Learning... thanks guys for another great episode! Keep them coming. As a retired engineer and one saved by grace through faith for even longer, I've clung to the Word through the years. Now you, and others, are strengthening my faith through these awesome teachings. Giving me the resources, through the guidance of the Spirit, to do the same for those around me. Thanks so much! Keep up the good work. Praying for you, Mark Sleppy
Great video. Classic stuff. Not likely to attract any from the evolution religion since this is more of the overwhelming proof that makes that religion look so ridiculous. I'm always astounded to think that in this day and age there are still people who believe in evolution. With all the technology to see inside cells and DNA, it's amazing that anyone with one brain cell still believes Darwin's hypothesis.
@@kf1000 ....Says the silly boy that doesn't understand epigenetics. I was arguing with the oriental man at a conference about a decade ago trying to convince him that the largest DNA CODE evolutionary study in history proved that DNA CODE CAN'T do what darwin said. Now here he is on this video explaining to me before it was widely known about epigenetic PREPROGRAMMING. I was right on the study. So was he on epigenetic code. It is programming within programming. DNA CODE is also read in opposite directions! Imagine a set of encyclopedias that you can turn ot over and read a 2nd completely relevant set of supporting information to the encyclopedias read the other direction. Remember any change in spelling on one direction CHANGES the meaning on the other direction! Mankind CAN'T do this! We aren't intelligent enough! The only question left is WHAT SUPERGENIUS DID THAT BEFORE LIFE BEGAN???!
You naysayers CAN'T produce or provide a single peer-reviewed scientific paper DEVOID OF FAITH STATEMENTS AND CIRCULAR REASONING that proves evolution happens. There are none! Zero! Zilch! All that smack talk about "definitions" and. Ei g so very "sure" evolution happens...is NOT UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE! When will evolutionists finally realize they've been duped? Suckered! All you have to do is provide that paper...but you CAN'T. And yet...you believe. 8 stopped believing in evolution when I COULDN'T FIND any such evidence for the MYTHOLOGY. EPIGENETIC code was labeled "junk" by the evolutionists. They were all PROVEN WRONG! Unequivocally WRONG! They weren't random mutations. They were preprogrammed genetic code that are reactionary to different climate and environmental conditions. Feel free to post any paper DEVOID OF FAITH STATEMENTS AND CIRCULAR REASONING that proves me wrong here. You can't. You have your FAITH in the DISPROVEN MYTHOLOGY of naturalism and evolution. You don't have evidence. All the many FAITH STATEMENTS were overturned and destroyed by FACTS that show we only devolve and mutate to harm. There remains no "fortunate" successive mutations nor mechanism for them that would ever build information and new functional systems accidentally. Douglas Axe's peer-reviewed reviewed works remain UNCHALLENGED by any UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE of his being wrong. Only BIASED scientists making even more FAITH STATEMENTS remain opposed to his conclusions! What they CAN'T DO is show any UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that successuve Novel Functional Proteins "emerge" to form Functional I formation relevant to increasing and improving life. The data that makes PREPROGRAMMED EPIGENETIC CHANGES like Darwin's finches ALREADY PRECEEDED the Functional reactionary code expression. It was ALREADY THERE! We simply didn't understand the complexity and layers of code before when the silly assumptions of biased scientists decided that these Novel Functional Proteins...which are never actually observed... simply don't occur in REALITY. Maybe in fantasy for people who believe the natural selection fairy 🧚♀️ can beat the odds and win every lottery! But for the rest of the people who don't leave their brains at the alter of naturalism...we are most skeptical and doubtful of your IMAGINARY CLAIMS. You want to prove that Novel Functional Proteins emerged to form new species....simoly SHOW US. Stop whining and post it! You want us to BELIEVE in evolution? Stop CLAIMING there is some IMAGINARY MADE-UP pre-chimpanzee "creature" that is the missing link with humans! Show us the UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE! We no longer believe the bone scraps and silly reconfigured displays of them to suit your fantasy. The DNA CODE EVIDENCE proves that Novel Functional Proteins NEVER EMERGE to form new species. The DNA CODE EVIDENCE proves that chromosomes NEVER combine to form new species. Only fantasies of these impossible "occurences" remain. What foes not remain is your silly theory intact. It was destroyed by the DNA CODE EVIDENCE and every single missing link that never existsed in the first place. No chromosomal translocation ever occurs when observing reality! The fantasy imaginings is all the evolutionists have left. It was embarrassing that I ever fell for such impossible nonsense. Life can't evolve. It NEVER DOES. It reacts and programmed or breaks and doesn't. We don't see any information increases as would have been necessary in the Fanta of bacteria to human "evolution"! Just post it if you still REALLY REALLY BELIEVE it "exists"! It doesn't. That's why no evolutionists have ever posted any. It's EMBARRASSING! They are happy to complain, curse, brag, criticize, ostracize, denigrate, and hate. What they CAN'T do is support their fantasy.
So epigenetics helps to prove the idea of constant environmental tracking. The idea that our systems are built with the ability to track our environment and rapidly produce predictable adaptations. This would help to explain the speciation we see among the different kinds and how it could be achieved in such a short timeframe.
In the example of the rabbits changing color to survive, it's interesting that we tend to think of adaptations in how a species survives, but the fact is the hawk also needs to survive. So the epigenetics of the hawk might be that the eye color sensitivity adjusts just enough that it can still spot rabbits! And in terms of Darwinian model evolution over millions of years, I have to wonder what is the "intelligence" in the "target model" (what is it turning into?), if it takes millions of years, to know what the environment will be in a million years? We know ice ages came and went in thousands of years, so it would seem anything taking millions of years is way too long to adjust to earths natural ebb and flow of climate. Epigenetics makes more sense that there are DNA codes that can flip on and off, for example, thickening the coat of horses and cows in the winter, and those animals who are healthiest and grow the thickest coats AND are better at foraging for food will survive, for example.
What’s your biggest concerns for a full on commitment to Christianity? Maybe I can point you to some resources that might help. It was a multiple year journey for me and back then the internet wasn’t really much help. You had to hunt for the answers and today it’s a lot easier but you still have to know what you’re looking for.
@@oxcart4172 - You can prove that Jesus was who they said He was beyond a reasonable doubt using accumulating circumstantial evidence but you can’t prove it beyond all doubt. One of the preconditions for Christianity is reasonableness. If a person isn’t reasonable or open minded enough to examine the evidence then they will not be compelled by any evidence presented to them no matter how reasonable it is and the reason why is pride. In order to find God pride must die first and that’s why so many people don’t. Pride is the only condition that tells you that you don’t have it and therefore is almost impossible to get rid of, we think that pride is an asset and we will defend it to our own peril.
@@oxcart4172 - We know the basics about Jesus life, teachings, miracles and resurrection from His hostile witnesses that wrote about Him around the first century. We don’t even need the Bible to know who He was or what He did. So even the people that were against Him are still telling us what happened. You can’t make this claim about other gods. Every major religion acknowledges Jesus in order to downplay Him. Just from the hostile religious we know a lot about Him. That’s interesting that they all felt that He was important enough to make mention of Jesus. Jesus offered kind of a unique test for proof of His deity in that He predicted His death and resurrection and then it happened. If you are claiming to be the author of life then it’s kind of reassuring to actually see the dead come back to life because that’s a hard claim to take on faith alone. Not even the Atheists have proven that their religion is true by creating life from the nonliving. Only Jesus has ever provided proof of life.
@@boxelder9167 I was raised under people who were very extreme with their beliefs, and grew up very nihilistic. They forced it in my brain until my Fiancé started challenging my atheistic beliefs. Now I'm trying to undo the brainwashing, and a lot of it has to do with science and the bible. I'm wondering how true are the stories in the bible? How do I know if they really happened? I still have a ton of learning to do.
Dr. Carter, in your 2010 paper on splicing and dicing you said "However, now that we are aware of alternate splicing, future work may show that many of the pseudogene exons are incorporated into functional proteins." So that was 13 years ago so I wonder if future (i.e. now past) work has shown that these exons are in some proteins?
When two men who know what they're talking about try to relate information simply to laymen, it comes off as disingenuous, even though they are quite genuine. But it has to be made simple, as any challenging concepts get glanced over. I find most of my time is spent attempting to phrase concepts as simply and succinctly as possible.
There are many scientists that have found evidence for evolution that also don't agree with a lot of Darwin's research. Darwin tried his best but obviously there is always new information every day. The goal is to critically think of the new information. Be humble and not give in to cognitive dissonance or willful denial.
Hey! CMI! I love your content! Really gave me a ton of new arguments and reasons to defend my faith, i watched some videos about evolution on your channel (including this one) and i did read some articles explaining why this foolish theory is wrong, (and i am very convinced it is) still, i have a question, why is evolution still considered true if the theory itself is sooo flawed? This is a genuine question, why do so much intelligent people and scientists still believe this? Is it some kind of brainwashing?
Well, there are a few reasons. Part of it is simply that the scientific consensus has become philosophically wedded to metaphysical naturalism, and so they default to naturalistic explanations no matter how absurd they are. They don't seek the best explanation, they seek out the best naturalistic explanation. Evolution is the only seemingly plausible naturalistic explanation. So, that's really the only game in town. Next, most people (scientists included) don't know much about evolution as for most people (scientists included) it is not their special field of research. Many scientists believe in evolution just because that's what they were taught, and that's what the other scientists think. For those who do have a serious education in evolution, usually by the time they received that higher education they have already been completely convinced of it (probably convinced as a child) and so when they see these problems they don't question evolution. The underlying theory is assumed true, and the extreme problems are just challenges to solve. creation.com/multiverse-theory The article I just linked to helps show the materialistic bias in the scientific consensus. Scientists are largely so personally opposed to the divine that despite observing positive evidence that the universe was designed by a benevolent creator, they choose to reject it out of hand and entertain alternate explanations that they admit are purely speculative. creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote The next link is to another deeply revealing quote. Of course, while most scientists and laymen are unaware of the problems, there are those who know, but keep the faith anyways. The shocking part is that they will admit that Neo-Darwinism fails as an explanation for the diversity of life, and the evolution education is deeply misleading and inaccurate. So, we can also say, another reason that so many scientists believe evolution is not just because (like everyone else) they had it drilled into their heads before they were capable of critical thought, and did not receive an in depth education on it, but the education systems teach evolution in a way that is misleading and conveniently leaves out problems that would lead to many students having doubts about the theory (ie don't let anyone know about the problems unless you are sure they are committed to the theory). Many people believe evolution in large part because they don't understand evolution. creation.com/review-altenberg-16 This link goes to a review of a report about a conference in which a group of high profile evolutionists gathered together to discuss the fact that modern evolutionary theory failed as an explanation for life's diversity and that while they maintain that evolution is true, they acknowledge that mutation and natural selection (plus time) are not adequate mechanisms to cause the major long term changes that evolution requires. The scientists at the Altenburg conference made revealing statements such as: "Scientists agree that natural selection can occur. But the scientific community also knows that natural selection has little to do with long-term changes in populations." "Oh sure natural selection's been demonstrated … the interesting point, however, is that it has rarely if ever been demonstrated to have anything to do with evolution in the sense of long-term changes in populations. … Summing up we can see that the import of the Darwinian theory of evolution is just unexplainable caprice from top to bottom. What evolves is just what happens to happen" (Stanley Salthe, p. 21). "The point is, however, that an organism can be modified and refined by natural selection, but that is not the way new species and new classes and new phyla originated" (Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini, p. 314). If someone tells you that examples of natural selection and mutation are evolution, then it seems the highly misleading and crude education has fooled them. "Unless the discourse around evolution is opened up to scientific perspectives beyond Darwinism, the education of generations to come is at risk of being sacrificed for the benefit of a dying theory" (Stuart Newman, p. 104). Remember very few scientists are evolutionary biologists (ie not many have a very in-depth education in evolution). The scientists who do go on to have those in-depth educations are convinced of evolution long before they finish middle school, so when they start looking at the dirty details, it is not with a critical eye.
@@creationministriesintl Ooooohhh so it IS a manipulation, thanks for the explanation! Also, i have seen atheists say that "The countries with the highest IQ count (Like Sweden and Japan) are mostly atheist, so this means that atheists are more intelligent" my answer to this claim is: "The countries that are mostly atheist, are more developed, which means that more people are educated with the basics, AND, the "basics" include evolution, soooo in these countries, young ones don't question evolution and take it as a fact, and since the majority of people is atheist, they find no motivation to enter a religion or question evolution. (also, the majority of these countries have an alarming depression rate)" Your statements just made my response stronger in my opinion, because, if even scientists (which we expect to be educated on the matter) can be manipulated, a population that isn't motivated to question it, is going to be mostly atheist. But i am curious, how would you guys respond to this claim? (Don't need to respond if you don't want to.) Anyways, thank God for your ministry, CMI! Keep up the good work! God bless you all.
That's just bad logic. At best they can show a loose correlation but an actual causal relationship? No such thing. I must wonder though, if atheism is the domain of the intelligent and religion is that of the unintelligent then why is the case that the founders of modern science were all religious fundamentalists? If the atheists are truly so intelligent and high minded, we would expect science to be invented by the atheists who overcame superstition. Instead, modern science was invented by Christians. Unlike this loose connection with IQ and atheism we can also show historically that belief in scripture was the explicit philosophical foundation of science. So, not only was science invented by Christians, but their intellectual justification for science came explicitly from scripture (ie they weren't people who invented science that just happened to be Christian) their religious beliefs played a direct and positive role in the development of modern science. “Science was not the work of western secularists or even deists; it was entirely the work of devout believers in an active, conscious, creator God.”-Rodney Stark Stark, R., For the Glory of God: How monotheism led to reformations, science, witch-hunts and the end of slavery, Princeton University Press, 2003 "The Bible played a positive role in the development of science. Had it not been for the rise of the literal interpretation of the Bible and the subsequent appropriation of biblical narratives by early modern scientists, modern science may not have arisen at all. In sum, the Bible and its literal interpretation have played a vital role in the development of Western science " Harrison, P., The Bible and the rise of science, Australasian Science 23(3):14-15, 2002. "Here is a final paradox. Recent work on early modern science has demonstrated a direct (and positive) relationship between the resurgence of the Hebraic, literal exegesis of the Bible in the Protestant Reformation, and the rise of the empirical method in modern science. I’m not referring to wooden literalism, but the sophisticated literal-historical hermeneutics that Martin Luther and others (including Newton) championed." Snobelen, S., Isaac Newton and Apocalypse Now: a response to Tom Harpur’s ‘Newton’s strange bedfellows’; A longer version of the letter published in the Toronto Star, 2004. What are the IQ tests testing for? Here is the thing, unlike western nations (where in public schools IQ and religiosity are dropping substantially), those other countries have certain policies/cultural values in place that encourage increasing IQs. Japanese children face massive pressure from family and culture to perform academically. The key to success in life is typically perceived to be achieved through high educational achievement (same happens to Japanese children in the US, they outcompete almost everyone, that includes American atheists). The pressure to succeed is so intense that often if a student fears they cannot meet expectations, that student will commit suicide. Such social pressure will obviously result in high academic achievement and IQs. Sweden's social pressure is less extreme, but they have another policy. They have an almost completely government-funded university system, and they provide free college, but not to everyone. The only people who get to go to college are those who get state-sponsored, and the only people who get state-sponsored are those who are at the top of their class. This pressures everyone to study hard and value education. If they don't focus on their education, then they won't get into college for anything. A lot of people in Western countries get into college with bad grades, go into debt, and end up being drop outs too. The fact is that educational institutions (which shape the IQs of students) are deeply secular and pro-evolution. So, if the IQs are low, that reflects the quality of secular education, which has been dropping its standards for decades (that includes colleges). Public schools have been dropping standards and colleges have too. With educational standards dropping obviously IQ will drop too. Homeschoolers (far more often religious) and private schools (many of which are also religious) have long outperformed the secular, and public counterparts. It is of course those same bad performing public schools that teach students evolution, and do so in such a misleading manner. However, all of that is nothing but a red herring based on a painfully low information analysis (not very intelligent on their part). The average IQ of a low religiosity nation vs the average IQ of a nation that is drastically shrinking in religiosity (but remains a fair bit higher) are both irrelevant to which belief system is correct or stands to scrutiny. Once upon a time, Eugenics and white supremacy was a position nigh universal among western academics (with their high IQs included) and the average person accepted their teaching of white superiority uncritically, yet it was the religious fundamentalists who took issue with such things. Was the high IQ of the white supremacists thus evidence that White supremacy is true? The infamous textbook Hunter's Civic Biology, which the ACLU defended at the Scopes Trial of 1925, taught the following blatantly white supremacist agitprop to American school kids: “At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man, each very different from the others in instincts, social customs, and, to an extent, in structure. These are the Ethiopian or negro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; the American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America.” “If such people were lower animals, we would probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity will not allow this, but we do have the remedy of separating the sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race. Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with success in this country.” These sentiments were spread through public education and higher academia all throughout the West, promoting such racial supremacy. Is that an argument that racists are smarter than non-racists and, therefore, white supremacy is probably true? Ultimately a position stands or falls on its own merit. These talking points about average IQs in other countries are not only so simplistic that it should bring into question the intelligence of the atheists who think it matters (that or their honesty), but it also dodges the issue. Atheists can avoid defending their position with logical arguments and evidence if they can just bluff people into thinking atheism must be true because they got you to associate being smart with being an atheist.
@@FlavinRapidin-xj4ei "It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." -Richard Lewontin, a leading evolutionist. creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote
The 123, 123 4 structure or the 123 456 7 are valid structures and frequent literary features in the Bible The main point of these literary structures is to highlight the ODD one out being # 4 in the 1st or #7 in the last. Genesis does not follow the most common structure of Chiasm being 123 4 321 as the central material is being the stand out and most emphasised or important. However, in the creation account I think the better structure is one we find in the book of Revelation which is a 6+1 or 4+3 structure or even more refined as 4+2+1 which is also how God has laid out His master plan of the millennial ages for this earth. Soulish life is given after 4-days on day 5 & 6 and rest on the 7th. The #7 is like a mother who give birth to the next 7 or the "8th" onwards.
Sorry, epigenetics do not lead to creation myth. They just say, life exists in the very form of evoluting co-existence. Humans are recreatable. Just not by technical progress of _now._ 14:47 Meth Class? I' m in 😂
Sorry, epigenetics do not lead to creation myth. They just say, life exists in the very form of evoluting co-existence. Humans are recreatable. Just not by technical progress of _now._
Wonderful! Glory to God. And the God-haters really believe that AI will take over humanity?!!! Hahaha! Listen to this and WEEP you fools! God laughs at you (Psalm 2)!!
😂 not all rabbits have the same genetics. I fact no two rabbits have identical dna farther reinforcing evolution. Also the theory has evolved a lot since Darwin published his book. That thing you’re about to say that is wrong where the strong survive does not refer to individuals being picked off by a bird. Evolution is better defined as changes in allele frequency in a given population. Evolution isn’t individual based. I’m not shocked you dont grasp the basics(or are intentionally misrepresenting them)
You should study epigenetics to understand the whole picture. What is left of Darwinism is the idea of natural selection which alone cannot do anything. Epigenetics makes the DNA mutations theory (=Neodarwinism) to look really obsolete.
Stupid video, wrong definition of epigenetics. He's mixing Regulatory DNA with epigenetics. Regulatory DNA is separate from epigenetics. Regulatory DNA evolves just like protein coding genes evolve.
Epigenetics proves there is adaptation. It is now known that even the changes in beak size and form of the famous Galapagos finches happen very rapidly, no millions of years is needed, it can go as fast as a couple of years! And the changes are reversible, because epigenetic does it.
Another bald assertion. These are not arguments. Surely if evolution is so well supported by evidence, you would prefer to actually provide some. You flat out ignore the issues laid out in the video in favour of just making bald assertions. That does not paint you as the scientific and reasonable individual.
A mistake is an accidental action, Eve ate the lie of Satan, knowing the Truth of GOD, the object didn't matter. GOD commands and all of HIS creation listens, except man and demons, we do HIS will in spite of our freedom of will!!!!😂😂😂😂😂
He explains epigenetics well enough. You should study the topic. Galapagos finches are a real example, the size and form of their beaks are now know to change as rapidly as a couple of years because of epigenetic adaptation, no millions of years are required.
This is great, you really need to cut these videos into shorts to promote this video even more
Great idea.
Learning... thanks guys for another great episode!
Keep them coming.
As a retired engineer and one saved by grace through faith for even longer, I've clung to the Word through the years. Now you, and others, are strengthening my faith through these awesome teachings. Giving me the resources, through the guidance of the Spirit, to do the same for those around me.
Thanks so much!
Keep up the good work.
Praying for you,
Mark Sleppy
This was one of those talks that left me with a sense of awe of our Awesome God as much as any song of sermon has.... Wow! just Wow!
Great video. Classic stuff.
Not likely to attract any from the evolution religion since this is more of the overwhelming proof that makes that religion look so ridiculous. I'm always astounded to think that in this day and age there are still people who believe in evolution. With all the technology to see inside cells and DNA, it's amazing that anyone with one brain cell still believes Darwin's hypothesis.
DNA supports evolution. Evolution isn’t a religion. Religions are dogmatic, ritualistic and unchanging. The opposite of science
Dumb video.... they even have the wrong definition for epigenetics.
@@kf1000
....Says the silly boy that doesn't understand epigenetics.
I was arguing with the oriental man at a conference about a decade ago trying to convince him that the largest DNA CODE evolutionary study in history proved that DNA CODE CAN'T do what darwin said. Now here he is on this video explaining to me before it was widely known about epigenetic PREPROGRAMMING. I was right on the study. So was he on epigenetic code. It is programming within programming.
DNA CODE is also read in opposite directions!
Imagine a set of encyclopedias that you can turn ot over and read a 2nd completely relevant set of supporting information to the encyclopedias read the other direction. Remember any change in spelling on one direction CHANGES the meaning on the other direction! Mankind CAN'T do this! We aren't intelligent enough!
The only question left is WHAT SUPERGENIUS DID THAT BEFORE LIFE BEGAN???!
No they actually didn’t it the definition wrong Google it
You naysayers CAN'T produce or provide a single peer-reviewed scientific paper DEVOID OF FAITH STATEMENTS AND CIRCULAR REASONING that proves evolution happens. There are none! Zero! Zilch!
All that smack talk about "definitions" and. Ei g so very "sure" evolution happens...is NOT UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE!
When will evolutionists finally realize they've been duped? Suckered!
All you have to do is provide that paper...but you CAN'T. And yet...you believe. 8 stopped believing in evolution when I COULDN'T FIND any such evidence for the MYTHOLOGY.
EPIGENETIC code was labeled "junk" by the evolutionists. They were all PROVEN WRONG! Unequivocally WRONG! They weren't random mutations. They were preprogrammed genetic code that are reactionary to different climate and environmental conditions. Feel free to post any paper DEVOID OF FAITH STATEMENTS AND CIRCULAR REASONING that proves me wrong here. You can't. You have your FAITH in the DISPROVEN MYTHOLOGY of naturalism and evolution. You don't have evidence. All the many FAITH STATEMENTS were overturned and destroyed by FACTS that show we only devolve and mutate to harm. There remains no "fortunate" successive mutations nor mechanism for them that would ever build information and new functional systems accidentally. Douglas Axe's peer-reviewed reviewed works remain UNCHALLENGED by any UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE of his being wrong. Only BIASED scientists making even more FAITH STATEMENTS remain opposed to his conclusions! What they CAN'T DO is show any UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that successuve Novel Functional Proteins "emerge" to form Functional I formation relevant to increasing and improving life. The data that makes PREPROGRAMMED EPIGENETIC CHANGES like Darwin's finches ALREADY PRECEEDED the Functional reactionary code expression. It was ALREADY THERE! We simply didn't understand the complexity and layers of code before when the silly assumptions of biased scientists decided that these Novel Functional Proteins...which are never actually observed... simply don't occur in REALITY. Maybe in fantasy for people who believe the natural selection fairy 🧚♀️ can beat the odds and win every lottery! But for the rest of the people who don't leave their brains at the alter of naturalism...we are most skeptical and doubtful of your IMAGINARY CLAIMS.
You want to prove that Novel Functional Proteins emerged to form new species....simoly SHOW US. Stop whining and post it!
You want us to BELIEVE in evolution? Stop CLAIMING there is some IMAGINARY MADE-UP pre-chimpanzee "creature" that is the missing link with humans! Show us the UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE! We no longer believe the bone scraps and silly reconfigured displays of them to suit your fantasy. The DNA CODE EVIDENCE proves that Novel Functional Proteins NEVER EMERGE to form new species. The DNA CODE EVIDENCE proves that chromosomes NEVER combine to form new species. Only fantasies of these impossible "occurences" remain. What foes not remain is your silly theory intact. It was destroyed by the DNA CODE EVIDENCE and every single missing link that never existsed in the first place. No chromosomal translocation ever occurs when observing reality! The fantasy imaginings is all the evolutionists have left. It was embarrassing that I ever fell for such impossible nonsense. Life can't evolve. It NEVER DOES. It reacts and programmed or breaks and doesn't. We don't see any information increases as would have been necessary in the Fanta of bacteria to human "evolution"!
Just post it if you still REALLY REALLY BELIEVE it "exists"! It doesn't. That's why no evolutionists have ever posted any. It's EMBARRASSING!
They are happy to complain, curse, brag, criticize, ostracize, denigrate, and hate. What they CAN'T do is support their fantasy.
once again I am in awe of His creation, utter genius on a level way beyond us. stunning
So epigenetics helps to prove the idea of constant environmental tracking. The idea that our systems are built with the ability to track our environment and rapidly produce predictable adaptations. This would help to explain the speciation we see among the different kinds and how it could be achieved in such a short timeframe.
Re-watch the video. You missed a lot and there is no physical evidence for single cell creatures evolving into multi-cell creatures.
I enjoy these short deep dives into a topic.
I can't remember the type of moth but it changes colors based on where it is in its migration to hide in its environment. God works in amazing ways!
creation.com/peppered-moth-caterpillars
In the example of the rabbits changing color to survive, it's interesting that we tend to think of adaptations in how a species survives, but the fact is the hawk also needs to survive. So the epigenetics of the hawk might be that the eye color sensitivity adjusts just enough that it can still spot rabbits!
And in terms of Darwinian model evolution over millions of years, I have to wonder what is the "intelligence" in the "target model" (what is it turning into?), if it takes millions of years, to know what the environment will be in a million years? We know ice ages came and went in thousands of years, so it would seem anything taking millions of years is way too long to adjust to earths natural ebb and flow of climate. Epigenetics makes more sense that there are DNA codes that can flip on and off, for example, thickening the coat of horses and cows in the winter, and those animals who are healthiest and grow the thickest coats AND are better at foraging for food will survive, for example.
Yes! Thank you, I’m a scientist so I love to hear evolution being confronted on scientific grounds. 😊
I'll be showing this to my classes, thank you for the clarity of your explanations!
Excellent! And Fascinating! Thank you. How can anyone continue to believe in evolution?
Hello, I'm trying to convert to Christianity. I was raised as an atheist, and now I'm noticing it's flaws. Thank you for this video!
What’s your biggest concerns for a full on commitment to Christianity? Maybe I can point you to some resources that might help. It was a multiple year journey for me and back then the internet wasn’t really much help. You had to hunt for the answers and today it’s a lot easier but you still have to know what you’re looking for.
Its anything but logical.
creation.com/self-contradictory-atheism
@@oxcart4172 - You can prove that Jesus was who they said He was beyond a reasonable doubt using accumulating circumstantial evidence but you can’t prove it beyond all doubt. One of the preconditions for Christianity is reasonableness. If a person isn’t reasonable or open minded enough to examine the evidence then they will not be compelled by any evidence presented to them no matter how reasonable it is and the reason why is pride. In order to find God pride must die first and that’s why so many people don’t. Pride is the only condition that tells you that you don’t have it and therefore is almost impossible to get rid of, we think that pride is an asset and we will defend it to our own peril.
@@oxcart4172 - We know the basics about Jesus life, teachings, miracles and resurrection from His hostile witnesses that wrote about Him around the first century. We don’t even need the Bible to know who He was or what He did. So even the people that were against Him are still telling us what happened. You can’t make this claim about other gods. Every major religion acknowledges Jesus in order to downplay Him. Just from the hostile religious we know a lot about Him. That’s interesting that they all felt that He was important enough to make mention of Jesus. Jesus offered kind of a unique test for proof of His deity in that He predicted His death and resurrection and then it happened. If you are claiming to be the author of life then it’s kind of reassuring to actually see the dead come back to life because that’s a hard claim to take on faith alone.
Not even the Atheists have proven that their religion is true by creating life from the nonliving. Only Jesus has ever provided proof of life.
@@boxelder9167 I was raised under people who were very extreme with their beliefs, and grew up very nihilistic. They forced it in my brain until my Fiancé started challenging my atheistic beliefs. Now I'm trying to undo the brainwashing, and a lot of it has to do with science and the bible. I'm wondering how true are the stories in the bible? How do I know if they really happened? I still have a ton of learning to do.
Great stuff 👏
Dr. Carter, in your 2010 paper on splicing and dicing you said "However, now that we are aware of alternate splicing, future work may show that many of the pseudogene exons are incorporated into functional proteins." So that was 13 years ago so I wonder if future (i.e. now past) work has shown that these exons are in some proteins?
This is amazing! God is such an incredible creator. Thanks for this explanation. Keep up the good work.
You have epigenetics AND fixed changes in the genome!
Epigenetics is not a problem for evolution.
Epigenetics IS a problem for the Neodarwinian theory based on random mutations of the genome. It makes Neodarwinism obsolete.
When two men who know what they're talking about try to relate information simply to laymen, it comes off as disingenuous, even though they are quite genuine.
But it has to be made simple, as any challenging concepts get glanced over.
I find most of my time is spent attempting to phrase concepts as simply and succinctly as possible.
Our faithful Creator God is awesome, and all His works are wonderful- we all are blessed by His creative purposes!
Commemt #5 CMI. God bless you in all things.
There are many scientists that have found evidence for evolution that also don't agree with a lot of Darwin's research. Darwin tried his best but obviously there is always new information every day. The goal is to critically think of the new information. Be humble and not give in to cognitive dissonance or willful denial.
Hey! CMI! I love your content! Really gave me a ton of new arguments and reasons to defend my faith, i watched some videos about evolution on your channel (including this one) and i did read some articles explaining why this foolish theory is wrong, (and i am very convinced it is) still, i have a question, why is evolution still considered true if the theory itself is sooo flawed? This is a genuine question, why do so much intelligent people and scientists still believe this? Is it some kind of brainwashing?
Well, there are a few reasons. Part of it is simply that the scientific consensus has become philosophically wedded to metaphysical naturalism, and so they default to naturalistic explanations no matter how absurd they are.
They don't seek the best explanation, they seek out the best naturalistic explanation. Evolution is the only seemingly plausible naturalistic explanation. So, that's really the only game in town.
Next, most people (scientists included) don't know much about evolution as for most people (scientists included) it is not their special field of research. Many scientists believe in evolution just because that's what they were taught, and that's what the other scientists think.
For those who do have a serious education in evolution, usually by the time they received that higher education they have already been completely convinced of it (probably convinced as a child) and so when they see these problems they don't question evolution. The underlying theory is assumed true, and the extreme problems are just challenges to solve.
creation.com/multiverse-theory
The article I just linked to helps show the materialistic bias in the scientific consensus. Scientists are largely so personally opposed to the divine that despite observing positive evidence that the universe was designed by a benevolent creator, they choose to reject it out of hand and entertain alternate explanations that they admit are purely speculative.
creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote
The next link is to another deeply revealing quote.
Of course, while most scientists and laymen are unaware of the problems, there are those who know, but keep the faith anyways. The shocking part is that they will admit that Neo-Darwinism fails as an explanation for the diversity of life, and the evolution education is deeply misleading and inaccurate.
So, we can also say, another reason that so many scientists believe evolution is not just because (like everyone else) they had it drilled into their heads before they were capable of critical thought, and did not receive an in depth education on it, but the education systems teach evolution in a way that is misleading and conveniently leaves out problems that would lead to many students having doubts about the theory (ie don't let anyone know about the problems unless you are sure they are committed to the theory). Many people believe evolution in large part because they don't understand evolution.
creation.com/review-altenberg-16
This link goes to a review of a report about a conference in which a group of high profile evolutionists gathered together to discuss the fact that modern evolutionary theory failed as an explanation for life's diversity and that while they maintain that evolution is true, they acknowledge that mutation and natural selection (plus time) are not adequate mechanisms to cause the major long term changes that evolution requires.
The scientists at the Altenburg conference made revealing statements such as: "Scientists agree that natural selection can occur. But the scientific community also knows that natural selection has little to do with long-term changes in populations."
"Oh sure natural selection's been demonstrated … the interesting point, however, is that it has rarely if ever been demonstrated to have anything to do with evolution in the sense of long-term changes in populations. … Summing up we can see that the import of the Darwinian theory of evolution is just unexplainable caprice from top to bottom. What evolves is just what happens to happen" (Stanley Salthe, p. 21).
"The point is, however, that an organism can be modified and refined by natural selection, but that is not the way new species and new classes and new phyla originated" (Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini, p. 314).
If someone tells you that examples of natural selection and mutation are evolution, then it seems the highly misleading and crude education has fooled them.
"Unless the discourse around evolution is opened up to scientific perspectives beyond Darwinism, the education of generations to come is at risk of being sacrificed for the benefit of a dying theory" (Stuart Newman, p. 104).
Remember very few scientists are evolutionary biologists (ie not many have a very in-depth education in evolution). The scientists who do go on to have those in-depth educations are convinced of evolution long before they finish middle school, so when they start looking at the dirty details, it is not with a critical eye.
@@creationministriesintl
Ooooohhh so it IS a manipulation, thanks for the explanation!
Also, i have seen atheists say that "The countries with the highest IQ count (Like Sweden and Japan) are mostly atheist, so this means that atheists are more intelligent" my answer to this claim is:
"The countries that are mostly atheist, are more developed, which means that more people are educated with the basics, AND, the "basics" include evolution, soooo in these countries, young ones don't question evolution and take it as a fact, and since the majority of people is atheist, they find no motivation to enter a religion or question evolution. (also, the majority of these countries have an alarming depression rate)"
Your statements just made my response stronger in my opinion, because, if even scientists (which we expect to be educated on the matter) can be manipulated, a population that isn't motivated to question it, is going to be mostly atheist.
But i am curious, how would you guys respond to this claim? (Don't need to respond if you don't want to.)
Anyways, thank God for your ministry, CMI!
Keep up the good work!
God bless you all.
That's just bad logic. At best they can show a loose correlation but an actual causal relationship? No such thing.
I must wonder though, if atheism is the domain of the intelligent and religion is that of the unintelligent then why is the case that the founders of modern science were all religious fundamentalists?
If the atheists are truly so intelligent and high minded, we would expect science to be invented by the atheists who overcame superstition. Instead, modern science was invented by Christians.
Unlike this loose connection with IQ and atheism we can also show historically that belief in scripture was the explicit philosophical foundation of science. So, not only was science invented by Christians, but their intellectual justification for science came explicitly from scripture (ie they weren't people who invented science that just happened to be Christian) their religious beliefs played a direct and positive role in the development of modern science.
“Science was not the work of western secularists or even deists; it was entirely the work of devout believers in an active, conscious, creator God.”-Rodney Stark
Stark, R., For the Glory of God: How monotheism led to reformations, science, witch-hunts and the end of slavery, Princeton University Press, 2003
"The Bible played a positive role in the development of science. Had it not been for the rise of the literal interpretation of the Bible and the subsequent appropriation of biblical narratives by early modern scientists, modern science may not have arisen at all. In sum, the Bible and its literal interpretation have played a vital role in the development of Western science "
Harrison, P., The Bible and the rise of science, Australasian Science 23(3):14-15, 2002.
"Here is a final paradox. Recent work on early modern science has demonstrated a direct (and positive) relationship between the resurgence of the Hebraic, literal exegesis of the Bible in the Protestant Reformation, and the rise of the empirical method in modern science. I’m not referring to wooden literalism, but the sophisticated literal-historical hermeneutics that Martin Luther and others (including Newton) championed."
Snobelen, S., Isaac Newton and Apocalypse Now: a response to Tom Harpur’s ‘Newton’s strange bedfellows’; A longer version of the letter published in the Toronto Star, 2004.
What are the IQ tests testing for? Here is the thing, unlike western nations (where in public schools IQ and religiosity are dropping substantially), those other countries have certain policies/cultural values in place that encourage increasing IQs. Japanese children face massive pressure from family and culture to perform academically. The key to success in life is typically perceived to be achieved through high educational achievement (same happens to Japanese children in the US, they outcompete almost everyone, that includes American atheists). The pressure to succeed is so intense that often if a student fears they cannot meet expectations, that student will commit suicide. Such social pressure will obviously result in high academic achievement and IQs. Sweden's social pressure is less extreme, but they have another policy. They have an almost completely government-funded university system, and they provide free college, but not to everyone. The only people who get to go to college are those who get state-sponsored, and the only people who get state-sponsored are those who are at the top of their class. This pressures everyone to study hard and value education. If they don't focus on their education, then they won't get into college for anything. A lot of people in Western countries get into college with bad grades, go into debt, and end up being drop outs too.
The fact is that educational institutions (which shape the IQs of students) are deeply secular and pro-evolution. So, if the IQs are low, that reflects the quality of secular education, which has been dropping its standards for decades (that includes colleges). Public schools have been dropping standards and colleges have too. With educational standards dropping obviously IQ will drop too.
Homeschoolers (far more often religious) and private schools (many of which are also religious) have long outperformed the secular, and public counterparts. It is of course those same bad performing public schools that teach students evolution, and do so in such a misleading manner.
However, all of that is nothing but a red herring based on a painfully low information analysis (not very intelligent on their part). The average IQ of a low religiosity nation vs the average IQ of a nation that is drastically shrinking in religiosity (but remains a fair bit higher) are both irrelevant to which belief system is correct or stands to scrutiny.
Once upon a time, Eugenics and white supremacy was a position nigh universal among western academics (with their high IQs included) and the average person accepted their teaching of white superiority uncritically, yet it was the religious fundamentalists who took issue with such things.
Was the high IQ of the white supremacists thus evidence that White supremacy is true?
The infamous textbook Hunter's Civic Biology, which the ACLU defended at the Scopes Trial of 1925, taught the following blatantly white supremacist agitprop to American school kids:
“At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man, each very different from the others in instincts, social customs, and, to an extent, in structure. These are the Ethiopian or negro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; the American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America.”
“If such people were lower animals, we would probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity will not allow this, but we do have the remedy of separating the sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race. Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with success in this country.”
These sentiments were spread through public education and higher academia all throughout the West, promoting such racial supremacy. Is that an argument that racists are smarter than non-racists and, therefore, white supremacy is probably true?
Ultimately a position stands or falls on its own merit. These talking points about average IQs in other countries are not only so simplistic that it should bring into question the intelligence of the atheists who think it matters (that or their honesty), but it also dodges the issue. Atheists can avoid defending their position with logical arguments and evidence if they can just bluff people into thinking atheism must be true because they got you to associate being smart with being an atheist.
@@FlavinRapidin-xj4ei
"It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
-Richard Lewontin, a leading evolutionist.
creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote
I have to say this is the best Talk I've heard. Keep them coming.
The 123, 123 4 structure or the 123 456 7 are valid structures and frequent literary features in the Bible The main point of these literary structures is to highlight the ODD one out being # 4 in the 1st or #7 in the last. Genesis does not follow the most common structure of Chiasm being 123 4 321 as the central material is being the stand out and most emphasised or important. However, in the creation account I think the better structure is one we find in the book of Revelation which is a 6+1 or 4+3 structure or even more refined as 4+2+1 which is also how God has laid out His master plan of the millennial ages for this earth. Soulish life is given after 4-days on day 5 & 6 and rest on the 7th. The #7 is like a mother who give birth to the next 7 or the "8th" onwards.
Great video.
Amen
"Junk dna" of Evolution cultist has been debunked.
Sorry, epigenetics do not lead to creation myth.
They just say, life exists in the very form of evoluting co-existence. Humans are recreatable. Just not by technical progress of _now._
14:47 Meth Class? I' m in 😂
Sorry, epigenetics do not lead to creation myth.
They just say, life exists in the very form of evoluting co-existence. Humans are recreatable. Just not by technical progress of _now._
Wonderful! Glory to God. And the God-haters really believe that AI will take over humanity?!!! Hahaha! Listen to this and WEEP you fools! God laughs at you (Psalm 2)!!
Epigenetic’s does ruin evolution.
What's God ever done for us?
He sent His Son to die for our sins so we can have eternal life with Him. It is your choice whether to accept or reject His salvation.
Wait, environmental effects on DNA can be inherited... PFAS 🚨💀🚨💀🚨💀🚨💀
😂 not all rabbits have the same genetics. I fact no two rabbits have identical dna farther reinforcing evolution. Also the theory has evolved a lot since Darwin published his book.
That thing you’re about to say that is wrong where the strong survive does not refer to individuals being picked off by a bird. Evolution is better defined as changes in allele frequency in a given population. Evolution isn’t individual based.
I’m not shocked you dont grasp the basics(or are intentionally misrepresenting them)
You should study epigenetics to understand the whole picture. What is left of Darwinism is the idea of natural selection which alone cannot do anything. Epigenetics makes the DNA mutations theory (=Neodarwinism) to look really obsolete.
Stupid video, wrong definition of epigenetics. He's mixing Regulatory DNA with epigenetics.
Regulatory DNA is separate from epigenetics.
Regulatory DNA evolves just like protein coding genes evolve.
So what is your definition of epigenetics then?
God bless you a great video
🤷 "PromoSM"
The proof of God by the rabbits!
Evolutionist are saying it proves their theory...
Epigenetics proves there is adaptation. It is now known that even the changes in beak size and form of the famous Galapagos finches happen very rapidly, no millions of years is needed, it can go as fast as a couple of years! And the changes are reversible, because epigenetic does it.
@@s.unosson the programming is there. It isn't coming about by random trial and error
Evolution is a fact 👍no god required.
A bald assertion...no refutation required.
@@creationministriesintl the findings of evolution is supported by almost every single field of science.
Another bald assertion. These are not arguments. Surely if evolution is so well supported by evidence, you would prefer to actually provide some.
You flat out ignore the issues laid out in the video in favour of just making bald assertions. That does not paint you as the scientific and reasonable individual.
@@LisaSimpsonLiberal
Ha hardly
appeal to authority fallacy
God made Adam from clay and Eve from his ribs and kicked them out just for one single mistake. This discussion is a joke.
You use a theological argument to make theology look stupid.
A mistake is an accidental action, Eve ate the lie of Satan, knowing the Truth of GOD, the object didn't matter.
GOD commands and all of HIS creation listens, except man and demons, we do HIS will in spite of our freedom of will!!!!😂😂😂😂😂
This is a field to study for sure, but this is being sensationalized prematurely.
Oh no, it is time to understand the theory of modern synthesis is dead.
This guy is just making stuff up about the rabbits. Why would I take him as an expert if he has to make up examples rather than use real examples?
u failed to give an example of what hes saying incorrect why would I trust ur opinion?
If you get off of the drugs you will see there is a clear example I gave. @@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n 90% of what he is saying is wrong. He's mixing up several concepts.
He explains epigenetics well enough. You should study the topic. Galapagos finches are a real example, the size and form of their beaks are now know to change as rapidly as a couple of years because of epigenetic adaptation, no millions of years are required.
2 whole comments that'll really get the algorithm spreading your videos. 🤣
Why are you being rude? There. 4 comments now. Happy?
Herre's another one, thanks for encouraging me to help out!
And another one
Insert comment here
And another