Evolution is based on imagination. Real science is based on facts. The Bible is proven by facts. Evolution has no proof because it's not true. It's that simple. If you want to be a tyrannical dictator, invent money and pay people to teach a bunch of lies so that you can subject people to total mind controlled slavery unquestioningly, and make sure they don't have the Bible available to them because if they learn the truth then they won't put up with lies and slavery anymore.
dude western religion didn't all originated from Judaism , that's buying the religious propaganda!
Judaism evolved out of Canaanite polytheism, Babylonian and Persian religions, Christianity evolved from Judaism Hellenic polytheism and Zarathustrism. you can't compare the evolution of religion to the evolution of life, as in the evolution of life one species originates directly from one ancestor, religions originate from the mixing of many older traditions.
@rseguizabal Oh yes i get it ,i meant that if you go past your initial programing and become an Atheist by yourself ,and then educate your children that religion is nothing but a modern day thinking evolved from something else ,aren't we part of the tree or maybe the fruit that falls to the ground? great video BTW absolutely loved it : )
@FrankaDith to be honest i grew up as a baptist and by 9 i was doubting my faith, by 12 i considered myself an atheist and i came out at 13, i would be silent about religion with my children (plz note i dont have any the moment) and educate them in the fact and figures of science, then have a chat with them when theyre old enough and let the choice of religion up to them
@FrankaDith COMPLETELY agree with you, thats sort of the point in the end but in the end it is theyre choice,,, so yeah i dont think they would trade the universe for a cage but remember that every1 is different in theyre own way...
Great vid , just wish it was more readable with a fuller view. But then I guess we'd need alot less religions. It would sorta be like trying to show an actual scale model of the solar system.
I guess the logical conclusion to draw from this would be ... Religious people have a hard time agreeing.
Evolution was made popular even though Darwin did not understand the impact of DNA, genes and the genetic code on the natural world. Nor did the natural world. Yet their changes are attributed to them. I can't even fix the lap top when it gets broken, but according to evolutionists, nothing is beyond the ability of the dumb natural world.
@001001110110 The truth is that which when you stop believing still exists.
To claim the truth is whatever you believe is to put it backwards mate, what you are saying is whatever i believe is true is true because i believe it.
Does that not strike you as childish, immature and as someone who is not really interested in whats true but interested in re-inforcing your own dogmatic beliefs.
Evolution is not fact, it's a process, Darwins THEORY of evolution is not fact either, you BELIEVE that it is true, it hasn't been proven, and there are many holes in the theory, however that said, a god is also a belief, so it's not even a theory, it's an idea that's almost impossible to be true, it's unintuitive to say with great confidence that either of them are wrong and the other is right, because until proven we must work under the assumption that both are wrong
Shut the fuck up and learn yourself. "Theory" in the scientific community is as close to "fact" as they get. For instance. it's still called the "theory of gravity"; stupid fucking internet trolls need to shut your goddamn mouths and read a fucking book for once instead of espousing insipid arguments your friends or parents have told you.
@protossenslaver ...that's because gravity IS a theory, and theories are not close to fact, they're contructs meant to help understand the facts, possible correct, more likely to have many holes in it, a theory such as gravity is still not proven, for instance could you tell me why particles seem to be attracting one another? we just know it happens, we dont know why or how, as for this theory there are many holes, also, you're very inpolite
@1burnman1 Evolution is fact (there is absolutely no other possible explanation for the progression of organisms as exhibited by the fossil record over geological time) just as gravity is a fact (let go a fork in your kitchen & it will always drop). The Theories are those that explain those facts. The theories fit the facts & no facts contravene the theories. The fact that we do not have an explantion for every piece of fine detail does not invalidate the theories. Both are falsifiable.
@pilgrimpater, gravity is a fact, evolution is a theory. CHarles Darwin himself said that if Evolution wasn't proven by the time he died, that scientists were to throw out the idea, because it was some silly idea he had made up. So why are they trying to prove it. So what you are saying if a sheep gives birth to a sheep, and this continues for 49 million years, the creature that will be born will be genetically and physically different to a sheep? what a load of crock.
@1Morey Gravity is a fact but the Theory of Gravity is NOT a fact. It is the best explanation that fits the facts. So it is with evolution. The fossil sequence is undeniably proof that evolution is a fact (even if it was imparted by some gofd or other). Nobody is trying to prove it. In fact quite the opposite, people are trying to falsify it but in 150 years can't do so. Of course a sheep can become a non sheep in 49 million years unless you can tell me why not.
@1Morey your miss quoting Darwin. it's the same miss information that creationists keep telling themselves. what Darwin said was that if ever there were fossils of modern lifeforms mixed in with prehistoric fossils then his theory should be thrown out. an example would be finding fossilized remains of humans alongside dinosaur remains (kinda like the flintstones).
The words Theory, Principle, Hypothesis, Law, and Rule are terms and are not for the layman. For example, the favorite phrase "There is no law without a flaw" is popular among the legal fraternity; but, the Law of Science has no flaw whatsoever else it wouldn't be a Law.
Water, aab, aqua, jal, etc is just H2O in Science - a fact, whether you believe it or not!
don't cut down the tree, It's just evolution it's self. The week regions or beliefs or memes don't live on. The stronger one, continue on, but they will come to there end on there own. People can't continue to believe that crap its crazy, but nice video
Interesting channel: But Humen race can be more complicated, I believe that we were created millions of years ago from other beings from another planet and afterwords there might be they had offsprings from ape like man which evolved from this planet. So in some persons you can find genes both from creation and evolution.
Instead of seeing the differences in us all, let us view the similarities and perhaps we can have a better understanding of life. Cos, no matter if you are religious or not, it isnt a god or your feelings on a god that will change this world, it is you, me, us that have the power to do so. Its about life now, not about what happens when you die.
@PsuedoNam: I didn't "steal" from anyone. I gave credit to the animator and the composer of the music I used. I replaced Rush's Malignant Narcissism because YouTube forced me to delete that audio for copyright reasons.
Now, if you're still pissed off, don't worry, you'll get over it. Time heals all wounds.
That is absolutely one of the best visual representations of what I learned as a young man in the 60's and have been trying to explain verbally ever since. Thank you. If I had one wish at all, it would be that it could be a bit clearer even in large screen mode, but still THANK YOU. I'll be sharing this with many people
@DevelX666 Scientology does at least share a common recruiting method with Christianity: that we're wretched defective diminished beings yet they have the amazing product that will make it all better. Though Scientology promises improvement while still alive...after squeezing out all vast quantities of money.
You take 4 humans. You strip them of all technology and place em in a temperate environment with predators , food and water in abundance. All live, all are happy and reproduce to a population of 200 humans. Then as part of the experiment, you decide to increase the sun strenght by 10 times. The humans with skin that blacken will survive, while the rest die. Then you got 20 humans left that have darkened skin.
Then you decide to take away the predators, but add a disease that affects oxygen to the blood. Now all the fast runners die off, and only the slower ones with weaker physics survive. These multiply and you get a large population afterwards
But then you want to cause a real change, so you take away the sun and cause everything to freeze. Only the ones that can produce fur will survive, also they need to be chubby. You end up with a small population of furry black humans.
3- The final step isthe most awesome thing in the world. You produced humans that for 20k years have never needed to use their brains, causing a 30% decrease in brain size. In addition those humans are smaller all furry, love the cold and have no idea they are nolonger humans. In fact they are a new species of apes, unless you want to call them a highly evolved stupid human derivative? Either way, human came from the branch of primates and so will all the decendants.
I think this step would be a bit difficult, as the issues before would have these hypothetical humans think up solutions to the problems you throw at them using the intelligence they have. Their intelligence would be an advantageous trait all throughout the story and would still be very much present. :-)
@IndianaJoel93 Evolution doesn't mean there is no chance of god. it would be stupid indeed to think so. but what evolution proves incidentally, is that all organized religions that we know today are false.
and in my personal opinion, science tries to answer everything, how and why. if there was a god of some sort, science will find him, but so far there is no proof of him.
See, some creationists will say it's ok, because as long as you believe at all, you will be fine. The harsher believers will say it's their belief or hell. But they will all see this as a testament to the strength in longevity of the truth (the one you never got an answer for).
I'd like to point out the Evolution is not anti-God.Evolution is an explanation of the naturally existing laws that govern the rise and fall of various life forms. Darwin never said that God did not create creation,he used the term creation,he was not an atheist,Evolutionary theory dose not establish an atheist view,atheism had already been established for at least a thousand year before.
If you take religion as irrational idea, I am sorry mate but it does not matter you too have irrational beliefs... The facts is that there are some absoulte values in this world and that is what Major religion is on about. ONE thing more, what proof would you need if we ( pro-GOD camp) wanted to prove God to you.. what if your acetylcholine in in the very synaptic cleft of yours could not comprehend it???
@roner61 My facts are not facts.. I agree. Lets see how do you derive your facts. Can you tell me, would I be wrong to say that the final place where you resolve your "facts" is between two sysnapsis in your CNS? if your answer is YES to this then I have a question for you. Please respond.. I like Athieists, as they live in fool's paradise... understanding " if music be the food of love... does not mean you have mastered the twelfth night/ As you like it.
Yes, I can prove it. They are all right by the phenomena that connects them all: enlightenment. The psychological path to reach this is infinitely variable and thus each individual's story of their spiritual journey has the potential to become a unique religion in itself.
Just because you can't prove something doesn't mean it don't exist. Not only that but if you did have evidence toward a religion it would only be prove that it's false. Not only that but why can't you have a religion and still know and understand evolution. Saying religions are wrong is not sciencetific in any shape form or fashion.
@Swiftlygothedays Someone who thinks they're a Jedi isn't likely to profess to be against science, either, but he sure as hell contradicts and dismisses it.
So, according to you, all religious beliefs contradict science? I think any belief in the supernatural will have contradictions to modern scientific beliefs. But hey, I can make a religion tomorrow and it'd be pretty awesome and non-contradictory. Or is that, to you, impossible?
- the vast majority of theists out there do NOT contest evolution. Statistically speaking, in fact, there are probably more theists who accept evolution than atheists.
- Darwin never intended for evolution to replace religion or theistic belief altogether. He was not anti-theist or anti-religion. He was an agnostic atheist.
- should not Christianity emerge from the Judaism branch?
You make some reasonable points. I myself consider myself an agnostic and when I tell the most adamant theists that Darwin wasn't an atheist, it has fallen on deaf ears.
I am curious as to who these atheists are that reject evolution. Well maybe not that curious. That sounds just as nonsensical as the YEC community. I don't think they deserve the time of day.
That part of my comment was more related to the statistical insinuation that evolution isn't really an inherently 'atheistic' phenomenon, and it isn't anti-God (from my perspective).
We re proud of that Chinese is the only atheist or secular major civilization in ancient world. This make ancient Chinese civilization the most merciful, rational and different from all other major civilizations which their peoples believed in one single God.
Science could not in any way prove or disprove God's existance, and Science can never understand what caused our Universe. Science is the study of the interactions in nature, and the origins of nature can only be understood through logic, reason, and philosophy, and Science backs these three. Natural phenomenom cannot explain natural phenomenom, so I rather say God did it than to commit a naturalistic fallacy.
The Big Bang is not impossible, a Universe like the one we live in is very improbable and to believe that it was by chance that our Universe has such precise parameters, then it would be following many logical flaws, you don't understand the argument at all.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
How does this in anyway prove Religion is wrong, how does this prove God's inexistance? I will agree it was fun to watch the roots grow, but it was a moot point.
@ogirv101: Where did I say this video was an attempt to prove religion is "wrong"? Why do you capitalize "religion", anyway?
Where did I say it was an attempt to prove God doesn't exist?
In addition, what this video attempts to show is not a "moot" point. It's a point that obviously sailed over your heard like a wild frisbee throw. Would you like I should explain it to you, even though I already explain the purpose at the beginning of the video?
@roner61 lol im using the seed as a metaphor, of the first self replicating organism. protein is made up of 20 different amino acids. the amino acids must line up the the right sequence or the protein would unwind. u could u compare protein and amino acids to a sentence and our english alphabet. letters must be set up in the right order to form sentence. very similar with proteins. there must be a great intelligence behind this system.
That have a problem: what created that intelligence? is a life being? is a God?
We have 2 options:
A) There is an intelligent and NOT created "God" that manipulate /create all in the universe, is out time and space,inmortal,invisible,etc.
B) All has a scientific explanation, all is about phisics/mechanic/energy/chemistry,etc.There isnt such an intelligent invisible,inmortal,etc thing, but we dont know yet a lot of things.
@roner61 first of all u could not apply these kind of logic out side our time, space, and mater because god himself set these kind of logic into our universe. second ur trying to reverse the burden of proof on me, im not trying to have my unproved theory taught in schools around the country. u are. look i know ur going to say evolution has been proven. if ur going to say that, then answer, how could amino acids form protein with out genetic information.
1)God is not necessary for this universe to exist. Not believing in him is totally rational.
2)Creationism has no supporting evidence and thus should not be taught in schools. All proven biological discoveries within the past 150 years comply and support evolution. DNA is regarded as the most important scientific discovery in the history of mankind, and look, it 100% supports evolution!
3)This is evolution we're talking about, not abiogenesis. Abiogeneis is not taught in schools.
@Yankyal1 u could not sit here and say evolution is a good logical theory when abiogenises has been proven wrong. dna does not create itself and no amount of natural selection or chemical reactions could produces information. this is an outrageous theory by all means. if u want to skip abiogenises and talk about evolution i'll do that. "evolution by means of natural selection". please give me 1 example by means of natural selection, where it increased complexity in the genome.
2)How about...short neck giraffes to long neck giraffes? Where the giraffes who were born with longer necks could get food higher in trees, and ones with shorter necks died off when they could not find food less high up?
@Yankyal1 thats like saying men with larger dicks get laid and men with smaller dicks does not, so soon only the black people survive because they would pass on there gene. hahaha thats not evolution. lol sorry i had to use that example but u were asking for it when u posted ur comment. that is not an increase of genetic complexity, that is a selection of already existing information.
No...it's like saying men with dicks that barely functioned would die off without medical treatment because they can not reproduce.
Both small and big dicks can still reproduce. If only black people had dicks that could impregnate women, then yes, they would end up being the only ones to pass their genes. Also saying black people have larger dicks is racist, but I'm black so I don't mind.
Short necked giraffes could not get food and died, long necked giraffes survived and fucked.
@Yankyal1 i was complementing african american's lol. ok but that is still selection existing information. im asking for an example of where natural selection increased complexity in the genome.
...are you saying the DNA necessary to support such a large neck would not be more complex than the one to support a short neck? Are you smoking something man?
@Yankyal1 the genetic information to build a long neck or a short neck is already there. so of course there could be variations of change in size. there is no new information added. that is not a increased complexity in the genome, its a variation of genetic instruction. thats like saying u could get the word "add" from the word "dad" by rearranging the letters, but ur not adding new letters to the sequence. ur not going to get the word "queen" or "monkey".
Mutations mostly create new information. Gene duplications = new information. So it's like changing dad to daad or dadda. Also, reproduction isn't producing new information?
Combining dad and dude and getting some crazy shit like daduded is not new information? That happens every time in sexual reproduction.
If you still say this isn't "new" information, then define information.
Once again, define new information. Like the "dad" analogy. Copying the letter d and a to create Dadda. Or maybe morphing the letters to create Maddy. Is that new information?
What about dad to maddy. That's increased complexity?
DNA mutations can take existing genes, duplicate them, morph them to provide new things. DNA mutations is the reason for new chromosomes. New chromosomes = increased complexity.
@Yankyal1 if u have to have me explain stuff to u ever step of the way, im pretty sure ur a high school student. maddy is new information due to the "M". thats increase in genetic structure, and more importantly increase in genetic complexity. mutations duplicate the chromosomes and rearrange the existing information in the dna, not morph. thats propaganda.
DNA has the 4 bases in which it uses to create the genes. Consider the 4 letters A B C D as the new alphabet. There are only those 4 letters. What you're asking for is the introduction of a totally new base to DNA, which just doesn't happen. However, chromosomes and genes DO increase in complexity. It's like for a program, the language doesn't change, what you say or what programs you create with the language can become more complex though.
@Yankyal1 the language does not change but the information does. the dna ladder r composed of 4 molecules represented with the letters A,T,C,G. most consider this the blue print of life. ur looking at the small picture here. when i used letters as an analogy, i used it in a sence of a long sequence information, as i said earlier. mutations is cutting long chains of the genetic sequence and to reattach to another dna sequence creating a new species.
@Yankyal1 but this process of is not creating any new genetic sequence. the genetic information was relocated. there is no furthering the boundary of genetic complexity.
@Yankyal1 what is this going to do? r u serious. this is a process call natural selection. natural selection is a process in which genetic information is rearranged. this process help to eliminate unnecessary genetic inforamtion and to preserve good dna to help the species survive. when natural selection is unsatisfied with the gene code given to produces the species it eliminate, then rearrange. this is what u mean when u say evolution by means of natural selection.
@Yankyal1 ur professors really needs to change up his curriculum, because u kids don't even know the clear definition of natural selection. this is sad, real sad.
@Yankyal1 no u r not right, u added up 2 existing genetic sequence. thats not extending the known complexity. an analogy would be like conjoining "I am" and "a superhero" together. therefore u got a more developed sentence "I am a superhero". but the letters to select for the sentence was available. as to nature the genetic sequence was available to natural select. i hope ur going to give me a better rebuttal then "but I'm still right". hahaha
@Yankyal1 i defined "information" for u already. ur a smart guy u know what i mean. i think u would rather debate me then to come to a realization, that maybe what these people told me wasn't the whole story. these people that i'd greatly respected had been indoctrinated me, into believing such. i gave u every example i know of and definition stright from the book. u and i both know u understanded what i said, u don't need definitions, u need to question ur belief.
So lets say there's a DNA sequence, called sequence A. A mutation changes sequence A into sequence B. This mutation causes a bone to not develop. This is a loss of information, right? The information to develop bones has now been lost. This IS considered a loss of information.
The organism with this mutation gives birth to an offspring. The offspring has a mutation which changes B back into A. If the first mutation subtracted information, this mutation MUST have added information.
It didn't prove God's nonexistence. That wasn't even the point. The point is there are hundreds of variations of religions that all at some point or another claimed to be God's authority. Which one, if any, is right, and can you prove it? If not, in all likelihood you are wasting your time, money and thought on something just as made up as all the rest.
Belief in god is unsubstantiated emotional feelings which are as subjective to each individual as one's choice of pizza toppings. There is ZERO empirical evidence for a god, any god, not just your god. ZERO. Where is this 'god' separate from your emotions? Nowhere. Your 'god' has not reality apart from your internal flood of thoughts and petides. No objective reality. Thats what faith is. A fragile candle adults use to keep away the boogyman of old age, death and egoic extinction. Let fear go.
Hmmmm, So God is just an emotion? So when Penrose calculated the probability of low entropy is 1:10^10^123, it was just nature making a miracle that humans can barely calculate let alone write it. The number of digits can't be written, even if we took all fundamental particles and wrote a digit on each one. I'm guessing nature blidnly allowed entropy to be that precise during the split second of the primordial atom, I'm guessing nature caused nature (fallacy), what're your thoughts?
I have come to know both God and religion. And I have found that God and religion are not united at all. Man has formed many religions through-out history as this video signifies and none of them lead to God. God is found through a person who is determined to find Him. One who is sincere and humble of heart has a much greater chance than a man filled with pride who is continually demanding proof.
All in all, it is God who reveals Himself to whom He wishes to.
That's how ALL of these religions started out, sir...with the very same intentions you have. Texts were written which were inspired by people whom either heard voicesor were supposedly witnesses to events that are confirmed to be true, by their own definiton, through these texts. This was done so that others could learn their faith, which as you know, all claim to "BE" the one and only. Religion is definately another piece in the puzzle that supports the evidence that humans evolved..
Believe me, Through what I have experienced , religion leads only to a dead end! After experiencing God and not religion, I found a spiritual relationship with Him is nothing of what man calls "religion".
God has no religion. Man has made all these religions. Religion is confusing, and as this video shows, it leads in many directions. A relationship with God comes through only one way and leads to only one destination. Through Christ.
you're still not accepting that christ was something made up by christian people and you have no proof for him either than converting druggies and alcoholics looking for intervention and your christ is your guys' blanket.
Christ was not made up by Christian people. Christian people are called "Christians" because they know and experience Christ in their lives. Because you have not yet experienced Christ, don't be so quick to judge those who have.
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution is based on imagination. Real science is based on facts. The Bible is proven by facts. Evolution has no proof because it's not true. It's that simple. If you want to be a tyrannical dictator, invent money and pay people to teach a bunch of lies so that you can subject people to total mind controlled slavery unquestioningly, and make sure they don't have the Bible available to them because if they learn the truth then they won't put up with lies and slavery anymore.
gloryboundkev 1 week ago
Comment removed
gloryboundkev 1 week ago
dude western religion didn't all originated from Judaism , that's buying the religious propaganda!
Judaism evolved out of Canaanite polytheism, Babylonian and Persian religions, Christianity evolved from Judaism Hellenic polytheism and Zarathustrism. you can't compare the evolution of religion to the evolution of life, as in the evolution of life one species originates directly from one ancestor, religions originate from the mixing of many older traditions.
MartianSanta 2 weeks ago
Make it branch off into Atheism .
FrankaDith 2 weeks ago
@FrankaDith u dont get atheism dont u? atheism wouldnt be a tree or branch, atheism is living with NO god, allowing u to take full advantage of life
rseguizabal 2 weeks ago
@rseguizabal Oh yes i get it ,i meant that if you go past your initial programing and become an Atheist by yourself ,and then educate your children that religion is nothing but a modern day thinking evolved from something else ,aren't we part of the tree or maybe the fruit that falls to the ground? great video BTW absolutely loved it : )
FrankaDith 2 weeks ago
@FrankaDith to be honest i grew up as a baptist and by 9 i was doubting my faith, by 12 i considered myself an atheist and i came out at 13, i would be silent about religion with my children (plz note i dont have any the moment) and educate them in the fact and figures of science, then have a chat with them when theyre old enough and let the choice of religion up to them
rseguizabal 2 weeks ago
@rseguizabal The choice is always up to any individuals ,but after being raised away from any brain washing why would they trade freedom for a cage?
FrankaDith 2 weeks ago
@FrankaDith COMPLETELY agree with you, thats sort of the point in the end but in the end it is theyre choice,,, so yeah i dont think they would trade the universe for a cage but remember that every1 is different in theyre own way...
rseguizabal 2 weeks ago
@gaglamesh maybe a tune similar to GUPT....bobby deol and kajol!!!heh heh
vinzymania 3 weeks ago
you need to upload a 720p version.
halflifeproductionz 3 weeks ago
I think the video is to fast is there a full picture of the tree?
MrMrbobblehead 3 weeks ago
THIS VIDEO IN NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH ABOUT RELIGION.WAKE UP BRAIN WASHED PEOPLE.
azucar1242 1 month ago
This inspires me... I ought to go make a parody of Darwin's work and put forth an "origin of species" but for religion!
HewettT2 1 month ago
ok
TheClaycreatures 1 month ago
@MyDrawsKeepRidinUp u r not a rocket scientist and u r not god :0
TheClaycreatures 1 month ago
Great vid , just wish it was more readable with a fuller view. But then I guess we'd need alot less religions. It would sorta be like trying to show an actual scale model of the solar system.
I guess the logical conclusion to draw from this would be ... Religious people have a hard time agreeing.
Mk101T 1 month ago
the potential although highly unlikely god i don't have a problem with. religion i do.
nikt 2 months ago
Evolution was made popular even though Darwin did not understand the impact of DNA, genes and the genetic code on the natural world. Nor did the natural world. Yet their changes are attributed to them. I can't even fix the lap top when it gets broken, but according to evolutionists, nothing is beyond the ability of the dumb natural world.
AnilaCelak 2 months ago
@AnilaCelak Darwin didnt understand the impact of DNA, genes and the genetic code??
He didnt even know it existed !!!! noone attributes DNA discoveries to darwin.
whats ur point??
haz020190 1 month ago
Chocalate rain, na na na na na na
NyxRedvines 2 months ago
u came from monkeys i came from adam :)
TheClaycreatures 3 months ago
Comment removed
damusmoose 3 months ago
Comment removed
damusmoose 3 months ago
Where could I find a still of this? Does it exist?
Ollyoxenfree1 3 months ago
Where can I find an actual image of these trees, I think that would be amazing to have framed
TheJasonWalsh 4 months ago 4
Ya know, most Christians don't give a flip about what atheists think about them. Whats the point in arguing about this?
bubbabobroy 5 months ago
@001001110110 The truth is that which when you stop believing still exists.
To claim the truth is whatever you believe is to put it backwards mate, what you are saying is whatever i believe is true is true because i believe it.
Does that not strike you as childish, immature and as someone who is not really interested in whats true but interested in re-inforcing your own dogmatic beliefs.
You would make a great muslim
shandcunt 5 months ago
The truth is whatever I believe. The proof is in my actions.
001001110110 6 months ago
Evolution is not fact, it's a process, Darwins THEORY of evolution is not fact either, you BELIEVE that it is true, it hasn't been proven, and there are many holes in the theory, however that said, a god is also a belief, so it's not even a theory, it's an idea that's almost impossible to be true, it's unintuitive to say with great confidence that either of them are wrong and the other is right, because until proven we must work under the assumption that both are wrong
1burnman1 7 months ago
@1burnman1
Shut the fuck up and learn yourself. "Theory" in the scientific community is as close to "fact" as they get. For instance. it's still called the "theory of gravity"; stupid fucking internet trolls need to shut your goddamn mouths and read a fucking book for once instead of espousing insipid arguments your friends or parents have told you.
protossenslaver 7 months ago
@protossenslaver ...that's because gravity IS a theory, and theories are not close to fact, they're contructs meant to help understand the facts, possible correct, more likely to have many holes in it, a theory such as gravity is still not proven, for instance could you tell me why particles seem to be attracting one another? we just know it happens, we dont know why or how, as for this theory there are many holes, also, you're very inpolite
1burnman1 6 months ago
@1burnman1 Evolution is fact (there is absolutely no other possible explanation for the progression of organisms as exhibited by the fossil record over geological time) just as gravity is a fact (let go a fork in your kitchen & it will always drop). The Theories are those that explain those facts. The theories fit the facts & no facts contravene the theories. The fact that we do not have an explantion for every piece of fine detail does not invalidate the theories. Both are falsifiable.
pilgrimpater 6 months ago
@pilgrimpater, gravity is a fact, evolution is a theory. CHarles Darwin himself said that if Evolution wasn't proven by the time he died, that scientists were to throw out the idea, because it was some silly idea he had made up. So why are they trying to prove it. So what you are saying if a sheep gives birth to a sheep, and this continues for 49 million years, the creature that will be born will be genetically and physically different to a sheep? what a load of crock.
1Morey 3 months ago
@1Morey Gravity is a fact but the Theory of Gravity is NOT a fact. It is the best explanation that fits the facts. So it is with evolution. The fossil sequence is undeniably proof that evolution is a fact (even if it was imparted by some gofd or other). Nobody is trying to prove it. In fact quite the opposite, people are trying to falsify it but in 150 years can't do so. Of course a sheep can become a non sheep in 49 million years unless you can tell me why not.
pilgrimpater 3 months ago
@1Morey your miss quoting Darwin. it's the same miss information that creationists keep telling themselves. what Darwin said was that if ever there were fossils of modern lifeforms mixed in with prehistoric fossils then his theory should be thrown out. an example would be finding fossilized remains of humans alongside dinosaur remains (kinda like the flintstones).
chaosami2 3 months ago
@1burnman1
The words Theory, Principle, Hypothesis, Law, and Rule are terms and are not for the layman. For example, the favorite phrase "There is no law without a flaw" is popular among the legal fraternity; but, the Law of Science has no flaw whatsoever else it wouldn't be a Law.
Water, aab, aqua, jal, etc is just H2O in Science - a fact, whether you believe it or not!
caarvaak 6 months ago
Good video but it went far too fast and was almost impossible to read.
tbdonnelly67 7 months ago
Looks more like slithering tentacles than like a tree. But hey, this is religion we're talking about.
Eilavesch 7 months ago
is that a watered down version of the theme from the exorcist? hahaha
zorbatheok 8 months ago
The music suits it, terrifying indeed
Hellsconsort 8 months ago
music sucks, bad editing
machib77 9 months ago
Hmm, creationist response...
"My grandmother wasn't a Muslim, therefore, this disproves religion has evolved."
Boy75402 10 months ago
Crummy video, I couldn't read any text-too fast=meaningless
tomtharp 10 months ago 3
@tomtharp very little effort + pause, almost feels like you're controlling time
Tw1St3DSt33L 10 months ago
Does this come in a poster form?
alexicoff 11 months ago
Yay! T. Bells. Love it.
NevilleRhysBarnes 11 months ago
don't cut down the tree, It's just evolution it's self. The week regions or beliefs or memes don't live on. The stronger one, continue on, but they will come to there end on there own. People can't continue to believe that crap its crazy, but nice video
n7morse 11 months ago
Susperia ftw. Scary ass movie and a spooky ass theme song!
intheshitter 11 months ago
Interesting channel: But Humen race can be more complicated, I believe that we were created millions of years ago from other beings from another planet and afterwords there might be they had offsprings from ape like man which evolved from this planet. So in some persons you can find genes both from creation and evolution.
rummiena 11 months ago
Is "The Holocaust" really a religious branch of Judaism?
There were a few other branches I found questionable, but other than that great video and I agree with the overall point of the video.
TheSkeptitcherRebbe 1 year ago
Instead of seeing the differences in us all, let us view the similarities and perhaps we can have a better understanding of life. Cos, no matter if you are religious or not, it isnt a god or your feelings on a god that will change this world, it is you, me, us that have the power to do so. Its about life now, not about what happens when you die.
xPINKxRIBBONxSCARSx 1 year ago
it would have been helpful if I COULD FUCKING READ ANY OF IT!!!
mackles 1 year ago
Only reason this video pisses me off is because you stole from Rush.
PsuedoNam 1 year ago
@PsuedoNam: I didn't "steal" from anyone. I gave credit to the animator and the composer of the music I used. I replaced Rush's Malignant Narcissism because YouTube forced me to delete that audio for copyright reasons.
Now, if you're still pissed off, don't worry, you'll get over it. Time heals all wounds.
LocusOfReason 1 year ago 17
OK this vid is very interesting... But is there a vid about this so i can actually read what is on the branches of this religious family Tree?
WinchesterDelta1 1 year ago
That is absolutely one of the best visual representations of what I learned as a young man in the 60's and have been trying to explain verbally ever since. Thank you. If I had one wish at all, it would be that it could be a bit clearer even in large screen mode, but still THANK YOU. I'll be sharing this with many people
ieguy3 1 year ago
you know the whole we came from a ape thing
JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET 1 year ago
@JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET You are still an ape.
Everytime you fall in love, that is proof of evolution.
Everytime you eat, that is proof of evolution.
Every breath you take, that is proof of evolution.
Every ounce of urea you excrete is proof of evolution.
You are the sum of your past. And until all humans accept it, our civilisation is doomed to disapear.
Flem1337 1 year ago
hey! and where is Scientology?
20324758 1 year ago
@20324758 Scientology is not based on Abrahamic believes. At least I don't think so :). Religion has many roots, there are many believes systems.
DevelX666 1 year ago
@DevelX666 Scientology does at least share a common recruiting method with Christianity: that we're wretched defective diminished beings yet they have the amazing product that will make it all better. Though Scientology promises improvement while still alive...after squeezing out all vast quantities of money.
ThorGoLucky 1 year ago
@ThorGoLucky Well, that's correct. Scientology is "salvation for the rich."
DevelX666 1 year ago
IF WE CAME FROM A ROCK AN IF MONKEYS BE ARE COUSINS THEY STILL LIVING BUT THEN WHY DID ARE ANT SISTER DIE OFF AN THEY ARE NOMORE.
JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET 1 year ago
@JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET: Time to lay off the Ketamine.
LocusOfReason 1 year ago 26
@LocusOfReason He Talks Like That Because You A Monkey And You Go Ack! Ack! Who Wants A Bannana ;D Noob
xInfected27x 9 months ago
@JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET You need to clarify you question.
Also it's "our". Not "are". and what is an "ant sister" ( ansester ? )
Andrewcranky 1 year ago
@JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET How did you possibly manage to create a youtube account.
vincentpistelli 1 year ago
@JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET How did you manage creating a youtube account or connecting to the internet for that matter_
vincentpistelli 1 year ago
@JUDONTOWNTHEINTERNET
You take 4 humans. You strip them of all technology and place em in a temperate environment with predators , food and water in abundance. All live, all are happy and reproduce to a population of 200 humans. Then as part of the experiment, you decide to increase the sun strenght by 10 times. The humans with skin that blacken will survive, while the rest die. Then you got 20 humans left that have darkened skin.
Flem1337 1 year ago
2-
Then you decide to take away the predators, but add a disease that affects oxygen to the blood. Now all the fast runners die off, and only the slower ones with weaker physics survive. These multiply and you get a large population afterwards
But then you want to cause a real change, so you take away the sun and cause everything to freeze. Only the ones that can produce fur will survive, also they need to be chubby. You end up with a small population of furry black humans.
Flem1337 1 year ago
3- The final step isthe most awesome thing in the world. You produced humans that for 20k years have never needed to use their brains, causing a 30% decrease in brain size. In addition those humans are smaller all furry, love the cold and have no idea they are nolonger humans. In fact they are a new species of apes, unless you want to call them a highly evolved stupid human derivative? Either way, human came from the branch of primates and so will all the decendants.
Flem1337 1 year ago
@Flem1337
I think this step would be a bit difficult, as the issues before would have these hypothetical humans think up solutions to the problems you throw at them using the intelligence they have. Their intelligence would be an advantageous trait all throughout the story and would still be very much present. :-)
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
What song is being used in the beginning past 0:07 ? It sounds very familiar to me but i can't put my finger on it ...
gaglamesh731 1 year ago
@gaglamesh731: That's "Tubular Bells" by Mike Oldfield.
LocusOfReason 1 year ago 2
@gaglamesh731 sounds like death note theme Oo
YaiBugy 1 year ago
@gaglamesh731 Search The Exorcist/Tubular bells/Bassie en Adriaan
loordargyle 9 months ago
@gaglamesh731 It was the music to the first Exorcist movie.
tbdonnelly67 7 months ago
@gaglamesh731 Song:Tubular Bells...theme from "The Exorcist"
speerdali 2 weeks ago
When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion
MalinaMihaiu 1 year ago
You have to be pretty stupid not to believe in religion.
You also have to be pretty stupid to think that evolution means there is no chance of God.
Evolution is the answer to how life changes, not how it came to be :|
In the words of Albert Einstien: "Religion without science is lame, science without religion is blind".
In my personal opinion, Science is the answer to how, and Religion is the answer to why.
IndianaJoel93 1 year ago
@IndianaJoel93 Evolution doesn't mean there is no chance of god. it would be stupid indeed to think so. but what evolution proves incidentally, is that all organized religions that we know today are false.
and in my personal opinion, science tries to answer everything, how and why. if there was a god of some sort, science will find him, but so far there is no proof of him.
Hasheteer 1 year ago
great video....right to the point!
moonshineinsummer1 1 year ago
See, some creationists will say it's ok, because as long as you believe at all, you will be fine. The harsher believers will say it's their belief or hell. But they will all see this as a testament to the strength in longevity of the truth (the one you never got an answer for).
It's all very simple! ;)
VideoMenu 1 year ago
Anybody know how i could get hold of a paper copy of this "religion tree?"
ins.dave@yahoo.com
jjessome 1 year ago
I'd like to point out the Evolution is not anti-God.Evolution is an explanation of the naturally existing laws that govern the rise and fall of various life forms. Darwin never said that God did not create creation,he used the term creation,he was not an atheist,Evolutionary theory dose not establish an atheist view,atheism had already been established for at least a thousand year before.
mariuszmajewski 1 year ago
@mariuszmajewski I know! And yet, fundamentalists claim that he was an atheist simply because he went aginst Creationism, at least in their eyes.
mastermind7771 1 year ago
waaaat?
ohyoooo1009009 1 year ago
If you take religion as irrational idea, I am sorry mate but it does not matter you too have irrational beliefs... The facts is that there are some absoulte values in this world and that is what Major religion is on about. ONE thing more, what proof would you need if we ( pro-GOD camp) wanted to prove God to you.. what if your acetylcholine in in the very synaptic cleft of yours could not comprehend it???
HomayunShirzadeh 1 year ago
@HomayunShirzadeh wich absolute values of the world are you talking about?
Your "facts" arent facts, thats why we (pro-atheist camp) dont believe in your god.
Atheists only need 1 proof of god to believe: and thats is ANY probe, cause at the momment not a single one was on the table.
roner61 1 year ago
@roner61 My facts are not facts.. I agree. Lets see how do you derive your facts. Can you tell me, would I be wrong to say that the final place where you resolve your "facts" is between two sysnapsis in your CNS? if your answer is YES to this then I have a question for you. Please respond.. I like Athieists, as they live in fool's paradise... understanding " if music be the food of love... does not mean you have mastered the twelfth night/ As you like it.
HomayunShirzadeh 1 year ago
It's good to see a graphic illustration of what i already new in my own mind. Thanks for the post.
RealityofThings 1 year ago 2
Yes, I can prove it. They are all right by the phenomena that connects them all: enlightenment. The psychological path to reach this is infinitely variable and thus each individual's story of their spiritual journey has the potential to become a unique religion in itself.
StovenGratch 1 year ago
Wasnt the music from this the exorcist song?
ovoon7 1 year ago
Is this video saying Taoism and Buddhism are also considered specious? Keep in mind that many followers of those religions are technically atheists.
EdMcStinko 1 year ago
The song is incorrectly labelled. This version is done entirely by Mike Olfield, the composer of the song, not a symphony orchestra.
Edgeof666 1 year ago
Just because you can't prove something doesn't mean it don't exist. Not only that but if you did have evidence toward a religion it would only be prove that it's false. Not only that but why can't you have a religion and still know and understand evolution. Saying religions are wrong is not sciencetific in any shape form or fashion.
gigaboy47 1 year ago
the lumberjack is atheism. lol! :)
ronny4ever123 1 year ago
beautiful peice of music
lequaie1234 1 year ago
Oompa loompa doompity doo.
AlexanderRaccoon 1 year ago
ALL THE RELIGIOUS HAVE ONE KING WHO IS ALLAH ,, so belive on GOD,
4511394 1 year ago
@4511394 You're worshipping the wrong God! You need to worship Zeus, you dolt!
Allah is lies, Zeus is truth! Allah =/= Zeus!
NakedCreep 1 year ago 3
i cant even read all the small letters..
JesusCaronte 1 year ago
Not all religions believe in creationism. Not all religions are against science and evolution. And not all religions believe in a God, either.
Just staing the obvious.
Swiftlygothedays 1 year ago
@Swiftlygothedays Someone who thinks they're a Jedi isn't likely to profess to be against science, either, but he sure as hell contradicts and dismisses it.
Saerain 1 year ago
@Saerain
So, according to you, all religious beliefs contradict science? I think any belief in the supernatural will have contradictions to modern scientific beliefs. But hey, I can make a religion tomorrow and it'd be pretty awesome and non-contradictory. Or is that, to you, impossible?
Swiftlygothedays 1 year ago
god bless Muslims everywhere thanks god for giving us BRAINS!!
Ashouri1991 1 year ago
I'm reading a book right now called the Evolution of God. You would like it. Its about how God evolved as human minds evolved.
xIAbs0LuteIx 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sagan said, "We are star stuff" and "a way for the cosmos to know itself."
All the atoms on earth and in our bodies came from supernova that blew up over 5 billion years ago.
Aren't we all just walking, talking stardust -- this cosmos become AWAKE and looking back at itself? -- and aren't we intimately connected to it all?
We are this wonder called life become AWAKE
Please enjoy the dance.
And ultimately there's nothing that separates us from others in this grand mystery. Please be kind.
goog2k 1 year ago
There are a few issues with this:
- the vast majority of theists out there do NOT contest evolution. Statistically speaking, in fact, there are probably more theists who accept evolution than atheists.
- Darwin never intended for evolution to replace religion or theistic belief altogether. He was not anti-theist or anti-religion. He was an agnostic atheist.
- should not Christianity emerge from the Judaism branch?
InfernalApocalypse 1 year ago
You make some reasonable points. I myself consider myself an agnostic and when I tell the most adamant theists that Darwin wasn't an atheist, it has fallen on deaf ears.
I am curious as to who these atheists are that reject evolution. Well maybe not that curious. That sounds just as nonsensical as the YEC community. I don't think they deserve the time of day.
grungefreak10 1 year ago
I wonder if such an atheist exists, to be honest.
InfernalApocalypse 1 year ago
That part of my comment was more related to the statistical insinuation that evolution isn't really an inherently 'atheistic' phenomenon, and it isn't anti-God (from my perspective).
InfernalApocalypse 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We re proud of that Chinese is the only atheist or secular major civilization in ancient world. This make ancient Chinese civilization the most merciful, rational and different from all other major civilizations which their peoples believed in one single God.
mapscraper 2 years ago
Beautiful and concise.
Kudos to both you, LocusOfReason, for the concept and to Bobby Standridge for the gorgeous animation.
Evolution FTW!
8blkcat 2 years ago
Science could not in any way prove or disprove God's existance, and Science can never understand what caused our Universe. Science is the study of the interactions in nature, and the origins of nature can only be understood through logic, reason, and philosophy, and Science backs these three. Natural phenomenom cannot explain natural phenomenom, so I rather say God did it than to commit a naturalistic fallacy.
ogirv101 2 years ago
The Big Bang is not impossible, a Universe like the one we live in is very improbable and to believe that it was by chance that our Universe has such precise parameters, then it would be following many logical flaws, you don't understand the argument at all.
ogirv101 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
How does this in anyway prove Religion is wrong, how does this prove God's inexistance? I will agree it was fun to watch the roots grow, but it was a moot point.
ogirv101 2 years ago
@ogirv101: Where did I say this video was an attempt to prove religion is "wrong"? Why do you capitalize "religion", anyway?
Where did I say it was an attempt to prove God doesn't exist?
In addition, what this video attempts to show is not a "moot" point. It's a point that obviously sailed over your heard like a wild frisbee throw. Would you like I should explain it to you, even though I already explain the purpose at the beginning of the video?
LocusOfReason 2 years ago 9
haha classic ownage by Locus
glossop08 1 year ago
@LocusOfReason i understand the tree of life theory, what i don't understand is where did the seed of the tree come from.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen What "seed" are you speaking about?
The proteins? the aminoacids? the molecules?...
If you are speaking about that better go see some biology videos.
roner61 1 year ago
@roner61 lol im using the seed as a metaphor, of the first self replicating organism. protein is made up of 20 different amino acids. the amino acids must line up the the right sequence or the protein would unwind. u could u compare protein and amino acids to a sentence and our english alphabet. letters must be set up in the right order to form sentence. very similar with proteins. there must be a great intelligence behind this system.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen Ok, you believe in ID.
That have a problem: what created that intelligence? is a life being? is a God?
We have 2 options:
A) There is an intelligent and NOT created "God" that manipulate /create all in the universe, is out time and space,inmortal,invisible,etc.
B) All has a scientific explanation, all is about phisics/mechanic/energy/chemistry,etc.There isnt such an intelligent invisible,inmortal,etc thing, but we dont know yet a lot of things.
Truth is: nobody knows.
roner61 1 year ago
@roner61 first of all u could not apply these kind of logic out side our time, space, and mater because god himself set these kind of logic into our universe. second ur trying to reverse the burden of proof on me, im not trying to have my unproved theory taught in schools around the country. u are. look i know ur going to say evolution has been proven. if ur going to say that, then answer, how could amino acids form protein with out genetic information.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
1)God is not necessary for this universe to exist. Not believing in him is totally rational.
2)Creationism has no supporting evidence and thus should not be taught in schools. All proven biological discoveries within the past 150 years comply and support evolution. DNA is regarded as the most important scientific discovery in the history of mankind, and look, it 100% supports evolution!
3)This is evolution we're talking about, not abiogenesis. Abiogeneis is not taught in schools.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 u could not sit here and say evolution is a good logical theory when abiogenises has been proven wrong. dna does not create itself and no amount of natural selection or chemical reactions could produces information. this is an outrageous theory by all means. if u want to skip abiogenises and talk about evolution i'll do that. "evolution by means of natural selection". please give me 1 example by means of natural selection, where it increased complexity in the genome.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
1)Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution.
2)How about...short neck giraffes to long neck giraffes? Where the giraffes who were born with longer necks could get food higher in trees, and ones with shorter necks died off when they could not find food less high up?
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 thats like saying men with larger dicks get laid and men with smaller dicks does not, so soon only the black people survive because they would pass on there gene. hahaha thats not evolution. lol sorry i had to use that example but u were asking for it when u posted ur comment. that is not an increase of genetic complexity, that is a selection of already existing information.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
No...it's like saying men with dicks that barely functioned would die off without medical treatment because they can not reproduce.
Both small and big dicks can still reproduce. If only black people had dicks that could impregnate women, then yes, they would end up being the only ones to pass their genes. Also saying black people have larger dicks is racist, but I'm black so I don't mind.
Short necked giraffes could not get food and died, long necked giraffes survived and fucked.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 i was complementing african american's lol. ok but that is still selection existing information. im asking for an example of where natural selection increased complexity in the genome.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
...are you saying the DNA necessary to support such a large neck would not be more complex than the one to support a short neck? Are you smoking something man?
There's an example right fucking there.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 the genetic information to build a long neck or a short neck is already there. so of course there could be variations of change in size. there is no new information added. that is not a increased complexity in the genome, its a variation of genetic instruction. thats like saying u could get the word "add" from the word "dad" by rearranging the letters, but ur not adding new letters to the sequence. ur not going to get the word "queen" or "monkey".
kissntellen 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 god, if i got to explain basic biology to u, i must wonder ur level of academic.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
So you're asking for NEW information?
Mutations mostly create new information. Gene duplications = new information. So it's like changing dad to daad or dadda. Also, reproduction isn't producing new information?
Combining dad and dude and getting some crazy shit like daduded is not new information? That happens every time in sexual reproduction.
If you still say this isn't "new" information, then define information.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 Mutations are rearranging the DNA sequence of a cell's genome and are caused by radiation. again nothing new is getting created.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
Once again, define new information. Like the "dad" analogy. Copying the letter d and a to create Dadda. Or maybe morphing the letters to create Maddy. Is that new information?
Define new information.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 ur exmaple of "dadda" is a duplication of already existing gene. new information would be an increase of complexity in the genetic code.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
What about dad to maddy. That's increased complexity?
DNA mutations can take existing genes, duplicate them, morph them to provide new things. DNA mutations is the reason for new chromosomes. New chromosomes = increased complexity.
Are you happy now?
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 if u have to have me explain stuff to u ever step of the way, im pretty sure ur a high school student. maddy is new information due to the "M". thats increase in genetic structure, and more importantly increase in genetic complexity. mutations duplicate the chromosomes and rearrange the existing information in the dna, not morph. thats propaganda.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
DNA has the 4 bases in which it uses to create the genes. Consider the 4 letters A B C D as the new alphabet. There are only those 4 letters. What you're asking for is the introduction of a totally new base to DNA, which just doesn't happen. However, chromosomes and genes DO increase in complexity. It's like for a program, the language doesn't change, what you say or what programs you create with the language can become more complex though.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 the language does not change but the information does. the dna ladder r composed of 4 molecules represented with the letters A,T,C,G. most consider this the blue print of life. ur looking at the small picture here. when i used letters as an analogy, i used it in a sence of a long sequence information, as i said earlier. mutations is cutting long chains of the genetic sequence and to reattach to another dna sequence creating a new species.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 but this process of is not creating any new genetic sequence. the genetic information was relocated. there is no furthering the boundary of genetic complexity.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
"not creating any new genetic sequence"
Sequence is an arrangement.
What is relocating the DNA going to do? REARRANGE the order of dna. What would this do? Create a new arrangement of DNA. Create a new sequence.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 what is this going to do? r u serious. this is a process call natural selection. natural selection is a process in which genetic information is rearranged. this process help to eliminate unnecessary genetic inforamtion and to preserve good dna to help the species survive. when natural selection is unsatisfied with the gene code given to produces the species it eliminate, then rearrange. this is what u mean when u say evolution by means of natural selection.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 ur professors really needs to change up his curriculum, because u kids don't even know the clear definition of natural selection. this is sad, real sad.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
...but I'm still right. It did create a new genetic sequence.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 no u r not right, u added up 2 existing genetic sequence. thats not extending the known complexity. an analogy would be like conjoining "I am" and "a superhero" together. therefore u got a more developed sentence "I am a superhero". but the letters to select for the sentence was available. as to nature the genetic sequence was available to natural select. i hope ur going to give me a better rebuttal then "but I'm still right". hahaha
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
Alright, then specifically define information, don't use analogies or anything.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 i defined "information" for u already. ur a smart guy u know what i mean. i think u would rather debate me then to come to a realization, that maybe what these people told me wasn't the whole story. these people that i'd greatly respected had been indoctrinated me, into believing such. i gave u every example i know of and definition stright from the book. u and i both know u understanded what i said, u don't need definitions, u need to question ur belief.
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
Just repeat what you said. I tried looking through previous comments and only saw examples.
Just give me a formal belief, of what information means.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 when i use the word information i use it in a sence of "a elaborated sequence of a code".
kissntellen 1 year ago
@kissntellen
So lets say there's a DNA sequence, called sequence A. A mutation changes sequence A into sequence B. This mutation causes a bone to not develop. This is a loss of information, right? The information to develop bones has now been lost. This IS considered a loss of information.
The organism with this mutation gives birth to an offspring. The offspring has a mutation which changes B back into A. If the first mutation subtracted information, this mutation MUST have added information.
Yankyal1 1 year ago
@Yankyal1 let me tell u there was never 1 found.
kissntellen 1 year ago
Not a very observant and aware individual, are you?
Watch the video again...
wcl82783 2 years ago
It didn't prove God's nonexistence. That wasn't even the point. The point is there are hundreds of variations of religions that all at some point or another claimed to be God's authority. Which one, if any, is right, and can you prove it? If not, in all likelihood you are wasting your time, money and thought on something just as made up as all the rest.
chodaboy51500 2 years ago 2
Belief in god is unsubstantiated emotional feelings which are as subjective to each individual as one's choice of pizza toppings. There is ZERO empirical evidence for a god, any god, not just your god. ZERO. Where is this 'god' separate from your emotions? Nowhere. Your 'god' has not reality apart from your internal flood of thoughts and petides. No objective reality. Thats what faith is. A fragile candle adults use to keep away the boogyman of old age, death and egoic extinction. Let fear go.
InnerAtheist 2 years ago 3
Hmmmm, So God is just an emotion? So when Penrose calculated the probability of low entropy is 1:10^10^123, it was just nature making a miracle that humans can barely calculate let alone write it. The number of digits can't be written, even if we took all fundamental particles and wrote a digit on each one. I'm guessing nature blidnly allowed entropy to be that precise during the split second of the primordial atom, I'm guessing nature caused nature (fallacy), what're your thoughts?
ogirv101 2 years ago
I have come to know both God and religion. And I have found that God and religion are not united at all. Man has formed many religions through-out history as this video signifies and none of them lead to God. God is found through a person who is determined to find Him. One who is sincere and humble of heart has a much greater chance than a man filled with pride who is continually demanding proof.
All in all, it is God who reveals Himself to whom He wishes to.
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago
... Continued
Afterall, It is rather foolish for creation to say to their Creator to do things on creations terms. The Creator calls the shots.
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago
That's how ALL of these religions started out, sir...with the very same intentions you have. Texts were written which were inspired by people whom either heard voicesor were supposedly witnesses to events that are confirmed to be true, by their own definiton, through these texts. This was done so that others could learn their faith, which as you know, all claim to "BE" the one and only. Religion is definately another piece in the puzzle that supports the evidence that humans evolved..
gblueslover2 2 years ago
That is one very cool video.
peace
2020bane 2 years ago
yawn
0uij4 2 years ago
I actually like this video Loch. It shows that following a religion leads only to a dead end.
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago
"...following a religion leads only to a dead end."
I took the animation to show another perspective:
watch?v=lEC423UQi9s&feature=channel_page
I don not think its a dead end. That is philosophically incorrect.
roberto8ag 2 years ago
Believe me, Through what I have experienced , religion leads only to a dead end! After experiencing God and not religion, I found a spiritual relationship with Him is nothing of what man calls "religion".
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago
Hi,
I agree, experiencing God (or god) is spirituality, however, I believe religion is the external visible consequences of that experience.
Otherwise, spirituality means nothing but just a "recreational drug type effect."
Religion is the consequence of that spirituality which can be seen in a person political, economic, social, scientific and ethical philosophy.
roberto8ag 2 years ago
Religion - Outward Ceremonialism
Christ - Inward experience
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago
"Religion - Outward Ceremonialism
Christ - Inward experience"
If religion is outward ceremonialism, which I disagree, then religion is inconsequential.
Religion is consequential behaviour.
I can't see your spirituality, since that is a personal, inner experience.
roberto8ag 2 years ago
Comment removed
roberto8ag 2 years ago
God has no religion. Man has made all these religions. Religion is confusing, and as this video shows, it leads in many directions. A relationship with God comes through only one way and leads to only one destination. Through Christ.
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago
you're still not accepting that christ was something made up by christian people and you have no proof for him either than converting druggies and alcoholics looking for intervention and your christ is your guys' blanket.
LiveFastDieHung 2 years ago
Christ was not made up by Christian people. Christian people are called "Christians" because they know and experience Christ in their lives. Because you have not yet experienced Christ, don't be so quick to judge those who have.
Here2AwakenU 2 years ago