Part 1/3 Why blind evolution theory could be wrong?

Please pause the video to read at your own pace. 7 second between slides.

Made by me, a student in biology.

It is aimed to give a honest and unbiased approach. Critics welcome.

There is no music in this video because this is not meant for entertainment but for a reflection and thinking.

Also please note I avoided the complicated issues. It is very simple video. In my next video I will focus on actual paradoxes in biology which definitely rule out even evolution at all. But the problem is that it is too complicated to make simple for the casual readers.. and people not used to biology. But this is coming up.

Check out my previous video, a very thought provoking one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snY9vvgybPU

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• evolution
• wrong
• intelligent
• design
• richard
• dawkins
• probability
• education
• spirituality
• biology

[howlifebegan]

Part 3: =SLUooWH5Wv8

[howlifebegan]

@Ryan1468 Please check out my new vid.. debunking the kenneth miller logic. These are not easy arguments.. but I am only showing my point of view.. which so far is unchallenged. I want to see someone challenge it.

[howlifebegan]

@Ryan1468 I think we should not talk of belief or not belief as a scientist. Let's us leave this to others. I am looking at the facts. Have you checked the part 3? Have you understood anything of it? When you do.. please make a comment about my viewpoints.

[Ryan1468]

@howlifebegan Dawkins is an outspoken atheist.He doesn't believe in a god.Neither do I.Lets be honest.You didn't come to that conclusion yourself.You had the idea of a creator driven into you as a child; no matter how much evidence there is against creationism,you can't completely turn your back on "god".So you try and find a place for him in the world.Driving evolution,in places science has not yet discovered,the "cause" of the big bang. These are places where people try to find a place for god

[howlifebegan]

@Ryan1468 I made part 3 of this video.. please check it out and critics much welcome.. much time invested in it.. I think this gives a best shot to my understanding and my reasoning..

[howlifebegan]

@Ryan1468 Exactly.. now we are speaking the same language.. I think exactly this happened. The same way as you say,..BUT.. I know.. Dawkins also said.. it.. where does the designer come from.. ? But in all sanity it is a tough question... We can debate for ages.. we will get no answer.. it tough when u think deeply of it..

[Ryan1468]

@howlifebegan Lets pretend for a minute that there is a designer. That does not rule out evolution. There is equal evidence for a designer creating every organism in its present state as there is for a designer making life and changing it every generation to improve it(like model numbers): absolutely zero. But there is an astronomical amount of evidence for evolution. So if you believe in a designer,it can only be one who works through natural methods(like evolution).Anything else is impossible.

[howlifebegan]

@Ryan1468 As a proof, I read biology and I saw it 100% a design amongst explanation of physical properties like bonding etc.. but the actual method was in my view all a design.. it does not look like a design at first.. in my smaller classes i wud have never thought it was.. but now everything is a design.. I want to make videos to explain my point of view.. it will come up.. i need to do a number of things at the same time.. including a thesis at the moment.. but I guarantee ..i am making them.

[howlifebegan]

@Ryan1468 In the beginning man thought that eclipses were manifestation of supernatural powers. The ancient Chinese believed that solar eclipses occur when a legendary celestial dragon devours the Sun. Now we know it is all nonsense. This is an intellectual knowledge. But can you push it to all levels at all levels to explain everything? Maybe you think you are. Then you might be prone to an intellectual bias.

[Ryan1468]

@howlifebegan Explain to me how my argument gives me an intellectual bias.I used the ID argument, applied it to physics,and came to the conclusion that the universe was created by an all powerful circle god(see previous comment).Both arguments are equally ridiculous and require the believer to ignore all the explanations given by biology/physics in favour of the supernatural.The believer must also ignore all of the contradictory evidence.ID can not compete with evolution in the realm of science.