I just had to say that Archeopteryx did not meet the standards of a transitional fossil. This was asserted by Pierer Nuoy who clearly laid out the standard of which it did not meet. And then what was that at 7:27? You clearly could have used an argument to point out without saying any of what you said. As I see it, that was clearly irrelevant.
@ukchristian28 Because you have to reject scientific evidence and not be willing to have your own evidence showing causality tested. That is the opposite of open mindedness, where you come from the standpoint that you could be wrong, and are willing to consider and weigh all the evidence supporting any point of view before making a decision.
Creationism starts with the assumption that the bible is literally true, the word of GOD. A non-testable starting point is no way to learn facts.
Actually I just noticed you got something a bit wrong. Dave said I was an open minded old earth creationist, not a young earth one. At the time I was, and I asked Dave to respond to the video. I wanted to hear what he had to say, which would of course include scientific arguments for evolution. I was and am open to these.
Also, could you explain how evolution is testable? Surely evolutionary processes can't be tested through repeated experimentation. It is something which is based upon observation and examination of the fossil record. The scientific method is a way in which we discover truth but it is not the only way.
@ukchristian28 Scientists work a bit like a detective. Clues (observations of nature) are put together and form a working hypothesis, which you then test to see what is PROBABLY true, knowing you will never know with certainty what is true.
All theories have predictive capacity, and evolutionary theory is no different. If you put guppies with different spot patterns in different environments with predators, those best fit (blend in) should be selected for over time. This has been done.
This is a really good video! You seem very knowledgeable in this subject. I personally do not believe the theory of evolution. I am created by God, and I admit that I have no proof of it. My argument is only this, theories are theories, they can be proven wrong. Not so long ago humans believed the world to be flat. It was a Theory accepted by most as fact.
Why does everyone insist that evolution is vs. creationism. The two theories don't even answer the same questions. Evolution answers the question of how all the species that we see come about from already existing matter. Creationism answers the question of how matter came to exist in the first place. They are not even mutually exclusive.
@ptashman Probably because they are mutually exclusive. Evolution is based on observations of nature, whereas Creationism is based on hocus pocus; it includes the origin of the Universe and formation of the solar system, which makes it mutually exclusive to cosmology and geology as well, and it refutes common descent.
@ptashman There is also no supporting evidence for Creationism; all Creationists do is set up straw man arguments against evolution, and if that wasn't laughable enough, a lot of their so-called evidence is self contradictory. As for how life came from non-life, that's abiogenesis.
"Fuck You Kent Hovind", why, because he's right? Watch that video where the girl asks the audience if they think she is winning and there is a little cheer. Kent asks the same thing and the crowd goes ape shit! Can chromosome fusion be duplicated in a lab, I'm sure you know 2 fusing from 48 leaves 47 not 46. If that's true evolution will eventually evolve to nothing. Why did you leave out the part where he says tobacco also has 48?
Umm... no. Of 24 chromosomes, one fused (13 fused with 2), thus creating 23. 23 * 2 = 46. Try to learn a little bit about what you're attempting to discredit.
All right , I stand corrected. How do they know it was a half and half split? If what he's saying is true, why are there still monkeys around today? Sounds to me like there is a lot of assuming going on.
You get 23 chromosomes from your father, and 23 from your mother. Americans came from Englishmen. Why are there still Englishmen? Monkeys don't directly change into humans. And no one ever says that they do except for creationists. We are related. We have a common ancestor. We are apes. The chimp is our nearest living cousin.
And no... there is NO assume. Unless there is evidence for something, it isn't even considered a hypothesis. You're taking on one of the most evidenced theories in all of science. And I find it amazing that you speak with authority, and yet know very little about the subject. Please learn about it first... before you dismiss it.
Ahh! And we come to the crux of your problem. You really don't know anything about evolution except what your preacher or some such has told you. I presume you mean "information". But I'll note that your side can't define the term "information". There are ferns with more than 1,000 chromosomes. Biological evolution is defined as any genetic change in a population that is inherited over several generations.
No, I mean what I said, gaining not losing. Now I'm sure I'm wrong but isn't information in DNA, not chromosomes? And just several generations, I know I don't know anything about evolution, but could have sworn I've heard many of you say millions of generations of evolution. Oh!! your several generations are millions of years right?
Ummm... no. Neither gaining NOR losing. Changing. Get it yet? Chromosomes contain DNA. And you definitely have your time scale off a bit. Evolution canoccur relatively quickly, or very slowly. It depends.
But I'm glad you admit you really don't know anything about evolution. A wise man would, at thsi point, educate himself on the subject. Drop everything you think you know, because you're probably wrong. And either ask, or view any of the many videos available on the subject.
Because humans and tobacco have completely different physiological and genetic structures. They don't have the same similarities that humans and apes have.
If they both have 48 chromosomes, they both have genetic structures that are similar in some ways, Do you believe humans are related to bananas? I've heard some of you say ultimately you are, Your turn..
They are both similar in some ways. All life is similar because all life comes from a common ancestor. The point is that the similarities between modern apes and humans are greater than that between humans and modern tobacco. You fail to understand the way in which the chromosomal fusion acted as a validated prediction of evolutionary theory.
Because we can match LARGE portions of our DNA to Chimpanzees, and small portions to Tobacco. Therefore, we have a close relationship with Chimps than with Tobacco. ALL life is related. The Octopus is related to the Banana. So are we. Very, VERY distantly.
Hey Exmech2, I did some research and watched Ken's video again and I THINK... I see what you're saying about the chromosomes. I want to do some more research before I belive It 100%
May I recommend AronRa's very excellent Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism. yes, he sometimes gets a little insulting to the creationist lot. But he's damned informative. And knows the subject well. Potholer54 also has some very informative, and very eloquent videos on the subject.
The similar number of chromosomes doesn't prove nothing. Chromosomes mean information. I'm pretty sure the chromosomes of the man and the tabbaco's contain different information. The fact we both have 50 coins in our pocket doesn't mean we're going to the same place.
Now I realize even in Costa Ricar there are stupid people believing in the Modern Myth of creation and worst of all the call this fairy tale science...guuua
I love science, but not Science Fiction...is boring...if you came from nothingness...finel...but don´t call it science, it´s true, home-fly and humans hearth genes are exactly the same, but is ludicrous to assert a home-fly is my cousin, next time save their lives, lest you are killing yor far related uncle, jajaja
Dude, study genetics, I already wasted much time discussing this with other people, evolution is obvious, and people that say flies are our cousins, we came from chimpanzees, and probably think evolution mean we will get superpowers like the Xmen. If you don't accept it cause faith, think fi it not cause you can't accept that we are as unimportant tot he universe like a fly, that maybe you are not part of a mayor plan, that you are irrelevant.
Nooop, I didn´t say we came from chimpanzeez, or home-fly is my cousin, I was just mocking you, but I have them in my heart, at least that´s what genetics indicates, and don´t even think about it, don´t jump into genetics, lest you don´t want to make a utter fool of yourself, genetics it´s the worst nightmare for evolutionistISM, NOT a single ioata scientific fact support the Charly´s fairy tale, sorry theory, nevr mention it, unless you want to be rediculized.
You know that by saying evolution is just a theory you just made a fool of yourself? Seems you know nothing about the subject, genetics the nightmare of evolutionists? The whole field of genetics is based on evolution.
Scientific Theory, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
First of all, I did not say evolution is just a theory, I said is a fairy tale for grown up´s and the greatest monument to human kind stupidity, evolutioniISM is a useless fairy tale as all fairy tales are for science...
It´s absolutly safety to say if you meet someone who claims TO believe in evolution, that person is ignarant, stupid, insane or wicked.- Remain in the bliss and enjoy yourself.
My, my you love to fool yourself, don't ya? So why don't you accept evolution? What do you believe in? Funny that you call it fairy tale, even if it doesn't involve magic or intervention like other hypothesis, just information that have been tested, it doesn't even try to say how life existed, only changed, existence is abiogenesis field. Or do you actually believe that humans were created by an all powerful cosmic ghost? NOW that is a fairy tale.
Maybe Ricky may educate you, I´mnot worthy to do so:
The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is "Divine Creation" and (we) both reject this alternative." (Dawkins, Richard, The Blind Watchmaker, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1996, p. 229-230)
You don´t believe in miracles, Do you? coming up next
An honest man***, arrmed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a MIRACLE, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.-
Francis Crick, Life Itself, pag88.
Unless you are smarter than R. Dawkins or F. Crick a Nobel Prize Winner you can deny directly and categorically their undeniable assertions.-
Didn't answer my questions, what do you believe in? Divine intervention? I don't believe in higher power defined by such human terms as intelligent, benevolent, evil or such, granting conscience and purpose to such a complex idea immediately denies its place as divine, as it's supposed to be above such terms.
Miracle? No. I don't see why people need to fit God into biology, or "creation of life". "God didn't need a creator, why do we?" And try not to be an smart ass, is not cute.
As any smart person I do believe not IN evolution, enough?
Well, high credentials people of the scientific community as R. Dawkins & F. Crick, are saying what the think could be a possible solution to your paradigma...it´s not me
By the way you need to be that smart ass to believe some chemical by random reactions came into living, that´s cute, isn´t it?
No not enough, saying you don't believe in something is not the same as saying what you do believe in. why can't you give an honest direct answer coming from yourself instead of quoting others? i though you said you were smart. Maybe not smart enough to think by yourself, which is sad for a 49 year old man.
I don't need to be an smart ass to believe in that. You don't even know what smart ass is meant to mean? Someone who enjoys giving flippant, sarcastic, rude answers to legitimate questions
But in the end, I won't keep wasting my time with people so blind as yourself that deny something so obvious as evolution. Why is it that you find it so hard to believe? Maybe you can't accept that our warmonger species shares ancestor with simple living apes? You need higher purpose? You need a god that gives you eternal life cause of our fear of death? Think about all this, maybe you will understand that you are the fool here.
Have a good day. I won't bother replying anymore, Waste of time.
But if you believe the whole diversity of life on earth living & extinct came from a single cell organism if you will or whatever you want to call it in 3850 millions years make you the smartest persons in the world, right?
Nooope, believing the whole diversity of life on earth living and extinct comes from a single organism, which by the way nobody has a clue what it was like, that miraculously emerged in a totally hypothetical and mythical primordial soup, by a yet not proved process, in roughly 3850 miilions years ago, that´s not only ignorance and suicide, it´s the greates stupidity of human kind ever perpetrated in the name in science, and is taught as science and gullible people believe so.
And believing that some invisible omnipresent sky fathers' hand took dirt to create the first person, and then a rib to create his wife is any *less* laughable?
Yeaph, I bet you´re right, believing in a omnipresent sky fahter takes a leap of faith, no questions about, but believing packicetus is a whales ancestor based on ear internal structure similarities (doubtfull) is doesn´t only take a leap of fait but a high dose of stupidity, irratinality and dogmantism, I still wonder how can scientists in Oxford and Harvad and all universities around the world can assert such a stupidity...
Nooope, yours is a belief system based on spontaneouness.
Um No. I never said anything about "leaps of faith".
Now, two things.
First. that's backwards. Dogmatism equals Religion. The "My belief is better than yours because I believe it to be." argument. Science is different. Science works on ideas (mutable) and facts. Facts are brought up and we ask "What conclusions can we draw from this?" People come up with a Scientific Theory and the best one that fits the available facts the best.
And guess what? The theory we have we that fits best? Evolution.
Sorry about my english is not my original language, but that aside...
Every single evolutionist on the tube utilizes the same observational data, and every single one of them are pretty confused and misleaded as you´re.- The word "evolution" is used in many different weird meanings.-
First of all, evolution is an observed, proved, tested and confirmed fact of science, IF evolution means allele frequency changes or descent with modification, mutantions & natural selection...cont
that happens and there´re plenty of examples either on the lab or in nature, but and listen oooh what a BIG, ENORMOUS, HUGE, UNSURMOUNTABLE but,...iF evolution means some chemical by random reactions brought forth a "simple living thing", since nobody has a clue what it was like, and this "living thing" by means of "evolution", evolved into the whole diversity of life on earth, living and extinct plants & animals in the last 3850 million years, that´s a heavy scientific hallucination
No. No it isn't. See bacteria have shorter life spans than your average dog or human. Not only that but they are able to Share information with each other. In the right conditions they could form a cell cluster, cell clusters have an advantage over single cells in that they are bigger than single cells.
How do you call to process by which a single cell organism whatever it was, that spontaneously appeared on planet earth about 3850 million year ago, and then by means of mutations and natural selection turned into the whole diversity of life living and extinct plants and animals, How do you call to such process?
You just confirmed that you believe in fairy tales.-
Remember the most famous one?
Once upon a time long time ago there was a frog that turns into a Prince in an instant,...that´s a fairy tale, isn´t it?
Now your fairy tale...Once upon a time long time ago there was a single cell that very slowly turned into the whole diversity of life on earth living and extinct plants and animal.-
The difference between the frog tale and yours is roughly 3850 million years, isn´t it?
Yeah. That's like saying the distance from New York City to Spokane washington is only 28 feet. And if you believe that the evolutionary process is a fairy tail. I can't help you. Perhaps you should seek out professional help.
So you truly believe a single cell ancestry just given 3850 million years would turn into the whole diverstisity of life on earth, living and extinct plants and animals...
Scientists have been observing all the way long finches producing finches, horseshoe crabs producing horseshoe crabs all the way long since 450 my, etc.
Why do you believe once upon a time long time ago plants and animals produced something different to that plant or animal?
Whether you understand it or not (argument from ignorance) the fact is that the Theory of Evolution has survived ALL tests, experiments and attacks from the best science minds over the past 150 to 160 years. If you think that you can disprove it, any of it, write your own scientific dissertation on the subject, carry out your own tests and experiments to prove your hypothesis and submit for peer review. Until such time, relax. The battle has been long won and you lost. Move on.
We need to run some tests on that. But I am sure the data will show that result.. In the mean time safety precautions should be taken. Prep subjects with 55 ccs of Education! Stat!
Next. Evolution is a belief as Bald is a hair colour. Evolution happens. A lot.
Case example. Over in japan there is this nylon factory. And in one of their nylon waste pits they found something interesting. Bacteria that can Eat Nylon. To prove this wasn't just a fluke, they did a little experiment were nylon was the only thing that bacteria in an environment.
And guess what? The same mutation became the norm in their lab.
Finally. Spelling. Dictionaries. You can Right Click words in Youtube.
Your famous nylon bacteria is a fact, but the stupid, non-sense, irrational, faithfull conclusion, which by the way is the most famous hallucination made by science, it that throughout this process repeated over and over again in 3850 million will turn that bacteria into the whole diverstiy of live on earth, that is non-sense and non-science, and certainly the most irrational conclusion.-
By the way after the mutation took place, the bacteria continued being......A BACTERIA...aaadha
That isn't a hallucination. That isn't "faithful". Nor is it irrational. And it is a Bacteria that Eats Nylon. You want some sort of spontaneous transformation into some New kind of animal, or a Different kind of animal, then you are looking at the wrong theory. Evolution is slow progression from one state to another over the course of many generations. New Mutations occur that if beneficial to a being spread through the group at the time. If they aren't they die out. Evolution it works.
Once upon a time, long, veeery loooong time ago there was a "living thing", wooow, go go go, that of course nobody has an iota fact to figure out what it was like or how it came into being, wooow...go go go, that veeery slooowly were turning into the whole diversity of life on earth living and extinct plants and animals....and of course to support such a stupid idea science offer all the stupidities that you believe in..-
That logic is based off the over simplification of the Theory as a whole. This is what is called a logical fallacy. By your logic, the statement "Anyone with the right parts could build a nuclear missile in their garage" is true.
If a frog turns into a Prince in an instant is a fairy tale, no doubt about it, but given 300 million years to the very same frog it can turn into the whole diversity of reptiles, birds, mammal and humans, and scientists put it on the text books and is thaugh as science, no doubt about it, remain on the bliss and enjoy yourself,
I of coarse would love to subscribe to creationist channels if they woud stop blocking me for poisting vetted scientific rebuttles to there nonsense(VFX in perticular).
Hovind's ramblings about creation have been proven to be completely bunk(please check out extantdodo or thunderf00t's channel for a step by step explination).
Can you think of a single valid point hovind made?
The people that you call idiots are the same people working in labs and trying to help humanity by curing diseases, as well as furthering our knowledge of the world. What the fuck have you done lately?
you've probably seen the video where they have actually created new living cells right?
well that video disproves evolution. it just shows that new life NEEDS a creator to come to being. if i shook up a box of individual computer parts, what are the odds of it putting itself together? it couldnt make its own electricity to run it. thats my example im sure there are better ones. evolution is a joke!!!
well curing diseases is way, way, way beyond your limited mental capacity. LOL!
Well it doesn't take a lot of mental power to understand evolution because anyone with normal intelligence could understand it, just requires one to STUDY and READ!
and you may wonder "Why people laugh at creationist?"
YOU are the perfect Example.
we are trying to help creationist to stop making pathetic laughable idiots of themselves. By telling you to educate yourself properly.
both sites are for the simple minded, you can do better than that to try in correcting what we know.
maybe you dont understand why science demands objective evidences.
Real tangible objective proof,
And again, you have not fully grasp the scientific method and not understand all the 150 years of failed rebuttals done by creationist in the theory of evolution. And ended up with creationist scientist accepting the theory of evolution true. why is that?
How so? Give a specific example. Even if I am, it's the fault of the original video maker for not including Hovind's arguments in context. My intention for this was to refute the video, not Hovind's arguments.
LOL same old crap from you guys. i love it when you use the Argument and say EXPLAIN EVOLUTION TO ME! lol. and i have seen that video and they did not take it out of context AT ALL!
nope, your the idiot for not understanding the irony.
only creationist that are so far deluded to do satanic tactics to prove their belief in creationism.
my advice to you. verify all your facts and you will realize in who is decieving who here. christianity is not all holy throughout its history, it had some demonic eras such as, ex. the inquisition, witch burnings, the crusade, castration of the boys choir
plus, the ATHEISTS have killed more innocent christians out of cold blood than any of those COMBINED!
which group of athiest do you mean. The communist, lead by Stalin and Mao combined. surely you could count, that his death toll cannot match the centuries of killing in the name of religion worldwide.
Hitler is no athiest, verify it yourself.
Nazi's and modern Germans are two different people
I was talking about when you mentioned the crusades and all that stuff. how is that different from my examples?
Atheists still kill Christians even today, with shootings and various hate crimes, just because they disagree with what atheists believe. that's no reason to kill someone.
Atheists still kill Christians even today, with shootings and various hate crimes, just because they disagree with what atheists believe. that's no reason to kill someone.
you say more than those combined, got the numbers?
Christian and non christians have perished due to differences in faith. exampe - The crusaders are fanatical christians, go verify it.
remember the catholic protestant wars in europe? both equally fanatical about their beliefs. verify the deathtoll.
Well, Jesus wasn't killed by atheists, was he? You bringing him up is just a non sequitor.
Both Atheists and Christians have been greatly persecuted in the past by various other groups of people and frankly, I don't see how it matters which one killed more.
That kind of conduct is not acceptable, no matter which group of people is inflicting it. A person who kills 10 people is not better than a person who kills 20.
yes, i know. I only said that because he was saying Christianity is evil just because of the crusades. I didn't mean to come off life that, I just hate it when people try to bash Christianity over a group of false Christians.
but im willing to let that go.
I do have a real question for you stutteringDave,
at the end of your video you said "God is my creator" did you mean that to be sarcastic or do you really believe in God? im just wondering.
I am a theistic evolutionist and a Christian. To repost what I typed to another person:
"I believe he (God) is my creator in the sense that he started off a process (with the big bang) that eventually led to my physical birth. I also believe that he directly created my soul.)
The bible says we shouldn't use vulgar obscenities, but let our words be good.
If you are really a christian, you wouldn't be saying "F YOU" and flipping off that creationist (forgot the name lol) and calling people "bastards" and various other vulgarities.
so I ask, are you a true Christian? or are you just an evolutionist that believes in God?
I have watched some more of your videos and I have come to respect you as a person.
I have come to respect you because you and I are very much alike. we have a lot of the same views on various things. the only thing I can find so far that makes our views different is the fact that I don't believe in evolution, and I don't believe in using said words to bash or ridicule people.
again I ask, are you a true christian, or do you just believe in God? there is a BIG difference.
VFX is a lieing/decetful prick who never swears while I know people with mouths that would embares marines on leave who would bend over backwards to help out there fellow man.
who cares if someone swears and helps people, works don't get someone into heaven. only faith. and how the heck do you know that VFX doesn't help people? to you stalk him like some kind of sadistic creep? I find your lack of knowledge refreshing :)
Pagan Rome for example all believed in their pagan gods, as well as the countries they have conquered also believed in their pagan gods. in the dark ages, up to the reinassance, upto the first half of the 20th century. all religious people, why, because there is no other belief system available to explain everything. Science haven't matured enough to explain the natural world.
Beliefs do not explain ANYTHING. Beliefs are that which you hold to be true. They can be just as wrong as the next guys beliefs. Belief in a God tells you nothing about the universe. Science can tell you about the things it already knows, and is trying to explain the things it does not. Beliefs tell you nothing, evidence gives you the best chance of your beliefs being true. Religion provides none.
In reply to emancoy's comment: "athiesm is extremely rare in ancient times."
Actually, every person on the planet is born an atheist. It's not until idiotic, fearful parents or organized religion manipulates the child are they a follower of faith.
there is a difference between not knowing God and not believing in God. does an abandoned baby know who he came from and where he was born? no, he is told who his mother is and told where he was born. it's the same thing with everyone, everyone knows they came from somewhere. but when you tell a kid they were born in a certain hospital, they don't say "i refuse to believe that". an atheist is someone who refuses to believe, not does not know.
Knowing a god and believing in a god are both delusional.
I know what an atheist is and it's far from your definition. I see an atheist as someone who understands the need for evidence and facts to back claims up.
A follower of faith is a person that has a deep-rooted need to believe despite evidence against their belief.
For most, the decision is like so - know nothing, or take the mindset of knowing at least something. Argue all you want, but in the end, you will know virtually nothing.
This is because the julian callender was established during the dark ages by the papaci. It's worth noting that muslims, buddhist and jews have their own callenders which reflect their own religious traditions. Do the fact that callenders were established around these god's validate their existance? Also, modern accademic discourse uses C.E.(common era) and B.C.E.(before common ear).
It is valid. Every university class/text book I've ever had contact with has used the secular CE and BCE.
That said, what does it matter if we still use a callander that we deviced by the papaci in the middle of the dark ages? Things like that are called "Ativisms" and they are a part of nature as well and suport evolution.
I am aware of the consequences, thank you very much for pointing that out -_- while you're at it, do you know what sound a cat makes? what does d-o-g spell? dude what are you, three?
Vanderbilt University, and I was not a christian at the time.
It is hard to believe that some one stupid enough to take kent hovind seriously was able sucessfully completely a university program. I smell a lier or a liberal arts major.
"t is hard to believe that some one stupid enough to take kent hovind seriously was able sucessfully completely a university program. I smell a lier or a liberal arts major."
Ok I'm not even going to point out all of the obvious spelling and grammar errors you have just made. While calling ME stupid, I might add. Whom should I take seriously here, the one that can't spell worth a flip, or, well you see where I'm going with this. Sorry my friend, I will take intelligence over arrogance any day.
You should take seroiusly the person who's claims are backed by mountains of peer reviewed evidence. Can you come up with even one kent hovind claim that hasn't been debunked 100 times?
LOL, real scientists have debunked Hovinds nonesense 100's of times. Infact, easy to understand walk throughs of these simple and damning rebuttles. Go to thunderf00t or extantdodo's channels. Hovind averages one lie a minute in his first 3 videos.
You give me the unfortnate impression that I'm talking to some one who has never read any of the argumenst against your own possition.
I have read tons of arguments against my position, and I must say, I found none of them valid or even slightly feasible. I refuse to believe that everything came from nothing by itself. That is scientifically impossible. Also, a species cannot produce completely different species.
A banana cannot make a dog, no matter how many billions of years you give it.
Science cannot explain everything.
There are things that can't be explained, like God, for instance.
If you have read "tons of arguments", than you wouldn't be making the absurd statements that that you. Nobody says that everything came from nothing. Nobody says that an extant banana has turned into an extant dog. And yes, we have observed a species produce a different species. Google "Observed instances of speciation."
"I have read tons of arguments against my position"
Which arguments specifically have you read against your own position?
That you'd parrot uncritically a Hovind straw man like "a banana cannot turn into a dog" tells me you've only ever read creationist paradies of the scientific explinations.
Please check out extantdodo's channel, he obliterates hovind's first 3 videos and is kind enough to site his sources.
"Which arguments specifically have you read against your own position?"
you have no idea.
"That you'd parrot uncritically a Hovind straw man like "a banana cannot turn into a dog" tells me you've only ever read creationist paradies of the scientific explinations."
no, I have heard pretty much every argument there is. I used to be atheist, I not only heard them, I believed them.
"lease check out extantdodo's channel"
I've already watched them, and the arguments made are idiotic and untrue
I don't have to prove anything to you, and I really don't care if you believe me or not.
You can think whatever you want about me, it's not like I will be shamed from civilization if you disagree with me. So saying that, I have heard pretty much every argument on BOTH sides. I choose to believe what I believe. By the way, bananas never made dogs, apes never made humans, whales never made cows, nothingness never made a single cell, and a single cell never made everything.
LOL, if the body of your argument is claiming to be knowledgable on your opponents possitions try not to end your statement with a massive straw man agument.
You claimed that extantdodo's vidoes were "full of lies" and when I asked you to site one you couldn't. That's pretty sad.
I'm just asking you to qualify your claims. That you are unable to site even a single lie in an extantdodo video proves how full of shit you are and how unsported your possition is.
Wolves are dogs, they are a different species, not a different animal altogether.
a dog can't make a cat, a cat can't make a pretzel, no matter how long you give it.
by the way, the whole dogs and wolves thing, didn't happen on it's own, we humans controlled the breeding, our own sort of "intelligent design" in a way. breeding and natural selection are very different.
but I'd expect that from someone who can't spell in the first place :P
I just had to say that Archeopteryx did not meet the standards of a transitional fossil. This was asserted by Pierer Nuoy who clearly laid out the standard of which it did not meet. And then what was that at 7:27? You clearly could have used an argument to point out without saying any of what you said. As I see it, that was clearly irrelevant.
MayonR 10 months ago
Open-minded young Earth creationist? That's the mother of all oxymorons.
Highlyskeptical 1 year ago
@Highlyskeptical
Why is it?
ukchristian28 10 months ago
@ukchristian28 Because you have to reject scientific evidence and not be willing to have your own evidence showing causality tested. That is the opposite of open mindedness, where you come from the standpoint that you could be wrong, and are willing to consider and weigh all the evidence supporting any point of view before making a decision.
Creationism starts with the assumption that the bible is literally true, the word of GOD. A non-testable starting point is no way to learn facts.
Highlyskeptical 9 months ago
@Highlyskeptical
Actually I just noticed you got something a bit wrong. Dave said I was an open minded old earth creationist, not a young earth one. At the time I was, and I asked Dave to respond to the video. I wanted to hear what he had to say, which would of course include scientific arguments for evolution. I was and am open to these.
ukchristian28 9 months ago
@Highlyskeptical
Also, could you explain how evolution is testable? Surely evolutionary processes can't be tested through repeated experimentation. It is something which is based upon observation and examination of the fossil record. The scientific method is a way in which we discover truth but it is not the only way.
ukchristian28 9 months ago
@ukchristian28 Scientists work a bit like a detective. Clues (observations of nature) are put together and form a working hypothesis, which you then test to see what is PROBABLY true, knowing you will never know with certainty what is true.
All theories have predictive capacity, and evolutionary theory is no different. If you put guppies with different spot patterns in different environments with predators, those best fit (blend in) should be selected for over time. This has been done.
Highlyskeptical 9 months ago
@Highlyskeptical
No, he said open-minded OLD earth creationist.
BassP86 10 months ago
This is a really good video! You seem very knowledgeable in this subject. I personally do not believe the theory of evolution. I am created by God, and I admit that I have no proof of it. My argument is only this, theories are theories, they can be proven wrong. Not so long ago humans believed the world to be flat. It was a Theory accepted by most as fact.
truthlightway 1 year ago
Why does everyone insist that evolution is vs. creationism. The two theories don't even answer the same questions. Evolution answers the question of how all the species that we see come about from already existing matter. Creationism answers the question of how matter came to exist in the first place. They are not even mutually exclusive.
ptashman 1 year ago
@ptashman Probably because they are mutually exclusive. Evolution is based on observations of nature, whereas Creationism is based on hocus pocus; it includes the origin of the Universe and formation of the solar system, which makes it mutually exclusive to cosmology and geology as well, and it refutes common descent.
Direkin 1 year ago
@ptashman There is also no supporting evidence for Creationism; all Creationists do is set up straw man arguments against evolution, and if that wasn't laughable enough, a lot of their so-called evidence is self contradictory. As for how life came from non-life, that's abiogenesis.
Direkin 1 year ago
I hate it when people take things out of context
50belowhotdog 2 years ago
"Fuck You Kent Hovind", why, because he's right? Watch that video where the girl asks the audience if they think she is winning and there is a little cheer. Kent asks the same thing and the crowd goes ape shit! Can chromosome fusion be duplicated in a lab, I'm sure you know 2 fusing from 48 leaves 47 not 46. If that's true evolution will eventually evolve to nothing. Why did you leave out the part where he says tobacco also has 48?
ironman197268 2 years ago
Umm... no. Of 24 chromosomes, one fused (13 fused with 2), thus creating 23. 23 * 2 = 46. Try to learn a little bit about what you're attempting to discredit.
Exmech2 2 years ago
That ain't what ken miller said dick head!! It doesn't make any difference any way because it is bull shit!!
ironman197268 2 years ago
Umm, I'm thinking you need to listen a little closer. Possibly take a math course while you're at it.
lrn2reason
Exmech2 2 years ago
All right , I stand corrected. How do they know it was a half and half split? If what he's saying is true, why are there still monkeys around today? Sounds to me like there is a lot of assuming going on.
ironman197268 2 years ago
You get 23 chromosomes from your father, and 23 from your mother. Americans came from Englishmen. Why are there still Englishmen? Monkeys don't directly change into humans. And no one ever says that they do except for creationists. We are related. We have a common ancestor. We are apes. The chimp is our nearest living cousin.
Exmech2 2 years ago
And no... there is NO assume. Unless there is evidence for something, it isn't even considered a hypothesis. You're taking on one of the most evidenced theories in all of science. And I find it amazing that you speak with authority, and yet know very little about the subject. Please learn about it first... before you dismiss it.
Exmech2 2 years ago
Isn't evolution supposed to be gaining not losing?
ironman197268 2 years ago
Not necessarily. Evolution is simply change.
StutteringDave 2 years ago
Ahh! And we come to the crux of your problem. You really don't know anything about evolution except what your preacher or some such has told you. I presume you mean "information". But I'll note that your side can't define the term "information". There are ferns with more than 1,000 chromosomes. Biological evolution is defined as any genetic change in a population that is inherited over several generations.
Exmech2 2 years ago
No, I mean what I said, gaining not losing. Now I'm sure I'm wrong but isn't information in DNA, not chromosomes? And just several generations, I know I don't know anything about evolution, but could have sworn I've heard many of you say millions of generations of evolution. Oh!! your several generations are millions of years right?
ironman197268 2 years ago
Ummm... no. Neither gaining NOR losing. Changing. Get it yet? Chromosomes contain DNA. And you definitely have your time scale off a bit. Evolution canoccur relatively quickly, or very slowly. It depends.
But I'm glad you admit you really don't know anything about evolution. A wise man would, at thsi point, educate himself on the subject. Drop everything you think you know, because you're probably wrong. And either ask, or view any of the many videos available on the subject.
Exmech2 2 years ago
Tobacco has 48 chromosomes like monkeys, how do you know humans did not evolve from tobacco?
ironman197268 2 years ago
Because humans and tobacco have completely different physiological and genetic structures. They don't have the same similarities that humans and apes have.
StutteringDave 2 years ago
If they both have 48 chromosomes, they both have genetic structures that are similar in some ways, Do you believe humans are related to bananas? I've heard some of you say ultimately you are, Your turn..
ironman197268 2 years ago
They are both similar in some ways. All life is similar because all life comes from a common ancestor. The point is that the similarities between modern apes and humans are greater than that between humans and modern tobacco. You fail to understand the way in which the chromosomal fusion acted as a validated prediction of evolutionary theory.
StutteringDave 2 years ago
Because we can match LARGE portions of our DNA to Chimpanzees, and small portions to Tobacco. Therefore, we have a close relationship with Chimps than with Tobacco. ALL life is related. The Octopus is related to the Banana. So are we. Very, VERY distantly.
Exmech2 2 years ago
@ironman197268 humans have 46 chromosomes.
fredsavagegarden 1 year ago
Hey Exmech2, I did some research and watched Ken's video again and I THINK... I see what you're saying about the chromosomes. I want to do some more research before I belive It 100%
ironman197268 2 years ago
May I recommend AronRa's very excellent Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism. yes, he sometimes gets a little insulting to the creationist lot. But he's damned informative. And knows the subject well. Potholer54 also has some very informative, and very eloquent videos on the subject.
Exmech2 2 years ago
7:27 owns
bigmike4758 2 years ago
What instrument do you play??You have a music stand!!
beefjerky3 2 years ago
Alto Saxophone.
StutteringDave 2 years ago
3:47
Oh boy. It's too much.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
Good points, sir.
No forward or backward.
But we want absolute answers!
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
even the "theory" of evolution is evolving.. very consistent proof folks
huyiy 2 years ago
The similar number of chromosomes doesn't prove nothing. Chromosomes mean information. I'm pretty sure the chromosomes of the man and the tabbaco's contain different information. The fact we both have 50 coins in our pocket doesn't mean we're going to the same place.
jonathandiaz8 2 years ago
decietfull cristian,not shocked
lowendentheogen 2 years ago
Screw it I'm not gonna pick up another fight.
natzo89 2 years ago
natzo89
Now I realize even in Costa Ricar there are stupid people believing in the Modern Myth of creation and worst of all the call this fairy tale science...guuua
I love science, but not Science Fiction...is boring...if you came from nothingness...finel...but don´t call it science, it´s true, home-fly and humans hearth genes are exactly the same, but is ludicrous to assert a home-fly is my cousin, next time save their lives, lest you are killing yor far related uncle, jajaja
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Dude, study genetics, I already wasted much time discussing this with other people, evolution is obvious, and people that say flies are our cousins, we came from chimpanzees, and probably think evolution mean we will get superpowers like the Xmen. If you don't accept it cause faith, think fi it not cause you can't accept that we are as unimportant tot he universe like a fly, that maybe you are not part of a mayor plan, that you are irrelevant.
So were do we come from stupid? Eden? Zeus?
natzo89 2 years ago
natzo89
Nooop, I didn´t say we came from chimpanzeez, or home-fly is my cousin, I was just mocking you, but I have them in my heart, at least that´s what genetics indicates, and don´t even think about it, don´t jump into genetics, lest you don´t want to make a utter fool of yourself, genetics it´s the worst nightmare for evolutionistISM, NOT a single ioata scientific fact support the Charly´s fairy tale, sorry theory, nevr mention it, unless you want to be rediculized.
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
You know that by saying evolution is just a theory you just made a fool of yourself? Seems you know nothing about the subject, genetics the nightmare of evolutionists? The whole field of genetics is based on evolution.
Scientific Theory, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Would you say cell theory is just a theory?
natzo89 2 years ago
natzo89
First of all, I did not say evolution is just a theory, I said is a fairy tale for grown up´s and the greatest monument to human kind stupidity, evolutioniISM is a useless fairy tale as all fairy tales are for science...
It´s absolutly safety to say if you meet someone who claims TO believe in evolution, that person is ignarant, stupid, insane or wicked.- Remain in the bliss and enjoy yourself.
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
My, my you love to fool yourself, don't ya? So why don't you accept evolution? What do you believe in? Funny that you call it fairy tale, even if it doesn't involve magic or intervention like other hypothesis, just information that have been tested, it doesn't even try to say how life existed, only changed, existence is abiogenesis field. Or do you actually believe that humans were created by an all powerful cosmic ghost? NOW that is a fairy tale.
natzo89 2 years ago
natzo89
Maybe Ricky may educate you, I´mnot worthy to do so:
The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is "Divine Creation" and (we) both reject this alternative." (Dawkins, Richard, The Blind Watchmaker, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1996, p. 229-230)
You don´t believe in miracles, Do you? coming up next
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
natzo89
An honest man***, arrmed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a MIRACLE, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.-
Francis Crick, Life Itself, pag88.
Unless you are smarter than R. Dawkins or F. Crick a Nobel Prize Winner you can deny directly and categorically their undeniable assertions.-
***Half brained if you will.-
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Didn't answer my questions, what do you believe in? Divine intervention? I don't believe in higher power defined by such human terms as intelligent, benevolent, evil or such, granting conscience and purpose to such a complex idea immediately denies its place as divine, as it's supposed to be above such terms.
Miracle? No. I don't see why people need to fit God into biology, or "creation of life". "God didn't need a creator, why do we?" And try not to be an smart ass, is not cute.
natzo89 2 years ago
natzo89
As any smart person I do believe not IN evolution, enough?
Well, high credentials people of the scientific community as R. Dawkins & F. Crick, are saying what the think could be a possible solution to your paradigma...it´s not me
By the way you need to be that smart ass to believe some chemical by random reactions came into living, that´s cute, isn´t it?
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
No not enough, saying you don't believe in something is not the same as saying what you do believe in. why can't you give an honest direct answer coming from yourself instead of quoting others? i though you said you were smart. Maybe not smart enough to think by yourself, which is sad for a 49 year old man.
I don't need to be an smart ass to believe in that. You don't even know what smart ass is meant to mean? Someone who enjoys giving flippant, sarcastic, rude answers to legitimate questions
natzo89 2 years ago
But in the end, I won't keep wasting my time with people so blind as yourself that deny something so obvious as evolution. Why is it that you find it so hard to believe? Maybe you can't accept that our warmonger species shares ancestor with simple living apes? You need higher purpose? You need a god that gives you eternal life cause of our fear of death? Think about all this, maybe you will understand that you are the fool here.
Have a good day. I won't bother replying anymore, Waste of time.
natzo89 2 years ago
"that person is ignarant"
I would try to explain to you how monumentally stupid you are but I doubt very much you would understand. Poor you - no wonder you're religious.
joyork 2 years ago
joyork
But if you believe the whole diversity of life on earth living & extinct came from a single cell organism if you will or whatever you want to call it in 3850 millions years make you the smartest persons in the world, right?
I don´t want to be that smart, sorry
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
So apparently ignorance is bliss?
No it isn't. Ignorance is suicide.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
Nooope, believing the whole diversity of life on earth living and extinct comes from a single organism, which by the way nobody has a clue what it was like, that miraculously emerged in a totally hypothetical and mythical primordial soup, by a yet not proved process, in roughly 3850 miilions years ago, that´s not only ignorance and suicide, it´s the greates stupidity of human kind ever perpetrated in the name in science, and is taught as science and gullible people believe so.
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
And believing that some invisible omnipresent sky fathers' hand took dirt to create the first person, and then a rib to create his wife is any *less* laughable?
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
Yeaph, I bet you´re right, believing in a omnipresent sky fahter takes a leap of faith, no questions about, but believing packicetus is a whales ancestor based on ear internal structure similarities (doubtfull) is doesn´t only take a leap of fait but a high dose of stupidity, irratinality and dogmantism, I still wonder how can scientists in Oxford and Harvad and all universities around the world can assert such a stupidity...
Nooope, yours is a belief system based on spontaneouness.
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Um No. I never said anything about "leaps of faith".
Now, two things.
First. that's backwards. Dogmatism equals Religion. The "My belief is better than yours because I believe it to be." argument. Science is different. Science works on ideas (mutable) and facts. Facts are brought up and we ask "What conclusions can we draw from this?" People come up with a Scientific Theory and the best one that fits the available facts the best.
And guess what? The theory we have we that fits best? Evolution.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
Sorry about my english is not my original language, but that aside...
Every single evolutionist on the tube utilizes the same observational data, and every single one of them are pretty confused and misleaded as you´re.- The word "evolution" is used in many different weird meanings.-
First of all, evolution is an observed, proved, tested and confirmed fact of science, IF evolution means allele frequency changes or descent with modification, mutantions & natural selection...cont
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
saber
that happens and there´re plenty of examples either on the lab or in nature, but and listen oooh what a BIG, ENORMOUS, HUGE, UNSURMOUNTABLE but,...iF evolution means some chemical by random reactions brought forth a "simple living thing", since nobody has a clue what it was like, and this "living thing" by means of "evolution", evolved into the whole diversity of life on earth, living and extinct plants & animals in the last 3850 million years, that´s a heavy scientific hallucination
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
No. No it isn't. See bacteria have shorter life spans than your average dog or human. Not only that but they are able to Share information with each other. In the right conditions they could form a cell cluster, cell clusters have an advantage over single cells in that they are bigger than single cells.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
Yeaph, in the right conditions the can form clusters, exactly what coral has been doing the last 500 millions years.-
And they will continue growing as cluster but also will continue being single cell organisms...aaadha
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Which is. Evolution. And I don't know what "aaadha" means.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
How do you call to process by which a single cell organism whatever it was, that spontaneously appeared on planet earth about 3850 million year ago, and then by means of mutations and natural selection turned into the whole diversity of life living and extinct plants and animals, How do you call to such process?
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
What happened after the "cell"? Evolution.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
You just confirmed that you believe in fairy tales.-
Remember the most famous one?
Once upon a time long time ago there was a frog that turns into a Prince in an instant,...that´s a fairy tale, isn´t it?
Now your fairy tale...Once upon a time long time ago there was a single cell that very slowly turned into the whole diversity of life on earth living and extinct plants and animal.-
The difference between the frog tale and yours is roughly 3850 million years, isn´t it?
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Yeah. That's like saying the distance from New York City to Spokane washington is only 28 feet. And if you believe that the evolutionary process is a fairy tail. I can't help you. Perhaps you should seek out professional help.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
So you truly believe a single cell ancestry just given 3850 million years would turn into the whole diverstisity of life on earth, living and extinct plants and animals...
Scientists have been observing all the way long finches producing finches, horseshoe crabs producing horseshoe crabs all the way long since 450 my, etc.
Why do you believe once upon a time long time ago plants and animals produced something different to that plant or animal?
That is not what we observe, don´t we?
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
chuyaventuras
Whether you understand it or not (argument from ignorance) the fact is that the Theory of Evolution has survived ALL tests, experiments and attacks from the best science minds over the past 150 to 160 years. If you think that you can disprove it, any of it, write your own scientific dissertation on the subject, carry out your own tests and experiments to prove your hypothesis and submit for peer review. Until such time, relax. The battle has been long won and you lost. Move on.
draagon66 2 years ago
*high fives Draagon*
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
You're so stupid I have no respect for people like you.
Theronguardaaah 2 years ago
Theronguard
If not believing that pakicetus is a whales ancestor is being stupid, so be it.
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Too much exposure to Hovind-radiation is dangerous. It destroys brain-cells.
draagon66 2 years ago
We need to run some tests on that. But I am sure the data will show that result.. In the mean time safety precautions should be taken. Prep subjects with 55 ccs of Education! Stat!
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
Next. Evolution is a belief as Bald is a hair colour. Evolution happens. A lot.
Case example. Over in japan there is this nylon factory. And in one of their nylon waste pits they found something interesting. Bacteria that can Eat Nylon. To prove this wasn't just a fluke, they did a little experiment were nylon was the only thing that bacteria in an environment.
And guess what? The same mutation became the norm in their lab.
Finally. Spelling. Dictionaries. You can Right Click words in Youtube.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
Your famous nylon bacteria is a fact, but the stupid, non-sense, irrational, faithfull conclusion, which by the way is the most famous hallucination made by science, it that throughout this process repeated over and over again in 3850 million will turn that bacteria into the whole diverstiy of live on earth, that is non-sense and non-science, and certainly the most irrational conclusion.-
By the way after the mutation took place, the bacteria continued being......A BACTERIA...aaadha
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
That isn't a hallucination. That isn't "faithful". Nor is it irrational. And it is a Bacteria that Eats Nylon. You want some sort of spontaneous transformation into some New kind of animal, or a Different kind of animal, then you are looking at the wrong theory. Evolution is slow progression from one state to another over the course of many generations. New Mutations occur that if beneficial to a being spread through the group at the time. If they aren't they die out. Evolution it works.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
And when did the common ancestor to both cats and dogs stop being a cat?
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
saber
So your fairy tale goes like this:
Once upon a time, long, veeery loooong time ago there was a "living thing", wooow, go go go, that of course nobody has an iota fact to figure out what it was like or how it came into being, wooow...go go go, that veeery slooowly were turning into the whole diversity of life on earth living and extinct plants and animals....and of course to support such a stupid idea science offer all the stupidities that you believe in..-
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
That logic is based off the over simplification of the Theory as a whole. This is what is called a logical fallacy. By your logic, the statement "Anyone with the right parts could build a nuclear missile in their garage" is true.
sabertooth1980 2 years ago
Fairy Tale
If a frog turns into a Prince in an instant is a fairy tale, no doubt about it, but given 300 million years to the very same frog it can turn into the whole diversity of reptiles, birds, mammal and humans, and scientists put it on the text books and is thaugh as science, no doubt about it, remain on the bliss and enjoy yourself,
are you dumb in any other area ehhhh?
Bye
chuyaventuras 2 years ago
Comment removed
natzo89 2 years ago
I of coarse would love to subscribe to creationist channels if they woud stop blocking me for poisting vetted scientific rebuttles to there nonsense(VFX in perticular).
soulinite 3 years ago
Kent Hovind is a fraud and a lier as are all creationists.
soulinite 3 years ago
if a thief says grass is green, does that make it any less true? Does that make him a liar?
nevets815 3 years ago
Hovind's ramblings about creation have been proven to be completely bunk(please check out extantdodo or thunderf00t's channel for a step by step explination).
Can you think of a single valid point hovind made?
soulinite 3 years ago
Can some one explain to these creationist what an atavism is?
en(dot)wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Atavism
soulinite 3 years ago
hahahhhhaaha none of those clips were deceptively taken out of context. I have seen the entirety of those videos. EVOLUTIONISTS ARE IDIOTS!
nevets815 3 years ago
The people that you call idiots are the same people working in labs and trying to help humanity by curing diseases, as well as furthering our knowledge of the world. What the fuck have you done lately?
StutteringDave 3 years ago
they may be curing diseases, but they are morons.
they may be smart but they're horribly dumb.
you've probably seen the video where they have actually created new living cells right?
well that video disproves evolution. it just shows that new life NEEDS a creator to come to being. if i shook up a box of individual computer parts, what are the odds of it putting itself together? it couldnt make its own electricity to run it. thats my example im sure there are better ones. evolution is a joke!!!
nevets815 3 years ago
"they may be curing diseases, but they are morons."
Well, whatever standard for intelligence you are using is clearly useless.
"they may be smart but they're horribly dumb."
Yes, just like how I might be tall but I'm terribly short.
"it just shows that new life NEEDS a creator to come to being."
By xenu you are a moron. If scientists are able to create a cell, it will be by duplicating natural processes that have already taken place.
StutteringDave 3 years ago
well curing diseases is way, way, way beyond your limited mental capacity. LOL!
Well it doesn't take a lot of mental power to understand evolution because anyone with normal intelligence could understand it, just requires one to STUDY and READ!
and you may wonder "Why people laugh at creationist?"
YOU are the perfect Example.
we are trying to help creationist to stop making pathetic laughable idiots of themselves. By telling you to educate yourself properly.
emancoy 3 years ago
first of all, I HAVE read and studied the theory of evolution so I could debate it fairly.
The Bible has more proof of God that you think.
don't believe me?
Google search "Proof God exists", and Proof Evolution is wrong".
there is proof, its just a matter of accepting it.
nevets815 3 years ago
both sites are for the simple minded, you can do better than that to try in correcting what we know.
maybe you dont understand why science demands objective evidences.
Real tangible objective proof,
And again, you have not fully grasp the scientific method and not understand all the 150 years of failed rebuttals done by creationist in the theory of evolution. And ended up with creationist scientist accepting the theory of evolution true. why is that?
you haven't read enough.
emancoy 3 years ago
LOL YOU are taking kent Hovind's Argument's OUT of context
coonkiller92 3 years ago
How so? Give a specific example. Even if I am, it's the fault of the original video maker for not including Hovind's arguments in context. My intention for this was to refute the video, not Hovind's arguments.
StutteringDave 3 years ago
LOL same old crap from you guys. i love it when you use the Argument and say EXPLAIN EVOLUTION TO ME! lol. and i have seen that video and they did not take it out of context AT ALL!
coonkiller92 3 years ago
why do creationist always use such tactics as misrepresentation, and deliberate deciet.
LOL!
the bible warns us about satan the deciever,
creationist uses the tactics of satan.
emancoy 3 years ago
so you're saying that Christians are of Satan by disproving his evil lies?
were of the devil for explaining God?
YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
nevets815 3 years ago
nope, your the idiot for not understanding the irony.
only creationist that are so far deluded to do satanic tactics to prove their belief in creationism.
my advice to you. verify all your facts and you will realize in who is decieving who here. christianity is not all holy throughout its history, it had some demonic eras such as, ex. the inquisition, witch burnings, the crusade, castration of the boys choir
and most recent, this events.
emancoy 3 years ago
well the Nazis kill thousands of jews, but you dont hate Germans do you?
The KKK killed thousands of black people, but you dont hate White people do you?
the crusades and those other practices were by FALSE Christians who CLAIMED to do all that in the name of God.
a true christian will not take the bible verses
plus, the ATHEISTS have killed more innocent christians out of cold blood than any of those COMBINED!
nevets815 3 years ago
plus, the ATHEISTS have killed more innocent christians out of cold blood than any of those COMBINED!
which group of athiest do you mean. The communist, lead by Stalin and Mao combined. surely you could count, that his death toll cannot match the centuries of killing in the name of religion worldwide.
Hitler is no athiest, verify it yourself.
Nazi's and modern Germans are two different people
and most white people donot belong to the KKK
emancoy 3 years ago
I never said Hitler was an atheist.
I was talking about when you mentioned the crusades and all that stuff. how is that different from my examples?
Atheists still kill Christians even today, with shootings and various hate crimes, just because they disagree with what atheists believe. that's no reason to kill someone.
nevets815 3 years ago
I just anticipated hitler- some people claims he is an athiest.
emancoy 3 years ago
Atheists still kill Christians even today, with shootings and various hate crimes, just because they disagree with what atheists believe. that's no reason to kill someone.
you say more than those combined, got the numbers?
Christian and non christians have perished due to differences in faith. exampe - The crusaders are fanatical christians, go verify it.
remember the catholic protestant wars in europe? both equally fanatical about their beliefs. verify the deathtoll.
emancoy 3 years ago
you actually believe that their shooting can outnumber the killings made by religious people throughout history?
Athiest in the past are often killed in public just by outright voicing their beliefs, verify it. Socrates paid the price.
emancoy 3 years ago
"Athiest in the past are often killed in public just by outright voicing their beliefs"
dude you've got that the other way around.
"Socrates paid the price"
yeah so did Jesus. he paid the biggest price anyone could ever endure. for YOU and ME and everyone.
what's so bad about believing that?
what is so darn bad about believing that there is a God and he created us?
what is the reason for killing because of that?
if athiests are so moral, why do they hate christianity?
why do they even care?
nevets815 3 years ago
"yeah so did Jesus."
Well, Jesus wasn't killed by atheists, was he? You bringing him up is just a non sequitor.
Both Atheists and Christians have been greatly persecuted in the past by various other groups of people and frankly, I don't see how it matters which one killed more.
That kind of conduct is not acceptable, no matter which group of people is inflicting it. A person who kills 10 people is not better than a person who kills 20.
StutteringDave 3 years ago
yes, i know. I only said that because he was saying Christianity is evil just because of the crusades. I didn't mean to come off life that, I just hate it when people try to bash Christianity over a group of false Christians.
but im willing to let that go.
I do have a real question for you stutteringDave,
at the end of your video you said "God is my creator" did you mean that to be sarcastic or do you really believe in God? im just wondering.
nevets815 3 years ago
I am a theistic evolutionist and a Christian. To repost what I typed to another person:
"I believe he (God) is my creator in the sense that he started off a process (with the big bang) that eventually led to my physical birth. I also believe that he directly created my soul.)
StutteringDave 3 years ago
ok let me get this straight. you are a christian right? ok. that's good. my next question, Do you believe the Bible is true?
nevets815 3 years ago
Yes, but I do not take the entirety of the document literally.
StutteringDave 3 years ago
but you do believe we should follow its law?
The bible says we shouldn't use vulgar obscenities, but let our words be good.
If you are really a christian, you wouldn't be saying "F YOU" and flipping off that creationist (forgot the name lol) and calling people "bastards" and various other vulgarities.
so I ask, are you a true Christian? or are you just an evolutionist that believes in God?
I have watched some more of your videos and I have come to respect you as a person.
(continued)
nevets815 3 years ago
I have come to respect you because you and I are very much alike. we have a lot of the same views on various things. the only thing I can find so far that makes our views different is the fact that I don't believe in evolution, and I don't believe in using said words to bash or ridicule people.
again I ask, are you a true christian, or do you just believe in God? there is a BIG difference.
nevets815 3 years ago
I accept Jesus as my savior, and believe that it is only through him that one can avoid eternal separation from God.
Regarding my swearing, they were probably excessive. Understand though, that I was using them to rebuke examples of great dishonesty.
StutteringDave 3 years ago
ok I can accept that, but you should really try not to talk like that, even if you're rebuking someone. even if they are an idiot.
It is never right for words like that. ever.
nevets815 3 years ago
what does vocabulary have to do with morality?
VFX is a lieing/decetful prick who never swears while I know people with mouths that would embares marines on leave who would bend over backwards to help out there fellow man.
soulinite 3 years ago
who cares if someone swears and helps people, works don't get someone into heaven. only faith. and how the heck do you know that VFX doesn't help people? to you stalk him like some kind of sadistic creep? I find your lack of knowledge refreshing :)
nevets815 3 years ago
if faith is all that maters then swearing is irelivant.
soulinite 3 years ago
Exactly! ding ding ding we have a winner!
nevets815 3 years ago
check your history,
athiesm is extremely rare in ancient times.
Pagan Rome for example all believed in their pagan gods, as well as the countries they have conquered also believed in their pagan gods. in the dark ages, up to the reinassance, upto the first half of the 20th century. all religious people, why, because there is no other belief system available to explain everything. Science haven't matured enough to explain the natural world.
emancoy 3 years ago
Beliefs do not explain ANYTHING. Beliefs are that which you hold to be true. They can be just as wrong as the next guys beliefs. Belief in a God tells you nothing about the universe. Science can tell you about the things it already knows, and is trying to explain the things it does not. Beliefs tell you nothing, evidence gives you the best chance of your beliefs being true. Religion provides none.
Squawkerd 3 years ago
beliefs no matter how wrong they were in the past, is the only explanation there is in the past.
But now, it is simply not true anymore. we have science which does
emancoy 3 years ago
In reply to emancoy's comment: "athiesm is extremely rare in ancient times."
Actually, every person on the planet is born an atheist. It's not until idiotic, fearful parents or organized religion manipulates the child are they a follower of faith.
GimbleTheWizard 3 years ago
yes, they may be an atheist as a child and were too young to even realize it, but all of them are raised up as theist seen in all cultures.
emancoy 3 years ago
there is a difference between not knowing God and not believing in God. does an abandoned baby know who he came from and where he was born? no, he is told who his mother is and told where he was born. it's the same thing with everyone, everyone knows they came from somewhere. but when you tell a kid they were born in a certain hospital, they don't say "i refuse to believe that". an atheist is someone who refuses to believe, not does not know.
nevets815 3 years ago
In reply to nevets815...
Knowing a god and believing in a god are both delusional.
I know what an atheist is and it's far from your definition. I see an atheist as someone who understands the need for evidence and facts to back claims up.
A follower of faith is a person that has a deep-rooted need to believe despite evidence against their belief.
GimbleTheWizard 3 years ago 2
says the atheist
nevets815 3 years ago
Yes, says an atheist.
Should I be saying "says the delusional" after each thing you type?
GimbleTheWizard 3 years ago
Only if you had some hard evidence to validate your claims.
Are you "delusional" for not believing in Thor, Allah or bigfoot?
soulinite 3 years ago
you have no hard evidence that there is no God.
nevets815 3 years ago
nevets815:
For most, the decision is like so - know nothing, or take the mindset of knowing at least something. Argue all you want, but in the end, you will know virtually nothing.
chert95 3 years ago
well I guess I'll know when I'm dead.
nevets815 3 years ago
nevets815: "well I guess I'll know when I'm dead. "
Actually, you'll no nothing when you're dead. Simply, you will be nothing, but a memory.
From an atheist point of view - that makes life far more meaningful. This is it. This is your one opportunity for humanity.
Once you're gone, you're gone.
It's what you do in life that can last forever - not life itself.
Get busy living! But living delusional is no way to live.
GimbleTheWizard 3 years ago
so have you died before? i don't think so.
there is no way for you to really know until it happens. and you are right, this is one chance for HUMANITY, not spirituality
nevets815 3 years ago
yup, you can't "know" anything without a working brian.
soulinite 3 years ago
I have no hard evidence against Thor or the invisible pink unicorn either. Beleif should be aportioned to the evidence.
soulinite 3 years ago
do you see historical timeline markers that go by Thor or the pink invisible unicorn?
A.D and B.C are measured in relativity of Jesus' life.
B.C historically ended and A.D historically began 2,000 years ago when Jesus was born.
Even you, an atheist has to go by my lord's historical marker in which carbonation and theories are made to disprove the very thing they use.
nevets815 3 years ago
This is because the julian callender was established during the dark ages by the papaci. It's worth noting that muslims, buddhist and jews have their own callenders which reflect their own religious traditions. Do the fact that callenders were established around these god's validate their existance? Also, modern accademic discourse uses C.E.(common era) and B.C.E.(before common ear).
soulinite 3 years ago
do archeologists/scientists go by C.E/B.C.E or A.D/B.C?
thought so.
nevets815 3 years ago
The entire scientific community goes by C.E. and B.C.E.
soulinite 3 years ago
that argument would be valid if it were true
nevets815 3 years ago
It is valid. Every university class/text book I've ever had contact with has used the secular CE and BCE.
That said, what does it matter if we still use a callander that we deviced by the papaci in the middle of the dark ages? Things like that are called "Ativisms" and they are a part of nature as well and suport evolution.
soulinite 3 years ago
"It is valid."
that would be true if that statement were valid
nevets815 3 years ago
evidence please.
soulinite 3 years ago
i agree, evidence please.
nevets815 3 years ago
Every academic institution i've ever been a part of has used CE/BCE. Every school my friends have attended has used CE/BCE.
Do you have any evidence that AD/BC are used by a significant portion of the academic community?
soulinite 3 years ago
do you have any evidence?
nevets815 3 years ago
Have you ever set foot in a university?
soulinite 3 years ago
yes, both of them. they both graduated along with the rest of my body.
nevets815 3 years ago
LOL, what university? Remember if you lie god will punish you.
soulinite 3 years ago
I am aware of the consequences, thank you very much for pointing that out -_- while you're at it, do you know what sound a cat makes? what does d-o-g spell? dude what are you, three?
Vanderbilt University, and I was not a christian at the time.
nevets815 3 years ago
It is hard to believe that some one stupid enough to take kent hovind seriously was able sucessfully completely a university program. I smell a lier or a liberal arts major.
soulinite 3 years ago
"t is hard to believe that some one stupid enough to take kent hovind seriously was able sucessfully completely a university program. I smell a lier or a liberal arts major."
Ok I'm not even going to point out all of the obvious spelling and grammar errors you have just made. While calling ME stupid, I might add. Whom should I take seriously here, the one that can't spell worth a flip, or, well you see where I'm going with this. Sorry my friend, I will take intelligence over arrogance any day.
nevets815 3 years ago
You should take seroiusly the person who's claims are backed by mountains of peer reviewed evidence. Can you come up with even one kent hovind claim that hasn't been debunked 100 times?
soulinite 3 years ago
there is no evidence against Hovind's theories
nevets815 3 years ago
LOL, real scientists have debunked Hovinds nonesense 100's of times. Infact, easy to understand walk throughs of these simple and damning rebuttles. Go to thunderf00t or extantdodo's channels. Hovind averages one lie a minute in his first 3 videos.
You give me the unfortnate impression that I'm talking to some one who has never read any of the argumenst against your own possition.
I get the impression that
soulinite 3 years ago
I have read tons of arguments against my position, and I must say, I found none of them valid or even slightly feasible. I refuse to believe that everything came from nothing by itself. That is scientifically impossible. Also, a species cannot produce completely different species.
A banana cannot make a dog, no matter how many billions of years you give it.
Science cannot explain everything.
There are things that can't be explained, like God, for instance.
nevets815 3 years ago
If you have read "tons of arguments", than you wouldn't be making the absurd statements that that you. Nobody says that everything came from nothing. Nobody says that an extant banana has turned into an extant dog. And yes, we have observed a species produce a different species. Google "Observed instances of speciation."
StutteringDave 3 years ago
"I have read tons of arguments against my position"
Which arguments specifically have you read against your own position?
That you'd parrot uncritically a Hovind straw man like "a banana cannot turn into a dog" tells me you've only ever read creationist paradies of the scientific explinations.
Please check out extantdodo's channel, he obliterates hovind's first 3 videos and is kind enough to site his sources.
soulinite 3 years ago
"Which arguments specifically have you read against your own position?"
you have no idea.
"That you'd parrot uncritically a Hovind straw man like "a banana cannot turn into a dog" tells me you've only ever read creationist paradies of the scientific explinations."
no, I have heard pretty much every argument there is. I used to be atheist, I not only heard them, I believed them.
"lease check out extantdodo's channel"
I've already watched them, and the arguments made are idiotic and untrue
nevets815 3 years ago
Please list one specific lie in an extantdodo video regarding hovind's claims?
soulinite 3 years ago
I don't have to prove anything to you, and I really don't care if you believe me or not.
You can think whatever you want about me, it's not like I will be shamed from civilization if you disagree with me. So saying that, I have heard pretty much every argument on BOTH sides. I choose to believe what I believe. By the way, bananas never made dogs, apes never made humans, whales never made cows, nothingness never made a single cell, and a single cell never made everything.
nevets815 3 years ago
LOL, if the body of your argument is claiming to be knowledgable on your opponents possitions try not to end your statement with a massive straw man agument.
You claimed that extantdodo's vidoes were "full of lies" and when I asked you to site one you couldn't. That's pretty sad.
soulinite 3 years ago
It's not that I can't, I choose not to. I do not see the relevance to prove something to someone I couldn't care less about.
Are you so insecure about your beliefs that you want to hear everyone's arguments?
nevets815 3 years ago
I'm just asking you to qualify your claims. That you are unable to site even a single lie in an extantdodo video proves how full of shit you are and how unsported your possition is.
soulinite 3 years ago
Why should I qualify my claims to you?
nevets815 3 years ago
Are you ready to admit you are full of shit yet? Why can't you accept resonsibility for your lie?
soulinite 3 years ago
what lie? and why do you even care if I am lying or not?
nevets815 3 years ago
and humans never made dogs out of wolfs.
mmm. wait a second....
josebuezas 3 years ago
hahahaha "wolfs"?
Wolves are dogs, they are a different species, not a different animal altogether.
a dog can't make a cat, a cat can't make a pretzel, no matter how long you give it.
by the way, the whole dogs and wolves thing, didn't happen on it's own, we humans controlled the breeding, our own sort of "intelligent design" in a way. breeding and natural selection are very different.
but I'd expect that from someone who can't spell in the first place :P
nevets815 3 years ago