1,085 people have no respect for religion. 49 people were offended by predjudice. 1,085 people believe religion should be banned in public schools. 49 people think evolution should be banned in public schools. 1,134 people obviously don't know what the first ammendment is. It should be a choice whether we learn evolution or religion. I also think it's hilarious how someone thinks they are smart because they are athiest...
i cant believe someone would actually allow that garbage to be aired. i mean yeah, there are probably a few people that would sway but, i would like to think that most people, even most christians, would see that and just be like "what the hell? thats retarded."
Hey idiot i'll try it this way. I no like young turks, I think they suck, i want OPTION to bann them cause they use tricks. I no care what you like/think. You can just fuck off. better? Yes there are a lot of idiots on you tube so i a m sure they have a fan or two like you. Its not fair to the rest of us that keep clicking their shit we never would if we knew it was them. You can copy and past my every word and make up shit i disnt say all you want, waste your time, but your done with mine.
fucking young turds and there fucking misleading titles, and there fucking misleading image, fuck you for your ill-gotten views you slow moronic half wit, no one fucking cares about your fucking commentary you douche bag fucks! You should be able to block a channels videos from coming up in recommended or related!!! FUCK the young turds!
@KesselRunner606 If there was some way to block a channel from coming up in "related" The turds would have like 300 views a video. I hope they feel real awesome about using tricks instead of talent to be popular.
Or maybe it's because there are people in the world who think differently than some parochial red neck with a chip on his shoulder. It didn't take any tricks to bring me to this channel years ago. Only an interest in current affairs and American politics, that don't come from the fantasy world of FUX News.
@KesselRunner606 "people that dont like what i like are rednecks, mmm my shit smells like cinnamon buns" I think the young turks are shit, oooh an opinion that isn't yours! I like my news to be about the news not what some personality thinks of the news. I could say because you need your news to be about the person delivering it your a thoughtless sheep, but i wont, its about the underhanded way they title and image the videos, instead of presenting themselves, that's douche.
Your claim is that TYT uses tricks to get viewers? again you're wrong, you just don't like other people to have differing opinions. TYT is the largest online news. There's only so far you can get with "tricks". And, once again,mit wasn't tricks that brought Me here.
I doubt it was tricks that brought most people.
And, for example, where in THis particular vid is there Any misleading headline; it pretty much says what's in the tin. The advert Does attack evolution.
@KesselRunner606 i dont care what brought you here, i dont care what you like or dont like, why you care so much what i like makes me think you got issues.Not one of there thumbnails has their image on it, not one title has "the young turks presents" or something that bears their name, MOST of their videos have very little in the way of clips, what they have is bootlegged from better sources. They suck, they know they suck, that's why they hide the fact its them Go give a shit!
"MOST of their videos have very little in the way of clips"
MOST is not all. And does a news show Have to have constant clips? some people like this studio discussion style. And besides, they're a low budget organization. You try and get your own and see how easy it is, if it means that much to you.
Science and religion are not compatible. Our children can only get a good education when this god-nonsense is removed. Creationism or 'intelligent design' is false, flawed, phony and unscientific.
You know that the retard is the one who things evolution is religion. Thati's what you get for not favoring public school, although some of those still teach this fairy tale called creationism. What a false, phony and unscientifically flawed idea.
Teaching this nonsense to your children is child abuse.
@lunoXxity musil, atheist...i dont know. ..but i do know this cenk fellow is a stupid bastard. he cant even hold a job on msnbc. hell al sharpton has just about lasted longer!
Most Christians don't understand the scientific arguments supporting creationism. Please read my popular Internet articles: ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS, HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, SECOND COMING OF CHRIST MISUNDERSTOOD, CONSERVATIVE THEOLOGIAN NO LONGER BELIEVES ETERNAL TORMENT (Explains why eternal punishment in the Bible does not mean eternal torment).
Popular evolutionary scientists Dawkins and Hawking refuse to debate with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at ICR, The Institure for Creation Research. They only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, and WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
@Mogley52 Christian Science is an oxymoron. If you believe in creation, you have already disregarded HEAPS of scientific evidence. LOOK AT THE DINOSAURS MAN! Or the fossil record. Or the geological record as well.
@Mogley52 I know already you are incorrect about this because A) Dawkins has stated he does not debate with creationists of any kind, which he shouldn't. B) Hawkins can barely talk and even then only through a high tech gadget. How the hell is he going to debate which is as much rhetorical presentation as anything?
@Mogley52 Dawkins refuses to debate creationist because it is pointless, and they don't deserve it. Should a geographer debate someone from the Flat Earth Society? His personal viewpoint is not to give credence to the ridiculous claims of creationism.
Hawkins is not an evolutionary scientist. He is a physicist. You fail big time on that one. But that is typical of a creationist, to be ignorant about science.
@deanosumo Ignorant about science? Evolutionists don't know shit about science. Come debate me retard, inbox me evidence of evolution. Evolution has no evidence, it has lies and non observable theories and assumptions made by morons such as yourself that believe that we came from apes. You ignore the origin of all matter and energy and ignore how life came to be from chemicals, you ignore the first two laws of thermodynamics and preach your own bullshit. Evolution is shit, it's been denounced.
@deanosumo 95%? I like how evolutionists all like to make up facts. Actually 51% believe in god. Not 90%+ of scientists are retarded and can see clearly.
@kingseho You do realise most Christians around the world believe in evolution, including scientists. It is not just atheists who believe in evolution. Most of the world's creationists are from the Bible Belt of the US! Get out of your narrow, backward, redneck, science denying world and wake up.
@deanosumo You're an idiot, those are the brainwashed christian morons and why are you bringing in the us? I understand why you're retarded since you're american. It's their education that's fucking up people. Wake up? You're an idiot, you still haven't provided me with evidence of evolution, nobody has because it doesn't exist. HOnest to god you're lucky this isn't face to face or i'd devolve you back to shit faggot
@kingseho What an internet tough guy. I advise you to look up the track 'Matrix Mobster' by Rational Warrior, here on Youtube. It describes you perfectly. No I'm not American...when did I ever say I was? There is a lot of evidence for evolution...the human genome, the fossil record, our domestic animals...but we have a small word limit. Also, I am not going to debate you any more... you just abuse people. You are disgusting, calling people faggots and such. Some Christian you are.
@deanosumo That's not evidence...i never said i was perfect you retard...fossil record? Fossil record only shows complete species..it's against evolution..theres vids of evolutionists saying it's proof then later on in the debate say it's not...you're all retarded with no education and lack evidence...
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their reproductive system and other vital organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
@Koseiku The word theory is defined as a noun meaning "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena". At no point is it called a guess. The definition is similar to a hypothesis which is where people get confused. There are theories that are proven and theories that aren't proven. Being called a theory doesn't put it in the latter category. Evolution is accepted as a confirmed theory by all respectable scientists in that field of study.
@Koseiku Nobody who knows what the word theory means, would put ‘just a’ before it. In science, a theory is the best you can come up with. It means a set of hypothesis allows you to make really good deductions about how the world works. These hypothesis have been corroborated over and over again, but more importantly, they can be falsified, if the right evidence presents itself. In that case the hypothesis must always be reconsidered. It has yet to happen in this case, and with good reason.
why do christians feel so threatened by evolution? evolution does not attack or disrespect christianity or God. it is just science. I dont remember anyone whining about teaching the theory of evolution when I was in school in the 60's. I still went to church every sunday. the reason I stopped going to church had nothing to do with being taught about evolution. I stopped going to church because christianity and thje bible is just so ridiculously irrational and hypocritical.
@BeingNobody1956 I think it is partly cultural as it is almost exclusively an American idea that evolution is false. Most Christians around the world are ok with it as are Jews and Moslems who all get taught about Adam and Eve. I think it also has to do with the Communists being athiests ... It is insane that such a large part of the developed world ignores good science ...
@magnifier2020 Evolution is religion. Obviously by keeping your kids in public schools they'll be reduced to complete retards as you have become. How sad...
Dude, you need to knock off this "Science/Bible" animosity. People like you are contributing to Creationist loonies messing with our school system. The Bible is not a science book; science is not a religion. The two are totally different. But by saying "Either science or the Bible," you make them get paranoid and want to keep their kids from getting a decent education.
@magnifier2020 Science is your religion, Im not a bible thumper at all, but science dosent trump any religion because idiots like the GOP are out there. Science is what men know, what men know is closer to nothing then the absolute, Bible is written by men, I believe in god, not men.
Is it bad that i saw this ad waaay before i saw this video? I was at a friend's house in alabama and it came on. Trust me, not all southerners are like this.
according to teachings of Christ the body is the temple of god
shrimp are bottom feeders like vultures eat the left overs that settle to the bottom of the sea rotted meat its doesn't matter including heavy amounts of mercury that's dropped out to sea
so yes if you eat shrimp you are destroying the fragile Neron connections to your brain thus desecrating the temple
the only proven here is these cracker white so called Christians in the bible belt are imposter's are not the chosen
@godscuttingyoudown However god condones the driking of wine and alchohol which could lead to liver failure. Wouldnt that be desecrating the temple as well?
@lunoXxity everyone knows that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-Muslims as authorized by the Holy Quran. So, clearly, he is lying when he says he is an atheist. :p
Wow, another blind person blinding others. Saying Gods name in vain and backing up evolution, like its more realistic than having a creator. keep reading the Bible you might learn something, preferably a study Bible that explains each verse to you, Because you shouldnt take the Bible out of context.
Leviticus 11: 10-11 "But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination TO YOU. They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." It doesn't say that eating shrimp is an abomination to God, but is an abomination to the Jewish people, to whom it was speaking. It is a law relating to health.
@MrGish1 Not specifically said. Eating cake = not in there. But eating shrimp is considered an abomination to your temple for the same reason as eating cake.
Eating shrimp can either then be 1 or the "vile" part of 2. Considering what cake does to your body, the effect is the same. It's pretty damn obvious why eating shrimp is considered vile too.
Don't change the subject by trying to make me look for the Bible saying exactly why such and such is an abomination, verbatim.
You don't know what you're talking about. Stupid muslim, quit trying to teach anything out of the Bible. Go back to Turky or where ever your muslim ugly ass came from.
If you would actually read the Bible, it might become apparent that the restriction on eating shrimp was lifted. Everything changed with the New Covenant. Besides, any problem you or I have with how God runs things can hardly be used as a tool to suggest that God is any less in control.
As for evolution, a greater farce has never overtaken the minds of otherwise seemingly intelligent beings. What a joke, one easily refuted by science itself. Read "In Six Days" written by scientists.
oh wow this is why i dont define myself as conservitive i agree with lots of parts of conseritives but i will always support science and education as well as secularism in goverment these morons make it really hard to be a scientific atheist conservitive and this is why i define myself as a moderate
Intelligent Design should be taught along side of Evolution. The holes in both theories should be taught and the proofs in both should be taught. That is true democracy and republican principles. Let the students decide what they believe to be true. The truth will show itself. Forcing a one-sided opinion on children in schools is Fascism.
@futuresailor03 The vast amount of the proof is in cosmology, astronomy, molecular science, & genetics. Also in biology but the evolutionists say thats debatable. Many ppl also think that Intelligent Design & creation science are the same thing but they are not. Creationism is the Biblical account of creation & Intelligent Design is saying that the universe & everything in it is so complex and everything is so finely tuned for life here on Earth that there had to be an Intelligent Designer.
@bRizzle2009100 Intelligent design isn't a theory, it's not even a coherent idea. Intelligent design has no theory about the origin and differentiation of life, it just tries to poke holes in evolutionary theory, all of which have been debunked by real science. Forcing children to be taught non-scientific religious nonsense as science is not only harmful to the progress of civilization, it's wrong.
@bRizzle2009100 democracy has nothing to do with what science is taught in a science class. We should teach accepted science promoted by scientists, not what is popular with politicians or bible thumpers.
What is this theory of ID about? Who is this intelligent designer? How did it design existence? where did this "designer" come from? intelligent design doesn't promote any ideas of it it's own nor makes any testable predictions. It is not a theory and has no place in a science class.
@jossman25 1. Let's take DNA. Let's use an analogy. If I were to hand u a newspaper(DNA) which contains information. There are 6 billion different types of newspapers all over the world. If I were to tell u that the information in these newspapers was created by random chance u would laugh at me. Why? Bc theres no way these 6 billion newspapers could be created by random chance & the language make perfect sense and all be unique in its own way. U would say they have to have a CREATOR.
@bRizzle2009100 Before you start with your flawed analogies you must first demonstrate how a newspaper is analogous to self-replicating DNA. Can a newspaper self-replicate with variation as DNA does? What do you mean random chance? You keep jumping around to all these different subjects. If you mean that evolution is random you clearly need to take a college level course in biology and stop visiting creationist websites. Evolution by means of natural selection is anything BUT random.
@jossman25 2. Now lets do the Big Bang Theory which scientists consider fact. In the beginning there was nothing, then an explosion. Matter, galaxies etc started to form. This contradicts science. The Laws of Thermodynamics says energy & matter cant be formed out of nothing. When an explosion happens, its very violent & disorderly. Entropy says u order cant come out of disorder. Unless, u inject an Intelligent Designer that orchestrated everything then the Big Bang makes perfect sense.
@bRizzle2009100 Another f*cking strawman fallacy! You truly are dim. Who has ever claimed that in the beginning "there was nothing"? I'll tell you who, creationists. They believe that their god wished/popped all matter into existence out of nothing. The BB theory NEVER claimed that there was nothing before the Big Bang but that all matter was condensed into a singularity that suddenly expanded forming space-time. Where the matter came from, scientist are not sure of and we may never know....
@bRizzle2009100 but because they are not sure where the matter came from, they are not going to invent silly superstitions about magical sky daddies that defy the laws of thermodynamics by creating matter out of nothing. The law of entropy ONLY applies to closed systems and definitely doesn't apply to life. Our space telescopes have actually SHOWN us pictures of solar systems and galaxies that are FORMING according to NATURAL PHENOMENA such as gravity etc. Do you dispute this? evidence please!
@bRizzle2009100 What is easier to believe? that matter has always existed because for it not to exist would be an impossibility or that some being that exists outside of our existence (even though this is a contradiction) created all matter out of nothing in a way which is unknowable, untestable and have no other comparisons to even assume that this is possible. We have no evidence that there has ever been a period in the universe when matter didn't exist in one form or another.
@jossman25 Einstien's theory of Relativity says the universe had a beginning which means at one time matter didnt exist. According to mathematics, the number infinite doesnt exist, it cant, Its completely impossible. Science has proven that the universe had to have a beginning. The problem is, where did everything originate from? Thru a naturalistic perspective, u cant explain it. It's impossible.The only possible way to explain it is thru a Creator.
@bRizzle2009100 Relativity has NEVER claimed that matter itself had a beginning (that something came from nothing), only that space-time/matter expanded into the known universe from a singularity. Stop getting your info from creationist websites! As for infinity, if nothing can be infinite, then your god can not be infinite either and you have just presented evidence against his/her existence. It is the ID/creationist argument that something came from nothing....
@bRizzle2009100 that an unknown being, created all of existence/matter out of nothing in a way that is unknowable and has no precedence. What if M theory is correct? you have no idea where matter "originated" but thats no excuse to make stuff up.
@jossman25 If science is the search for the truth, then evolution should have been shelved a long time ago. There is scientific evidence for a Creator. Read Lee Strobel's "The Case for a Creator". Anyway, limiting children to one point of view and forcing it upon them is nothing but fascism. Most evolutionists only want there point of view taught in public schools and for that, they're no better than fascists. I want BOTH taught so they can CHOOSE. Most evolutionists dont.
@bRizzle2009100 Why exactly should evolution have been "shelved a long time ago"? Give specific examples inconsistencies in evolutionary theory. Why do you use the word evolutionist? It is yet another form of creationist ignorance. The theory of evolution is completely independent of cosmological theories. Even if god could be proven to exist tomorrow, it would have absolutely no bearing on the validity of evolution because it makes no claims about nor does it depend on a god existing.
@bRizzle2009100 Furthermore, most "evolutionists" are in fact christians so why use the term "evolutionist" at all? Th majority of christians around the world (including most of the 2 billion catholics, orthodox and mainstream protestants) accept the validity of evolution because it is based on sound undeniable evidence. They can reconcile scientific facts with their personal beliefs in a god, why cant you? Why do you have to twist the facts in order to fit what you WANT to believe?
@bRizzle2009100 Sure we can let students decide what to believe but ID/creationism must be taught in a religious studies class along with every other non-scientifically based creation myth and let students decide which one they like the most. When it comes to facts, however, you are not allowed to "choose" which facts suit your personal beliefs the best but accept them because they are factually based. At this time there is NO alternative to the theory of evolution that fits in with the evidence
@bRizzle2009100 So you also agree to let students believe in things which we can show are demonstrably false? Things aren't "true" simply because we want them to be or because enough people believe them. Things are true because they fit in with observable evidence. Any evidence that ID has put forward has been completely discredited so why would we teach bad science in a class room. (I realize even calling ID "bad science" is insulting to bad science.)
@jossman25 Not really. ID is very credible. It's just that scientists nowadays embrace what's called naturalism. That is, they try to explain the world thru a naturalistic point of view and any other way explaining it (i.e. thru the supernatural or thru an Intelligent Designer) is considered to be void in there minds. The term science means the search for the truth. Truth is unbiased, which means u have to have an open mind to search for it. Most scientists do not have an open mind.
@bRizzle2009100 That's because when you invoke supernatural or intelligent design, you don't have to provide evidence
Science doesn't discount evidence. It discounts assumptions without evidence
The difference between ID and science is this
Science looks for evidence, test, retest, other scientists then try to "debunk" those tests, and if they can't, they publish peer reviewed papers with their answers
ID starts with the answer (creator) and looks for supporting evidence
@tommy605 ... and by the way, since when do the Court's have the power to tell a school district what they can and cannot teach? There's nothing in the Constitution that limits what a school district can or cannot teach. That is up to the states, not the Supreme Court. If a school district wants to teach ID, there's nothing in the Constitution from stopping them unless the individual state has something barring them from doing so.
@bRizzle2009100 Courts do have the power. The courts aren't denying the teaching of of creation or ID. It's denying it as being taught in science class because it's not science. You can't just put the word "science" with something like "creation" and then it's magically science. If that were the case, boxing would be taught in science as "the sweet science".
And once you allow ID, then what do you allow? Do you teach that Poseidon was the god of the sea and the cause of earthquakes?
@tommy605 Im not advocating teaching the Bible or religion in science classes. I think everybody is using that straw man argument to try and disprove what Im saying. ID is NOT religion. The Supreme Court isnt a school board. It was designed to enforce the law not create laws or set school doctrine. For instance, when the Court ruled in '61 that voluntary prayer in schools were unconstitutional it reversed precedent that was in place for hundreds of years in America even before the Constitution.
@bRizzle2009100 But you're not saying what would be taught with ID? What would the science curriculum look like with ID?
Intelligent design IS religion. The claim is that there's an intelligent designer, but not necessarily god, but we both know that the idea to get ID in the science class is to not let students get the idea that evolution is fact and maybe start losing believers.
But again, what would the ID curriculum in ID class look like?
@tommy605 Science would still be taught. Cellular, molecular, genetics, cosmology, astronomy, biology, etc would still be taught. But it would be taught differently than taught thru the prism of evolution. Students would basically learn the laws of science and the facts that science has discovered and how those resonate with the idea that life is so complex and so unique that it all came from a common source, an Intelligent Designer, instead of macroevolution.
@bRizzle2009100 So, in short, ignore the evidence that points to evolution (micro and macro), the overwhelming amount of evidence mind you, and teach that "it could be" from an intelligent designer? That's not science. How do you test the designer idea? How do you bypass all the evidence in favor of evolution and teach ID without any possible way to prove a designer?
You're starting with the answer (designer) and working backwards to find evidence to support. That's backwards.
@tommy605 Evolution does contradict itself and doesnt have as much evidence as u think. Look at the public, the majority of the public doesnt even buy the evolution theory. ID doesnt deny microevolution. U have many different types of dogs and cats. It's the macro evolution that is questionable. A whale cant breed with a tuna. Or a bat cant evolve into a pigeon bc they're two completely different creatures. Many evolutionist scientists are skeptical about evolution themselves.
@bRizzle2009100 Who gives a shit about what the public think! I would rather take my information from people who actually have knowledge in the field then some random person of the street.
The Discovery Institute got 800 scientist to sign a document to say the were sceptical of evolution. In response, the NCSE introduced 'Project Steve' and were able to find more than 1100 people called Steve who accept evolution. There is no contreoversy!!
@maskofsan1ty Not only that, but the people named Steve were also scientists. That was the whole point... such a narrow field of requirements, and they still had more than the creationists, which just showed the ridiculousness of their attempt at an appeal to authority.
@suumr Exactly! It pisses me off that people are so keen to reject modern science and get all their information from the likes of 'The Banana Man' and Hovind. Not only is it frustrating but it's dangerous as well, as these morons often promote the ridiculous idea that vaccines are dangerous and other crap like that.
@maskofsan1ty The problem is people are getting their information from the internet. Which we all know is 90% porn, and 99% crap. You have to really REALLY look hard for that 1% good stuff. (The 90% porn is just an added bonus)
I sometimes feel bad for the ones being taken by the likes of Comfort and Behe, et al, and tricked into believing their agenda. These people are authority figures to them, and they listen to the person, not the words they're saying. Hopefully they break free one day.
-Fossels: Many dont realise that the fossel record is pretty huge by now, with dozens of fossels for almose every evolutionary family
-DNA: in all the current animals we can see in the dna that they are related and are aways just as closely related as the fossils will suggest.
-Reproduction and observance: In contrary to what most creationists say, we have reproduced and observed evolution, both micro and macro and(Need more space-.-)
@bRizzle2009100 You're talking about belief. Belief has no place with facts. People used to believe the earth was flat, and the bible says that too btw. But people and science proved the earth was (sort of) spherical.
I think you misunderstand what macro evolution is. It is not a change from one species to another, but it is many (thousands) of micro changes producing the macro result. There's evidence everywhere of this. The galapagos islands is a great example. Ppl having tailbones is another.
@bRizzle2009100 The examples you listed are in no way representative of evolutionary theory. You claim that evolution contradicts itself, then rattle off a bunch of ridiculous and completely unrelated shit. If you accept microevolution, you must accept macroevolution; it's the same thing. Amongst biologists, the only real difference between the two is time.
@bRizzle2009100 So, an honest question here and not trying to be an ass. Have you actually read anything on biology and evolution that wasn't on the internet, and was in a real science book, or even a paper? Something peer reviewed?
The problem with the internet is, there is no review process for what get's posted. Anybody can publish their beliefs and it's very misleading. An easy read on the subject is "The Greatest Show on Earth" by Dawkins. It's not anti religious. Just evolution facts.
@tommy605 U have to realize that religion plays a huge role in the creation vs evolution battle on both sides. Dawkins is an atheist. He refuses to acknowledge a Creator therefore he already has a bias. It works the other way as well. Evolution is something secular ppl hold onto bc its the only way to explain the creation of the universe without a Creator. So of course most evolutionists are going to say ID is BS. It works the other way as well. Thats why u teach both & let students decide.
@bRizzle2009100 No, you teach that that best fits the evidence available. Evolution fits all the evidence so is what is taught! Evolutionists say ID is BS because it plainly is!
As for you comment about the chance of life happening being slim, evolutionary theory has nothing to do with life forming. That's abiogenesis! And chance is a fairly irrelevant thing anyway!
@bRizzle2009100 Dawkins didn't come up with the evolution idea/theory. And when Darwin did, he wasn't looking for it. It was a "Wow" moment. He searched all over for evidence, and then his book on the origins of life emerged. Since then, and this is the scientific model, scientists have tried to prove his idea wrong, but in doing so, they found out that it was in fact, absolutely correct.
Evolution does not explain creation. It explains life and the origins of it.
@bRizzle2009100 And yes, I know religion plays a huge role in creation vs evolution. However, when the overwhelming evidence shows evolution to be accurate, disproves the 6 day creation story, disproves the world wide flood story, has shown that all the main stories and characters in the bible were all borrowed from other cultures pre-dating the bibles, why then should religion be taken seriously when it comes to anything science related? Look around. We owe everything to science.
We have seen it so often that bioligists even named 6 different types of macro evolution.
-Computer reproduction: There are now programs that simulate the proces of randome mutation(Witch isent even the main drive of evolution) and natural selection witch can be used to create objects and systems that are even more refined than anything a human desiner can create.
And as i look at your arguments(Tuna/wale hybride, bat to pigeon) i can see you have no idea who(damn letter limit)
@mikstar890 If evolution were true, the chances of life happening would be slim to none & we wouldnt be here. Evolutionists cant even explain how water got on the Earth. They have to go into comets hitting the Earth & so forth which produced water which is highly unlikely. The chances of all the things happening the evolutionary model says happened, are slim to none at best. Evolution is something secular ppl hold onto bc its the only way to explain the creation of the world without a Creator.
Your saying that evolution is wrong because it cant explain water on the earth?? Thats a compleat non-argument. Its like saying the theory of gravity is wrong because it cant explain the working of your computer:S
And even if, scientists dont think water came from comets. It was already presant during te formation of the earth. Further more, evolution isent so slow that we couldent have evolved to your current form. You have nothing to back that argument.
@bRizzle2009100 Wow, you are so wrong on so many levels, it's hard to know where to begin. Let's start with your "slim to none" argument. This assertion carries no weight because obviously it's not "none", because we are here and science has demonstrated how that came to be-- which had nothing to do with any so-called "god". The evidence for the fact of evolution is overwhelming. To assert "slim to none" is merely an argument from ignorance. Look it up.
@nycgroove1 So u just proved my other argument. U just said that evolution proves that no god had anything to do with creating our world. Evolution is the foundation of atheism and human secularism and since we dont teach the concept of a Deity in schools, are u not teaching atheism or human secularism in schools? But wait, isn't that a violation of the same concept of "separation of church & state" that u ppl scream when a Christian puts a Nativity scene in a town square? HYPOCRISY.
@bRizzle2009100 First you need to define "god" before you can make a case for anything. Science has proven evolution to be is a fact. Also, evolution and atheism are mutually exclusive, do your research. You want to put your creationist hypothesis in a text book? Publish a scientific thesis and put it through rigorous peer review. If you want to circumvent that process, then we can talk about "hypocrisy".
@nycgroove1 Do your own research. Science has NEVER proven evolution to be a fact. On the contrary, science HAS proven the Big Bang and Spontaneous Generation (the two predecessors of evolution) to be lies. Being with the First Law of Thermodynamics. 2. The Law of Information. 3. The Law of Biogenesis. Don't be so weak as to let atheist liberal liars in the media and public education tell you what to think. Do some homework. Look up 100 Reasons Why Evolution is Stupid by Kent Hoving here on U.
DOWN IN ALABAAAMA
redTalonsss 4 days ago
Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church.
ThePhantom135 1 week ago
1,085 people have no respect for religion. 49 people were offended by predjudice. 1,085 people believe religion should be banned in public schools. 49 people think evolution should be banned in public schools. 1,134 people obviously don't know what the first ammendment is. It should be a choice whether we learn evolution or religion. I also think it's hilarious how someone thinks they are smart because they are athiest...
kyrur 1 week ago
Science flies us to the moon.
Religion flies us into buildings.
ThePhantom135 2 weeks ago
This vid went viral on New Delhi
timothymanzella 1 month ago
The Torah, Bible and Quran belong nowhere near the public school system. 'Nuff said.
XxI3ioHazardxX 1 month ago
In retrospect, maybe we should've let the South go.
mikek44224 1 month ago
Wait -so 7 comes somewhere between 6 and 8?
Oh.
I feel so... enlightened.
similispastor 1 month ago
nom nom nom-I'll eat all the shrimp I want-nom nom nom
Z0mbeSlayer 1 month ago
So if you are not an inbred moron you can't be a conservative?
PktMma 1 month ago
i cant believe someone would actually allow that garbage to be aired. i mean yeah, there are probably a few people that would sway but, i would like to think that most people, even most christians, would see that and just be like "what the hell? thats retarded."
HaloFreak2323 1 month ago
Balaam's Ass. Fundies believe in talking donkeys.
scottandrewhutchins 2 months ago
This vid is popular on Reykjavik
reubenshephe25 2 months ago
Hey idiot i'll try it this way. I no like young turks, I think they suck, i want OPTION to bann them cause they use tricks. I no care what you like/think. You can just fuck off. better? Yes there are a lot of idiots on you tube so i a m sure they have a fan or two like you. Its not fair to the rest of us that keep clicking their shit we never would if we knew it was them. You can copy and past my every word and make up shit i disnt say all you want, waste your time, but your done with mine.
nerdwonder 2 months ago
fucking young turds and there fucking misleading titles, and there fucking misleading image, fuck you for your ill-gotten views you slow moronic half wit, no one fucking cares about your fucking commentary you douche bag fucks! You should be able to block a channels videos from coming up in recommended or related!!! FUCK the young turds!
nerdwonder 2 months ago
@nerdwonder
You know, the more views and comments a video gets the higher its exposure on Youtube?
So by coming on and trolling a slew of barely cohesive curses you are helping it get more and more views.
on behalf of TYT, thanks
KesselRunner606 2 months ago
@KesselRunner606 If there was some way to block a channel from coming up in "related" The turds would have like 300 views a video. I hope they feel real awesome about using tricks instead of talent to be popular.
nerdwonder 2 months ago
@nerdwonder
Or maybe it's because there are people in the world who think differently than some parochial red neck with a chip on his shoulder. It didn't take any tricks to bring me to this channel years ago. Only an interest in current affairs and American politics, that don't come from the fantasy world of FUX News.
KesselRunner606 2 months ago
@KesselRunner606 "people that dont like what i like are rednecks, mmm my shit smells like cinnamon buns" I think the young turks are shit, oooh an opinion that isn't yours! I like my news to be about the news not what some personality thinks of the news. I could say because you need your news to be about the person delivering it your a thoughtless sheep, but i wont, its about the underhanded way they title and image the videos, instead of presenting themselves, that's douche.
nerdwonder 2 months ago
@nerdwonder
Your claim is that TYT uses tricks to get viewers? again you're wrong, you just don't like other people to have differing opinions. TYT is the largest online news. There's only so far you can get with "tricks". And, once again,mit wasn't tricks that brought Me here.
I doubt it was tricks that brought most people.
And, for example, where in THis particular vid is there Any misleading headline; it pretty much says what's in the tin. The advert Does attack evolution.
KesselRunner606 2 months ago
@KesselRunner606 i dont care what brought you here, i dont care what you like or dont like, why you care so much what i like makes me think you got issues.Not one of there thumbnails has their image on it, not one title has "the young turks presents" or something that bears their name, MOST of their videos have very little in the way of clips, what they have is bootlegged from better sources. They suck, they know they suck, that's why they hide the fact its them Go give a shit!
nerdwonder 2 months ago
@nerdwonder
I Don't care what You like. But you think stuff you disagree with should be banned.
"i dont care what brought you here,"
You claimed TYT uses tricks to get people to come to their channel: obviously No.
"not one title has "the young turks presents""
But it Does have "by TheYoungTurks" Under the thumbnail. How bad's your attention deficit disorder?
KesselRunner606 2 months ago
"MOST of their videos have very little in the way of clips"
MOST is not all. And does a news show Have to have constant clips? some people like this studio discussion style. And besides, they're a low budget organization. You try and get your own and see how easy it is, if it means that much to you.
KesselRunner606 2 months ago
This is the way the fuck'in world ends man! Look at this fuck'in shit we're in man!
Trolleymoose 3 months ago
Science and religion are not compatible. Our children can only get a good education when this god-nonsense is removed. Creationism or 'intelligent design' is false, flawed, phony and unscientific.
magnifier2020 3 months ago
You know that the retard is the one who things evolution is religion. Thati's what you get for not favoring public school, although some of those still teach this fairy tale called creationism. What a false, phony and unscientifically flawed idea.
Teaching this nonsense to your children is child abuse.
magnifier2020 3 months ago
Well you just alienated your southern fans with that accent YoungTurks
You wouldn't make fun of the way Black, Chinese or Mexican people speak, but hey I know you love the double standard :)
Jamespot24 3 months ago 2
BRADLEY BURRRRRN!
Moppy1988 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution is an absolute disgrace to science.
Objects never order anything, mutations never order anything and natural selection will only select what has already been ordered.
Evolution is so irrational that it should be removed from all classrooms.
watch?v=HoKVVYJ8KJM
JungleJargon 4 months ago
I love Shrimp. I had Shrimp on my trip to America, and in Texas one of the most conservative states in the US, lol.
nortalus 4 months ago
He considers himself an agnostic.
ignatei 5 months ago
@lunoXxity musil, atheist...i dont know. ..but i do know this cenk fellow is a stupid bastard. he cant even hold a job on msnbc. hell al sharpton has just about lasted longer!
usaf317 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Most Christians don't understand the scientific arguments supporting creationism. Please read my popular Internet articles: ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS, HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, SECOND COMING OF CHRIST MISUNDERSTOOD, CONSERVATIVE THEOLOGIAN NO LONGER BELIEVES ETERNAL TORMENT (Explains why eternal punishment in the Bible does not mean eternal torment).
Mogley52 6 months ago
Popular evolutionary scientists Dawkins and Hawking refuse to debate with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at ICR, The Institure for Creation Research. They only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, and WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
@Mogley52 Christian Science is an oxymoron. If you believe in creation, you have already disregarded HEAPS of scientific evidence. LOOK AT THE DINOSAURS MAN! Or the fossil record. Or the geological record as well.
fingersticks74 6 months ago
@Mogley52 I know already you are incorrect about this because A) Dawkins has stated he does not debate with creationists of any kind, which he shouldn't. B) Hawkins can barely talk and even then only through a high tech gadget. How the hell is he going to debate which is as much rhetorical presentation as anything?
MrNicMachiavelli 6 months ago
@Mogley52 Dawkins refuses to debate creationist because it is pointless, and they don't deserve it. Should a geographer debate someone from the Flat Earth Society? His personal viewpoint is not to give credence to the ridiculous claims of creationism.
Hawkins is not an evolutionary scientist. He is a physicist. You fail big time on that one. But that is typical of a creationist, to be ignorant about science.
deanosumo 4 months ago
@deanosumo Hawkins is a BIOLOGIST NOT PHYSICIST, but yeah you're right about debating with creationists its pointless.
TheAwesome45 3 months ago
@TheAwesome45 debate me you little bitch, inbox me your evidence of evolution? come on retard?
kingseho 3 months ago
@deanosumo Ignorant about science? Evolutionists don't know shit about science. Come debate me retard, inbox me evidence of evolution. Evolution has no evidence, it has lies and non observable theories and assumptions made by morons such as yourself that believe that we came from apes. You ignore the origin of all matter and energy and ignore how life came to be from chemicals, you ignore the first two laws of thermodynamics and preach your own bullshit. Evolution is shit, it's been denounced.
kingseho 3 months ago
@kingseho Funny that 95% of scientists agree with me, and 5% with you. Checkmate.
deanosumo 3 months ago
@deanosumo 95%? I like how evolutionists all like to make up facts. Actually 51% believe in god. Not 90%+ of scientists are retarded and can see clearly.
kingseho 3 months ago
@kingseho You do realise most Christians around the world believe in evolution, including scientists. It is not just atheists who believe in evolution. Most of the world's creationists are from the Bible Belt of the US! Get out of your narrow, backward, redneck, science denying world and wake up.
deanosumo 3 months ago
@deanosumo You're an idiot, those are the brainwashed christian morons and why are you bringing in the us? I understand why you're retarded since you're american. It's their education that's fucking up people. Wake up? You're an idiot, you still haven't provided me with evidence of evolution, nobody has because it doesn't exist. HOnest to god you're lucky this isn't face to face or i'd devolve you back to shit faggot
kingseho 3 months ago
@kingseho What an internet tough guy. I advise you to look up the track 'Matrix Mobster' by Rational Warrior, here on Youtube. It describes you perfectly. No I'm not American...when did I ever say I was? There is a lot of evidence for evolution...the human genome, the fossil record, our domestic animals...but we have a small word limit. Also, I am not going to debate you any more... you just abuse people. You are disgusting, calling people faggots and such. Some Christian you are.
deanosumo 3 months ago
@deanosumo That's not evidence...i never said i was perfect you retard...fossil record? Fossil record only shows complete species..it's against evolution..theres vids of evolutionists saying it's proof then later on in the debate say it's not...you're all retarded with no education and lack evidence...
kingseho 3 months ago
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their reproductive system and other vital organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 6 months ago
Comment removed
Mogley52 6 months ago
Reason why I hate conservative is because they are against scientific evidence (Evolution).
killerboyfoolz 6 months ago
@killerboyfoolz Idiot, everybody with common sense knows evolution is just a theory (a guess).
Koseiku 6 months ago
@Koseiku Let me 'guess,' you believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
killerboyfoolz 6 months ago
@Koseiku The word theory is defined as a noun meaning "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena". At no point is it called a guess. The definition is similar to a hypothesis which is where people get confused. There are theories that are proven and theories that aren't proven. Being called a theory doesn't put it in the latter category. Evolution is accepted as a confirmed theory by all respectable scientists in that field of study.
ChakatBlackstar 6 months ago
@Koseiku Nobody who knows what the word theory means, would put ‘just a’ before it. In science, a theory is the best you can come up with. It means a set of hypothesis allows you to make really good deductions about how the world works. These hypothesis have been corroborated over and over again, but more importantly, they can be falsified, if the right evidence presents itself. In that case the hypothesis must always be reconsidered. It has yet to happen in this case, and with good reason.
drummerponsi 6 months ago
I'm a lib and proud of it. We need to take back the word and make it ours again.
ETericET 7 months ago
ha ha ha "Thats a number!"
moondancekid1 7 months ago
Geeze why is it so hard to get the uncut commercial?
Laughingblades 7 months ago
why do christians feel so threatened by evolution? evolution does not attack or disrespect christianity or God. it is just science. I dont remember anyone whining about teaching the theory of evolution when I was in school in the 60's. I still went to church every sunday. the reason I stopped going to church had nothing to do with being taught about evolution. I stopped going to church because christianity and thje bible is just so ridiculously irrational and hypocritical.
BeingNobody1956 7 months ago
@BeingNobody1956 Research oxford movement
gladiator1010 7 months ago
@BeingNobody1956 I think it is partly cultural as it is almost exclusively an American idea that evolution is false. Most Christians around the world are ok with it as are Jews and Moslems who all get taught about Adam and Eve. I think it also has to do with the Communists being athiests ... It is insane that such a large part of the developed world ignores good science ...
vohshkab 7 months ago
That video makes me want to vote for the guy.
For no other reason then to keep the guy who made it, and ok'd putting it on TV out of government.
Craigmw45 8 months ago
The bible is totally false. Don't teach nonsense to my children; let all religions go to hell so we can get on with science.
magnifier2020 8 months ago 9
@magnifier2020 Evolution is religion. Obviously by keeping your kids in public schools they'll be reduced to complete retards as you have become. How sad...
kingseho 3 months ago
@magnifier2020
Dude, you need to knock off this "Science/Bible" animosity. People like you are contributing to Creationist loonies messing with our school system. The Bible is not a science book; science is not a religion. The two are totally different. But by saying "Either science or the Bible," you make them get paranoid and want to keep their kids from getting a decent education.
AgApE010 3 months ago
@magnifier2020 then why is evolution being taught in schools if its just a myth as well?
nukeusa911x2 2 months ago
@magnifier2020 Science is your religion, Im not a bible thumper at all, but science dosent trump any religion because idiots like the GOP are out there. Science is what men know, what men know is closer to nothing then the absolute, Bible is written by men, I believe in god, not men.
guitargold77 1 hour ago
debilais idiots
jurciks702 8 months ago
45 people think it's a sin to believe in facts.
cadman2300 8 months ago 10
Is it bad that i saw this ad waaay before i saw this video? I was at a friend's house in alabama and it came on. Trust me, not all southerners are like this.
yootubematt 9 months ago
@lunoXxity Glad you are following the Christian teachings of tolerance and acceptance.
xlibra15 9 months ago
I love how those fundamentalists/republicans are proud of their ignorance.
patu8010 9 months ago
according to teachings of Christ the body is the temple of god
shrimp are bottom feeders like vultures eat the left overs that settle to the bottom of the sea rotted meat its doesn't matter including heavy amounts of mercury that's dropped out to sea
so yes if you eat shrimp you are destroying the fragile Neron connections to your brain thus desecrating the temple
the only proven here is these cracker white so called Christians in the bible belt are imposter's are not the chosen
godscuttingyoudown 9 months ago
@godscuttingyoudown However god condones the driking of wine and alchohol which could lead to liver failure. Wouldnt that be desecrating the temple as well?
mucura1 9 months ago
@lunoXxity everyone knows that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-Muslims as authorized by the Holy Quran. So, clearly, he is lying when he says he is an atheist. :p
l337pwnage 9 months ago
44 people don't believe in numbers.
aagrait 9 months ago
I LOVE how he says Alabama.
TehFunnehMann 9 months ago
I allways thought Alabama was an awsome place when i was a kid becouse of their awsome theme song.
Sweet home Alabama!
marcus8374 10 months ago
Bradley Burn believes the earth is a sphere and goes around the sun. Damn librul!
DerSchnurrbart 10 months ago 3
god help Alabama.
JImmy4336 10 months ago
Wow, another blind person blinding others. Saying Gods name in vain and backing up evolution, like its more realistic than having a creator. keep reading the Bible you might learn something, preferably a study Bible that explains each verse to you, Because you shouldnt take the Bible out of context.
hangmantx 10 months ago
Is it just me or do these people suck at reporting.
Pref4n 10 months ago
I believe in creationism, but I still think that evolution is partly true. Teaching evolution in school doesn't offend me.
iplaydrumsnguitar 10 months ago
Leviticus 11: 10-11 "But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination TO YOU. They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." It doesn't say that eating shrimp is an abomination to God, but is an abomination to the Jewish people, to whom it was speaking. It is a law relating to health.
JPmaster46 10 months ago
The problem with dumbasses is they always assume they are always the smartest person in the room. Be humble grasshopper, and patient.
BartholomewCounty 11 months ago
hate extremism....
FalloutTheMaster 11 months ago
what the fuk, u chat so much shit swear down
AbdulSalam1992 11 months ago
You know you're in trouble when people argue against your schools teaching evidential fact.
JorgsnewYTaccount 1 year ago
That shrimp argument is weak.
Megajanitor 1 year ago
@Megajanitor why is that?
MrGish1 11 months ago
@MrGish1 Because eating shrimp is a sin in that you're doing your own body harm by eating a filter feeder.
It's kind of like....a sin to eat cake.
Megajanitor 11 months ago
@Megajanitor Sins make you that much closer to hell. But eating cake is no problem in terms of going to hell or not.
MrGish1 11 months ago
@MrGish1 Eating cake = eating shrimp, basically. So that's why the argument sucks.
Megajanitor 11 months ago
@Megajanitor not according to the bible. eating cake = meh. eating shrimp = abomination
MrGish1 11 months ago
@MrGish1 Not specifically said. Eating cake = not in there. But eating shrimp is considered an abomination to your temple for the same reason as eating cake.
Megajanitor 11 months ago
@Megajanitor how do you know? eating shrimp is an abomination. end of that. no reason given.
MrGish1 11 months ago
@MrGish1 Because:
Abomination:
1. a person or thing that is disgusting
2. an action that is vicious, vile, etc
3. intense loathing
Eating shrimp can either then be 1 or the "vile" part of 2. Considering what cake does to your body, the effect is the same. It's pretty damn obvious why eating shrimp is considered vile too.
Don't change the subject by trying to make me look for the Bible saying exactly why such and such is an abomination, verbatim.
Megajanitor 11 months ago
@Megajanitor But you are saying you know. you say that shrimp is bad for you and therefore as bad as cake.
MrGish1 11 months ago
@MrGish1 Yep, and that's the crux of the entire "abomination" thing.
Megajanitor 11 months ago
@Megajanitor Meat also makes people fat. it doesn't say it's an abomination in the bible, your logic sucks.
Reasonwillwin 11 months ago
@Reasonwillwin Yeah, because the Bible mentions EVERYTHING IN EXISTENCE, and because we're fasting meat now.
Took you three days for THAT?
Megajanitor 11 months ago
@Reasonwillwin Why'd you invite me. Did you say that to entice me?
Megajanitor 11 months ago
1,000th like!
andrewsaccount09 1 year ago
"....your fat ass keeps eating shrimp"
Holy Sh** Cenk, that was F**kin' Awesome
stefers08 1 year ago 47
Comment removed
djlazlow1 1 year ago
You don't know what you're talking about. Stupid muslim, quit trying to teach anything out of the Bible. Go back to Turky or where ever your muslim ugly ass came from.
mammal46 1 year ago
@mammal46
1. He's agnostic, not a Muslim.
2. Muslims believe in creationism just like Christians.
3. Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet
Christianity has more in common with Islam than Judaism. You mad, bro?
EliteKiller07 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
A conservative is someone who is amazingly ignorant and is proud of it!
hagf73 1 year ago
Comment removed
hagf73 1 year ago
SO AWESOME
Hemouth 1 year ago
If you would actually read the Bible, it might become apparent that the restriction on eating shrimp was lifted. Everything changed with the New Covenant. Besides, any problem you or I have with how God runs things can hardly be used as a tool to suggest that God is any less in control.
As for evolution, a greater farce has never overtaken the minds of otherwise seemingly intelligent beings. What a joke, one easily refuted by science itself. Read "In Six Days" written by scientists.
randalusa 1 year ago
wait a minute.....
forrest gump was a shrimp boat captain, and was a bible believing fucktard.
volound 1 year ago
oh wow this is why i dont define myself as conservitive i agree with lots of parts of conseritives but i will always support science and education as well as secularism in goverment these morons make it really hard to be a scientific atheist conservitive and this is why i define myself as a moderate
lonewolfM16 1 year ago
"...believes that the number 7 comes after 6..."
That is just hilarious! Funniest thing I've heard this week... for some reason. Yet it's just what these redneck conservatives would say.
HimmiJoe 1 year ago
this is epic win....
darkhalo116 1 year ago
That arsing prat Kirk Cameron is behind this, I'll bet. Lying f***wit.
EddieTheFishReturns 1 year ago
Intelligent Design should be taught along side of Evolution. The holes in both theories should be taught and the proofs in both should be taught. That is true democracy and republican principles. Let the students decide what they believe to be true. The truth will show itself. Forcing a one-sided opinion on children in schools is Fascism.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Proof of intelligent design?
futuresailor03 1 year ago
@futuresailor03 The vast amount of the proof is in cosmology, astronomy, molecular science, & genetics. Also in biology but the evolutionists say thats debatable. Many ppl also think that Intelligent Design & creation science are the same thing but they are not. Creationism is the Biblical account of creation & Intelligent Design is saying that the universe & everything in it is so complex and everything is so finely tuned for life here on Earth that there had to be an Intelligent Designer.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Haha them still be religious words!! However you wanna dress it up.
futuresailor03 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Intelligent design isn't a theory, it's not even a coherent idea. Intelligent design has no theory about the origin and differentiation of life, it just tries to poke holes in evolutionary theory, all of which have been debunked by real science. Forcing children to be taught non-scientific religious nonsense as science is not only harmful to the progress of civilization, it's wrong.
TheIntolerantAtheist 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 democracy has nothing to do with what science is taught in a science class. We should teach accepted science promoted by scientists, not what is popular with politicians or bible thumpers.
What is this theory of ID about? Who is this intelligent designer? How did it design existence? where did this "designer" come from? intelligent design doesn't promote any ideas of it it's own nor makes any testable predictions. It is not a theory and has no place in a science class.
jossman25 1 year ago
@jossman25 1. Let's take DNA. Let's use an analogy. If I were to hand u a newspaper(DNA) which contains information. There are 6 billion different types of newspapers all over the world. If I were to tell u that the information in these newspapers was created by random chance u would laugh at me. Why? Bc theres no way these 6 billion newspapers could be created by random chance & the language make perfect sense and all be unique in its own way. U would say they have to have a CREATOR.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Before you start with your flawed analogies you must first demonstrate how a newspaper is analogous to self-replicating DNA. Can a newspaper self-replicate with variation as DNA does? What do you mean random chance? You keep jumping around to all these different subjects. If you mean that evolution is random you clearly need to take a college level course in biology and stop visiting creationist websites. Evolution by means of natural selection is anything BUT random.
jossman25 1 year ago
@jossman25 2. Now lets do the Big Bang Theory which scientists consider fact. In the beginning there was nothing, then an explosion. Matter, galaxies etc started to form. This contradicts science. The Laws of Thermodynamics says energy & matter cant be formed out of nothing. When an explosion happens, its very violent & disorderly. Entropy says u order cant come out of disorder. Unless, u inject an Intelligent Designer that orchestrated everything then the Big Bang makes perfect sense.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Another f*cking strawman fallacy! You truly are dim. Who has ever claimed that in the beginning "there was nothing"? I'll tell you who, creationists. They believe that their god wished/popped all matter into existence out of nothing. The BB theory NEVER claimed that there was nothing before the Big Bang but that all matter was condensed into a singularity that suddenly expanded forming space-time. Where the matter came from, scientist are not sure of and we may never know....
jossman25 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 but because they are not sure where the matter came from, they are not going to invent silly superstitions about magical sky daddies that defy the laws of thermodynamics by creating matter out of nothing. The law of entropy ONLY applies to closed systems and definitely doesn't apply to life. Our space telescopes have actually SHOWN us pictures of solar systems and galaxies that are FORMING according to NATURAL PHENOMENA such as gravity etc. Do you dispute this? evidence please!
jossman25 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 What is easier to believe? that matter has always existed because for it not to exist would be an impossibility or that some being that exists outside of our existence (even though this is a contradiction) created all matter out of nothing in a way which is unknowable, untestable and have no other comparisons to even assume that this is possible. We have no evidence that there has ever been a period in the universe when matter didn't exist in one form or another.
jossman25 1 year ago
@jossman25 Einstien's theory of Relativity says the universe had a beginning which means at one time matter didnt exist. According to mathematics, the number infinite doesnt exist, it cant, Its completely impossible. Science has proven that the universe had to have a beginning. The problem is, where did everything originate from? Thru a naturalistic perspective, u cant explain it. It's impossible.The only possible way to explain it is thru a Creator.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bRizzle2009100 "The problem is, where did everything originate from?"
Where'd your creator originate from?
kirkey99 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Relativity has NEVER claimed that matter itself had a beginning (that something came from nothing), only that space-time/matter expanded into the known universe from a singularity. Stop getting your info from creationist websites! As for infinity, if nothing can be infinite, then your god can not be infinite either and you have just presented evidence against his/her existence. It is the ID/creationist argument that something came from nothing....
jossman25 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 that an unknown being, created all of existence/matter out of nothing in a way that is unknowable and has no precedence. What if M theory is correct? you have no idea where matter "originated" but thats no excuse to make stuff up.
jossman25 1 year ago
@jossman25 If science is the search for the truth, then evolution should have been shelved a long time ago. There is scientific evidence for a Creator. Read Lee Strobel's "The Case for a Creator". Anyway, limiting children to one point of view and forcing it upon them is nothing but fascism. Most evolutionists only want there point of view taught in public schools and for that, they're no better than fascists. I want BOTH taught so they can CHOOSE. Most evolutionists dont.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Why exactly should evolution have been "shelved a long time ago"? Give specific examples inconsistencies in evolutionary theory. Why do you use the word evolutionist? It is yet another form of creationist ignorance. The theory of evolution is completely independent of cosmological theories. Even if god could be proven to exist tomorrow, it would have absolutely no bearing on the validity of evolution because it makes no claims about nor does it depend on a god existing.
jossman25 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Furthermore, most "evolutionists" are in fact christians so why use the term "evolutionist" at all? Th majority of christians around the world (including most of the 2 billion catholics, orthodox and mainstream protestants) accept the validity of evolution because it is based on sound undeniable evidence. They can reconcile scientific facts with their personal beliefs in a god, why cant you? Why do you have to twist the facts in order to fit what you WANT to believe?
jossman25 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Sure we can let students decide what to believe but ID/creationism must be taught in a religious studies class along with every other non-scientifically based creation myth and let students decide which one they like the most. When it comes to facts, however, you are not allowed to "choose" which facts suit your personal beliefs the best but accept them because they are factually based. At this time there is NO alternative to the theory of evolution that fits in with the evidence
jossman25 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 So you also agree to let students believe in things which we can show are demonstrably false? Things aren't "true" simply because we want them to be or because enough people believe them. Things are true because they fit in with observable evidence. Any evidence that ID has put forward has been completely discredited so why would we teach bad science in a class room. (I realize even calling ID "bad science" is insulting to bad science.)
jossman25 1 year ago
@jossman25 Not really. ID is very credible. It's just that scientists nowadays embrace what's called naturalism. That is, they try to explain the world thru a naturalistic point of view and any other way explaining it (i.e. thru the supernatural or thru an Intelligent Designer) is considered to be void in there minds. The term science means the search for the truth. Truth is unbiased, which means u have to have an open mind to search for it. Most scientists do not have an open mind.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 That's because when you invoke supernatural or intelligent design, you don't have to provide evidence
Science doesn't discount evidence. It discounts assumptions without evidence
The difference between ID and science is this
Science looks for evidence, test, retest, other scientists then try to "debunk" those tests, and if they can't, they publish peer reviewed papers with their answers
ID starts with the answer (creator) and looks for supporting evidence
Huge dif. in methodology
tommy605 1 year ago
@tommy605 ... and by the way, since when do the Court's have the power to tell a school district what they can and cannot teach? There's nothing in the Constitution that limits what a school district can or cannot teach. That is up to the states, not the Supreme Court. If a school district wants to teach ID, there's nothing in the Constitution from stopping them unless the individual state has something barring them from doing so.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Courts do have the power. The courts aren't denying the teaching of of creation or ID. It's denying it as being taught in science class because it's not science. You can't just put the word "science" with something like "creation" and then it's magically science. If that were the case, boxing would be taught in science as "the sweet science".
And once you allow ID, then what do you allow? Do you teach that Poseidon was the god of the sea and the cause of earthquakes?
tommy605 1 year ago
@tommy605 Im not advocating teaching the Bible or religion in science classes. I think everybody is using that straw man argument to try and disprove what Im saying. ID is NOT religion. The Supreme Court isnt a school board. It was designed to enforce the law not create laws or set school doctrine. For instance, when the Court ruled in '61 that voluntary prayer in schools were unconstitutional it reversed precedent that was in place for hundreds of years in America even before the Constitution.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 But you're not saying what would be taught with ID? What would the science curriculum look like with ID?
Intelligent design IS religion. The claim is that there's an intelligent designer, but not necessarily god, but we both know that the idea to get ID in the science class is to not let students get the idea that evolution is fact and maybe start losing believers.
But again, what would the ID curriculum in ID class look like?
tommy605 1 year ago
@tommy605 Science would still be taught. Cellular, molecular, genetics, cosmology, astronomy, biology, etc would still be taught. But it would be taught differently than taught thru the prism of evolution. Students would basically learn the laws of science and the facts that science has discovered and how those resonate with the idea that life is so complex and so unique that it all came from a common source, an Intelligent Designer, instead of macroevolution.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 So, in short, ignore the evidence that points to evolution (micro and macro), the overwhelming amount of evidence mind you, and teach that "it could be" from an intelligent designer? That's not science. How do you test the designer idea? How do you bypass all the evidence in favor of evolution and teach ID without any possible way to prove a designer?
You're starting with the answer (designer) and working backwards to find evidence to support. That's backwards.
tommy605 1 year ago
@tommy605 Evolution does contradict itself and doesnt have as much evidence as u think. Look at the public, the majority of the public doesnt even buy the evolution theory. ID doesnt deny microevolution. U have many different types of dogs and cats. It's the macro evolution that is questionable. A whale cant breed with a tuna. Or a bat cant evolve into a pigeon bc they're two completely different creatures. Many evolutionist scientists are skeptical about evolution themselves.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Who gives a shit about what the public think! I would rather take my information from people who actually have knowledge in the field then some random person of the street.
The Discovery Institute got 800 scientist to sign a document to say the were sceptical of evolution. In response, the NCSE introduced 'Project Steve' and were able to find more than 1100 people called Steve who accept evolution. There is no contreoversy!!
maskofsan1ty 1 year ago
@maskofsan1ty Not only that, but the people named Steve were also scientists. That was the whole point... such a narrow field of requirements, and they still had more than the creationists, which just showed the ridiculousness of their attempt at an appeal to authority.
suumr 1 year ago
@suumr Exactly! It pisses me off that people are so keen to reject modern science and get all their information from the likes of 'The Banana Man' and Hovind. Not only is it frustrating but it's dangerous as well, as these morons often promote the ridiculous idea that vaccines are dangerous and other crap like that.
maskofsan1ty 1 year ago
@maskofsan1ty The problem is people are getting their information from the internet. Which we all know is 90% porn, and 99% crap. You have to really REALLY look hard for that 1% good stuff. (The 90% porn is just an added bonus)
I sometimes feel bad for the ones being taken by the likes of Comfort and Behe, et al, and tricked into believing their agenda. These people are authority figures to them, and they listen to the person, not the words they're saying. Hopefully they break free one day.
tommy605 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100
Number of reasons we know evolution happens:
-Fossels: Many dont realise that the fossel record is pretty huge by now, with dozens of fossels for almose every evolutionary family
-DNA: in all the current animals we can see in the dna that they are related and are aways just as closely related as the fossils will suggest.
-Reproduction and observance: In contrary to what most creationists say, we have reproduced and observed evolution, both micro and macro and(Need more space-.-)
mikstar890 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 You're talking about belief. Belief has no place with facts. People used to believe the earth was flat, and the bible says that too btw. But people and science proved the earth was (sort of) spherical.
I think you misunderstand what macro evolution is. It is not a change from one species to another, but it is many (thousands) of micro changes producing the macro result. There's evidence everywhere of this. The galapagos islands is a great example. Ppl having tailbones is another.
tommy605 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 The examples you listed are in no way representative of evolutionary theory. You claim that evolution contradicts itself, then rattle off a bunch of ridiculous and completely unrelated shit. If you accept microevolution, you must accept macroevolution; it's the same thing. Amongst biologists, the only real difference between the two is time.
suumr 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 So, an honest question here and not trying to be an ass. Have you actually read anything on biology and evolution that wasn't on the internet, and was in a real science book, or even a paper? Something peer reviewed?
The problem with the internet is, there is no review process for what get's posted. Anybody can publish their beliefs and it's very misleading. An easy read on the subject is "The Greatest Show on Earth" by Dawkins. It's not anti religious. Just evolution facts.
tommy605 1 year ago
@tommy605 U have to realize that religion plays a huge role in the creation vs evolution battle on both sides. Dawkins is an atheist. He refuses to acknowledge a Creator therefore he already has a bias. It works the other way as well. Evolution is something secular ppl hold onto bc its the only way to explain the creation of the universe without a Creator. So of course most evolutionists are going to say ID is BS. It works the other way as well. Thats why u teach both & let students decide.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 No, you teach that that best fits the evidence available. Evolution fits all the evidence so is what is taught! Evolutionists say ID is BS because it plainly is!
As for you comment about the chance of life happening being slim, evolutionary theory has nothing to do with life forming. That's abiogenesis! And chance is a fairly irrelevant thing anyway!
maskofsan1ty 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Dawkins didn't come up with the evolution idea/theory. And when Darwin did, he wasn't looking for it. It was a "Wow" moment. He searched all over for evidence, and then his book on the origins of life emerged. Since then, and this is the scientific model, scientists have tried to prove his idea wrong, but in doing so, they found out that it was in fact, absolutely correct.
Evolution does not explain creation. It explains life and the origins of it.
tommy605 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 And yes, I know religion plays a huge role in creation vs evolution. However, when the overwhelming evidence shows evolution to be accurate, disproves the 6 day creation story, disproves the world wide flood story, has shown that all the main stories and characters in the bible were all borrowed from other cultures pre-dating the bibles, why then should religion be taken seriously when it comes to anything science related? Look around. We owe everything to science.
tommy605 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100
We have seen it so often that bioligists even named 6 different types of macro evolution.
-Computer reproduction: There are now programs that simulate the proces of randome mutation(Witch isent even the main drive of evolution) and natural selection witch can be used to create objects and systems that are even more refined than anything a human desiner can create.
And as i look at your arguments(Tuna/wale hybride, bat to pigeon) i can see you have no idea who(damn letter limit)
mikstar890 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100
evolution works. You can just as well try to disprove the way quantum physics work. Since you have just as much know-how about that.
mikstar890 1 year ago
@mikstar890 If evolution were true, the chances of life happening would be slim to none & we wouldnt be here. Evolutionists cant even explain how water got on the Earth. They have to go into comets hitting the Earth & so forth which produced water which is highly unlikely. The chances of all the things happening the evolutionary model says happened, are slim to none at best. Evolution is something secular ppl hold onto bc its the only way to explain the creation of the world without a Creator.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Wait... What?!
Your saying that evolution is wrong because it cant explain water on the earth?? Thats a compleat non-argument. Its like saying the theory of gravity is wrong because it cant explain the working of your computer:S
And even if, scientists dont think water came from comets. It was already presant during te formation of the earth. Further more, evolution isent so slow that we couldent have evolved to your current form. You have nothing to back that argument.
mikstar890 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 Wow, you are so wrong on so many levels, it's hard to know where to begin. Let's start with your "slim to none" argument. This assertion carries no weight because obviously it's not "none", because we are here and science has demonstrated how that came to be-- which had nothing to do with any so-called "god". The evidence for the fact of evolution is overwhelming. To assert "slim to none" is merely an argument from ignorance. Look it up.
nycgroove1 1 year ago
@nycgroove1 So u just proved my other argument. U just said that evolution proves that no god had anything to do with creating our world. Evolution is the foundation of atheism and human secularism and since we dont teach the concept of a Deity in schools, are u not teaching atheism or human secularism in schools? But wait, isn't that a violation of the same concept of "separation of church & state" that u ppl scream when a Christian puts a Nativity scene in a town square? HYPOCRISY.
bRizzle2009100 1 year ago
@bRizzle2009100 First you need to define "god" before you can make a case for anything. Science has proven evolution to be is a fact. Also, evolution and atheism are mutually exclusive, do your research. You want to put your creationist hypothesis in a text book? Publish a scientific thesis and put it through rigorous peer review. If you want to circumvent that process, then we can talk about "hypocrisy".
nycgroove1 1 year ago
@nycgroove1 Do your own research. Science has NEVER proven evolution to be a fact. On the contrary, science HAS proven the Big Bang and Spontaneous Generation (the two predecessors of evolution) to be lies. Being with the First Law of Thermodynamics. 2. The Law of Information. 3. The Law of Biogenesis. Don't be so weak as to let atheist liberal liars in the media and public education tell you what to think. Do some homework. Look up 100 Reasons Why Evolution is Stupid by Kent Hoving here on U.
randalusa 1 year ago