 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
Imaginefree69 2 years ago 4
Il kill you XD
Krowges 2 years ago
And Hovind complains about Berkely as if i were run by the devil.
PoopShoot1102 3 years ago 6
Oh yeah! He did use his "conversations with a Berkeley professor" as one of his focal points in his cre-tarded presentation! Lol! The irony is so sweet!
SYLFan2008 2 years ago
I didn't know the ID founder actually admitted that it wasn't science.
TheRealBladeRunner 3 years ago 2
"I didn't know the ID founder actually admitted that it wasn't science. "
He does not need to, look up what scientific theory means.
gorilla199uncensored 3 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Miller is a theist. And this is interesting, because Michael Ruse admitted that a majority of darwinism is philosophy and its secrets are hidden from the public. He confessed that most of it is propaganda spat out my intellectual elites ever since it began. I'm not a creationist, but I think both sides of this are interesting.
braino2000 3 years ago
You are nuts. haha.
MisturEff 3 years ago
Why am I nuts? I didn't really claim any position.
braino2000 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are a faggot. That's why hAHAHAHHAHAAAHHHAAAHA
MisturEff 3 years ago
You're very mature and intelligent!
Oh, wait...
braino2000 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm Mr. F (Mister Ferrone). I am a fag.
MisturEff 3 years ago
Brilliant stuff by Ken Miller as usual, but, speaking as an alumnus of the University of California, I resent that remark! ;)
ianw115 3 years ago
Don, I noticed your comment that you like Ken are a catholic. Given your obvious understanding of scientific ideas, I was wondering if you could try to give a definition of your idea of god in a way that a scientifically minded person might understand. I've heard many definitions before, but nothing that I really understand. Is it a deistic type of belief, that god started the universe and didn't interfere afterwards, or is it a more traditional type of personal god, or somewhere inbetween?
theinquisitor 3 years ago
I believe he created matter and stepped back until we evolved. He is a personal God, but he doesnt give a shit if your brat wins his soccer match.
Oh, and Im not really Catholic, I just like some of their theology- dislike others.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
How did you come up with that idea? Certainly not from the bible. It is my opinion that the only way God is legitimate is if his "word" is true. Since we know the bible is not true in many respects and that is the only knowledge of the Christian God that we have, how can you say that he did this or that even though the bible doesn't say so? I'm not tryin to attack you, I'm just curious. Reply to this or message me with your answer, I am very interested. Also, I love your videos.
kja30 3 years ago
What part of the Bible must be figuratively false for my belief to be true?
The only part I can fathom this contradicting is Genesis, which by all accounts, is not meant to be taken literally anyways.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
I just mean that I don't understand how people can say "Well, maybe God guided the evolution process" when the bible doesn't suggest that in the slightest. The bible is pretty clear about what God did and didn't do, and evolution isn't in there anywhere even thought we know evolution happened. Therefore, God's word is wrong and holds no authority over anything. It has no more facts than the Harry Potter series.
kja30 3 years ago
I dont recall saying God guided it.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
Started it/guided it, same difference
kja30 3 years ago
Not really. One can turn on the oven and wait until the food is done, or they can hover over it, stirring every 2 seconds.
DonExodus2 3 years ago