Added: 5 years ago
From: akg41470
Views: 4,748
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (80)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • God i hate that bitch!!

  • Because she was mistaken as to how old they said the earth was in her days of school, doesn't prove that the earth is actually that old. 

  • lol they're saying not even scientists get it right, leave the science to the christians? wow.. strong argument. i mean, obviously they have all the answers, testable or not. oh did i mention islam, jews and christians worship the same god? they can't even get their own stories straight lol

  • the bible has never needed change, bull shit. how about galieo the church refused to exept his theories and charged him with treason, until they finaly realized he was right and CHANGED THE BIBLE.

  • Damn, the song at the beggining is catchy!

  • I have this weird sex fantasy; P.Z. Meyer's, Stephen J. Ghould and Richard Dawkins fuck this stupid bitch six ways from the sabbath in all holes, all at once while rebutting all of her claims. Am I alone with this?

  • I love that she smashes science and then uses it to say things are complex....it really hurts my head.

  • That old bitch was annoying...up her..

  • nice vid, about the last part i would of said that for the lava to be 20 years old it would have to magically appear from nowhere but the that small stream of lava came from the mantle where it could stirring around for millions probably billions of years

    but i dont know much about the mantle and geology

    but you still owned that bitch hard

  • sorry i stopped prematurely thinking it was the end

    but i am sure you already realized that "last" part was about mount st helens

  • I bet she trusts the science of modern medicine even though early doctors thought a lil green frog in the stomach caused our ailments

  • I was SO searching for something like this about that particular series. I was close to doing it myself. You just made my night.

  • "The bible never needed changing"

    Said by a woman...

    (not discriminating them, it's just that women weren't allowed to say anything in the bible)

  • Two minutes into it now... Where are they getting their information? "The bible has never needed changing" - Come on, what do people do nowadays? They ignore the violence in the bible because that would make them hypocritical. People change it themselves by ignoring certain parts.

    And science proving the bible 100%? That is just pure gold...

  • If our textbooks never changed, the earth would be flat, and every civilization that was even slightly influential (and some that weren't) would be the center of the universe... Hmmm... Changes necessary?? Nah...

  • What worries me is that she might convince someone....

  • Haha, good videos. Honestly I'm not longer interested in debating creationists, I just laugh at them. They sit in their silly little superstitious world of gods and talking snakes and gardens and assume that they have a firm grasp of science.

    They also don't seem to realize that this ongoing debate over creation and evolution is exclusively centered in America. If this lady made one of these videos in Norway or Switzerland, she would be laughed at.

  • Trust me, we may not live in the US, but we're laughing nonetheless.

  • Oh I know you do. Particularly in Northern Europe the last vestiges of Christian fundamentalism are steadily fading away and you guys generally don't have to deal with the nonsense we have to put up with.

    Odd how when we established our Separation of Church and State, it was meant to avoid the problems with religious interference with government that was prevalent in Europe at the time. Now look how the tables have turned

  • Fudgeya: I take it your in the U.S.? Why dont people stand up to these nutters and prove them all liars? I heard this crap is being taught in U.S schools but surely there is something people can do about it and debunk these cretins once and for all? I mean their theories couldnt stand up to the most basic science and could be proved wrong by a preschool child. Why is it being allowed in schools?

  • Because a good portion of this country's culture is deeply entrenched in puritanical, fundamentalist Christian thought. This dates back to the English Puritans who left looking for a safe haven. As such, fundamentalist Christian has lot's of influence particular in rural areas. This video was obviously made in the South.

  • I'm from Norway and you are absolutely right. I'm laughing of all these creationist videos, but I'm also very conserned. The U.S is the biggest influence in the world and I'm stuned that so meny americans have this delution about sience and evloution being a conspiracy.

  • We are totally aware of this, and we're all working on it. Good thing for us that the government in general is on our side (secular constitution and all), so we've got good things to stand on. It holds up in the courts. It's just the popular opinion left to convince, that's all.

  • just hijack FOX news and that's done^^

  • Wow, I never realised how lucky I was to live in Europe, and not get preached to every second of my life.

  • And the world wonders why americans are so nuts. Ya, religion is part of why we are so crazy. Stupid priests.

    We should genetically engineer bull elephants to trample anyone who says the word GOD.

  • Lol, is she trying to be an actress?

  • What is pathetic is not that you all rebut the creation science but that you can only SEEK truth by bashing other persons with 3rd-gradish comments/attitudes. Is it the person, or is it the idea that is the issue? There is only 1 ans. to the Earth's age & to whether you are specially created in the image of God or that you are nothing more than trousered apes. Solve these problems as adults (seek truth no matter where it goes) or play in your sandbox & fill up your diapers with do-do. GROW UP

  • The idea is always the issue, but the person promoting the idea deserves all the ridicule they get. "There is only 1 ans?" Seems like you've ALREADY decided on the conclusion -- *no matter where the truth goes*. You wanna solve these problem as adults? BRING IT ON. YouTube is entertainment. You wanna have a real debate, bring your proof of creation (not your "debunking" of evolution) and we'll talk.

  • its ok to make fun of these people because they didn't say anything worth listening too.  all of the arguments in this video have already been refuted by many people.

    if they had provided a question that hasn't already been answered a thousand times, maybe we wouldn't make fun of them

  • The Bible is awesome. Deuteronomy 25:11-12--"If two Israelite men are fighting and the wife of one tries to rescue her husband by grabbing the testicles of the other man, her hand must be cut off without pity." So, yeah. And if you want to read some other wonderful bible moments, just from 1 book...read Deu 21:18, 22:13-30, 23:ALL verses. Totally applicable. God's words truly have lasted the test of time.

  • Hey pandemos, youve just quoted my fave line from the bible. 0:) deuteronomy rocks! Jesus loves us thats why he wants us to sell our daughters into slavery and let them be raped by strangers and stone children who disobey parents. All in Deuteronomy.

  • OMG. One would think that a guy would go ape shit about them touching his wife over this.

    I don't even like the concept of worship, but if anything in this world should be worshiped it should be women. O_O

  • GJ, Ive watched most of these creationist vids, and they are painful!

    As for the dating on the lava dome, I wouldnt be surpised if they used one of the million-billion year isotope dating methods. There +/- a million years could be good to one part in a thousand. Either that or its just a shameless lie, like most the stuff in these creationist vids.

  • Can you explain polonium halos?If God created all that there is,then it would have been created mature.This would be the reason that things would appear with age.God certainly knows the future and predicted alot that is happening now,I don't have room to give you all the fulfilled prophecies,but they are amazing.

  • Polonium halos I'm sure have a good geologic explanation, but if that's all you've got to go on to "prove creation", then that's pretty weak. "Fulfilled prohpecies"? Sure. Whatever. That sure debunks evolution.

  • Look,believe what you want,but animals don't just die and automatically become fossils they have to be buried quickly.Marine fossils on tops of all the mountains in the world,millions of different animals in pockets with their bones all mixed up together,that just doesn't happen without water.The geologic column has trees running through billions of years worth of strata,trees rot and fall over,they just don't stand there for billions of years.

  • Knowing what it takes to make a fossil,shows that there would hardly be any,if not for the world wide flood.They say that water was once plentiful on Mars.Where did it go?

  • What would the "world wide flood" have to do with fossilization? It can happen with or without "massive water displacement". The water never left Mars, it just froze. What does this have to do with evolution again?

  • Sorry but, two things. Where 'o where is the evidence for a world-wide flood? Oh and you don't necessarily need to be under water for fossilisation. You do need moisture however. By the way thousands of gallons of water would most likely destroy most fossils and there would be hardly any if there was a flood.

    Secondly, WHAT THE HELL DOES WATER ON MARS HAVE TO DO WITH EVOLUTION ON EARTH??

    Stick to the damn subject.

  • Look Cliff,the reason I said Mars is because of evos like you always bellowing about no proof for a flood,instead they tout mars as having proof for water every where,but we don't see all this water,GET IT.Why don't you explain how fossils are formed!How come they are on the summit of everest.How come trees run vertically through millions or billions of years of stata?

  • Why don't you just do some Google research and find out for yourself. The answers and explanations are easy to find. I'm not going to do your research for you anymore, you're not accepting it (or at least not acknowledging that you do).

  • I did not say there was no water "ice",what I said was where did it all go!

  • Oh my GAWD can you be more dense. There WAS fluid water, then it BECAME solid water. None of it left the planet! Good god man, you are just impossible.

  • There is not enough ice to account for all the water that was supposed to be there.

  • And do you actually know that? Have you looked it up for real? I doubt it.

  • Firstly, there USED TO BE water on Mars. OK. Mars does have ICE at the poles though. It isn't that difficult. Oh and about Fossils on mountains, LEARN GEOLOGY.

    AND THERE IS NO PROOF FOR A FLOOD.

  • The evolutionist version of how marine fossils came to be on mountains is just an opinion,it is not proof.

  • It is not an opinion. It is fact that Landmasses shift. And you still fail to offer proof for a Global Flood.

  • Good job. God I hate that woman. Sometimes I feel like I want to shoot her for blatently lying and calling it the truth (I hate anyone who does that) and for being so damn smug about it.

  • Haha, I'm glad someone finally stuck it to that smug bitch

  • this methodology is based on the measurable decay of radio isotopes.  No assumptions here. 'Go back to science class.

  • Nice work!

  • As a Muslim, I find this whole debate pretty interesting, and quite honestly, amusing. It really isn't evolution vs creation, its atheism vs Christianity. Again, don't mix the idea of a creator with the Biblical account.

    Too bad the "age of living things" and "origin of living things" have become intertwined issues when in essence they aren't that related.

  • This has NOTHING to do with atheism. It has to do with an attack on the validity of SCIENCE from people who lie about it and know nothing about it. Theism has nothing to do with this.

  • A legitimately dated fossil is probably a fossil that does not contradict the teachings of the bible

  • Well, knowing that the teachings of the Bible have nothing to do with science, then I'd agree with you!

  • God help you guys

  • I'm sure he does.

  • I have two words for you: CALIBRATION CURVE. Next argument?

  • For crying out loud, read up on your history. Check the Wikipedia entry on "Age of the Earth", everything is spelled out right there.

  • Great vid! Thanks.

  • Actually... scientists had proven it was ~1.3b years old (but had theories of it being older) until the Canyon Diablo meteorite - then they had proof. It was never *2*, then *3*, then *4.5*.

    Radiometric dating is corroborated by many other fields of science, it is not a single "assumption"

  • awsome video!! encore, encore!

  • superb!

  • Nice one, I like the way it's done. These people are are like an ostrich. Has anyone responded to your responses. That TW*T venomfang is so sure of himself yet so wrong, your response said everything i wanted to, but was unable to think of! Keep up the good work.

  • Oh he's responded, but only in private - he won't have public or comment-based debate or discussions. I can tell you, it's like trying to talk to a wet noodle.

  • Did he do the thing where he selects only a tiny portion of your arguement and starts arguing over completely irrelevant semantics? That's what he would do with most of my replies, choosing to completely ignore that all my statements completely destroyed his arguements.

    I think I finally shut him up when I managed to reveal that I, as an atheist and fond proponent of science, actually know more about what's actually written in the Bible than he does.

  • Nah an Ostrich knows more about Science than these people.

  • Nice! I'm going to watch the other ones now.

  • The argument about the lava giving an erroneous date sounds suspiciously like the creationist argument everyone site seems to use of a 1803 eruption being dated to several million years. Of course, they don't bother to tell you that that dating was used to test the viability of the potassium-argon method on lava flows that had erupted in the ocean, thus preventing the free argon to escape while the magma was still liquid.

  • these videos are excellent.

    please do more soon. there are very few things better than smashing an argument of someone who has no backing to their claims!

  • good job, can't wait to see more.

    i was thinking about the lava thing she was being picky about what qualified as starting age of said lava

  • You are correct! The lava age could have come from when it was formed below the earth's surface, I suppose. Gotta look that one up and see when the "start date of rock formations" with regards to radiometric dating is valid.

  • Maybe they simple took the false rocks?

    Look at cdk007 's videos (if you don't know them already). He has some good contents on this, too.

  • Evirus made a good point. The lava could indeed be millions of years old especially if it came from beneath the surface.

  • Excellent videos. Keep them coming.

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