Creationism and Non-creationism are, in effect, the same thing: something came from nothing. Hence, the debate presents a pseudo-argument, meaningless, irrelevant to the de facto Species-istic Humanism which Hedges knows is destroying our Home, the Earth.
@MegaTarkers "There are none so blind as those who will not see. Poor fish, aren't you?" Nice one. I see you got your undergraduate degree in mixology for metaphors. Poor little Mega
@MegaTarkers. Poor Mega. Unable to construct a logical argument. Unable to write in plain English. Unable to arrive at the proper conclusions given the facts. Unable to insult others with any effectiveness. No wonder he so transparently attempts to cover his understandable inferiority complex with overblown wording and vacuous insults. And a Hitchens fan to boot! Truly a creature to be pitied
Dude is pro. ID has not a single shred of evidence to back it up. It's all just , "Science can't explain this, OOO that's amazing and I don't understand it, how could it arise naturally it's so complex OMG LOL". Yeah that sums up intelligent design. It is not actual science. Plain and simple. If you want to teach it, teach it in a religion class.
@MegaTarkers No. Evolutionary theory is unhinged in the cellular world. To still use it as a framework of scientific inquiry has been a dead end since the decoding of the DNA became possible. The 'corroborative evidence' is clearly a castle made of sand. Your proofs point to evolution like Bush's intel points to WMD's. They are not there. Decisions are made assuming that they were there and now you're scouring the country or the internet to save face. Good luck, I guess.
@MegaTarkers No biologist living or dead has offered a believable mechanism of gross change. Not Darwin, not Stephen Jay Gould. Instead there's just vitriol from the ignorant (on both sides, admittedly). What qualifications do I need to believe or disbelieve a hoax? I've been reading Chris Hedges books: 'The Death of Liberalism' and 'Dispatches'. There's not much I can disagree with, but to condemn real discussion and debate of origins is frankly hypocritical of him.
I am not waiting for C. Hedges, as erudite as he is, to give respectability to a view alternate to his. Evolutionary biology is bankrupt in its proposal of mechanism. If it wasn't it might perhaps convince almost everyone of it's 'undeniability'. I am sorry that such a strong voice of reason in the US has to give respectability to the issue - politically. Debate the issue, Chris, or know that your judgments come off like the right wing protofascists you love to hate.
Hedges is brilliant. He's an important political voice in America. I don't understand why he picks on creationists and ID'ers. He doesn't get into the debate itself but instead makes broad judgments: "I worry that when we elevate and give respectability to intelligent design, it's the equivalent of giving respectability to the pseudo-science of eugenics." Bio-evolution belongs to the century that saw electricity as magic, phrenology, table-rapping spiritualists.
There is no evolution,in reality its deevolution.Specie become contaminated and move away from perfection,genetic mutations,disease,habitat degradation till the inevitable extinction.Ask any T rex.
Don't you get it? Evolution is change is the continues living creative evolution of the Universe? Science is evolutionary too. Science is not about finding eternal truth, it is a devolopping process - also evolution. If you deny evolution, you deny change right in front of your eyes. Evolution is not just about DNA either! It is about everything in the Universe: Stars, atoms, and thoughts! It is also about developping your thoughts - criticizing them and correcting them infinitely.
@RSFO Should the scientist, who is aware of the natural causes and of the factors determining each step of creation towards perfection, of mankind's evolution, of the minute accuracy and exactitude that rules every change in the nature that surrounds us, come to believe that these wondrous laws and amazing interactions have somehow *fortuitously* emerged out of *mindless* matter?
@1tabligh Well, I don't think there are any true laws. They are evolutionary too. So they are more like habits. Universe has a tendency towards habits, yet it also has a tendency to break them. That causes evolution somehow. How can you eternally know the causes, when/if they are evolutionary too? Noone has shown that they are not evolutionary. How would you ever do that without a developping, and hence evolutionary, theory anyway? People who say that should take LSD or ayahuasca. ;-)
@RSFO Is it at all feasible to regard all the geometry, functioning and movement of the universe as the outcome of matter in its ignorance?
How could it be believed that matter should itself be the origin of millions of attributes and characteristics and thus be the equivalent of the purposeful, wise and all-knowing Creator?
@1tabligh Matter is just a trait of the ongoing creation. People who perceive that there are either an all-knowing Creator or that the Universe is mindless matter seem to believe that eternal truth can be found, which goes practically against the nature of creativity itself, which IS evolution in my view. I don't buy the evolutionism vs creationism cliché at all. Evolution is creation. I think it is evolution vs statism. Even in a political sense.
@RSFO Is it at all possible that the cells of the body should learn their functions, pursue their aim in a precise and orderly fashion, and crystallize so miraculously in the world of being, without there being a conscious and powerful being to instruct them?
Is it not rather the case that phenomena such as these prove and demonstrate, with the utmost emphasis, the need for a plan, a design, a guiding hand inspired by conscious will?
@1tabligh Rupert Sheldrake's Morphic Resonance theory is that the evolutionary process itself is intelligent or creative, but it does in no way suggest that there is a fixed mind behind it, an external God or something. It is an evolution of *habits*. They themselves have mind, because that is just a trait also. There is no separation between matter and mind. If God is anything, then I suggest it is the entire Creative Universe itself. It is no man with a long white beard in Heaven.
@RSFO What realistic scientist, sincerely given to seeking the truth could claim today that while a kidney transplant is the result of centuries of continuous scientific research and experimentation, the structure of the kidney itself reveals no trace of a creative intelligence and will, being the product of mere nature—nature which has no more knowledge or awareness than a kindergarten pupil?
@1tabligh Genuine evolutionism is non-dualist. Look up Morphic Resonance. I am open to be proven wrong (a result of my fundamentalist believe in evolution itself), but I sincerely think that kidney's and everything else was/is intelligently created by the ongoing evolutionary processes of the Universe. The Universe is being created all the time. But it is as if the form, any form, is part of the intelligence that is creating it. Perhaps a somewhat skizofrenic intelligence.
@RSFO Is it not more logical to posit the existence of intelligence, will and planning in the creation of and ordering of the world than to attribute creativity to matter which lacks intelligence, thought, consciousness and the power to innovate?
@RSFO Belief in the existence of a wise creator is without doubt more logical than faith in the creativity of matter, which has neither perception, consciousness, nor the ability to plan; we cannot attribute to matter all the properties and attributes of intelligence that we see in the world and the ordering will that it displays.
@1tabligh You've explained nothing. No scientist knows about laws. Noone has ever shown any laws in nature, because you can't prove anything for certainty on induction. All you can say is that nature has habits as in tendensies - some very conservative. Something is not true just because you find it "logical" or convenient. Even Richard Dawkins says that. While he is no profound spokesperson for evolution (I don't regard him as a true evolutionist at all), I do agree with him on that.
@RSFO Is it logical to say that belief in God is peculiar to those who know nothing about man's composition and creation, and that, by contrast, a scientist who is aware of the natural laws and factors responsible for man's growth and development, who knows that law and precise calculation preside over all stages of man's existence, is bound to believe that matter, lacking all perception and consciousness, is the source of the wondrous laws of nature?
@1tabligh I still believe the whole spirit of what can be called development, growth, creation, learning, science, inquiry, change etc. *is* the spirit of evolution. It is the very same thing. Matter is just a trait of evolution. So are thoughts. And I think quantum physics (QM) gave a hint to how it is done. In the 19th century philosophers and scientists were the same thing, and it is if people like Peirce and Wallace already thought what QM showed us.
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
@1tabligh You are unworthy of debate, until you convince me how matter is lifeless. You haven't. Saying it is logical is not prove. I am not part of the socalled atheist movement with Richard Dawkins et al. I am part of the Evolutionist Movement. Both Richard Dawkins and your kind only have a partly believe in evolution (change), which together form the Dualist Delusion. Evolutionism is non-dualist. We hold that science/Wissenschaft is the belief in eternal fallibility.
@RSFO What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
@RSFO If man, through the application of scientific instruments and criteria, cannot perceive the existence of a thing, he cannot deny its existence simply because it is incompatible with material criteria, unless he disposes of some proof that the thing in question is impossible.
@RSFO Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *unknowing and unperceiving *, is his creator and that of all beings?
No?
Then how can the duped atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@1tabligh And I think "nature" or the Universe has as much knowledge as all pupils, all atoms, all stars, all galaxies and even all your thoughts and memories as its knowledge. I wonder if it has any boundaries at all.
Why do you have videos about the theism vs atheism debate? Such false dichonomy is beneath me. The whole problem is to overcome the problem of duality.
Don't you get it? Evolution is change is the continues living creative evolution of the Universe? Science is evolutionary too. Science is not about finding eternal truth, it is a devolopping process - also evolution. If you deny evolution, you deny change right in front of your eyes. Evolution is not just about DNA either! It is about everything in the Universe: Stars, atoms, and thoughts! It is also about developping your thoughts - criticizing them and correcting them infinitely.
lol...the ironic thing is this guy says that rationality and science cannot be relied upon. He is very selective in the application of those principles...
When we are taught the lies of abiogenesis and macro-evolution as truth people become fools.To hold to these theories just makes common sense and science null and void,since real scientific laws have crushed the possibility of them ever happening.We have scientific laws that can't be broken,if they could we couldn't depend on anything being true.
I find myself agreeing with Hedges on everything he says, except this point here. I see intelligent design in the natural world, although I can't prove it scientifically. Others see the opposite, but still can't prove it. When no proof exists, you can't claim that something is a lie, like he does. It's just his opinion, and he's entitled to it, as is everyone else.
Belief in intelligent design is simply that, a belief, an assertion. It doesn't go beyond that, there is no course in any curriculum that teaches it. One who believes in it will conduct science in the same manner as one who doesn't. It never ceases to amaze me at all the time and effort expended on debating this when there is nothing to debate. Just go about your lives and do what you do, it doesn't matter if you believe in ID or not. Then again it seems human nature is to hate and fight.
You folks can dismiss Intelligent Design all you want, and God as well, but once the Muslim invasion is firmly established in the Western world, all this effort on bashing God and his creation will be a footnote in history, and hopelessly obsolete. Incidentally, all the greatest scientific minds in history were believers in God and his creation, their beliefs did not interfere with their accomplishments in the study of the natural wold, or science. Some may argue it augmented it.
@Boodle545 Creationism is not science. The teaching of creationism stops our children from receiving valid science education and critical thinking skills. Science is about evidence and objective reasoning. Evolutionary theory is one of the most substantiated theories in all of science and to deny this because it goes aganist some religion is absurd. If there was evidence to support these claims then it would be science but it does not have any.
@Boodle545 Hell ya, I couldn't agree with you more Boodle! It's so funny watching one extreme ridicule another... especially on a subject that neither side can legitimately grasp!
@iluminatr462 Every 15 or 20 YEARS, an abnormal Christian goes CRAZY and does something like The OSLO MASSACRE. The Christian world MOURNS the death of innocents.
Every 15 or 20 MINUTES a normal MUSLIM does something like this and the MUSLIM WORLD FLOODS INTO THE STREETS TO REJOICE!!!!
While effete intellectuals like Chris Hedges preen behind ivory podiums, the world's political, economic and academic control is being inexorably transferred into the hands of fascist, genocidal Muslims.
and you're upset about that, because you want the world's political, economic and academic control to stay in the hands of fascist, genocidal judeo-christians? yeah, you come across very un-nazi like. except that your paranoia is identical to the nazi's. you just replaced jew with muslim. every 15 or 20 years a christian goes crazy? christians have been going crazy for 2000 years without reprieve. get a fucking clue.
@iluminatr462 Even a cursory comparison of the quality of life and human dignity in Christian versus Islamic societies will show that ISLAM IS A FASCIST GENOCIDAL, OPPRESSIVE DISEASE SPREADING ACROSS THE FREE WORLD; TREATING WOMEN LIKE ANIMALS OR PROPERTY TO BE BOUGHT, SOLD OR KILLED ON THE SLIGHTEST WHIM.
@AztlanPrincess That is not an achievement of christianity, it is an achievement of secular morality, if we kept following the Bible without questioning it we would still be using slaves.
@AztlanPrincess you have a right to your opinion. and I have a right to shut it down.
the "muslim" world is not responsible for the crazies anymore than the "christian" world is responsible for theirs. Muslims are not celebrators of death. they are people who wish to live like anyone else. don't confuse the religion with politically motivated violence and destruction.
Thanks for sharin. Hedges is my favorite intellectual.
JustCamus 19 hours ago
Another far-left loon peddling propaganda for the Commie NWO left.
TexasFreedomFighter 3 days ago
Creationism and Non-creationism are, in effect, the same thing: something came from nothing. Hence, the debate presents a pseudo-argument, meaningless, irrelevant to the de facto Species-istic Humanism which Hedges knows is destroying our Home, the Earth.
sugarlanskee8 2 weeks ago
@MegaTarkers "There are none so blind as those who will not see. Poor fish, aren't you?" Nice one. I see you got your undergraduate degree in mixology for metaphors. Poor little Mega
Uncle99B 1 month ago
@MegaTarkers. Poor Mega. Unable to dish it out. Unable to take it. Should have stayed in the wading pool
Uncle99B 1 month ago
@MegaTarkers. Poor Mega. Unable to construct a logical argument. Unable to write in plain English. Unable to arrive at the proper conclusions given the facts. Unable to insult others with any effectiveness. No wonder he so transparently attempts to cover his understandable inferiority complex with overblown wording and vacuous insults. And a Hitchens fan to boot! Truly a creature to be pitied
Uncle99B 1 month ago
Dude is pro. ID has not a single shred of evidence to back it up. It's all just , "Science can't explain this, OOO that's amazing and I don't understand it, how could it arise naturally it's so complex OMG LOL". Yeah that sums up intelligent design. It is not actual science. Plain and simple. If you want to teach it, teach it in a religion class.
McNutzo 1 month ago
@MegaTarkers No. Evolutionary theory is unhinged in the cellular world. To still use it as a framework of scientific inquiry has been a dead end since the decoding of the DNA became possible. The 'corroborative evidence' is clearly a castle made of sand. Your proofs point to evolution like Bush's intel points to WMD's. They are not there. Decisions are made assuming that they were there and now you're scouring the country or the internet to save face. Good luck, I guess.
wurclav1 1 month ago
@wurclav1 Are you a geneticist?
Antiks72 12 hours ago
@MegaTarkers No biologist living or dead has offered a believable mechanism of gross change. Not Darwin, not Stephen Jay Gould. Instead there's just vitriol from the ignorant (on both sides, admittedly). What qualifications do I need to believe or disbelieve a hoax? I've been reading Chris Hedges books: 'The Death of Liberalism' and 'Dispatches'. There's not much I can disagree with, but to condemn real discussion and debate of origins is frankly hypocritical of him.
wurclav1 1 month ago
I am not waiting for C. Hedges, as erudite as he is, to give respectability to a view alternate to his. Evolutionary biology is bankrupt in its proposal of mechanism. If it wasn't it might perhaps convince almost everyone of it's 'undeniability'. I am sorry that such a strong voice of reason in the US has to give respectability to the issue - politically. Debate the issue, Chris, or know that your judgments come off like the right wing protofascists you love to hate.
wurclav1 1 month ago
Hedges is brilliant. He's an important political voice in America. I don't understand why he picks on creationists and ID'ers. He doesn't get into the debate itself but instead makes broad judgments: "I worry that when we elevate and give respectability to intelligent design, it's the equivalent of giving respectability to the pseudo-science of eugenics." Bio-evolution belongs to the century that saw electricity as magic, phrenology, table-rapping spiritualists.
wurclav1 1 month ago
There is no evolution,in reality its deevolution.Specie become contaminated and move away from perfection,genetic mutations,disease,habitat degradation till the inevitable extinction.Ask any T rex.
leiberfrasmilch 1 month ago
Don't you get it? Evolution is change is the continues living creative evolution of the Universe? Science is evolutionary too. Science is not about finding eternal truth, it is a devolopping process - also evolution. If you deny evolution, you deny change right in front of your eyes. Evolution is not just about DNA either! It is about everything in the Universe: Stars, atoms, and thoughts! It is also about developping your thoughts - criticizing them and correcting them infinitely.
RSFO 2 months ago
@RSFO Should the scientist, who is aware of the natural causes and of the factors determining each step of creation towards perfection, of mankind's evolution, of the minute accuracy and exactitude that rules every change in the nature that surrounds us, come to believe that these wondrous laws and amazing interactions have somehow *fortuitously* emerged out of *mindless* matter?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh Well, I don't think there are any true laws. They are evolutionary too. So they are more like habits. Universe has a tendency towards habits, yet it also has a tendency to break them. That causes evolution somehow. How can you eternally know the causes, when/if they are evolutionary too? Noone has shown that they are not evolutionary. How would you ever do that without a developping, and hence evolutionary, theory anyway? People who say that should take LSD or ayahuasca. ;-)
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO Is it at all feasible to regard all the geometry, functioning and movement of the universe as the outcome of matter in its ignorance?
How could it be believed that matter should itself be the origin of millions of attributes and characteristics and thus be the equivalent of the purposeful, wise and all-knowing Creator?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh Matter is just a trait of the ongoing creation. People who perceive that there are either an all-knowing Creator or that the Universe is mindless matter seem to believe that eternal truth can be found, which goes practically against the nature of creativity itself, which IS evolution in my view. I don't buy the evolutionism vs creationism cliché at all. Evolution is creation. I think it is evolution vs statism. Even in a political sense.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO Is it at all possible that the cells of the body should learn their functions, pursue their aim in a precise and orderly fashion, and crystallize so miraculously in the world of being, without there being a conscious and powerful being to instruct them?
Is it not rather the case that phenomena such as these prove and demonstrate, with the utmost emphasis, the need for a plan, a design, a guiding hand inspired by conscious will?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh Rupert Sheldrake's Morphic Resonance theory is that the evolutionary process itself is intelligent or creative, but it does in no way suggest that there is a fixed mind behind it, an external God or something. It is an evolution of *habits*. They themselves have mind, because that is just a trait also. There is no separation between matter and mind. If God is anything, then I suggest it is the entire Creative Universe itself. It is no man with a long white beard in Heaven.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO What realistic scientist, sincerely given to seeking the truth could claim today that while a kidney transplant is the result of centuries of continuous scientific research and experimentation, the structure of the kidney itself reveals no trace of a creative intelligence and will, being the product of mere nature—nature which has no more knowledge or awareness than a kindergarten pupil?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh Genuine evolutionism is non-dualist. Look up Morphic Resonance. I am open to be proven wrong (a result of my fundamentalist believe in evolution itself), but I sincerely think that kidney's and everything else was/is intelligently created by the ongoing evolutionary processes of the Universe. The Universe is being created all the time. But it is as if the form, any form, is part of the intelligence that is creating it. Perhaps a somewhat skizofrenic intelligence.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO Is it not more logical to posit the existence of intelligence, will and planning in the creation of and ordering of the world than to attribute creativity to matter which lacks intelligence, thought, consciousness and the power to innovate?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh How do you know it lacks thought? And how does something not exist? All primary societies believe that everything is conscious.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO Belief in the existence of a wise creator is without doubt more logical than faith in the creativity of matter, which has neither perception, consciousness, nor the ability to plan; we cannot attribute to matter all the properties and attributes of intelligence that we see in the world and the ordering will that it displays.
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh You've explained nothing. No scientist knows about laws. Noone has ever shown any laws in nature, because you can't prove anything for certainty on induction. All you can say is that nature has habits as in tendensies - some very conservative. Something is not true just because you find it "logical" or convenient. Even Richard Dawkins says that. While he is no profound spokesperson for evolution (I don't regard him as a true evolutionist at all), I do agree with him on that.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO Is it logical to say that belief in God is peculiar to those who know nothing about man's composition and creation, and that, by contrast, a scientist who is aware of the natural laws and factors responsible for man's growth and development, who knows that law and precise calculation preside over all stages of man's existence, is bound to believe that matter, lacking all perception and consciousness, is the source of the wondrous laws of nature?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh I still believe the whole spirit of what can be called development, growth, creation, learning, science, inquiry, change etc. *is* the spirit of evolution. It is the very same thing. Matter is just a trait of evolution. So are thoughts. And I think quantum physics (QM) gave a hint to how it is done. In the 19th century philosophers and scientists were the same thing, and it is if people like Peirce and Wallace already thought what QM showed us.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO The atheist Delusion!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh You are unworthy of debate, until you convince me how matter is lifeless. You haven't. Saying it is logical is not prove. I am not part of the socalled atheist movement with Richard Dawkins et al. I am part of the Evolutionist Movement. Both Richard Dawkins and your kind only have a partly believe in evolution (change), which together form the Dualist Delusion. Evolutionism is non-dualist. We hold that science/Wissenschaft is the belief in eternal fallibility.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh
The socalled science-worshippers believe in a notion of science within a *DUALIST* framework. We do not. We see habits, not laws.
You can believe in your version of Allah. But let the discussion end here. I am SATAN to you anyway.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO If man, through the application of scientific instruments and criteria, cannot perceive the existence of a thing, he cannot deny its existence simply because it is incompatible with material criteria, unless he disposes of some proof that the thing in question is impossible.
1tabligh 1 month ago
@RSFO Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *unknowing and unperceiving *, is his creator and that of all beings?
No?
Then how can the duped atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 month ago
@1tabligh And I think "nature" or the Universe has as much knowledge as all pupils, all atoms, all stars, all galaxies and even all your thoughts and memories as its knowledge. I wonder if it has any boundaries at all.
Why do you have videos about the theism vs atheism debate? Such false dichonomy is beneath me. The whole problem is to overcome the problem of duality.
RSFO 1 month ago
Don't you get it? Evolution is change is the continues living creative evolution of the Universe? Science is evolutionary too. Science is not about finding eternal truth, it is a devolopping process - also evolution. If you deny evolution, you deny change right in front of your eyes. Evolution is not just about DNA either! It is about everything in the Universe: Stars, atoms, and thoughts! It is also about developping your thoughts - criticizing them and correcting them infinitely.
RSFO 2 months ago
lol...the ironic thing is this guy says that rationality and science cannot be relied upon. He is very selective in the application of those principles...
Redfingers 2 months ago
When we are taught the lies of abiogenesis and macro-evolution as truth people become fools.To hold to these theories just makes common sense and science null and void,since real scientific laws have crushed the possibility of them ever happening.We have scientific laws that can't be broken,if they could we couldn't depend on anything being true.
CBALLEN 2 months ago
I find myself agreeing with Hedges on everything he says, except this point here. I see intelligent design in the natural world, although I can't prove it scientifically. Others see the opposite, but still can't prove it. When no proof exists, you can't claim that something is a lie, like he does. It's just his opinion, and he's entitled to it, as is everyone else.
Cifrocco 2 months ago
Belief in intelligent design is simply that, a belief, an assertion. It doesn't go beyond that, there is no course in any curriculum that teaches it. One who believes in it will conduct science in the same manner as one who doesn't. It never ceases to amaze me at all the time and effort expended on debating this when there is nothing to debate. Just go about your lives and do what you do, it doesn't matter if you believe in ID or not. Then again it seems human nature is to hate and fight.
Cifrocco 2 months ago
You folks can dismiss Intelligent Design all you want, and God as well, but once the Muslim invasion is firmly established in the Western world, all this effort on bashing God and his creation will be a footnote in history, and hopelessly obsolete. Incidentally, all the greatest scientific minds in history were believers in God and his creation, their beliefs did not interfere with their accomplishments in the study of the natural wold, or science. Some may argue it augmented it.
Cifrocco 2 months ago
He doesn't like creationism. But he also doesn't like atheists.
He has very ambiguous views on religion.
charlesvan13 2 months ago
I would be Christian if this guy was a preacher!
tstruss912 3 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
it's quite evident you CAN believe anything you want to.....
reliablebow 4 months ago
Creationism is part of the Zeitgeist
flynnjp19 4 months ago
@Boodle545 Creationism is not science. The teaching of creationism stops our children from receiving valid science education and critical thinking skills. Science is about evidence and objective reasoning. Evolutionary theory is one of the most substantiated theories in all of science and to deny this because it goes aganist some religion is absurd. If there was evidence to support these claims then it would be science but it does not have any.
jrockd36 5 months ago
@Boodle545 Hell ya, I couldn't agree with you more Boodle! It's so funny watching one extreme ridicule another... especially on a subject that neither side can legitimately grasp!
maximus505 5 months ago
This guy - who i have never heard of - just spoke a lot of sense
vohshkab 6 months ago 8
@vohshkab lol, yeah, this guy is awesome, watch all of his interviews if you can, you'll learn something new each time
dvzqz87 2 months ago
@Boodle545 not too good at listening are we? mr hedges criticized academics for not taking creationist to task.
iluminatr462 7 months ago
Nazis ruled through fascism.
Muslims rule through fascism.
Nazis conducted a genocidal campaign against the Jews.
Muslims ARE conducting a genocidal campaign against the Jews.
Nazis DIDN'T want to exterminate all non-Nazis.
Muslims DO want to exterminate all non-Muslims.
Most Nazis were normal people who went to work each day and loved their children.
Most Muslims are normal people who go to work each day and love their children.
The Koran is a FASCIST MANIFESTO OF RACISM AND GENOCIDE!
AztlanPrincess 7 months ago
Nazis based their ideology on ignorance and xenophobia
AztlanPrincess bases her ideology on ignorance and xenophobia
Nazis spread lies to harm innocent people
AztlanPrincess spreads lies to harm innocent people
AztlanPrincess is a FASCIST and doesn't even realize it.
iluminatr462 7 months ago
@iluminatr462 Every 15 or 20 YEARS, an abnormal Christian goes CRAZY and does something like The OSLO MASSACRE. The Christian world MOURNS the death of innocents.
Every 15 or 20 MINUTES a normal MUSLIM does something like this and the MUSLIM WORLD FLOODS INTO THE STREETS TO REJOICE!!!!
While effete intellectuals like Chris Hedges preen behind ivory podiums, the world's political, economic and academic control is being inexorably transferred into the hands of fascist, genocidal Muslims.
AztlanPrincess 7 months ago
and you're upset about that, because you want the world's political, economic and academic control to stay in the hands of fascist, genocidal judeo-christians? yeah, you come across very un-nazi like. except that your paranoia is identical to the nazi's. you just replaced jew with muslim. every 15 or 20 years a christian goes crazy? christians have been going crazy for 2000 years without reprieve. get a fucking clue.
iluminatr462 7 months ago
@iluminatr462 Even a cursory comparison of the quality of life and human dignity in Christian versus Islamic societies will show that ISLAM IS A FASCIST GENOCIDAL, OPPRESSIVE DISEASE SPREADING ACROSS THE FREE WORLD; TREATING WOMEN LIKE ANIMALS OR PROPERTY TO BE BOUGHT, SOLD OR KILLED ON THE SLIGHTEST WHIM.
AztlanPrincess 7 months ago
@AztlanPrincess That is not an achievement of christianity, it is an achievement of secular morality, if we kept following the Bible without questioning it we would still be using slaves.
KKDragonLord 7 months ago 9
@AztlanPrincess you have a right to your opinion. and I have a right to shut it down.
muslims are people like anyone else. don't confuse the religion with political oppression, dictatorship, and conflict.
theshunzun 4 months ago in playlist More videos from reticularimus
@AztlanPrincess you have a right to your opinion. and I have a right to shut it down.
the "muslim" world is not responsible for the crazies anymore than the "christian" world is responsible for theirs. Muslims are not celebrators of death. they are people who wish to live like anyone else. don't confuse the religion with politically motivated violence and destruction.
theshunzun 4 months ago in playlist More videos from reticularimus
The TRUTH !
gregrutz 9 months ago