@dechha1981 I have seen an apple fall but I have never seen a fish fly , sorry about that ! You have to have a monsterous belief to accept that a single cell evolved into an inteligent human , moral evolved also ! Monsterous belief I tell u
Try this, you idiots: believe what you want to believe and let others do the same. I believe in God, but I don't make videos about it, or battle every atheist I see and try to convert them. I couldn't care what less about how stupid you think God is and I'm sure you won't care about how stupid I think evolution and the Big Bang is, so why even talk about it? Neither of us will change our beliefs so lets save time and energy and find something else to discuss.
@camdevtube No, I very much do care. I care about the majority of our children being taught that evolution is "just a theory" co-opting both the definitions of evolution and theory. I care about our population taking absurd nonsense as more credible than 40,000 years of scientific advancement. I care about our children being taught to accept a priest as a higher authority on science than extensively educated experts in fields like astrophysics.
@camdevtube I care about the propagation of ignorance. It is wrong and should be spoken out against. Creationists, authoritarian theists, global warming deniers, and others who spread lies about basic scientific principles which have brought you every aspect of your life in one way or another and condition gullible people and innocent children not to accept knowledge, evidence, and reason are doing something that is wrong! This is wrong! It deserves to be ridiculed because it is ridiculous.
If anyone wants to see proof that Macro Evolution has been observed it's put together nicely by Potholer54 in this clip:
watch?v=1RnygS7opCA&feature=digest
It's a Q.E.D. moment.
I pointed one fucktard to it though and he said that's just a guy SAYING that and there's no evidence that this happened. Tsk tsk tsk, these guys should be embarrassed to say such things in public.
Well as they say, you can lead a Creationist to knowledge but you can't make him THINK!
@dechha1981 by luck an animal is given a new ability which helps it survive, but not neccessarily in a new environment, however sometimes by luck an animal will be simultaneously given several specific abilities which make it possible for an animal like a fish to be given a chance of surviving long enough in a different environment to reproduce and continue its species, after a while the new species, recieves further abilities which help it survive???
Ho boy, this is not gonna all fit in 500 characters. This would be so much easier if you payed attention in High School Science.
You need to understand Mendelian Genetics, Gregor Mendel's Pea experament, selective breeding, natural selection, and genetic mutation. Look those up youyrself.
@dechha1981 yh i know all of this, this is pretty obvious stuff, but it doesn't answer my question as to how exactly does a fish attain the ability to live on land, as in give me the probable sequence of events, does the fish attain two heart and lung systems? explain
@dechha1981 You can't answer my question, hmmm i wonder why? perhaps you don't even know what you're talking about yourself?... Perhaps. It would be ironic seeing as you make a video attempting to discredit that very idea.
I take it the video is trying to say that fish couldn't have never survived a terristrial habitat?
That simply isn't true. Scientists have already discovered a significant amount of the forms that made the aquatic to terrestrial transition. For example, Acanthostega g, Euthenopteron f, and Tikaalik r (paste "Animal Armageddon: First Vertebrate" in your search bar to see)
If you're still skeptical, here's a current fish with lungs and legs: paste " LIFE - Mudskipper Mud Wrestles | Fish"
@dechha1981 Not exactly, I didn't realize the last half is you criticizing someone elses animation: I thought it was all one author expressing the same idea. Sorry
I can't remove my mistake, but I'll copy/paste my comment into the original video.
There are now air-breathing fish. A million years, a pond dried up, and several fish died of suffocation. the solution was: to make fish breathe our air. By then, there were plants on earth to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen, making breathing easier fish. And even today there are such fish as the pirambóia that have lungs. Other fish that also live in swamps where the water is low in oxygen can breathe the air.
my opinion? hmm let me see, you were making the point that we won't see it happen in one generation obviously implying it can happen in many. my opinion? it's not worth our breath or thought processes in consideration TILL we've been around long enough to see something like a cat turn into a dog.
@pelonisas That is NOT HOW EVOLUTION WORKS you stupid fucktard! You might as well have said, "I'll believe in Gravity when some stars fall down and hit me on the head".
@pelonisas Evolution is the gradual change in a species in response to a stimulus in an environment. There is nothing in the theory that says something turns into another. And yes, your understanding is as bad as saying: "I will believe the earth is round when people in China fall off".
All religion is all bad all the time for everyone everywhere in the past the present and the future. Religion is for cowards, it is for the weak. Religion is about control and corruption, murder, rape, genocide. Choose to be human and not religious. You cannot be both. Fight for our species, not against it. Religion makes you guilty of high treason. Fact
Humans do all of these things whether they are religious or not. Perhaps the common flaw is humanity itself. The atrocity of eugenics, most clearly illustrated in Nazi Germany, was done for the good of the Human species based on Darwinist principles.
Hmmmmm... look at your children, don't they look like you? Then your partner found you worthy of fathering their children, or you simply survived, now, over millions of generations don't think that slowly, very slowly we would move closer to the "perfect" race? The simple fact that all humans don't look alike prooves evoloution, and I'm not saying I don't believe in a higher force, not nessicarily your "God," but an intelligent force that created this universe.
This is the stupidest video ever. Fish didn't just start living on land. It just was a helpful thing to be able to survive out of water for a little bit, whether because your stream dried up and you need to find another water source, or to travel up stream in rough areas. Eventually, as there tolerance for staying out of water got longer and longer (over many many generations ofcourse). They soon became able to spend a large part of their lives on land (amphibians).
Just because Darwin found that certain dots connect doesn't mean other dots immediately do too without the same emperical data to prove. Most of what evolution says to have happened so assuredly cannot be observed and that is by nature essential to pure science. Evolution still is in fact a theory. Meaning: no data can prove a fish ultimately evolved into a man, so it's a huge stretch to push as an ultimate fact.
@boonemusic Common descent is a fact. There is no other way to explain the fossil record or the sequence similarities between different species. Natural selection is a scientific theory explaining the fact of common descent.
@boonemusic technically humans never stopped being fish... you're just a branch of warm blooded bipedal air breathing fish that have adapted to the point where you can no longer breath water. Easy enough to trace the markers ^_^
it's pretty clear that evolution does occur. i think the problem i have with it, is that similar to people who have a religious belief and are willing to blur the line for their own cause, scientists seem similarly willing to call huge assumptions fact as well.
@dechha1981 Hey I'm sorry I called you silly, little, and ignorant. It is not my place to judge someone and I apologize for my immaturity. Even though I do not agree with what you believe that is no excuse for my disrespect. I mean for all I know I'm talking to a professor with a PhD. The point is that I should find other ways to express my beliefs that don't include putting others down. Also, I don't believe this is Evolution, its just a silly cartoon.
The reason both evolutionists and creationists cannot prove their points is simple: The evolutionist would say If God created everything, who created God? The creationist would say, "If all forms of matter formed from non-living matter, what made the non-living matter come to life"? The only answer that seems plausible to answer both impossible arguments is that there has to be a realm outside of our realm of understanding, and a dimension outside our dimension.
I get the joke! Really! The fish has always been the symbol for Christianity! In this video, it's swimming in a sea of ignorance & it's unable to breath the fresh air of logic and reason. It suffocates & dies because it's unable to adapt to a progressively changing world. It shares the fates of dinosaurs like Zeus & Osiris & dies out of existence. ...Maybe that last line was overextending the metaphor...
You fucking idiots They didn't Think of having legs and there fucking pop out Its a fucking mutation in which took millions of years for that gene pool to spread if you going to say evolutions fake you should really put some research in to it!
Actually that's not how we say fish evolved into land animals. Certain groups of fish stayed close to the surface water, and they eventually adapted to being able to breath air. So they then became land/water creatures like crocodiles. Eventually some groups went away from their land/water habitats and started to lose their need for water after a long period of time.
@Coolpuncht Makes sense in swamps of course. Fish don't breath water, they breath the oxygen which is dissolved IN water. Fish can actually DROWN in still water like that found in swamps because of the lack of oxygen. Therefore being able to come up for gulps of air, like the lungfish does, is advantageous.
"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."
This is pure hubris. Do you honestly believe yourself that much more clever than anyone who rejects evolution?
Evolution is almost never debated on the merits. Someone voices an objection, gets called an idiot, and all of the evolutionists applaud and declare victory.
Science is about process, not consensus or reputation. When there is a falsifiable proof for evolution, then it will be science. Otherwise, it is just a fanciful notion.
@dragknuckle This is a response concerning my analogy of creationists to a pigeon playing chess? I regret that comment as it was rather insulting. I think I had just come out of a debate and was "expressing myself". However, If you'd like to debate, I'm game. First I think it is important that you NOT believe or accept evolution. Evolution is a tool used to solve problems... not something you believe in.
@dragknuckle No, I don't consider myself more clever. However, you can and I will argue/debate the process of evolution and it's known mechanisms based on it's merits. Although not everything is known about evolution (as is true about any discipline of science), the process of evolution and its known mechanisms are well documented. I will list a few examples....
@dragknuckle General list of evolutionary uses in science:
Evolution: benefits; bioinformatics, zoology, pathology in agriculture and medicine (disease physiology and treatment, drugs, pesticides), artificial selection, biodiversity management, epidemiology & health policy, phylogenetic analysis (systematics, cladistics), understanding molecular pathways and related products (antibiotics, biopolymers), GENETIC ENGINEERING, natural history.
@dragknuckle Some evolutionary model applications:
Achievement tech: computer programs called evolutionary or genetic algorithms. reference: [see "Evolving Inventions," by John R. Koza, Martin A. Keane and Matthew J. Streeter; Scientific American, February 2003]
evolutionary app: DNA analysis of how pathogens evolve produces useful information for combating the outbreak and spread of disease. Recent examples would include 2009's Swine flu vaccine.
@dragknuckle Scroll down to view a short list of evolutionary applications and uses/merits. The evolutionary model is a tool used to solve problems and can be "debated on its merits". You don't believe in evolution, you use it to solve problems.... like your hammer.
Evolutionary app: Studying mutation RATES allows science the ability to predict how an organism will evolve/adapt. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2009 26(5):1143-1153; doi:10.1093/molbev/msp029
Wow, a lot of responses. You are coming at evolution from a different angle than I have ever heard before. As a model, it appears that it is useful.
My concern is whether it actually is the source of humanity, not whether the theory has applications. The "Conventional Current" model in electricity is useful, but is entirely backwards as a matter of fact.
You must admit that the evolutionary model has also been applied in the fields of eugenics and ethics, with devastating results.
@dragknuckle "My concern is whether it actually is the source of humanity, not whether the theory has applications"
Science is essentially a set of tools and knowledge that can be used to solve problems. Therefore, our primary concern with any discipline of science should be it's ability to effectively solve problems. Many people who argue against evolution complain about "holes" in the theory/process. Since all the sciences have unknowns/"holes", then what makes evolution so unacceptable?
You have reframed the terms of debate. I am arguing that there is no falsifiable test to determine whether or not Man is the product of natural selection, or a creation of a divine being. Therefore, the level of bile directed at people who are skeptical of evolution is misplaced.
@dragknuckle "Therefore, the level of bile directed at people who are skeptical of evolution is misplaced."
I think even good evolutionary scientist needs to be skeptical of evolution. The scientific community fully admits that not all the mechanisms that govern evolution are known and properly understood. Skepticism, hopefully, breeds further study and refinement to the theory. BUT, your primary concern surrounds man as you've mentioned many times. Why is man's origin of primary concern?
You are more focused on my motivations than the merits of the case for evolution. Science should never rely on such things, only on what can be proven.
In fact, it makes more sense to just assume bias on the part of everyone, and require definitive falsifiable tests to prove any theory.
Even if evolution supports eugenics, that does not disprove it. Even if it undermines everything I believe in, it does not disprove it.
@dragknuckle "You are more focused on my motivations than the merits of the case for evolution.
Humm,... well, I'm more interested in discussing the "merits" of evolution. However, you've mentioned multiple times that man's origin is of primary concern and importance to you. This suggests that the process of evolution holds little interest to you and that your primary concern is the implication of evolution.
This is a waste of my time. You dodge and weave to avoid discussing the real question: did evolution actually happen and does it account for human life? Everything else is just irrelevant distraction.
@dragknuckle "did evolution actually happen and does it account for human life? "
The evolutionary model is the current best model and tool to describe how organisms change and adapt over the course of time. Did evolution happen? We can see organisms evolve now, so I don't think anyone has any good reason to suspect it hasn't always happened. I don't think I'm dodging anything. I try to address all your points clearly. Do you think evolution accounts for human life? I think it does.
@dragknuckle "My concern is whether it actually is the source of humanity, not whether the theory has applications."
Read paragraphy just below this one before reading what follows this sentence. For example: In your mind, what makes evolution impossible/"unacceptable" while you most likely deem gravity completely acceptable and possible? I will assume that you find gravity to be an acceptable/possible phenomenon since most people do.
We have observed planets and can see that there is an inverse square law governing their behaviour. It is consistent and predictable. I experience gravity every day.
@dragknuckle" We have observed planets and can see that there is an inverse square law governing their behaviour. It is consistent and predictable. I experience gravity every day."
Good. So, gravity exists because you can experience it. Are you suggesting that evolution cannot be tested, witnessed or experienced in a similar manner? Do scientists understand the mechanisms that govern gravity?
@dragknuckle "The "Conventional Current" model in electricity is useful, but is entirely backwards as a matter of fact."
I think the purpose of a model is to aid our understanding of something. I agree that their are many models that exist that we know can't be 100% accurate. BUT, they aid our understanding AND encourage further refinement to the model. Other examples would include electron cloud theory or molecular models in general.
@dragknuckle "So we agree on that. Did you get my point? That the usefulness of a model does not prove its literal accuracy?"
Absolutely! The usefulness of a model does not prove its accuracy. I can definitely agree with this and that all the sciences are littered with these models. What differentiates and elevates the evolutionary model to a degree where other theories and models aren't worth questioning or mentioning? Because of the potential of harm inflicted by eugenics?
@dragknuckle "You must admit that the evolutionary model has also been applied in the fields of eugenics and ethics, with devastating results."
Yes, I would agree that the evolutionary process and model has been hijacked for "dubious" purposes... but what useful idea and knowledge hasn't been exploited? If you find evolution to be unacceptable, the first let's ID WHY you deem it to be an unacceptable model/science. I find evolution to be an acceptable based on the overwhelming evidence.
@dragknuckle "You must admit that the evolutionary model has also been applied in the fields of eugenics and ethics, with devastating results."
A simple example of another theory that has been hijacked for dubious endeavors: Germ theory has been used to create biological weapons ALSO "with devastating results". Does this mean that we should question the validity of germ theory? Does it make sense to render germ theory unacceptable and abandon modern medicine?
This demonstrates that you didn't understand my point. The model of germ theory is benign, it is the actual existence of the germs that makes germ warfare possible. The model of "survival of the fittest" and "preferred races" is inherently dangerous.
@dragknuckle " The model of germ theory is benign..... The model of "survival of the fittest" and "preferred races" is inherently dangerous."
How is germ theory benign vs. while "survival of the fittest" is dangerous. Assuming "germs" exist and that resourceful genes aid in organismal survival ("survival of the fittest"); how is one idea less "dangerous" than the other?
Germ theory does not touch on a key philosophical element of life. Evolution does.
The origin of Man speaks volumes as to what purpose and meaning (if any) human life has. The philosophical conclusions of evolutionists are fundamentally different from creationists.
If we are the products of chance, life cannot be said to have meaning or purpose. If we are created, then our purpose flows from the nature and purposes of our creator.
@dragknuckle "Germ theory does not touch on a key philosophical element of life. Evolution does."
You can make philosophical statements and generate philosophical ideas concerning both germ theory and evolution. Both theories are based on tremendous amounts of evidence. Knowledge about both can solve problems AND cause problems to the well being of others. There are mysteries surrounding both theories. Scientifically, these are very similar. You'll have to be more specific.
@dragknuckle "The origin of Man speaks volumes as to what purpose and meaning (if any) human life has. The philosophical conclusions of evolutionists are fundamentally different from creationists."
You're speaking philosophy here, not science. An evolutionist uses evidence to create a model used to solve problems and potentially explain biodiversity. A creationist uses ancient stories. When drawing conclusions, there is a big difference where you get your information from.
@dragknuckle "If we are the products of chance, life cannot be said to have meaning or purpose. If we are created, then our purpose flows from the nature and purposes of our creator."
Ultimately, only you can decide your purpose whether you're a creationist, evolutionist, or neither. If you're using a holy book to define your purpose, you're still interpreting it yourself and coming up with your own purpose. Holy books don't offer specified purpose anyway.
@blaisingm debating an atheist is like arguing against a nerdy seven year old, extreme hypocritical thinking and trying not to get beat to a punch of stuff all their friends have told them
@ikaninjau2 "trying not to get beat to a punch of stuff all their friends have told them"
This is the best you could think of? "beat to a punch of stuff"??? Perhaps you should leave the thinking to me and seven year olds capable of far more witty material.
@blaisingm LOL I am someone who believes in a God but I still believe in Evolution. Evolution doesn't prove the non-existence of a God, it just proves how we evolved not how we came into existence!
@ThomasWinkworth I don't call my God Yahweh but Allah. I am a Muslim. Actually Evolution and God don't cancel out each other. Watch this: youtube.com/watch?v=Wk-2m0mevtE and also this: youtube.com/watch?v=kwzZ_Sh4SJE I hope this helps. Peace & Blessings!
I happen to disagree with you about the existance of Allah but unlike Thomas here I can see how you can believe in both since technically the bible doesn't say that Adam and Eve weren't ape-like. I think he has a complete and utter lack of imagination.
@dechha1981 Well, as a Muslim and specifically as an Ahmadi Muslim I don't believe in Adam and Eve to be the first and only people on Earth (that's metaphorical). I think it is mentioned in the links I posted before. I don't agree with the Bible story of Adam & Even especially when it is taken literal by many and confusion starts. I don't know what was your or his argument who believes in God, do you? You may find this interesting: alislam.org/topics/quran/QURANIC%20CONCEPT%20OF%20EVOLUTION.pdf
the only thing this fish video proves is that creationists minds cant comprehend with the theory of animals adapting over millions of years so result to piss taking to defend their belifs.
@bjdr9 I'm not the creacionist.. do you believe dinossaurs and man coexisted?? Well, maybe I'm not the one not thinking.. If you believe in the bible as it is you are being fooled..
i'm a creationist, and i agree that this guy is an idiot. but whether you believe in god or evolution, it takes the same amount of faith. you either believe that someone supernatural made the universe, or you believe that it spontaneously appeared. obviously animals evolve, creationists dont usually argue against that, but evolution as a theory of the origin of the universe is just as rediculous as believing in god. don't pretend that evolution is a 100% "logical" "proven" idea. it's a belief
i'm a creationist, and i agree that this guy is an idiot. but whether you believe in god or evolution, it takes the same amount of faith. you either believe that someone supernatural made the universe, or you believe that it spontaneously appeared. obviously animals evolve, creationists dont usually argue against that, but evolution as a theory of the origin of the universe is just as rediculous as believing in god. don't pretend that evolution is a 100% "logical" "proven" idea. it's a belief
1. you CAN believe in god and evolution at the same time. I've talked to and heard about people who believe in evolution and that it was the process by which their god created life as we know it today (though personally I see no reasons why I should believe a god exists, so I dismiss the claim)
2. There are reasons and studies and logic to support evolution. the only time when people have a hope of "god did it" being a possible explanation is when they can think of nothing else.
@KevinLounsberry yeah i know you can, there's lots of people who do. evolution tends to get labeled as the completely logical, scientific version of where the world came from, and really it is. but it's incomplete and full of holes, so until you can figure out where all the matter and energy came from in the universe, you have to believe in it just as much as other people have to believe in a god.
@bjdr9 uhhh... ok What? We don't need to know where something comes from for us to know how it works. Evolution has virtually no holes... in fact it has more factual evidence than gravity. Sadly for your point of view but science has a foothold and is tested in reality. Also it is not God OR Evolution in fact most christians do accept evolution as fact.
@916Omega well evolution in animals has been seen, but it's never been proven on a scale as big as single cells becoming humans. plus it doesn't explain how random combonations of elements became self aware or how the universe began
@bjdr9 Evolution only pertains to Biology... not how the universe began. And if something has been observed it is proven. And finally we are not a random combonation of elements we are grizzled products of Millions of years of natural selection. Evolution is not a world view it is a piece of factual science it is not ment to explain the origin of the universe or the origin of life for that matter. It only explaines the diversity of life.
Don't give me that "It's a metaphore" shit. Either the Bible says what it says or it doesn't. The X-Men is a metaphore for discrimination, doesn 't mean super-powered mutants literally exist ay all.
And also, either DNA can chage, and further, genetic Variation exists AT ALL, or every single living thing that exists is an exact clone of something that existed 1,000 years ago and further, Races don't exist. Which is it?
The Bible has to be understood as a text that is born from thousands of texts and other previous cultures and civilizations beliefs or stories - therefore is a metaphore, mainly 'cause what it says is made for confusing - see the Book of Enoch. Evolution exists, don't know if its DNA changes or not, but species do evolve. What I said is that maybe there's truth in both - like in the Sumerian story, for example. Don't be rud, please. See docs about Egipt too, Horus, Mayans, etc, Zeitgeist..
You can have that "superficial" look at it, sure. I'm an existencilist, never believed in God or even in the Bible. But then I started to investigate from where did those texts came from - and got to the conclusions I was briefly mentioning.. Yeah, they say its flat.. well, nowadays everyone also says its CO2 the cause for climate change so.....
Umm you gave you the right as an atheist to judge anything about anything when it comes to matters of the spirit. You made your choice. You choose not to pursue, yet pursue to enlighten. You want to stand on the outside of a building and tell people whats on the inside? I dont think so.
Maybe you should stick the god delusion and let what doesnt exist to you, remain nonexistent throughout the existence of every expression towards your higher materiality.
As an atheist, you need to realize that those who actually study the subject, those who live with it, those who do it every day, will always have a better understanding than you.
You've obviously been consumed by your emotions. I never said you gave up your right about anything. But thats what you see. Thats what emotions do. When youve calmed down, read it again.
What if I say "cre". Are you going to flip out again. Stabilize man..
" you need to realize that those who actually study the subject, those who live with it, those who do it every day, will always have a better understanding than you."
How the fuck do you think I deconverted in the first place? Did you think I was RAISED Atheist? Did you think I just 'Decided" to be an Atheist? Do you honestly think it's even possible to just "Decide" what to believe or not believe without actually studying it?
Having once been a theist and now an atheist does not give you the authority. You talk with the knowledge of an atheist on the subject because you looked into the matter.
You waited on somebody to spoonfeed you. The nazarene said seek and you shall find. Sitting on your rear is not seeking. Further, you actually let atheists spoonfeed you. Then deconverted. A snowball
And I have no problem with that. But you need to calm down. What you think you know is still unknown to you.
I wouldn't be suprised if, in fact, I know more about the Bible than you do. Unlike, you, however, I am NOT prepared to just make assumptions about someone and claim those assumptions as fact.
(which is the act of a complete dick, by the way.)
Instead, I shall simply test my hypothesis;
YOU tell ME where Jesus said that anyone who loves their family can't worship him and where Moses/god said that the "Punishment" for raping a virgin is marriage.
The nazarene said, If you do not hate your mother [like I do] and hate your father [like I do], then you cannot be a disciple of mine. In some instances, the bracketed is left out. Its obvious that he didnt mean hate your mother, for he loved his.
But im not going to spoonfeed you anything. You have eyes, go and see. You have ears, go and hear.
Every time I tell a Theist exactly where the Bible says something, they accuse me of taking it out context BEFORE they could possibly look it up themselves.
Once, I didn't even quote the Bible, I just gave him a list of the numbers, and I was STILL accused of taking it out of context.
Nice ivd.=D It's good to show people how life was really created or give them an idea of how it all was made becos otherwise they won't know anything about God and Him creation the world. Its a good thing to start thinking about, like how can a fish start walking on the earth, breathe air? I know they say that it happens in a long period of time but still those science programs suggest that the fish already somehow auqwardly created lungs already before they started breathing air... How come???
One question for you so called evolutionst. How do you date these FOSSILS?????? when every repeated test comes out with ridiculous results. So you best just do the tests once for fear of exposure to the truth. LOL
Oh NOW there's more than one animal/generation involved! Now there's fossils! NOW it involves sex and death mutation and genetics rather than just wishing! But I thought you said this video was "Mostly accurate".
If all you just mentioned what actually a lie or false or impossible and you kept labouring the point relentlessly and turned it into a movement and religion just as evolution, then you probably would be called those names too. But the the problem with evolution is goes deeper than gravity ect (besides those are proven and observed facts) It deals with the very origin of our existence. Evolution is just speculation, suggestions, millions and billions of years, given time anything can happen. LOL
LOL! You are such a fucktard! Only Theists think Evolution is any more or less important than Gravity, (other than the simple fact that, ironically, because of those very same Theists, it's the most tested and varified theory in all of Science)
Yeah, you got my point. Sometimes that all it takes to make a point. All those your so called "over 40 different types of radiametric dating that "agree" with each other" do not work and have been refuted thoroughly.
Sure, I got you're point - just like I get it now. However, you've yet to refute what I said.
Please, cite some studies that indicate that the 40 + types of radiometric dating are inaccurate. (I mean a real study, not just because some creationist website says so.)
I reckon the purpose for the original clip was for the lay person to understand what the evolution theory is all about. Which is impossible. Not the added part which tries to confuse people to think evolution can only be understood with special knowledge. Evolution is still impossible. LOL
It was trying to do nothing of the sort and you're an idiot.
It DOES require special knowledge to understand Evolution, you have to PAY ATTENTION IN HIGH SCHOOL.
The guy who made the original animation knew NOTHING about Evolution and neither do you. I mean... you honestly found this EDUCATIONAL? You knew LESS about Evolution than is displayed here? Really?
No one ever knows or understands evolution soon as they come to a conclusion that it is just fairy tales and impossible. I'm not the first idiot. Former prrofessors of evolution are also according to you so....
I found it quite educational. At least to the layman. Just the basics. Any layman would understand what you're trying to suggest. It's not rocket science, just basics.
No matter how difficult you want to make is look, doesn't make it possible. Still absolutely IMPOSSIBLE.
You... you honestly think this is how Evolution works, don't you? You think this is teh Theory of Evolution. You ACTUALLY think the SAME animal, WILLINGLY, morphs like a warewolf in one day into a completely different Genus. You aCTUALLY think that's the theory.
This is the main idea of evolution. I have been on these forums a long time and know better but this is not at all far from the truth.
You make it seem like the original clip is inaccurate. Come on, what is your beef? Evolution no matter how you try and package it is still garbage. Still impossible. It's a shame how the "theory" of evolution has a funny way of evolving itself. What new absolutely factual method have we got going now? LOL
LMFAO!!!
MasterYangLi 1 month ago
Evilution !
MrCobra811 1 month ago
Keep trying, fishy. You'll get it eventually.
FrankLightheart 3 months ago
Evolution is not science. It is a belief system.
earlysda 4 months ago
@earlysda Yeah, kinda like Astronomy and gravity is a belief system.
dechha1981 4 months ago 7
Comment removed
MrCobra811 4 months ago
@MrCobra811
That's NOT how Evolution works you stupid fucking shithead! That's even worse than the idea this animation illustrates.
And, since neither can be demonstrated in a single sitting, I suppose you don't believe in continental drift, either.
dechha1981 4 months ago 6
@dechha1981 I have seen an apple fall but I have never seen a fish fly , sorry about that ! You have to have a monsterous belief to accept that a single cell evolved into an inteligent human , moral evolved also ! Monsterous belief I tell u
MrCobra811 1 month ago
@MrCobra811
*points at a flying fish (Exocoetidae)*
jk jk I know that's not what you meant :P
MasterYangLi 1 month ago
@earlysda I just wanna check something, I hape a suspicion about you but I wanna make absolutely sure before I make fun of you for it;
Do you think Evolution has anything to do with planets?
dechha1981 4 months ago
I believe in evolution so strongly that I call anyone who doesn't an idiot, but I do like that animation of the fish dying!
anticorncob6 5 months ago
Try this, you idiots: believe what you want to believe and let others do the same. I believe in God, but I don't make videos about it, or battle every atheist I see and try to convert them. I couldn't care what less about how stupid you think God is and I'm sure you won't care about how stupid I think evolution and the Big Bang is, so why even talk about it? Neither of us will change our beliefs so lets save time and energy and find something else to discuss.
camdevtube 5 months ago
@camdevtube No, I very much do care. I care about the majority of our children being taught that evolution is "just a theory" co-opting both the definitions of evolution and theory. I care about our population taking absurd nonsense as more credible than 40,000 years of scientific advancement. I care about our children being taught to accept a priest as a higher authority on science than extensively educated experts in fields like astrophysics.
xJoeEDangerouslyx 5 months ago 3
@camdevtube I care about the propagation of ignorance. It is wrong and should be spoken out against. Creationists, authoritarian theists, global warming deniers, and others who spread lies about basic scientific principles which have brought you every aspect of your life in one way or another and condition gullible people and innocent children not to accept knowledge, evidence, and reason are doing something that is wrong! This is wrong! It deserves to be ridiculed because it is ridiculous.
xJoeEDangerouslyx 5 months ago 3
If anyone wants to see proof that Macro Evolution has been observed it's put together nicely by Potholer54 in this clip:
watch?v=1RnygS7opCA&feature=digest
It's a Q.E.D. moment.
I pointed one fucktard to it though and he said that's just a guy SAYING that and there's no evidence that this happened. Tsk tsk tsk, these guys should be embarrassed to say such things in public.
Well as they say, you can lead a Creationist to knowledge but you can't make him THINK!
warren52nz 5 months ago 2
ok so if a fish trying to get onto land is not how animals developed to survive on land then how did it happen?
ThomasWinkworth 6 months ago
@ThomasWinkworth Seriously? Is that how little you know about Evolution?
dechha1981 6 months ago
@dechha1981 perhaps
ThomasWinkworth 6 months ago
@ThomasWinkworth Well, alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not a troll. Let's start with the basics;
Tell me how you think Evolution works and I'll correct you.
dechha1981 6 months ago
@dechha1981 by luck an animal is given a new ability which helps it survive, but not neccessarily in a new environment, however sometimes by luck an animal will be simultaneously given several specific abilities which make it possible for an animal like a fish to be given a chance of surviving long enough in a different environment to reproduce and continue its species, after a while the new species, recieves further abilities which help it survive???
ThomasWinkworth 6 months ago
@ThomasWinkworth
No. Wrong.
Ho boy, this is not gonna all fit in 500 characters. This would be so much easier if you payed attention in High School Science.
You need to understand Mendelian Genetics, Gregor Mendel's Pea experament, selective breeding, natural selection, and genetic mutation. Look those up youyrself.
dechha1981 6 months ago
@dechha1981 yh i know all of this, this is pretty obvious stuff, but it doesn't answer my question as to how exactly does a fish attain the ability to live on land, as in give me the probable sequence of events, does the fish attain two heart and lung systems? explain
ThomasWinkworth 6 months ago
@ThomasWinkworth If you're not gonna pay attention in school to learn the BASICS of Evolution, I've got no time to catch you up.
dechha1981 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dechha1981 You can't answer my question, hmmm i wonder why? perhaps you don't even know what you're talking about yourself?... Perhaps. It would be ironic seeing as you make a video attempting to discredit that very idea.
ThomasWinkworth 6 months ago
I take it the video is trying to say that fish couldn't have never survived a terristrial habitat?
That simply isn't true. Scientists have already discovered a significant amount of the forms that made the aquatic to terrestrial transition. For example, Acanthostega g, Euthenopteron f, and Tikaalik r (paste "Animal Armageddon: First Vertebrate" in your search bar to see)
If you're still skeptical, here's a current fish with lungs and legs: paste " LIFE - Mudskipper Mud Wrestles | Fish"
Howsonify 7 months ago
@Howsonify Just to double check something;
You saw the very end of the video, right?
dechha1981 7 months ago
@dechha1981 Not exactly, I didn't realize the last half is you criticizing someone elses animation: I thought it was all one author expressing the same idea. Sorry
I can't remove my mistake, but I'll copy/paste my comment into the original video.
Howsonify 7 months ago
@Howsonify Cool
dechha1981 7 months ago
There are now air-breathing fish. A million years, a pond dried up, and several fish died of suffocation. the solution was: to make fish breathe our air. By then, there were plants on earth to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen, making breathing easier fish. And even today there are such fish as the pirambóia that have lungs. Other fish that also live in swamps where the water is low in oxygen can breathe the air.
Henridinossaurojp 10 months ago
I cant tell the difference in absurdity from her video and the real story. They are equally fantasy.
JesusforLife2 11 months ago
I can't breath under water therefore fish are impossible
ThereIsCake 1 year ago
my opinion? hmm let me see, you were making the point that we won't see it happen in one generation obviously implying it can happen in many. my opinion? it's not worth our breath or thought processes in consideration TILL we've been around long enough to see something like a cat turn into a dog.
pelonisas 1 year ago
@pelonisas That is NOT HOW EVOLUTION WORKS you stupid fucktard! You might as well have said, "I'll believe in Gravity when some stars fall down and hit me on the head".
dechha1981 1 year ago 16
@pelonisas For a start we all know fish didn't sprout wings - and jump out of the water --
"TILL we've been around long enough to see something like a cat turn into a dog."
Lol cats and dogs are on different branch on the evolutionary tree.. if we can see a cat turn into a dog then that would actually disprove evoultion.
badpanda84 1 year ago
@pelonisas I'm going to assume you've never read of the Galapagos finch. You should do that.
halonone 11 months ago
@pelonisas Evolution is the gradual change in a species in response to a stimulus in an environment. There is nothing in the theory that says something turns into another. And yes, your understanding is as bad as saying: "I will believe the earth is round when people in China fall off".
1234yersiman 11 months ago
@pelonisas yeah, i gotta agree, that was pretty fucking retarded
konohanominato 11 months ago
All religion is all bad all the time for everyone everywhere in the past the present and the future. Religion is for cowards, it is for the weak. Religion is about control and corruption, murder, rape, genocide. Choose to be human and not religious. You cannot be both. Fight for our species, not against it. Religion makes you guilty of high treason. Fact
699backstab 1 year ago
@699backstab
Humans do all of these things whether they are religious or not. Perhaps the common flaw is humanity itself. The atrocity of eugenics, most clearly illustrated in Nazi Germany, was done for the good of the Human species based on Darwinist principles.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
hahaha XD
Fucking bonehead, evolution didnt' take place over a day
RavenofDenmark 1 year ago
Oh, Oh, I got it!
Really funny!!
It's the fish, that he jumps out of the water and can't survive without water.
Ya, totaly. you just proved evolution is wrong, smart guy.
ILIYYILI 1 year ago
Hmmmmm... look at your children, don't they look like you? Then your partner found you worthy of fathering their children, or you simply survived, now, over millions of generations don't think that slowly, very slowly we would move closer to the "perfect" race? The simple fact that all humans don't look alike prooves evoloution, and I'm not saying I don't believe in a higher force, not nessicarily your "God," but an intelligent force that created this universe.
colt5495 1 year ago
Fail! Evolution happens over millions of years not in a minute and a half.
jaredcones 1 year ago
@jaredcones
bingo
... except with some bacteria, but thats a whole 'nother story
Mikeybetts 1 year ago
I HATE this kind of stuff. it's an embarrassment to creationism.
LIGHTRONIX 1 year ago
@LIGHTRONIX it's an embarrassment to creationism? That's like saying, makeup is an embarrassment to clowns.
udoloh 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@udoloh let me guess, you're from the south?
LIGHTRONIX 1 year ago
This is the stupidest video ever. Fish didn't just start living on land. It just was a helpful thing to be able to survive out of water for a little bit, whether because your stream dried up and you need to find another water source, or to travel up stream in rough areas. Eventually, as there tolerance for staying out of water got longer and longer (over many many generations ofcourse). They soon became able to spend a large part of their lives on land (amphibians).
godlynessdog 1 year ago
Much of it is still a mystery - for example, how baffling it is that the human genome isn't more complex than scientists assumed it to be.
boonemusic 1 year ago
@boonemusic They found it has far less protein coding genes than they thought it would, not that it is less complex.
KingOfCarrotFIowers 1 year ago
Just because Darwin found that certain dots connect doesn't mean other dots immediately do too without the same emperical data to prove. Most of what evolution says to have happened so assuredly cannot be observed and that is by nature essential to pure science. Evolution still is in fact a theory. Meaning: no data can prove a fish ultimately evolved into a man, so it's a huge stretch to push as an ultimate fact.
boonemusic 1 year ago
@boonemusic Common descent is a fact. There is no other way to explain the fossil record or the sequence similarities between different species. Natural selection is a scientific theory explaining the fact of common descent.
KingOfCarrotFIowers 1 year ago
@boonemusic technically humans never stopped being fish... you're just a branch of warm blooded bipedal air breathing fish that have adapted to the point where you can no longer breath water. Easy enough to trace the markers ^_^
PinkProgram 1 year ago
it's pretty clear that evolution does occur. i think the problem i have with it, is that similar to people who have a religious belief and are willing to blur the line for their own cause, scientists seem similarly willing to call huge assumptions fact as well.
boonemusic 1 year ago
ahh look at the silly little evolutionists grubble in ignorance
dbhorner3 1 year ago
@dbhorner3 ... says the guy who thinks THIS is Evolution.
dechha1981 1 year ago 12
@dechha1981 Hey I'm sorry I called you silly, little, and ignorant. It is not my place to judge someone and I apologize for my immaturity. Even though I do not agree with what you believe that is no excuse for my disrespect. I mean for all I know I'm talking to a professor with a PhD. The point is that I should find other ways to express my beliefs that don't include putting others down. Also, I don't believe this is Evolution, its just a silly cartoon.
dbhorner3 1 year ago
@dbhorner3 Then how am I supposed to make fun of Creationists fo thinking this is how Evolution works?
dechha1981 1 year ago
@dbhorner3 I like it how you creationists make statements that describe yourself.
1234yersiman 1 year ago
The reason both evolutionists and creationists cannot prove their points is simple: The evolutionist would say If God created everything, who created God? The creationist would say, "If all forms of matter formed from non-living matter, what made the non-living matter come to life"? The only answer that seems plausible to answer both impossible arguments is that there has to be a realm outside of our realm of understanding, and a dimension outside our dimension.
boonemusic 1 year ago
@boonemusic
Biologists can prove their point. Evolution happens. Its observable.
Case closed.
odinata 1 year ago
Comment removed
boonemusic 1 year ago
1 word MUDSKIPPER
robertwc82 1 year ago
HD my ass but I agree with your reponse
hivecluster5 1 year ago
HD my ass
hivecluster5 1 year ago
Ahh, it's so funny to see creationist stupidity.
FibonaziProductions 1 year ago
that was fucking awesome!
MobileThinker 1 year ago
I get the joke! Really! The fish has always been the symbol for Christianity! In this video, it's swimming in a sea of ignorance & it's unable to breath the fresh air of logic and reason. It suffocates & dies because it's unable to adapt to a progressively changing world. It shares the fates of dinosaurs like Zeus & Osiris & dies out of existence. ...Maybe that last line was overextending the metaphor...
bencamp18 1 year ago
ROFL! This really made my day.
DuykRuyk 1 year ago
Hack, cough, evolve, dammit, evolve!
tbsla13 1 year ago
You fucking idiots They didn't Think of having legs and there fucking pop out Its a fucking mutation in which took millions of years for that gene pool to spread if you going to say evolutions fake you should really put some research in to it!
elskato89 1 year ago
Actually that's not how we say fish evolved into land animals. Certain groups of fish stayed close to the surface water, and they eventually adapted to being able to breath air. So they then became land/water creatures like crocodiles. Eventually some groups went away from their land/water habitats and started to lose their need for water after a long period of time.
Coolpuncht 1 year ago
@Coolpuncht Makes sense in swamps of course. Fish don't breath water, they breath the oxygen which is dissolved IN water. Fish can actually DROWN in still water like that found in swamps because of the lack of oxygen. Therefore being able to come up for gulps of air, like the lungfish does, is advantageous.
Beelzeboogie 1 year ago
@koiboi59 There's aot of left over fossils from Noahs ark, all things were created except 2 of each animal that could have been gathered from Noah.
purpleleach1 1 year ago
"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."
blaisingm 1 year ago 28
@blaisingm
This is pure hubris. Do you honestly believe yourself that much more clever than anyone who rejects evolution?
Evolution is almost never debated on the merits. Someone voices an objection, gets called an idiot, and all of the evolutionists applaud and declare victory.
Science is about process, not consensus or reputation. When there is a falsifiable proof for evolution, then it will be science. Otherwise, it is just a fanciful notion.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle This is a response concerning my analogy of creationists to a pigeon playing chess? I regret that comment as it was rather insulting. I think I had just come out of a debate and was "expressing myself". However, If you'd like to debate, I'm game. First I think it is important that you NOT believe or accept evolution. Evolution is a tool used to solve problems... not something you believe in.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle No, I don't consider myself more clever. However, you can and I will argue/debate the process of evolution and it's known mechanisms based on it's merits. Although not everything is known about evolution (as is true about any discipline of science), the process of evolution and its known mechanisms are well documented. I will list a few examples....
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle General list of evolutionary uses in science:
Evolution: benefits; bioinformatics, zoology, pathology in agriculture and medicine (disease physiology and treatment, drugs, pesticides), artificial selection, biodiversity management, epidemiology & health policy, phylogenetic analysis (systematics, cladistics), understanding molecular pathways and related products (antibiotics, biopolymers), GENETIC ENGINEERING, natural history.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle Some evolutionary model applications:
Achievement tech: computer programs called evolutionary or genetic algorithms. reference: [see "Evolving Inventions," by John R. Koza, Martin A. Keane and Matthew J. Streeter; Scientific American, February 2003]
evolutionary app: DNA analysis of how pathogens evolve produces useful information for combating the outbreak and spread of disease. Recent examples would include 2009's Swine flu vaccine.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle Examples of Evolutionary problem solving capability continue:
Evolutionary app: A laboratory process called directed evolution that rapidly evolves proteins can improve vaccines and other useful proteins.
Evolutionary app: Among directed evolution's successes are a vaccine against human papillomavirus and better hepatitis C vaccines.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle Scroll down to view a short list of evolutionary applications and uses/merits. The evolutionary model is a tool used to solve problems and can be "debated on its merits". You don't believe in evolution, you use it to solve problems.... like your hammer.
Evolutionary app: Studying mutation RATES allows science the ability to predict how an organism will evolve/adapt. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2009 26(5):1143-1153; doi:10.1093/molbev/msp029
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
Wow, a lot of responses. You are coming at evolution from a different angle than I have ever heard before. As a model, it appears that it is useful.
My concern is whether it actually is the source of humanity, not whether the theory has applications. The "Conventional Current" model in electricity is useful, but is entirely backwards as a matter of fact.
You must admit that the evolutionary model has also been applied in the fields of eugenics and ethics, with devastating results.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "My concern is whether it actually is the source of humanity, not whether the theory has applications"
Science is essentially a set of tools and knowledge that can be used to solve problems. Therefore, our primary concern with any discipline of science should be it's ability to effectively solve problems. Many people who argue against evolution complain about "holes" in the theory/process. Since all the sciences have unknowns/"holes", then what makes evolution so unacceptable?
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
You have reframed the terms of debate. I am arguing that there is no falsifiable test to determine whether or not Man is the product of natural selection, or a creation of a divine being. Therefore, the level of bile directed at people who are skeptical of evolution is misplaced.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "Therefore, the level of bile directed at people who are skeptical of evolution is misplaced."
I think even good evolutionary scientist needs to be skeptical of evolution. The scientific community fully admits that not all the mechanisms that govern evolution are known and properly understood. Skepticism, hopefully, breeds further study and refinement to the theory. BUT, your primary concern surrounds man as you've mentioned many times. Why is man's origin of primary concern?
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
You are more focused on my motivations than the merits of the case for evolution. Science should never rely on such things, only on what can be proven.
In fact, it makes more sense to just assume bias on the part of everyone, and require definitive falsifiable tests to prove any theory.
Even if evolution supports eugenics, that does not disprove it. Even if it undermines everything I believe in, it does not disprove it.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "You are more focused on my motivations than the merits of the case for evolution.
Humm,... well, I'm more interested in discussing the "merits" of evolution. However, you've mentioned multiple times that man's origin is of primary concern and importance to you. This suggests that the process of evolution holds little interest to you and that your primary concern is the implication of evolution.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
This is a waste of my time. You dodge and weave to avoid discussing the real question: did evolution actually happen and does it account for human life? Everything else is just irrelevant distraction.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle No it doesn't! That'S ABIOGENESIS You fucktard!
And what do you mean "Did"? Like it was a single event that only happened once.
dechha1981 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "did evolution actually happen and does it account for human life? "
The evolutionary model is the current best model and tool to describe how organisms change and adapt over the course of time. Did evolution happen? We can see organisms evolve now, so I don't think anyone has any good reason to suspect it hasn't always happened. I don't think I'm dodging anything. I try to address all your points clearly. Do you think evolution accounts for human life? I think it does.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "My concern is whether it actually is the source of humanity, not whether the theory has applications."
Read paragraphy just below this one before reading what follows this sentence. For example: In your mind, what makes evolution impossible/"unacceptable" while you most likely deem gravity completely acceptable and possible? I will assume that you find gravity to be an acceptable/possible phenomenon since most people do.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
We have observed planets and can see that there is an inverse square law governing their behaviour. It is consistent and predictable. I experience gravity every day.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle" We have observed planets and can see that there is an inverse square law governing their behaviour. It is consistent and predictable. I experience gravity every day."
Good. So, gravity exists because you can experience it. Are you suggesting that evolution cannot be tested, witnessed or experienced in a similar manner? Do scientists understand the mechanisms that govern gravity?
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "The "Conventional Current" model in electricity is useful, but is entirely backwards as a matter of fact."
I think the purpose of a model is to aid our understanding of something. I agree that their are many models that exist that we know can't be 100% accurate. BUT, they aid our understanding AND encourage further refinement to the model. Other examples would include electron cloud theory or molecular models in general.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
So we agree on that. Did you get my point? That the usefulness of a model does not prove its literal accuracy?
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "So we agree on that. Did you get my point? That the usefulness of a model does not prove its literal accuracy?"
Absolutely! The usefulness of a model does not prove its accuracy. I can definitely agree with this and that all the sciences are littered with these models. What differentiates and elevates the evolutionary model to a degree where other theories and models aren't worth questioning or mentioning? Because of the potential of harm inflicted by eugenics?
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "You must admit that the evolutionary model has also been applied in the fields of eugenics and ethics, with devastating results."
Yes, I would agree that the evolutionary process and model has been hijacked for "dubious" purposes... but what useful idea and knowledge hasn't been exploited? If you find evolution to be unacceptable, the first let's ID WHY you deem it to be an unacceptable model/science. I find evolution to be an acceptable based on the overwhelming evidence.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "You must admit that the evolutionary model has also been applied in the fields of eugenics and ethics, with devastating results."
A simple example of another theory that has been hijacked for dubious endeavors: Germ theory has been used to create biological weapons ALSO "with devastating results". Does this mean that we should question the validity of germ theory? Does it make sense to render germ theory unacceptable and abandon modern medicine?
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
This demonstrates that you didn't understand my point. The model of germ theory is benign, it is the actual existence of the germs that makes germ warfare possible. The model of "survival of the fittest" and "preferred races" is inherently dangerous.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle " The model of germ theory is benign..... The model of "survival of the fittest" and "preferred races" is inherently dangerous."
How is germ theory benign vs. while "survival of the fittest" is dangerous. Assuming "germs" exist and that resourceful genes aid in organismal survival ("survival of the fittest"); how is one idea less "dangerous" than the other?
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm
Germ theory does not touch on a key philosophical element of life. Evolution does.
The origin of Man speaks volumes as to what purpose and meaning (if any) human life has. The philosophical conclusions of evolutionists are fundamentally different from creationists.
If we are the products of chance, life cannot be said to have meaning or purpose. If we are created, then our purpose flows from the nature and purposes of our creator.
dragknuckle 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "Germ theory does not touch on a key philosophical element of life. Evolution does."
You can make philosophical statements and generate philosophical ideas concerning both germ theory and evolution. Both theories are based on tremendous amounts of evidence. Knowledge about both can solve problems AND cause problems to the well being of others. There are mysteries surrounding both theories. Scientifically, these are very similar. You'll have to be more specific.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "The origin of Man speaks volumes as to what purpose and meaning (if any) human life has. The philosophical conclusions of evolutionists are fundamentally different from creationists."
You're speaking philosophy here, not science. An evolutionist uses evidence to create a model used to solve problems and potentially explain biodiversity. A creationist uses ancient stories. When drawing conclusions, there is a big difference where you get your information from.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@dragknuckle "If we are the products of chance, life cannot be said to have meaning or purpose. If we are created, then our purpose flows from the nature and purposes of our creator."
Ultimately, only you can decide your purpose whether you're a creationist, evolutionist, or neither. If you're using a holy book to define your purpose, you're still interpreting it yourself and coming up with your own purpose. Holy books don't offer specified purpose anyway.
blaisingm 1 year ago
@blaisingm debating an atheist is like arguing against a nerdy seven year old, extreme hypocritical thinking and trying not to get beat to a punch of stuff all their friends have told them
ikaninjau2 8 months ago
@ikaninjau2 "trying not to get beat to a punch of stuff all their friends have told them"
This is the best you could think of? "beat to a punch of stuff"??? Perhaps you should leave the thinking to me and seven year olds capable of far more witty material.
blaisingm 8 months ago
@blaisingm LOL I am someone who believes in a God but I still believe in Evolution. Evolution doesn't prove the non-existence of a God, it just proves how we evolved not how we came into existence!
United1ification 7 months ago
Comment removed
ThomasWinkworth 6 months ago
@ThomasWinkworth I don't call my God Yahweh but Allah. I am a Muslim. Actually Evolution and God don't cancel out each other. Watch this: youtube.com/watch?v=Wk-2m0mevtE and also this: youtube.com/watch?v=kwzZ_Sh4SJE I hope this helps. Peace & Blessings!
United1ification 6 months ago
@United1ification thank you!
I happen to disagree with you about the existance of Allah but unlike Thomas here I can see how you can believe in both since technically the bible doesn't say that Adam and Eve weren't ape-like. I think he has a complete and utter lack of imagination.
dechha1981 6 months ago
@dechha1981 Well, as a Muslim and specifically as an Ahmadi Muslim I don't believe in Adam and Eve to be the first and only people on Earth (that's metaphorical). I think it is mentioned in the links I posted before. I don't agree with the Bible story of Adam & Even especially when it is taken literal by many and confusion starts. I don't know what was your or his argument who believes in God, do you? You may find this interesting: alislam.org/topics/quran/QURANIC%20CONCEPT%20OF%20EVOLUTION.pdf
United1ification 6 months ago
the only thing this fish video proves is that creationists minds cant comprehend with the theory of animals adapting over millions of years so result to piss taking to defend their belifs.
cragster101 1 year ago
amusing response at the end, animation was weird imo though. good way of putting it so good job on that.
daemonowner 1 year ago 2
@bjdr9 I'm not the creacionist.. do you believe dinossaurs and man coexisted?? Well, maybe I'm not the one not thinking.. If you believe in the bible as it is you are being fooled..
tiagopolen 1 year ago
i'm a creationist, and i agree that this guy is an idiot. but whether you believe in god or evolution, it takes the same amount of faith. you either believe that someone supernatural made the universe, or you believe that it spontaneously appeared. obviously animals evolve, creationists dont usually argue against that, but evolution as a theory of the origin of the universe is just as rediculous as believing in god. don't pretend that evolution is a 100% "logical" "proven" idea. it's a belief
bjdr9 1 year ago
i'm a creationist, and i agree that this guy is an idiot. but whether you believe in god or evolution, it takes the same amount of faith. you either believe that someone supernatural made the universe, or you believe that it spontaneously appeared. obviously animals evolve, creationists dont usually argue against that, but evolution as a theory of the origin of the universe is just as rediculous as believing in god. don't pretend that evolution is a 100% "logical" "proven" idea. it's a belief
bjdr9 1 year ago
@bjdr9
1. you CAN believe in god and evolution at the same time. I've talked to and heard about people who believe in evolution and that it was the process by which their god created life as we know it today (though personally I see no reasons why I should believe a god exists, so I dismiss the claim)
2. There are reasons and studies and logic to support evolution. the only time when people have a hope of "god did it" being a possible explanation is when they can think of nothing else.
KevinLounsberry 1 year ago
@KevinLounsberry yeah i know you can, there's lots of people who do. evolution tends to get labeled as the completely logical, scientific version of where the world came from, and really it is. but it's incomplete and full of holes, so until you can figure out where all the matter and energy came from in the universe, you have to believe in it just as much as other people have to believe in a god.
bjdr9 1 year ago
@bjdr9 uhhh... ok What? We don't need to know where something comes from for us to know how it works. Evolution has virtually no holes... in fact it has more factual evidence than gravity. Sadly for your point of view but science has a foothold and is tested in reality. Also it is not God OR Evolution in fact most christians do accept evolution as fact.
916Omega 1 year ago
@916Omega well evolution in animals has been seen, but it's never been proven on a scale as big as single cells becoming humans. plus it doesn't explain how random combonations of elements became self aware or how the universe began
bjdr9 1 year ago
@bjdr9 Evolution only pertains to Biology... not how the universe began. And if something has been observed it is proven. And finally we are not a random combonation of elements we are grizzled products of Millions of years of natural selection. Evolution is not a world view it is a piece of factual science it is not ment to explain the origin of the universe or the origin of life for that matter. It only explaines the diversity of life.
916Omega 1 year ago
Creation is observable fact. Evolution is not. I have no time to wait 1 million years.
viktermore 1 year ago
omg, it was a cartoon for 1st graders for Vacation Bible School! Grow up!
rach1and1tiff 1 year ago
Thanks!!!!
well done
wimwelker 1 year ago
Heh heh.
L00NGB00W 1 year ago
lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol!!! :D
BronzeOrwin 2 years ago
too bad thats not how evolution works.
tiland520 2 years ago
Creation is a metaphore, evolution has some gaps.. you figure out..
tiagopolen 2 years ago
Don't give me that "It's a metaphore" shit. Either the Bible says what it says or it doesn't. The X-Men is a metaphore for discrimination, doesn 't mean super-powered mutants literally exist ay all.
And also, either DNA can chage, and further, genetic Variation exists AT ALL, or every single living thing that exists is an exact clone of something that existed 1,000 years ago and further, Races don't exist. Which is it?
dechha1981 2 years ago
The Bible has to be understood as a text that is born from thousands of texts and other previous cultures and civilizations beliefs or stories - therefore is a metaphore, mainly 'cause what it says is made for confusing - see the Book of Enoch. Evolution exists, don't know if its DNA changes or not, but species do evolve. What I said is that maybe there's truth in both - like in the Sumerian story, for example. Don't be rud, please. See docs about Egipt too, Horus, Mayans, etc, Zeitgeist..
tiagopolen 2 years ago
"The Bible has to be understood as a text that is born from thousands of texts and other previous cultures and civilizations beliefs or stories"
Bullshit. it says the Earth is flat. Therefore, it is wrong.The end.
dechha1981 2 years ago
You can have that "superficial" look at it, sure. I'm an existencilist, never believed in God or even in the Bible. But then I started to investigate from where did those texts came from - and got to the conclusions I was briefly mentioning.. Yeah, they say its flat.. well, nowadays everyone also says its CO2 the cause for climate change so.....
tiagopolen 2 years ago
"Therefore, it is wrong. The end"
Umm you gave you the right as an atheist to judge anything about anything when it comes to matters of the spirit. You made your choice. You choose not to pursue, yet pursue to enlighten. You want to stand on the outside of a building and tell people whats on the inside? I dont think so.
Maybe you should stick the god delusion and let what doesnt exist to you, remain nonexistent throughout the existence of every expression towards your higher materiality.
thehalfvolley 2 years ago
BULLSHIT! The Bible says that the Earth is Flat. It says Bats are birds. It says there's no seed smaller than the mustard seed. It says Pi = 3!
These are SCIENTIFIC FACTUAL errors! It's about REALITY! There's no "spirituality" about it!
And what's this shit about "you gave up your right as an atheist to..." Utter Bullshit!
dechha1981 2 years ago
@dechha1981
As an atheist, you need to realize that those who actually study the subject, those who live with it, those who do it every day, will always have a better understanding than you.
You've obviously been consumed by your emotions. I never said you gave up your right about anything. But thats what you see. Thats what emotions do. When youve calmed down, read it again.
What if I say "cre". Are you going to flip out again. Stabilize man..
thehalfvolley 2 years ago
" you need to realize that those who actually study the subject, those who live with it, those who do it every day, will always have a better understanding than you."
How the fuck do you think I deconverted in the first place? Did you think I was RAISED Atheist? Did you think I just 'Decided" to be an Atheist? Do you honestly think it's even possible to just "Decide" what to believe or not believe without actually studying it?
dechha1981 2 years ago
Having once been a theist and now an atheist does not give you the authority. You talk with the knowledge of an atheist on the subject because you looked into the matter.
You waited on somebody to spoonfeed you. The nazarene said seek and you shall find. Sitting on your rear is not seeking. Further, you actually let atheists spoonfeed you. Then deconverted. A snowball
And I have no problem with that. But you need to calm down. What you think you know is still unknown to you.
thehalfvolley 2 years ago
I wouldn't be suprised if, in fact, I know more about the Bible than you do. Unlike, you, however, I am NOT prepared to just make assumptions about someone and claim those assumptions as fact.
(which is the act of a complete dick, by the way.)
Instead, I shall simply test my hypothesis;
YOU tell ME where Jesus said that anyone who loves their family can't worship him and where Moses/god said that the "Punishment" for raping a virgin is marriage.
dechha1981 2 years ago
@dechha1981
The nazarene said, If you do not hate your mother [like I do] and hate your father [like I do], then you cannot be a disciple of mine. In some instances, the bracketed is left out. Its obvious that he didnt mean hate your mother, for he loved his.
But im not going to spoonfeed you anything. You have eyes, go and see. You have ears, go and hear.
thehalfvolley 2 years ago
WRONG!
It was Luke 14:26 and Deutoronomy 22:28 and 22:29.
dechha1981 2 years ago
good job. You can locate pages. I guess that means you understand the bible.
thehalfvolley 2 years ago
DUH!
dechha1981 2 years ago
People like are are so stupid. So engrossed in your own ideas that you can get a joke...
BronzeOrwin 2 years ago
it wasnt a joke though.
ShatteredDreams888 2 years ago
How was it not? Every one I showed it to was laffing... Well... other than the fact that it was kind of stupid.
BronzeOrwin 2 years ago
@BronzeOrwin If you watch the other videos by BibleJump, it's quite clear that he really believes that crap.
dechha1981 2 years ago
kk, and I am assuming that you are referring to them and not me. >.>
BronzeOrwin 2 years ago
can you tell me where it says that I just want to know,
windwalker111089 1 year ago
Oh no, I'm not falling for that again.
Every time I tell a Theist exactly where the Bible says something, they accuse me of taking it out context BEFORE they could possibly look it up themselves.
Once, I didn't even quote the Bible, I just gave him a list of the numbers, and I was STILL accused of taking it out of context.
YOU tell ME where it says that.
dechha1981 1 year ago
Evolution and creation are not contraditory - that's my opinion - and none of them is 100% right. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
tiagopolen 2 years ago
Magic?
dechha1981 2 years ago
@tiagopolen you say that because you don't want to think or have an opinion and so sit on the fence where no one will attack you
bjdr9 1 year ago
Nice ivd.=D It's good to show people how life was really created or give them an idea of how it all was made becos otherwise they won't know anything about God and Him creation the world. Its a good thing to start thinking about, like how can a fish start walking on the earth, breathe air? I know they say that it happens in a long period of time but still those science programs suggest that the fish already somehow auqwardly created lungs already before they started breathing air... How come???
nafedz 2 years ago
One question for you so called evolutionst. How do you date these FOSSILS?????? when every repeated test comes out with ridiculous results. So you best just do the tests once for fear of exposure to the truth. LOL
shayneby 2 years ago
Oh NOW there's more than one animal/generation involved! Now there's fossils! NOW it involves sex and death mutation and genetics rather than just wishing! But I thought you said this video was "Mostly accurate".
dechha1981 2 years ago
And how come you call me an Evolutionist but you don't also call me a Gravitationist, an Aerodynamicsist, a Magneticist, an Astronomyist, etc?
Also, the very fact that you believe in Conspiracy Theories undermines everything you've ever said.
dechha1981 2 years ago
If all you just mentioned what actually a lie or false or impossible and you kept labouring the point relentlessly and turned it into a movement and religion just as evolution, then you probably would be called those names too. But the the problem with evolution is goes deeper than gravity ect (besides those are proven and observed facts) It deals with the very origin of our existence. Evolution is just speculation, suggestions, millions and billions of years, given time anything can happen. LOL
shayneby 2 years ago
LOL! You are such a fucktard! Only Theists think Evolution is any more or less important than Gravity, (other than the simple fact that, ironically, because of those very same Theists, it's the most tested and varified theory in all of Science)
And worse, you think Evolution revers to Origins!
dechha1981 2 years ago
There are over 40 different types of radiometric dating that "agree" with each other.
Leehofooks 2 years ago
Wow. Really? I believe you now.
shayneby 2 years ago
Sarcasm is no substitute for a refutation.
Leehofooks 2 years ago
Yeah, you got my point. Sometimes that all it takes to make a point. All those your so called "over 40 different types of radiametric dating that "agree" with each other" do not work and have been refuted thoroughly.
shayneby 2 years ago
Sure, I got you're point - just like I get it now. However, you've yet to refute what I said.
Please, cite some studies that indicate that the 40 + types of radiometric dating are inaccurate. (I mean a real study, not just because some creationist website says so.)
Leehofooks 2 years ago
I reckon the purpose for the original clip was for the lay person to understand what the evolution theory is all about. Which is impossible. Not the added part which tries to confuse people to think evolution can only be understood with special knowledge. Evolution is still impossible. LOL
shayneby 2 years ago
It was trying to do nothing of the sort and you're an idiot.
It DOES require special knowledge to understand Evolution, you have to PAY ATTENTION IN HIGH SCHOOL.
The guy who made the original animation knew NOTHING about Evolution and neither do you. I mean... you honestly found this EDUCATIONAL? You knew LESS about Evolution than is displayed here? Really?
dechha1981 2 years ago
Ha ha ha ha ha
No one ever knows or understands evolution soon as they come to a conclusion that it is just fairy tales and impossible. I'm not the first idiot. Former prrofessors of evolution are also according to you so....
I found it quite educational. At least to the layman. Just the basics. Any layman would understand what you're trying to suggest. It's not rocket science, just basics.
No matter how difficult you want to make is look, doesn't make it possible. Still absolutely IMPOSSIBLE.
shayneby 2 years ago
You... you honestly think this is how Evolution works, don't you? You think this is teh Theory of Evolution. You ACTUALLY think the SAME animal, WILLINGLY, morphs like a warewolf in one day into a completely different Genus. You aCTUALLY think that's the theory.
I suppose you think gravity involves a vaccume.
dechha1981 2 years ago
This is the main idea of evolution. I have been on these forums a long time and know better but this is not at all far from the truth.
You make it seem like the original clip is inaccurate. Come on, what is your beef? Evolution no matter how you try and package it is still garbage. Still impossible. It's a shame how the "theory" of evolution has a funny way of evolving itself. What new absolutely factual method have we got going now? LOL
shayneby 2 years ago
LOL! You are such a fuckwhit! You honestly actually know NOTHING about Evolution! You have NO High School Education whatsoever!
The animation has it happening to the SAME FISH in ONE DAY for crying out loud!
dechha1981 2 years ago
Yes, I learned evolution in school when I was only 15 or 16 years old. These people must be ignorant drop-outs.
cheeseylemon 2 years ago