All I can say is that every Spring, I see the flowers on my trees, the food which I eat shows its Peaches Identical on my Fruit Trees than at my Supermarket. The Grapes of Wine upon my Vines of my Vineyards in South ,Ontario,CANADA!My Apples huge Soft-Balled Apples upon my Trees.Real Plums upon my Trees. Once I see then and Video/Photograph them my Computers tell me it is real but I DID NOT MAKE THE TREES NOR FRUIT, so there is a CREATOR and that CREATOR-Designer on my Computer Say"GOD-YAHWEH"!!
By Manesfesting into reality, the verification is in the instrumentation of science tools, a Pro-DSLR, Digital-Camera, Audio if there is Audio in the Menifestation. Once confirmed by not only our 5 Senses but also our Science Equipment,Computer Analysis comfirms the Manisfestation, then the Observation becomes reality both human and Instrumentation Science Instruments of Detection-Computer Confirmed!!!!
If I understand your question, no I see no reason to think there was a God or any other supernatural being involved. Not sure why you're referring to spontaneous occurrence in a vacuum, Earth is anything but a vacuum.
Until Humanbeings don't come to the Conclusive-Laboratory Science Proof using Todays 21st Century Instrumentation &Bio-Chemicals.Until,Humanity can rest a Peace with"BOTH CREATION-EVOLUTION&ViceVersa ofEVOLUTION-CREATION BOTH Exchanges just like Humanity Creates its Technologies then Evolves, Technologies,Until Humanity can Realise that BOTH Processess Are Involved with the Life Dilemma=Peace with Creation+Evolution.BOTH Processes"combined"!If this,doesn't take place,then Conflicts will exist!!
Polonium radio halos show that the Earths foundation was created INSTANTLY as if it was SPOKE INTO EXISTANCE. No sciententist has been able to disprove this SCIENTIFIC PROOF.
lol, what nonsense. Creationism was conclusively debunked 150 years ago and they haven't come up an original argument since then. Evolution (biological evolution) is one of (if not the) most strongly supported therories in science. THERE IS NO DEBATE!
It is"Ultimately Insane for ANY Atheistic Scientist to try to use their Colossus"FAILURE in the "Spontaneous Generation of Life, it FAILED,it was Objectively"Controlled only with Periodic Elements & Electric-Charges in a"Sterile Vacuum Laboratory Chamber at either Universities or Colleges,& the Atheistic Scientists & People"DID NOT produce even 1 Single Celled Virus or Bacteria NEVER Mind about Multi-Cellular Life!The"FAILURE"by Atheistic Scientists to only produce Random Amino Acids=NOT Life"!!
@Jules7892 You don't understand the science friend. The miller Urey experiment was not an attempt to create life, it was an attempt to create organic molecules which they achieved. By the way, only creationists believe that multicellular life sprung out of the ground. Science has found that single celled organisms lived for over a billion years before multicelled systems, why would they spring forth in a lab?
@richjammcl The Urey Miller Experiment wanted to produce the 1st Uni-CellularOrganisms,that was the objective,but any Bio-Engineer can make Random Bio-Chemical Structured Elements but NOTUni-Cellular Life!My position,pertaining to my GOLD Diploma General Sciences is"Creation Mechanisms occurs inPRIMARY by an Ultimate-Engineer,called"GOD-Yahweh-Jehovah"then the"Evolution takes Secondary Processes to Advance Life from Uni-Cellular to Multi-Cellular,Exchanges between"Creation"&"Evolution"Combined!!
@Jules7892 Actually, the experiment was to recreate early earth conditions and see if organic molecules would spontaneously be synthesized. Bio engineers can synthesize all sorts of things but those are concerted efforts to create those things. This experiment was to see if organic material would come about naturally, not to create life. Feel free to look up the articles, they're easy to find and clear about what they're attempting to achieve.
@Jules7892 by the way, no one is impressed with a general sciences diploma, even when you tag GOLD to the beginning. General sciences is like taking high school science over again, it's a joke. Even if we never figure out how to create life, which isn't likely, it does nothing to suggest any supernatural entities were involved.
@richjammcl I suggust that you are suggesting "nothing to sugggest any supernatural entities were involved" then you are possibly suggesting "NO Supernatural Entities ie. A "God" or The "God" than Atheism maybe "No God" therefore "Spontaneous Occurances from Vacuum"????
@Jules7892 If I understand your question, no I see no reason to think there was a God or any other supernatural being involved. Not sure why you're referring to spontaneous occurrence in a vacuum, Earth is anything but a vacuum.
@richjammcl "Even if we never figure out how to create life" this are your statement. Therefore, if you "cannot" "create life" then how can We , the reader believe in "NO" God because "which isn't likely" in your statement. It certainly is NOT going to make Anybody an "Atheist" if Life "ins't likely" or "does nothing to suggest any supernatural entities"in your statement! Then tell me, what is the "Force" creating Life Everyday in Our Lives is it a "Vacuum????"????
@Jules7892 The point is, there are a multitude of different ways that life could have originated and God is only one of them. Given that there is no evidence for this, there is no reason to believe it. Our ability or inability to create something proves nothing. Try finding a person pre 500bc who could create a magnet, they wouldn't even know what it was you were talking about and yet we are able to create them en masse today. That doesn't prove anything.
@richjammclLet me say,that understand you,I do agree with you to a limit.You state"that life could have originated and God is only one of them"I can agree with this statement.But again your statement"Given that there is no evidence for this,there is no reason to believe it"I am to now assume that you are stating one does NOT have to believe in a "GOD" becaues your Statement:"That doesn't prove anything" prove anything=nothing??If so, then are you stating either 1st: there is GOD then2) NO"God"??
@Jules7892 Proving that something exists is relatively easy. All you have to do is show that it manifests in some way in reality. I know my computer exists because I'm here typing on it. Some things are more difficult, for example electrons can't be seen but we are able to observe their effects. They manifest. If God manifests in reality, those manifestations can be observed if he does not, then by definition he does not exist.
@richjammcl Caution here, your statement "If God manifests in reality, those manisfestations can be observed if he does not". My Cognitivie thought tells me that "If God manifests in reality, thos manisfestations can be observed"your statememt": In my European-Greek Thought of Cognition "If God manifests in reality,those manesfestations can be observed" to my Cognitive Vision=Some Entity or possible GOD is Manifestating Stimulating my Vision,implant Instrumentation Science Equipment for Facts??!
@Jules7892 Manifesting in reality could be anything from granting prayers to going for a walk down the road. He could perform miracles or just exert influence on an object. It doesn't have to be impressive. If it manifests in reality, we will be able to observe it.
It is"Ultimately Insane for ANY Atheistic Scientist to try to use their Colossus"FAILURE in the "Spontaneous Generation of Life, its FAILED,it was Objectively"Controlled only with Periodic Elements &Electric-Charges in a"Sterile Vacuum Laboratory Chamber at either Universities or Colleges,& the Atheistic Scientists & People"DID NOT produce even 1 Single Celled Virus or Bacteria NEVER Mind about Multi-Cellular Life!The"FAILURE"by Atheistic Scientists to only produce Random Amino Acids=NOT Life"!!
Finally, upon that "Conclusion" that Mankind also Designs Technology by the Process of "CREATION Then EVOLUTION of his/her Technologies Since the Dawn of B.C.E. Humankind, EVOLUTION-CREATION or CREATION-EVOLUTION Drive Side by Side as Male & Female, or Negative and Positive,Neutral as the "Stablizer"!Upon this Utopian"Conclusion between Science Bsc,Msc & P.H.D.s & Science Students,ALL Atheists and Atheistic Scientists of"Idiocisy Instentence"were NEVER listened AGAIN for their NON-Rationality!!
In Canadian General Sciences,old Grade 13 Honourary Sciences & College University Science studies,there was a"Unanimous Vote that "BOTH""EVOLUTION-CREATION"or"CREATION-EVOLUTION" was"Existing upon ALL Sciences Instrumentations,Telescopes,MicroScopes,Both MicroAtomic & Macro Universe!It was"UNANIMOUS that the LAWS of SCIENCE & NATURE"CANNOT"come out of a"Vacuum=Impossible"!There just has to be the"ULTIMATE ENGINEER We all call"GOD"or"YAHWEH-JEHOVAH"!Failure to except this creates "Controversy"!!
In Canadian General Sciences,old Grade 13 Honourary Sciences & College University Science studies,there was a"Unanimous Vote that "BOTH" "EVOLUTION-CREATION"or"CREATION-EVOLUTION" was"Existing upon ALL Sciences Instrumentations,Telescopes,MicroScopes,Both Micro Atomic & Macro Universe!It was"UNANIMOUS that the LAWS of SCIENCE&NATURE"CANNOT"come out of a"Vacuum=Impossible"!There just has to be the"ULTIMATE ENGINEER We all call"GOD"or"YAHWEH-JEHOVAH"!Failure to except this creates "Controversy"!!
Science is not interested in the question IF God did it. And creationism is not interested in the question HOW God did it. Even if evolution was not true, it is not logic to deduct from that fact, that the creationist's view of the world is.
Example: Morale values are much better backed up by psychology than religion, because psychology is able to explain why we should behave in one or the other way, whereas religion solely relies on the imaginary authority of a higher being.
At first I though this was a scientifically educational video. Then I saw that the ratings were disabled. And I knew it was a fucking creationist video. Bias and, underhtought-out. Don't forget about the "pastafarians Intelligent design" theory. Fuck I hate ignorance. And there really is no debate in the scientific community about this. Evolution is a testable fact. Fuck it. This won't be read.
i love it how in the video they say that there are creation scientists, but when it involves god or creator or the boogy man, it automatically is not scientific
In the beginning .. or rather 'before' the beginning there was nothing, not even space .. no vacuum, no forces, no time - nothing. Nothing can be defined 'before' the material Universe expanded from a 'singularity' at the instant time began - a vast amount of energy was converted into all the particles in the Universe and inflated over a very short finite time. The entire mass of the Universe was defined during this inflation period with the conversion of energy to matter ...
... which implies that the amount of energy used was also a specific and finite quantity. From the initial inflation period, the Universe has continued to expand - the rate of expansion and the force of gravity, together with the entire known mass of the Universe have been calculated and found to be so finely tuned that this expansion will continue forever, although gradually slowing down until the Universe occupies a vast finite amount of space, surrounded by .. nothing.
Physicists and cosmologists can only speculate about the boundary conditions of space-time expanding into nothing. Would it be possible in theory to travel to the edge of the Universe and throw a tennis ball beyond this boundary? Would it carry 'space' with it and exist outside of the boundary - would it be able to escape the boundary and would 'time' for the ball be synchronised with the Universe which it left? .. or will the 'boundary' prevent it from leaving.
How is saying evolution created it any different from God?
To me that just sounded like a nice story, no fucking facts as to why things evolved or how. They just did. Well fuck me is that not the Christians argument, God just done it?
We have seti, and yet I fail to see any intelligence on this plant.
No offence intended but any video that so much as turns the ratings off is not worth watching.
It's censoring, avoiding people from giving it their opinion.
I know it's something every theist does but no video, no matter how good is gone convince any atheist from anything if the video itself prohibits free speech.
"and so the debate rages on" Err, no. There is no debate, that is just what creationists would have you believe in order to lend their arguments some credibility.
There is no controversy at all within any field of science, biological evolution is a fact, biblical creation is a myth.
Any one who says anything else is either a liar, a charlatan, or an idiot.
Do you disagree? then point me to the peer reviewed paper that supports your assertion that a (any) god did it.
I laughed when I watched this. Then I realized it was being serious. So I wept for humanity. Going to skip the rest of the videos seeing how the first one set the tone for ignorance and bias.
"Empty space" isn't exactly right. General Relativity tells us that "In the beginning, all of space was packed into a single point. All of space. The point in space in three dimensions where I am located and where you the reader are located were the same space. The question of what was outside of this is a nonsense question. There was no outside of the singularity in the sense that we think about space.
LMFAO....I knew from the start this was going to be a mis-informed Creatard vid when the narrator by-passed the compressed singularty, called space the primordial soup and said the universe formed rapidly....geez when will U CREATARDS get it right and quit screwing up Science, and BTW Creationism IS NOT A THEORY. Theorys are based on FACTS, not Made Up SHIT ! !
Cosmology covers the BigBangTheory NOT EVOLUTION ! !
Evolution explains Life development on the Planet.
... did this guy just quote evolution as the theory that explains the creation of matter...? I guess I won't be wasting my time watching the rest of this video if they can't even get THAT right!
The theory of evolution doesn't say anything about the origin of the universe - it is about random genetic mutation and survival of the fittest. This is a video using a straw man approach to evolutionary theory. Apparently, this guy is clueless about the theory he rejects in favor of religious superstition.
People use the word 'theory' in an unscientific sense when talking about evolution. In everyday language, a theory is more like a speculation or a guess, while in scientific terms, it's a tested, studied, and proven fact (it cannot be called a definite fact because there is always more to study, learn, and tweak about science.) Relgion is a theory in every sense of the word. Evolution is not. I don't hate religion, but I think religion is illogical.
i just wanna machinegun every motherfucker in this video. what a bunch of cunts. 93% of the members of the national academy of sciences are atheists so suck it creationist pea brains
Ha! "the debate rages on"! maybe between parents and teacher in a public school. im all for teaching creationism in school. we always going to need soldiers and walmart greeters. but who am i too argue with some random geological engineer.
The video says man is continuing to evolve ... thats false.
Evolution is a consequence of the enviroment being harsher for those who are not adapted to it . Evolution hasnt worked on humans for several hundred years, when we arn't suited to our enviroment we reshape the environment until it does fit our needs.
Example:
When the enviroment is too cold, humans build heated homes and wear jackets, we dont let the hairless skinny people freeze to death.
I think you might be getting a little confused. Yes, we have the ability regulate the temperature of our surroundings, but obvious physical changes are just the tip of the iceberg. In fact, contrary to your opinion, there's evidence to suggest that humans are evolving faster that ever (due to our large population).
Here's a great site that shows some evidence of evolution in 'modern humans';
@47571660 .... I'm confident I have a good handle on evolution
(I work as a biochemist combating the evolution of microbes.)
My argument above was simply stating that humans no longer succumb to the selective pressures that normally drive evolution.
In order for humans to “evolve” there has to be a “pressure” giving some humans a meaningful reproductive advantage over others. I currently see no environmental pressures that would be significant for humans in a developed country.
@FearedUnknown - Not all pressures are purely environmental. All you need to do is see what drives women to mate with which specific kinds of men, and you will be able to find that the selection process has simply changed.
@FearedUnknown hey you wanna know something evolution is always happening for example we humans have gotten taller within the last 500 years back then you were considers tall at 5.6" which by today's standards is quite small... so we are constantly evolving... :)..... but its very very slow
@frostek scientist expect we will have evolved even more in another 500 years as we"re adapting to changes of the earth we might start to grow even gills or fins due to most of the earth being below sea level.. but this is only speculation we can't be sure but we will always be evolving it is a fact and it will continue. you see evolution is about natural selection and as long as people have kids we will be evolving... and if you are coming from a religious point of view i suggest you shut it :)
@darthesgoobis123 - It's probably not a good idea to dive straight in there with assumptions. 500 years is hugely insufficient for any visible changes of the type you mention. You'd be looking at thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years for substantial differences.
I'd like you to quote the source of this claim, so I can take a look at it. Thanks.
PS - Most of Earth under water? Really, dude? Climate change is one thing, but let's not get carried away here.
@frostek look at a knights Armour set it is about 5"6 and thats large at that time (by the way its a widely known fact and not assumptions) (oh and there are many many quotes from people like Stephen Fry (u probs never heard of) Richard Dawkins, and just about every historian... and yes you do realize there is a large... very very very large mound of frozen water at either end of the earth like a shit load and it is melting (i watch allot of documentaries) and it is a very likely situation... :)
@darthesgoobis123 - Not only do I know far more about knight's armour than you ever will since I study Western Martial Arts, I have several shelves of the excellent works of Fry, Dawkins and many others.
It's. Down. To. Nutrition! Evolution in humans *doesn't* work that quickly.
Whilst you understand the generalities of the subject, it appears you've overlooked the specifics.
I know moar about motor assisted exo-frames than you ever will since I study engineering programs and isn't afraid of anything,I have several shelves of the excellent J. K. Rowlings, Stephenie Meyer many copies of each.
Evolution has nothing to do with cosmology. The theory of evolution is completely diffrent from the big bang theory. It really amazes me how someone who does not understand something trying to argue against it.
Creationists are morally bankrupt treasonous members of the human race. I might argue successfully that they declassify themselves out of, and below the homo sapein sapein to lets say homo sapein religulous. Creationists are devolved humans, a stupefied sub tangent of bipedal hominid. If you work against the progress of my species then we are at war. Prepare.
I genuinely came here with the intent to watch this and realized that even staring at a blank wall would be a better use of my time ... so no thanks..
I can't help but picture the creators of this video wokring for several days on the animations och editing of the clip... but not spending one single minute reading a science textbook.
There's a special place in heaven with extra thick clouding on the walls for the people hwo made this clip.
I like how you can believe in evolution without any physical proof of us evolving from monkies. All you use is your logic. There is in fact NO actual physical proof of us evolving from a fucking monkey.
@heartsydney You are 100% correct. Man did not evolve from a monkey. No evolutionist makes that claim. The paleontological record, however, shows that man and monkeys have a common ancestor. Before criticizing a scientific theory you know nothing about, at least understand it first. You tube search: 9th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism. Your physical proof awaits. Yes, watch the WHOLE THING, it will be the best 10 min you spent in a very long time, then get back to me with your critic.
APES.. Now say it with me: We evolved from Apes. Technically we could say monkeys as well, ever since the discovery of darwinius masillae. But you clearly did not intend it that way. So, say with me: I'm an ape.
As far as proof. Well, you can look at this clip: Ken Miller on Intelligent Design : JVRsWAjvQSg
Very hard to fake that, wouldn't you say? Or is your god malevolent?
@Muthsera80 Woah woah woah..... Where did you get that idea? we are related to apes but were never evolved "from" apes. But there is always a chance I could be wrong. Where is your source?
The group of classified animals which we belong to are called apes. Not really monkeys as that is a larger group which include our group apes and others like lemurs. Since the discovery of darwinius masillae, we could claim we are monkeys. But more closely we are apes. As far as evolved from apes. Well, we evolved from a hole host of apes like Australopithecus afarensis. As far as sources. Just look them up. But these are the classifications that are used.
@Muthsera80 Actually, we could claim we came from monkeys long before "Ida" was discovered. As taxonomy is based on how closely related species are to each other, both New World monkeys and Old World monkeys are considered to be monkeys. Apes like chimpanzees and gibbons are more closely related to Old World monkeys, therefore the Last Common Ancestor between the two was itself an Old World monkey, and in order to make Old World monkeys a monophyletic group, apes have to be considered monkeys.
You are of course right. I should rather have said it was more firmly supported that it was true by the discovery of Ida. But it seemed rather less poetic at the time. :/
The reason I forced the word Ape is that some theists seems to think the claims say we're monkeys and now apes. "Their not a son of a monkey". Their not, their sons of man, who way back who gradually descended from apes who again gradually descended from monkeys.
@Muthsera80 Ida was a really overblown thing- the press ran the story of it being the "earliest human ancestor" but in reality it was just a very interesting and well preserved fossil of an ancient monkey and the stuff about human ancestry was largely hype. But the truth is that humans did "come from" monkeys in the sense that an ancient ancestor to humans was an animal that we'd identify as a monkey, while earlier ancestors included amphibians (mammals aren't actually descended from reptiles).
Overblown and overblown. She is the most complete and detailed fossil we have of our ancestors. Or potentially closely related ancestor. The learned disagree. But I'll agree that the find was hyped out of all proportions. It's after all just another one of our many ancestors.
Either way, I think it's a brilliant fossil. Absolutely gorgeous and stunning to look at. I can look at it for hours. And, it tells us a great part of our history.
@Muthsera80 Absolutely. I just hate how the press starts screaming about how the missing link has been found every time someone announces a new simian fossil.
@madjimms Humans are apes. We have all the characteristics of apes- opposable thumbs, five fingers/toes, nails instead of claws, forward facing eyes, fused vestigial tail, possessing only a single pair of mammary glands located high on the chest, ect. Claiming that humans didn't come from apes is on the same level of silliness as claiming that humans didn't come from mammals or tetrapods.
omg just the first thing, "empty space" fuck there wasnt even space, but then they say that this "fireball" created space wat? creationists.... you so silly
@rkyeun What different views ? Consider this: - You are here. - Either - You was created by a Super intelligent life form - or - you just evolved from nothing (Big Bang)... THERE IS NO OTHER POSSIBILITY... Now, which one do you believe ?
This is what the beginning of this video states... OK ?
This is single-handedly the most ignorant video I have ever seen.
I didn't even go beyond the first minute because of the crap that's been spewing out.
1. Space and time hadn't existed before the big bang.
2. What the flap is a fireball got to do with anything? What the flap is going on. Who the flap made this flapping video...Holy flap you are so flapping ignorant.
Science doesn't actually know what happened in the beginning, we only have theories.
@IveSeenManyThings Scientific theories to be exact. Which means "A conclusion from facts". Saying, "Only a theory" is stupid. However, if new facts are presented and it contradicts the theory, the theory becomes disproven. We do not have an explanation to "What caused the big bang" as we didn't gather enough facts to come with a complete conclusion.
@YTBscience "In the beggining there was nothing" is simply not true. It's just that we don't know what caused the big bang. It is thought that it's energy turning to matter or something like that.... But saying "There was nothing" is ignorant.
Then speaking about evolution, without even mentioning dinosaurs.
Then saying that there are two theories, when there is only one (Creation is not a theory)
Saying that mutations only causes disease is wrong.
@YTBscience Continued. "We never seen something changed to something else" animals don't change instantly, it's not like an ape like creature ever gives birth to a human. It takes a lot of time to see a difference. Observed species here: talkorigins(dot)org/faqs/faq-speciation(dot)html "Evolution has no evidence" is also wrong, it's one of the most supported theories ever, read more at that talkorigins site.
btw, evolution has nothing to do with the big bang. This video IS a poor presentation.
This video in a nutshell: *cool, brief explanation of scientific knowledge*, interspersed with "hurrr durrrrrr!!! herp...derp derp....variation occurs, not evolution! hur hurrrr derp"
You don't even know who I am or what I've studied. If you want to discuss theism or atheism with me, I'll gladly do so, but don't expect me to waste time watching another video with ratings disabled, as it usually means the uploader wants to hide the fact that his target audience isn't going to agree with the points he raises (especially when he uses the red-flag word "evolutionists"). If he had allowed ratings, I would've watched it, so don't give me that boring truth speech.
Uhg, read some philosophy people. Science is but a branch of philosophy, religious dogma, however, is retarded. This video makes me feel ill, and angry at how many people get BRAINWASHED by this stuff. Yeah, I said it.
Gravity is just a theory also, creationist will hopefully just float away....the average IQ of mankind would skyrocket. Man did not evolve from chimpanzees, chimps and humans have a common ancestor.
@THEREALMcLuvin32 "Acorafication evolution is still a THEORY you know right?" but of course you don't understand what a THEORY means in scientific terms.
SnipeZuDown uh.... From a chimp to a human is a completely different biogenetical and physiological change that is virtually impossible even if you aren't a Christian.... Durrrrrrrrrrrr. You're so dumb.
@THEREALMcLuvin32 " From a chimp to a human" well evolution doesn't propose a chimp to a human so...learn about what you're talking about, before talking.
12. In fact, the majority of mutations aren't bad. Most are neutral, since different hair color, eye color, height, genetically predisposed weight, and all other differences between members of the same species are mutations. These are all harmless. Anyone who tells you that all mutations are bad is a liar.
13. The 'basic type of one thing never changes into something else' is a fallacy. These changes happen over thousands of years, however.
14. Variety and adaptation IS evolution, you moron.
@Acorafication I think you shouldn't use the word adaptation, that makes it seem like you are talking about Lamarck's Evolution, which is obviously wrong... I understood what you meant, but creationists aren't as inteligent as you and I... :)
@Koizitozinho I know, but the point I was making is that the 'creation scientist' at the end of the video who claimed that we see variation and adaptation but never evolution is a moron, because variation and adaptation IS evolution. Species adapt and gain variety through their generations, and that's exactly what evolution is.
But yes, I should probably make that a bit clearer. However, most creationists won't even know what Lamarck's Evolution is, so in this case, their stupidity helps.
8. Even if we don't have the answer for a question, it doesn't mean that we were created by a magical sky daddy.
9. There is NO observable evidence for a creator, especially not a specific one.
10. There is no such thing as a creation scientist. Creationism is the direct contradiction of a scientific fact, and is performed through lies and desceptionrather then through evidence and experiments.
11. Mutations aren't errors, they're merely changes. They are also not always bad.
Ratings disabled! That figures. Religious wackos and creationists usually disable ratings because they don't want viewers to know how many people think that they are full of shit! This comment is probably a waste of time too, because it too will probably be blocked. If these fools would invest the same time and effort into exploring the universe around them instead of propagating religious fables and myths - the world would probably be a much better place.
Evolution has been observed and documented both in the field and in controlled sites in nature. Just look them up. EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE from fossil records to genes to embryonic development fit the theory of evolution! In fact, there's more evidence for evolution than gravity!
Actually, most, if not all, mutations are not life threatening and are neutral. Mutations can also be beneficial, such as more resistance to a disease or a stronger body structure. And usually they go unnoticed unless a drastic change is observed.
"Many insist that I am wrong and mutations cause uphill evolution. How can you know? Here is an experiment you can do yourself. Radiation speeds up the mutation rate, so buy a trunk full of atomic waste and keep it under your bed. Maybe the children you have after that will be super evolved geniuses. Maybe not." -Tom Heinze
2nd law of thermodynamics people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! organisms go from more complex to simpler so how does an organism go from simple cell to a mammel???? Also mutation is very dangerous, mutation did not turn animals to supreme beings
@Dokkenm4 Three points on your various comments: First, evolution doesn't deal with the beginning of the universe. It deals with the development of life on Earth. It breaks no natural laws, and it requires no religious faith to accept. It is confirmed by fossil, genetic, biochemical, anatomical, and geological evidence, to name only a few fields which affirm (and make use of) evolutionary theory.
@Dokkenm4 The second law of thermodynamics refers to closed systems. The Earth is not a closed system. It has a constant influx of energy from the Sun. Also, the 2nd law doesn't forbid complexity coming from simplicity. Complex structures have assembled throughout the universe over the last 12 billion years or so. The 2nd law describes an increase in total entropy over time, not the impossibility of complexity.
@Dokkenm4 Second, the big bang theory doesn't claim that the universe, matter, energy, etc., came from nothing. That's a straw man invented by creationists who either honestly or willfully misunderstand what the theory (which is also confirmed by multitudes of evidence) says, namely that prior to the big bang matter, energy, and space-time itself was contained in an infinitesimal that, for reasons yet to be understood, expanded.
@stevelikestocurse okay then where did it come from, because all the teories i know say that or some ignor telling where it came from completely like this one
@Dokkenm4 Where did the big bang come from? The answer is, we don't know. There are multiple theories, but none have really been demonstrated. But the answer being "I don't know at the moment" doesn't mean that anything supernatural played a role.
@stevelikestocurse explain to me how a random explosion turned out to make the perfect environment for humans, the chance is the same mathmatical chance as a tornado going through a junk yard, throwing up all the peices, and the peices come down and put together a fully functioning plane, its nearly impossible
@Dokkenm4 That is an utterly retarded analogy. A good environment for life is definitely not something that occurs wherever there is a planet, but you give life way too little credit. It doesn't need _that_ much to sustain itself. In fact, the conditions on earth when life formed was harsh, and life itself turned earth into what it is today.
Also, given the sheer amount of locations that could support an ecology in the universe, the chance of life existing like ours, becomes almost unavoidable.
@dagspoket But do you know whats not unavoidable, and most likely almost impossible? The fact that during the big bang the molten hot mass as we know of the earth today didnt get to close the the sun or too far, the fact that gravity is just at a perfect measurment, the fact that the moons lunar activity isnt any stronger, the fact that the earth doesnt rotate too far from the sun in the winter season and much more
@Dokkenm4 Sure. However when it comes to the unlikeliness of life - even though the chance of life springing up here is small, the only thing that can observe life and make that claim is life itself, so the observer will always be where life is.
@dagspoket so you are saying that life can reate its own sientific laws so it can survive in any environment? then why arnt there living things floating in space creating themselves to be able to live there? living things can adapt to surtain environments, they cannot however just plainly choose where to live and out of nowhere make it possible to live there, it doesnt work like that
@Dokkenm4 Err, no? What in my comment made you think I was implying that? However, religious people seem to think themselves able to alter the laws of physics.
@dagspoket so you are saying that life can reate its own sientific laws so it can survive in any environment? then why arnt there living things floating in space creating themselves to be able to live there? living things can adapt to surtain environments, they cannot however just plainly choose where to live and out of nowhere make it possible to live there, it doesnt work like that
@Dokkenm4 And third, the evolution of sex actually makes a lot of sense if you know even a little bit about it. The biggest benefit to sex is that it increases the genetic diversity of a population. Genetic diversity allows greater variation, a larger number of traits, and therefore a greater chance that beneficial traits will emerge and be passed down to offspring. Look into it a bit; sexual reproduction was one of evolution's most beneficial innovations.
@stevelikestocurse but how did it happen it makes no sense if life started reproducing nonsexually thats how it should be, explain how cells came to perform more than one function
@Dokkenm4 It makes sense if you make some effort to understand how evolution works. Sexual reproduction arose the same way other traits did, through the accumulation random genetic mutations passed down generation to generation. It stuck around and became widespread because it was extremely beneficial -- sex increases genetic variation by mixing the genes of the parents, and helps to dispose of harmful mutations in a population far faster than in an asexual population.
@stevelikestocurse well random genetic mutation cant be the answer wanna know why? because life has order, if random mass shot out randomly and ligtning struck the organic soup at the right moment at the right place and a random organism appeared and randomly.. you get it, evolution depends on randomness where the world we live in has order
and guys you have to understand, if there was truly nothing at one point, according to science nothing should have came into existence unless a supernatural force existsted. we are here, that means something had to break the laws of science to create life, science cant be the answer to life, because at one point before time even existed, someone or something had to break the laws of science
Evolution isnt a theory, for a theory you need evidence, evolution you have to believe, you have to believe that science found a way to break its own laws to get matter out of nowhere, its pure religoen and belief
There is no controversy in scientific world, and there is no discussion for the simplest of reasons- creationists have absolutely no arguments that haven't been debunked a 100 times, and they are NOT scientists.
Statements like "we've never seen one organism change into something completely different, hence evolution doesn't exist" - we've never seen such thing, because it's not how evolution works.
DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME WATCHING THIS- check out AronRa.
The "primordial soup" doesn't refer to the forming of early chemical elements, but a caricaturization of the early oceans and the conditions in which the first ponds of life appeared on Earth.... This gross mistake took any credibility from this video.
...And mammals don't come from reptiles... neither do birds...
Besides, if you're going to take in the Creationist view, then there are a lot more than 2 views.
As far as I'm concerned, if Evolution is wrong, then the Buddhists must be right!
All I can say is that every Spring, I see the flowers on my trees, the food which I eat shows its Peaches Identical on my Fruit Trees than at my Supermarket. The Grapes of Wine upon my Vines of my Vineyards in South ,Ontario,CANADA!My Apples huge Soft-Balled Apples upon my Trees.Real Plums upon my Trees. Once I see then and Video/Photograph them my Computers tell me it is real but I DID NOT MAKE THE TREES NOR FRUIT, so there is a CREATOR and that CREATOR-Designer on my Computer Say"GOD-YAHWEH"!!
Jules7892 2 months ago
@Jules7892 "Peaches are identical, Grapes grow in my vineyards, apples rule; and I can see it all on my computer.
Go god!"
=P
jaieet 2 months ago
By Manesfesting into reality, the verification is in the instrumentation of science tools, a Pro-DSLR, Digital-Camera, Audio if there is Audio in the Menifestation. Once confirmed by not only our 5 Senses but also our Science Equipment,Computer Analysis comfirms the Manisfestation, then the Observation becomes reality both human and Instrumentation Science Instruments of Detection-Computer Confirmed!!!!
Jules7892 2 months ago
If I understand your question, no I see no reason to think there was a God or any other supernatural being involved. Not sure why you're referring to spontaneous occurrence in a vacuum, Earth is anything but a vacuum.
richjammcl 2 months ago
Until Humanbeings don't come to the Conclusive-Laboratory Science Proof using Todays 21st Century Instrumentation &Bio-Chemicals.Until,Humanity can rest a Peace with"BOTH CREATION-EVOLUTION&ViceVersa ofEVOLUTION-CREATION BOTH Exchanges just like Humanity Creates its Technologies then Evolves, Technologies,Until Humanity can Realise that BOTH Processess Are Involved with the Life Dilemma=Peace with Creation+Evolution.BOTH Processes"combined"!If this,doesn't take place,then Conflicts will exist!!
Jules7892 2 months ago
ratings disabled
stebbi94 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Another ID attempt to teach us science, funny!!! this is plain BS!!!
TCallejasw 2 months ago
Polonium radio halos show that the Earths foundation was created INSTANTLY as if it was SPOKE INTO EXISTANCE. No sciententist has been able to disprove this SCIENTIFIC PROOF.
casemanprice 3 months ago
lol, what nonsense. Creationism was conclusively debunked 150 years ago and they haven't come up an original argument since then. Evolution (biological evolution) is one of (if not the) most strongly supported therories in science. THERE IS NO DEBATE!
Pinage 4 months ago
Ratings disabled. Quelle surprise.
deekomendez 4 months ago
It is"Ultimately Insane for ANY Atheistic Scientist to try to use their Colossus"FAILURE in the "Spontaneous Generation of Life, it FAILED,it was Objectively"Controlled only with Periodic Elements & Electric-Charges in a"Sterile Vacuum Laboratory Chamber at either Universities or Colleges,& the Atheistic Scientists & People"DID NOT produce even 1 Single Celled Virus or Bacteria NEVER Mind about Multi-Cellular Life!The"FAILURE"by Atheistic Scientists to only produce Random Amino Acids=NOT Life"!!
Jules7892 4 months ago
@Jules7892 You don't understand the science friend. The miller Urey experiment was not an attempt to create life, it was an attempt to create organic molecules which they achieved. By the way, only creationists believe that multicellular life sprung out of the ground. Science has found that single celled organisms lived for over a billion years before multicelled systems, why would they spring forth in a lab?
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl The Urey Miller Experiment wanted to produce the 1st Uni-CellularOrganisms,that was the objective,but any Bio-Engineer can make Random Bio-Chemical Structured Elements but NOTUni-Cellular Life!My position,pertaining to my GOLD Diploma General Sciences is"Creation Mechanisms occurs inPRIMARY by an Ultimate-Engineer,called"GOD-Yahweh-Jehovah"then the"Evolution takes Secondary Processes to Advance Life from Uni-Cellular to Multi-Cellular,Exchanges between"Creation"&"Evolution"Combined!!
Jules7892 2 months ago
@Jules7892 Actually, the experiment was to recreate early earth conditions and see if organic molecules would spontaneously be synthesized. Bio engineers can synthesize all sorts of things but those are concerted efforts to create those things. This experiment was to see if organic material would come about naturally, not to create life. Feel free to look up the articles, they're easy to find and clear about what they're attempting to achieve.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@Jules7892 by the way, no one is impressed with a general sciences diploma, even when you tag GOLD to the beginning. General sciences is like taking high school science over again, it's a joke. Even if we never figure out how to create life, which isn't likely, it does nothing to suggest any supernatural entities were involved.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl I suggust that you are suggesting "nothing to sugggest any supernatural entities were involved" then you are possibly suggesting "NO Supernatural Entities ie. A "God" or The "God" than Atheism maybe "No God" therefore "Spontaneous Occurances from Vacuum"????
Jules7892 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jules7892 If I understand your question, no I see no reason to think there was a God or any other supernatural being involved. Not sure why you're referring to spontaneous occurrence in a vacuum, Earth is anything but a vacuum.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl "Even if we never figure out how to create life" this are your statement. Therefore, if you "cannot" "create life" then how can We , the reader believe in "NO" God because "which isn't likely" in your statement. It certainly is NOT going to make Anybody an "Atheist" if Life "ins't likely" or "does nothing to suggest any supernatural entities"in your statement! Then tell me, what is the "Force" creating Life Everyday in Our Lives is it a "Vacuum????"????
Jules7892 2 months ago
@Jules7892 The point is, there are a multitude of different ways that life could have originated and God is only one of them. Given that there is no evidence for this, there is no reason to believe it. Our ability or inability to create something proves nothing. Try finding a person pre 500bc who could create a magnet, they wouldn't even know what it was you were talking about and yet we are able to create them en masse today. That doesn't prove anything.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammclLet me say,that understand you,I do agree with you to a limit.You state"that life could have originated and God is only one of them"I can agree with this statement.But again your statement"Given that there is no evidence for this,there is no reason to believe it"I am to now assume that you are stating one does NOT have to believe in a "GOD" becaues your Statement:"That doesn't prove anything" prove anything=nothing??If so, then are you stating either 1st: there is GOD then2) NO"God"??
Jules7892 2 months ago
@richjammcl What does "Prove" some Existence to yourself then....????
Jules7892 2 months ago
@Jules7892 Proving that something exists is relatively easy. All you have to do is show that it manifests in some way in reality. I know my computer exists because I'm here typing on it. Some things are more difficult, for example electrons can't be seen but we are able to observe their effects. They manifest. If God manifests in reality, those manifestations can be observed if he does not, then by definition he does not exist.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl Caution here, your statement "If God manifests in reality, those manisfestations can be observed if he does not". My Cognitivie thought tells me that "If God manifests in reality, thos manisfestations can be observed"your statememt": In my European-Greek Thought of Cognition "If God manifests in reality,those manesfestations can be observed" to my Cognitive Vision=Some Entity or possible GOD is Manifestating Stimulating my Vision,implant Instrumentation Science Equipment for Facts??!
Jules7892 2 months ago
@Jules7892 Manifesting in reality could be anything from granting prayers to going for a walk down the road. He could perform miracles or just exert influence on an object. It doesn't have to be impressive. If it manifests in reality, we will be able to observe it.
richjammcl 2 months ago
It is"Ultimately Insane for ANY Atheistic Scientist to try to use their Colossus"FAILURE in the "Spontaneous Generation of Life, its FAILED,it was Objectively"Controlled only with Periodic Elements &Electric-Charges in a"Sterile Vacuum Laboratory Chamber at either Universities or Colleges,& the Atheistic Scientists & People"DID NOT produce even 1 Single Celled Virus or Bacteria NEVER Mind about Multi-Cellular Life!The"FAILURE"by Atheistic Scientists to only produce Random Amino Acids=NOT Life"!!
Jules7892 4 months ago
Finally, upon that "Conclusion" that Mankind also Designs Technology by the Process of "CREATION Then EVOLUTION of his/her Technologies Since the Dawn of B.C.E. Humankind, EVOLUTION-CREATION or CREATION-EVOLUTION Drive Side by Side as Male & Female, or Negative and Positive,Neutral as the "Stablizer"!Upon this Utopian"Conclusion between Science Bsc,Msc & P.H.D.s & Science Students,ALL Atheists and Atheistic Scientists of"Idiocisy Instentence"were NEVER listened AGAIN for their NON-Rationality!!
Jules7892 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In Canadian General Sciences,old Grade 13 Honourary Sciences & College University Science studies,there was a"Unanimous Vote that "BOTH""EVOLUTION-CREATION"or"CREATION-EVOLUTION" was"Existing upon ALL Sciences Instrumentations,Telescopes,MicroScopes,Both MicroAtomic & Macro Universe!It was"UNANIMOUS that the LAWS of SCIENCE & NATURE"CANNOT"come out of a"Vacuum=Impossible"!There just has to be the"ULTIMATE ENGINEER We all call"GOD"or"YAHWEH-JEHOVAH"!Failure to except this creates "Controversy"!!
Jules7892 4 months ago
In Canadian General Sciences,old Grade 13 Honourary Sciences & College University Science studies,there was a"Unanimous Vote that "BOTH" "EVOLUTION-CREATION"or"CREATION-EVOLUTION" was"Existing upon ALL Sciences Instrumentations,Telescopes,MicroScopes,Both Micro Atomic & Macro Universe!It was"UNANIMOUS that the LAWS of SCIENCE&NATURE"CANNOT"come out of a"Vacuum=Impossible"!There just has to be the"ULTIMATE ENGINEER We all call"GOD"or"YAHWEH-JEHOVAH"!Failure to except this creates "Controversy"!!
Jules7892 4 months ago
Science is not interested in the question IF God did it. And creationism is not interested in the question HOW God did it. Even if evolution was not true, it is not logic to deduct from that fact, that the creationist's view of the world is.
Example: Morale values are much better backed up by psychology than religion, because psychology is able to explain why we should behave in one or the other way, whereas religion solely relies on the imaginary authority of a higher being.
flamifer1 4 months ago
At first I though this was a scientifically educational video. Then I saw that the ratings were disabled. And I knew it was a fucking creationist video. Bias and, underhtought-out. Don't forget about the "pastafarians Intelligent design" theory. Fuck I hate ignorance. And there really is no debate in the scientific community about this. Evolution is a testable fact. Fuck it. This won't be read.
rampaginwalrus 4 months ago
i love it how in the video they say that there are creation scientists, but when it involves god or creator or the boogy man, it automatically is not scientific
SirScaredalot 4 months ago
In the beginning .. or rather 'before' the beginning there was nothing, not even space .. no vacuum, no forces, no time - nothing. Nothing can be defined 'before' the material Universe expanded from a 'singularity' at the instant time began - a vast amount of energy was converted into all the particles in the Universe and inflated over a very short finite time. The entire mass of the Universe was defined during this inflation period with the conversion of energy to matter ...
Tony07UK 5 months ago
... which implies that the amount of energy used was also a specific and finite quantity. From the initial inflation period, the Universe has continued to expand - the rate of expansion and the force of gravity, together with the entire known mass of the Universe have been calculated and found to be so finely tuned that this expansion will continue forever, although gradually slowing down until the Universe occupies a vast finite amount of space, surrounded by .. nothing.
Tony07UK 5 months ago
Physicists and cosmologists can only speculate about the boundary conditions of space-time expanding into nothing. Would it be possible in theory to travel to the edge of the Universe and throw a tennis ball beyond this boundary? Would it carry 'space' with it and exist outside of the boundary - would it be able to escape the boundary and would 'time' for the ball be synchronised with the Universe which it left? .. or will the 'boundary' prevent it from leaving.
Tony07UK 5 months ago
Brainwashing is accurate.
evolutionism—the doctrine of strict philosophical naturalism as a necessary presupposition in matters of science history (i.e., origins).
TCupUK 5 months ago
How is saying evolution created it any different from God?
To me that just sounded like a nice story, no fucking facts as to why things evolved or how. They just did. Well fuck me is that not the Christians argument, God just done it?
We have seti, and yet I fail to see any intelligence on this plant.
TCupUK 5 months ago
No offence intended but any video that so much as turns the ratings off is not worth watching.
It's censoring, avoiding people from giving it their opinion.
I know it's something every theist does but no video, no matter how good is gone convince any atheist from anything if the video itself prohibits free speech.
Londron 6 months ago
A video that no one should watch, tbfh.
ukspizzaman 7 months ago
The video doesn't deserve the title! It contains wrong and unimportent information.
guillatra 7 months ago
"and so the debate rages on" Err, no. There is no debate, that is just what creationists would have you believe in order to lend their arguments some credibility.
There is no controversy at all within any field of science, biological evolution is a fact, biblical creation is a myth.
Any one who says anything else is either a liar, a charlatan, or an idiot.
Do you disagree? then point me to the peer reviewed paper that supports your assertion that a (any) god did it.
unixhead101 7 months ago
Even their totally butchered versions of established scientific theories still make much more sense than any religious claim about reality.
MomoTheBellyDancer 8 months ago
ROFL! "Adaptation happens; evolution doesn't happen." What do these people think evolution is?!
NoDeity 8 months ago
This is typical creationist nonsense from people who understand neither cosmology nor evolution well enough to offer competent criticism.
NoDeity 8 months ago
I laughed when I watched this. Then I realized it was being serious. So I wept for humanity. Going to skip the rest of the videos seeing how the first one set the tone for ignorance and bias.
tommy605 8 months ago
"Empty space" isn't exactly right. General Relativity tells us that "In the beginning, all of space was packed into a single point. All of space. The point in space in three dimensions where I am located and where you the reader are located were the same space. The question of what was outside of this is a nonsense question. There was no outside of the singularity in the sense that we think about space.
vengefuldiety 9 months ago
LMFAO....I knew from the start this was going to be a mis-informed Creatard vid when the narrator by-passed the compressed singularty, called space the primordial soup and said the universe formed rapidly....geez when will U CREATARDS get it right and quit screwing up Science, and BTW Creationism IS NOT A THEORY. Theorys are based on FACTS, not Made Up SHIT ! !
Cosmology covers the BigBangTheory NOT EVOLUTION ! !
Evolution explains Life development on the Planet.
No wonder Ur called CREATARDS
Urfullobull 9 months ago
... did this guy just quote evolution as the theory that explains the creation of matter...? I guess I won't be wasting my time watching the rest of this video if they can't even get THAT right!
MikeCPTZA 9 months ago
A MUST SEE for Scientists ? to watch this ???
So they can discard scientific facts.....??? And become Creationists.
Aleksamson 10 months ago
I was so getting into this until 4:08, When he lumped evolution in with explaining the origin of the universe.
brewerbrian420 10 months ago
The theory of evolution doesn't say anything about the origin of the universe - it is about random genetic mutation and survival of the fittest. This is a video using a straw man approach to evolutionary theory. Apparently, this guy is clueless about the theory he rejects in favor of religious superstition.
ndrthrdr1 10 months ago
Bullshit packed in more bullshit is still bullshit.
Londron 10 months ago
amazing
gogolplex74 10 months ago
People use the word 'theory' in an unscientific sense when talking about evolution. In everyday language, a theory is more like a speculation or a guess, while in scientific terms, it's a tested, studied, and proven fact (it cannot be called a definite fact because there is always more to study, learn, and tweak about science.) Relgion is a theory in every sense of the word. Evolution is not. I don't hate religion, but I think religion is illogical.
JannaBanana552 10 months ago
i just wanna machinegun every motherfucker in this video. what a bunch of cunts. 93% of the members of the national academy of sciences are atheists so suck it creationist pea brains
BANGBANGBANGBBANG 10 months ago
Ha! "the debate rages on"! maybe between parents and teacher in a public school. im all for teaching creationism in school. we always going to need soldiers and walmart greeters. but who am i too argue with some random geological engineer.
quondam0 11 months ago
03:58 - Creationism can never be a theory, only at best an untestable hypothesis.
frostek 11 months ago
"something wondrous"? where do you get warrant to make value judgements in a mere materialist universe
Strefanasha 11 months ago
The video says man is continuing to evolve ... thats false.
Evolution is a consequence of the enviroment being harsher for those who are not adapted to it . Evolution hasnt worked on humans for several hundred years, when we arn't suited to our enviroment we reshape the environment until it does fit our needs.
Example:
When the enviroment is too cold, humans build heated homes and wear jackets, we dont let the hairless skinny people freeze to death.
FearedUnknown 11 months ago
@FearedUnknown
I think you might be getting a little confused. Yes, we have the ability regulate the temperature of our surroundings, but obvious physical changes are just the tip of the iceberg. In fact, contrary to your opinion, there's evidence to suggest that humans are evolving faster that ever (due to our large population).
Here's a great site that shows some evidence of evolution in 'modern humans';
ht
tp:/
/ww
w.lurj.
org/article.php/vol4n1/genome.xml
47571660 11 months ago
@47571660 .... I'm confident I have a good handle on evolution
(I work as a biochemist combating the evolution of microbes.)
My argument above was simply stating that humans no longer succumb to the selective pressures that normally drive evolution.
In order for humans to “evolve” there has to be a “pressure” giving some humans a meaningful reproductive advantage over others. I currently see no environmental pressures that would be significant for humans in a developed country.
FearedUnknown 11 months ago
@FearedUnknown - Not all pressures are purely environmental. All you need to do is see what drives women to mate with which specific kinds of men, and you will be able to find that the selection process has simply changed.
frostek 11 months ago
@FearedUnknown hey you wanna know something evolution is always happening for example we humans have gotten taller within the last 500 years back then you were considers tall at 5.6" which by today's standards is quite small... so we are constantly evolving... :)..... but its very very slow
darthesgoobis123 11 months ago
@darthesgoobis123 - That's more due to improved nutrition and medical advances than evolution. Evolution (in humans) is slower than that.
frostek 11 months ago
@frostek scientist expect we will have evolved even more in another 500 years as we"re adapting to changes of the earth we might start to grow even gills or fins due to most of the earth being below sea level.. but this is only speculation we can't be sure but we will always be evolving it is a fact and it will continue. you see evolution is about natural selection and as long as people have kids we will be evolving... and if you are coming from a religious point of view i suggest you shut it :)
darthesgoobis123 11 months ago
@darthesgoobis123 - It's probably not a good idea to dive straight in there with assumptions. 500 years is hugely insufficient for any visible changes of the type you mention. You'd be looking at thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years for substantial differences.
I'd like you to quote the source of this claim, so I can take a look at it. Thanks.
PS - Most of Earth under water? Really, dude? Climate change is one thing, but let's not get carried away here.
frostek 11 months ago
@frostek look at a knights Armour set it is about 5"6 and thats large at that time (by the way its a widely known fact and not assumptions) (oh and there are many many quotes from people like Stephen Fry (u probs never heard of) Richard Dawkins, and just about every historian... and yes you do realize there is a large... very very very large mound of frozen water at either end of the earth like a shit load and it is melting (i watch allot of documentaries) and it is a very likely situation... :)
darthesgoobis123 10 months ago
@darthesgoobis123 - Not only do I know far more about knight's armour than you ever will since I study Western Martial Arts, I have several shelves of the excellent works of Fry, Dawkins and many others.
It's. Down. To. Nutrition! Evolution in humans *doesn't* work that quickly.
Whilst you understand the generalities of the subject, it appears you've overlooked the specifics.
frostek 10 months ago
@frostek
I know moar about motor assisted exo-frames than you ever will since I study engineering programs and isn't afraid of anything,I have several shelves of the excellent J. K. Rowlings, Stephenie Meyer many copies of each.
It's. Left. From. salad! Devolution in starfish *will* siesta whatever whenever.
Whilst you understand the abc can count to 9, it appears you've gone and become a douche.
mg03nma 10 months ago
@6:58 "changes in genes that already exist"
Outright misinformation!
Most mutations are to none coding DNA because most DNA does not code for genes. So most mutations do not effect genes *at all*!
And what about gene duplication? That's a mutation which copies a gene creating 2 copies without changing the gene.
kandtell 1 year ago
To all creatiionist,
Evolution has nothing to do with cosmology. The theory of evolution is completely diffrent from the big bang theory. It really amazes me how someone who does not understand something trying to argue against it.
kleb100 1 year ago
Few points:
1. Big bang theorists does not claim that nothing exploded.
2. Big band theory has nothing to do with evolution, in fact, it was created by Albert Einstein, Edwin Hubble and Alexander Friedmann (a priest)
3. Simple chemical reaction did not randomly formed cells as we know, it formed first organic molecules (molecules is not cells).
4. Mutations are only harmful? What about TB developing immunity to antibiotics?
I'd like evolution to be criticized, but not distorted, caricatured
Kesc777 1 year ago
Creationists are so amazingly ignorarant and stupid... it makes wonder me how they remember to breath!
effyleven 1 year ago
The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection doesn't have a fucking thing to do with the origin of the universe.
Macrochenia 1 year ago
What an uninformed, ignorant, misleading and biased presentation
Daneoid81 1 year ago
I just fucked a dog in the ass.
madjimms 1 year ago
I find it hilarious that the one student at the end equated studying with brainwashing
TasteOfGreen 1 year ago
Creationists are morally bankrupt treasonous members of the human race. I might argue successfully that they declassify themselves out of, and below the homo sapein sapein to lets say homo sapein religulous. Creationists are devolved humans, a stupefied sub tangent of bipedal hominid. If you work against the progress of my species then we are at war. Prepare.
699backstab 1 year ago
I genuinely came here with the intent to watch this and realized that even staring at a blank wall would be a better use of my time ... so no thanks..
symelian 1 year ago
I can't help but picture the creators of this video wokring for several days on the animations och editing of the clip... but not spending one single minute reading a science textbook.
There's a special place in heaven with extra thick clouding on the walls for the people hwo made this clip.
SwedishYouthHumanist 1 year ago
I like how you can believe in evolution without any physical proof of us evolving from monkies. All you use is your logic. There is in fact NO actual physical proof of us evolving from a fucking monkey.
heartsydney 1 year ago
@heartsydney You are 100% correct. Man did not evolve from a monkey. No evolutionist makes that claim. The paleontological record, however, shows that man and monkeys have a common ancestor. Before criticizing a scientific theory you know nothing about, at least understand it first. You tube search: 9th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism. Your physical proof awaits. Yes, watch the WHOLE THING, it will be the best 10 min you spent in a very long time, then get back to me with your critic.
coolgreyoneabby 1 year ago
@heartsydney
APES.. Now say it with me: We evolved from Apes. Technically we could say monkeys as well, ever since the discovery of darwinius masillae. But you clearly did not intend it that way. So, say with me: I'm an ape.
As far as proof. Well, you can look at this clip: Ken Miller on Intelligent Design : JVRsWAjvQSg
Very hard to fake that, wouldn't you say? Or is your god malevolent?
Muthsera80 1 year ago
@Muthsera80 Woah woah woah..... Where did you get that idea? we are related to apes but were never evolved "from" apes. But there is always a chance I could be wrong. Where is your source?
madjimms 1 year ago
@madjimms
The group of classified animals which we belong to are called apes. Not really monkeys as that is a larger group which include our group apes and others like lemurs. Since the discovery of darwinius masillae, we could claim we are monkeys. But more closely we are apes. As far as evolved from apes. Well, we evolved from a hole host of apes like Australopithecus afarensis. As far as sources. Just look them up. But these are the classifications that are used.
Muthsera80 1 year ago
@Muthsera80 Ah, I see. You are indeed correct.
madjimms 1 year ago
@Muthsera80 Actually, we could claim we came from monkeys long before "Ida" was discovered. As taxonomy is based on how closely related species are to each other, both New World monkeys and Old World monkeys are considered to be monkeys. Apes like chimpanzees and gibbons are more closely related to Old World monkeys, therefore the Last Common Ancestor between the two was itself an Old World monkey, and in order to make Old World monkeys a monophyletic group, apes have to be considered monkeys.
Macrochenia 1 year ago
@Macrochenia
You are of course right. I should rather have said it was more firmly supported that it was true by the discovery of Ida. But it seemed rather less poetic at the time. :/
The reason I forced the word Ape is that some theists seems to think the claims say we're monkeys and now apes. "Their not a son of a monkey". Their not, their sons of man, who way back who gradually descended from apes who again gradually descended from monkeys.
Muthsera80 1 year ago
@Muthsera80 Ida was a really overblown thing- the press ran the story of it being the "earliest human ancestor" but in reality it was just a very interesting and well preserved fossil of an ancient monkey and the stuff about human ancestry was largely hype. But the truth is that humans did "come from" monkeys in the sense that an ancient ancestor to humans was an animal that we'd identify as a monkey, while earlier ancestors included amphibians (mammals aren't actually descended from reptiles).
Macrochenia 1 year ago
@Macrochenia
Overblown and overblown. She is the most complete and detailed fossil we have of our ancestors. Or potentially closely related ancestor. The learned disagree. But I'll agree that the find was hyped out of all proportions. It's after all just another one of our many ancestors.
Either way, I think it's a brilliant fossil. Absolutely gorgeous and stunning to look at. I can look at it for hours. And, it tells us a great part of our history.
Muthsera80 1 year ago
@Muthsera80 Absolutely. I just hate how the press starts screaming about how the missing link has been found every time someone announces a new simian fossil.
Macrochenia 1 year ago
@madjimms Humans are apes. We have all the characteristics of apes- opposable thumbs, five fingers/toes, nails instead of claws, forward facing eyes, fused vestigial tail, possessing only a single pair of mammary glands located high on the chest, ect. Claiming that humans didn't come from apes is on the same level of silliness as claiming that humans didn't come from mammals or tetrapods.
Macrochenia 1 year ago
@Macrochenia I know now, I was just insure if it was actually classified as apes or primates or something else.
madjimms 1 year ago
omg just the first thing, "empty space" fuck there wasnt even space, but then they say that this "fireball" created space wat? creationists.... you so silly
Quiestre 1 year ago
@YTBscience
'Do you know 10%...etc'...What?
Imagine all religion and scienfific knowledge was suddenly wiped out. How would YOU go about finding out where the universe, earth etc came from?
You COULD make up some stories (like ALL civilisations have done) OR...
NO, tell us all; HOW would you go about finding the facts?
derek24hudson 1 year ago
@rkyeun What different views ? Consider this: - You are here. - Either - You was created by a Super intelligent life form - or - you just evolved from nothing (Big Bang)... THERE IS NO OTHER POSSIBILITY... Now, which one do you believe ?
This is what the beginning of this video states... OK ?
YTBscience 1 year ago
Piss poor.
B0ombastix 1 year ago
Wow, what a poor presentation.
amazingbollweevil 1 year ago
@amazingbollweevil What are you ralking about ?
YTBscience 1 year ago
What the...FUCK IS THIS?!?!?!
This is single-handedly the most ignorant video I have ever seen.
I didn't even go beyond the first minute because of the crap that's been spewing out.
1. Space and time hadn't existed before the big bang.
2. What the flap is a fireball got to do with anything? What the flap is going on. Who the flap made this flapping video...Holy flap you are so flapping ignorant.
Science doesn't actually know what happened in the beginning, we only have theories.
IveSeenManyThings 1 year ago
@IveSeenManyThings Scientific theories to be exact. Which means "A conclusion from facts". Saying, "Only a theory" is stupid. However, if new facts are presented and it contradicts the theory, the theory becomes disproven. We do not have an explanation to "What caused the big bang" as we didn't gather enough facts to come with a complete conclusion.
KeistasZmogelis 1 year ago
@YTBscience "In the beggining there was nothing" is simply not true. It's just that we don't know what caused the big bang. It is thought that it's energy turning to matter or something like that.... But saying "There was nothing" is ignorant.
Then speaking about evolution, without even mentioning dinosaurs.
Then saying that there are two theories, when there is only one (Creation is not a theory)
Saying that mutations only causes disease is wrong.
Continued in other comment
KeistasZmogelis 1 year ago
@YTBscience Continued. "We never seen something changed to something else" animals don't change instantly, it's not like an ape like creature ever gives birth to a human. It takes a lot of time to see a difference. Observed species here: talkorigins(dot)org/faqs/faq-speciation(dot)html "Evolution has no evidence" is also wrong, it's one of the most supported theories ever, read more at that talkorigins site.
btw, evolution has nothing to do with the big bang. This video IS a poor presentation.
KeistasZmogelis 1 year ago
@YTBscience Something did not explode into a vaccuum. Space-Time expanded and the universe cooled.
gregrutz 9 months ago
So the maker of this video has a Harvard degree on biology?
Killjeser 1 year ago
This video in a nutshell: *cool, brief explanation of scientific knowledge*, interspersed with "hurrr durrrrrr!!! herp...derp derp....variation occurs, not evolution! hur hurrrr derp"
goddamnuser 1 year ago
All hail the magickally-appearing "PRIMORDIAL FIREBALL!!!"
ROFLMFAO!!!
Purushadasa 1 year ago
Ratings disabled? I know where this is heading and I'm not wasting my time on it.
Provoker7 1 year ago
@Provoker7 How are those intellectual blinders working out for ya?
Typical atheist -- scared to even CONSIDER the truth in an unbiased fashion.
atheist total fail
Purushadasa 1 year ago
@Purushadasa
You don't even know who I am or what I've studied. If you want to discuss theism or atheism with me, I'll gladly do so, but don't expect me to waste time watching another video with ratings disabled, as it usually means the uploader wants to hide the fact that his target audience isn't going to agree with the points he raises (especially when he uses the red-flag word "evolutionists"). If he had allowed ratings, I would've watched it, so don't give me that boring truth speech.
Provoker7 1 year ago
@Purushadasa
I find it very revealing that you're not interested in a discussion. How are THOSE intellectual blinders working out for ya?
Provoker7 1 year ago
I love how it starts with a common misrepresentation of big bang theory.
Otherwise this is pretty dumb.
glennfinito 1 year ago
I say - if you don't believe in the evolution then stop going to the hospital and using modern day drugs( or you're a hypocrite)
electronikita 1 year ago
Uhg, read some philosophy people. Science is but a branch of philosophy, religious dogma, however, is retarded. This video makes me feel ill, and angry at how many people get BRAINWASHED by this stuff. Yeah, I said it.
danrayson 1 year ago
Gravity is just a theory also, creationist will hopefully just float away....the average IQ of mankind would skyrocket. Man did not evolve from chimpanzees, chimps and humans have a common ancestor.
kager 1 year ago
Acorafication evolution is still a THEORY you know right? Most people present it as fact but, in actuality, it is still a THEORY.
THEREALMcLuvin32 1 year ago
@THEREALMcLuvin32 "Acorafication evolution is still a THEORY you know right?" but of course you don't understand what a THEORY means in scientific terms.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
SnipeZuDown uh.... From a chimp to a human is a completely different biogenetical and physiological change that is virtually impossible even if you aren't a Christian.... Durrrrrrrrrrrr. You're so dumb.
THEREALMcLuvin32 1 year ago
@THEREALMcLuvin32 " From a chimp to a human" well evolution doesn't propose a chimp to a human so...learn about what you're talking about, before talking.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
Small changes over time = ONE BIG CHANGE
Durrrrrrrrrrrr. Creationists are so dumb.
SnipeZuDown 1 year ago
YTBscience = you tube bullshit science
xBuscopanx 1 year ago
12. In fact, the majority of mutations aren't bad. Most are neutral, since different hair color, eye color, height, genetically predisposed weight, and all other differences between members of the same species are mutations. These are all harmless. Anyone who tells you that all mutations are bad is a liar.
13. The 'basic type of one thing never changes into something else' is a fallacy. These changes happen over thousands of years, however.
14. Variety and adaptation IS evolution, you moron.
Acorafication 1 year ago
@Acorafication I think you shouldn't use the word adaptation, that makes it seem like you are talking about Lamarck's Evolution, which is obviously wrong... I understood what you meant, but creationists aren't as inteligent as you and I... :)
Koizitozinho 1 year ago
@Koizitozinho I know, but the point I was making is that the 'creation scientist' at the end of the video who claimed that we see variation and adaptation but never evolution is a moron, because variation and adaptation IS evolution. Species adapt and gain variety through their generations, and that's exactly what evolution is.
But yes, I should probably make that a bit clearer. However, most creationists won't even know what Lamarck's Evolution is, so in this case, their stupidity helps.
Acorafication 1 year ago
8. Even if we don't have the answer for a question, it doesn't mean that we were created by a magical sky daddy.
9. There is NO observable evidence for a creator, especially not a specific one.
10. There is no such thing as a creation scientist. Creationism is the direct contradiction of a scientific fact, and is performed through lies and desceptionrather then through evidence and experiments.
11. Mutations aren't errors, they're merely changes. They are also not always bad.
Acorafication 1 year ago
1. There is no such thing as an evolutionist. Only people who accept scientific facts.
2. No, in the beginning, there was a singularity.
3. The singularity wasn't a primordial fireball.
4. The Big Bang was not an explosion.
5. Actually, several of the planets developed atmospheres, but have since lost them because of their loss of magnetic fields.
6. The primates were not man's earliest ancestors. The first single celled organisms were.
7. Evolution has no 'higher', and has no destiny.
Acorafication 1 year ago
Same old garbage from the fundies. I know of no one who has a greater disregard for truth than fundamentalist christians.
Evolution has nothing to do with the big bang.
A primordial fireball did not emerge and explode and create the universe. The whole description of evolution is wrong. Same old fundamentalist liars.
bigpchamber 1 year ago
You know it is stupid Christian fundamentalist propaganda when they lump atheism in with science. Fucking bullshit.
Why the fuck can't we rate this piece of shit straw-man, dishonest propaganda. Lying for Jesus is apparently ok.
mikethebiped 1 year ago
Ratings disabled! That figures. Religious wackos and creationists usually disable ratings because they don't want viewers to know how many people think that they are full of shit! This comment is probably a waste of time too, because it too will probably be blocked. If these fools would invest the same time and effort into exploring the universe around them instead of propagating religious fables and myths - the world would probably be a much better place.
aerhearts 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aerhearts
*Thumbs Up*
666Xeres 1 year ago
Thumbs down.
oneoveralpha 1 year ago
Evolution has been observed and documented both in the field and in controlled sites in nature. Just look them up. EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE from fossil records to genes to embryonic development fit the theory of evolution! In fact, there's more evidence for evolution than gravity!
kaygirl10101 1 year ago
Actually, most, if not all, mutations are not life threatening and are neutral. Mutations can also be beneficial, such as more resistance to a disease or a stronger body structure. And usually they go unnoticed unless a drastic change is observed.
kaygirl10101 1 year ago
Comment removed
selvmordspilot 1 year ago
"A Video that EVERYONE Should Watch" but then not be allowed to rate it for yourself. = typical christian/fascist bullshit.
LMAOatCHRISTIANS 1 year ago
"Many insist that I am wrong and mutations cause uphill evolution. How can you know? Here is an experiment you can do yourself. Radiation speeds up the mutation rate, so buy a trunk full of atomic waste and keep it under your bed. Maybe the children you have after that will be super evolved geniuses. Maybe not." -Tom Heinze
smile95y 1 year ago
cant you explain how? appeared doesnt cut it wow unless your talking about a supernatural force
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
2nd law of thermodynamics people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! organisms go from more complex to simpler so how does an organism go from simple cell to a mammel???? Also mutation is very dangerous, mutation did not turn animals to supreme beings
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
evolutionists- explain why sexual reproduction was "evolved" it makes no sense haha serious question guys
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 Three points on your various comments: First, evolution doesn't deal with the beginning of the universe. It deals with the development of life on Earth. It breaks no natural laws, and it requires no religious faith to accept. It is confirmed by fossil, genetic, biochemical, anatomical, and geological evidence, to name only a few fields which affirm (and make use of) evolutionary theory.
stevelikestocurse 1 year ago
@stevelikestocurse well i look at genetic evidence as evidence of a common creator
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@stevelikestocurse evolution breaks the 2nd law of thermodynamics, organisms go from more complex to simpler
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 The second law of thermodynamics refers to closed systems. The Earth is not a closed system. It has a constant influx of energy from the Sun. Also, the 2nd law doesn't forbid complexity coming from simplicity. Complex structures have assembled throughout the universe over the last 12 billion years or so. The 2nd law describes an increase in total entropy over time, not the impossibility of complexity.
stevelikestocurse 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 Second, the big bang theory doesn't claim that the universe, matter, energy, etc., came from nothing. That's a straw man invented by creationists who either honestly or willfully misunderstand what the theory (which is also confirmed by multitudes of evidence) says, namely that prior to the big bang matter, energy, and space-time itself was contained in an infinitesimal that, for reasons yet to be understood, expanded.
stevelikestocurse 1 year ago
@stevelikestocurse okay then where did it come from, because all the teories i know say that or some ignor telling where it came from completely like this one
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 Where did the big bang come from? The answer is, we don't know. There are multiple theories, but none have really been demonstrated. But the answer being "I don't know at the moment" doesn't mean that anything supernatural played a role.
stevelikestocurse 1 year ago
@stevelikestocurse explain to me how a random explosion turned out to make the perfect environment for humans, the chance is the same mathmatical chance as a tornado going through a junk yard, throwing up all the peices, and the peices come down and put together a fully functioning plane, its nearly impossible
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 That is an utterly retarded analogy. A good environment for life is definitely not something that occurs wherever there is a planet, but you give life way too little credit. It doesn't need _that_ much to sustain itself. In fact, the conditions on earth when life formed was harsh, and life itself turned earth into what it is today.
Also, given the sheer amount of locations that could support an ecology in the universe, the chance of life existing like ours, becomes almost unavoidable.
dagspoket 1 year ago
@dagspoket But do you know whats not unavoidable, and most likely almost impossible? The fact that during the big bang the molten hot mass as we know of the earth today didnt get to close the the sun or too far, the fact that gravity is just at a perfect measurment, the fact that the moons lunar activity isnt any stronger, the fact that the earth doesnt rotate too far from the sun in the winter season and much more
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 Sure. However when it comes to the unlikeliness of life - even though the chance of life springing up here is small, the only thing that can observe life and make that claim is life itself, so the observer will always be where life is.
dagspoket 1 year ago
@dagspoket so you are saying that life can reate its own sientific laws so it can survive in any environment? then why arnt there living things floating in space creating themselves to be able to live there? living things can adapt to surtain environments, they cannot however just plainly choose where to live and out of nowhere make it possible to live there, it doesnt work like that
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 Err, no? What in my comment made you think I was implying that? However, religious people seem to think themselves able to alter the laws of physics.
dagspoket 1 year ago
@dagspoket so you are saying that life can reate its own sientific laws so it can survive in any environment? then why arnt there living things floating in space creating themselves to be able to live there? living things can adapt to surtain environments, they cannot however just plainly choose where to live and out of nowhere make it possible to live there, it doesnt work like that
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 And third, the evolution of sex actually makes a lot of sense if you know even a little bit about it. The biggest benefit to sex is that it increases the genetic diversity of a population. Genetic diversity allows greater variation, a larger number of traits, and therefore a greater chance that beneficial traits will emerge and be passed down to offspring. Look into it a bit; sexual reproduction was one of evolution's most beneficial innovations.
stevelikestocurse 1 year ago
@stevelikestocurse but how did it happen it makes no sense if life started reproducing nonsexually thats how it should be, explain how cells came to perform more than one function
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
@Dokkenm4 It makes sense if you make some effort to understand how evolution works. Sexual reproduction arose the same way other traits did, through the accumulation random genetic mutations passed down generation to generation. It stuck around and became widespread because it was extremely beneficial -- sex increases genetic variation by mixing the genes of the parents, and helps to dispose of harmful mutations in a population far faster than in an asexual population.
stevelikestocurse 1 year ago
@stevelikestocurse well random genetic mutation cant be the answer wanna know why? because life has order, if random mass shot out randomly and ligtning struck the organic soup at the right moment at the right place and a random organism appeared and randomly.. you get it, evolution depends on randomness where the world we live in has order
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
There is evidence God is real wach The Star Of Bethleham
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
and guys you have to understand, if there was truly nothing at one point, according to science nothing should have came into existence unless a supernatural force existsted. we are here, that means something had to break the laws of science to create life, science cant be the answer to life, because at one point before time even existed, someone or something had to break the laws of science
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
Evolution isnt a theory, for a theory you need evidence, evolution you have to believe, you have to believe that science found a way to break its own laws to get matter out of nowhere, its pure religoen and belief
Dokkenm4 1 year ago
Evolutionary theory or creation MYTH. Get the facts right.
alianchild 1 year ago
LOL, what a pile of propaganda.
There is no controversy in scientific world, and there is no discussion for the simplest of reasons- creationists have absolutely no arguments that haven't been debunked a 100 times, and they are NOT scientists.
Statements like "we've never seen one organism change into something completely different, hence evolution doesn't exist" - we've never seen such thing, because it's not how evolution works.
DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME WATCHING THIS- check out AronRa.
smych1 1 year ago
Ratings disabled on a "must see", that's all you need to know about this video.
MrLawrenceV 1 year ago
The "primordial soup" doesn't refer to the forming of early chemical elements, but a caricaturization of the early oceans and the conditions in which the first ponds of life appeared on Earth.... This gross mistake took any credibility from this video.
...And mammals don't come from reptiles... neither do birds...
Besides, if you're going to take in the Creationist view, then there are a lot more than 2 views.
As far as I'm concerned, if Evolution is wrong, then the Buddhists must be right!
Unicron4ever 1 year ago
"..and so the debate rages on..." lmfao, i dont know anyone who seriously debates for an invisible sky creator.