Added: 2 months ago
From: BereanBeacon
Views: 234
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (59)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • hmmmmm lets see. Normal speed muscles produce crap calls, there is sexual selection towards calls requiring higher frequency vibration (more energy needed = fitter male) and therefore over the generations a switch to faster muscles.

    theres an idea for ya.

  • ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)

  • @Mogley52 Jesus' own words:

    Matthew 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

    Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

  • @Mogley52 You are mistaken. Lucifer said he would rather reign in hell and serve in heaven. You must be thinking he changed his mind and now wants to serve?

  • EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator

  • THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)

  • NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.

  • DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.

  • NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.

  • I HAVE GIVEN OVER A DOZEN LECTURES defending scientific creationism before evolutionist science faculty and students at colleges. At the end, I would open up for questions, comments, rebuttals. The science faculty, for the most part, was silent. They knew enough science to understand what I was saying was true. Some in the science faculty offered tricky rebuttals and I successfully answered them. It's those who don't know enough science that I've found the most challenging to convince.

  • SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST prevents macro-evolution. Natural selection wouldn't preserve a newly evolving trait because they wouldn't have any survival value. A partially-evolved hand evolving from a previous trait, partially-evolved tissues, organs, biological structures would make a species unfit for survival. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species. All species of plants and animals in the fossil record are complete and fully-formed. They came into existence as complete!

  • HOW DOES DNA MAKE A BODY? When you divide a cake the parts are smaller than the original cake and the cake never gets bigger. When we were a single cell and that cell divided, the new cells were the same size as the original cell and we got bigger. New material had to come from somewhere. That new material came from food. The sequence in our DNA directed our mother's food, we received in the womb, to become new cells forming all the tissues and organs of our body. Read: HOW DID MY DNA MAKE ME?

  • GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

  • WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.

  • Well if they couldn't mate before they would have died off long before they created these muscles.That makes no sense.

  • @korzon Who said they couldn't mate?

  • @korzon I can't make any sense of your post. What does "died off long before they created these muscles"? Muscles aren't created, they grow. And f course they can mate, they have to mate to be a species. That's how (animal) babies are made.

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy How could they have mated before they supposedly grew a muscle that made fish sounds?They would have had to be born with them not evolve some.

  • @korzon By doing what they were already doing. There is no such thing as a "kind", and no such thing as "evolving into another kind".

    Why do BereanBeacon,and you think they HAD to evolve in this direction? There are no "goals" in evolution, They didn't "have to" evolve those muscles. They just did. They were doing just fine without them.

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy "There is no such thing as a "kind"" Hey dummass, do you know what a fucking dog is? Do you know what a cat is? How about a dam bird you birdbrain? Those are "KINDS" and since they CANNOT define "species" "kind" is more scientific and exact than science so shut the fuck up ya loonie.

  • @MaximusArurealius There is no such thing as "cat kind". There are many species of cat. Tigers, house cats, bobcats; leopards, etc.

    A species is a population of freely inter-breeding individuals. (BSC)

    Who is the "they" that can't define things? Just off the top of my head, I can think of several definitions:: iological species concept: T cladistic species concept, ecological species, phenetic species and recognition species .

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy "There are no "goals" in evolution, They didn't "have to" evolve those muscles. They just did. They were doing just fine without them" READ WHAT YOU JUST WROTE DUMMASS. You just self-pwned you stupid self. Now don't blow a gasket ya dumshit. You're getting all excited over some silly assed bullshit Darwin made up while he was dancing around the witch doctor's campfire in South America.

    SELF-PWNED and probably too dumb to know it.

    EPIC BLUNDER hahahahahahahha

  • For those interested there are a series of videos on Netflix called "Animals that Defy Evolution". It is good one on this subject.

  • @MegaDude1969

    Awesome!

    I have netflix streamed on my ps3. is it on there?

  • @MegaDude1969 Every species we have seen TODAY . Archaea, bacteria, plants, fungi, animals ... is evolving. When do you think it started, of not 3+ billion years ago?

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy "Every species we have seen TODAY . Archaea, bacteria, plants, fungi, animals ... is evolving" WELL that's your claim moron, but proving it is another matter. Good try though dummass.

    OWNED

  • You're really not very bright. The point of noting homology is because the lung was co-opted from the swim bladder, not evolved alongside it. There are even modern fish that can breathe air through a co-opted swim bladder.

  • @TheScienceFoundation Let's for the sake of argument say evolution was true.... a stretch but let's go there for moment. We would all be in a stage of "CO-Opting" at a minimum of about 10-50 different organs to adapt to all of our changing daily situations. Since humans swim why is my body after ages not adapted some organ for gills for breathing underwater. My friend let the light sink in!

  • @cto511987 That's not the way evolution works, we don't develop parts because we need them, traits appear through mutation and other genetic mechanisms and beneficial ones are kept.

    Let the knowledge sink in.

  • @TheScienceFoundation Thats insane

  • @cto511987 Yes, every species on Earth is in the process of changing allale frequencies. Allele frequencies change all the time.

    Do you read the posts you reply to? TheScienceFoundation wrote, " we don't develop parts because we need them, traits appear through mutation and other genetic mechanisms and beneficial ones are kept."

    My genes have no way of knowing whether I swim, or live in the desert or the arctic ice. A mutation may help one group, or none. They are random with respect to that

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy In nature there is no proof of a beneficial mutation (adding information) it's always information being lost (Second Laws of Thermodynamics - real science). Not that most would look into it but considering the truth is much better than arguing to win. Most people I find don't want the truth but want to win or not look wrong. I once also took for truth what I was taught in school but it's your call.

  • @cto511987 I have a hard time making ANY sense of your post.

    Any change in the frequency of alleles is evolution, by definition.

    Any change to the genome that adds to the size adds "information", any change that shortens it lessens information.

    Neither one has ANYTHING to do with whether a mutation is "beneficial" or not.

    Any mutation that allows the organism to live to reproduce is "beneficial" enough.

    SLoT has nothing to do with information And applies to thermodynamic systems, noto evolutio

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy "Any change in the frequency of alleles is evolution, by definition."

    So does my watch. By definition.

  • @MaximusArurealius So does your watch WHAT? Where did I mention a watch AT ALL? 

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy My watch changes as the minutes tick on. That's evolution according to definition you dolt. What the fuck is the matter with your stupid brain?

  • @MaximusArurealius That isn't change in ALLELE FREQUENCY. Watches don't have alleles, so the frequency of them cannot change.

    Pick a trait that is inherited (say, plaid fur). To have plaid fur the animal has to have the ALLELE for plaid fur.IF 20% have the allele, that is the FREQUENCY. When someone asks you, "How frequently do you find the plaid allele"? You answer, "20% of the time"

    If you count later and the 20 has changed to ANYTHING ELSE, you have seen evolution.

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy said, "blah blah blah wah wah wah" You dumshit. Read the definition of evolve "change over time." Now tell me that your watch doesn't do that! HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR

  • @MaximusArurealius My watch doesn't do that. And I said nothing about "over time" I said "change in allele frequencies", and "over time" is the only way that can happen. So putting it in the definition would be redundant.

    You don't say, "He won 5 consecutive games in a row." for the same reason. "Consecutive" MEANS "in a row"

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy "My watch doesn't do that." No wonder you never know what time it is. Go get a new watch dummass.

  • @MaximusArurealius No watch does that. Watches don't have alleles, they don't reproduce, so the allele frequencies can't change.

    They would have to HAVE alleles, for the alleles to change.

    And someone who can't spell "dumb ass" can't be the sharpest knife in the drawer. K? :)

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy YOUR BEST ARGUMENT: "And someone who can't spell "dumb ass" can't be the sharpest knife in the drawer" Hey dummass, are you now the YT spell check nanny for slang terms? HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR way to go dummass.

    PWNED

  • @MaximusArurealius "check nanny for slang terms?"

    Why? I have no interest in talking to children, or to people who are too ignorant to use standard English. Slang is for children and mental deficients

  • @xyxxyplughxyzzy "Why? I have no interest in talking to children" HAR HAR HAR HAR That couldn't have been your best shot. Now c'mon, hit me with your best shot.

    HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR

  • @MaximusRetardus

    the real thing to notice here is that you keep being unable to explain AB resistance w/out using evolution theory.

    it's obvious that your religious nonsense is useless.

  • @transtupid Still can't explain the sudden appearance of animals in the fossil record without creation theory?

  • @MaximusRetardus

    I see you can't answer to my challenge...

    it's obvious you have no idea what Science is all about...

    When you figure how to explain AB resistance or fish diversity without using evolution theory, feel free to come back.

  • @MaximusArurealius WHAHAH! Trolls are easy to spot. They run away! LOL

  • @srexob715 Thanks for letting me know. Where you been?

    hahahahahahaahahahahahaaaaa

  • @MaximusArurealius Yep, I was right. Nothing but trolls here! LOL

  • @srexob715 "TROLL" == CODE FOR "I'm getting my ass kicked and I don't know what to say." HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR or just yell "calf-rope" like they do in Texas Rasslin' when they are pinned. HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR

  • @MaximusArurealius TROLL! WHAHAHAHA

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more