Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
@ironman197268 and i suppose your a professor of biology with all the proof and studies needed to say why it cant happen???? or are you some sky daddy loving illiterate who's instinctual achievement was to not be outsmarted by a glass of water?
@braunblender Man that's got to be the Stupidest and most unintellectual response and insult I've ever heard in my life!! "sky daddy" Wow, that's original!!
Mutations do NOT add beneficial information to the genome. But if it makes you happy, then by all means keep on worshiping your god nothing and his apostles the big bang and evilution.
@leviterande Actually, no it doesn't. Actually do some research on it and stop relying on a self contradicting book made by a bunch of sheep herders in the middle east. Worship the one, true God, Thor.
@leviterande And yet I actually know what Evolution is and payed to the video. You also used the wrong form of THAN. Tell me, what makes the Bible the one and only truth out of all religions in the world?
@XxI3ioHazardxX and who the phuck said the Bible was the only truth? you did. r u on something son? I would rather believe that my left toe created earth .... but the bible... ahahah all religions are man made
@strengthinweakness1 As all well prepared people do...You really want all the pauses he takes to think if he just did it off the top of his head? Come on, If that's all you have in objection to this, just don't even bother to comment.
@strengthinweakness1 Or good information. A species of bacterium have been found to eat nilon in a nilon rich environment (The back of a nilon factory), but only they can eat nilon. This random genetic mutation added the ability, in the genes, to allow them to ingest and digest nilone strands. Scientists have recreated this with non-nilon eating bacteria and found exactly the same result. They mutated and gained the ability to eat nilon. Adding new information to the genes.
@uknowispeaksense First of all I'm not a creationist so you can take your pat "God of the gaps " arguments elsewhere. I have no problem with all of life forming through natural processes. I just found it ironic that there is a video explaining how organisms evolve without being able to explain how their underlying genetic code evolved in the first place. As far as abiogenesis, what do we know? Miller-Urey=fail. The sequence of chemical events that led to the first nucleic acids is not known.
@alsdyall even if we discover a process that gets there, we won't know if that is the process that actually occurred. There are many different ways to get to the same place in chemistry. The point of Miller-Urey was to show that molecules used and produced in biological systems can be created in from a totally a-cellular mix of chemicals, so it was NOT a failure. People often misconstrue the purpose of that experiment and say it failed to create DNA/RNA or living cells or some such.
This video is is a good example of why some Christians can't handle evolution, at about 3 minutes when it gets technical, they start feeling like they are back in science class and feeling stupid, so they shut down the thinking process, and just go..."Nooooo!" .... "...Jeeeesus saaaave meeee!"
Hey, kiddos, want to see a fairy tale that adults really believe? Google whale evolution and go watch a 7 minutes video on the PBS web site that shows how an ancient 200 pound wolf searched for food along the beach, wander out into the surf, and morphed (evolved) into a 100 ton whale. There is nothing scientific about it, but nonetheless, this is the fairy tale that some adults really believe! Especially comical are the nostrils migrating to the top of the head to become a blow hole!
I guess what some are simply saying is why hold on to Darwin's theory which claims to explain the origin of species when Darwin nor his followers can even begin to explain how this highly complex coding system engineered itself in the first place. How can you explain something at the organic/physiolocial level if you don't have an explanation for it's development at the chemical microbiolocial level. Belief in God or not one has to acknowledge that there is an intelligence that pervades life.
@alsdyall That is just plain dumb, man, sorry to break it to you, but you're saying that just because we haven't yet gotten all the answers in the understanding of our world, the only way to explain what we cannot understand is to believe that some divine creature made it all possible. Am I not right? How can you encourage people to believe in something that may or may not exist just because we do not yet have a full understand of how our world is build up? Messed up!
@UltimaDalle No you are not right. Your comment had nothing to do with anything I was saying. Maybe you should read my comment again. What I was saying was that Darwin's theory claims to have an explanation for the development of all life but it doesn't. It explains how some species adapt to their environment -that's it. Then I said it can be acknowledged that intelligence pervades all life. i didn't mention a divine creature. I didn't even mention a designer of this intelligence.
@alsdyall we don't even know for sure if the first "genomic material" was RNA or DNA or something else entirely. Early life may have been completely alien to us and only arrived in its current form after sampling other ways to do the same jobs. one form of organism won out and dominated, and thats why we all have DNA-based genomes, RNA gene transcripts, and protein structural components (albeit with some aid from RNA in some enzymes.)
@kotoroshinoto Ok. So you have this grand theory of evolution and when you examine it closely it is full of maybe, may have, could have, etc. Can't you see that's just as fuzzy and subjective as saying the Easter rabbit may have done it? Evolution should mean change we can prove or change we can predict or change we can use to explain phenomena. Otherwise you sound like a doctrinarian rather than someone curious about how like works.
@alsdyall the maybes and may haves are examples of how evolution could act in given situations, we can never know for sure exactly what path it took because the process itself erased all the evidence that it ever took place. The most successful organisms dominated and either killed the others directly or out-competed them. The first detectable traces weren't left until bacteria capable of growing in giant colonies evolved.
@alsdyall in addition you're arguing "you can't provide proof of exactly which path and steps it occurred in, therefore we say it never happened." Its the argument from ignorance in an even weaker form, because evolution has MUCH more support behind it, the parts we can't pin down exactly aren't weaknesses they're just unknowns. We have no samples of organisms from that era because they did not LEAVE any samples behind. Theres plenty of other evidence however.
@kotoroshinoto I never said evolution never happened. If we're talking about change. I'm saying it's an empty theory that rules out any other possibilites while failing to give a working mechanism as to how any of the species developed (not how species changed once established). In addition what is false about it is the assertion that random mutation account for all the information we have available in the millions of different species that exist within the quantifiable time frame we know.
@kotoroshinoto I always here about this plenty of evidence but never see it explained. When you look at the moths, the finches, the bewildering fossil record, etc you don't have much in the way of a compelling body of evidence at all.
@alsdyall That's the thing though: Despite the "Maybe's, May haves and could haves" Evolution DOES prove things and DOES predict things. Rather accurately. In science we acknowledge that we could be wrong. We do not pretend to know everything or that things are absolute. We could be wrong. We look forward to being wrong because that makes us closer to being right. We do understand that while not absolute the odds of us being wrong about evolution are the same as falling up.
@goratrix1799 That's just the thing, skip all the philsophy about science what are the predictions that random selection working with natural selection provides WHERE are the proofs that this is the origin of the vast array of species we see?
@alsdyall so, which do you want to discuss, evolution or abiogensis? I'm only asking because you have linked the two together when they are very different things. But while we're here, your postulation that there is no explanantion is patently incorrect. The way different atoms and molecules react to each other in terms of polarity and attraction is very well understood and the precursors to DNA base pairs have been found to occur naturally and form sponstaneously in vitro. Deductive...cont..
@alsdyall cont1..reasoning, logic and the level of understanding of the time periods involved leads to a pretty good ideaof how it happened. To simply say God did it is wilful ignorance at best. This mystical quality that creationists try to place on DNA demonstrates a high degree of scientific illiteracy and isessentially a ploy to cover for it and make in their own minds the "God must have done it because its so complex" argument acceptable. The problem with that is, it isn't. When you ..cont.
@alsdyall cont 2. have a good understanding of organic chemistry you realise that it's just the way it works. There are a set of natural laws that the different chemicals follow in order to do what they do. There's nothing magical or special about it. Further, to simply say God did it is disingenuous in that it is lazy and fulfils only the strange need many theists have to have an answer dor everything. Its almost like an insecurity. Its sad.
How do mutations add new information to the genome and are there any observed examples of this? LMAO I paused at exactly 0:50 seconds to write this then pressed play again after writing it. Still have a question tho, maybe I missed this in the video but how do we know the bacteria that eats nylon couldn't do this before nylon was invented, but just never had the opportunity to. Like I've never had sushi, but if I ate some I wouldn't be mutating a new ability I'd just be eating something new.
@Drunkenprophet23 The specific enzymes needed to digest nylon could only digest nylon and nothing else. Enzymes are complex and specialised proteins that are highly unlikely (if not impossible) to come into existence before what they would have to adapt to digest does. No offence intended, but this is almost like asking why Windex couldn't have existed before windows were invented, if you catch my drift?
@FactThis Thanks for the answer. I know just enough about biology to barely get by, so I ask stupid questions sometimes. But I'm not afraid to be stupid so I should get points for that. Do you know any other examples of observed mutations, or do you know good places on the web to look? I prefer video's to long reading. Thanks again.
@Drunkenprophet23 I'm not a geneticist (my biological training is more ecological), and I can't list many specific instances off the top of my head, although antibiotic resistant bacteria spring to mind, as does emerging patterns of HIV resistance in parts of Africa. Websites such as talkorigins(dot)org has some useful information, and pubmed has a wealth of biology related papers.
It's always good to ask questions (even if you think they're stupid). And you're very welcome.
OK, I clicked on your user name and I subscribed to your channel. Now, when do I get my free cake? Just kidding! I enjoy your educational videos on evolution. That's a sweet enough treat for me! Keep up the good work!
It goes something like this. Boys, we have to figure out how the universe came to be. Oh, and you cant say that a Supreme being made it all. Now get to work. Remember, whatever you come up with cant be absolutely proven or disproven so just come up with something and agree on it.
So the first claim, that random mutations are selected and create different forms of life, is unsustained. The second problem is that there are a vast number of complex systems in nature, and no matter how unglamorous this problem is, no matter how people try to look the other way, the fact is that a huge number of highly complex systems in nature cannot be plausibly accounted for in terms of a gradual build-up of small random mutations. - Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis
Mutations as a catalyst for evolution are thoroughly debunked. See Cornell University's Dr. John Sanford, Genetic Entropy and The Mystery of The Genome. The human genome is deteriorating via the accumulation of mutations. Overall, mutations have the sum impact of being deleterious. Mutations and natural selection don't evolve anything - macro evolution is a fairy tale for adults.
@achilles197474 wrote: "A simple brain does not evolve into a complex brain."
I repeat: Speak for yourself, retard.
achilles wrote: "See... Dr. John Sanford..."
Another intellectual who, as he inches closer to death, has latched on to the judeo-christian superstition because it promises him eternal life. No different than any other intellectual who claims alliance with any other religion which offers the same promise...
... and certainly not a convincing argument for intelligent design.
John Sanford is not has published 2 articles on genetic entropy. they have received little attention from the scientific community..u call speciation an adult fairy tale?..what do u call the story where a man is created by mud from the transcendent, all powerful, creator of the universe, and where a woman is then sculpted from his rib?..that's your believable, serious alternative?..would u like a link debunking Sanford's bullshit?
@itzahazylife It is not my fault that you can't compete with Sanford. Your are not even close to being in his league when it comes to understanding the impact of mutations on the genome. This is obviously unsettling to you, but when you are wrong you are wrong. Sanford has 25 genetic patents and is the inventor of the gene gun. "Random mutations consistently destroy information." - P. 14 Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome.
you're right..i don't know more than Sanford. i'm not a scientist. great job pointing that out..but,i'll tell u who does..the rest of the scientific community who have given his measly 2 articles little attention..when u say "random mutations consistently destroy information" u are basically saying that mutations are consistently harmful, right? but, the thing is,beneficial mutations,while quite rare,have been found to occur with enough frequency to allow for natural selection.
@itzahazylife First, I really appreciate your sincere responses and cordial tone. But, "good" mutations do not occur frequently enough to drive evolution. You need to read Sanford's book. He thoroughly addresses this issue with pro and con arguments. "Selection cannot rescue the genome." P. 69 Also, see Chapter 9, Can Natural Selection Create?
Listen @achilles197474-whether a mutation is BENEFICIAL is not that easy to say cause it depends on the environment- the same trait/mutation can be useless or even deleterious in one environment but turn out to be priceless in another. Besides mutation may happen way to seldomly in one organism to drive its evoultion, but evolution has never been reported in or attributed to single organisms-it happens to whole populations At least TRY to understand things before you start criticizing them
Do said that a deletion of a single letter would be likely to create a stop code (just by probability I assume). But wouldn't it ruin the entire DNA "text" after the stop code? till the end of the DNA? Shoudn't that change, say, half of the entire DNA?
When we have for example chicken's egg forming(is this right word?) and needed information for that is in DNA, how does that DNA information come to act. How it and actual result is linked together?
No se on hyvä että meni vain tosi vähän oli. Yritetään uudelleen. Eli kun meillä on informaatio esim. jostain prosessista koodattuna organismiin ja sitten on varsinainen prosessi - vaikkapa maitohampaiden poisto ja uusien muodostus - niin mikä on se menetelmä jolla lopputulos toteutetaan annetun informaation (geneettinen koodi) perusteella?
Meillä on siis "piirustukset" ja lopputulos. Nyt siis haetaan informaation lukumenetelmää ja sen käytännön toteuttamistapaa.
@Taaplari Hmmm.. Meinaatko nyt sitten proteiinisynteesiä? Eli kun DNA:sta aletaan lukea tiettyä koodia, sen kaksoiskierre avataan ensin, ja luetaan käänteiseksi RNA molekyyliksi. Tämä RNA molekyyli viedään sitten solun ribosomien luettavaksi, joissa RNA:n koodi tulkitaan kodonien mukaan aminohappoketjuksi, eli proteiiniksi. Sitten riippuen proteiinin tarkoituksesta, se kuljetetaan tiettyjen soluelimien kautta soluun tai sen ulkopuolelle, jossa se vaikuttaa tietyllä tavalla.
Valitettavasti olen täysi maallikko näissä asioissa.
Missä muodossa on tieto esim. siitä että "poistetaanpa nyt tuo hammas ja valmistetaan siihen tilalle tämän muotoinen uusi hammas"? Siihen nimittäin tarvitaan muutama pätkä koodia. Pelkkä määrätyn muotoisen hampaan valmistaminen ympäröivistä aineista vaatii naurettavan pajon erinäisiä huomioitavia asioita ja prosesseja.
@Taaplari Hmmm.. Ehkä tämä on parempi siirtää yksityisviestien puolelle, ei kyllä riitä tuben kommenttipalstoil tilaa. Yritän parhaani mukaa selittää tätä hommaa siitäkin huolimatta.
here is the hypocrisy, whenever something is explained in a detail that makes me watch the video 3 times to gain a basic understanding of evolutionary biology. The comments from the clown crew never refute the data on the video. Mainly due to these deluded individuals that cannot comprehend and throw out non sequiter and red herring arguments. Hello they are not going to get it! this is an area that will only be battled with education and basic structure to the next generation. help them!
Your video does have more info than others. Yet you are just merely characterizing types of mutations that are see in the lab but you are not giving us dtailed mechanism that answer HOW? Just look at a full arrow mechanism in orgo to see what kind detail I'm talking about. Try to answer the question nature asking HOW? What the causality? Quantum or what? Why do corrective enzymes fail, etc? Go beyond what know.
I'm amazed how some people get so upset and react like their world is crumbling, just because Evolution has been found to be the driving force for the current diversity of life, or Genetics the mechanism for life existing... I've never found this to contradict Theological scripture such as Genesis, only that such texts use language meant for people who knew nothing about DNA, Molecular Biology, etc.. When a child asks you "how are babies made", most will talk about Birds & Bees, same in Genesis
Can someone explain to me how God and evolution can exist together? I have a hard time understanding it because it seems that they would contradict themselves. For example, the bible never mentions anything about adam and eve evolving, unless the person who wrote the book of gensis forgot to leave out the fact that we evolved from a common ape like ancestor.
@DANgerKim if you take the bible non-literally then it could go together but the idea of it being literal cannot go together. thats the problem with some christians is that they will not accept that the bible is not literal but then again theres stuff that we can demonstrate to be not literally true
@patrickledford420 The style of writing in the New Testament is literal. Yes, Jesus rose from the dead the third day, showed himself to everyone, and flew up to Heaven. Now if you're going to mince the word "everyone" by all means, do so, we won't stop idiots trying to be themselves.
What you have never seen, you can deny you have never seen, but you cannot say that it never happened, because you never saw it NOT happen, nor can you prove it so.
@toasterder so, the old testament isnt literal? its not my burden to prove a negative, its yours to show me some evidence. evolution isnt supposed to create life, how could you say that if you really watched these videos? evolution is just change in living things which is a fact. the theory explains how it happens, please go watch some more of these vids
@toasterder I think you must think of evolution as some kind of philosophy of everything, or something like a religion. Even if we ignore for the moment that science is merely a set of technical methods, the theory of evolution is just an attempt to explain how animals change over time.
Saying "evolution cannot create life" is like saying that the boulder rolling down a hill can't push itself down the hill. Which is blindingly obvious.
All this is conceptual mathematics that created everything. I think the atheists believe that " existence" created the mathematics but deists believe that the mathematics created existence. If you believe that the mathematics created existence then who created the mathematics? An interesting question is how did mitosis cells know how to become meiosis? They made several failed attempts until success, and our evolution began.
@patrickledford420 I fully agree the cells didn't know anything but the whole of evolution depended on that decission. Why would something decide to change from a totally selfish gene attitude of subdivision to an altruistic position of meiosis.
Just what number is this on the set of dice that created your world?
@petebax1 you again said "decission" and "decide" there was NO decision it was chemical reactions there was no choice. i think you need to go look up cdk007, aronra watch some more of dons videos and seriously think about how what your thinking about evolved
@patrickledford420 You are teaching the sames theory that einstein laughed at with his dice quip. Even if everything is created by a throw of a dice something has to throw it. Also meiosis is a concept and it needs conceptual mathematics to work also created by chance or the tooth fairy. Try learning the difference between facts, beliefs and fantasies before you try and teach others.
People who don't know the difference need medical help.
@petebax1 what theory did i talk about that einstein laughed at? where at all did i say anything about a theory? how the hell does meosis need conceptual mathematics to work? its simple biology and molecular biology. i know the difference between facts, fantasy and beleifs i really dont WTF you are talking about
"Since a gene doesnt have another function (duplicate), it would have accrued lots of mutations had it been there from the beginning as theres nothing selecting against it, and remember mutations occur at a set rate."
OR do you mean that both are expressed, however the mutation of the duplicated gene won't affect the production of the necessary protein, therefore the cell can produce mutated proteins with no ill effect.
But how is this not evidence of intelligent design? Screw creationism, I'm no christian. If I claim any belief system, it would be Taoism. But I KNOW there is a spirit, there are dimensions beyond our own, physics is finding them. So how does that play into this evolution theory? And how does the fact that we, an intelligent being no doubt, creating a mutation in a DNA sequence, isn't evidence of Intelligent Design. We did it, and we're intelligent aren't we. Maybe our creator was less than God.
First: This is an argument against Young Earth creationism.
Second: How do you "know" there is a soul?
Third: The dimensions "beyond our own" that string theory HYPOTHESISES about (aka. not taken as theory yet - yes, the title is a tad misleading) are still in our universe; they are not supernatural or spiritual.
Fourth: Intelligent creators is interesting, but the process of abiogenesis is only complementary of evolution and is not what video is describing.
@hydrilisk0 to add to this, also if it was guided evolution then the deity would know/ cause a couple to breed and the outcome of that massively random coupling, hence eliminating free will.
The mutation happens each time a new life form comes to existence, because it is an error in copying the genetic code, whether that is neutral, beneficial or not. We don't have to create mutations when they are already being created.
I know what you are saying, I am simply correcting you.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
random mutation is an assumption, nobody has ever proved it, however there is something called adaptive mutation, which is a respond to the change to the environment... and very likely all the mutations are adaptive mutations
I just don't understand why with so many mutations that have taken place on earth and how evolution is saying organisms evolve into new organisms, we should have hundreds and thousands of pieces of evidence of things changing into other things, and just so many discoveries of organisms gaining more complexities for the better. It should be getting discovered everywhere. But all we see is things degrading. Where is all the proof? I don't see how macro evolution can stand up as a theory.
That correlation could also be used for the argument of intelligent design though. But your saying to my statement about "we should have thousands of pieces of evidence", that we do have evidence? As I said the above could be used for both sides. So if I wanted to back macro evolution with some facts or say a statement, what would I say or how would it be phrased so it can only be used for the evolution argument?
"That correlation could also be used for the argument of intelligent design though. ""
I don't think you understand what molecular biology actually looks like. What we see again and again is groups of organisms that can be grouped solely through neutral changes in DNA bases or to some extent even amino acids.
This is exactly what evolution predicts. There's no systematic way of explaining why some agency would make it look exactly like common ancestry.
it is kinda a massive list, everywhere around you things are degrading. The moons orbit is degrading, human genes could be said to be degrading, the magnetic strength of the earths polar fields are degrading, the earths rotation is degrading, our atmosphere is said to be degrading. Not like it is new or anything or something to even really argue. Doesn't the second law of thermodynamics talk about everything degrading also? Things degrading is not illogical.
Yes but from the material I've been finding all those DNA changes are the loss of info for the most part not gaining, and certainly not gaining in a way that would that would give a positive change for an organism. There should be millions of these changes being observed that give a increase to genetic info that has a positive effect yet not one, even Richard Dawkins couldnt state when asked. That seems like a pretty important thing to be missing for the evolutionists side, like theory breaking.
Open up a textbook. Genes duplicate and then drift. There are also insertions of bases observed all the time.
For example all the globin genes are modified copies of each other. Go over to C0nc0rdance's channel and ask him to explain how genes get duplicated and then diverge. It's well understood that this is the case.
If fact all genes have homology going back to some other gene which branched out.
Now will I continue to see you post this talking point?
I dont know why there should be millions of beneficial mutations to satisfy you. That would indicate very rapid change and we don't see that as creationists usually are happy to point out. May I kindly invite you to watch this very video again? Please pay attention to the nylon eating part. There you go! That is just the one pointed out in this video. I especially recommend the last part of the video adressing your question. Glad I could help out there.
the reason there should be millions of beneficial mutations is because rapid change is the only explanation evolutionists give in order for their story about fossils to come off as believable. Since according to them there is a big gap in change between the fossils they claim to be transitional, in which if there was slow change there would be no gap. Out of the 100 million+ fossils discovered to date they have not found any fossils to fill that gap which kinda doesn't look good for evolutionism
@blueiceplayer dude watch the vids and try to learn you obviously havnt bothered to learn anything except your bible which you probably havnt read it either as most dont there is no problem with evolution all evidence is for it none against it to prove it wrong just find ONE phylogenetic tree that doesnt match EVERY OTHER EXACTLY yes just ONE
@patrickledford420 what do you mean? you prove there is evolution in the first place lol. prove what happened in the bible isn't historical fact, prove we are not created, prove there isn't a supernatural realm, prove God doesn't exist. Prove you don't have a soul and that there is no heaven or hell.
@blueiceplayer dogs PROVE evolution also fossils, genetics, homologies, phylogonies, dna are massive evidence for it supernatural realm has no bearing on evolution neither does a god and i cant prove a negative its you that have to prove it or atleast show ONE piece of evidence that your god is real not A god but YOUR god
@blueiceplayer Before u ask people to prove there is heaven, hell, god, and souls, prove them exists first. But before u "try" to prove them exists logically, first define and tell us whats your definition of exists. Then try to prove them exists.
A single book cant win a library full of informational books (chemical, biology, etc), or even Wikipedia.
Well how could the theory of evolution even make sense then? There is cosmic evolution (big bang), chemical evolution (pertaining to chemicals and elements), stellar evolution(stars,planets,"outer space"), organic evolution(orgin of life),macro evolution(different kinds of animals), micro evolution(adaptation within different kinds of organisms). Without all of them evolutionists have a incomplete theory.
Can't you come up with any of your own arguements?
Are you that unable to think for yourself that you have to copy fraudsters hovind and pcs?
If you spent 10 seconds doing a google search for "Evolution" you will see what total BS you just came out with. Hovind doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, you have no place in talking about evolution. Especially as u clearly have no idea what it actually is.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
So your telling me I have to use a thesaurus in order to word sentences to your liking. I can post whatever I want and don't have to give an account to you. I don't care what conclusions you have come to in the first place. Someone who has a pic depicting murder as their background is a little fucked in the head anyways. Unload your frustrations with creationists with your psychiatrist not me.
blueiceplayer , What the hell are you talking about ?, Your simply copy and pasting someone else's already debunked arguments. . . a chimp could do that.
"I can post whatever I want and don't have to give an account to you." Yes you can, and I'm going to say why its stupid.
"Someone who has a pic depicting murder as their background is a little fucked in the head anyways." Typical creationist. . . you can't attack the message so you have to attack the person. didn't jesus say something about love thy neighbour?, how about judge not lest ye be judged?. . . If you can't even follow your own rules abandon the damn faith.
You've still yet to even bother watching this video have you?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
o.O you googled a bible verse I'm impressed. Try actually reading the book and more than a few verses after you get saved. Otherwise probably would be best not to quote it, you make yourself look like a fool. I'm not gonna preach a sermon on what Christianity is. Find out for yourself. You know Christians give the finger too. Arguing for the sake of argueing doesn't float my boat. Accept there is a God and you'll serve him or go to hell with your teddy bear. BYE!! -gives the finger-
It was actually reading the bible that turned me away from it, something which most theists haven't actually done.
"probably would be best not to quote it" Says a creationist. . . LOL!
"you make yourself look like a fool" See what i mean, you haven't even read your own book, Try Mat 5:22 " Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell."
"you'll serve him or go to hell " LOL! so the only way you can convert people is by using that threat. . . grow up. . .
I'll leave you with a quote. . "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus 341bc 270bc
No matter the matter anyway, because the mission statement of all monotheistic religions is as follows " Other religions are teaching / preaching false doctrine". Religion really doesn't matter or count, because it's always contentious towards other religions anyways. It SO does not matter...
@manhunt48 Eh, qq? age old debate? Just because there is evil doesn't mean that there is no God. Just because there is God doesn't mean that there is no evil. To question the malevolence of God, go ahead, many times it was mentioned that he is so, against evil people. But, he is forgiving. Just because they are around doesn't mean that they will be forever. Just because they aren't there for a few days mean that they will never exist. If things never happened, there is nothing to compare to.
@manhunt48 Science observes today that damaging mutations continue to overwhelm the quality control of natural selection by a ratio of 50:1 - or more. The contribution of positive mutations is less than 1 per million - it has never even been observed. All species' genomes are undergoing catastrophic genetic entropy - extinction is the inevitable result and exactly what we observe today. Evolutionists believe in their religious dogma because they resent the idea of God, not because of science.
" it has never even been observed. " . . . really?. . . First comment to me and you show you're nothing but a complete liar. . . consider these to be my final comments to you as i have no time for liars.
So CCR5-delta 32 the mutation that makes the bearers of it resistant to HIV is not beneficial? Oh and not to mention the pages upon pages listening hundreds if not thousands of observed mutations that you can find from a 5 second google search.
" All species' genomes are undergoing catastrophic genetic entropy ". . . No, you know all that shows is that you have no idea what those words means nor what field of science they're even related to.
"Evolutionists believe in their religious dogma because they resent the idea of God,". . . Really? So what about the people who accept evolution and believe in god? You know those which actually make up the majority who accept evolution. . . once again you're a complete LIAR!
@blueiceplayer are you talking about yourself you can beleive in god and evolution shit you say for it all to happen by chance is stupid well evolution is NOT chance but if you think so than bring god into why cant you agree with the FACTS and MASSIVE EVIDENCE and just say god made it all happen
@patrickledford420 all that proves God more than it ever will evolution. if you think that much about evolution and can't see where a God would fit in then something is wrong emotionaly to ignore fact and logic.
@blueiceplayer "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus 341bc 270bc
@Houltoke A God willing to give free will, will not interfere in the free will of it's creation otherwise that God is not a just, rightous God. Epicurus obviously never thought that far. A single book can win, because it came from God. Has it ever been proven to be historicaly wrong, no, has any of the hundreds of prophecys which were given and fullfiled been wrong, no. 100% accuracy of fullifilled prophecy is proof enough really.
@blueiceplayer two goats having sex looking at a striped object will not have striped babys like the bible says they will. killing a bird and bathing another bird in its blood will not cure leprosy like the bible says. i just proved it wrong
@patrickledford420 lol where does it say about the goats in the bible? if it's anything like what your saying about the birds then you have no clue what your even saying. the bird thing was what the priets did to declair a lepor clean. I think you need to recheck what prove means. even today people are healed of diseases. just because you can't percieve something doesn't make it real. reality isn't based on your understanding of it.
@blueiceplayer the goats are in genesis chapter 30. leviticus 14:2-52 is where it talks about the "cure" for leprosy. also, if you think the bible is literal you may want to look up contradictions in the bible (google it) and you will see its impossible to beleive the bible literaly
@patrickledford420 there are no contradictions in the bible, google the facts about the so called contradictions, that is if you really aren't here just to argue. lol your so lame, genesis 30 it doesn't say that's what will happen, it said that's what DID happen.
your arguement is rediculous. Jesus walked on water, Peter steped out in faith and walked on it too. That isn't the bible saying you can walk on water, it's just talking about what happened. guess that's too complecated for you?
@blueiceplayer Yes, the bible has been proven to be historically wrong. Just google historical inaccuracies Bible. 100% fulfilled prophecy?? HA?? Ever read where Jesus said that his second coming would be during the lifetimes of his apostles??
@atheistram google the opposite. ever stoped to think the apostles lifetime is eternity? Last time I checked a soul and spirit have eternal life through Jesus.
The only thing EPIC FAIL here is you and your comment... !!
@sabertooth1980 existence, he is not eternal, eternity exists in him. He is the begining and the end, the alpha and omega, the first and last. Everything is evidence.
Give evidence you can comprehend the answer to your question to judge it correct.
@blueiceplayer That didn't answer anything. Circular reasoning is being Circular. Now anity up the evidence for the existence of this jesus character or bugger off.
@sabertooth1980 I agree, except that's not circular reasoning, it's called a truth, just like saying you did not always exist and your understanding if any answer I give you is finite.
My answer is completely valid.
Answer my question, and in fact you quit going in circles.
@blueiceplayer No. Your answer isn't valid. I want Empirical Evidence that your jesus character actually existed. Answering in non-sequiturs isn't going to get you anywhere.
I can't answer a question that you haven't asked.
Now give your Evidence That This Jesus Character You Claim Existed actually Existed.
@sabertooth1980 of course you cant answer a question I havnt asked, but the point is I did.
Secondly I did answer your question, you just lack the comprehention to grasp it, that is why I ask YOU the question I did. Which YOU did not answer, or even attempt to.
@blueiceplayer Larf. Circular reasoning isn't a question. Next you are accusing me of not understanding your answer. Which is true. If you are speaking garbled nonsense, How Can I understand you? Or if you were even asking a real question?
I asked a mere question about you giving EVIDENCE. Do you have any evidence outside the bible, empirical testable, actual evidence of this jesus person actually existing?
And what does this even have to do with how evolution works I wonder...
@blueiceplayer "I'm right because I am smarter than you, and I am smarter than you because I am right."
First off, the statement doesn't explain anything. It only feeds into itself. Why am I right? Cause I am smarter than you. Why am I smarter than you? cause I am right. No answers. No nothing.
@blueiceplayer Or better yet, let's go with an example situation eh?
Let's say that two people walk into a room. One person tells the other that he has a baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth. The other one asks to see it.
What normally happens? The Person making the statement that they have the bat produces said bat.
They don't go on about how the bat is "The beginning and end" of all baseball bats. They don't go on about how everything else in the room proves that he has said baseball bat.
@blueiceplayer They don't go saying some random bit of garble and then saying that that garble supports that they have this baseball bat. And in turn they don't laugh at the other person when that person has shouted garble at them saying that "Because you don't understand my statement, that Proves that I have a baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth! You just can't understand that I have this bat!"
No.
They either produce the goods or admit that they are pulling your leg.
@sabertooth1980 ok, that's really nice and all. But when I look at what you wrote and its all said and done you never attempted to even answer my question when I did yours.
hmmm.... yes lets talk about producing the goods shall we?
@blueiceplayer you can type 50 paragraphs again but it really does you no good. You dont have to believe in Jesus, but he believes in you. You don't have to believe in gravity or believe I exist for me to exist. Only a foolish person goes looking for the answers to existance in the mindset of wanting to fully understand.
@blueiceplayer First off. Congrads for not even thinking about what I just said. Next, good job on the emotional black mailing bit. "You don't have to believe in jesus but jesus believes in you!" So sugary sweet it could be called an after school special.
And no, you don't have to believe in gravity, but you can constantly test gravity, you can read gravity, you can see how gravity works, You can use a telescope to see how gravity can Bend Light.
@blueiceplayer See, to me, Faith is meaningless. Belief is Meaningless. Acceptance of the evidence to show that something has enough evidence? That's something. Ideas? those are something, but ideas without evidence don't mean bub-kiss in the real world.
And really only a foolish person goes out looking for the answer to life's questions thinking they know it all already.
@blueiceplayer I am doing so to give you examples of why circular reason is Flawed. I am asking for Evidence Outside the bible that shows this jesus character actually existed, thus far. None. Zip Ziltch. Instead you keep turning this around on me.
@blueiceplayer "A God willing to give free will, will not interfere in the free will of it's creation otherwise that God is not a just, rightous God"
indeed.... and going by the number of times your god interferes with his creation, according to your very own bible, just shows how unjust and unrightious he is.
@scottpastry except your too dense to read what I said properly or willingly ignorant? I said "interfere in mans free will", not "interfere."
Your second statement if you want to use it could then be applyed to all statements and theories about existence and the universe and puts you on a neutral position about a God then.
@blueiceplayer "except your too dense to read what I said properly or willingly ignorant? I said "interfere in mans free will", not "interfere.""
insults already? sigh..... i quoted you right...... you said god didnt interfere in the free will of of his creation.... this includes the free will of man..... which he obviously interfered with when he flooded the world because of mans sin caused by the freewill your god created.
@Houltoke secondly what are the odds everything in the universe exists the way it is by chance? from a logical standpoint everything points to a creator, because the mathamatical possibility for everything to have come about without a creator is a impossibility.
This has been flagged as spam show
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
Watch:
"youtube.com/watch?v=INH-lNUQQZg"
"youtube.com/watch?v=lutJYDxP6ys"
"youtube.com/watch?v=R9ike7PKd8U"
Regards.
TrumpetCallofGodLT 4 weeks ago in playlist How Evolution Works
This video should be called "How EVILution Wishes it could Work with Detrimental mutations"
ironman197268 1 month ago
@ironman197268 and i suppose your a professor of biology with all the proof and studies needed to say why it cant happen???? or are you some sky daddy loving illiterate who's instinctual achievement was to not be outsmarted by a glass of water?
braunblender 4 weeks ago
@braunblender Man that's got to be the Stupidest and most unintellectual response and insult I've ever heard in my life!! "sky daddy" Wow, that's original!!
Mutations do NOT add beneficial information to the genome. But if it makes you happy, then by all means keep on worshiping your god nothing and his apostles the big bang and evilution.
ironman197268 4 weeks ago
@ironman197268 Did you not pay attention to any of this guy's videos?
XxI3ioHazardxX 3 weeks ago
@XxI3ioHazardxX What's this guy got that Richard Dawkins doesn't? It's all the same old Science fiction nonsense.
ironman197268 3 weeks ago
@ironman197268 How is it science fiction? And way to not answer my question.
XxI3ioHazardxX 3 weeks ago
@braunblender lol'd
childmolester16 3 weeks ago
evolution means (if it exists )= super random rare pointless dna changes.
leviterande 1 month ago
@leviterande Watch part 5 please.
NathanWubs 1 month ago
@leviterande Actually, no it doesn't. Actually do some research on it and stop relying on a self contradicting book made by a bunch of sheep herders in the middle east. Worship the one, true God, Thor.
XxI3ioHazardxX 3 weeks ago
@XxI3ioHazardxX woow buddy, you seem even more stupid then you really are...
leviterande 1 week ago
@leviterande And yet I actually know what Evolution is and payed to the video. You also used the wrong form of THAN. Tell me, what makes the Bible the one and only truth out of all religions in the world?
XxI3ioHazardxX 1 week ago
@XxI3ioHazardxX and who the phuck said the Bible was the only truth? you did. r u on something son? I would rather believe that my left toe created earth .... but the bible... ahahah all religions are man made
leviterande 1 week ago
This dude is just reading a script.
strengthinweakness1 1 month ago
@strengthinweakness1 As all well prepared people do...You really want all the pauses he takes to think if he just did it off the top of his head? Come on, If that's all you have in objection to this, just don't even bother to comment.
Alphacaliber 1 month ago
New information can be produced by mutations but NOT increased information. A mistake produces NEW information ie. bad information.
strengthinweakness1 1 month ago
@strengthinweakness1 Or good information. A species of bacterium have been found to eat nilon in a nilon rich environment (The back of a nilon factory), but only they can eat nilon. This random genetic mutation added the ability, in the genes, to allow them to ingest and digest nilone strands. Scientists have recreated this with non-nilon eating bacteria and found exactly the same result. They mutated and gained the ability to eat nilon. Adding new information to the genes.
Alphacaliber 1 month ago
@strengthinweakness1 If this did not increase information, how do you explain the different numbers of chromosones for species?
Alphacaliber 1 month ago
@uknowispeaksense First of all I'm not a creationist so you can take your pat "God of the gaps " arguments elsewhere. I have no problem with all of life forming through natural processes. I just found it ironic that there is a video explaining how organisms evolve without being able to explain how their underlying genetic code evolved in the first place. As far as abiogenesis, what do we know? Miller-Urey=fail. The sequence of chemical events that led to the first nucleic acids is not known.
alsdyall 3 months ago in playlist DonExodus's 'How evolution works.'
@alsdyall even if we discover a process that gets there, we won't know if that is the process that actually occurred. There are many different ways to get to the same place in chemistry. The point of Miller-Urey was to show that molecules used and produced in biological systems can be created in from a totally a-cellular mix of chemicals, so it was NOT a failure. People often misconstrue the purpose of that experiment and say it failed to create DNA/RNA or living cells or some such.
kotoroshinoto 1 month ago
This video is is a good example of why some Christians can't handle evolution, at about 3 minutes when it gets technical, they start feeling like they are back in science class and feeling stupid, so they shut down the thinking process, and just go..."Nooooo!" .... "...Jeeeesus saaaave meeee!"
beastshawnee 3 months ago in playlist Religion Pwned
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey, kiddos, want to see a fairy tale that adults really believe? Google whale evolution and go watch a 7 minutes video on the PBS web site that shows how an ancient 200 pound wolf searched for food along the beach, wander out into the surf, and morphed (evolved) into a 100 ton whale. There is nothing scientific about it, but nonetheless, this is the fairy tale that some adults really believe! Especially comical are the nostrils migrating to the top of the head to become a blow hole!
achilles197474 4 months ago
I guess what some are simply saying is why hold on to Darwin's theory which claims to explain the origin of species when Darwin nor his followers can even begin to explain how this highly complex coding system engineered itself in the first place. How can you explain something at the organic/physiolocial level if you don't have an explanation for it's development at the chemical microbiolocial level. Belief in God or not one has to acknowledge that there is an intelligence that pervades life.
alsdyall 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alsdyall
Why don't you watch these videos?
odinata 4 months ago
@alsdyall That is just plain dumb, man, sorry to break it to you, but you're saying that just because we haven't yet gotten all the answers in the understanding of our world, the only way to explain what we cannot understand is to believe that some divine creature made it all possible. Am I not right? How can you encourage people to believe in something that may or may not exist just because we do not yet have a full understand of how our world is build up? Messed up!
UltimaDalle 3 months ago
@UltimaDalle No you are not right. Your comment had nothing to do with anything I was saying. Maybe you should read my comment again. What I was saying was that Darwin's theory claims to have an explanation for the development of all life but it doesn't. It explains how some species adapt to their environment -that's it. Then I said it can be acknowledged that intelligence pervades all life. i didn't mention a divine creature. I didn't even mention a designer of this intelligence.
alsdyall 3 months ago in playlist DonExodus's 'How evolution works.'
@alsdyall we don't even know for sure if the first "genomic material" was RNA or DNA or something else entirely. Early life may have been completely alien to us and only arrived in its current form after sampling other ways to do the same jobs. one form of organism won out and dominated, and thats why we all have DNA-based genomes, RNA gene transcripts, and protein structural components (albeit with some aid from RNA in some enzymes.)
kotoroshinoto 1 month ago
@kotoroshinoto Ok. So you have this grand theory of evolution and when you examine it closely it is full of maybe, may have, could have, etc. Can't you see that's just as fuzzy and subjective as saying the Easter rabbit may have done it? Evolution should mean change we can prove or change we can predict or change we can use to explain phenomena. Otherwise you sound like a doctrinarian rather than someone curious about how like works.
alsdyall 1 month ago
@alsdyall the maybes and may haves are examples of how evolution could act in given situations, we can never know for sure exactly what path it took because the process itself erased all the evidence that it ever took place. The most successful organisms dominated and either killed the others directly or out-competed them. The first detectable traces weren't left until bacteria capable of growing in giant colonies evolved.
kotoroshinoto 1 month ago
@alsdyall in addition you're arguing "you can't provide proof of exactly which path and steps it occurred in, therefore we say it never happened." Its the argument from ignorance in an even weaker form, because evolution has MUCH more support behind it, the parts we can't pin down exactly aren't weaknesses they're just unknowns. We have no samples of organisms from that era because they did not LEAVE any samples behind. Theres plenty of other evidence however.
kotoroshinoto 1 month ago
@kotoroshinoto I never said evolution never happened. If we're talking about change. I'm saying it's an empty theory that rules out any other possibilites while failing to give a working mechanism as to how any of the species developed (not how species changed once established). In addition what is false about it is the assertion that random mutation account for all the information we have available in the millions of different species that exist within the quantifiable time frame we know.
alsdyall 1 month ago
@kotoroshinoto I always here about this plenty of evidence but never see it explained. When you look at the moths, the finches, the bewildering fossil record, etc you don't have much in the way of a compelling body of evidence at all.
alsdyall 1 month ago
@alsdyall That's the thing though: Despite the "Maybe's, May haves and could haves" Evolution DOES prove things and DOES predict things. Rather accurately. In science we acknowledge that we could be wrong. We do not pretend to know everything or that things are absolute. We could be wrong. We look forward to being wrong because that makes us closer to being right. We do understand that while not absolute the odds of us being wrong about evolution are the same as falling up.
goratrix1799 1 month ago
@goratrix1799 That's just the thing, skip all the philsophy about science what are the predictions that random selection working with natural selection provides WHERE are the proofs that this is the origin of the vast array of species we see?
alsdyall 1 month ago
@alsdyall so, which do you want to discuss, evolution or abiogensis? I'm only asking because you have linked the two together when they are very different things. But while we're here, your postulation that there is no explanantion is patently incorrect. The way different atoms and molecules react to each other in terms of polarity and attraction is very well understood and the precursors to DNA base pairs have been found to occur naturally and form sponstaneously in vitro. Deductive...cont..
uknowispeaksense 3 months ago
@alsdyall cont1..reasoning, logic and the level of understanding of the time periods involved leads to a pretty good ideaof how it happened. To simply say God did it is wilful ignorance at best. This mystical quality that creationists try to place on DNA demonstrates a high degree of scientific illiteracy and isessentially a ploy to cover for it and make in their own minds the "God must have done it because its so complex" argument acceptable. The problem with that is, it isn't. When you ..cont.
uknowispeaksense 3 months ago
@alsdyall cont 2. have a good understanding of organic chemistry you realise that it's just the way it works. There are a set of natural laws that the different chemicals follow in order to do what they do. There's nothing magical or special about it. Further, to simply say God did it is disingenuous in that it is lazy and fulfils only the strange need many theists have to have an answer dor everything. Its almost like an insecurity. Its sad.
uknowispeaksense 3 months ago
i didnt got a free cake
PrateekGurjar 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MUTATIONS WERE NEVER IN THE FAVOR OF EVOLUTION!!.... :)
exposeevolutiontales dot blogspot dot com
Feel free to reply and comment there Mr. Don Exodus
mhdmoh1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MUTATIONS WERE NEVER IN THE FAVOR OF EVOLUTION!!.... :)
exposeevolutiontales dot blogspot dot com
mhdmoh1 5 months ago
How do mutations add new information to the genome and are there any observed examples of this? LMAO I paused at exactly 0:50 seconds to write this then pressed play again after writing it. Still have a question tho, maybe I missed this in the video but how do we know the bacteria that eats nylon couldn't do this before nylon was invented, but just never had the opportunity to. Like I've never had sushi, but if I ate some I wouldn't be mutating a new ability I'd just be eating something new.
Drunkenprophet23 6 months ago
@Drunkenprophet23 The specific enzymes needed to digest nylon could only digest nylon and nothing else. Enzymes are complex and specialised proteins that are highly unlikely (if not impossible) to come into existence before what they would have to adapt to digest does. No offence intended, but this is almost like asking why Windex couldn't have existed before windows were invented, if you catch my drift?
FactThis 6 months ago
@FactThis Thanks for the answer. I know just enough about biology to barely get by, so I ask stupid questions sometimes. But I'm not afraid to be stupid so I should get points for that. Do you know any other examples of observed mutations, or do you know good places on the web to look? I prefer video's to long reading. Thanks again.
Drunkenprophet23 6 months ago
@Drunkenprophet23 I'm not a geneticist (my biological training is more ecological), and I can't list many specific instances off the top of my head, although antibiotic resistant bacteria spring to mind, as does emerging patterns of HIV resistance in parts of Africa. Websites such as talkorigins(dot)org has some useful information, and pubmed has a wealth of biology related papers.
It's always good to ask questions (even if you think they're stupid). And you're very welcome.
FactThis 6 months ago
OK, I clicked on your user name and I subscribed to your channel. Now, when do I get my free cake? Just kidding! I enjoy your educational videos on evolution. That's a sweet enough treat for me! Keep up the good work!
BigFatHeretic 6 months ago
It goes something like this. Boys, we have to figure out how the universe came to be. Oh, and you cant say that a Supreme being made it all. Now get to work. Remember, whatever you come up with cant be absolutely proven or disproven so just come up with something and agree on it.
j919or 7 months ago
how do you know all this information???? How are you educated??? :)
SHIBBYiPANDA 8 months ago
So the first claim, that random mutations are selected and create different forms of life, is unsustained. The second problem is that there are a vast number of complex systems in nature, and no matter how unglamorous this problem is, no matter how people try to look the other way, the fact is that a huge number of highly complex systems in nature cannot be plausibly accounted for in terms of a gradual build-up of small random mutations. - Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis
achilles197474 9 months ago
Mutations as a catalyst for evolution are thoroughly debunked. See Cornell University's Dr. John Sanford, Genetic Entropy and The Mystery of The Genome. The human genome is deteriorating via the accumulation of mutations. Overall, mutations have the sum impact of being deleterious. Mutations and natural selection don't evolve anything - macro evolution is a fairy tale for adults.
achilles197474 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@achilles197474 wrote: "A simple brain does not evolve into a complex brain."
I repeat: Speak for yourself, retard.
achilles wrote: "See... Dr. John Sanford..."
Another intellectual who, as he inches closer to death, has latched on to the judeo-christian superstition because it promises him eternal life. No different than any other intellectual who claims alliance with any other religion which offers the same promise...
... and certainly not a convincing argument for intelligent design.
fubaraoul 11 months ago
@achilles197474
John Sanford is not has published 2 articles on genetic entropy. they have received little attention from the scientific community..u call speciation an adult fairy tale?..what do u call the story where a man is created by mud from the transcendent, all powerful, creator of the universe, and where a woman is then sculpted from his rib?..that's your believable, serious alternative?..would u like a link debunking Sanford's bullshit?
itzahazylife 10 months ago
@itzahazylife It is not my fault that you can't compete with Sanford. Your are not even close to being in his league when it comes to understanding the impact of mutations on the genome. This is obviously unsettling to you, but when you are wrong you are wrong. Sanford has 25 genetic patents and is the inventor of the gene gun. "Random mutations consistently destroy information." - P. 14 Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome.
Your little mutation fairy tale is not science.
achilles197474 9 months ago
@achilles197474
you're right..i don't know more than Sanford. i'm not a scientist. great job pointing that out..but,i'll tell u who does..the rest of the scientific community who have given his measly 2 articles little attention..when u say "random mutations consistently destroy information" u are basically saying that mutations are consistently harmful, right? but, the thing is,beneficial mutations,while quite rare,have been found to occur with enough frequency to allow for natural selection.
itzahazylife 9 months ago
@itzahazylife First, I really appreciate your sincere responses and cordial tone. But, "good" mutations do not occur frequently enough to drive evolution. You need to read Sanford's book. He thoroughly addresses this issue with pro and con arguments. "Selection cannot rescue the genome." P. 69 Also, see Chapter 9, Can Natural Selection Create?
achilles197474 9 months ago
Listen @achilles197474-whether a mutation is BENEFICIAL is not that easy to say cause it depends on the environment- the same trait/mutation can be useless or even deleterious in one environment but turn out to be priceless in another. Besides mutation may happen way to seldomly in one organism to drive its evoultion, but evolution has never been reported in or attributed to single organisms-it happens to whole populations At least TRY to understand things before you start criticizing them
F1del 9 months ago
The Cake is a Lie! I subscribed and still NO CAKE! It is Portal all over again T.T
tndowns 11 months ago
Thank you for making these videos.
shipiboconibo 11 months ago
Do said that a deletion of a single letter would be likely to create a stop code (just by probability I assume). But wouldn't it ruin the entire DNA "text" after the stop code? till the end of the DNA? Shoudn't that change, say, half of the entire DNA?
musikali1 1 year ago
thanks for the vid
voidstuff 1 year ago
When we have for example chicken's egg forming(is this right word?) and needed information for that is in DNA, how does that DNA information come to act. How it and actual result is linked together?
Sorry my English.
Taaplari 1 year ago
@Taaplari Siis mitä meinaat tolla kysymyksel? Täytyy sanoo et meni iha vähä yli, ni koitappa uusiks Suomeks.
makaralaatikko 1 year ago
@makaralaatikko
No se on hyvä että meni vain tosi vähän oli. Yritetään uudelleen. Eli kun meillä on informaatio esim. jostain prosessista koodattuna organismiin ja sitten on varsinainen prosessi - vaikkapa maitohampaiden poisto ja uusien muodostus - niin mikä on se menetelmä jolla lopputulos toteutetaan annetun informaation (geneettinen koodi) perusteella?
Meillä on siis "piirustukset" ja lopputulos. Nyt siis haetaan informaation lukumenetelmää ja sen käytännön toteuttamistapaa.
Taaplari 1 year ago
@Taaplari Hmmm.. Meinaatko nyt sitten proteiinisynteesiä? Eli kun DNA:sta aletaan lukea tiettyä koodia, sen kaksoiskierre avataan ensin, ja luetaan käänteiseksi RNA molekyyliksi. Tämä RNA molekyyli viedään sitten solun ribosomien luettavaksi, joissa RNA:n koodi tulkitaan kodonien mukaan aminohappoketjuksi, eli proteiiniksi. Sitten riippuen proteiinin tarkoituksesta, se kuljetetaan tiettyjen soluelimien kautta soluun tai sen ulkopuolelle, jossa se vaikuttaa tietyllä tavalla.
makaralaatikko 1 year ago
@makaralaatikko
Valitettavasti olen täysi maallikko näissä asioissa.
Missä muodossa on tieto esim. siitä että "poistetaanpa nyt tuo hammas ja valmistetaan siihen tilalle tämän muotoinen uusi hammas"? Siihen nimittäin tarvitaan muutama pätkä koodia. Pelkkä määrätyn muotoisen hampaan valmistaminen ympäröivistä aineista vaatii naurettavan pajon erinäisiä huomioitavia asioita ja prosesseja.
Taaplari 1 year ago
@Taaplari Hmmm.. Ehkä tämä on parempi siirtää yksityisviestien puolelle, ei kyllä riitä tuben kommenttipalstoil tilaa. Yritän parhaani mukaa selittää tätä hommaa siitäkin huolimatta.
makaralaatikko 1 year ago
@makaralaatikko
Okei. Aika on vähän kortilla mutta seuraan kyllä viestejä ajoittain.
Taaplari 1 year ago
0:46 Fuckin Magnets! How do they work? ^_^
Smokatronic 1 year ago
here is the hypocrisy, whenever something is explained in a detail that makes me watch the video 3 times to gain a basic understanding of evolutionary biology. The comments from the clown crew never refute the data on the video. Mainly due to these deluded individuals that cannot comprehend and throw out non sequiter and red herring arguments. Hello they are not going to get it! this is an area that will only be battled with education and basic structure to the next generation. help them!
neilandbobbie 1 year ago
Your video does have more info than others. Yet you are just merely characterizing types of mutations that are see in the lab but you are not giving us dtailed mechanism that answer HOW? Just look at a full arrow mechanism in orgo to see what kind detail I'm talking about. Try to answer the question nature asking HOW? What the causality? Quantum or what? Why do corrective enzymes fail, etc? Go beyond what know.
thebestsuperdoctor 1 year ago
I'm amazed how some people get so upset and react like their world is crumbling, just because Evolution has been found to be the driving force for the current diversity of life, or Genetics the mechanism for life existing... I've never found this to contradict Theological scripture such as Genesis, only that such texts use language meant for people who knew nothing about DNA, Molecular Biology, etc.. When a child asks you "how are babies made", most will talk about Birds & Bees, same in Genesis
RuniChannel1 1 year ago
Genetics is amazing...
JonathanSharman 1 year ago
Can someone explain to me how God and evolution can exist together? I have a hard time understanding it because it seems that they would contradict themselves. For example, the bible never mentions anything about adam and eve evolving, unless the person who wrote the book of gensis forgot to leave out the fact that we evolved from a common ape like ancestor.
DANgerKim 1 year ago
@DANgerKim if you take the bible non-literally then it could go together but the idea of it being literal cannot go together. thats the problem with some christians is that they will not accept that the bible is not literal but then again theres stuff that we can demonstrate to be not literally true
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 The style of writing in the New Testament is literal. Yes, Jesus rose from the dead the third day, showed himself to everyone, and flew up to Heaven. Now if you're going to mince the word "everyone" by all means, do so, we won't stop idiots trying to be themselves.
What you have never seen, you can deny you have never seen, but you cannot say that it never happened, because you never saw it NOT happen, nor can you prove it so.
BTW, evolution cannot create life. Proven.
toasterder 1 year ago
@toasterder so, the old testament isnt literal? its not my burden to prove a negative, its yours to show me some evidence. evolution isnt supposed to create life, how could you say that if you really watched these videos? evolution is just change in living things which is a fact. the theory explains how it happens, please go watch some more of these vids
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@toasterder So when your hand or eye sins, you self-amputate as jesus tells you to?
Btw, do you have some bat eggs?
GronTheMighty 1 year ago
@toasterder Evolution isn't supposed to create life that's Abiogenesis.
swordhunter12 1 year ago
@toasterder I think you must think of evolution as some kind of philosophy of everything, or something like a religion. Even if we ignore for the moment that science is merely a set of technical methods, the theory of evolution is just an attempt to explain how animals change over time.
Saying "evolution cannot create life" is like saying that the boulder rolling down a hill can't push itself down the hill. Which is blindingly obvious.
pjnlsn 10 months ago
All this is conceptual mathematics that created everything. I think the atheists believe that " existence" created the mathematics but deists believe that the mathematics created existence. If you believe that the mathematics created existence then who created the mathematics? An interesting question is how did mitosis cells know how to become meiosis? They made several failed attempts until success, and our evolution began.
petebax1 1 year ago
@petebax1 the cells didnt "know" anything it was simple chemical reactions
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 I fully agree the cells didn't know anything but the whole of evolution depended on that decission. Why would something decide to change from a totally selfish gene attitude of subdivision to an altruistic position of meiosis.
Just what number is this on the set of dice that created your world?
petebax1 1 year ago
@petebax1 you again said "decission" and "decide" there was NO decision it was chemical reactions there was no choice. i think you need to go look up cdk007, aronra watch some more of dons videos and seriously think about how what your thinking about evolved
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 You are teaching the sames theory that einstein laughed at with his dice quip. Even if everything is created by a throw of a dice something has to throw it. Also meiosis is a concept and it needs conceptual mathematics to work also created by chance or the tooth fairy. Try learning the difference between facts, beliefs and fantasies before you try and teach others.
People who don't know the difference need medical help.
petebax1 1 year ago
@petebax1 what theory did i talk about that einstein laughed at? where at all did i say anything about a theory? how the hell does meosis need conceptual mathematics to work? its simple biology and molecular biology. i know the difference between facts, fantasy and beleifs i really dont WTF you are talking about
patrickledford420 1 year ago
Ghaha, love the comments creationists leave. They show they indeed have the moral high ground :P
ispaniola 1 year ago
lol "this is commonly used and its really not up for debate" i love this guy
Jantles 1 year ago
"Since a gene doesnt have another function (duplicate), it would have accrued lots of mutations had it been there from the beginning as theres nothing selecting against it, and remember mutations occur at a set rate."
Take home statement of this video? Yes? No?
crazysoccerman14 1 year ago
OR do you mean that both are expressed, however the mutation of the duplicated gene won't affect the production of the necessary protein, therefore the cell can produce mutated proteins with no ill effect.
crazysoccerman14 1 year ago
Question at 6:40
So if you have a duplicate gene is it expressed in conjunction with the original gene? Or is it only expressed if the original gene is deleted?
crazysoccerman14 1 year ago
what a fucking idiot shaggy clown ur a duche
donniesview 1 year ago
But how is this not evidence of intelligent design? Screw creationism, I'm no christian. If I claim any belief system, it would be Taoism. But I KNOW there is a spirit, there are dimensions beyond our own, physics is finding them. So how does that play into this evolution theory? And how does the fact that we, an intelligent being no doubt, creating a mutation in a DNA sequence, isn't evidence of Intelligent Design. We did it, and we're intelligent aren't we. Maybe our creator was less than God.
musicequalstruth 2 years ago
First: This is an argument against Young Earth creationism.
Second: How do you "know" there is a soul?
Third: The dimensions "beyond our own" that string theory HYPOTHESISES about (aka. not taken as theory yet - yes, the title is a tad misleading) are still in our universe; they are not supernatural or spiritual.
Fourth: Intelligent creators is interesting, but the process of abiogenesis is only complementary of evolution and is not what video is describing.
hydrilisk0 2 years ago
@hydrilisk0 to add to this, also if it was guided evolution then the deity would know/ cause a couple to breed and the outcome of that massively random coupling, hence eliminating free will.
BallisticGinger 2 years ago
The mutation happens each time a new life form comes to existence, because it is an error in copying the genetic code, whether that is neutral, beneficial or not. We don't have to create mutations when they are already being created.
I know what you are saying, I am simply correcting you.
justforflag2 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
random mutation is an assumption, nobody has ever proved it, however there is something called adaptive mutation, which is a respond to the change to the environment... and very likely all the mutations are adaptive mutations
hookey24 2 years ago
cancer
rkyeun 2 years ago
I just don't understand why with so many mutations that have taken place on earth and how evolution is saying organisms evolve into new organisms, we should have hundreds and thousands of pieces of evidence of things changing into other things, and just so many discoveries of organisms gaining more complexities for the better. It should be getting discovered everywhere. But all we see is things degrading. Where is all the proof? I don't see how macro evolution can stand up as a theory.
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
"We should have hundreds and thousands of pieces of evidence of things changing into other things,"
>>We do
"I don't see how macro evolution can stand up as a theory. "
Genetic and molecular analysis shows a statistical correlation between all organisms that is only explainable by common descent
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
That correlation could also be used for the argument of intelligent design though. But your saying to my statement about "we should have thousands of pieces of evidence", that we do have evidence? As I said the above could be used for both sides. So if I wanted to back macro evolution with some facts or say a statement, what would I say or how would it be phrased so it can only be used for the evolution argument?
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
"That correlation could also be used for the argument of intelligent design though. ""
I don't think you understand what molecular biology actually looks like. What we see again and again is groups of organisms that can be grouped solely through neutral changes in DNA bases or to some extent even amino acids.
This is exactly what evolution predicts. There's no systematic way of explaining why some agency would make it look exactly like common ancestry.
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
"But all we see is things degrading."
Such as?
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
it is kinda a massive list, everywhere around you things are degrading. The moons orbit is degrading, human genes could be said to be degrading, the magnetic strength of the earths polar fields are degrading, the earths rotation is degrading, our atmosphere is said to be degrading. Not like it is new or anything or something to even really argue. Doesn't the second law of thermodynamics talk about everything degrading also? Things degrading is not illogical.
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
You do know that the rotation of the earth and stuff like that isn't evolution right? It's in other fields like astronomy and physics.
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
Yes but from the material I've been finding all those DNA changes are the loss of info for the most part not gaining, and certainly not gaining in a way that would that would give a positive change for an organism. There should be millions of these changes being observed that give a increase to genetic info that has a positive effect yet not one, even Richard Dawkins couldnt state when asked. That seems like a pretty important thing to be missing for the evolutionists side, like theory breaking.
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
Open up a textbook. Genes duplicate and then drift. There are also insertions of bases observed all the time.
For example all the globin genes are modified copies of each other. Go over to C0nc0rdance's channel and ask him to explain how genes get duplicated and then diverge. It's well understood that this is the case.
If fact all genes have homology going back to some other gene which branched out.
Now will I continue to see you post this talking point?
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
I dont know why there should be millions of beneficial mutations to satisfy you. That would indicate very rapid change and we don't see that as creationists usually are happy to point out. May I kindly invite you to watch this very video again? Please pay attention to the nylon eating part. There you go! That is just the one pointed out in this video. I especially recommend the last part of the video adressing your question. Glad I could help out there.
knurd75 2 years ago
the reason there should be millions of beneficial mutations is because rapid change is the only explanation evolutionists give in order for their story about fossils to come off as believable. Since according to them there is a big gap in change between the fossils they claim to be transitional, in which if there was slow change there would be no gap. Out of the 100 million+ fossils discovered to date they have not found any fossils to fill that gap which kinda doesn't look good for evolutionism
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
Not any? They have! If you would care to credit non hovindish kind of sources. Punctuated Equilibrium also is an approach. Suggests fits and starts.
Why a perfect fossil record? Be glad "we" found any! It just needs a FR that does not disprove it. See "fossil bunnies in the cambrian".
Last: TOE would work if we would have found NO fossils at all. Taxonomy and Genetics in itself are rather convincing.
Together they win hands down.
Evidence convinces, not the arguments of fiendish biologists.
knurd75 2 years ago
@blueiceplayer dude watch the vids and try to learn you obviously havnt bothered to learn anything except your bible which you probably havnt read it either as most dont there is no problem with evolution all evidence is for it none against it to prove it wrong just find ONE phylogenetic tree that doesnt match EVERY OTHER EXACTLY yes just ONE
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 what do you mean? you prove there is evolution in the first place lol. prove what happened in the bible isn't historical fact, prove we are not created, prove there isn't a supernatural realm, prove God doesn't exist. Prove you don't have a soul and that there is no heaven or hell.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer dogs PROVE evolution also fossils, genetics, homologies, phylogonies, dna are massive evidence for it supernatural realm has no bearing on evolution neither does a god and i cant prove a negative its you that have to prove it or atleast show ONE piece of evidence that your god is real not A god but YOUR god
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer Before u ask people to prove there is heaven, hell, god, and souls, prove them exists first. But before u "try" to prove them exists logically, first define and tell us whats your definition of exists. Then try to prove them exists.
A single book cant win a library full of informational books (chemical, biology, etc), or even Wikipedia.
sorry for my bad english
Houltoke 1 year ago
Well how could the theory of evolution even make sense then? There is cosmic evolution (big bang), chemical evolution (pertaining to chemicals and elements), stellar evolution(stars,planets,"outer space"), organic evolution(orgin of life),macro evolution(different kinds of animals), micro evolution(adaptation within different kinds of organisms). Without all of them evolutionists have a incomplete theory.
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
"Without all of them evolutionists have a incomplete theory.
Someone who studies the formation of star systems is entirely different than someone who studies the evolution of orchid flowers.
Do you see why this is?
It would be possible to build a quantum model of a seed germinating and developing into a rose but what would be the point?
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
the formation of star systems? you mean to say the evolution of star systems? now your going to use the term when it best suits your argument?
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
evolution = change
evolution of star systems
formation of stellar systems
development of star systems
change in stellar systems.
whatever it's all the same
This is now literally a semantic argument thanks
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago
blueiceplayer
Can't you come up with any of your own arguements?
Are you that unable to think for yourself that you have to copy fraudsters hovind and pcs?
If you spent 10 seconds doing a google search for "Evolution" you will see what total BS you just came out with. Hovind doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, you have no place in talking about evolution. Especially as u clearly have no idea what it actually is.
Tip: actually watch this video series.
manhunt48 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So your telling me I have to use a thesaurus in order to word sentences to your liking. I can post whatever I want and don't have to give an account to you. I don't care what conclusions you have come to in the first place. Someone who has a pic depicting murder as their background is a little fucked in the head anyways. Unload your frustrations with creationists with your psychiatrist not me.
Tip: keep your tips to yourself =)
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
blueiceplayer , What the hell are you talking about ?, Your simply copy and pasting someone else's already debunked arguments. . . a chimp could do that.
"I can post whatever I want and don't have to give an account to you." Yes you can, and I'm going to say why its stupid.
manhunt48 2 years ago 3
"Someone who has a pic depicting murder as their background is a little fucked in the head anyways." Typical creationist. . . you can't attack the message so you have to attack the person. didn't jesus say something about love thy neighbour?, how about judge not lest ye be judged?. . . If you can't even follow your own rules abandon the damn faith.
You've still yet to even bother watching this video have you?
manhunt48 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
o.O you googled a bible verse I'm impressed. Try actually reading the book and more than a few verses after you get saved. Otherwise probably would be best not to quote it, you make yourself look like a fool. I'm not gonna preach a sermon on what Christianity is. Find out for yourself. You know Christians give the finger too. Arguing for the sake of argueing doesn't float my boat. Accept there is a God and you'll serve him or go to hell with your teddy bear. BYE!! -gives the finger-
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
It was actually reading the bible that turned me away from it, something which most theists haven't actually done.
"probably would be best not to quote it" Says a creationist. . . LOL!
"you make yourself look like a fool" See what i mean, you haven't even read your own book, Try Mat 5:22 " Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell."
"Accept there is a God " Then Prove it!!
manhunt48 2 years ago 4
lmao great reply XD
Sciborg09 2 years ago
"you'll serve him or go to hell " LOL! so the only way you can convert people is by using that threat. . . grow up. . .
I'll leave you with a quote. . "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus 341bc 270bc
manhunt48 2 years ago 15
No matter the matter anyway, because the mission statement of all monotheistic religions is as follows " Other religions are teaching / preaching false doctrine". Religion really doesn't matter or count, because it's always contentious towards other religions anyways. It SO does not matter...
gblueslover2 2 years ago
nice quote !! =O
Sciborg09 2 years ago
@manhunt48 Eh, qq? age old debate? Just because there is evil doesn't mean that there is no God. Just because there is God doesn't mean that there is no evil. To question the malevolence of God, go ahead, many times it was mentioned that he is so, against evil people. But, he is forgiving. Just because they are around doesn't mean that they will be forever. Just because they aren't there for a few days mean that they will never exist. If things never happened, there is nothing to compare to.
toasterder 1 year ago
@manhunt48 Science observes today that damaging mutations continue to overwhelm the quality control of natural selection by a ratio of 50:1 - or more. The contribution of positive mutations is less than 1 per million - it has never even been observed. All species' genomes are undergoing catastrophic genetic entropy - extinction is the inevitable result and exactly what we observe today. Evolutionists believe in their religious dogma because they resent the idea of God, not because of science.
alyosha24601 1 year ago
@alyosha24601
" it has never even been observed. " . . . really?. . . First comment to me and you show you're nothing but a complete liar. . . consider these to be my final comments to you as i have no time for liars.
So CCR5-delta 32 the mutation that makes the bearers of it resistant to HIV is not beneficial? Oh and not to mention the pages upon pages listening hundreds if not thousands of observed mutations that you can find from a 5 second google search.
manhunt48 1 year ago
@alyosha24601
" All species' genomes are undergoing catastrophic genetic entropy ". . . No, you know all that shows is that you have no idea what those words means nor what field of science they're even related to.
"Evolutionists believe in their religious dogma because they resent the idea of God,". . . Really? So what about the people who accept evolution and believe in god? You know those which actually make up the majority who accept evolution. . . once again you're a complete LIAR!
manhunt48 1 year ago
lmao...no doubt on whos making himself look like the fool...
Sciborg09 2 years ago
@Sciborg09 thanks it's too much work retyping for people who know better but are in denial lol
blueiceplayer 2 years ago
@blueiceplayer are you talking about yourself you can beleive in god and evolution shit you say for it all to happen by chance is stupid well evolution is NOT chance but if you think so than bring god into why cant you agree with the FACTS and MASSIVE EVIDENCE and just say god made it all happen
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 all that proves God more than it ever will evolution. if you think that much about evolution and can't see where a God would fit in then something is wrong emotionaly to ignore fact and logic.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus 341bc 270bc
The best quote, thanks manhunt48!
Houltoke 1 year ago
@Houltoke A God willing to give free will, will not interfere in the free will of it's creation otherwise that God is not a just, rightous God. Epicurus obviously never thought that far. A single book can win, because it came from God. Has it ever been proven to be historicaly wrong, no, has any of the hundreds of prophecys which were given and fullfiled been wrong, no. 100% accuracy of fullifilled prophecy is proof enough really.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer two goats having sex looking at a striped object will not have striped babys like the bible says they will. killing a bird and bathing another bird in its blood will not cure leprosy like the bible says. i just proved it wrong
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 lol where does it say about the goats in the bible? if it's anything like what your saying about the birds then you have no clue what your even saying. the bird thing was what the priets did to declair a lepor clean. I think you need to recheck what prove means. even today people are healed of diseases. just because you can't percieve something doesn't make it real. reality isn't based on your understanding of it.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer the goats are in genesis chapter 30. leviticus 14:2-52 is where it talks about the "cure" for leprosy. also, if you think the bible is literal you may want to look up contradictions in the bible (google it) and you will see its impossible to beleive the bible literaly
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 there are no contradictions in the bible, google the facts about the so called contradictions, that is if you really aren't here just to argue. lol your so lame, genesis 30 it doesn't say that's what will happen, it said that's what DID happen.
your arguement is rediculous. Jesus walked on water, Peter steped out in faith and walked on it too. That isn't the bible saying you can walk on water, it's just talking about what happened. guess that's too complecated for you?
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer Yes, the bible has been proven to be historically wrong. Just google historical inaccuracies Bible. 100% fulfilled prophecy?? HA?? Ever read where Jesus said that his second coming would be during the lifetimes of his apostles??
You are an EPIC FAIL!!
atheistram 1 year ago
@atheistram google the opposite. ever stoped to think the apostles lifetime is eternity? Last time I checked a soul and spirit have eternal life through Jesus.
The only thing EPIC FAIL here is you and your comment... !!
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer Give evidence that your jesus actually existed from outside the bible.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@sabertooth1980 existence, he is not eternal, eternity exists in him. He is the begining and the end, the alpha and omega, the first and last. Everything is evidence.
Give evidence you can comprehend the answer to your question to judge it correct.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer That didn't answer anything. Circular reasoning is being Circular. Now anity up the evidence for the existence of this jesus character or bugger off.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@sabertooth1980 I agree, except that's not circular reasoning, it's called a truth, just like saying you did not always exist and your understanding if any answer I give you is finite.
My answer is completely valid.
Answer my question, and in fact you quit going in circles.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer No. Your answer isn't valid. I want Empirical Evidence that your jesus character actually existed. Answering in non-sequiturs isn't going to get you anywhere.
I can't answer a question that you haven't asked.
Now give your Evidence That This Jesus Character You Claim Existed actually Existed.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@sabertooth1980 of course you cant answer a question I havnt asked, but the point is I did.
Secondly I did answer your question, you just lack the comprehention to grasp it, that is why I ask YOU the question I did. Which YOU did not answer, or even attempt to.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer Larf. Circular reasoning isn't a question. Next you are accusing me of not understanding your answer. Which is true. If you are speaking garbled nonsense, How Can I understand you? Or if you were even asking a real question?
I asked a mere question about you giving EVIDENCE. Do you have any evidence outside the bible, empirical testable, actual evidence of this jesus person actually existing?
And what does this even have to do with how evolution works I wonder...
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@sabertooth1980 hahaha
Typical. I answered you, you dont even have the guts to answer me.
...am I missing something here? ...lol sure doesnt seem so.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer Yes. Yes you are missing something. But let's break it down shall we?
I asked Where the Evidence that jesus even existed outside the bible was.
You made a circular argument. And then said that you wanted evidence that I even understood what you said.
One doesn't need to understand a circular argument to know that it is wrong. Just understanding that it is circular makes it wrong.
Here. I'll give you an example.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer "I'm right because I am smarter than you, and I am smarter than you because I am right."
First off, the statement doesn't explain anything. It only feeds into itself. Why am I right? Cause I am smarter than you. Why am I smarter than you? cause I am right. No answers. No nothing.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer Or better yet, let's go with an example situation eh?
Let's say that two people walk into a room. One person tells the other that he has a baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth. The other one asks to see it.
What normally happens? The Person making the statement that they have the bat produces said bat.
They don't go on about how the bat is "The beginning and end" of all baseball bats. They don't go on about how everything else in the room proves that he has said baseball bat.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer They don't go saying some random bit of garble and then saying that that garble supports that they have this baseball bat. And in turn they don't laugh at the other person when that person has shouted garble at them saying that "Because you don't understand my statement, that Proves that I have a baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth! You just can't understand that I have this bat!"
No.
They either produce the goods or admit that they are pulling your leg.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@sabertooth1980 ok, that's really nice and all. But when I look at what you wrote and its all said and done you never attempted to even answer my question when I did yours.
hmmm.... yes lets talk about producing the goods shall we?
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer I did. And it was nothing but circular reasoning. And Circular Reasoning is Meaningless.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@sabertooth1980 if you can't answer my question, how do I know you even know you can recognize a answer to your question?
So why are YOU talking in circles then? If you can't answer my question then you have no right to say my answer to yours is not valid.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer you can type 50 paragraphs again but it really does you no good. You dont have to believe in Jesus, but he believes in you. You don't have to believe in gravity or believe I exist for me to exist. Only a foolish person goes looking for the answers to existance in the mindset of wanting to fully understand.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer First off. Congrads for not even thinking about what I just said. Next, good job on the emotional black mailing bit. "You don't have to believe in jesus but jesus believes in you!" So sugary sweet it could be called an after school special.
And no, you don't have to believe in gravity, but you can constantly test gravity, you can read gravity, you can see how gravity works, You can use a telescope to see how gravity can Bend Light.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer See, to me, Faith is meaningless. Belief is Meaningless. Acceptance of the evidence to show that something has enough evidence? That's something. Ideas? those are something, but ideas without evidence don't mean bub-kiss in the real world.
And really only a foolish person goes out looking for the answer to life's questions thinking they know it all already.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer I am doing so to give you examples of why circular reason is Flawed. I am asking for Evidence Outside the bible that shows this jesus character actually existed, thus far. None. Zip Ziltch. Instead you keep turning this around on me.
Stop using tactics and start using your Brain.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer "A God willing to give free will, will not interfere in the free will of it's creation otherwise that God is not a just, rightous God"
indeed.... and going by the number of times your god interferes with his creation, according to your very own bible, just shows how unjust and unrightious he is.
scottpastry 1 year ago
@scottpastry except your too dense to read what I said properly or willingly ignorant? I said "interfere in mans free will", not "interfere."
Your second statement if you want to use it could then be applyed to all statements and theories about existence and the universe and puts you on a neutral position about a God then.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer "except your too dense to read what I said properly or willingly ignorant? I said "interfere in mans free will", not "interfere.""
insults already? sigh..... i quoted you right...... you said god didnt interfere in the free will of of his creation.... this includes the free will of man..... which he obviously interfered with when he flooded the world because of mans sin caused by the freewill your god created.
its your circular reasoning, not mine.
scottpastry 1 year ago
@Houltoke secondly what are the odds everything in the universe exists the way it is by chance? from a logical standpoint everything points to a creator, because the mathamatical possibility for everything to have come about without a creator is a impossibility.
blueiceplayer 1 year ago
@blueiceplayer pretty high but theres many many possibilitys enough really that it was inevitable that one planet would end up like ours
patrickledford420 1 year ago