facts and science itself is the enemy of evolution. The bible can't be disproved but evolution has huge holes that can't be explained. Evolution theory is the fairy tale.
@Scobo11 can you explain why the bible cant be disproved also what holes in evolution are you talking about (if their are any) "Evolution theory is the fairy tale" so a talking snake, magic sky daddy, men living for 600 years is true while a scientific theory that has been going strong or 150 years and has been proven multiple times is a fairy tail? wow you creationist have a very weird way of thinking(very,very weird)
@Scobo11 SBKHJBKABKSJBSKJ LOLOO(LOLOLOL the bible cant be dispproved hahahahahaha WHAT A FUCKING HOLE snakes cant talk= bible dissproved LOL it didnt take a scientist to figure that shit out
@Pirate44444 Why are we not seeing half and half species today? And the evolution crowd's "fossils" don't prove evolution of species, no matter how many times they say they do. Species don't change into other species. Evolution happens within a species as it adapts. That's as far as it goes.
@Pirate44444 If evolution of species exists we should be seeing in the wild, animals half way becoming other animals. Duh... common sense. Sounds like you have non.
@Scobo11 well we do, only we obviously don't know what they will evolve into. You seem to have a croco-duck understanding of evolution. It's not like you should see an animal with the head of a tiger and the body of a dolphin. Just as when a baby grows into an adult, you don't have a transitional stage where there is a baby head with an adult body.
So if you want to see an animal part-way to becoming another animal, look at any animal.
@Pirate44444 Can't be proofed period. I don't trust man, I trust God. Darwin was a biased man with an axe to grind with God. He is also a races elitist who believed black people should be eliminated for the good of humanity. His work created social Darwinism which made man think some races were inferior and expendable. Evolution is a lie to denigrate human life. Satan is working behind the scenes here.
@ndrthrdr1 You can't disprove God, you are trusting a fictional story of life. The burden of proof is on evolution. And they have non. You need to stop being a sucker.
@Scobo11 The evidence for evolution from simpler organisms is overwhelming.
Do you think that tens of thousands of scientists, spread all over the world in different cultures, are all secretly conspiring to keep a huge secret from you?
Those who don't know that evolution has been conclusively proven don't understand the evidence - or are unaware of it.
@ndrthrdr1 you know squat. Micro-evolution does happen. Macro evolution is not proven, if you think it is you're mistaken. They are still trying to find the missing link(s). They have nothing but humans that were always humans and apes that were always apes. You are brainwashed, I feel sorry for you.
@Scobo11 There are fossilized remains of so many intermediate fossils between Homo sapiens and ape-like predecessors that now scientists argue about which stage is to be called the first humans. You only listen to other creatards who are also clueless about the evidence. Remain an ignorant worshiper of your imaginary friends. Wallow in your superstitions. Some people are just too dim-witted to reach.
Respond if you want to, religiotard. From here on, you're talking to yourself.
@MrKGatl The entire scientific community thought light speed was the speed limit of everything within space, and if recent discoveries are confirmed accurate, the ENTIRE scientific community will have been proven wrong and that TINY minority who didn't believe in the limit will have been right.
I didn't even read the other guy's comments. Point is, debating over this topic is useless. It's far beyond science's current reach. Atheism has as much of a burden of proof as creationism because both
This isn't "evolution vs creationism". This is "atheists discuss creationism". "Vs" implies a debate.
although I don't take part in religion, creationism, intelligent design, atheism and all other views that require to firmly believe something is true knowing it's unverifiable (ie: require faith), I do believe that it is illogical, self-contradictory and absurd to believe that the origin of everything is nothing, and this video doesn't give the other side a fair chance as it's title implies it
@JungleJargon here you are again. Obviously you do not watch any of these videos. Please tell me what grounds you have to disagree with the entire scientific community. Like they are all part of this conspiracy to spread false knowledge. Your comments sound crazy enough to be a joke and you are just messing with people.
The metaphysical world is fantastical to humans and humanoids with 3-pound brains, as 3-pound brains aren't brains enough to measure infinity. Apes are humanoids; men are not simians. Large chunks of ancient ape parts should be fossilized en masse like the woolly mammoths and the minor & major king lizards what fill the cavernous museums of Western societies. There are realms beyond human perception.
"Random mutations consistently destroy information." P. 15; "Selection cannot rescue the genome." P. 69; "Mutation / selection cannot even create a single gene." P. 123; "All evidence points to human genetic degradation." P.143 - Genetic Entropy & The Mystery of the Genome by Cornell U. Genetics Professor John Sanford. He holds 25 genetic patents and is the inventor of the gene gun. He is truly an expert on the subject of mutations and natural selection. Evolution is a fairy tale for adults.
The bible is not the word of God ? so they got together and made up the stories and commandments ? in order to control the masses right ? so the masses obey the bible ? hmm - and the evidence that I keep referring to that you guys refuse to look at - that was all strategically planted there right ? so the bible is a big conspiracy !! so now we know evolutionists are conspiracy theorists !!!! and they also beleive in fairy tales- mutations don't cause new species - this does not happen- ever !
( continued ) The biggest concept evolution tries to sell people is that mutations cause new DNA info and that is how new species are formed. But mutations are damaged DNA info - deformations and defects are the result. Not once has a mutation ever passed on valuable new and improved information in lab conditions - not once. Yet they claim that this happenned millions of times - its not logical at all to base a whole theory on something that has never been proven, You beleive ANYTHING but God !
@fernieboy100 Seriously? Grow up, please. You are ridiculous. It is highly unlikely that you are an evolutionary biologist, so how dare you say things like "Not once has a mutation ever passed on valuable new and improved information in lab conditions - not once". How do you think viruses and bacteria become more and more resistant to new treatments? The hand of god is guiding them to make it easier for them to kill us?
@LesPaul2006 I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE WAY I'LL ANSWER THAT QUESTION,SO WHY WAISTE YOUR TIME. I ALSO KNOW THAT WE GOT 30 MILION SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES, AND THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE "MISSING" LINK ALIVE. WHY? THEY ALL DIED? LOL. PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT STATISTICS, 30 MILION IS NOT 1 THOUSAND.
@LesPaul2006 Platypus is a big problem to evolution,that animal has both reptilian and mammalian elements, as well as two genes found previously only in birds, amphibians, and fish. More than 80% of the platypus' genes are common to the other mammals whose genomes have been sequenced.It is classified as mammal and no one knows his ancestry.As you see that animal is not a missing link,it is a big problem to explain how that happened because its came from another mammal not from reptiles.
@JesusRealTV Man, mammals evolved from a line of ancient reptiles. We already had a fossil record backing up that theory, now we have platypus confirming it. All of this genomic traces of other species of animals, that's not only platypus, that ALL living things, that's genetically proven by Craig Venter and others. Even US humans. That's why phenotype comparison is to date the strongest evidence for evolution.
@JesusRealTV One single species usually sticks around for a couple of million years the most, so yes, most (if not all) transitional forms have become extinct. There are, on the other hand, living creatures that are possibly related to these transitionary forms and who have in common with them. - hoatzins (whose chicks have claws on their wings like archaeopteryx), lungfish, amphibians (who have both reptile-like and fish-like characteristics), echidnas, platypuses (as is mentioned above)...
@Mirhaus we got 30 million species and sub species, so when you show me few examples that means you don't know statistics. Besides the homo sapiens evolved in 250 thousand years, and if you check fossils you'll see that there is a lot animal looking exactly the same as today.
@JesusRealTV I know statistics. I'm a statistician, actually. Showing only a few examples is the entire reason why we use statistics, because we can't take and list all 30 million species and painstakingly explain all of the connections to you. We'll take a sample, and apply whatever information we find to the population as a whole. Perhaps it's you who doesn't understand statistics - nor biology.
@LesPaul2006 REASON,LANGUAGE,INQUIRY,WONDER ,LONGING,RELIGION,MORALITY,AESTHETICS,CREATIVITY,IMAGINATION ,ASPIRATION AND HUMOR,CREATIVE IMPULSE,POETRY,PAINTING,DANCE, DRAMA,MUSIC,YEARN THE MEANING OF LIFE,PHILOSOPHY,THEOLOGY AND ETHICS,RESEARCH FIELDS LIKE MATHEMATICS,ASTRONOMY,MEDICINE AND PHYSICS,SUCH INTANGIBLE BUT FUNDAMENTAL QUALITIES ARE UNIQUE TO HUMANS. FURTHERMORE,IF GOD HAS NO CLAIM ON US,THEM WE ARE FREE TO BE AS LOW-DOWN AS SNAKES,AND TO MAKE PIG OF OURSELVES,AND ACT LIKE DONKEYS.
Revelation 10:11 And they say to me(John), "You must prophesy again with regard to peoples and nations and tongues and many kings."
Is John one of the witnesses?
Check out my favs, especially the one about the stars found in the bible. Pics in those videos of the Sun Moon and Stars are authentic and the end time is drawing. The stars seem to be 11 then 12 and then definitely7. Check out these symbols and signs from heaven.
Revelation 10:11 And they say to me(John), "You must prophesy again with regard to peoples and nations and tongues and many kings."
Is John one of the witnesses?
Check out my favs, especially the one about the stars found in the bible. Pics in those videos of the Sun Moon and Stars are authentic and the end time is drawing. The stars seem to be 11 then 12 and then definitely7. Check out these symbols and signs from heaven.
What appears to be true is at least practical, so why can't it at least be accepted on that level alone? "In Pragmatism nothing practical or useful is held to be necessarily true, nor is anything which helps to survive merely in the short term." -Wikipedia
Creationism does not legitimately belong alongside evolution in a science class. We could teach EVERY belief system ( thousands of them) , but it would only serve to muddy-up the learning process. We are now 25th in science, it is a part of the reason. I am not saying that people who have a belief system are bad or stupid or anything else negative. I am only saying it belongs in a religious-teaching course and science belongs in a science class. Cheers.
I too used to think science was just picking on religious people's beliefs. It is not, it is simply trying to keep the science class purely science...not beliefs, not speculation, not how it make people "feel" You CANNOT teach the scientific process by interjecting magical thinking or evoking the supernatural.
.Science is not attacking religion. I think it's just fine that people have beliefs...it is called "freedom" But as you can see, it has a different place in a different classroom.
This is the first time I've EVER seen an evolutionist argue their position by talking about evolution and not just insulting creationism at every turn. For example:
fuzzy987321
4 months ago 17 Creationists are idiots.
While I don't agree with what the people in this video are saying, I have to give them credit for actually presenting points instead of just idiotically downsizing creationism. They still insult it, but they insult it intelligently.
I don't know about this Judge, but as far as I know this days wrong jugments are very common. 13 judges in state of new york have been replaced within last few years. If a Judge orders for something, that dose not mean that matter is correct. Judges have been wrong many times in history. Please lady look for something diffrent to fool us.
Come on, how can anyone honestly believe that animals were created by a supreme being in their adult forms?!
I'm a religious person too, but the idea behind creationism is a scam to sell books and dvds, while indoctrinating a few kids on the side.
Creationism is NOT the fundamentals of christianity or islam, so who cares. If it was (and btw it actually was) proven wrong, it wouldn't change anything about those religions.
It's important to understand that there is a BIG, BIG difference between science and belief systems. Scientific laws and theories are tools used to solve problems. Religions are things you believe in. Evolution is NOT something you believe in. It is a tool used to solve problems... like your hammer. You don't believe in your hammer, you use it to solve problems.
3:30 We cannot ban evolution in a public school, but the teaching of ANY religion & their beliefs CAN be ban from public schools? It's also pretty sad the the constitution would be the "biggest obstacle" for anyone when it comes to free speech & being able to teach & be taught not from one view, but from all. Do evolutionist not want the information about the conflicts, controversy among the scientists, & all of that information out there? Because if not, that sounds fishy enough to me...
@cplhewett . science is not a dogmatic thing, they all don't agree on the same things. scientist work hard to disprove each other. there are no experts or authority in science, even Einstein, Darwin. what science do is to look for the truth, it doesn't just favor ideas just because an expert said so, it works hard to make our understanding of reality better... other real scientists have been trying to disprove it for the past 150 years, but nobody has found evidence to disprove it
@Atheist603 And yet... no one has really found the evidence to prove it? Seems weird that people who have this mindset of "logical" & keeping things "rational" in their world & only believing in things that which can be proven by science would have something to prove. "Scientists have drawn on a variety of fields ranging from astronomy to geology to biochemistry in their attempts to answer these questions. Nevertheless, the details of the story of life's beginnings remain obscure."
@Atheist603 That quote is a part of a plaque that is taken from an evolution museum in Washington D.C. You may not believe my faith, but while scientists are constantly scurrying for the answer, the "details of the story of life's beginnings.." are all answered in the very first chapter of the first book of the Bible. Continue with your logic of proving things without really proving a thing. I'm not here to stop you & I'm certainly not here to argue with you.
@Atheist603 And yet... (according to the most noted evolution museum in the country) there are no facts that support evolution? Whatever there is out there that is so-called evidence for evolution is admitted to being obscure. Can't really be any proof without details & if those details are obscure (at best) - uncertain or in anyway ambiguous, how can it be considered any sort of fact?
And yet, my Bible is very explicit about the details of creation & the questions that arise in science.
@Atheist603 Could I ask the same question toward evolution? What makes it right? Because humans have come up with so many theories & ways to try & "prove" it without ever actually proving anything about it with more than mere speculation? I already said I'm not here to argue... That goes even more so for a public wall. I do believe in the Bible, & as that stands a fact for my own life, the Bible says I shouldn't argue. Discussion is one thing...
@cplhewett n evolution has massive evidence to support it,i have no faith in it, i'm aware that it cud b proven wrong someday . it's supported by all kind of evidence. your antibiotics, scientists look at evidence of evolution to make new ones. the genetics support evolution. DNA itself supports evolution with massive of evidence.Also the fossil record, plenty of evidence. Show me one thing that disprove evolution, then I'll shut up. not the bible because it's just a book..
@cplhewett: The concurrence of the conclusions of so many different branches of science, is the best proof of evolution. "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science..."
That would make the support for creation science among those branches of science who deal with the earth and its life forms to be about 0.14%
@cplhewett if you have real evidence to disprove evolution,..you got money and fame waiting 4 you. actually science works hard to try hard to get rid of as many bad ideas as possible. so if you have real evidence to disprove evolution then go and disprove it. even if there are some gaps in the theory, that doesn't mean they won't be found. the theory of gravity has more gaps than evolution has, but y aren't you tlking about that? seriously show some real things that disprove evolution
@lizazoon I think I got it. The bible isn't a science book because it contains so many claims which have been scientifically disproved, it isn't a history book because it contains so many events that never really happened, and it is a book of faith because there is absolutely zero evidence for its truthfulness, so the only way one could think it's true is blind acceptance/belief, aka faith. Right?
2:26 Evolution is theory. It could not possibly be anything else with how times & dates are measured. Even the dates & times that are figured up are based off of "Well, if this is then, this one would then at that time in history so this one has to be this answer..."
Quote 2:47 "And it will continue even after the probable demise of intelligent design..." assuming there is an intelligent designer?
Leones.....I know, I know....you think I'm stupid. Like I said, this is where the conversation ALWAYS ends up. You just continue to prove me right at every corner. NO ONE could possibly understand evolution like you and the rest of the evolution-believing scientific geek-squad. HAHHAHAA.......it's funny.
@BeckhamRacing describe evolution as going from hydrogen to human when it has nothing to do with that, or you completely misdefine the definition of a scientific theory,... well you get the point, I could go on forever. Even this idea about the first living cell and how life began (Which is NOT evolution) there is evidence about self replicating polymers and such but you will NOT read any of it. People like you stick their head in the sand and remain willingfully ignorant for fear you may ...
Condescending....nice! Again...the problem with your argument is that you all segregate Evo and Abiogenesis. From a science standpoint, I understand the classification of those fields. But where it goes wrong is that you ALL willfully ignore the significance of their connection in the start of mankind. You believe LOGIC should prevail in all-things-evo. But logic doesn't exist when asked about the "PROCESS" of life: Beginning, Middle, End. Mutually exclusive? No....
@BeckhamRacing discover something that may challenge your faith. I'm done. No matter how many times I correct you, you just turn around and make the same erroneous statments and retain you misguided viewpoints about science. No amount of logic, reason, rationality, or evidence will change your mind.
@Leones44 No amount of logic, reason, rationality, or evidence will change your mind.
Dude.....could I say the same thing about you? YES! See...that's the problem. You're wrapped up in what you PERSONALLY believe makes sense to YOU. But, I doubt that you have TRULY explored a case for Christ. I doubt you've bothered to try to understand the "why's" of the Bible or significance of evidence like the Dead Sea Scrolls....right? If you have and you still have the same position........(TBC)
@BeckhamRacing No, you could NOT say the same thing about me. There is NOTHING logical about your conclusion that just bc Jesus was written about extensively that means he walked on water, rose from the dead, healed the sick etc. That is the basic premise of your argument which you repeat over and over again. That premise is completely illogical! But again, logic is not your priority its maintaining your beliefs.
@Leones44 " There is NOTHING logical about your conclusion", I don't know how to explain this any differently. The question of "Why", when applied to the 24K manuscripts, is compelling because of the sheer qty of books over time. It begs the question of "If it wasn't true and JC didn't do the things spoke of, then why write about it to the length of the undertaking?". The pendulum certainly swings to the side "true" moreso than "false".
@BeckhamRacing I can't explain it any better than I already did. The idea that the more books there are the more likely the stories told are to be true is COMPLETELY IRRATIONAL. It's a line of reasoning that only reasonates with religous fundamentalist or people whose minds are made up regardless of the evidence. Again, there are a whole bunch of spider man comics. That doesn't make spider man real. And these people wrote about JC bc they believed the stories but were not wintess to the events.
@Leones44 Of course, Leones....it is completely irrational to use logical reasoning to make a conclusion about historical literature or the nature of the creation of that literature. Of course, we NEVER do that with regards to evolution.
You're right. I think this conversation is over because you clearly can't see that what you're accusing me of doing - you are doing yourself. That's the definition of idiocy: Doing the same thing over & over and expecting different results each time.
@BeckhamRacing This debate has led me to realize two things. One, you are a fundamentalist and I'm not going to change you're mind about your beliefs no matter how demonstrably erroneous they may be. Two, you are rationalizing. As you may or may not know, creationists are a running joke to people in mainstream culture. Precisely bc what you believe to be true based on a literal interpreation of the bible is demonstrably wrong and just plain ridiculous. The earth is 10,000 year old Jesus walked..
@Leones44 ... there was a worldwide flood etc. These things are ridiculous. You remedy this outlandish beliefs in your mind by reasoning that the claims made by scientists are just as faith based and not supported by the evidence so you are in some distored way justified for hold such silly beliefs. The problem is you reasoning for not accepting scientific conclusions is based on ignorance and a lack of understanding of these scientific concepts. but you have no interest in understanding them..
@Leones44 And you're right. I'm a fundamentalist on the level that Christ NEVER wanted us to be a mental gymnast to believe & accept him. He didn't want us to be blind robots either. BALANCE is the keyword here. And I don't believe in the whole literal interpretation of the Bible. It is full of characterizations and parables too, which is not meant for literal acceptance. See, this is how I know you're NOT the expert on the Bible - yet you criticize me for not knowing "science"? Laughable.
@BeckhamRacing Has anything I said registered in your mind? When I say you're ignorant about science its for good reason. I say so for specific reasons. Again, you criticize scientists for using carbon to dating as if you found some major loop hole bc carbon is only accurate to about 5000 years old. Blantant ignorance. Carobn dating is not used in this way. You have no clue what the definition of a scientific theory is. More ignorance. After several post you finally understood the difference...
@BeckhamRacing abiogenesis and evolution. But still irrational fundamentalist logic feel that evo is somehow less valid bc it doesn't explain how life originated. Nevermind the fact that other equally valid scientific theories don't explain the origins of whatever they explain. Again ignorance. Don't know anything about abiogenesis and how scientist believe life may have originated but make some baseless statement that cells are too complex to have developed via abiogenesis. These are several..
@BeckhamRacing These are seveal specific examples of how I KNOW YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND SCIENCE! Its only mental gymnastics when you don't understand the concepts the scientific conclusions are based on. But again, understanding science is not your priority, its maintaining your religious beliefs and whatever line of reasoning will allow you to do that that's what you'll believe. Evolution is just religious beliefs its not well supported science. (Right)....
@BeckhamRacing You are clinging to your religious beliefs and being completely irrational. So when I call you ignorant its for good reason. Its not meant to be an insult, its just a fact. And I never said science explains everything bc it doesn't. That doesn't mean we should make up silly religious myths to explain what we as humans have yet to understand.
@Leones44 I'm never surprised when a science junky says you're not ignorant because it's an insult - just fact. Of course it's fact. Coz you say so!
Son, at 28 yrs old, you need a lesson in wisdom, clearly. If our country's forefathers founded our "way" with a fundamental belief in God, you're lack of respect (or understanding) speaks volumes about your character. That alone makes YOU the ignorant one and in my opinion, it's sad that you don't understand that. But you will.....some day.
@BeckhamRacing You are a living breathing stereotype of a religious fundamentalists. Its like you put on blinders , stick you fingers in your ears and go "La la la la la" when somebody says something you don't want to hear. Again, the multiple examples of your errors about these scientific ideas are the reason I know you're ignorant about science and instead of recognizing that fact you completely overlook it and pretend it just me being some arrogant "science junky". You people are scary.
@BeckhamRacing And what the heck do our country's forefathers have to do with the evidence for or against evolution or creationism?!? The answer is NOTHING! You're going off on tangents that have nothing to do with the debate at hand. And many of our foundings fathers were deists! Meaning they didn't believe in scripture and all the stuff you see in the Bible/Koran etc. Why don't you just admit that you don't believe in evo bc it contradicts your religious beliefs and we'll leave it at that?
@BeckhamRacing WTF are you talking about? Leones has just delivered them most respectful speech to a fuck head creationist that I have ever seen and it raised his reputation level in my opinion a thousand fold above your condescending shit. You are not worthy of any more posts or replies. FU beckham
@ExtantFrodo HAHAHAHAHA......what a nice guy you are. 52 years old and a big boy behind that computer screen. But, I'm guessing your ego won't let you ignore this post. We'll see.
@BeckhamRacing And one other thing, you seem to be equating belief in God with creationism. The two are not synonomous. Its completely possibe that God deicided to create life as descirbed by abiogenesis or some other mechanism and then allowed life to evolve as describe by evolutionary theory. This view is called theistic evolution and there are plenty of people in this country who have the belief. The part about God is not a scientific viewpoint just so you know.
@Leones44 theistic evolution - here we go again with the titles, labels, and mutual exclusivity on another theory. I guess I'm going to have to re-classify my cereal and milk in order to have a conversation with you.
@BeckhamRacing Every religious person thinks their religion is "the truth" and if only you would give it a chance, or open you mind or heart you would realize the truth and choose to follow their religion. Its a story that's as old as the earth. If only I "TRULY explored" ... just stop I've heard this story before.
@Leones44 (TBC) then I could say, you're ignorant, or you willful CHOOSE to ignore the evidence, or stop burying your head in the sand because your faith in science is challenged. All those things apply to your logic too.
Bottom line, I'm challenging you to discover something that challenges your faith (in Evo) and you are willfully and wholly ignoring that challenge and criticisizing me for doing the same thing. True?
Better take a long look in the mirror, bro. Your logic is flawed.
@BeckhamRacing I'm not ignoring anything. What I've been saying is you have no idea what you're talking about! This debate is so one sided its not even fun anymore. Everytime you make some comment about evolution or science its almost always way off base and many times just plain wrong! You're scientifically ignorant but you1. refuse to admit it or maybe just don't know it 2. refuse to read about these topics. This is why we go in circles. You say something wrong, I correct you and you repeat it
@BeckhamRacing Are you kidding me? It makes me a rational human being. There are lots of Christians in this country who don't believe in creationism! Most people in this country don't believe in creationism as described in genesis! People who are strict creationist are in the minority. So to act as if I'm some anomoly is crazy. Strict creationism makes claims which are demonstranably wrong! Most accept this except for fundamentalist and other religious zealots.
@Leones44 Dude, relax before you have a heart attack. The point I'm driving at is that you emphatically say you're not an atheist, yet you're not a believer either. That must mean you're agnostic - which means you believe in some high power. But, you didn't say that either. So, I'm just trying to drill down to where you stand on that. If you don't believe in God, Creationism, - then yes - you're atheist.
@BeckhamRacing ... you have no interest in understanding them though bc that would shatter your justification for hold you ridiculous viewpoints. So I will stop this futile exchange. The bottom line is I'm not accusing you of doing what I'm doing. I'm telling you you're ignorant and don't udnerstand the science you are tryint to discredit. And you believe things which are demonsrably false.
@Leones44 "I'm telling you you're ignorant and don't udnerstand the science you are tryint to discredit"
Thank you.....as I said MANY POSTS AGO, a discussion with an Evoist always disolves into flinging insults at the non-evoist about him being stupid and not possibly understanding the science, blah, blah, blah. You've proved me right. Again, thank you.
@BeckhamRacing Don't pride yourself on being right when you should know better than anyone what a self fulfilling prophecy is all about. When you argue matters you do not comprehend (even refuse to comprehend) you most certainly should expect to be handed your hat and shown the door. Now, when you continue to flaunt your pathetic (that's an insult word right?) lack of knowledge and proclaim said lunacy as truth, those who have some integrity have a certain right to correct you. Like it or not.
@Leones44 Evo-boy, what you have done is made a choice to believe in something more than faith. You've chosen a "belief system". Sure, you can conclude science explains everything. But that's just not true and you know it. Does that make you a liar? No. Just misinformed. But, when I look at the evidence, for both Evo & Christ, the question for evolution is full of holes for me, not because I don't understand it.....because it takes more faith to believe in evolution than Christ!
To Frodo/Leones - I know that any minute now, this discussion will erode to a name calling rant about how stupid you think I am for believing the way I do. That's because I've answered your points with responses that neither of you can dispute - especially considering I did that without belittling your own views. That typically upsets people. I hope we don't end up there.
@BeckhamRacing As I said before, the DI is a joke among scientists. And you haven't really said much that makes any sense within the scope of science during this debate. I can dispute just about everything you've posted (at least to me). Its clear you still don't grasp the definition of the word theory. You don't understand what empirical evidence is. Don't understand dating. The list goes on.
@Leones44 " Its clear you still don't grasp the definition of the word theory" I understand every aspect you're discussing, Leones. Here we go....your attempt to "nicely" say that I'm dumb. Again, I understand everything you're discussing - I've debated Atheist Evolutionists for years. I'm simply saying that comparatively, what you're belief system involves is not that much different than mine.
@BeckhamRacing Ok, that's fair. You can believe what you want for whatever reasons you want. I'm not saying you're dumb. You're being defensive. I'm saying you don't understand science or the way it works or why a scientific theory is not based on belief like a religious belief is.
@Leones44 I'm telling you that I understand the principles of science......it's just that there is no way shape or form that it's as objective as you believe it to be. It can't be. There's too much at stake.
@BeckhamRacing I don't know why this is so hard to understand but just bc something is written in a book or many book(24k books) doesn't make it true. Do you know how many spiderman comics have been sold since the first edition. Probably thousands. Does that mean that spiderman is real? Of course not! If you're going to suggest that a man rose from the dead, or walked on water etc. you can't claim it to be true just bc it appears in a bunch of books. That's just silly.
@Leones44 Gosh, when you folks start comparing fictional comic books to literary history.....now that's silly. First, the 24K is recognized as the largest collection of HISTORY LITERATURE known to man. The question that arises is, why would the people of that time go to that much trouble to write 24K? Was it to propogate a lie? A myth? Why? Second, do you know what Historiography is? Yeah, the historiography of 24K is sound.
@BeckhamRacing Well, I would love for you to explain why assuming that bc there are a lot of books discussing Jesus that means he walked on water, rose from the dead after 3 days, healed the sick buy why the millions of copies of spiderman in print don't suggest that spiderman is real. Its faulty logic to assume that the more somethng is written about in some way makes supernatural occurrances fact.
@Leones44 "Its faulty logic to assume that the more somethng is written about in some way makes supernatural occurrances fact." Gee, it requires a conclusion to be based on something without evidence? Gee, Carbon Dating a rock is only known to be accurate back to about 6000 years, but we conclude it "could be" a million years old? Hmmmm....is that type of conclusion faulty too?
@BeckhamRacing You really really don't know you're talking about! You are right, carbon dating is only accurate about 6000 years. That's why scientist don't use carbon to date things thought to be more than 6000 years old! They use argon, potassium, uranium etc.! And they use several different isotopes independently to see if the results agree with one another. This is the part where you acknowledge you don't understand science and apologize for posting stupid shit.
@iWantAGoodName - 60,000 years? HAHA....not hardly. Carbon 14 dating is troublesome beyond reality. Go to Google, type in "Carbon 14 Dating Accuracy" and read along at all the problems - or necessities required to produce consistent & accurate results.
@BeckhamRacing, keep reading your own propaganda, doesn't become more true, tell me some of these "problems" rather than just waving your hand and saying "troublesome beyond reality" without proof.
@Leones44 "the more somethng is written about in some way makes supernatural occurrances fact" Just like a scientist would do for evolution, you have to ask the question of "WHY WOULD THESE PEOPLE GO TO THIS MUCH TROUBLE TO WRITE THIS STORY (REPEATEDLY) IF IT WASN'T TRUE?" The fact is, the historiography is sound and it's recognized as "history" whether you want it to or not. So, Leones, here's your chance....why?
@BeckhamRacing A theory has to make predictions, be falsifiable, provide positivistic evidence, and provide useful information. These qualities sepearate a theory from faith based beliefs of religion. and make it far more likely to be true Again the theory of evolution has these qualities just like the theory of gravity, atomic theory etc. If you are going to assert that evolution is just a belief system like religious belief then every scientific theory is. Why do you single out evolution?
@Leones44 "A theory has to make predictions, be falsifiable, provide positivistic evidence, and provide useful information." Okay, so then 24,000+ literary manuscripts all describing a story about a man who performed miracles and was raised from the dead - does it not fit the description? If you say no, then you're not being objective as called for by "science".
@BeckhamRacing Because Miller provided emperic evidence and published his work, he allowed his work to be reviwed by his peers. For that reason other scientists were able to demonstrate his work was erroneous. This is why science is different from religion. You have a belief which you accept as true and then look for evidence to confirm your beliefs.
@Leones44 "If you are going to assert that evolution is just a belief system like religious belief then every scientific theory is. Why do you single out evolution?" Don't put words in my mouth. I never said EVERY scientific theory is a belief system. But, I single out evolution because its' conclusions are so far fetched and extraordinary that the possibilities are way more preposterous than believing in Christ.
@BeckhamRacing What makes evolution far fetched or extraordinary? What's far fetched about mutations or natural selection? We can directly observe both occuring. No one has ever seen a man rise from the dead after three days nor a man walk on water or a talking bush or a ship large enough to house two of every species on the planet. These things are ridiculous if taken literally.
@Leones44 "What makes evolution far fetched or extraordinary?" The mental gymnastics you have to go through to buy into an idea that somehow a puddle of goo was struck by a package of energy that mutated it into a species that ultimately evolved into an upright walking, breathing, carbon based creature that exudes REASON. Reason didn't just "happen". You can't evolve REASON. You can't evolve Conscience.
@BeckhamRacing "... a puddle of goo was struck by a package of energy..." That statement is pure ignorance. All I can do is roll my eyes at that one. Evolution has nothing to do with energy striking goo. You're talking about abiogenesis which is a separate theory from evolution. And why can't you evolve the ability to reason? Is that a scientific statment or a philosophical one?
@Leones44@Leones44 Life is a process. There's a beginning, middle, and end. Evolution deals specifically with the middle and cares nothing about the beginning or the end. Fine. From now on, I want you to start watching NFL or whatever sport that interests you - starting in the 2nd qtr and stopping at the end of the 3rd qtr. Tell me what you learn from that experience. Does it tell the whole story of the event? Hardly.
@BeckhamRacing And there are people like you who don't understand this process or evolution and view it as being antirelgious in nature who more than welcome what they have to say.
Another red flag that you don't understand much about science is when you claim that evolution is shaky bc not every scientist agrees on all the details as to how evolution occurred.
@Leones44 "you claim that evolution is shaky bc not every scientist agrees on all the details as to how evolution occurred" - Dude, that's not JUST my claim. It's fact! Why does simple logic escape you on this? It's because you have made a willful choice to negate the validity of the 24K manuscripts and historiography. You believe that's ok. But, when I do the same thing about evolution and its' lack of evidence, I somehow misunderstand "science"? Wow.
@BeckhamRacing Again, evolution is not special in that respect. There is no single theory that every scientists in that field is in total agreement about every detail of the theory. There are disagreements about atomic theory, theory of relativity, gravitational theory etc. Does that mean that you think these theories are just belief systems?
@Leones44 Does that mean that you think these theories are just belief systems?
It means that some parts of "theory" involves a BELIEF based on a "GUESS" or an "ASSUMPTION" because we can't positively CONCLUDE something by an evidenciary standpoint. The limiting factor(s) in that process may be technology limitations or missing pieces of evidence. Either way, it forces one to base a conclusion on a belief.
@BeckhamRacing With every post you make it clear that you really don't understand science. A theory is not a "GUESS" or "ASSUMPTION" for reasons I've stated twice already! When you can test your idea, it can make predictions about discoveries that turn out to be true, when it helps explain genetics etc it is MUCH more than just a guess. A guess would be saying Jesus must have walked on water simlply bc it is written about in a whole bunch of books!
@Leones44 "A guess would be saying Jesus must have walked on water simlply bc it is written about in a whole bunch of books" Webster says "guess" is "forming an OPINION with little or no evidence". "Theory" is analyzing a set of facts in relation to one another. You can't say every part of evolution is FACT. Some parts are opinions given by scientists. Period, Leones.
@Leones44 "A theory has to make predictions, be falsifiable, provide positivistic evidence, and provide useful information."
I wanna go back to this because you didn't answer it. Last week, Noah's Ark was the topic on the news. Your beloved Carbon Dating method was used to determine the wood on this structure was 4,800 yrs old. But, it doesn't confirm when the structure was built. Sure, this isn't new news. But, are you objective about that?
@Leones44 IF the scientific method is observable, testable, and repeatable, then viewing a rock that's allegedly dated to be 1 million years old is NOT possible. Interject the hyperbole about conclusions based on "theories" (aka FAITH STATEMENTS) here.
@BeckhamRacing"... then viewing a rock that's allegedly dated to be 1 million years old..." That statement is why I know you don't understand the definition of a scientific theory. If a theory was directly obeservable it wouldn't be a theory! Again, we cannot directly see electrons or neutrons yet we know they exists. We don't directly observe techtonic plates moving yet we have the theory of plate techtonics
@Leones44 THEORY - And we can't see air, yet we know it will be there when we inhale. We can't see "reason", yet we know it exists. We can't see "logic", yet we know it is exists. All of these things require "FAITH" in order for us to BELIEVE they exist. That's why evolution definitely has a certain amount of FAITH STATEMENTS involved........no different than Christianity.
@BeckhamRacing No, we know humans have the ability to reason or to use logic. We can observe this. We cannot observe a man walking on water or rising from the dead after 3 days. In fact no one has ever observed that. And we have no way of falsifying those claims. We can't test to see of Jesus did any of those things. We can directly observe evolution. We have ways to falsify evo. We can test our theory and make predictions. This is why science is different than religion.
@BeckhamRacing B/c they have been so unsuccessful with the peer review process, a process which every other scientific theory has to go through they attempt to bypass it all together by appealing to politicians and an aggressive PR compaingn to try to convince the general public that evolution is a "theory in crisis" or there is some major "controversy" around evo.When there is none.
book: "Darwin on Trial" by Phillip E Johnson
Wanda7771 1 week ago
This is a "verdant" video. =p
lanemays513 1 week ago
Your video is popular on Saint Lucia
chrlsnewsom5 3 weeks ago
facts and science itself is the enemy of evolution. The bible can't be disproved but evolution has huge holes that can't be explained. Evolution theory is the fairy tale.
Scobo11 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Scobo11 can you explain why the bible cant be disproved also what holes in evolution are you talking about (if their are any) "Evolution theory is the fairy tale" so a talking snake, magic sky daddy, men living for 600 years is true while a scientific theory that has been going strong or 150 years and has been proven multiple times is a fairy tail? wow you creationist have a very weird way of thinking(very,very weird)
mimarp478 3 months ago
@Scobo11 SBKHJBKABKSJBSKJ LOLOO(LOLOLOL the bible cant be dispproved hahahahahaha WHAT A FUCKING HOLE snakes cant talk= bible dissproved LOL it didnt take a scientist to figure that shit out
DonkeyDong156 3 months ago
@DonkeyDong156 Satan as a snake dimwit
Scobo11 3 months ago
@Scobo11 there aren't huge holes in evolution...
Pirate44444 3 months ago
@Pirate44444 Why are we not seeing half and half species today? And the evolution crowd's "fossils" don't prove evolution of species, no matter how many times they say they do. Species don't change into other species. Evolution happens within a species as it adapts. That's as far as it goes.
Scobo11 3 months ago
@Scobo11 what do you mean half and half species? It sounds to me like you don't really understand evolution.
Pirate44444 3 months ago
@Pirate44444 If evolution of species exists we should be seeing in the wild, animals half way becoming other animals. Duh... common sense. Sounds like you have non.
Scobo11 3 months ago
@Scobo11 well we do, only we obviously don't know what they will evolve into. You seem to have a croco-duck understanding of evolution. It's not like you should see an animal with the head of a tiger and the body of a dolphin. Just as when a baby grows into an adult, you don't have a transitional stage where there is a baby head with an adult body.
So if you want to see an animal part-way to becoming another animal, look at any animal.
Pirate44444 3 months ago
@Pirate44444 Can't be proofed period. I don't trust man, I trust God. Darwin was a biased man with an axe to grind with God. He is also a races elitist who believed black people should be eliminated for the good of humanity. His work created social Darwinism which made man think some races were inferior and expendable. Evolution is a lie to denigrate human life. Satan is working behind the scenes here.
Scobo11 3 months ago
@Scobo11 If you trust a god, you are trusting an invisible, magical figment of your imagination.
Grow up.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 You can't disprove God, you are trusting a fictional story of life. The burden of proof is on evolution. And they have non. You need to stop being a sucker.
Scobo11 3 months ago
@Scobo11 Google Project Steve NCSE to see that the overwhelming majority of scientists know that evolution has been proven.
You can't prove that I don't have invisible leprechauns living in my garage.
In fact, you don't believe in leprechauns (hopefully).
Of course not.
But WHY not?
No actual (empirical) evidence.
Same as any of the many, many gods that people have made up.
Absolutely no evidence.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@Scobo11 The evidence for evolution from simpler organisms is overwhelming.
Do you think that tens of thousands of scientists, spread all over the world in different cultures, are all secretly conspiring to keep a huge secret from you?
Those who don't know that evolution has been conclusively proven don't understand the evidence - or are unaware of it.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago 2
@ndrthrdr1 you know squat. Micro-evolution does happen. Macro evolution is not proven, if you think it is you're mistaken. They are still trying to find the missing link(s). They have nothing but humans that were always humans and apes that were always apes. You are brainwashed, I feel sorry for you.
Scobo11 3 months ago
@Scobo11 There are fossilized remains of so many intermediate fossils between Homo sapiens and ape-like predecessors that now scientists argue about which stage is to be called the first humans. You only listen to other creatards who are also clueless about the evidence. Remain an ignorant worshiper of your imaginary friends. Wallow in your superstitions. Some people are just too dim-witted to reach.
Respond if you want to, religiotard. From here on, you're talking to yourself.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@Pirate44444 you're deluded man.
Pirate44444 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Scobo11
"If evolution of species exists we should be seeing in the wild, animals half way becoming other animal"
The word is "transitional" and every living thing is transitional.
Before commenting on evolution first learn something about it.
Pigdowndog 3 months ago
"obstacle" is her favorite word :-)
Meskiagkasher 4 months ago in playlist All about Creationism
(cont'd)
are equally unverifiable at the moment, and thus as religious as creationism.
Armoterra 4 months ago
@MrKGatl The entire scientific community thought light speed was the speed limit of everything within space, and if recent discoveries are confirmed accurate, the ENTIRE scientific community will have been proven wrong and that TINY minority who didn't believe in the limit will have been right.
I didn't even read the other guy's comments. Point is, debating over this topic is useless. It's far beyond science's current reach. Atheism has as much of a burden of proof as creationism because both
Armoterra 4 months ago
This isn't "evolution vs creationism". This is "atheists discuss creationism". "Vs" implies a debate.
although I don't take part in religion, creationism, intelligent design, atheism and all other views that require to firmly believe something is true knowing it's unverifiable (ie: require faith), I do believe that it is illogical, self-contradictory and absurd to believe that the origin of everything is nothing, and this video doesn't give the other side a fair chance as it's title implies it
Armoterra 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution is a fraud. Mutations do not accumulate. That means that mutations do not work together to order anything.
Evolution is a failure.
watch?v=lEledPONpkQ
JungleJargon 5 months ago
@JungleJargon here you are again. Obviously you do not watch any of these videos. Please tell me what grounds you have to disagree with the entire scientific community. Like they are all part of this conspiracy to spread false knowledge. Your comments sound crazy enough to be a joke and you are just messing with people.
MrKGatl 4 months ago
The metaphysical world is fantastical to humans and humanoids with 3-pound brains, as 3-pound brains aren't brains enough to measure infinity. Apes are humanoids; men are not simians. Large chunks of ancient ape parts should be fossilized en masse like the woolly mammoths and the minor & major king lizards what fill the cavernous museums of Western societies. There are realms beyond human perception.
UTubeOfficialSite 7 months ago
Creationists can't keep up with the Jones
kaduisaui 8 months ago
Creationists shouldn't be allowed access to the internet.
porkYcain 8 months ago
"Random mutations consistently destroy information." P. 15; "Selection cannot rescue the genome." P. 69; "Mutation / selection cannot even create a single gene." P. 123; "All evidence points to human genetic degradation." P.143 - Genetic Entropy & The Mystery of the Genome by Cornell U. Genetics Professor John Sanford. He holds 25 genetic patents and is the inventor of the gene gun. He is truly an expert on the subject of mutations and natural selection. Evolution is a fairy tale for adults.
achilles197474 9 months ago
The bible is not the word of God ? so they got together and made up the stories and commandments ? in order to control the masses right ? so the masses obey the bible ? hmm - and the evidence that I keep referring to that you guys refuse to look at - that was all strategically planted there right ? so the bible is a big conspiracy !! so now we know evolutionists are conspiracy theorists !!!! and they also beleive in fairy tales- mutations don't cause new species - this does not happen- ever !
fernieboy100 9 months ago
( continued ) The biggest concept evolution tries to sell people is that mutations cause new DNA info and that is how new species are formed. But mutations are damaged DNA info - deformations and defects are the result. Not once has a mutation ever passed on valuable new and improved information in lab conditions - not once. Yet they claim that this happenned millions of times - its not logical at all to base a whole theory on something that has never been proven, You beleive ANYTHING but God !
fernieboy100 9 months ago
@fernieboy100 Seriously? Grow up, please. You are ridiculous. It is highly unlikely that you are an evolutionary biologist, so how dare you say things like "Not once has a mutation ever passed on valuable new and improved information in lab conditions - not once". How do you think viruses and bacteria become more and more resistant to new treatments? The hand of god is guiding them to make it easier for them to kill us?
xmaneater 9 months ago
@fernieboy100 You haven't been inside a bio-weapon development lab, have you?
LesPaul2006 7 months ago
@JesusRealTV no one knows the origin of life... yet.
toejamonrye 10 months ago
RICHARD DAWKINS DOESN'T KNOW THE ORIGIN OF LIFE CHECK THIS OUT:watch?v=DSM3BpTrA88
JesusRealTV 10 months ago
@JesusRealTV Neither do you, mr Argument from Ignorance.
LesPaul2006 7 months ago
@LesPaul2006 YOU ARE RIGHT NEITHER ANYBODY BOY.
JesusRealTV 7 months ago
@JesusRealTV So how can you KNOW it was god?
LesPaul2006 7 months ago
@LesPaul2006 I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE WAY I'LL ANSWER THAT QUESTION,SO WHY WAISTE YOUR TIME. I ALSO KNOW THAT WE GOT 30 MILION SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES, AND THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE "MISSING" LINK ALIVE. WHY? THEY ALL DIED? LOL. PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT STATISTICS, 30 MILION IS NOT 1 THOUSAND.
JesusRealTV 7 months ago
@JesusRealTV Ever heard of platyphus?
LesPaul2006 7 months ago
@LesPaul2006 Platypus is a big problem to evolution,that animal has both reptilian and mammalian elements, as well as two genes found previously only in birds, amphibians, and fish. More than 80% of the platypus' genes are common to the other mammals whose genomes have been sequenced.It is classified as mammal and no one knows his ancestry.As you see that animal is not a missing link,it is a big problem to explain how that happened because its came from another mammal not from reptiles.
JesusRealTV 7 months ago
@JesusRealTV Man, mammals evolved from a line of ancient reptiles. We already had a fossil record backing up that theory, now we have platypus confirming it. All of this genomic traces of other species of animals, that's not only platypus, that ALL living things, that's genetically proven by Craig Venter and others. Even US humans. That's why phenotype comparison is to date the strongest evidence for evolution.
LesPaul2006 7 months ago
@JesusRealTV One single species usually sticks around for a couple of million years the most, so yes, most (if not all) transitional forms have become extinct. There are, on the other hand, living creatures that are possibly related to these transitionary forms and who have in common with them. - hoatzins (whose chicks have claws on their wings like archaeopteryx), lungfish, amphibians (who have both reptile-like and fish-like characteristics), echidnas, platypuses (as is mentioned above)...
Mirhaus 6 months ago
@Mirhaus we got 30 million species and sub species, so when you show me few examples that means you don't know statistics. Besides the homo sapiens evolved in 250 thousand years, and if you check fossils you'll see that there is a lot animal looking exactly the same as today.
JesusRealTV 6 months ago
@JesusRealTV I know statistics. I'm a statistician, actually. Showing only a few examples is the entire reason why we use statistics, because we can't take and list all 30 million species and painstakingly explain all of the connections to you. We'll take a sample, and apply whatever information we find to the population as a whole. Perhaps it's you who doesn't understand statistics - nor biology.
BParker049 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LesPaul2006 REASON,LANGUAGE,INQUIRY,WONDER ,LONGING,RELIGION,MORALITY,AESTHETICS,CREATIVITY,IMAGINATION ,ASPIRATION AND HUMOR,CREATIVE IMPULSE,POETRY,PAINTING,DANCE, DRAMA,MUSIC,YEARN THE MEANING OF LIFE,PHILOSOPHY,THEOLOGY AND ETHICS,RESEARCH FIELDS LIKE MATHEMATICS,ASTRONOMY,MEDICINE AND PHYSICS,SUCH INTANGIBLE BUT FUNDAMENTAL QUALITIES ARE UNIQUE TO HUMANS. FURTHERMORE,IF GOD HAS NO CLAIM ON US,THEM WE ARE FREE TO BE AS LOW-DOWN AS SNAKES,AND TO MAKE PIG OF OURSELVES,AND ACT LIKE DONKEYS.
JesusRealTV 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Revelation 10:11 And they say to me(John), "You must prophesy again with regard to peoples and nations and tongues and many kings."
Is John one of the witnesses?
Check out my favs, especially the one about the stars found in the bible. Pics in those videos of the Sun Moon and Stars are authentic and the end time is drawing. The stars seem to be 11 then 12 and then definitely7. Check out these symbols and signs from heaven.
themiraclesonearth 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Revelation 10:11 And they say to me(John), "You must prophesy again with regard to peoples and nations and tongues and many kings."
Is John one of the witnesses?
Check out my favs, especially the one about the stars found in the bible. Pics in those videos of the Sun Moon and Stars are authentic and the end time is drawing. The stars seem to be 11 then 12 and then definitely7. Check out these symbols and signs from heaven.
themiraclesonearth 11 months ago
What appears to be true is at least practical, so why can't it at least be accepted on that level alone? "In Pragmatism nothing practical or useful is held to be necessarily true, nor is anything which helps to survive merely in the short term." -Wikipedia
brttcm8 11 months ago
i want to stab these people in the chest and yell wheres your god now
SargentandGreenLeaf 1 year ago 2
Creationism does not legitimately belong alongside evolution in a science class. We could teach EVERY belief system ( thousands of them) , but it would only serve to muddy-up the learning process. We are now 25th in science, it is a part of the reason. I am not saying that people who have a belief system are bad or stupid or anything else negative. I am only saying it belongs in a religious-teaching course and science belongs in a science class. Cheers.
orangemod 1 year ago 3
I too used to think science was just picking on religious people's beliefs. It is not, it is simply trying to keep the science class purely science...not beliefs, not speculation, not how it make people "feel" You CANNOT teach the scientific process by interjecting magical thinking or evoking the supernatural.
.Science is not attacking religion. I think it's just fine that people have beliefs...it is called "freedom" But as you can see, it has a different place in a different classroom.
orangemod 1 year ago 4
@TheTazzaman1 no it was copernicus that came up with the heliocentric system, galileo just built the first telescope and supported copernicus' ideas
Vlaxerman343 1 year ago
@Vlaxerman343 Hans Lippershey built the first telescope, not Galileo.
goldenthroat86 1 year ago
@goldenthroat86 really? hmmm I guess I heard something about how galileo only took the credit for that, but now I know
Vlaxerman343 1 year ago
Creationists, its not fuckin working
Give up!
CrazyMarauder 1 year ago
@TheTazzaman1 Not only we evolved from primates, we still are primates.
sihsobhk 1 year ago
Owls have a better sense of sight than humans,
dogs have a better sense of smell,
bats have better hearing,
cheetahs are faster,
gorillas are stronger,
etc, etc, etc.....
If God created humans in his image he didn't do a very good job on himself.
ftwsmp 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
This is the first time I've EVER seen an evolutionist argue their position by talking about evolution and not just insulting creationism at every turn. For example:
fuzzy987321
4 months ago 17 Creationists are idiots.
While I don't agree with what the people in this video are saying, I have to give them credit for actually presenting points instead of just idiotically downsizing creationism. They still insult it, but they insult it intelligently.
MazorKuziaki 1 year ago
I don't know about this Judge, but as far as I know this days wrong jugments are very common. 13 judges in state of new york have been replaced within last few years. If a Judge orders for something, that dose not mean that matter is correct. Judges have been wrong many times in history. Please lady look for something diffrent to fool us.
apspacking 1 year ago
"Creationists have had to evolve" Priceless
dredoc1 1 year ago 39
Come on, how can anyone honestly believe that animals were created by a supreme being in their adult forms?!
I'm a religious person too, but the idea behind creationism is a scam to sell books and dvds, while indoctrinating a few kids on the side.
Creationism is NOT the fundamentals of christianity or islam, so who cares. If it was (and btw it actually was) proven wrong, it wouldn't change anything about those religions.
Jiggerjinn 1 year ago
@Jiggerjinn religion has always been a scam. a way to control people. the church reminds me of the federal reserve. both a form of slavery
MrJackclarke 1 year ago
@MrJackclarke
Yes you are righ and that is why Evolutionists want to get the church out and take all for themself.
apspacking 1 year ago
I am so glad I grew up and went to school in a non US country. Vive le science.
BOULDERDP 1 year ago 11
This has been flagged as spam show
It's important to understand that there is a BIG, BIG difference between science and belief systems. Scientific laws and theories are tools used to solve problems. Religions are things you believe in. Evolution is NOT something you believe in. It is a tool used to solve problems... like your hammer. You don't believe in your hammer, you use it to solve problems.
blaisingm 1 year ago
3:30 We cannot ban evolution in a public school, but the teaching of ANY religion & their beliefs CAN be ban from public schools? It's also pretty sad the the constitution would be the "biggest obstacle" for anyone when it comes to free speech & being able to teach & be taught not from one view, but from all. Do evolutionist not want the information about the conflicts, controversy among the scientists, & all of that information out there? Because if not, that sounds fishy enough to me...
cplhewett 1 year ago
@cplhewett . science is not a dogmatic thing, they all don't agree on the same things. scientist work hard to disprove each other. there are no experts or authority in science, even Einstein, Darwin. what science do is to look for the truth, it doesn't just favor ideas just because an expert said so, it works hard to make our understanding of reality better... other real scientists have been trying to disprove it for the past 150 years, but nobody has found evidence to disprove it
Atheist603 1 year ago
@Atheist603 And yet... no one has really found the evidence to prove it? Seems weird that people who have this mindset of "logical" & keeping things "rational" in their world & only believing in things that which can be proven by science would have something to prove. "Scientists have drawn on a variety of fields ranging from astronomy to geology to biochemistry in their attempts to answer these questions. Nevertheless, the details of the story of life's beginnings remain obscure."
cplhewett 1 year ago
@Atheist603 That quote is a part of a plaque that is taken from an evolution museum in Washington D.C. You may not believe my faith, but while scientists are constantly scurrying for the answer, the "details of the story of life's beginnings.." are all answered in the very first chapter of the first book of the Bible. Continue with your logic of proving things without really proving a thing. I'm not here to stop you & I'm certainly not here to argue with you.
cplhewett 1 year ago
@cplhewett ooh,..that's what you want to believe, but it doesn't make it true. the fact are the facts. you bible is wrong, end of the story
Atheist603 1 year ago
@Atheist603 And yet... (according to the most noted evolution museum in the country) there are no facts that support evolution? Whatever there is out there that is so-called evidence for evolution is admitted to being obscure. Can't really be any proof without details & if those details are obscure (at best) - uncertain or in anyway ambiguous, how can it be considered any sort of fact?
And yet, my Bible is very explicit about the details of creation & the questions that arise in science.
cplhewett 1 year ago
@cplhewett please..don't start. what makes the bible right? because it says so?
Atheist603 1 year ago
@Atheist603 Could I ask the same question toward evolution? What makes it right? Because humans have come up with so many theories & ways to try & "prove" it without ever actually proving anything about it with more than mere speculation? I already said I'm not here to argue... That goes even more so for a public wall. I do believe in the Bible, & as that stands a fact for my own life, the Bible says I shouldn't argue. Discussion is one thing...
cplhewett 1 year ago
@cplhewett n evolution has massive evidence to support it,i have no faith in it, i'm aware that it cud b proven wrong someday . it's supported by all kind of evidence. your antibiotics, scientists look at evidence of evolution to make new ones. the genetics support evolution. DNA itself supports evolution with massive of evidence.Also the fossil record, plenty of evidence. Show me one thing that disprove evolution, then I'll shut up. not the bible because it's just a book..
Atheist603 1 year ago
@cplhewett: The concurrence of the conclusions of so many different branches of science, is the best proof of evolution. "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science..."
That would make the support for creation science among those branches of science who deal with the earth and its life forms to be about 0.14%
lizazoon 1 year ago
@lizazoon 700 scientists with Phd's from the Patriot University.
lewisner 1 year ago
@Atheist603 But to sit here just trying to openly humiliate each other is not something I'm going to participate in. Good day.
cplhewett 1 year ago
@cplhewett if you have real evidence to disprove evolution,..you got money and fame waiting 4 you. actually science works hard to try hard to get rid of as many bad ideas as possible. so if you have real evidence to disprove evolution then go and disprove it. even if there are some gaps in the theory, that doesn't mean they won't be found. the theory of gravity has more gaps than evolution has, but y aren't you tlking about that? seriously show some real things that disprove evolution
Atheist603 1 year ago
@cplhewett :And yet, my Bible is very explicit about the details of creation & the questions that arise in science.
As our pastor said in his homily; The bible is no science book. The bible is no history book. The bible is a book of faith. Got it ?
lizazoon 1 year ago
@lizazoon Faith as in: believing in what you know is not true? ^^
grimordwow 1 year ago
@lizazoon I think I got it. The bible isn't a science book because it contains so many claims which have been scientifically disproved, it isn't a history book because it contains so many events that never really happened, and it is a book of faith because there is absolutely zero evidence for its truthfulness, so the only way one could think it's true is blind acceptance/belief, aka faith. Right?
fudrick43 11 months ago
@cplhewett "And yet, my Bible is very explicit about the details of creation & the questions that arise in science."
Really? Where does it explain E=MC2, Quantum Theory, Gravity, Electricity and DNA ?
lewisner 1 year ago
@lewisner God created it all. There it is explained.
cplhewett 1 year ago
@cplhewett Don't be silly 8-)
lewisner 1 year ago
@cplhewett Which God? Yaweah, Allah, Zeus, Odin, Thor, Hercules, Poseidon, Ra, Vichunu, Shiva, Gaia, Flying Spaghetti monster, Cthulu?
sihsobhk 1 year ago
2:26 Evolution is theory. It could not possibly be anything else with how times & dates are measured. Even the dates & times that are figured up are based off of "Well, if this is then, this one would then at that time in history so this one has to be this answer..."
Quote 2:47 "And it will continue even after the probable demise of intelligent design..." assuming there is an intelligent designer?
cplhewett 1 year ago
Christians are backwards sly cheating basterds
maddoxhell 1 year ago 4
Creationists are idiots.
fuzzy987321 1 year ago 35
Leones.....I know, I know....you think I'm stupid. Like I said, this is where the conversation ALWAYS ends up. You just continue to prove me right at every corner. NO ONE could possibly understand evolution like you and the rest of the evolution-believing scientific geek-squad. HAHHAHAA.......it's funny.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing describe evolution as going from hydrogen to human when it has nothing to do with that, or you completely misdefine the definition of a scientific theory,... well you get the point, I could go on forever. Even this idea about the first living cell and how life began (Which is NOT evolution) there is evidence about self replicating polymers and such but you will NOT read any of it. People like you stick their head in the sand and remain willingfully ignorant for fear you may ...
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 People like you
Condescending....nice! Again...the problem with your argument is that you all segregate Evo and Abiogenesis. From a science standpoint, I understand the classification of those fields. But where it goes wrong is that you ALL willfully ignore the significance of their connection in the start of mankind. You believe LOGIC should prevail in all-things-evo. But logic doesn't exist when asked about the "PROCESS" of life: Beginning, Middle, End. Mutually exclusive? No....
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing discover something that may challenge your faith. I'm done. No matter how many times I correct you, you just turn around and make the same erroneous statments and retain you misguided viewpoints about science. No amount of logic, reason, rationality, or evidence will change your mind.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 No amount of logic, reason, rationality, or evidence will change your mind.
Dude.....could I say the same thing about you? YES! See...that's the problem. You're wrapped up in what you PERSONALLY believe makes sense to YOU. But, I doubt that you have TRULY explored a case for Christ. I doubt you've bothered to try to understand the "why's" of the Bible or significance of evidence like the Dead Sea Scrolls....right? If you have and you still have the same position........(TBC)
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing No, you could NOT say the same thing about me. There is NOTHING logical about your conclusion that just bc Jesus was written about extensively that means he walked on water, rose from the dead, healed the sick etc. That is the basic premise of your argument which you repeat over and over again. That premise is completely illogical! But again, logic is not your priority its maintaining your beliefs.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 " There is NOTHING logical about your conclusion", I don't know how to explain this any differently. The question of "Why", when applied to the 24K manuscripts, is compelling because of the sheer qty of books over time. It begs the question of "If it wasn't true and JC didn't do the things spoke of, then why write about it to the length of the undertaking?". The pendulum certainly swings to the side "true" moreso than "false".
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing I can't explain it any better than I already did. The idea that the more books there are the more likely the stories told are to be true is COMPLETELY IRRATIONAL. It's a line of reasoning that only reasonates with religous fundamentalist or people whose minds are made up regardless of the evidence. Again, there are a whole bunch of spider man comics. That doesn't make spider man real. And these people wrote about JC bc they believed the stories but were not wintess to the events.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 Of course, Leones....it is completely irrational to use logical reasoning to make a conclusion about historical literature or the nature of the creation of that literature. Of course, we NEVER do that with regards to evolution.
You're right. I think this conversation is over because you clearly can't see that what you're accusing me of doing - you are doing yourself. That's the definition of idiocy: Doing the same thing over & over and expecting different results each time.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing This debate has led me to realize two things. One, you are a fundamentalist and I'm not going to change you're mind about your beliefs no matter how demonstrably erroneous they may be. Two, you are rationalizing. As you may or may not know, creationists are a running joke to people in mainstream culture. Precisely bc what you believe to be true based on a literal interpreation of the bible is demonstrably wrong and just plain ridiculous. The earth is 10,000 year old Jesus walked..
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 ... there was a worldwide flood etc. These things are ridiculous. You remedy this outlandish beliefs in your mind by reasoning that the claims made by scientists are just as faith based and not supported by the evidence so you are in some distored way justified for hold such silly beliefs. The problem is you reasoning for not accepting scientific conclusions is based on ignorance and a lack of understanding of these scientific concepts. but you have no interest in understanding them..
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 And you're right. I'm a fundamentalist on the level that Christ NEVER wanted us to be a mental gymnast to believe & accept him. He didn't want us to be blind robots either. BALANCE is the keyword here. And I don't believe in the whole literal interpretation of the Bible. It is full of characterizations and parables too, which is not meant for literal acceptance. See, this is how I know you're NOT the expert on the Bible - yet you criticize me for not knowing "science"? Laughable.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Has anything I said registered in your mind? When I say you're ignorant about science its for good reason. I say so for specific reasons. Again, you criticize scientists for using carbon to dating as if you found some major loop hole bc carbon is only accurate to about 5000 years old. Blantant ignorance. Carobn dating is not used in this way. You have no clue what the definition of a scientific theory is. More ignorance. After several post you finally understood the difference...
Leones44 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing abiogenesis and evolution. But still irrational fundamentalist logic feel that evo is somehow less valid bc it doesn't explain how life originated. Nevermind the fact that other equally valid scientific theories don't explain the origins of whatever they explain. Again ignorance. Don't know anything about abiogenesis and how scientist believe life may have originated but make some baseless statement that cells are too complex to have developed via abiogenesis. These are several..
Leones44 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing These are seveal specific examples of how I KNOW YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND SCIENCE! Its only mental gymnastics when you don't understand the concepts the scientific conclusions are based on. But again, understanding science is not your priority, its maintaining your religious beliefs and whatever line of reasoning will allow you to do that that's what you'll believe. Evolution is just religious beliefs its not well supported science. (Right)....
Leones44 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing You are clinging to your religious beliefs and being completely irrational. So when I call you ignorant its for good reason. Its not meant to be an insult, its just a fact. And I never said science explains everything bc it doesn't. That doesn't mean we should make up silly religious myths to explain what we as humans have yet to understand.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 I'm never surprised when a science junky says you're not ignorant because it's an insult - just fact. Of course it's fact. Coz you say so!
Son, at 28 yrs old, you need a lesson in wisdom, clearly. If our country's forefathers founded our "way" with a fundamental belief in God, you're lack of respect (or understanding) speaks volumes about your character. That alone makes YOU the ignorant one and in my opinion, it's sad that you don't understand that. But you will.....some day.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing You are a living breathing stereotype of a religious fundamentalists. Its like you put on blinders , stick you fingers in your ears and go "La la la la la" when somebody says something you don't want to hear. Again, the multiple examples of your errors about these scientific ideas are the reason I know you're ignorant about science and instead of recognizing that fact you completely overlook it and pretend it just me being some arrogant "science junky". You people are scary.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 "You people are scary."
That is why we are here doing what we are doing. Let these people just parade their crap unchallenged and it spreads like manure all over everything.
ExtantFrodo 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing And what the heck do our country's forefathers have to do with the evidence for or against evolution or creationism?!? The answer is NOTHING! You're going off on tangents that have nothing to do with the debate at hand. And many of our foundings fathers were deists! Meaning they didn't believe in scripture and all the stuff you see in the Bible/Koran etc. Why don't you just admit that you don't believe in evo bc it contradicts your religious beliefs and we'll leave it at that?
Leones44 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing WTF are you talking about? Leones has just delivered them most respectful speech to a fuck head creationist that I have ever seen and it raised his reputation level in my opinion a thousand fold above your condescending shit. You are not worthy of any more posts or replies. FU beckham
ExtantFrodo 1 year ago
@ExtantFrodo HAHAHAHAHA......what a nice guy you are. 52 years old and a big boy behind that computer screen. But, I'm guessing your ego won't let you ignore this post. We'll see.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing And one other thing, you seem to be equating belief in God with creationism. The two are not synonomous. Its completely possibe that God deicided to create life as descirbed by abiogenesis or some other mechanism and then allowed life to evolve as describe by evolutionary theory. This view is called theistic evolution and there are plenty of people in this country who have the belief. The part about God is not a scientific viewpoint just so you know.
Leones44 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leones44 theistic evolution - here we go again with the titles, labels, and mutual exclusivity on another theory. I guess I'm going to have to re-classify my cereal and milk in order to have a conversation with you.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Every religious person thinks their religion is "the truth" and if only you would give it a chance, or open you mind or heart you would realize the truth and choose to follow their religion. Its a story that's as old as the earth. If only I "TRULY explored" ... just stop I've heard this story before.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 (TBC) then I could say, you're ignorant, or you willful CHOOSE to ignore the evidence, or stop burying your head in the sand because your faith in science is challenged. All those things apply to your logic too.
Bottom line, I'm challenging you to discover something that challenges your faith (in Evo) and you are willfully and wholly ignoring that challenge and criticisizing me for doing the same thing. True?
Better take a long look in the mirror, bro. Your logic is flawed.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing I'm not ignoring anything. What I've been saying is you have no idea what you're talking about! This debate is so one sided its not even fun anymore. Everytime you make some comment about evolution or science its almost always way off base and many times just plain wrong! You're scientifically ignorant but you1. refuse to admit it or maybe just don't know it 2. refuse to read about these topics. This is why we go in circles. You say something wrong, I correct you and you repeat it
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 Oy....Let's see....you don't believe in Creationism but you're not an atheist. Ok...I'll bite, where does that exactly land you?
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Are you kidding me? It makes me a rational human being. There are lots of Christians in this country who don't believe in creationism! Most people in this country don't believe in creationism as described in genesis! People who are strict creationist are in the minority. So to act as if I'm some anomoly is crazy. Strict creationism makes claims which are demonstranably wrong! Most accept this except for fundamentalist and other religious zealots.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 Dude, relax before you have a heart attack. The point I'm driving at is that you emphatically say you're not an atheist, yet you're not a believer either. That must mean you're agnostic - which means you believe in some high power. But, you didn't say that either. So, I'm just trying to drill down to where you stand on that. If you don't believe in God, Creationism, - then yes - you're atheist.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing ... you have no interest in understanding them though bc that would shatter your justification for hold you ridiculous viewpoints. So I will stop this futile exchange. The bottom line is I'm not accusing you of doing what I'm doing. I'm telling you you're ignorant and don't udnerstand the science you are tryint to discredit. And you believe things which are demonsrably false.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 "I'm telling you you're ignorant and don't udnerstand the science you are tryint to discredit"
Thank you.....as I said MANY POSTS AGO, a discussion with an Evoist always disolves into flinging insults at the non-evoist about him being stupid and not possibly understanding the science, blah, blah, blah. You've proved me right. Again, thank you.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Don't pride yourself on being right when you should know better than anyone what a self fulfilling prophecy is all about. When you argue matters you do not comprehend (even refuse to comprehend) you most certainly should expect to be handed your hat and shown the door. Now, when you continue to flaunt your pathetic (that's an insult word right?) lack of knowledge and proclaim said lunacy as truth, those who have some integrity have a certain right to correct you. Like it or not.
ExtantFrodo 1 year ago
@Leones44 Evo-boy, what you have done is made a choice to believe in something more than faith. You've chosen a "belief system". Sure, you can conclude science explains everything. But that's just not true and you know it. Does that make you a liar? No. Just misinformed. But, when I look at the evidence, for both Evo & Christ, the question for evolution is full of holes for me, not because I don't understand it.....because it takes more faith to believe in evolution than Christ!
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
I am an atheist and this video is beautiful.
romanmir01 1 year ago
To Frodo/Leones - I know that any minute now, this discussion will erode to a name calling rant about how stupid you think I am for believing the way I do. That's because I've answered your points with responses that neither of you can dispute - especially considering I did that without belittling your own views. That typically upsets people. I hope we don't end up there.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing it's amazing the you can insult and belittle people and in the same breath say that you aren't. Simply amazing.
ExtantFrodo 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing As I said before, the DI is a joke among scientists. And you haven't really said much that makes any sense within the scope of science during this debate. I can dispute just about everything you've posted (at least to me). Its clear you still don't grasp the definition of the word theory. You don't understand what empirical evidence is. Don't understand dating. The list goes on.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 " Its clear you still don't grasp the definition of the word theory" I understand every aspect you're discussing, Leones. Here we go....your attempt to "nicely" say that I'm dumb. Again, I understand everything you're discussing - I've debated Atheist Evolutionists for years. I'm simply saying that comparatively, what you're belief system involves is not that much different than mine.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Ok, that's fair. You can believe what you want for whatever reasons you want. I'm not saying you're dumb. You're being defensive. I'm saying you don't understand science or the way it works or why a scientific theory is not based on belief like a religious belief is.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 I'm telling you that I understand the principles of science......it's just that there is no way shape or form that it's as objective as you believe it to be. It can't be. There's too much at stake.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing I don't know why this is so hard to understand but just bc something is written in a book or many book(24k books) doesn't make it true. Do you know how many spiderman comics have been sold since the first edition. Probably thousands. Does that mean that spiderman is real? Of course not! If you're going to suggest that a man rose from the dead, or walked on water etc. you can't claim it to be true just bc it appears in a bunch of books. That's just silly.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 I meant to type there have been millions of spiderman comics published since the first copy.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 Gosh, when you folks start comparing fictional comic books to literary history.....now that's silly. First, the 24K is recognized as the largest collection of HISTORY LITERATURE known to man. The question that arises is, why would the people of that time go to that much trouble to write 24K? Was it to propogate a lie? A myth? Why? Second, do you know what Historiography is? Yeah, the historiography of 24K is sound.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Well, I would love for you to explain why assuming that bc there are a lot of books discussing Jesus that means he walked on water, rose from the dead after 3 days, healed the sick buy why the millions of copies of spiderman in print don't suggest that spiderman is real. Its faulty logic to assume that the more somethng is written about in some way makes supernatural occurrances fact.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 "Its faulty logic to assume that the more somethng is written about in some way makes supernatural occurrances fact." Gee, it requires a conclusion to be based on something without evidence? Gee, Carbon Dating a rock is only known to be accurate back to about 6000 years, but we conclude it "could be" a million years old? Hmmmm....is that type of conclusion faulty too?
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing You really really don't know you're talking about! You are right, carbon dating is only accurate about 6000 years. That's why scientist don't use carbon to date things thought to be more than 6000 years old! They use argon, potassium, uranium etc.! And they use several different isotopes independently to see if the results agree with one another. This is the part where you acknowledge you don't understand science and apologize for posting stupid shit.
Leones44 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing er no, carbon dating is accurate to about 60,000 years, don't worry, you were only an order of magnitude out :)
iWantAGoodName 1 year ago
@iWantAGoodName - 60,000 years? HAHA....not hardly. Carbon 14 dating is troublesome beyond reality. Go to Google, type in "Carbon 14 Dating Accuracy" and read along at all the problems - or necessities required to produce consistent & accurate results.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing, keep reading your own propaganda, doesn't become more true, tell me some of these "problems" rather than just waving your hand and saying "troublesome beyond reality" without proof.
iWantAGoodName 1 year ago
@iWantAGoodName I have named those things in previous posts. I'm not doing it again.....
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leones44 "the more somethng is written about in some way makes supernatural occurrances fact" Just like a scientist would do for evolution, you have to ask the question of "WHY WOULD THESE PEOPLE GO TO THIS MUCH TROUBLE TO WRITE THIS STORY (REPEATEDLY) IF IT WASN'T TRUE?" The fact is, the historiography is sound and it's recognized as "history" whether you want it to or not. So, Leones, here's your chance....why?
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing A theory has to make predictions, be falsifiable, provide positivistic evidence, and provide useful information. These qualities sepearate a theory from faith based beliefs of religion. and make it far more likely to be true Again the theory of evolution has these qualities just like the theory of gravity, atomic theory etc. If you are going to assert that evolution is just a belief system like religious belief then every scientific theory is. Why do you single out evolution?
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 "A theory has to make predictions, be falsifiable, provide positivistic evidence, and provide useful information." Okay, so then 24,000+ literary manuscripts all describing a story about a man who performed miracles and was raised from the dead - does it not fit the description? If you say no, then you're not being objective as called for by "science".
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Because Miller provided emperic evidence and published his work, he allowed his work to be reviwed by his peers. For that reason other scientists were able to demonstrate his work was erroneous. This is why science is different from religion. You have a belief which you accept as true and then look for evidence to confirm your beliefs.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 "If you are going to assert that evolution is just a belief system like religious belief then every scientific theory is. Why do you single out evolution?" Don't put words in my mouth. I never said EVERY scientific theory is a belief system. But, I single out evolution because its' conclusions are so far fetched and extraordinary that the possibilities are way more preposterous than believing in Christ.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing What makes evolution far fetched or extraordinary? What's far fetched about mutations or natural selection? We can directly observe both occuring. No one has ever seen a man rise from the dead after three days nor a man walk on water or a talking bush or a ship large enough to house two of every species on the planet. These things are ridiculous if taken literally.
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 "What makes evolution far fetched or extraordinary?" The mental gymnastics you have to go through to buy into an idea that somehow a puddle of goo was struck by a package of energy that mutated it into a species that ultimately evolved into an upright walking, breathing, carbon based creature that exudes REASON. Reason didn't just "happen". You can't evolve REASON. You can't evolve Conscience.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing "... a puddle of goo was struck by a package of energy..." That statement is pure ignorance. All I can do is roll my eyes at that one. Evolution has nothing to do with energy striking goo. You're talking about abiogenesis which is a separate theory from evolution. And why can't you evolve the ability to reason? Is that a scientific statment or a philosophical one?
Leones44 1 year ago
Comment removed
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leones44 @Leones44 Life is a process. There's a beginning, middle, and end. Evolution deals specifically with the middle and cares nothing about the beginning or the end. Fine. From now on, I want you to start watching NFL or whatever sport that interests you - starting in the 2nd qtr and stopping at the end of the 3rd qtr. Tell me what you learn from that experience. Does it tell the whole story of the event? Hardly.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@Leones44 Where does Reason come from?
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing And there are people like you who don't understand this process or evolution and view it as being antirelgious in nature who more than welcome what they have to say.
Another red flag that you don't understand much about science is when you claim that evolution is shaky bc not every scientist agrees on all the details as to how evolution occurred.
Leones44 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leones44 "you claim that evolution is shaky bc not every scientist agrees on all the details as to how evolution occurred" - Dude, that's not JUST my claim. It's fact! Why does simple logic escape you on this? It's because you have made a willful choice to negate the validity of the 24K manuscripts and historiography. You believe that's ok. But, when I do the same thing about evolution and its' lack of evidence, I somehow misunderstand "science"? Wow.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing Again, evolution is not special in that respect. There is no single theory that every scientists in that field is in total agreement about every detail of the theory. There are disagreements about atomic theory, theory of relativity, gravitational theory etc. Does that mean that you think these theories are just belief systems?
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 Does that mean that you think these theories are just belief systems?
It means that some parts of "theory" involves a BELIEF based on a "GUESS" or an "ASSUMPTION" because we can't positively CONCLUDE something by an evidenciary standpoint. The limiting factor(s) in that process may be technology limitations or missing pieces of evidence. Either way, it forces one to base a conclusion on a belief.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing With every post you make it clear that you really don't understand science. A theory is not a "GUESS" or "ASSUMPTION" for reasons I've stated twice already! When you can test your idea, it can make predictions about discoveries that turn out to be true, when it helps explain genetics etc it is MUCH more than just a guess. A guess would be saying Jesus must have walked on water simlply bc it is written about in a whole bunch of books!
Leones44 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leones44 "A guess would be saying Jesus must have walked on water simlply bc it is written about in a whole bunch of books" Webster says "guess" is "forming an OPINION with little or no evidence". "Theory" is analyzing a set of facts in relation to one another. You can't say every part of evolution is FACT. Some parts are opinions given by scientists. Period, Leones.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leones44 "A theory has to make predictions, be falsifiable, provide positivistic evidence, and provide useful information."
I wanna go back to this because you didn't answer it. Last week, Noah's Ark was the topic on the news. Your beloved Carbon Dating method was used to determine the wood on this structure was 4,800 yrs old. But, it doesn't confirm when the structure was built. Sure, this isn't new news. But, are you objective about that?
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing What faith based statements do scientists make for their acceptance of evolution? Be specific!
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 IF the scientific method is observable, testable, and repeatable, then viewing a rock that's allegedly dated to be 1 million years old is NOT possible. Interject the hyperbole about conclusions based on "theories" (aka FAITH STATEMENTS) here.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing"... then viewing a rock that's allegedly dated to be 1 million years old..." That statement is why I know you don't understand the definition of a scientific theory. If a theory was directly obeservable it wouldn't be a theory! Again, we cannot directly see electrons or neutrons yet we know they exists. We don't directly observe techtonic plates moving yet we have the theory of plate techtonics
Leones44 1 year ago
@Leones44 THEORY - And we can't see air, yet we know it will be there when we inhale. We can't see "reason", yet we know it exists. We can't see "logic", yet we know it is exists. All of these things require "FAITH" in order for us to BELIEVE they exist. That's why evolution definitely has a certain amount of FAITH STATEMENTS involved........no different than Christianity.
BeckhamRacing 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing No, we know humans have the ability to reason or to use logic. We can observe this. We cannot observe a man walking on water or rising from the dead after 3 days. In fact no one has ever observed that. And we have no way of falsifying those claims. We can't test to see of Jesus did any of those things. We can directly observe evolution. We have ways to falsify evo. We can test our theory and make predictions. This is why science is different than religion.
Leones44 1 year ago
@BeckhamRacing B/c they have been so unsuccessful with the peer review process, a process which every other scientific theory has to go through they attempt to bypass it all together by appealing to politicians and an aggressive PR compaingn to try to convince the general public that evolution is a "theory in crisis" or there is some major "controversy" around evo.When there is none.
Leones44 1 year ago