Smart lady. Funny how creationism is rearing its ugly head again. I really thought that the majority of people now believed in evolution. I never doubted it, even though I had a religious upbringing. I've been atheist ever since I learned about evolution in school, when I was in 5th grade. I'm Canadian, though, people here are less inclined to be hard-core about the bible.
What i dont get is, why do these states feel that science teachers can properly teach theology? I mean, if someone wants to learn science, they dont go to a priest. At least i would hope not. So why would students go to a science teacher to learn the bible? How much more ass-backwards can Christianity get? lol.
scientific claims are falsifiable, creationism or ID is not.
In science you always start with the null hypothesis and only reject the null hypothesis if the evidence leads you to do so. In ID they start with a presupposition and then look for "evidence" that supports their claim (usually utilizing logical fallacies like argument from ignorance). The whole concept is the antithesis of science and a farce. Any scientist who proposes ID should be stripped of their PhD's and publicly ridiculed.
What about the religions that have a totally different story of creationism? Should the schools talk about them to? For example L Ron Hubbard's origin of humanity says we're actually aliens. Can you prove that your ID concept has more evidence than Xenu's story?
Evolution is based on reason and evidence.
Creationism is based on faith alone with zero evidence.
Where are they now? They are passing bills allowing ID to be brought back left and right. They just sneak it in in a different form. Now they are making it legal for a science teacher to discuss ID. With that, a biased teacher will skew everything in the class.
@GsliMaIiy The Bible proves nothing. The evidence that the Bible has been edited multiple times is insurmountable. Its easy to fulfill prophecy when you can revise history. Celsus was an outspoken critic of Jesus and Christianity, and mounted a very convincing attack on the facts presented in the Bible. Tacitus was a historian, but not an eyewitness. His knowledge of Jesus was limited to what the christians at the time said about him. Same with Lucian, who mocked christians for their ignorance.
@GsliMaIiy The jewish messiah is suppose to fulfill only 23 messianic prophecies, not 200, not 300, just 23 and jesus didn't fulfill any of them. All the people you are claiming to be secular sources are as false as your religion. All of them were born after the so-called crucifixion and cannot be used as sources for any account.
Come back when you have more reliable sources that haven't been debunked already.
1: Name them and detail how they precisely relate. Detail the process involved.
2: Other tha Jesus was suffering from a schizophrenic disorder, state and detail what "I am " actually proves...
3: Celsus, Tacitus and Lucian were NOT contemporaries. And there is not one shred of evidence that they knew exactly whom they were talking about. There is no name mentioned. No origin of anything. Juust a vague mention of a charismatic figure. Of whom during that time there were multitudes.
Creationism/Intelligent Design is a denial of all we have accomplished in the understanding of our Universe. It is based on the need of theists to perpetuate the enslavement to an unverifiable, malicious, and capricious tyrant/fiction.
Evolution is based on sound reasoning, evidence, and logic. It is a hallmark of technologic advancement and social justice.
Once we become a 3rd world nation, only then will we re evaluate our stupid darwinistic curricullums, and start to repent for our mistakes. Mrs scott is the perfect example of why this country is falling. God is not with us anymore
@mironyuk Thats right . God thinks you are fat retards who dont understand or respect science , which is why you are handing over your technical lead to the Asians. And its DOCTOR Scott to you ,tractor boy .
Since you hate science and the scientific method so much, get off the computer and stop using all that the scientific method has given us. And when you go into the hospital just pray instead of getting modern life-saving treatment, and see how far you get....
These creationists haven't taken a peep outside of the US. If they had, they'd know that nobody's joining them. Why? Because no other developed western country is as fundamentalist christian as the US.
Then what they do is try and argue science against scientists. They do it for so long that they create the illusion of a debate and trick themselves into thinking ID has nothing to do with religion.
They fake PHDs, they profit hugely, some get thrown in jail for fraud...damn they are stubborn.
First we had "Happy Days" , then" Beverly Hillbillies" , now America has come up with "Creationist Street" A story about everyday folk living in the worlds greatest democracy who come out with the most hilarious stuff. Yeeeeheew I must tune in to channel 13 after I get back from Science class . It helps me relax. I like the Ted Haggard Character Gay Bob and his pet T Rex. " How comes he got them big fangs paw? He dont want to finish his turnips ,phoooooatang"
No problem. If creationism is taught in schools, there must be a special class for it -" Comparative creation mythology", after all every civilization in the past has a creation story too and all of them are different so they too should be included - to be fair, of course. Personally, I like the apache creation story the best, with the giant turtle rising out of the ground with the first people on its back.
Hey guys, thanks for not censoring your comments and ratings... unlike the creationists, you're not afraid of your ideas being challenged and debated in a free and open forum
Go creationism. Why the heck are we teaching our kids we evolved from gas, when a more likely explanation is that God created us. We didn't evolve from apes, let alone from hydrogen and helium. Neo-darwinian evolution is being taught as fact when, 150 years after it was proposed, we still haven't found the evidence Darwin expected us to find. Teach THAT to our children.
Whenever a creationist says "We evolved from apes", please just automatically take it to mean "We evolved from an ape-like creature" mkay? It's shorter to write "We evolved from apes" than "We have an ape as a common ancestor".
The mountains of what you call "evidence" is all circumstantial.
lol. ironically, it's you who don't know what you're talking about. You're debating that we didn't evolve from apes - but you probably can't define "Ape" and yet you'll also probably say that we are apes ourselves and that our nearest ancestors were apes themselves and... what the heck...our common ancestor was probably an ape himself.
@pbaylis1 The cardhouse of your Creatard belief falls into pieces through the irrefutablyfically, ad libitum reproducibly provable FACTUM that Earth is 4...4.51 Billion Ys old.
Creationists' dishoneest objections refuted GOOGLE
talkorigins isochron dating
And LEARN about the permanently integrated retroviral genomes as well as about the human chromosom nr.2
You simply DESPISE the inconvenient facts bcz you BELIEVE that they interfere with a Creator. That they DO NOT in the slightest
What I despise is atheists jumping onto the evolution bandwagon and using it to further their agendas. Agreed, I have nothing to fear if we evolved from proteins in a primordial soup. But, if atheists want to denounce creationism, they'll need to wait a long time till science gets its theory of abiogenesis together, then proves it. So far, we haven't even proven a common descent to an ape-like creature, let alone all the way back to hydrogen and helium.
@pbaylis1 Whether you like it or not, you are an evolved mutated Primate, with a n=23 chromosome set including a chr. Nr.2 that it originated from the fusion of to ancestral chromosomes in the set n=24.
Chimps and Bonobos can be considered our cousins ist das nicht FASZINIEREND?
Regrettably, you brain is infected with faith-psychosis,it harbors at least one Alien that it distorts the gyri of your brain. The ORIGIN [A]biogenesis has nothing to do with EVOLUTION that it is a Fact.
No, you can't say "Whether you like it or not.." That's just sheer arrogance. Look, if it's all so undisputable, why were there scams like the Piltdown man? Why do people go to extreme lengths to scam the scientific community. Why are people still looking for the elusive definitive missing link? Because, there isn't enough evidence to categorically tell me "Whether you like it or not". You can tell me that about the grass being green or the sun being hot.
@pbaylis1 Actually I CAN say this, (bcz it is scientifically, irrefutably PROVEN) until the NEXT occasion is due that I go into myself and perform the sacred action as that I worship my PenusChristus[=ANOINTED] that he resurrects in my crotch and spends the milkey river of life...
EACH and EVERY fossil IS a "missing link"
THe FACTS are INCONVENIENT... but for those people that they do not APPRECIATE them, bcz they COLLIDE with their Aliens in their brain.
Why billions of people on earth still believe in gods...Many gods. Many religions. Many creation versions. Many legends. Many conspiracy theories. Why, why...?
Well, because no more than 5-10% of the people of the present times, evolved enough to have their brains functioning properly. That's why.
We are who we are. Basically primates at certain stage of the human development.
Creationism: Total degradation of humanity by believing in 'Puff, the magic dragon' in the skies!
Too bad you're not a proper scientist. Just an parasitic atheist feeding off the parts of science that you like and giving science a bad name in the process.
@pbaylis1 Behold, THAT I am actually a Scientist. Sorry to burst your bubble. I researched in the field of certain inherited disorders of metabolism iow: MUTATIONS.
It is just a matter of how much I care worthful to bother myself, that I can refute you, on each point.
You Creatards always hope to "retrieve the weak points" to only prove that they have no clue as HOW scientific papers cumbersomely "EVOLVE"
Your strategy is called TOTSCHLAGARGUMENT (silencing / thought-terminating-cliché) it is meaningles BECAUSE my utterings do not influence any scientific fortcoming WHERE the "hard data" are being scientifically created namely the laboratories.
@pbaylis1 FYI: So that I perceive that you are Catholic - do I have to school you, that RCC and LutheranProtestant Churches both ACCEPT the irrefutible FACT of Evolution of the life beings. How dare you have your own brain on this issue (rhetorically asking)
You need to school yourself on humility. That'd be a good starting point. God help us if you're an example of what scientists of the future are going to be like.
Actually, what was ruled in Dover was ID was not "methodological naturalism". For those of you who do not know what that means, it's, ""nature is all there is, and all basic truths are truths of nature." So what was ruled in Dover was ID is not science because we think ID deals with something that is not in nature and we define in science that nature is all there is.
creationism is a religious term, and since the united states supposably baned religious tolerance inside public schools that means creationism should not be taught in schools!! religion should stay in the church and no where else! plus evolution is a fact among scientists and its not by any mean to do with religion but only science.
Honestly though, I'd love to have creationism in the classroom... I've always wanted to waste time during each and every class by starting arguements and debates of creationism vs. evolution :D
Yes, put creationism in the classrooms... and no one will learn anything, science or religious, lol!!
The rules and standards that MUST be abided by in science for a theory to exist... every "actual science" follows these rules and standards in order to form their theories... that being said, if you do not believe one science is correct... then you must also believe that NO science is correct!
Evolutionary Theories follow all the same rules and standards that every other science followed... to deny it is to deny all science.
Point is I have done a lot of research because I love learning, about science, history, etc. So don't use the argument that Christians don't like to learn. I honestly am pretty sure by your ignorant comments below, that you have not done nearly enough research on the subject, even on your own side. I recomment you do an honest look into researching your own side of the issue, then look into the plenty of Creation scientist points. It may take a little effort to do all this. Hope you don't mind.
Burymegames and to any of the others who have commented likewise in believing there is no Creation theory. I watched a 17 hour seminar broken up into 7 parts by Dr. Kent Hovind. I recommend you watch it. You can find it through netflix. Also, read something by Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells and a host of other Creation Scientists. Also, I read many articles, books, and watched many videos by prominent evolutionists and they always leave me with a thousand other questions.
You wrote "I have no problem with the offering of both sides, then let the student decide," which means you are probably an uneducated ignorant fucktard. There is only one correct explanation for every observed natural phenomena: therefore there is no such thing as "both sides" when it comes to explaining the diversity of life on Earth.
But there is no 'other side.' No one has come up with any legitimate evidence that could be used to create a "theory of creation."
And there is no decision to make in science. We don't teach creationism along side evolution for the same reason we don't teach astronomy and astrology together. Children should not be fed false information in school. Any decisions to be made ae made in the real academic arena, with considerable debate among scientists. Not in schools among uneducated children.
Thing is, there is no controversy. Creationism and Intelligent design have both been overturned in the lab and the courtroom.
Aside from that, whats the point in teaching Creationism anyway? After the teacher says "God did it" a few times, what else will be left? It'll be the easiest A the kids will get.
For most of human history, education did not operate like a factory. Students were tutored, not forced to fit pre-built molds. Individuality was cherished, not viewed with fear. Teachers and students alike were on a quest for learning.
This helped us understand the source of the problem. Modern culture, influenced by naturalism and its assertion that man has no soul, views man as an animal subject to heredity and environment.
Naturalism views education as training or conditioning. Humans, it says, don't need to be tutored any more than does a dog; they need to undergo behavior modification. More recently naturalism has come to depict man as machine; man needs to be programmed, as computers are programmed.
You learn by reading thoroughly and deeply in preparation for class. You learn by discussing the texts with other outstanding students, led by a tutor who asks rather than tells, who prods you to think carefully. This is what Darwin has taken away what Scott would replace science with. Text books designed to take away your ability to think.
But they have been brain washed FFF they don't even realize it. But we are on our way back. More and more schools are opening their doors and challenging the idol worship of naturalism.
How am I being dishonest? Creationism is not science. While there are flaws in Evolutionary theory, it's also the theory with the most evidence in it's favor. If the schools want to add a Religion and Philosophy class to the curriculum, I would be all for it.
By the way, Theory can also mean principal. The theory of relativity (E = MC*2) is not actually a theory anymore. The word theory has 2 meanings.
True science. We would start by throwing the textbooks out and replace them with the original books. Copernius, Bacon, Gallieo, Lavorisier, Berg, Schihdewolf, Bateson and George Mivart to start
Your missing the point, by producing them in textbooks they can tell you what the answer's are even if the evidence doesn't support it. It is behavioral modification they have stole your ability for critical thinking Scott is fully aware of this.
@MirabiliaMania Evolution has been tested and made predictions repeatedly.
It is used by geologists to age strata, it predicted where chromosomes would be joined on human DNA to account for differences with ape DNA. it tells us how species diverge from common ancestors.
Your other definitions are even more nuts.
If something cannot be measured in any-way-whatsoever then it is not science.
Ie, ID has no supporting data or predictive power at all.
It is in fact as the courts have ruled, a religion
@marsCubed Darwinism, like any mathematical system, is based on a set of premises that are taken without proof.hey claim to make accurate predictions with respect to reality using their theory and I admit the purely logical inferences of Darwin’s ideas are at least tenable. The supposed cause is two fold: blind luck and brutal necessity.
@marsCubed Also to make predictions The Darwinian thesis does not even qualify as a bona fide hypothesis since it can make no predictions, the essential feature that distinguishes an hypothesis from a mere notion.
I have thought about all the things you mention for the past quarter century and published my conclusions. Science is discovery and that is all it has ever been. Mathematics was always there, waiting to be discovered and it always existed independent of the human condition. I believe that to be true for all of science. The trouble came when some decided they knew the cause of both ontogeny and phylogeny and erected artificial, untenable hypotheses as explanations.
Forget education and give all kids bibles in school. Belief can be called "fact.," to the point that belief won't even be an issue. Belief won't be required, for they'll be told that they should think this.
This needs to happen so that big corporations can get stupid, cheap labor without having to go Third World countries.
With god in control, I never have to fear that nobody will be around to ask me if I want fries with that. Paper or plastic? Glad you asked, oh child of god.
I am ashamed of my country, and the TEN YEARS of "christianity classes" that children have, from the age of 6-15. Biology is taught in 7th grade, after several years of indoctrination (My Life With Religion, in my channel). Im working to try and go against this in Denmark and get religion out of our schools.
Really? Denmark comes in 3rd (after Sweden and Vietnam) on the Zuckerman religiosity chart that's going around... I don't doubt your words, but perhaps the airing of the conflicting ideas has a net secularizing effect, even if a few credulous kids buy into it?
This is one of the arguments for early comparative religion courses in more fundamentalist cultures. It's really an integral part of history for most Western nations, and probably bad to avoid completely (e.g. Galileo, Crusades, etc.)
I object to the title "Teaching Creationism in the Schools." It is impossible to teach Creationism: there is nothing about Creationism that can be taught except perhaps why it is wrong. For one to teach Creationism one must first have a body of evidence showing Creationism is true.
Theory doesn't mean "guess." A theory is the explanation for all the evidence we have. Nothing in science ever proogresses past becoming a theory, so you stance "it's only a theory makes no sense." Evolution is a scientific theory, and creationism is not, and from the looks of it, never will be. Simple as that
The mountain of fossil evidence, genetic evidence, direct observation of living organism, applications to bioengineering and the translation of the basic principle to machine learning techniques and mechanical engineering does indeed go on and on.
Its good to have a explanation of life that is accountable to real scrutiny and is so widely applicable, isn't it?
Lol wtf was that fire graphic? Guys, if you don't have the budget for good special fx, please, for the love of pandas, DON'T TRY. No graphics are better than bad graphics.
For me its not enough to defend science from creationism. This is an assault on science by those who are willing to plumb the depths of intellectual dishonesty in order to get their way. There needs to be strong legal repercussions for being caught out employing such underhanded tactics.
I remove my hat and talk a bow to Dr. Scott et al. at the NCSE. All congratulations go to you for attaining the Steve Gould prize. I continue to watch this channel and browse the NCSE regularly for updates. Thank you for keeping science in the science classroom, and for helping to mould young minds with responsibility.
Excellent work! But there is still much to be doen. I think with the number of kids who use this particular medium that the NCSE needs a full-time presence on YT. There are alot of us gifted amatuers out here, but if they could come up with a specific curricula (other than talkorgins) or maybe get some subject matter experts out here? Make make more inroads in our wired society.
that's a badass keyboard at 3:06 o.o
Frann182 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution is an absolute disgrace to science.
Objects never order anything, mutations never order anything and natural selection will only select what has already been ordered.
Evolution is so irrational that it should be removed from all classrooms.
watch?v=HoKVVYJ8KJM
JungleJargon 4 months ago
Smart lady. Funny how creationism is rearing its ugly head again. I really thought that the majority of people now believed in evolution. I never doubted it, even though I had a religious upbringing. I've been atheist ever since I learned about evolution in school, when I was in 5th grade. I'm Canadian, though, people here are less inclined to be hard-core about the bible.
nancy6ify 5 months ago
I am an atheist, and Eugenie Scott is my goddess.
dimefeet 7 months ago
What i dont get is, why do these states feel that science teachers can properly teach theology? I mean, if someone wants to learn science, they dont go to a priest. At least i would hope not. So why would students go to a science teacher to learn the bible? How much more ass-backwards can Christianity get? lol.
JabberCT 7 months ago
So... people want to teach christian creationism in school... what about buddhism and Scientology's story of where people came from
StateCCM 8 months ago
Comment removed
StateCCM 8 months ago
NCSE will be there until the Right Wing takes away all funding.
baxtar1963 8 months ago
scientific claims are falsifiable, creationism or ID is not.
In science you always start with the null hypothesis and only reject the null hypothesis if the evidence leads you to do so. In ID they start with a presupposition and then look for "evidence" that supports their claim (usually utilizing logical fallacies like argument from ignorance). The whole concept is the antithesis of science and a farce. Any scientist who proposes ID should be stripped of their PhD's and publicly ridiculed.
AnXtheist 9 months ago
@AnXtheist
What about the religions that have a totally different story of creationism? Should the schools talk about them to? For example L Ron Hubbard's origin of humanity says we're actually aliens. Can you prove that your ID concept has more evidence than Xenu's story?
Evolution is based on reason and evidence.
Creationism is based on faith alone with zero evidence.
StateCCM 8 months ago
@StateCCM I don't understand why you are saying "your ID concept" as I am an atheist and agree with you 100%. Did you misread my comment??
AnXtheist 7 months ago
Where are they now? They are passing bills allowing ID to be brought back left and right. They just sneak it in in a different form. Now they are making it legal for a science teacher to discuss ID. With that, a biased teacher will skew everything in the class.
cutes22 9 months ago
Jesus Christ Is God
1. Jesus Christ fulfills o-v-e-r 200 Old Testament Messianic Prophecies ( Micah 5:2; etc.) Google Messianic Prophecies fulfilled by Jesus.
2. Jesus Christ makes 30 “I AM” statements in the Gospel of John.
ex: “… for unless you believe that I am, you shall die in your sins.” (John 8:24)
Check the Gospel of John in the New Testament.
3. 17 Secular sources confirm that Jesus Christ walked the earth (Celsus, Tacitus, Lucian, etc.) Google Secular sources for Jesus.
GsliMaIiy 11 months ago
@GsliMaIiy The Bible proves nothing. The evidence that the Bible has been edited multiple times is insurmountable. Its easy to fulfill prophecy when you can revise history. Celsus was an outspoken critic of Jesus and Christianity, and mounted a very convincing attack on the facts presented in the Bible. Tacitus was a historian, but not an eyewitness. His knowledge of Jesus was limited to what the christians at the time said about him. Same with Lucian, who mocked christians for their ignorance.
DieFatorLiveThin 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GsliMaIiy
Send me your address and I will send you money for a psychiatrist.
tellnet 10 months ago
@GsliMaIiy The jewish messiah is suppose to fulfill only 23 messianic prophecies, not 200, not 300, just 23 and jesus didn't fulfill any of them. All the people you are claiming to be secular sources are as false as your religion. All of them were born after the so-called crucifixion and cannot be used as sources for any account.
Come back when you have more reliable sources that haven't been debunked already.
Testure34 10 months ago
@GsliMaIiy
1: Name them and detail how they precisely relate. Detail the process involved.
2: Other tha Jesus was suffering from a schizophrenic disorder, state and detail what "I am " actually proves...
3: Celsus, Tacitus and Lucian were NOT contemporaries. And there is not one shred of evidence that they knew exactly whom they were talking about. There is no name mentioned. No origin of anything. Juust a vague mention of a charismatic figure. Of whom during that time there were multitudes.
philster611 10 months ago
Creationism/Intelligent Design is a denial of all we have accomplished in the understanding of our Universe. It is based on the need of theists to perpetuate the enslavement to an unverifiable, malicious, and capricious tyrant/fiction.
Evolution is based on sound reasoning, evidence, and logic. It is a hallmark of technologic advancement and social justice.
You decide? Oh Please.
drfoxcourt 11 months ago
ITS A FUCKING GUESS FROM A SEVERAL-THOUSAND YEAR OLD BOOK! LETS NOT TEACH KIDS YOU'RE MADE OF SPIT AND DIRT!
CHAOSin8bits 1 year ago
Once we become a 3rd world nation, only then will we re evaluate our stupid darwinistic curricullums, and start to repent for our mistakes. Mrs scott is the perfect example of why this country is falling. God is not with us anymore
mironyuk 1 year ago
@mironyuk Thats right . God thinks you are fat retards who dont understand or respect science , which is why you are handing over your technical lead to the Asians. And its DOCTOR Scott to you ,tractor boy .
ilikezappa 1 year ago
@mironyuk
Since you hate science and the scientific method so much, get off the computer and stop using all that the scientific method has given us. And when you go into the hospital just pray instead of getting modern life-saving treatment, and see how far you get....
karlkarlkarl1234 1 year ago
These creationists haven't taken a peep outside of the US. If they had, they'd know that nobody's joining them. Why? Because no other developed western country is as fundamentalist christian as the US.
Then what they do is try and argue science against scientists. They do it for so long that they create the illusion of a debate and trick themselves into thinking ID has nothing to do with religion.
They fake PHDs, they profit hugely, some get thrown in jail for fraud...damn they are stubborn.
ihaterobbie123 1 year ago 2
First we had "Happy Days" , then" Beverly Hillbillies" , now America has come up with "Creationist Street" A story about everyday folk living in the worlds greatest democracy who come out with the most hilarious stuff. Yeeeeheew I must tune in to channel 13 after I get back from Science class . It helps me relax. I like the Ted Haggard Character Gay Bob and his pet T Rex. " How comes he got them big fangs paw? He dont want to finish his turnips ,phoooooatang"
ilikezappa 1 year ago
No problem. If creationism is taught in schools, there must be a special class for it -" Comparative creation mythology", after all every civilization in the past has a creation story too and all of them are different so they too should be included - to be fair, of course. Personally, I like the apache creation story the best, with the giant turtle rising out of the ground with the first people on its back.
LoraSinger 1 year ago
Hey guys, thanks for not censoring your comments and ratings... unlike the creationists, you're not afraid of your ideas being challenged and debated in a free and open forum
intriguedgorilla 1 year ago
Go creationism. Why the heck are we teaching our kids we evolved from gas, when a more likely explanation is that God created us. We didn't evolve from apes, let alone from hydrogen and helium. Neo-darwinian evolution is being taught as fact when, 150 years after it was proposed, we still haven't found the evidence Darwin expected us to find. Teach THAT to our children.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 No one says we evolved from apes. And there is mountains of evidence. Don't lie to yourself.
asargentb 1 year ago
@asargentb
Whenever a creationist says "We evolved from apes", please just automatically take it to mean "We evolved from an ape-like creature" mkay? It's shorter to write "We evolved from apes" than "We have an ape as a common ancestor".
The mountains of what you call "evidence" is all circumstantial.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 That's just a cop out for whenever people don't know what they are talking about.
Circumstantial? Please, give an example.
asargentb 1 year ago
@asargentb
lol. ironically, it's you who don't know what you're talking about. You're debating that we didn't evolve from apes - but you probably can't define "Ape" and yet you'll also probably say that we are apes ourselves and that our nearest ancestors were apes themselves and... what the heck...our common ancestor was probably an ape himself.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 Thanks for dodging the question and instead making baseless assumption about what I probably think. Stop wasting my time.
asargentb 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 The cardhouse of your Creatard belief falls into pieces through the irrefutablyfically, ad libitum reproducibly provable FACTUM that Earth is 4...4.51 Billion Ys old.
Creationists' dishoneest objections refuted GOOGLE
talkorigins isochron dating
And LEARN about the permanently integrated retroviral genomes as well as about the human chromosom nr.2
You simply DESPISE the inconvenient facts bcz you BELIEVE that they interfere with a Creator. That they DO NOT in the slightest
kleenex3000 1 year ago
@kleenex3000
What I despise is atheists jumping onto the evolution bandwagon and using it to further their agendas. Agreed, I have nothing to fear if we evolved from proteins in a primordial soup. But, if atheists want to denounce creationism, they'll need to wait a long time till science gets its theory of abiogenesis together, then proves it. So far, we haven't even proven a common descent to an ape-like creature, let alone all the way back to hydrogen and helium.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 Whether you like it or not, you are an evolved mutated Primate, with a n=23 chromosome set including a chr. Nr.2 that it originated from the fusion of to ancestral chromosomes in the set n=24.
Chimps and Bonobos can be considered our cousins ist das nicht FASZINIEREND?
Regrettably, you brain is infected with faith-psychosis,it harbors at least one Alien that it distorts the gyri of your brain. The ORIGIN [A]biogenesis has nothing to do with EVOLUTION that it is a Fact.
kleenex3000 1 year ago
@kleenex3000
No, you can't say "Whether you like it or not.." That's just sheer arrogance. Look, if it's all so undisputable, why were there scams like the Piltdown man? Why do people go to extreme lengths to scam the scientific community. Why are people still looking for the elusive definitive missing link? Because, there isn't enough evidence to categorically tell me "Whether you like it or not". You can tell me that about the grass being green or the sun being hot.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 Actually I CAN say this, (bcz it is scientifically, irrefutably PROVEN) until the NEXT occasion is due that I go into myself and perform the sacred action as that I worship my PenusChristus[=ANOINTED] that he resurrects in my crotch and spends the milkey river of life...
EACH and EVERY fossil IS a "missing link"
THe FACTS are INCONVENIENT... but for those people that they do not APPRECIATE them, bcz they COLLIDE with their Aliens in their brain.
kleenex3000 1 year ago
@playlist1
Why billions of people on earth still believe in gods...Many gods. Many religions. Many creation versions. Many legends. Many conspiracy theories. Why, why...?
Well, because no more than 5-10% of the people of the present times, evolved enough to have their brains functioning properly. That's why.
We are who we are. Basically primates at certain stage of the human development.
Creationism: Total degradation of humanity by believing in 'Puff, the magic dragon' in the skies!
MrJurekGG 1 year ago
@kleenex3000
Too bad you're not a proper scientist. Just an parasitic atheist feeding off the parts of science that you like and giving science a bad name in the process.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 Behold, THAT I am actually a Scientist. Sorry to burst your bubble. I researched in the field of certain inherited disorders of metabolism iow: MUTATIONS.
It is just a matter of how much I care worthful to bother myself, that I can refute you, on each point.
You Creatards always hope to "retrieve the weak points" to only prove that they have no clue as HOW scientific papers cumbersomely "EVOLVE"
kleenex3000 1 year ago
@kleenex3000
lol, sniff this arrogance will you? What do they say...pride comes before a fall?
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 "giving science a bad name"
Your strategy is called TOTSCHLAGARGUMENT (silencing / thought-terminating-cliché) it is meaningles BECAUSE my utterings do not influence any scientific fortcoming WHERE the "hard data" are being scientifically created namely the laboratories.
kleenex3000 1 year ago
@kleenex3000
Might be a good idea for you to review your utterings before posting. Are you a native English speaker?
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 FYI: So that I perceive that you are Catholic - do I have to school you, that RCC and LutheranProtestant Churches both ACCEPT the irrefutible FACT of Evolution of the life beings. How dare you have your own brain on this issue (rhetorically asking)
kleenex3000 1 year ago
@kleenex3000
You need to school yourself on humility. That'd be a good starting point. God help us if you're an example of what scientists of the future are going to be like.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
Go Girl ! Squash these baccy chewing retards with your righteous quest to defend respect for the truth .
ilikezappa 1 year ago
@ilikezappa
Im a baccy chewing creatard and proud of it.
pbaylis1 1 year ago
@pbaylis1 Is that you Mrs Palin ? Ok girl ! I love Flatt and Scruggs and own a Banjo and a 69 Impala
Prefer Camel cigarettes to Chewing and prefer the evidence to religion tho
ilikezappa 1 year ago
"NCSE is going to be there until the last fire is out."
-
Eugenie Rocks !!
nolobede 1 year ago
Actually, what was ruled in Dover was ID was not "methodological naturalism". For those of you who do not know what that means, it's, ""nature is all there is, and all basic truths are truths of nature." So what was ruled in Dover was ID is not science because we think ID deals with something that is not in nature and we define in science that nature is all there is.
Less than a brilliant conclusion eh?
gcnengineer 1 year ago
Evolution is both theory and fact, just like gravity.
Staldren 1 year ago
@Staldren
That evolution happens, is fact.
The theory of evolution is an explanation of how.
There IS no viable argument against evolution as fact.
nolobede 1 year ago
creationism is a religious term, and since the united states supposably baned religious tolerance inside public schools that means creationism should not be taught in schools!! religion should stay in the church and no where else! plus evolution is a fact among scientists and its not by any mean to do with religion but only science.
monarchking666 1 year ago
3:05 Wtf is wrong with his key board?
nocturnalsamurai1000 1 year ago
@nocturnalsamurai1000
It is intelligently designed.
Cab0cl0 1 year ago
Heroes.
quasimojo8 2 years ago 21
Teaching creationism is UNETHICAL!
I have never studied in US and outside youtube I HAVE NEVER HEARD ABOUT CREATIONISM, more than 45 minutes.
Believe me! that is pure dirt! Ok, God it magic wad created all the stuff!
I believe in God, but for his own sake! since Hypocrates times he has put him out of stage!
Science is science and religion is religion: give God the stuff of God and Caesar the stuff of Caesar!
hedleypanama 2 years ago 21
This has been flagged as spam show
@hedleypanama If you believe in the God of the bible, you are mandated to proselytize to everyone. Wake up.
AsSomedayItMayHappen 1 year ago
I cannot believe that some creationists try and use science to disprove evolution. Talk about being out of your depth!
ffsnametaken 2 years ago 2
Honestly though, I'd love to have creationism in the classroom... I've always wanted to waste time during each and every class by starting arguements and debates of creationism vs. evolution :D
Yes, put creationism in the classrooms... and no one will learn anything, science or religious, lol!!
HypnoPants 2 years ago
Look, lets just make it simple...
The rules and standards that MUST be abided by in science for a theory to exist... every "actual science" follows these rules and standards in order to form their theories... that being said, if you do not believe one science is correct... then you must also believe that NO science is correct!
Evolutionary Theories follow all the same rules and standards that every other science followed... to deny it is to deny all science.
HypnoPants 2 years ago 3
I can't believe evolution is taught in some schools in the USA!
ultamatepower 2 years ago
The reason is because the atheistic/Darwinist have promoted it. They haven't a shred of evidence to support their claims.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
What we know for certain is that the fossil record does not support that scenario.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
I can't believe that creationism is taught in some schools in the USA!
turxxx 2 years ago 2
Intelligent Design=Creationism=Religion.
Bf2009 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends
hellofaname 2 years ago
Point is I have done a lot of research because I love learning, about science, history, etc. So don't use the argument that Christians don't like to learn. I honestly am pretty sure by your ignorant comments below, that you have not done nearly enough research on the subject, even on your own side. I recomment you do an honest look into researching your own side of the issue, then look into the plenty of Creation scientist points. It may take a little effort to do all this. Hope you don't mind.
cdogg1121 2 years ago
Burymegames and to any of the others who have commented likewise in believing there is no Creation theory. I watched a 17 hour seminar broken up into 7 parts by Dr. Kent Hovind. I recommend you watch it. You can find it through netflix. Also, read something by Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells and a host of other Creation Scientists. Also, I read many articles, books, and watched many videos by prominent evolutionists and they always leave me with a thousand other questions.
cdogg1121 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Actually, evolution was never omitted from any Kansas text or curriculum. To say so, is just wrong.
What really happened, was that the "other side" was added. No big deal, as this was the way most textbooks read, 40 years and back.
I have no problem with the offering of both sides, then let the student decide.
Automeris 2 years ago
You wrote "I have no problem with the offering of both sides, then let the student decide," which means you are probably an uneducated ignorant fucktard. There is only one correct explanation for every observed natural phenomena: therefore there is no such thing as "both sides" when it comes to explaining the diversity of life on Earth.
Desertphile 2 years ago 4
Ramen Desert.
These uneducated creationists think a scientific theory is just some hypothesis, hence they refer to it as *still*, or *only* a theory.
And you're right, there isn't a *both sides* to this stupid debate, because there isn't a creation theory.
OnTheFritz602 2 years ago 2
But there is no 'other side.' No one has come up with any legitimate evidence that could be used to create a "theory of creation."
And there is no decision to make in science. We don't teach creationism along side evolution for the same reason we don't teach astronomy and astrology together. Children should not be fed false information in school. Any decisions to be made ae made in the real academic arena, with considerable debate among scientists. Not in schools among uneducated children.
BuryMeInGames 2 years ago
To coin a phrase I've heard used many times.
"Teach the controversy"
Thing is, there is no controversy. Creationism and Intelligent design have both been overturned in the lab and the courtroom.
Aside from that, whats the point in teaching Creationism anyway? After the teacher says "God did it" a few times, what else will be left? It'll be the easiest A the kids will get.
acronus 2 years ago
Being a little dishonest there? Evolution as people like to call macroevolution has failed the acid test. It's a failed theory.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
It's failed everything.
Hi MirabiliaMania.
FirstFreedomFighter 2 years ago
How is it going FFF can you believe this crap?
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
No I can't. These evolutionists want to make it sound like they know everything.
They don't.
FirstFreedomFighter 2 years ago
For most of human history, education did not operate like a factory. Students were tutored, not forced to fit pre-built molds. Individuality was cherished, not viewed with fear. Teachers and students alike were on a quest for learning.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
Now it's brainwashing the students to believe in Darwinism and evolution.
FirstFreedomFighter 2 years ago
This helped us understand the source of the problem. Modern culture, influenced by naturalism and its assertion that man has no soul, views man as an animal subject to heredity and environment.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
Naturalism views education as training or conditioning. Humans, it says, don't need to be tutored any more than does a dog; they need to undergo behavior modification. More recently naturalism has come to depict man as machine; man needs to be programmed, as computers are programmed.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
You learn by reading thoroughly and deeply in preparation for class. You learn by discussing the texts with other outstanding students, led by a tutor who asks rather than tells, who prods you to think carefully. This is what Darwin has taken away what Scott would replace science with. Text books designed to take away your ability to think.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
But they have been brain washed FFF they don't even realize it. But we are on our way back. More and more schools are opening their doors and challenging the idol worship of naturalism.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
Why is it that school text books overlook the importance of the Cambrian explosion?
It's obvious that they are trying to hide something from the students.
FirstFreedomFighter 2 years ago
The Cambrian Explosion is one of the first thing they teach you about, because it is important. They were all sea animals at that time.
gregrutz 2 years ago
How am I being dishonest? Creationism is not science. While there are flaws in Evolutionary theory, it's also the theory with the most evidence in it's favor. If the schools want to add a Religion and Philosophy class to the curriculum, I would be all for it.
By the way, Theory can also mean principal. The theory of relativity (E = MC*2) is not actually a theory anymore. The word theory has 2 meanings.
acronus 2 years ago 2
I hate to tell you it doesn't even qualify as a theory, It has no predictive value.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
What should we be teaching the kids in school then?
acronus 2 years ago
True science. We would start by throwing the textbooks out and replace them with the original books. Copernius, Bacon, Gallieo, Lavorisier, Berg, Schihdewolf, Bateson and George Mivart to start
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
A lot of the science curriculum is already based on the works of the mentioned scientists above.
Is it all science in the school that you have a problem with, or just biology and evolutionary theory?
acronus 2 years ago
Your missing the point, by producing them in textbooks they can tell you what the answer's are even if the evidence doesn't support it. It is behavioral modification they have stole your ability for critical thinking Scott is fully aware of this.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
Ok, give an example of something that is taught in science class, but doesn't have supporting evidence.
Chemistry and physics are pretty straight forward and provable with repeatable experiments.
acronus 2 years ago
I think you've got a point in that a lot of the stuff that's part of the high school curriculum is more well established than evolutionary theory.
Mortison77577 2 years ago
I predict you will not find a bunny fossil buried with the dinosaurs.
gregrutz 2 years ago
@MirabiliaMania Evolution has been tested and made predictions repeatedly.
It is used by geologists to age strata, it predicted where chromosomes would be joined on human DNA to account for differences with ape DNA. it tells us how species diverge from common ancestors.
Your other definitions are even more nuts.
If something cannot be measured in any-way-whatsoever then it is not science.
Ie, ID has no supporting data or predictive power at all.
It is in fact as the courts have ruled, a religion
marsCubed 1 year ago
@marsCubed Darwinism, like any mathematical system, is based on a set of premises that are taken without proof.hey claim to make accurate predictions with respect to reality using their theory and I admit the purely logical inferences of Darwin’s ideas are at least tenable. The supposed cause is two fold: blind luck and brutal necessity.
MirabiliaMania 1 year ago
@marsCubed Also to make predictions The Darwinian thesis does not even qualify as a bona fide hypothesis since it can make no predictions, the essential feature that distinguishes an hypothesis from a mere notion.
MirabiliaMania 1 year ago
I have thought about all the things you mention for the past quarter century and published my conclusions. Science is discovery and that is all it has ever been. Mathematics was always there, waiting to be discovered and it always existed independent of the human condition. I believe that to be true for all of science. The trouble came when some decided they knew the cause of both ontogeny and phylogeny and erected artificial, untenable hypotheses as explanations.
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
There is now and never was a tangible identifiable cause for either ontogeny or phylogeny that can be identified with the environment in any way. JAD
MirabiliaMania 2 years ago
Forget education and give all kids bibles in school. Belief can be called "fact.," to the point that belief won't even be an issue. Belief won't be required, for they'll be told that they should think this.
This needs to happen so that big corporations can get stupid, cheap labor without having to go Third World countries.
With god in control, I never have to fear that nobody will be around to ask me if I want fries with that. Paper or plastic? Glad you asked, oh child of god.
TheOtherSide100 2 years ago
I am ashamed of my country, and the TEN YEARS of "christianity classes" that children have, from the age of 6-15. Biology is taught in 7th grade, after several years of indoctrination (My Life With Religion, in my channel). Im working to try and go against this in Denmark and get religion out of our schools.
Qieth 2 years ago 3
Really? Denmark comes in 3rd (after Sweden and Vietnam) on the Zuckerman religiosity chart that's going around... I don't doubt your words, but perhaps the airing of the conflicting ideas has a net secularizing effect, even if a few credulous kids buy into it?
This is one of the arguments for early comparative religion courses in more fundamentalist cultures. It's really an integral part of history for most Western nations, and probably bad to avoid completely (e.g. Galileo, Crusades, etc.)
tehinfidel 2 years ago
Keep religion in the churches and out of the schools! FFRF.
caveman73 2 years ago 2
I object to the title "Teaching Creationism in the Schools." It is impossible to teach Creationism: there is nothing about Creationism that can be taught except perhaps why it is wrong. For one to teach Creationism one must first have a body of evidence showing Creationism is true.
Desertphile 2 years ago 3
That is a very biased comment!
ryanbert 2 years ago
"That is a very biased comment!"
Science education is supposed to be biased, idiot.
Desertphile 2 years ago 2
lol, here here! Well put.
Swidhelm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
We must first find a body of evidence showing evolution is true.
Just goes on and on, doesn't it?
Automeris 2 years ago
We got that already: it's called "Evolutionary Theory." Ever hear of it?
Now then: where is the evidence for Creationism?
Desertphile 2 years ago 6
Yes, Desert, you just said it; "THEORY."
If you do not even want to look at the theory of creation, at least you admid evolution is still only a theory as well.
Automeris 2 years ago
Theory: a large body of observed facts that correctly explains a natural phenomena.
As for "the theory of creation," that is called Big Bang Cosmology and I already looked at it.
Now then: produce a theory of Creationism: be the first on the planet to do so.
Desertphile 2 years ago 3
You don't know what a theory is.
Theory doesn't mean "guess." A theory is the explanation for all the evidence we have. Nothing in science ever proogresses past becoming a theory, so you stance "it's only a theory makes no sense." Evolution is a scientific theory, and creationism is not, and from the looks of it, never will be. Simple as that
BuryMeInGames 2 years ago
The mountain of fossil evidence, genetic evidence, direct observation of living organism, applications to bioengineering and the translation of the basic principle to machine learning techniques and mechanical engineering does indeed go on and on.
Its good to have a explanation of life that is accountable to real scrutiny and is so widely applicable, isn't it?
websnarf 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Still does NOT prove evolution any more than creation.
Automeris 2 years ago
What do you propose as a standard of proof that would satisfy you?
Science only has facts, evidence, test, predictions, explanation, and understanding to offer. What do you propose we add to that?
websnarf 2 years ago 2
hey at 00:31 that lady i saw her do a talk at a college i saw the vid of it on youtube
ebs2323 2 years ago
God is fake, only Harry Potter can give you eternal life, get over it.
DoctorE0 2 years ago 8
On the back cover of every Harry Potter book in small letters is the word 'fiction'.
Every creationist book should have these same letters in large print on the front cover.
yourcamden 2 years ago 7
I completely agree. Creationist books should have "WARNING: THIS IS NOT SCIENCE" on it.
wrongwayup 2 years ago
Or "WARNING: EXTREME BULLSHIT AHEAD"
Sqirril 2 years ago
Yes including bibles, korans, etc etc
GowanBray 2 years ago
Wooo Hooo. GOOO NCSE!
beastlt12 2 years ago
kansas... wtf, what a backwards place
MilletGtr 2 years ago 2
Lol wtf was that fire graphic? Guys, if you don't have the budget for good special fx, please, for the love of pandas, DON'T TRY. No graphics are better than bad graphics.
Hooya2 2 years ago
They do accept donations...
tehinfidel 2 years ago
Agree. Much as I respect their efforts, that fire graphic *was* pretty cheesy.
bagelboi66 2 years ago 2
she's old lol. not hot. i smell a trollll!!!!!!!!
H3Serpent 2 years ago
She's hot
;-)
notbendable 2 years ago 6
Yes, she is.
Kashrlyyk 2 years ago
For me its not enough to defend science from creationism. This is an assault on science by those who are willing to plumb the depths of intellectual dishonesty in order to get their way. There needs to be strong legal repercussions for being caught out employing such underhanded tactics.
554466551 2 years ago 7
Keep up the good fight!
Saukko31 2 years ago 4
Great video!!! Where in the world can I get a keyboard like the one in this video at 3:06???
hoard88 2 years ago
What will be next in public schools? Released Time Scientific Education trailers?
I say that because in California we have Released Time Christian Education trailers hanging out around schools.
katey1dog 2 years ago
I remove my hat and talk a bow to Dr. Scott et al. at the NCSE. All congratulations go to you for attaining the Steve Gould prize. I continue to watch this channel and browse the NCSE regularly for updates. Thank you for keeping science in the science classroom, and for helping to mould young minds with responsibility.
Politicimo 2 years ago 6
Much respect.
PTurchan1 2 years ago 3
We need more like you. Thank you!
chodaboy51500 2 years ago 3
Excellent work! But there is still much to be doen. I think with the number of kids who use this particular medium that the NCSE needs a full-time presence on YT. There are alot of us gifted amatuers out here, but if they could come up with a specific curricula (other than talkorgins) or maybe get some subject matter experts out here? Make make more inroads in our wired society.
magick205 2 years ago 2
Yay NCSE! And congrats to Eugenie on her Stephen Jay Gould Prize!
unaka2012 2 years ago 7
Thanks Genie, Josh, and everyone else at the NCSE for standing up for reason and science for decades.
tehinfidel 2 years ago 8