Added: 2 years ago
From: Eye2EyeIIIV
Views: 558
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (61)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • your are cold bloded liar,man.its shame your god doesnt exist because you will go to hell.

  • HAHAHAH you brought up Nebraska man. Cook found a tooth, and in his notes he worte, " may be homind, cannot tell yet", then a london paper got hold of it and blew it out of porption. Also Nebraska man in no way invaildates, lucy, Homo hablis, or any other homind ancestors. Nebraska man was throw out and is not used in any way to prove evoultion, so there is no reason to bring it up.

  • How dishonest, still unable to rate your videos. Synbolc0729 said it best, "You need a religion to appreciate your life?" No, and you don't need to keep rationalizing away the fossils and tree of life to justify your belief in myth. Piltdown man was a fraud as you said, but it is not accepted in the scientific field - if science worked like religion it might still be but under peer review, ideas that are fraudulent or incorrect are discarded.

  • @soulure how ignorant .... there are still schoolbooks that promote piltdown man as an ancestor of humans.

    if you weren't so indoctrinated you would look up evidence for yourself. but you wont because you'll say the evidence already proves evolution even though it hasnt. and also quit complaining about not being able to rate the video. its his video not yours. you just want to harass him with snide remarks and trying to put him down. how ungentlemanly of you.

  • @thehikarikage "there are still schoolbooks that promote piltdown man as an ancestor of humans."

    Which books and in which schools? The scientific community rejects piltdown man. If a school is incorrectly teaching it, they should be corrected; we agree.

  • You need a religion to appreciate your life? REALLY?

    Dude...

    A sperm and an egg got together and you were created.. should your sperm have missed or another egg fertalized.. YOU WOULD NOT BE HERE!..YOU ARE A MIRACLE! We are on a spec of dust in comparison to the universe. Nevertheless this spec of dust is teaming with all sorts of life and beauty..Here we are in the middle of this vastness of space..were worried about whos God has a bigger cock? Fuck religion. Look around. Enjoy your gift.

  • @Symbolc0729 Uh... actuaaaally... 0.46% of earth is habitable, 99.54 wants to kill us consciously or naturally, be it animals/viruses or the earth's environment. Lets not even talk about the space. I would say being born is more of a 'welcome to hell' rather than a miracle. The only miracle is that YOU and everyone else who does, read this message, are not dead. Yet.

  • At about 6:00

    "Technically, people who have been brought up being spoon-fed evolution can get brainwashed into thinking that they are smart enough to think for themselves and that they don't need to accept religion."

    That's right, this guy insists that we must be brainwashed if we think we are smart enough to think for ourselves. This is why religion is detrimental to our society. It encourages us NOT to think for ourselves; rather just blindly follow whats written in a book. Disgraceful!

  • D I N O S A U R S ?

  • Evolution is true and the DNA proves it. Get over it, Jesus and his dad...Yahweh... are DEAD!

    Lets put them to REST as FICTION, just like Winnie the POOH

  • Comment removed

  • "Today Neanderthals are classified as completely human"

    No this is a complete lie, their morphology and DNA says differently.

  • "No one has found an ape man"

    Nor has anyone found a half dinosaur and half t-rex and nor should they. The term ape is a category not a species and it is a category that humans are found in. So what you said is like me saying it is fully bird or its fully chicken.... It makes no sense unless you are a creationists.

  • @sweatytoothmadman so you are a proponant of the "hopeful monster" theory?

    the evolutionists say that fossilization happens over millions of years when dirt covers them layer by layer but where are all the bones?most likely they were eaten by predetors and scavangers and the bones were taken elsewhere.but there is a problem with that though. bones are highly resilient they can last for thousands and maybe millions of years but there are so few of them that it is confusing for evolutionists.

  • I'm sorry but this little argument makes little to no sense.

    "but where are all the bones"

    If it isn't barried then they would get eating away by just about anything, A dead organism isn't going to last long on the surface.

  • @thehikarikage

    No, they don't agree, at the longest I would be suprised if they lasted over a year.

  • @copypaper92704 but then that contradicts the many MILLIONS of years that the bones were supposedly buried by dirt. because the evolutionists say it takes millions of years to form a fossile layer by layer for it to completely cover the bones up.

  • "Vestigial organs..." "Many medical doctors have important medical functions"

    A vestigial organ is an organ that has lost all or most of its original function, it is not one that has lost all its function. Therefore proving that it has a function does not change the fact that it is vestigial. You changed the definition.

  • @sweatytoothmadman Vestigiality- describes homologous characters of organisms that have seemingly lost (all) or (most) of their original function in a species through evolution. from wikipedia. he didnt change it . he is correct that there are no vestigal organs at all. look it up for yourself. and stop berating him since he has researched and you have not.

  • Hey this is sweatytoothmadman on my backup account. EagleEye blocked me some time ago.

    "he is correct that there are no vestigal organs at all"

    He stated that the organs in question have no function and therefore are not V.O. That goes against the basic defintion. It is loss or change or original. What he thinks vestigail stands for is with out any function at all. So his argument is incorrect. He is changing the def.

  • man has been trying for centuries to put words in Gods mouth

    He said firmament and since we think it means dome He is wrong???

  • if i put up a curtain where you couldn't go touch it and painted it to look like brick and called it firmawall

    years would go by and firmawall would mean brick wall but i'd laugh and know it wasn't right at all

    firmawall really means curtain painted to look like brick

    you would upon discovering the truth accuse me of misnaming the curtain?

    who would be wrong me for naming it firmawall

  • "Can you find any error in the theory of evolution?"

    they find the tooth of a pig and it is broadcast to the world that they have found mans missing link

    what kind of science would think a pig tooth was human?

    junk science

    the same speculation and conjecture is the definition of evolution

  • any book written thousands of years ago should be full of errors yet the only thing you can come up with is somebodies misinterpretation of what could just as easily mean surface tension

    pretty weak don't you think?

  • anyone who believes life can exist anywhere at all has to admit there is a God

    if you want to dispute it first ask yourself how many other universes are there and list if you can the number of other places life could have begun well before we could have emerged

    because we have no idea what eternal stuff might look like but must surly have been

    One of the curious developments in cosmology in recent years has been the emergence of the multiverse as a mainstream idea. (technologyreview)

  • The appendix is not generally credited with substantial function. However, current evidence tends to involve it in the immunologic mechanism. Gordon McHardy, The Appendix, Gastroenterology, Vol. 4, editor J. Edward Berk (Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co., 1985), p 2609.

  • "The appendix has long been categorized as a useless vestigial organ, but this is totally inaccurate. Since the 1960s it has been scientifically known that it has an important lymphatic and

    antibody production function, as part of the bodys immune system. See Dr Jerry Bergman and Dr George Howes review of thescientific literature in their book Vestigial Organs are Fully Functional, CRS Monograph Series No. 4, 1993.

  • "Thus, although scientists have long discounted the human appendix as a vestigial organ, a growing quantity of evidence indicates that the appendix does in fact have a significant function as a part of the bodys immune system. N. Roberts, Does the Appendix Serve a Purpose in Any Animal? (Scientific American, Vol. 285, November 2001, p. 96.)

  • "Long regarded as a vestigial organ with no function in the human body, the appendix is now thought to be one of the sites where immune responses are initiated,(Hartenstein,R.(1998­). Grolier Encyclopedia.) See also "VestigialOrgans" are Fully Functional by Jerry Bergman and George Howe.

    "its removal also increases a persons susceptibility to leukemia,Hodgkin's disease,cancer of the colon,and cancer of the ovaries," (Brown,W.(1980). In The Beginning. Center for Scientific Creation p 18.

  • Great Video. Make sure to post your video response on my newly updated "Examining Evolution" video, sometime in the future. It will completely DESTROY every argument in the book used for evolution. Rationalanarchy, You know nothing of "vestigial organs." There are MANY sources to prove that is has function.

  • It IS true that you can live without your appendix. But you're going to have a higher chance of quite a few diseases.

    But just because you can live WITHOUT something doesn't prove you don't NEED it. You can live without both your arms, and both your legs, and both your eyes. ...That doesn't prove you don't NEED it.

  • 6 minutes and 37 seconds of hot air

  • 5:10 - except that it claims the world is flat, the sky is a solid dome, astrology works (according to genesis, the stars are "for signs"), and a lot of other very wrong things.

    Also, it argues against the scientific method itself (by arguing for faith,which is it's opposite)

    5:18 - By other scientists, who corrected their relatively (compared to the bible) minor errors to reach an even more accurate picture of the world. That's how science works.

  • 5:10 ible never said the world was flat and before you post anything that says it's circular remember that is in no way flat

    5:18 just before you were ready to burn the Bible because it said the world was circular

    now your calling the fraud of numerous scientsts "minor errors that they corrected" some of those minor frauds and complete bungles weren't found out for years

    some are still in textbooks

    i'd say you were more than a little biased

    you should have hung around for 5:58

  • Okay, sorry about the flat earth thing, it doesn't specifically say that it's flat. Although it does have four corners, and that outside of the "firmament" (the sky, which is a solid dome) there is an ocean. So it's still BS.

    Those fossils:

    ramapithecus - wikipedia article redirects to sivapethicus, and extinct ancestor of modern orangutans. not a human ancestor.

    java man - an early, and incomplete example of homo erectus. Currently there are dozens of fossils, some almost complete.

  • And he complains about "how do bones survive for 750,000 years without rotting?". Or in other words "why don't i even know what the word fossil means?". 10 points from christianity.

    Piltdown man - at least this one was actually a mistake, and there's something to complain about. But it was thrown out in the 50s, and only one or a few men in the scientific community were involved, so it doesn't mark the modern theory of evolution, just those individual scientists' records.

  • "the so-called neanderthal man" is an entire species of extinct hominids, and there have been enough discoveries that their genome has even been sequenced. I don't know whether that first specimen did in fact turn out to be a mistake, but in the end it doesn't matter.

    As for lucy, again this is the first specimen of an entire species (Australopithecus afarensis) with enough fossils to conclusively prove the species existed.

  • the sky is a solid dome and if upon reentery a spacecraft doesn't have a steep enough angle it will bounce off like a rock will do on water or a bullet on ground

    now if you want to get technical about it rock is not solid because particles can pass right through feet of it without hitting anything(upon that fact of science the new quantum transistors are made)

    gasses are solid matter as we define matter

    so the nit picky vote has to go to the Bible again

  • Just because it's possible for something moving at orbital velocity to bounce off of it doesn't make it solid. That's like saying that because a megawatt laser will make a glow on the other side of 6 inches of steel, it's transparent

    And now you're changing the definition of "solid" in a different direction.

    Solid is a state of matter, as opposed to gas or liquid (or plasma, and i think there's others), and the sky is gas, not solid.

  • the Bible doesn't say it's solid the way your referring to solid

    so your overzealous accusations are bunk

    post this verse that says the air is solid

    you being ignorant doesn't prove the Bible is wrong it only proves your wrong

  • Genesis 1:6-8

    "God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

  • Firmament is the translation of the hebrew "raqiya", meaning an extended solid surface or flat expanse, considered to be a hemisphere above the ground.

    So it does specifically say that the sky is a solid dome, which is there to keep the water out. I win.

  • solid or flat expance which is it then because there is alot of difference between solid and expance

    which verse are we talking about because i'd like to see it

    it soungs like anouther cheap attempt like the old circular means flat

    if you need to try that hard to find error then i'd say the Bible is doing much better than evolution

    if you wrote "surface tention" could i interpret that to mean solid barrier and say you think water is solid?

    you loose

  • Well, since it's "considered to be a hemisphere above the ground", i'd say solid. Even if it was meant to be a gaseous hemisphere, that's still wrong by any stretch of the imagination.

    Genesis 1:6-8 is the verse i'm talking about, i'm just telling you what the word "firmament" in those verses means.

    Try that hard? This is the very first page of the bible i'm talking about.

    Can you find any error in the theory of evolution?

    No, no you could not. Are you going anywhere with this?

  • "considered to be a hemisphere"

    it doesn't mean hemisphere it's just that men used to think it was a hemisphere

    the Bible knew more than men at that time

    celestial sphere:(pinceton edu)

    it wasn't the Bible that said it was a solid dome men thought it meant solid dome

  • Specifically, the men who wrote the bible thought it was a hemisphere :)

    But, seriously, it means it's a solid dome. And you can tell that because Gen. 1:6 and 1:7 say that the firmament was made to keep the water out, and air doesn't do that.

  • Specifically, the men who read it think

    you don't know any more than i do what they one who wrote it thought

    moses never gave a commentary on the subject

    can you see how you are making assumptions?

    do you see that you have entered this subject with preconceived prejudices?

    because it's plain to me that you just want the Bible to be wrong at any cost

  • I'm making reasonalble assumptions, based on the fact that these were bronze age tribespeople, and so wouldn't interpret it as a metaphor, and instead interpret it directly as being a dome.

    Besides, if it's not a solid dome, how is it keeping the water out? (or "separating the waters" as the bible says)

  • if you entered study on evolution theory it would be rather plain that you can't pick up a pig tooth and conclude that it's preman and still have any credibility with me

    the same scientific method was used to divine the relationship of every fossil ever found

    uuuuh i think it looks like a half lizard half fish

    duhh they must be our kinfolk duhh

  • That's not a flaw in evolutionary theory, because that one mistake, by one guy, whose reputation was destroyed because of it, is not part of evolutionary theory.

    A flaw in evolutionary theory would mean proving every fossil we have to be wrong, or that mutation doesn't happen, or show that decay rates are way too variable to use radiometric dating, or any of a dozen other impossible things. And to refute it, you'd need to do all of those at once.

    Good luck :)

  • no it's a pattern

    they didn't stop picking things up and concluding from the look of it how it might fit in their line up

    there was 0 proof that the tooth was a mans and there is 0 proof that the other fossils were ever kin to any thing

    you could just as easily say it was created that way with exactly as much proof

    so if you used the same critical thinking you used when looking at the Bible you could never call any fossil a kin of man because you don't know if it ever had children

  • Okay, even if we assume that all of the dozens and dozens of hominid fossils that support evolution are fake, or just don't support evolution, there's still enough evidence elsewhere to prove it irrefutably.

    For one thing, speciation has actually been observed, which i think is as conclusive proof as you can possibly get.

    Also, it's just certain to happen whenever there is genetic variation, and mortality, in a population.

  • a great dane and chihuahua can't bread and are as different looking as they can get but we know they are exactly the same species in reality

    of course in an overzealous mind it is speciation and the fact that pigeons vary greatly yet are all the same species never enters the debate

    speciation is a good example of the pattern in evolutions unscientific methods

    just call this one speciation because it happened in nature and don't mention pigeons or dogs because it would sour the claim

  • As for 5:58, this completely ignores the point that evolution, and science in general, backs everything up with evidence, and answers questions with explanations and some more evidence.

    While, on the other hand, religion backs everything up with faith, hellfire, and smiting.

    So, yeah, which do you think does the brainwashing?

    6:08 - Evolution isn't there to give purpose in life, it's to explain the variety of life on earth. It explains just that, and nothing else.

  • So complaining that it offers no real purpose in life is like complaining that the law of gravity doesn't explain the photoelectric effect.

    If you want purpose in life, try philosophy.

  • evolution is pseudoscience has nothing but speculation to back it up

    proof would be if we had actually observed a species change in any living thing

    speculation is when you see a bone and automatically claim kinship

    see the difference

    zealotry is when you think you have evidence but can name any specific evidence only a general idea you call proof

    like say mistaking a pigs tooth for a preman tooth because it looks nearly man like

  • yes but your legs and arms at least serve a purpose whereas, say your appendix serves absolutely no purpose in humans

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