@Typho0n86 . adam and eve had kids the same way we do today. believing in evolution requires more faith since it contradicts with both the laws of physics and laws of probabliity and statistics.
@reynandvalenzuela WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how does evolution contradict physics and probablity? You obiously have no idea what you are talking about! and NO... the question was. how did their kids have kids??? They had 2 boys...............
OMG your saying that evolution isnt real!?!?! its time to get your head out of the sand. Its constantly and continually happening!!! Societies are built on morals through people helping on another, it is a survival technique, no god is needed for morals. Your videos are complete and utter bullshit you are truly stupid and brainwashed
@reynandvalenzuela No!!! Evolution is suported by fossils and science, and research and logic, to ignore this is totaly ignorant. And we can see it happening. There are worms in England that have Evolved to become resistant to poisens in soil and now can live in it.
Just so you all know. seeing isnt believing. Thats what Faith is for. Putting your faith in God means you accept him into your life as your Lord and Savior. God doesnt have to show himself to prove he exists. Its up to you to trust and believe in him. By his grace we were all saved and our sins have been paid for. How much more could you want than that! Honestly there is no greater gift than the love of God
Sir, your starting with the belief that we were meant to be, that this universe was designed with us in mind. A simple shift of perception will change all that.
We evolved in the environment, the environment wasn't created for us.
Your top 12 list of "proofs" for God has been dealt with many many times before. I think it's time for you to understand the facts you oppose. You seem to have no understanding of what science shows to be facts.
Your beliefs are blinding you from actual knowledge.
@metalsusa1 It is sad to see that you turn your back on someone who has saved your life and paid for your sins. He went through torture and death for us and you repay him by fighting against him? You need to open your eyes and your heart a little bit more. I pray that you will.
@KlopexD My only response is that this deity I'm turning my back on as you say knew every sin that would be committed and knew every punishment that he would dole out before the foundation of the world. At the very least God knew that I would send myself to hell by not conforming to his will before he created me. So screw your God.
Slave minded people like you will never get this analogy. Your to busy kissing Gods ass out of fear of him..... ah, I mean because you love him. Ha Ha yeah right!
You can prattle on and on about whether God exists or not. I'll go with the hypothesis that God does indeed exist.
So a God who knew the outcome before the start holds me accountable for sins he knew I would commit. God also knew before the foundation of the world that not only me, but billions of people would either not repent or be born into the wrong religion. Hell will be our final destination.
Again I ask you, ultimately how is it my fault when God already knew the end from the begining?
the only reason we know the internet exists is b/c theres an designer and the only why we know they exist is b/c we know his existence. In the case of god in this analogy is that we can't prove he's ever real since we don't know about his existence
@zero13o The only reason that you dont know about God's existence is because you did not seek Him out. How did you know that the person that created the computer existed? You did not wait until he appeared in your room right? You looked him up. You sought him out. You need to do the same thing with God. You need to seek Him out.
@thomasfort18 I once did and it was a waste of time, my life is too short to be worrying what is going to happen to me when I die. your analogy is based on the fact that i know who made my computer which was me however my computer cannot evolve at all it is not organic it is man made. your god exists in the minds of those who are ignorant and not willing to believe in anything else except the supposed word of god aka the bible which we know it written by men.
@zero13o Your argument can work both ways. I can also say that evolution exists in the minds of those who are ignorant and not willing to believe in anything else because what men has written in a "science" book. And I know that men had written the Bible. 40 authors I think. But all of them were inspired by God to write it. And just a question. What is your life compared to eternity?
@auggiedoggy Im sorry, but I did find God. Best decision I ever made. And please, try not to compare something that is fact (God) to something that is fiction (leprechaun), because you have no idea what you are talking about.
@thomasfort18 : No its called being intellectually honest. I can't claim something to be fact if I don't have reasonable evidence. That would be intellectually dishonest. Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary. That is why I do not believe in yours or anyone else's god or gods.
There are two criteria for publishing anything that has to do with creation vs. evolution. 1. you must have a pertinent degree. 2. You must pass peer review. (catch 22) If paper is pro creation or anti evolution. You will never pass peer review, in addition to that you will become professionally black balled. How objective is that for science? Darwin came from an Illuminati satanic family and had much to gain from deceiving people. Satan is a liar!!! There are no transitory fossils ever found.
@aimeecurry46 is it not the reason why peer review exists to begin with ? What if I say that I go to church and say to the congregation that god spoke to me in a dream telling me to disregard the bible for being false does the congregation agree to what I say or do they say the bible is the only word of god? now peer review almost serves the same purpose of course not in this regard but they look at the research that was done to see if it stands up and if it didn't then it gets attacked
What he is saying is true. All of you think that we just randomly poofed out of an atomic fission or something scientific like that? if you deny when a Christian says "God was always there" you are wrong. In order for time to be real, there had to be somehting outside of time that had to have created it.That explains why God was always there, because for him there was no begining he has just been there.Also look around you are saying all of this just randomly fel into place by probability?really
Dude, I like your proofs that the Bible is true, a lot better. This video only shows that it is POSSIBLE that God exists; it doesn't PROVE jack squat, like your video about the Bible does.
i love how hilarious this is. everything you said can be explained in evolutionary terms also. its also hilarious that you talk like theres no holes in the bible. ofc evolution isnt complrtly explained because its so complicated. i could counter everything you say but its really not tht important to me.
Put it easy, WHO CREATED GOD? if anything can't be created with out a creator, so who create GOD. 2 there are limits, but technically is posible anything in fisics. 3.- God is a mechanisims creator of universes... soo who created that mechanisims HIS GOD? 4.- Religion is no sciencie, is faith, the catolic church said it.
@capsule56 I don't remember, who pope, but was a pope, :) and tanks for that kind of thinking, UK have public school with religion :) and don't have a neutral school.
Then why do your people from Africa still live in tribes sacrificing cattle to some idiot thing? c'mon dude, get a life insteaqd of preaching to the cattle. you think your converting anyone with your old outdated propaganda? it ONLY TAKES COMMON SENSE TO SEE GOD IN YOUR DESCRIPTION IS A FICTIONAL BEING. Superman is more likely to live than Jesus Christ. I prayed... WHERE IS HE??>? HE PROMISED HE WOULD COME.
@hillsilk5 lololol. called God, where is he? never showed up. never heard a voice. never felt anything. you lied. lying is a sin. your going to hell. lololol PWNED.
@OnTheGrand Lol its funny because this video pwns you, PWNED atheist! :D
God loves you :D Jesus loves you :D I dont care what you have to say, because until you accept Jesus, one day youll stand before God and you WILL realize you were wrong. I know, because God told me how I was wrong and lead me in the right direction. Just know that Im praying for you, friend :]
one thing darwins findings support is that physical traits over the coarse of several generations can be dropped or phased out for more favorable ones example there are two deer in a field a one slower the other faster a mountain lion comes down and tracks the prey gets them to run and chases down and kills the slower one cause its slower that leaves the faster one to reproduce and spawn geneticly faster deer meaning they would be more likely to survive its called natural selection ie evolution
12. Might does not make right. This has been figured out a long time ago in civilization. God's characteristics are an argument against him because his primitive morality is representative of the primitive men who made him up.
10. Another argument from ignorance, as well as a strawman and a false dichotomy.
11. You say that God answers prayers when called for. Why then does he not answer the prayers of the starving and suffering and those who pray for them, and prayers for peace? Why is suffering so unequal in the world? Why is there suffering that is completely unrelated to free will (natural disasters, birth defects, disease, ect.?)
Fossil records are incomplete, they are not the only evidence used to prove the theory of evolution. I also disagree with your comparison of evolution to throwing paint on a canvas and expecting a beautiful painting to form. That doesn't disprove Evolution, because evolution requires something to be alive in order for it to evolve. Paint and a canvas are not living things.
@lovelypinkflower . calculate the chances of evolution occuring, with all the assumptions, chances, and specific conditions for the next conditions to occur.
now if we were to start evolution all over again, what are the chances that every single 'chanced' chain of events would occur in the exact same pattern.
Mathematical probability and statistics has ALREADY DISPROVEN evolution.
now the chances of a Designer, since everything is sciences is "designed to _" has a greater probability!!!
@reynandvalenzuela my problem is not with believing in a god. My problem is with religious people that don't think evolution and god can coexist. I have a hard time accepting that math can disprove evolution but it can not disprove that a man can magically appear from dust and a woman from his rib. So how has math probability disproved evolution?
@lovelypinkflower . saying God took a billiong years to create is like you finished a project in 5 days, but everyone says it took you 5 years.
math disproves evolution:
take every event in the evolution timeline, and multiple each event by the probability it can happen. or take every event and multiply each even the probability will happen starting tomorrow. chances of evolution happening again, 0%.
u don't know who build ur house but there is a designer. atoms, DNA, nature, have a Designer
@reynandvalenzuela evolution doesn't require billions of years in all species. We have seen evolution in our lifetime. We can see it with insect and insecticides. Every single time farmers spray insects with insecticides, the less susceptible bugs develop an immunity. An immunity which they pass on to their offspring, and so on and so on. Farmers can keep spraying the insects with hasher and harsher chemicals, yet there will always be some that survive.
@lovelypinkflower If we look at the different generations of those insects we can see how they are evolving. They are basically evolving into what some scientists call "super bugs". We do not only need insects to see evolution, we can see it at the microscopic level with bacteria or cells infected with with the aids virus. Although the virus is not alive the cell it is using to reproduce is evolving and it's daughter cells are either becoming stronger or weaker. Depending on their treatment.
@lovelypinkflower . here's the same story from a different perspective. God created the super bugs with all immune genes, and did the same for humans. after the fall, sin, we corrode, and various genes were turned off. but as environments change, these genes are turned on. my dad was short. i'm taller than him. my son is now in the US getting taller than me. evolution? nope.
@reynandvalenzuela What you are describing is called Inheritance of Acquired Traits. That is a hypothesis that has been disproved with the help of Darwin, because he discovered evolution is not individual, it happens in large groups. The super bugs are created in large groups with the help of humans, they were naturally selected to reproduce. We changed their environment and as a result their genes developed a mutation which will drive their evolution.
@reynandvalenzuela The problem is you cannot develop an antibody to non living thing. You can develop an antibody to a virus even though it is not a living thing by itself but it is living once it enters a host cell. After being exposed to a chemical the group may reproduce. Every time they reproduce, or their offspring mate with the offspring of other pesticide resistant bugs, they present an opportunity for genetic mutation.
@lovelypinkflower . the same cannot be said for macroevolution. macroeevolution is not observable.
to say that organisms have to keep evolving due to survival, that means there is a threat that evolved much greater than they. how did the predator devlop further than the organism that needed to mutate to survive?
these possible events in science does not mean it happened, esp in evol. ie: i am capable of driving my car into the bank vault, therefore so i must have.
@reynandvalenzuela So because you personally can not see macroevolution with your own eyes that means it does not exist?
"That is like saying because the world looks flat to me than it must be so" "because I cannot see anything smaller that an atom that the Atomic theory must be wrong". Macroevolution can bee seen with our own eyes, we can see it using many of the things I mentioned before. Including vestigial organs and homologous structures.
@reynandvalenzuela again you are assuming that I do not believe in a god or a higher power. I never said such a thing. My argument is that the existence of a designer does not disprove evolution. The theory of evolution remains a theory because time after time, every experiment comes up with the same conclusion. Evolution exists, until someone can successfully refute it, then it will remain a theory.
@lovelypinkflower . to believe that a Creator exists and evolution is true is self-contradictory. that means, you don't really believe in the Creator because you don't believe that the Creator has the ability to create quickly, within days.
you can believe in God, but what about Him is it that you believe in? If all things r created by Him who's beyond the physical, why does He need d evolution process? He create a sperm in Mary. didn't take billion yrs.
@reynandvalenzuela You can believe in evolution and believe in a creator, you are assuming that everyone believes in the same god that is talked about in the Christian Bible. As we have seen from the different groups of religions on this earth that is not true. I don't belong to a religion because my beliefs of god are different from the ones of most religions. Why would a creator give us a brain if it wanted us to all believe in the same things.
@lovelypinkflower . any Creator wouldn't waste a billion years to create a sinful selfish race.
we are given a brain to understand and have a relationship with the Creator. notice how our brain can conceptualize spiritual matters (love, hate, forgiveness, hurt, relgion, peace, meaning to life, purpose, time, etc.).
but to believe in both evolution and Creator means you DON'T REALLY believe IN the CREATOR.
@reynandvalenzuela So now finally arrive to what is behind it all. It's either my way or the high way. You either believe what I believe or your wrong. "to believe in both evolution and Creator means you DON'T REALLY believe IN the CREATOR" That's a bit of an arrogant presumption don't you think?
@lovelypinkflower . scientifically, a theory can only be developed after a series of hypothesis have been proven true.
science = explanation of why observable things occur again and again.
we cannot observe a dog turning to ape turning to man. the space frontier have been looking for this observation in space and have found nothing! therefore evolution is not science. it is history.
@reynandvalenzuela the series of the hypothesis have to arrive to the same conclusion. There are way too many experiment on this earth for something to be proven true. So a theory can never be proven, but it can be refuted. Until then it is accepted as fact. Evolution does not try to prove that a a dog can turn into an ape, and an ape turn into a man. People have the misconception that evolution states that man evolved from a monkey. Instead it suggest that we evolve from a common ancestor.
@reynandvalenzuela Common ancestors created by a god that evolved into the different species that we are today. How is evolution mathematically impossible? I will never be able to live a sufficient amount of years to replay all the events and see that they may not happen. Evolution on the other hand has been studied for at least 2 centuries now. Every new discovery provides more and more evidence about how species have evolved. If it had been refuted scientist would not waste their time.
@soccer92ist I understand your question. A lot of people are under the impression that the word theory means something can be dismissed. In our everyday English that would be true but in science we use the definition that applies to the Scientific Method. Under the scientific method a theory is a tested explanation of the behavior of nature. This means that after the experimental data has been gathered a generalization or scientific law would be made.
@lovelypinkflower A law because after numerous experiments the generalization is uniformly applicable to everything tested.A theoretical model would try to explain observed law. Then a hypothesis would be formed and more experiment would be done. Eventually if the theoretical model survives repeated testing it achieves the status of theory. Now if an experiment can come along and destroy any part of that theory then it ceases to be a theory. Until that happens, the theory is accepted as fact .
@lovelypinkflower .it would only be a scientific law if it is observavbl over and over again. microevo, i've seen. macro, never!!!.
believing the evolution story is like believing that "oh an airplane must have hit my car becuase the weight of the plan has enough force to dent my bumper," when in fact in reality, another car just hit it. evolution looks for possible impossiblities. that chances of every event of the story is close to 0%.
@reynandvalenzuela Christians make the argument that just because you cannot see a creator does not mean one does not exist. Because you have not seen macroevolution, even though many scientist have found evidence of it, does not mean it does not exist. I can argue that mathematically and scientifically the chances of every event in the bible happening is close to 0%. Is the whole bible wrong?
@reynandvalenzuela As far as everything in science being described as designed, I agree with you that overall everything in life must be designed my some higher or higher beings (plural or singular I do not know, that is another debate). However when it comes to science I do not think that is what scientists mean by design. Every time I have seen that word come up, it is usually synonymous with function. If they say something is designed to do this you can usually say its' function is to do this
@lovelypinkflower . many scientists use the word "design" and perhaps should begin to use "function"
even if it's a function, why the need to create the functions. when life was simpler, there were no predators, no enemies, resources were more abundant than they are today.....
@reynandvalenzuela I don't mean to offend you but what does this sentence "when life was simpler, there were no predators, no enemies, resources were more abundant than they are today" have to do with the question, why is there a need to create a function? I do not see an association with it.
@lovelypinkflower . if everything wasn't designed , but rather an added function, assuming evolution is true, why would organisms need to keep developing when they were all simple amoebas with enough resources to keep them alive forever. y do we need evolution when predators were almost non-existent and there was enough premordial soup of chemicals to keep em alive?
@reynandvalenzuela no one is arguing that there was not an original design, but rather that the original design evolved into something else. Evolution is not chosen, rather it's chosen for you by nature (you could argue god). An abundance of food is not enough to keep a species from evolving. A combination of genetic mutation, prey, lack of food, and a change in the environment that made conditions unfavorable for the species would be suffice to make it evolve.
@NeuronQuiz . cancer is the perfect example. cells will malfunction as well. it will no longer function as expected if the sequence was correct. see how important and carefully DESIGNED our world is?
Sort of; cells get gene information from their parent cells, this results in different combinations of genes, certain combinations end with mutations, these mutations fall into three categories; 1.) Deleterious, mutations that make life harder for the cell. 2.) Beneficial, mutations that make life easier for the cell 3.) Neutral, mutations that aren't bad or good. Good and neutral mutations are usually passed onto posterity and deleterious ones are deleted from the genes.
You are stating observations, which is what you are against.
I ask you again; what would you like to know.
Are asking why rabbits ears have varying sizes, or patterns of height in homo saipens?
Some rabbits have bigger ears because that's the mutation that species has evolved, I do not know which species this refers too, but, it's likely it's a neutral mutation; neither beneficial nor deleterious. Or it could be a beneficial one, increasing hearing capabilities...
"The paint on the canvas argument is NOT a good example for one simple reason; paint is not alive. nor does it reproduce. Nor does it mutate."
@lifescomicrelief . Yes my point exactly. it takes Someone living to create something remotely organized and complex.
Paint on it's own cannot organize just as atoms on its own cannot organize on its own. Evolutionists will believe that in terms of paint w/o an artist, WILL turn into a pic in a billion yrs through abiogenesis.
Organisms randomly mutate thanks too two parent's genes, most of these mutations are pointless ones, some are deleterious (they are harmful to a species) but some are beneficial, so they are kept. Deleterious ones are eliminated and neutral ones are kept, because they aren't harmful. Paint does not mutate, therefore, it should not be used as an argument for or against evolution.
@lifescomicrelief . When was the last time a mutation was passed on to more than 2 generations? when was the last time a mutation was beneficial and not a disease? mutations are a latter part of the evolution story. the paint analogy is about the earlier, forming functioning organelles by 'chance'.
paint is not alive but the one who applies the paint is. is the act of randomness that show equate to the chances atoms can build up to a functioning cell, protein, etc.
look, I am no biologist nor am I a chemist. However, I know someone who is, and made an excellent video about abiogenisis. His username is cdk007 you should watch that video and see for yourself the explanation.
I am no scientist, but, I am smart enough to go with science over blind faith.
@lifescomicrelief . Do the math. The chances of an atom existing out of nothing, times the chances of an atom chemically bonding with another atom, times the chances of other the right atom bonding with that bonded atom times another atom, times another atom, times those atoms forming a working protein. ~0% so far. then multiply the chances of another type of protein forming, times all those proteins forming an organelle (and we have many organells) times the chances of them becoming funtiona
@lifescomicrelief . Evolutionary "science" is less likely than real life. real life say that the complexity of science PROVE that EVERYTHING CANNOT have been formed w/o an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER.
Real science is the observation and explanation of why things happen again and again. Evolution is not science. but science's complexity show that there is a designer.
If evolution isn't science, than how come biologists and chemists, along with physicists, geologists, and astronomers all say it's true?
But, let's ignore all of them for a second and give your theory a chance; let's say that a god did create the earth and stars and all that. Let's pretend that it is true.
Where is he now?
How did we know about him in the first place?
If the bible is infallible, than why are there so many contradictions?
"Why do ppl believe evolution?" many. pride, lack of accountability, ignorance.
"where is God?" everywhere.
"How did we know of God?" God used to communicate to humans. The sense of His existence is innate in humans.
"Bible contradictions?" on the surface they seem to be. but if you look at it from the writer's style from that era, original manuscripts, archeological records, the Bible is the most reliable source in the world. 1000's of mnspts=originals
@lifescomicrelief . "tangble" proof is subject to interpritation. it is not science. it is historical deduction. it would ONLY be science if we can observe evolution. we tried in space, we tried in Mars but to NO AVAIL. evolution is not observable, therefore is not science.
the only way you can prove i went to my first period class is by documentation and proper validity of that document (attendance sheet) and documentor.
@lifescomicrelief . based on what they knew at the time, that is all they can describe it as.
can you expect a first grader to describe water turning to ice as "removal of heat forming slowing of electrons forming bonds blah blah blah to crystalize into ice." no. the 1st grader would say it turns from water to ice because of cold. scientifically cold doesn't exist. it is heat that exists and is removed.
thus, it's based on vocab n knowledge at the time. God can only sho so much 4 them t undrs
"Prove that you are right". (1)One things for sure is that the Bible, as mentioned in the video, with all the prophecies and scientific comments, could not have been fabricated by the people of those days. there has to have been a much Intelligent source. (2)Look at all the religions in the world and the human life span. look at sin. do u think we have a conscience for nothing. it's a radar that alerts us of an afterlife judgment. moral accountability exists.
"Prove that you are right" (3)mathematically and statistically speaking, mathmatician doctorate William Dembski calculated that the chances of a few proteins forming a functioning, purposeful flagellum motor is 1^-2000 chances. ~ 0%. and that's only one organelles out of hundreds of organelles. then continue to multiply that by hundred types of cells, tissues, organs, organisms. Evolution is not possible. On the other hand, even the complexity of DNA ....
3.) the chances of proteins randomly forming a flagellum may be that high, however. They are the result of years and years of development from the proteins and their ancestry. Not a single random occurrence.
@lifescomicrelief . it is random. w/o a Designer putting it together, where does it get the energy to bond. Chemical reactions require applied energy. where and who applied the required energy at the exact moment. therefore, w/o a Designer, its random chance.
@lifescomicrelief . the ones who discovered the DNA helix Watson and Crick attribute the complexity of DNA strands to have been created by an "Intelligent Lifeform" beyond earth. So did Dawkins in the movie "Expelled". The chances that an Intelligent Designer is greater than the chances that evolution occurred. (4) of all religions, Christianity is the only one stating, you can't go to heaven by religions duties. Only by forgiveness of sins via the Messiah who paid for sins.
True, but none of what you have described is undeniable, physical, testable proof of a deity that created the universe in it's entity. Nor any proof against evolution.
christian god is cruel and evil, he kills whole population of earth just because we dont believe in him. well that sounds like a good story for nasty children. by the way Bible was writen loong after "the Jesus"
its in fact prety cool story. it has eveythink in it, if you put aside all the brainwashing ...believe...believe...believe... its good mithological story bit raw but i would give it B+ other religions have somethink that they can base the faith on such as Buddhism, or
hahaha nice story indeed. but as you were trying to explain some basic social arangements between humas you kinda jumped to end too soon. principles of those relationships were formed looong before the christian "god" was made up and still after that if there is only one god as you probably believe other religions must automaticly believe in him under different name soo let me ask you why did your soo caled god let people to kill, slaughter and torture milions of others.
christian god is cruel and evil, he kills whole population of earth just because we dont believe in him. well that sounds like a good story for nasty children. by the way Bible was writen loong after "the Jesus"
its in fact prety cool story. it has eveythink in it, if you put aside all the brainwashing ...believe...believe...believe... its good mithological story bit raw but i would give it B+ other religions have somethink that they can base the faith on such as Buddhism, or
@Denerog christian god is cruel and evil, he kills whole population of earth just because we dont believe in him. well that sounds like a good story for nasty children. by the way Bible was writen loong after "the Jesus"
its in fact prety cool story. it has eveythink in it, if you put aside all the brainwashing ...believe...believe...believe... its good mithological story bit raw but i would give it B+ other religions have somethink that they can base the faith on such as Buddhism, or
science fabricates a fable of evolution in hopes that they are true w/o going into depths of the chances, probability and statistics of evolution occuring.
deeper analysis of mathematics, probabilities, statistics, irreducible complexity, and the calculated chances that evolution is possible if 0%, is less shallow than sciences fabricated fairy tail that people HOPE to be true, as not to be accountable to their actions.
@cyxgun If you read Darwin't origin of species chapter 6, it says summariezed "my theory would fail if there is no series of species/organs that exist one after the other functioning with very slight modificaitons from one to another."
scienc proves that a slight modification of any organ will NOT function, hence, proving Irreducible Complexity TRUE and Darwin's benefit of the doubt proved true. His theory of evolution is not true.
@reynandvalenzuela No, you're just plain wrong about this... There are detrimental mutations, true... but there are beneficial ones as well. Go back to my post with my summary of evolution and tell me which of those two things doesn't occur. If both do occur then why would evolution not happen?
1. Descent with modification - does not occur. mutations are more detrimental. example of slight modicifation, add a protien or 2 or 3 to the eye. wil the eye funtion as well as its current design? better or worse? the eye in itself cannot be further modified. how many versions of a dog eye would it take to be the same as the human eye? and will all those versions FUNCTION? the answer is no, hence proving darwin right in his book chpt 6.
You seem to be of the opinion that every system must exist exactly as it is without changing because any change would disrupt it.... But this is demonstrably untrue. Human are genetically diverse, our metabolisms differ quite a bit and as a result some people are healthier than others. This completely obliterates your argument.
As for the eye, the evolution of the eye is well documented: /watch?v=62ptt_co3kM&feature=related
2. how many mutations would it take for a ie. frog DNA to be like a human DNA? billions and trillions of years is not enough time for a few proteins to produce a flagella motor. Sciene is the observation of why things happen AGAIN and AGAIN. When was the last time a benefitial mutation occured, NATURALLY to aid in the survival of that specie.
2. con't.... Furthermore, when was the last time science observed a mutation was passed on to its offspring and that offspring? When was the last time the environment aided in developing a mutation and how?
I guess you haven't further investigated the evidence.
furthermore, if you read about recent debates, a lawyer debated an acclaimed evolutionist and the debate ended as a draw. technically, the lawyer comes as the winner as science wasn't his field. one of his biggest remarks was "two people can look at the SAME EVIDENCE and conclude different BIASED conclusions. "
@reynandvalenzuela I like how you totally ignored my questions. You obviously have no interest in finding out the truth, only supporting your current position.
God is real. Just stop and look around. Look at the detail in a leaf or the fingerprint on your hand. You think that was made from a big bang? There's no possible way anything on this earth was a mistake. God is real
Othewise known as the Kirk Cameron theory, say that the world is full of detailed, beautiful, slightly-similar patterns, then proceed to jump to the conclusion that your invisible imaginary friend is responsible. It wasn't billions and of years of a perpetual Cosmic Evolution resulting in countless individual galaxies and billions of stars and planets within these galaxies. Oh no, the Universe was made just for YOU by pixiedust wielding fairys. and the Earth is the center of it all.
@Chrispybutters We know why leaves are the way they are. We have a rational explanation for it, and it does not involve them being a 'mistake'. Read "The blind watchmaker" or watch the video series called "how evolution works" by Donexodus2.
Evolution doesn't conflict with God or Christianity. There's a reason why all Christians that understand science believe in both God and evolution. Neither one negates the other. They believe that EVOLUTION is how and GOD is why.
at our website NEWAGEDAWNS we Prove Christianity Evolution and Other religions wrong we are constantly on the Forums and there are many discussions happening. no one has been able to disprove us.
Beleiving in the bible is like beleving in a story book, Evolution uccors all around us in addapting bacteria and cells. We have not scanned every corner of the earth, we have barley scanned any at all. There a thousands of organisms we have not discovered. at 3:51 it supports that the bible was written by humans for the sake of morality. at 4:45 or so the answer is that we are made to reproduce. Like all other animals. At 5:00 it is due to that our brains are the biggest on earth.
Your arguments have so many flaws I don't know where to begin, just about everything is twisted or shows a great misunderstanding of evolution and science. But that's not my point, what I wanted to ask you is this: Suppose we find out that God does not exist, just suppose it, the quesiton is, would you continue being a good person (as I suppose you are or consider yourself to be) or would you go and kill, rape, etc just because no one will be judging you when you die?
@reynandvalenzuela The God of the Bible commanded rape and murder in the Old Testament. His morals are the most relative of all. The argument that God made morals is flawed because morals have their own inherent value, having arisen out of millennia of collective human experience. If God made the morals, they have no inherent value. It's just one big "Might Makes Right," which pretty much every modern intelligent human knows is bullshit.
please people, dislike these kinds of videos so we faster can evolve as a species...
aboyborninjune 1 week ago
Religion is what is causing all the problems in this world get it into ur fucking head. without science we would all be fucked End Of Point Made.
MrAceOfSpades93 2 weeks ago
How did Adams and Eves kids have babies............... if you dont believe in Evolution, how the hell do you beilieve in this????
Typho0n86 4 months ago
@Typho0n86 . adam and eve had kids the same way we do today. believing in evolution requires more faith since it contradicts with both the laws of physics and laws of probabliity and statistics.
reynandvalenzuela 4 months ago
@reynandvalenzuela WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how does evolution contradict physics and probablity? You obiously have no idea what you are talking about! and NO... the question was. how did their kids have kids??? They had 2 boys...............
Typho0n86 4 months ago
OMG your saying that evolution isnt real!?!?! its time to get your head out of the sand. Its constantly and continually happening!!! Societies are built on morals through people helping on another, it is a survival technique, no god is needed for morals. Your videos are complete and utter bullshit you are truly stupid and brainwashed
Typho0n86 4 months ago
@Typho0n86 . your faith in evolution is no different from my faith in the Bible. they are both faith in a historical occurence.
reynandvalenzuela 4 months ago
@reynandvalenzuela No!!! Evolution is suported by fossils and science, and research and logic, to ignore this is totaly ignorant. And we can see it happening. There are worms in England that have Evolved to become resistant to poisens in soil and now can live in it.
Typho0n86 4 months ago
@reynandvalenzuela Man you're my hero. We need more evangelical Xtians on youtube.
LolZ4LifE456 3 months ago
Just so you all know. seeing isnt believing. Thats what Faith is for. Putting your faith in God means you accept him into your life as your Lord and Savior. God doesnt have to show himself to prove he exists. Its up to you to trust and believe in him. By his grace we were all saved and our sins have been paid for. How much more could you want than that! Honestly there is no greater gift than the love of God
KlopexD 6 months ago
3:17 - 3:38 WTF? Please never say anything so stupid ever again.
SammySamff1 6 months ago
*facepalm*
TheLeviathan241 7 months ago
Using the same old broken arguments over and over again only leads to show that your either highly ignorant or willfully missleading.
Sweddude 7 months ago
Sir, your starting with the belief that we were meant to be, that this universe was designed with us in mind. A simple shift of perception will change all that.
We evolved in the environment, the environment wasn't created for us.
Your top 12 list of "proofs" for God has been dealt with many many times before. I think it's time for you to understand the facts you oppose. You seem to have no understanding of what science shows to be facts.
Your beliefs are blinding you from actual knowledge.
metalsusa1 8 months ago
@metalsusa1 It is sad to see that you turn your back on someone who has saved your life and paid for your sins. He went through torture and death for us and you repay him by fighting against him? You need to open your eyes and your heart a little bit more. I pray that you will.
KlopexD 6 months ago
@KlopexD My only response is that this deity I'm turning my back on as you say knew every sin that would be committed and knew every punishment that he would dole out before the foundation of the world. At the very least God knew that I would send myself to hell by not conforming to his will before he created me. So screw your God.
Slave minded people like you will never get this analogy. Your to busy kissing Gods ass out of fear of him..... ah, I mean because you love him. Ha Ha yeah right!
metalsusa1 6 months ago
You can prattle on and on about whether God exists or not. I'll go with the hypothesis that God does indeed exist.
So a God who knew the outcome before the start holds me accountable for sins he knew I would commit. God also knew before the foundation of the world that not only me, but billions of people would either not repent or be born into the wrong religion. Hell will be our final destination.
Again I ask you, ultimately how is it my fault when God already knew the end from the begining?
metalsusa1 8 months ago
the only reason we know the internet exists is b/c theres an designer and the only why we know they exist is b/c we know his existence. In the case of god in this analogy is that we can't prove he's ever real since we don't know about his existence
zero13o 10 months ago
@zero13o The only reason that you dont know about God's existence is because you did not seek Him out. How did you know that the person that created the computer existed? You did not wait until he appeared in your room right? You looked him up. You sought him out. You need to do the same thing with God. You need to seek Him out.
thomasfort18 8 months ago
@thomasfort18 I once did and it was a waste of time, my life is too short to be worrying what is going to happen to me when I die. your analogy is based on the fact that i know who made my computer which was me however my computer cannot evolve at all it is not organic it is man made. your god exists in the minds of those who are ignorant and not willing to believe in anything else except the supposed word of god aka the bible which we know it written by men.
zero13o 8 months ago
@zero13o Your argument can work both ways. I can also say that evolution exists in the minds of those who are ignorant and not willing to believe in anything else because what men has written in a "science" book. And I know that men had written the Bible. 40 authors I think. But all of them were inspired by God to write it. And just a question. What is your life compared to eternity?
thomasfort18 8 months ago
@thomasfort18 : And while you're at it try seeking out a leprechaun. You'll have about as much luck.
auggiedoggy 6 months ago
@auggiedoggy Im sorry, but I did find God. Best decision I ever made. And please, try not to compare something that is fact (God) to something that is fiction (leprechaun), because you have no idea what you are talking about.
thomasfort18 6 months ago
@thomasfort18 : Until proven otherwise, they are one and the same to me ... myths.
auggiedoggy 6 months ago
@auggiedoggy What you think is not real or real does not prove your point. Thats plain arrogance.
thomasfort18 6 months ago
@thomasfort18 : No its called being intellectually honest. I can't claim something to be fact if I don't have reasonable evidence. That would be intellectually dishonest. Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary. That is why I do not believe in yours or anyone else's god or gods.
auggiedoggy 6 months ago
@auggiedoggy Well have you looked at all the evidence? How do you know for sure that there is no god?
thomasfort18 6 months ago
There are two criteria for publishing anything that has to do with creation vs. evolution. 1. you must have a pertinent degree. 2. You must pass peer review. (catch 22) If paper is pro creation or anti evolution. You will never pass peer review, in addition to that you will become professionally black balled. How objective is that for science? Darwin came from an Illuminati satanic family and had much to gain from deceiving people. Satan is a liar!!! There are no transitory fossils ever found.
aimeecurry46 11 months ago
@aimeecurry46 is it not the reason why peer review exists to begin with ? What if I say that I go to church and say to the congregation that god spoke to me in a dream telling me to disregard the bible for being false does the congregation agree to what I say or do they say the bible is the only word of god? now peer review almost serves the same purpose of course not in this regard but they look at the research that was done to see if it stands up and if it didn't then it gets attacked
zero13o 10 months ago
What he is saying is true. All of you think that we just randomly poofed out of an atomic fission or something scientific like that? if you deny when a Christian says "God was always there" you are wrong. In order for time to be real, there had to be somehting outside of time that had to have created it.That explains why God was always there, because for him there was no begining he has just been there.Also look around you are saying all of this just randomly fel into place by probability?really
KlopexD 11 months ago
@KlopexD I believe that all that exists is created by God, but I cannot believe that the Bible is wright about who God is.
gtrKun 11 months ago
@ShiPshapeD00d
...do you feel better now?
jebuschi 11 months ago
haha one word: PATHETIC
x1x2x3ct 11 months ago
this was cute
jebuschi 1 year ago
@jebuschi You say that because you dont have a valid argument with this...in other words you fail.
Awww dont cry.
ShiPshapeD00d 11 months ago
53 people are atheists and darwinians hahah their low IQ got SERVED
slithroatxiv 1 year ago
@slithroatxiv wtf dude, are you kidding
and this video is full of strawmans
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 11 months ago
@slithroatxiv troll
zero13o 10 months ago
Dude, I like your proofs that the Bible is true, a lot better. This video only shows that it is POSSIBLE that God exists; it doesn't PROVE jack squat, like your video about the Bible does.
dstebbin 1 year ago
What do you mean that without god there is no reason to be a good person. What if you genuinely like random people that meet on the street?
MaestroAlvis 1 year ago
Please stop quoting Darwin like he was a prophet of Evolution. He's over a century of research out of date... -.-
And please stop misinterpreting "survival of the fittest" as "survival of the asshole".
And please stop spreading the lie that any "evolutionist" believes "everything came from nothing".
Geobacter 1 year ago
i love how hilarious this is. everything you said can be explained in evolutionary terms also. its also hilarious that you talk like theres no holes in the bible. ofc evolution isnt complrtly explained because its so complicated. i could counter everything you say but its really not tht important to me.
lmweed20 1 year ago
I don't kwon, but this video is creacionism, so it sucks.
Peniche94 1 year ago
Put it easy, WHO CREATED GOD? if anything can't be created with out a creator, so who create GOD. 2 there are limits, but technically is posible anything in fisics. 3.- God is a mechanisims creator of universes... soo who created that mechanisims HIS GOD? 4.- Religion is no sciencie, is faith, the catolic church said it.
Peniche94 1 year ago
@Peniche94
Who ever said religion and science need to conflict?
capsule56 1 year ago
@capsule56 I don't remember, who pope, but was a pope, :) and tanks for that kind of thinking, UK have public school with religion :) and don't have a neutral school.
Peniche94 1 year ago
ok ok but this doesn't prove god is there what about the outer religions that believe in a higher up power
stirfryin 1 year ago
Then why do your people from Africa still live in tribes sacrificing cattle to some idiot thing? c'mon dude, get a life insteaqd of preaching to the cattle. you think your converting anyone with your old outdated propaganda? it ONLY TAKES COMMON SENSE TO SEE GOD IN YOUR DESCRIPTION IS A FICTIONAL BEING. Superman is more likely to live than Jesus Christ. I prayed... WHERE IS HE??>? HE PROMISED HE WOULD COME.
OnTheGrand 1 year ago
if you want to know the truth ,you should try to call and talk to God
100% i believe God will repkly for those whose who called to Him.
hillsilk5 1 year ago
@hillsilk5 lololol. called God, where is he? never showed up. never heard a voice. never felt anything. you lied. lying is a sin. your going to hell. lololol PWNED.
OnTheGrand 1 year ago
@OnTheGrand Lol its funny because this video pwns you, PWNED atheist! :D
God loves you :D Jesus loves you :D I dont care what you have to say, because until you accept Jesus, one day youll stand before God and you WILL realize you were wrong. I know, because God told me how I was wrong and lead me in the right direction. Just know that Im praying for you, friend :]
ShiPshapeD00d 1 year ago
You dont NEED proof! You need FAITH!
ShiPshapeD00d 1 year ago
Thats true
hillsilk5 1 year ago
Thanks, awesome video.....May God Bless You!!!
jbarwick22 1 year ago
The flagellum has a red penis and yellow testicles. funny,
salahhe 1 year ago
You're as stupid as a down syndrome
Paumonsu 1 year ago
I facepalmed so hard while listening to this shit.
supercoolguyT 1 year ago
one thing darwins findings support is that physical traits over the coarse of several generations can be dropped or phased out for more favorable ones example there are two deer in a field a one slower the other faster a mountain lion comes down and tracks the prey gets them to run and chases down and kills the slower one cause its slower that leaves the faster one to reproduce and spawn geneticly faster deer meaning they would be more likely to survive its called natural selection ie evolution
ruku871 1 year ago
12. Might does not make right. This has been figured out a long time ago in civilization. God's characteristics are an argument against him because his primitive morality is representative of the primitive men who made him up.
horsesandmountains 1 year ago
10. Another argument from ignorance, as well as a strawman and a false dichotomy.
11. You say that God answers prayers when called for. Why then does he not answer the prayers of the starving and suffering and those who pray for them, and prayers for peace? Why is suffering so unequal in the world? Why is there suffering that is completely unrelated to free will (natural disasters, birth defects, disease, ect.?)
horsesandmountains 1 year ago
@horsesandmountains .11-these are consequences and proof that sin exists. therefore needs atonement.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
1 - 5: One huge argument from ignorance and a huge misunderstanding of science.
6: Morality is completely unrelated to belief/unbelief in God, and developed slowly over time because it was necessary for successful societies.
7. Purpose is begging the question. You assume that purpose exists, therefore God must exist to give us a purpose. Purpose does not exist.
8. Human traits are emergent properties resulting from evolution.
9. Is this an argument? Afterlife exists because i want it to?
horsesandmountains 1 year ago
Fossil records are incomplete, they are not the only evidence used to prove the theory of evolution. I also disagree with your comparison of evolution to throwing paint on a canvas and expecting a beautiful painting to form. That doesn't disprove Evolution, because evolution requires something to be alive in order for it to evolve. Paint and a canvas are not living things.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . calculate the chances of evolution occuring, with all the assumptions, chances, and specific conditions for the next conditions to occur.
now if we were to start evolution all over again, what are the chances that every single 'chanced' chain of events would occur in the exact same pattern.
Mathematical probability and statistics has ALREADY DISPROVEN evolution.
now the chances of a Designer, since everything is sciences is "designed to _" has a greater probability!!!
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela my problem is not with believing in a god. My problem is with religious people that don't think evolution and god can coexist. I have a hard time accepting that math can disprove evolution but it can not disprove that a man can magically appear from dust and a woman from his rib. So how has math probability disproved evolution?
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . saying God took a billiong years to create is like you finished a project in 5 days, but everyone says it took you 5 years.
math disproves evolution:
take every event in the evolution timeline, and multiple each event by the probability it can happen. or take every event and multiply each even the probability will happen starting tomorrow. chances of evolution happening again, 0%.
u don't know who build ur house but there is a designer. atoms, DNA, nature, have a Designer
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela evolution doesn't require billions of years in all species. We have seen evolution in our lifetime. We can see it with insect and insecticides. Every single time farmers spray insects with insecticides, the less susceptible bugs develop an immunity. An immunity which they pass on to their offspring, and so on and so on. Farmers can keep spraying the insects with hasher and harsher chemicals, yet there will always be some that survive.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower If we look at the different generations of those insects we can see how they are evolving. They are basically evolving into what some scientists call "super bugs". We do not only need insects to see evolution, we can see it at the microscopic level with bacteria or cells infected with with the aids virus. Although the virus is not alive the cell it is using to reproduce is evolving and it's daughter cells are either becoming stronger or weaker. Depending on their treatment.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . here's the same story from a different perspective. God created the super bugs with all immune genes, and did the same for humans. after the fall, sin, we corrode, and various genes were turned off. but as environments change, these genes are turned on. my dad was short. i'm taller than him. my son is now in the US getting taller than me. evolution? nope.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela What you are describing is called Inheritance of Acquired Traits. That is a hypothesis that has been disproved with the help of Darwin, because he discovered evolution is not individual, it happens in large groups. The super bugs are created in large groups with the help of humans, they were naturally selected to reproduce. We changed their environment and as a result their genes developed a mutation which will drive their evolution.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . does their DNA change as they become immune or do they only develop new antibodies?
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela The problem is you cannot develop an antibody to non living thing. You can develop an antibody to a virus even though it is not a living thing by itself but it is living once it enters a host cell. After being exposed to a chemical the group may reproduce. Every time they reproduce, or their offspring mate with the offspring of other pesticide resistant bugs, they present an opportunity for genetic mutation.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . the same cannot be said for macroevolution. macroeevolution is not observable.
to say that organisms have to keep evolving due to survival, that means there is a threat that evolved much greater than they. how did the predator devlop further than the organism that needed to mutate to survive?
these possible events in science does not mean it happened, esp in evol. ie: i am capable of driving my car into the bank vault, therefore so i must have.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela So because you personally can not see macroevolution with your own eyes that means it does not exist?
"That is like saying because the world looks flat to me than it must be so" "because I cannot see anything smaller that an atom that the Atomic theory must be wrong". Macroevolution can bee seen with our own eyes, we can see it using many of the things I mentioned before. Including vestigial organs and homologous structures.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . everything in science is described as "designed".
by whom?
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela again you are assuming that I do not believe in a god or a higher power. I never said such a thing. My argument is that the existence of a designer does not disprove evolution. The theory of evolution remains a theory because time after time, every experiment comes up with the same conclusion. Evolution exists, until someone can successfully refute it, then it will remain a theory.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . to believe that a Creator exists and evolution is true is self-contradictory. that means, you don't really believe in the Creator because you don't believe that the Creator has the ability to create quickly, within days.
you can believe in God, but what about Him is it that you believe in? If all things r created by Him who's beyond the physical, why does He need d evolution process? He create a sperm in Mary. didn't take billion yrs.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela You can believe in evolution and believe in a creator, you are assuming that everyone believes in the same god that is talked about in the Christian Bible. As we have seen from the different groups of religions on this earth that is not true. I don't belong to a religion because my beliefs of god are different from the ones of most religions. Why would a creator give us a brain if it wanted us to all believe in the same things.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . any Creator wouldn't waste a billion years to create a sinful selfish race.
we are given a brain to understand and have a relationship with the Creator. notice how our brain can conceptualize spiritual matters (love, hate, forgiveness, hurt, relgion, peace, meaning to life, purpose, time, etc.).
but to believe in both evolution and Creator means you DON'T REALLY believe IN the CREATOR.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reynandvalenzuela So now finally arrive to what is behind it all. It's either my way or the high way. You either believe what I believe or your wrong. "to believe in both evolution and Creator means you DON'T REALLY believe IN the CREATOR" That's a bit of an arrogant presumption don't you think?
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower Christianity is NOT a religion.
ShiPshapeD00d 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . scientifically, a theory can only be developed after a series of hypothesis have been proven true.
science = explanation of why observable things occur again and again.
we cannot observe a dog turning to ape turning to man. the space frontier have been looking for this observation in space and have found nothing! therefore evolution is not science. it is history.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela the series of the hypothesis have to arrive to the same conclusion. There are way too many experiment on this earth for something to be proven true. So a theory can never be proven, but it can be refuted. Until then it is accepted as fact. Evolution does not try to prove that a a dog can turn into an ape, and an ape turn into a man. People have the misconception that evolution states that man evolved from a monkey. Instead it suggest that we evolve from a common ancestor.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . yes we all came from a common ancestor and Designer. God!!!
evolution has been refuted. it has too many scientific inconsistencies for it to be true.
plus, mathematically, evolution is not possible. try to replay all the events and the chances of it happening is 0%.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela Common ancestors created by a god that evolved into the different species that we are today. How is evolution mathematically impossible? I will never be able to live a sufficient amount of years to replay all the events and see that they may not happen. Evolution on the other hand has been studied for at least 2 centuries now. Every new discovery provides more and more evidence about how species have evolved. If it had been refuted scientist would not waste their time.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower how can u say evolution exists but is a theory
soccer92ist 1 year ago
@soccer92ist I understand your question. A lot of people are under the impression that the word theory means something can be dismissed. In our everyday English that would be true but in science we use the definition that applies to the Scientific Method. Under the scientific method a theory is a tested explanation of the behavior of nature. This means that after the experimental data has been gathered a generalization or scientific law would be made.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower A law because after numerous experiments the generalization is uniformly applicable to everything tested.A theoretical model would try to explain observed law. Then a hypothesis would be formed and more experiment would be done. Eventually if the theoretical model survives repeated testing it achieves the status of theory. Now if an experiment can come along and destroy any part of that theory then it ceases to be a theory. Until that happens, the theory is accepted as fact .
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower .it would only be a scientific law if it is observavbl over and over again. microevo, i've seen. macro, never!!!.
believing the evolution story is like believing that "oh an airplane must have hit my car becuase the weight of the plan has enough force to dent my bumper," when in fact in reality, another car just hit it. evolution looks for possible impossiblities. that chances of every event of the story is close to 0%.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela Christians make the argument that just because you cannot see a creator does not mean one does not exist. Because you have not seen macroevolution, even though many scientist have found evidence of it, does not mean it does not exist. I can argue that mathematically and scientifically the chances of every event in the bible happening is close to 0%. Is the whole bible wrong?
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela As far as everything in science being described as designed, I agree with you that overall everything in life must be designed my some higher or higher beings (plural or singular I do not know, that is another debate). However when it comes to science I do not think that is what scientists mean by design. Every time I have seen that word come up, it is usually synonymous with function. If they say something is designed to do this you can usually say its' function is to do this
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . many scientists use the word "design" and perhaps should begin to use "function"
even if it's a function, why the need to create the functions. when life was simpler, there were no predators, no enemies, resources were more abundant than they are today.....
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela I don't mean to offend you but what does this sentence "when life was simpler, there were no predators, no enemies, resources were more abundant than they are today" have to do with the question, why is there a need to create a function? I do not see an association with it.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
@lovelypinkflower . if everything wasn't designed , but rather an added function, assuming evolution is true, why would organisms need to keep developing when they were all simple amoebas with enough resources to keep them alive forever. y do we need evolution when predators were almost non-existent and there was enough premordial soup of chemicals to keep em alive?
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela no one is arguing that there was not an original design, but rather that the original design evolved into something else. Evolution is not chosen, rather it's chosen for you by nature (you could argue god). An abundance of food is not enough to keep a species from evolving. A combination of genetic mutation, prey, lack of food, and a change in the environment that made conditions unfavorable for the species would be suffice to make it evolve.
lovelypinkflower 1 year ago
"Even with a faulty mechanism, or just one amino acid out of place, either the cell will repair itself or completely break down."
Oh really. So if there is something wrong with a cell it will either repair itself or break down completely?
Have you ever heard of cancer? Seems like those cells get along pretty well with their mutations.
NeuronQuiz 1 year ago
@NeuronQuiz . cancer is the perfect example. cells will malfunction as well. it will no longer function as expected if the sequence was correct. see how important and carefully DESIGNED our world is?
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
humans love darkness naturally
stormtrooper125 1 year ago
Wait wait.. Everything in a cell does something since it was. -EVOLVEd-. That way?
Gregonn 1 year ago
@Sum41rocks47
Sort of; cells get gene information from their parent cells, this results in different combinations of genes, certain combinations end with mutations, these mutations fall into three categories; 1.) Deleterious, mutations that make life harder for the cell. 2.) Beneficial, mutations that make life easier for the cell 3.) Neutral, mutations that aren't bad or good. Good and neutral mutations are usually passed onto posterity and deleterious ones are deleted from the genes.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@Sum41rocks47
You are stating observations, which is what you are against.
I ask you again; what would you like to know.
Are asking why rabbits ears have varying sizes, or patterns of height in homo saipens?
Some rabbits have bigger ears because that's the mutation that species has evolved, I do not know which species this refers too, but, it's likely it's a neutral mutation; neither beneficial nor deleterious. Or it could be a beneficial one, increasing hearing capabilities...
Next.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
The paint on the canvas argument is NOT a good example for one simple reason; paint is not alive. nor does it reproduce. Nor does it mutate.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
"The paint on the canvas argument is NOT a good example for one simple reason; paint is not alive. nor does it reproduce. Nor does it mutate."
@lifescomicrelief . Yes my point exactly. it takes Someone living to create something remotely organized and complex.
Paint on it's own cannot organize just as atoms on its own cannot organize on its own. Evolutionists will believe that in terms of paint w/o an artist, WILL turn into a pic in a billion yrs through abiogenesis.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
I didn't say someone needed to be there.
I said paint cannot proof or disprove evolution.
Organisms randomly mutate thanks too two parent's genes, most of these mutations are pointless ones, some are deleterious (they are harmful to a species) but some are beneficial, so they are kept. Deleterious ones are eliminated and neutral ones are kept, because they aren't harmful. Paint does not mutate, therefore, it should not be used as an argument for or against evolution.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . When was the last time a mutation was passed on to more than 2 generations? when was the last time a mutation was beneficial and not a disease? mutations are a latter part of the evolution story. the paint analogy is about the earlier, forming functioning organelles by 'chance'.
paint is not alive but the one who applies the paint is. is the act of randomness that show equate to the chances atoms can build up to a functioning cell, protein, etc.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
look, I am no biologist nor am I a chemist. However, I know someone who is, and made an excellent video about abiogenisis. His username is cdk007 you should watch that video and see for yourself the explanation.
I am no scientist, but, I am smart enough to go with science over blind faith.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . Do the math. The chances of an atom existing out of nothing, times the chances of an atom chemically bonding with another atom, times the chances of other the right atom bonding with that bonded atom times another atom, times another atom, times those atoms forming a working protein. ~0% so far. then multiply the chances of another type of protein forming, times all those proteins forming an organelle (and we have many organells) times the chances of them becoming funtiona
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . Evolutionary "science" is less likely than real life. real life say that the complexity of science PROVE that EVERYTHING CANNOT have been formed w/o an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER.
Real science is the observation and explanation of why things happen again and again. Evolution is not science. but science's complexity show that there is a designer.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
If evolution isn't science, than how come biologists and chemists, along with physicists, geologists, and astronomers all say it's true?
But, let's ignore all of them for a second and give your theory a chance; let's say that a god did create the earth and stars and all that. Let's pretend that it is true.
Where is he now?
How did we know about him in the first place?
If the bible is infallible, than why are there so many contradictions?
Prove that you are right.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . very good questions.
"Why do ppl believe evolution?" many. pride, lack of accountability, ignorance.
"where is God?" everywhere.
"How did we know of God?" God used to communicate to humans. The sense of His existence is innate in humans.
"Bible contradictions?" on the surface they seem to be. but if you look at it from the writer's style from that era, original manuscripts, archeological records, the Bible is the most reliable source in the world. 1000's of mnspts=originals
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
People know evolution to be true *not believe it to be true* we know it to be true because there is tangible proof.
If he is everywhere, than how do we know it.
What about the bible saying the earth is a circle *not a sphere, it says circle*
Or the moon being a light, when it just reflects light.
Or that the earth both 'hangs in space' and 'rests on pillars'
That isn't a stylistic choice.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . "tangble" proof is subject to interpritation. it is not science. it is historical deduction. it would ONLY be science if we can observe evolution. we tried in space, we tried in Mars but to NO AVAIL. evolution is not observable, therefore is not science.
the only way you can prove i went to my first period class is by documentation and proper validity of that document (attendance sheet) and documentor.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . based on what they knew at the time, that is all they can describe it as.
can you expect a first grader to describe water turning to ice as "removal of heat forming slowing of electrons forming bonds blah blah blah to crystalize into ice." no. the 1st grader would say it turns from water to ice because of cold. scientifically cold doesn't exist. it is heat that exists and is removed.
thus, it's based on vocab n knowledge at the time. God can only sho so much 4 them t undrs
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
I, again, fail to see the relevance of this statement to the debate at hand.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief .
"Prove that you are right". (1)One things for sure is that the Bible, as mentioned in the video, with all the prophecies and scientific comments, could not have been fabricated by the people of those days. there has to have been a much Intelligent source. (2)Look at all the religions in the world and the human life span. look at sin. do u think we have a conscience for nothing. it's a radar that alerts us of an afterlife judgment. moral accountability exists.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief .
"Prove that you are right" (3)mathematically and statistically speaking, mathmatician doctorate William Dembski calculated that the chances of a few proteins forming a functioning, purposeful flagellum motor is 1^-2000 chances. ~ 0%. and that's only one organelles out of hundreds of organelles. then continue to multiply that by hundred types of cells, tissues, organs, organisms. Evolution is not possible. On the other hand, even the complexity of DNA ....
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
3.) the chances of proteins randomly forming a flagellum may be that high, however. They are the result of years and years of development from the proteins and their ancestry. Not a single random occurrence.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . it is random. w/o a Designer putting it together, where does it get the energy to bond. Chemical reactions require applied energy. where and who applied the required energy at the exact moment. therefore, w/o a Designer, its random chance.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . the ones who discovered the DNA helix Watson and Crick attribute the complexity of DNA strands to have been created by an "Intelligent Lifeform" beyond earth. So did Dawkins in the movie "Expelled". The chances that an Intelligent Designer is greater than the chances that evolution occurred. (4) of all religions, Christianity is the only one stating, you can't go to heaven by religions duties. Only by forgiveness of sins via the Messiah who paid for sins.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
4.) This is neither proof nor relevent to the debate.
This all spawned from the paint argument?
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@lifescomicrelief . you did say "Prove that your are right". ;)
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela
True, but none of what you have described is undeniable, physical, testable proof of a deity that created the universe in it's entity. Nor any proof against evolution.
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
@Sum41rocks47
Ok, so what would you like to know? Or rather, what would you like me to tell you what you are looking at with your eyes closed?
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
Comment removed
lifescomicrelief 1 year ago
Any reasonable person has only one choice: to believe there is a God.
agfigueroaa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
christian god is cruel and evil, he kills whole population of earth just because we dont believe in him. well that sounds like a good story for nasty children. by the way Bible was writen loong after "the Jesus"
its in fact prety cool story. it has eveythink in it, if you put aside all the brainwashing ...believe...believe...believe... its good mithological story bit raw but i would give it B+ other religions have somethink that they can base the faith on such as Buddhism, or
Denerog 1 year ago
hahaha nice story indeed. but as you were trying to explain some basic social arangements between humas you kinda jumped to end too soon. principles of those relationships were formed looong before the christian "god" was made up and still after that if there is only one god as you probably believe other religions must automaticly believe in him under different name soo let me ask you why did your soo caled god let people to kill, slaughter and torture milions of others.
by my opinion the
Denerog 1 year ago
christian god is cruel and evil, he kills whole population of earth just because we dont believe in him. well that sounds like a good story for nasty children. by the way Bible was writen loong after "the Jesus"
its in fact prety cool story. it has eveythink in it, if you put aside all the brainwashing ...believe...believe...believe... its good mithological story bit raw but i would give it B+ other religions have somethink that they can base the faith on such as Buddhism, or
Denerog 1 year ago
@Denerog Christianity is not the only religion out there
1646Alex 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Denerog christian god is cruel and evil, he kills whole population of earth just because we dont believe in him. well that sounds like a good story for nasty children. by the way Bible was writen loong after "the Jesus"
its in fact prety cool story. it has eveythink in it, if you put aside all the brainwashing ...believe...believe...believe... its good mithological story bit raw but i would give it B+ other religions have somethink that they can base the faith on such as Buddhism, or
Denerog 1 year ago
perhaps you should update your data.
greetings from finland
mosamasa 1 year ago
"I don't understand science, it's hard and confusing. God is much simpler and I prefer that."
You have no idea how foolish this video makes you look to everyone with even a basic grasp of scientific concepts.
Morality, purpose: arguments from consequences. Google it.
I'm not impressed by your arguments. They are shallow, fallacious and unsupported by facts.
cyxgun 1 year ago
@cyxgun
science fabricates a fable of evolution in hopes that they are true w/o going into depths of the chances, probability and statistics of evolution occuring.
deeper analysis of mathematics, probabilities, statistics, irreducible complexity, and the calculated chances that evolution is possible if 0%, is less shallow than sciences fabricated fairy tail that people HOPE to be true, as not to be accountable to their actions.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela It's painfully obvious you don't understand evolution. Evolution is NOT random. Evolution is also well supported by evidence.
Here's what's required for evolution:
1 Descent with modification.
2 Environmental selection.
The first one is random, but the second is not. This non-random process makes gradual change toward beneficial attributes accumulate over time.
Would you seriously say that one of these two does not occur? If they both do occur why wouldn't it happen?
cyxgun 1 year ago
@cyxgun If you read Darwin't origin of species chapter 6, it says summariezed "my theory would fail if there is no series of species/organs that exist one after the other functioning with very slight modificaitons from one to another."
scienc proves that a slight modification of any organ will NOT function, hence, proving Irreducible Complexity TRUE and Darwin's benefit of the doubt proved true. His theory of evolution is not true.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela No, you're just plain wrong about this... There are detrimental mutations, true... but there are beneficial ones as well. Go back to my post with my summary of evolution and tell me which of those two things doesn't occur. If both do occur then why would evolution not happen?
cyxgun 1 year ago
@cyxgun
furthermore, Darwin had no idea that inside a cell has just as much movement in it as the city of Manhattan NY.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela Yes, modern cells are amazingly complex. This doesn't suggest anything about evolution...
cyxgun 1 year ago
@cyxgun
1. Descent with modification - does not occur. mutations are more detrimental. example of slight modicifation, add a protien or 2 or 3 to the eye. wil the eye funtion as well as its current design? better or worse? the eye in itself cannot be further modified. how many versions of a dog eye would it take to be the same as the human eye? and will all those versions FUNCTION? the answer is no, hence proving darwin right in his book chpt 6.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela DOES NOT OCCUR? Are you serious?
You seem to be of the opinion that every system must exist exactly as it is without changing because any change would disrupt it.... But this is demonstrably untrue. Human are genetically diverse, our metabolisms differ quite a bit and as a result some people are healthier than others. This completely obliterates your argument.
As for the eye, the evolution of the eye is well documented: /watch?v=62ptt_co3kM&feature=related
cyxgun 1 year ago
@cyxgun
2. how many mutations would it take for a ie. frog DNA to be like a human DNA? billions and trillions of years is not enough time for a few proteins to produce a flagella motor. Sciene is the observation of why things happen AGAIN and AGAIN. When was the last time a benefitial mutation occured, NATURALLY to aid in the survival of that specie.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela When peruvian colonists developped more hemoglobine to cope with the high altitude air, so they could get pregnant again.
Blobitibob 1 year ago
@cyxgun
2. con't.... Furthermore, when was the last time science observed a mutation was passed on to its offspring and that offspring? When was the last time the environment aided in developing a mutation and how?
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@cyxgun
I guess you haven't further investigated the evidence.
furthermore, if you read about recent debates, a lawyer debated an acclaimed evolutionist and the debate ended as a draw. technically, the lawyer comes as the winner as science wasn't his field. one of his biggest remarks was "two people can look at the SAME EVIDENCE and conclude different BIASED conclusions. "
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela I like how you totally ignored my questions. You obviously have no interest in finding out the truth, only supporting your current position.
cyxgun 1 year ago
HAhahahah i couldn't stop laughing at how weak these arguments are!. Keep up the good work cose i haven't laughed this hard in a very long time.
elrascal 1 year ago
@elrascal
he who laughs last eternally laughs best.
reynandvalenzuela 1 year ago
Very well put, although My beliefs are different I like how detailed you are!
Omeganis 1 year ago 2
God is real. Just stop and look around. Look at the detail in a leaf or the fingerprint on your hand. You think that was made from a big bang? There's no possible way anything on this earth was a mistake. God is real
Chrispybutters 2 years ago
Othewise known as the Kirk Cameron theory, say that the world is full of detailed, beautiful, slightly-similar patterns, then proceed to jump to the conclusion that your invisible imaginary friend is responsible. It wasn't billions and of years of a perpetual Cosmic Evolution resulting in countless individual galaxies and billions of stars and planets within these galaxies. Oh no, the Universe was made just for YOU by pixiedust wielding fairys. and the Earth is the center of it all.
bigmatt101 2 years ago
@Chrispybutters We know why leaves are the way they are. We have a rational explanation for it, and it does not involve them being a 'mistake'. Read "The blind watchmaker" or watch the video series called "how evolution works" by Donexodus2.
Evolution doesn't conflict with God or Christianity. There's a reason why all Christians that understand science believe in both God and evolution. Neither one negates the other. They believe that EVOLUTION is how and GOD is why.
cyxgun 1 year ago
There is no positive evidence for the existence of any god(s),
but there IS evidence against the god of the Bible.
Just as there can not be a one-dimentional swan
or a solid gas, or a fossilized flame,
there can not be a god of love who devises evil against humanity.
I do not insist that there are no gods,
but the evidence is very clear that the god of Abraham
is a myth with no basis in fact.
Imaginefree69 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
at our website NEWAGEDAWNS we Prove Christianity Evolution and Other religions wrong we are constantly on the Forums and there are many discussions happening. no one has been able to disprove us.
NewAgeDawned 2 years ago
another excellent video by the Fish Comix guy :)
ajgYT09 2 years ago
"The unique capability to be individuals"...
You must work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
By the way, where did God come from, and where did God get his sense of right and wrong?
mrplow8 2 years ago
Beleiving in the bible is like beleving in a story book, Evolution uccors all around us in addapting bacteria and cells. We have not scanned every corner of the earth, we have barley scanned any at all. There a thousands of organisms we have not discovered. at 3:51 it supports that the bible was written by humans for the sake of morality. at 4:45 or so the answer is that we are made to reproduce. Like all other animals. At 5:00 it is due to that our brains are the biggest on earth.
petthehomeless 2 years ago
the more we discover new species, the more missing links we need to find that we cannot.
the chances of evolution being true as missing links increase, decreases. evolution is just a fable.
speciation is impossible due to the inconsistency of developments of different organs in teh same animals.
reynandvalenzuela 2 years ago
Your arguments have so many flaws I don't know where to begin, just about everything is twisted or shows a great misunderstanding of evolution and science. But that's not my point, what I wanted to ask you is this: Suppose we find out that God does not exist, just suppose it, the quesiton is, would you continue being a good person (as I suppose you are or consider yourself to be) or would you go and kill, rape, etc just because no one will be judging you when you die?
Joel354vanfanel 2 years ago
if God does not exist, rape, murder, etc. is justified by "survival of the fittest"
reynandvalenzuela 2 years ago 3
Yeah, justified as it happens nature, and by most non-rational animals. My question was. Would you do that if there was no God?
Joel354vanfanel 2 years ago
@reynandvalenzuela No. People do'nt rape, murder, etc. for the continuity of the species,but ebcause of psychological problems.
If God does exists, what are rape and murder for, then, actually?
Blobitibob 1 year ago
@reynandvalenzuela The God of the Bible commanded rape and murder in the Old Testament. His morals are the most relative of all. The argument that God made morals is flawed because morals have their own inherent value, having arisen out of millennia of collective human experience. If God made the morals, they have no inherent value. It's just one big "Might Makes Right," which pretty much every modern intelligent human knows is bullshit.
horsesandmountains 1 year ago