Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Part 1-Ben Stein and Dr. R.C. Sproul Discussion on Expelled

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
16,881
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on May 2, 2008

Talking about the existence of God

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 29 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (236)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @buttface112211 No man, you get fuckin' real.

  • @buttface112211 Nonexistent* And no shit, "nothing" would be nonexistant because it is NOTHING. :D

  • @ImagenNoReligion Then he could just simply ask, well then, who designed the designer's designer? It could go on, but the fact is, the idea of any deity is one that is and always has been, and was never created himself. In perspective of that, any deity is supposed to be so beyond humans that we cannot understand their coming to being, because they are...the deity. Ya know? But cool Q.

  • @BashYouLongtime Nat Geo is a science organization, why would they support anything but science? Every legitimate science organization supports evolution, there is a reason why, and it isn't your conspiracy bullshit. These sources are bullshit because they aren't the discovery institute or AiG which are run by theologians with no scientific background? Get fuckin real. The talkorigins link inserts a - in "dinosaur" after being copied/pasted which has to be deleted.

  • @buttface112211 Not Found

    The requested URL /faqs/dinos­aur/blood.html was not found on this server.

    Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

    Guess Evolution doesn't exit.

  • @buttface112211 LOLOLOL. WOW, these are the most bullshit filled sources I've ever seen. I'm very sorry you've lived your life in a falsehood, and btw, Nat Geo ONLY supports evolution, no wonder you'd link me there-hahaha.

  • @BashYouLongtime Make up more?

    smithsonianmag[dot]com/science­-nature/dinosaur.html

    sciencedaily[dot]com/releases/­2005/03/050325100541.htm

    talkorigins[dot]org/faqs/dinos­aur/blood.html

    talkorigins[dot]org/faqs/dinos­aur/flesh.html

    nationalgeographic[dot]com/new­s/2009/05/090501-oldest-dinosa­ur-proteins.html

    sciencemag[dot]org/content/307­/5717/1952.abstract

    And the list goes on, get informed. You're a troll.

  • @buttface112211 Keep digging a hole for losing.

  • @BashYouLongtime My questions were not "useless", there is a specific reason why I asked them. Is it useless for me to request criteria by which a fossils can be deemed transitional when discussing the prevalence of transitional fossils? I asked you to describe the process of evolution and mutations so I can guage your understanding of evolution, because as of now, your comments indicate otherwise. You say I've failed, yet you described evolution as acting with intent.

  • @buttface112211 Yes, please make up more. I win.

View all Comments »
Loading...

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