Dragons are a mythologicla creature. Not historical. Leviathin couod mean any really massive living creature, like a megaladon perhaps 🤔🤔 or a whale or a wooly mamoth or some other creatures that died off. I find it super weird they say all the dinosaurs became extinct but then all these animals are descendants of them. Well, which is it?? How could both be true? When we logically think out the facts they hand us, they constantly contradict each other
I always wondered if they had missed that bit, about some of the dinos they think they discovered just being juvenile skeletons of ones that were already documented.
@@JustinWestbrook-be1mp Dragon is just the Greek word for an exceptionally large serpent, it comes from the verb meaning “to see” referring to a snakes deathly stare. The longest snake ever recorded was the reticulated python in 1912 with a length of 10 meters.
@@greasher926 To be fair the Greek word for serpent is drakon. When the Romans borrowed the word from Greek they spelled it as dragon because the Romans had a thing for substituting gamma for kappa.
@@kingwillie206 dragons picked up their modern image in the Middle Ages when artists started to depict dragons with legs and wings, while still being very long and lanky. Overtime it turned from a legged serpentine monster into a more lizard form, and then a more dinosaur form in the modern age. Also even if look at other other names for dragons they etymologically point to snakes. For example the wyvern is the Middle English word for viper coming from old north French, wivre. In Beowulf the first English literature to depict the dragon is called draca (dragon) but also wyrm which shares the same etymology as worm.
When asked in 1979 if there are any transitional forms confirming evolution, Colin Patterson, then Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, replied, I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader? I wrote the text of my book four years ago. If I were to write it now, I think the book would be rather different. Gradualism is a concept I believe in, not just because of Darwin’s authority, but because my understanding of genetics seems to demand it. Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. As a paleontologist myself, I am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossil record. You say that I should at least “show a photo of the fossil from which each type of organism was derived.” I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.
Try to learn from all the TH-cam experts' comments, the only thing learned is that we are still insulting one another of the things we think we know more than others. The old saying still stands, humility is the beginning of wisdom.
yet here you are watching a video from people who think they know more about the subject that people who dedicate their entire lives stuffing biology and dinosaur all while throwing snide at the very experts. ironic.
@@Dustandfuzz Thanks for making it clear. What did David Daniels mean when he said, "I had nowhere to set my faith," and how did this realization impact his search for the truth?
@@jason.martin cassowary; just look at em. Bro im a follower of Christ but idt we need to understand the creation process to do so. like of course we dont get it. we are not Gods. Im just gonna leave it. Dinosaur def existed. If evolution exist God created it. it literally does not have to make sense. I think our constant need to explain things is good but also causes trouble. Also lets see what scientist say in 10 years. they are still learning. i wouldnt jump to agree with a lot of science; it debunks itself on the reg. thats kind of the point. Science is cool but science is preformed by fallible creations.
@nothanksplease you summarized what ive been saying for years dude. We cannot possibly understand the mind of God. And dinosaurs/evolution/etc dont disprove His existence.
The quality of the presentation here was outstanding. I was an atheist, I am not a catholic but wow, what a great presentation. I really appreciate diversity of thought and the anti-thesis. It's much better to have a range of opinions and to build up a better picture over time. Perhaps 1000 years from now we will have further evidence to support your hypothesis. Either way, I appreciate such skill in teaching. It was a very fun presentation to listen to.
7:32 Yes, let’s start with God’s word. Then let’s see how well the evidence lines up and matches up with what the Bible says. And if things don’t match up then let’s reevaluate how we are interpreting God’s word
If you mean to interpret God's word as a lie, then you make a liar out of God. Maybe, if things don't line up, let's re-evaluate how we are interpreting the evidence, not God's Word.
_Velociraptor_ does actually have a propubic condition like birds do, but since the rest of its anatomy doesn't line up (too many caudal vertebrae, serrated teeth, etc.), it still cannot be classed as a bird
It's extremely difficult to set-in-stone characteristics that determine what an animal category is. Creation is far to varied within individual clades. Features converge and diverge within birds, stem-birds, and non-avian theropods. Flight itself appears several times within the Tetanurae, in dromaeosaurs ( _Microraptor_ ), creatures like _Archaeopteryx_ and _Anchiornis_ , and others. Convergent evolution/biology is when features arise independently in different groups (e.g., the dog-like thylacinids and true dogs). By looking at minute characteristics on the "inside", it can be determined whether shared features are homologous because of a shared clade or convergence. _Velociraptor_ shares as much if not more features with true birds than _Archaeopteryx_ , although neither are true birds (Aves).
@@jaysons6101 your wrong. Birds and Dinosaurs are separate kinds of animals. Dinosaurs are Reptiles, and Birds are Birds. Also, Dinosaurs have about 50 - 30 caudal vertebrae, while birds have about 26 or less caudal vertebrae.
keep in mind they date the fossils based on the age of the rocks they are found nearby. Also remember, they date rocks based on the fossils found near the rocks. thats why school books published over time started by estimating that the rocks and fossils were thousands of years old, then hundreds of thousands, then millions. and now billions. the more they run in this circular reasoning, the older it gets
Yes, those are some dating methods, but they're not the only ones used nor are they ever employed together. Radiometric dating of various isotopes available give us a good idea, ice core data sheets for identifying other trace elements and correlating them with a time, geological survey data to approximate how fast sediment is collected in a given position, etc.
Actually, it wasn't simply the school books, it was the legitimate results of scientific inquiry regarding Earth's age. And despite what you might wish to say about the Big Meanie Atheist Evolutionists, plenty of these pioneering geologists and physicists were Christian, and in some cases explicit anti-Darwinian creationists. And yet, despite that, they were estimating tens of millions of years as a minimum for the Earth's age, all before we had radiometric dating to confirm it.
The Hebrew of Genesis 1:21 is sometimes interpreted as insects, which have wings. "Ohf" is winged creatures, not necessarily birds. Also, later on in geneis it mentions "sea creatures", yet the term in Hebrew is "taninim gadolim" which literally means "big lizards".
18:28 The Wrist thing was a dumb point to make especially when many dinosaurs had those types of wrists and you decided to label a Dromaeosaurid as being just an extinct bird when it is listed as having the other things you used to differentiate birds from Dinosaurs. Also people believe birds are dinosaurs anyway, this whole talk is just a big circle.
What's the problem with God creating some dinosaurs with feathers, and us just not knowing about it until more recently? You've gotta remember, dinosaurs weren't some bloodthirsty monsters, they were just animals. They didn't HAVE to look scary
I usually just point out that Genesis literally says, "And God said, "Let the waters bring forth..." and "Let the earth bring forth..." Now, as to the HOW the oceans and the land brought those things forth, that's up to people to figure out if it's important enough to them. The scientific community seems to be operating under the assumption that materialism is true so they seek naturalistic explanations and discount any alternatives. Personally, I think they are misinterpreting the evidence to make it fit their presuppositions but that's kinda what people do. Either way, I have far more important issues to deal with in my personal walk with Christ so I can't invest much time on this one anymore. But thank you guys for what you do, you helped preserve my faith when I was struggling with this.
Another thing that often makes me roll my eyes is the whole "we live in a simulation" thing. I'm like, well, DUH, the entire universe is just CONDENSED ENERGY, so it's kinda like a hologram. Spoken into existence and condensed into everything that is. We are the product, Bride, designed and grown using a tedious and detailed process using time, free will, and a Spark of the Manufacturer, Himself. These immortal products, if they can be refined sufficiently to exist and operate in an ETERNAL (without beginning or end) state, they will be ready. Sorry, I'm autistic so I love me some metaphor. Jesus is the Absolute Master of metaphor, though. Wow, another reason to love Him. Man, I love this Guy.
You sound like you disagree..? or agree?.. doesn’t matter. Props to you for the most genuinely, and humanly respectful comment I’ve seen on this video thus far.
I deeply appreciated this, particularly the parts related to the translation capability of the wrist joints being radically different including the muscle connection points, this left no place for a middle ground where one of those would have translated into the other without making the transitional animals radically disadvantaged mutants that would be out-competed by their existant healthier relatives or better designed animals in the niche they were transitioning to fill.
Isn't the fact that you can make a skeleton look convincingly like either a dinosaur or a bird just by posing it a great example of a transitional fossil?
Taking the Bible literally instead of figuratively or accepting that time is very different for God is just being intentionally ignorant. “The bible says 6 days so therefore evolution isn’t real.” No, the simple solution is that billions of years to God is a few days. 8:39
There are parts where God means literally and other times, it is figuratively. How do we tell? Taking the time to understand the context of the text and Jewish traditions and what is God saying throughout the book in question
Traits unique whales -blowhole -flippers -vestigial hips -underwater echolocation -gives birth underwater So the same criteria that AIG uses to says birds are not dinosaurs can also be used to say whales are not mammals.
Question: How do Hoatzin birds fit into this theory? They are born with useable fingers and even a tooth. Also, what about the Cassowary? I can't help but see a dino when I look at this large, dangerous bird. They will kill a human on site.
Cassowaries and other ratites are apparently descended from flying birds so they are not as primitive as they look. Hoatzin is a good example since they do still have some primitive characters
Ty, I had to look this fascinating creature up. Many scientists believe this bird to be the first. I agree. Obviously, I would disagree on how the bird appeared, but I believe it may have been the first bird. Ty, for that.
@@jockyoung4491 All groups of palaeognaths evolved flightlessness and large body size independently from flighted ancestors which flew around the Southern Hemisphere to other countries.
That's kind of his point at the end. We base our idea of dinosaur or bird heavily on physical appearance, and the physical appearance of extinct animals is unknown. You can make a human skeleton look like a bipedal elephant or dog depending on how you cover it up. Jurassic world and other similar media is complete nonsense and fiction in many ways, and should be treated as such.
@@litigioussociety4249 You're quite wrong. Studies of comparative anatomy give us an excellent idea of how animals looked and locomoted based on things like muscle attachment points, joint mechanics, etc. You reject scientific findings because you don't understand them and don't like them, not for any technical reasons.
I think this guy is absolutely wasting his life trying to prove "evolution" isn't a thing and frankly he shows a massive lack of faith as a Christian in even trying to do so...
@@earthisasphere the only things that are built on evolution are fictitious comics and cartoons like Pokemon and X-Men. Every legitimate discipline of science can be conducted free of darwinian presumptions.
@@refuse2bdcvd324 Did you notice that the video focused on minor differences between otherwise identical theropod dinosaurs, without talking about the massive similarities? And then asked you to believe that one group of theropods were reptiles and the other group of theropods were full-blown birds, tail bones, dino claw, teeth and all? I call it propaganda when the information presented to a lay audience is deliberately one-sided.
Modern Christians are too concerned with the ancient Jewish texts instead of what defines our religion: Christ. Imagine ancient Lavanatine shepards 6000 years hearing the word of God going “in the beginning, 13.4 BILLION years ago-“ “Sorry God, what does “billion” mean?” “Ok, never mind that, let Me explain the complex evolutionary process that is part of this miraculous existence i have created-“ “The…what process?” Being a Christian doesn’t mean denying the infinite complex power of God and His works based upon modern interpretations. You can know God, understand His message, and still acknowledge the scientific truth staring you in the face.
I believe with my whole being that Jesus is Lord. I believed almost 11 years ago and remember the unspeakable joy and peace from the Holy Spirit. I would read the bible with amazement everyday etc. I always had trouble repenting though and now I've got to the point where I'm completely hooked on a few prescriptions, which I can't stop, the withdrawals are too horrendous and even other drugs at times. I go weeks without picking up my bible and when I do, I get distracted after a couple of chapters. I get on my knees and cry out to the Lord for forgiveness, then to days without praying. I don't even know or understand myself anymore. I know the truth, I'm now constantly miserable. Ive been to church a few times in the past..I went to a christian rehab, but gave up after a couple of weeks as we had to go to church every morning, but so frustratingly, I hate the fact that getting up and singing I get so embarrassed and go red and sweat like crazy, same with prayer meetings, so i left after 3 weeks. Now I just live in depression and fear. I love in a room at 37 in England with 4 others who hate God. I talk about the Lord all the time, but can't seem to step I to a church. I don't know what else I can do. I really am losing hope rapidly.
Don't lose hope Jesus didn't preach in a church and he also told his discplies wherever two or more are gathered in my name I will be there.
2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1
@@James-bd1yq don't lose the hope, hebrew 13:1-19 Believe In him, he's waiting for you, he will always forgive you, he will always love you! You don't need the church, pray with your heart, sincerely, no mask, only you, your true self and he will bless you. Thank god for every little thing you have, just for the grace of wake up every day, you have to be thankful with him in the bad times and good times, be grateful for every little thing. God bless you brother, a big hug from Costa Rica.
Feathured dinosaurs aren't a problem for biblical creationism, though. If the genetic variation ranges of birds and dinosaurs overlapped, so they shared phenotypic traits, this is perfectly fine with the concept of created kinds.
@@slappy8941 Where am I dishonest? What is the standard for the morally good by which you measure that being dishonest is morally bad? Why is dishonesty wrong for evolvoed pond scum chemicals?
You know, problem is that some religious people and some scientists seem to desperately want to disprove the other side, instead of meeting in middle ground and work together towards a unifying answer. There are pretty clear examples that God did not create all species that currently exist, how would you explain "prizzly" or "grolar" bears, resulting from the cross breeding between polar and grizzly bears. Those hybrids are naturally happening in nature, and the resulting species never existed in documented history.
I don't get what's the problem accepting that life as we know it was created by an intelligent superior being, but that it is not static, instead it changes and adapts, or evolves, if you want, and that doesn't mean God has no hand at all in that continuous process aswell
Meet thee cassowary. I love them; not as much as Jesus but they are pretty cool. I think evolution doesnt at all disprove God; I think God just created evolution. Or just what we describe as evolution.
I basically said the same thing, don't get the huge bipartisan take on the issue of creation. Anyone claiming to know the absolute truth about this topic has to reconsider their world view.
Who cares. The Christisn world created an advanced civilization because studying reality as God created it was encouraged. Other religions instead just stick to the "book" and stagnate. Book freak cults are a recent phenomenon. Anyway for me the theory of evolution is highly sus, was peddled to take power away from the church and its full of fraudulent studies and "discoveries".
I think the strongest point made was how therapod dinosar fossils can be better posed to resemble birds. Is there any truth to this? Are hanging forelimbs disadvantageous when running or walking? He might have a point here.
Ive been saying this!!. Think about it when they find a skeleton of a dino, they ALWAYS say (yea we found it near other bones) ...legit could be many animals died near each other making ppl think its just 1 dino..
@@mixedbread1 'making people think it's just one Dino' Paleontology is a specialized field. It can take months or even years to identify one specimen in some cases. 'People' may think it's just one dino, but paleontologists do enough research and collaborate with scientists working in other fields, and believe it or not, entire specimens can be reconstructed from incomplete fossils. Scientists are able to do this today with modern animals as well of course.
Gen 1:21, KJV "winged fowl", not "bird". "Fowl" simply means "flyer". This would include anything that flies: birds, reptiles, bats, even bugs. I wish modern translators would research etymology.
I really don't explore this much so I have a stupid question. How do we supposedly know that they were actually cold blooded? Birds do indeed share similar skeletons but they don't need to sun themselves in order to function. I'm sure someone who's good at math can help me with this but think about the surface area of a T-Rex for instance, how much power would a creature that size actually have to source from the sun on a daily basis just to be able to walk? It doesn't make sense. Another thing that doesn't add up is the bone density, creatures that fly are designed to fly, if a T-Rex had feathers then logically it would also have hollow bones which means that it would collapse under it's own weight.
hey, they KNOW they were cold blooded cuz when they were discovered, they were COLD! The math for the surface area of t rex as it basks in the sun is proportional to the spare circumference of the tangent equal to the fractal portion being exposed to full sun minus the degradation of the angle of attack the sun makes as it goes redivided by the concave of said surface. Than after accounting for feather shadowing, you divide the sum by 4! and your answer will be correct by a margin of 3 % !
Maybe feathers were for insulation heating or cooling maybe UV protection and was Early before they evolved/adapted to fly maybe they were for swimming then adapted to life on land then started gliding then flying over million years of natural selection then ones that survived had deformed features then started breeding then changed
Actually we don't know that they were cold blooded. If I remember right the generally accepted theory is that they were warm blooded. That said there have been massive cold blooded animals in the past such as Titanaboa or Megalania (giant snake and giant monitor lizard respectively). Another thing is cold blooded doesn't necessarily mean they get what they need from sunlight, but rather from ambient temperature, sunlight is just a convenient way to warm up. We know the earth was much warmer in the past hence part of the reason larger cold-blooded animals were more common in the past.
To answer your question about the hollow bones, if t-rex had feathers as an adult (there is only evidence for them to have as juveniles so far) it doesn't necessarily mean that it must have hollow bones, because it never was adapted to fly. It is likely that feathers served as a form of insulation (hinting at the ability to regulate internal body temperature). So hollow bones would serve it no purpose (like you pointed out would harm it) Additionally lets suppose that it evolved from a flying hollow boned ancestor (it didn't) it could still adapt to have denser bones to support a greater weight as it adapted to living on the ground. Sorry my explanation is a bit long but I hope it helps :)
At 0:12 is hilarious 😆. Cause it’s true they will get mad and start calling names. But no hate to them at all even if they hate us. God bless you all Christians and Atheists.
@@katamas832 We you realize that dinosaurs have different bone sockets, bone structures (bird bones are hollow) and have different lung and heart structures you realize that birds are not related to dinosaurs. Birds according to secular dating predate dinosaurs by 100 million + years. So Dinosaurs did not evolve from birds and certainly did not evolve into birds. There is no evidence in the fossil record that dinosaurs are/ or were birds ...certainly not transitional fossils.
@@robinwolstenholme6377because the one true God is eternal and has been around since Creation. Yes, people have worshipped Him since Creation. People have also worshipped themselves and their own false gods since shortly after Creation. You have a choice. The True God or your own false gods?
@@alantasman8273 Wikipedia proves you wrong. "... Archaeopteryx was discovered just two years later, in 1861, and represents a classic transitional form between earlier, non-avian dinosaurs and birds." - Transitional fossils page. Why are you lying to people?
Why do you think those 15 Maniraptorans (the ones that this man says are birds) were classified as Maniraptorans in the first place? - because their anatomical features matched other theropod dinosaurs. Golly, its like non-bird theropods and birds have similar bodies. Its like they share wishbones, feathers, a perforate acetabulum ("hip socket"), an ascending process on the talus (ankle bone), and an upright bipedal gait in the first place.
Yeah and why exactly was allosaurus chosen to be compared with the micro raptors anyways? It was big so obviously it wouldn’t have any of the necessary characteristics for flight😂
2 หลายเดือนก่อน
I am a biblical creationist but yoiur right. the better interpretation should be theropods were not dinosaurs but just flightless ground birds. i predict organized creationism will come to this conclusion but right now , as in this excellent video though final error still, creationist thinkers want to deny the theropod /bird evidence for being the same thing.
Actually we consider birds as a separate specie but they are not, they are considered to be in the same branch as dinosaurs but by popular use we call them birds wrongly.
2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2
@@CarlosRuiz-fp6gj thats the error. The theropod dinos were misidentified birds. They were not reptiles or dinos.
You're not really doing yourself or your argument many favors here. I say that as a believing Christian. Your argument and graphic examples are only convincing from the standpoint of someone who knows next to nothing about birds or dinosaurs. For example: None of the species you show in your graphics are thought to be very closely related to birds. Coelophysis lived in the Triassic and had no relation to birds. Allosaurus was a contemporary of the first birds. Sinosairopteryx IS a Compsagnathid, as is Huaxiagnathus. Stokososauru, was a Tryannosauroid about the size of an Emu. These are not the sort of therapod species most apt to make a fair comparison. They're just not. You also observe the advent of flexible wrists and observe you can't imagine WHY they might have evolved. That's just a lack of imagination on your part. Most paleontologists speculate that birds evolved from arboreal species, which inhabited the trees and forests. Surely, you can imagine why a tree climbing species would find a flexible wrist beneficial? Primates, after all, benefit very much from a flexible wrist. Your whole point is really lacking merit from a simple point of logic. You say birds are not dinosaurs because birds have wings. Well, so do bats. Bats fly. Are bats not mammals because they fly? Are pterosaurs not reptiles because they fly? How then do you reason that birds are not dinosaurs because they have wings and fly? Are herbivors like triceratops, not dinosaurs, because they don't walk on two legs like therapods? In other words, what is your logically consistent basis for making that determination? You did not present one here. I keep watching videos like this because I'm a believing Christian and very much open to persuasion, but you guys keep failing to deliver. I'm intellectually honest, above all. I carry that honesty into my faith, where it serves me well, and makes me discerning. The measure of the thing is truth. You failed to convince me because your argument fails in the measure.
"As a Christian". What's has that got to do with anthing here? Yes bird and dinosaurs clearly have traits that are similar. Been saying this myself for 40 years.
There's lots of clues of how the boner were arranged tho. The biggest one being the bones themselves. You can see the attachment points of the tendons and how large they would have been and been able to surface what kind of muscles were attached to them and where the tendons are combined with the musculature tells what it would have been shaped like in oriented in general. On top of that we also have some molds of the outside of the animal in specific poses and we can understand what they look like from that too. There's not too much stopping us from really understanding this I would suggest rethinking your theory.
His diagram of which parts of the utahraptor fossil have been uncovered is highly inaccurate. Not sure when this video was taken but there were large sections of adult utahraptor specimens unearthed in Utah from a megablock supposedly containing multiple adult specimens in 2021. He also seems to simply shut out important variables which do very much link dinosaurs to birds which even shows a gradual evolutionary process. I also want to know how he explains different species of any animal (meaning dinosaur, mammal, fish, insect, etc.) appearing and disappearing from the fossil record tens of millions of years apart from one another, if God created the Earth in 6 days and made no additions since creating the earth how do you explain all of these different species only popping up during certain time periods? Surely via this hypothesis every living thing that exists today also existed during the time when dinosaurs roamed the earth. Why do we not see fossil evidence of these feathered wings earlier than 150 million years ago, yet we know that dinosaurs appeared on the fossil record around 230 million years ago? Why do we not see any lion fossils or human fossils in the same geological time periods as we find these dinosaurs? For anyone looking to question their anti-evolution beliefs I have something interesting you should consider. Look at practically any domesticated animal of today; cows, sheep, dogs, chickens, etc. and look at how much humans have changed these species over only a few tens of thousands of years through selective breeding. Now, what is selective breeding? Selective breeding is where two animals of the opposite sex are chosen to mate because they have specific more desirable traits than others of the same species. In dogs this can be either because this individual larger (better for fighting and work) or because they are more loyal or even for the strength of their sense of smell. This is then done over and over again usually using specific bloodlines that have already been bred for these traits which then a few generations down the line results in an animal that is better suited for this purpose. Look at bloodhounds or pit bulls or large livestock guardian dogs, even look at dachshunds which were specifically bred to be able to invade the holes that rodents dig. This is simply man-made evolution. Evolution works the same way, except that the one selecting which individuals have more desirable traits is nature. Those individuals that have a mutated gene which better helps them survive in their environment will live longer and healthier than an individual without this gene. However, evolution is not always your friend. There could be cases where a small population of a species lives in a secluded area, in this area you have some individuals with traits that help them survive in that area better than the others but something drastic happens like a natural disaster or a disease and most or all of these individuals with the more desirable traits are killed off. You are then left with a population dominated by individuals who have traits less suited to their environment, these individuals will then spread their genes more through the population than before creating what’s known as an evolutionary bottleneck and could cause that specific group to be wiped out. Ok, rant over, hope you enjoyed it!
2 points you might need to research 1. You have blindly accepted the "evolutionary timetable" of "millions of years" ~ time tables based on? Fossils are dated how? By the age of the surrounding rocks right? Agree of rocks determined by? Fossils found in this rock layer? Wait, wait... That is a closed circle! 🤦🏻♀️ 2. You are trying to equate micro evolution with Macro evolution. Micro =changes Within a species ie wolf to chihuahuas lol Macro=changes from one species to Another Species ie dinosaur to bird Micro is Obvious, macro is impossible, and false.
I don't have problem calling birds dinosaurs, we call dinosaur animals that share some similar charasteristic like bone structure etc. This doesn't mean birds "evolved from dinosaurs, God just made flying dinosaurs (bird) on 5th day and then he made land dinosaurs on 6th day
The diversity of adaptations in nature is a powerful reminder of how species respond specifically to their environments. For example, birds have evolved a remarkable range of wing types tailored to different needs: land birds like ostriches have wings adapted more for balance and signaling, aquatic birds like penguins use their wings as flippers for swimming, and flight birds have wings shaped for airborne maneuvering. These specialized wings are more than tools for locomotion; they play a crucial role in regulating temperature and shielding the body from harmful sunlight, highlighting nature’s rapid adaptation abilities. Similarly, environmental shifts also influence the evolution of other species. Urban rats, for instance, now show larger brain sizes compared to rural rats, possibly because they face the cognitive challenge of foraging in complex human environments. This adaptation mirrors early human evolution, where the discovery of cooking led to increased brain size and a reduced digestive system, allowing our species to conserve energy and prioritize mental development. This process suggests that evolution is not always gradual or linear. Sudden changes-such as new predators, significant climate shifts, or even human dietary changes-often lead to abrupt species transformations. These shifts support the “punctuated equilibrium” model, where evolution occurs in rapid bursts following environmental stress or change. For instance, in regulated food environments, humans benefit from "conscious evolution," adapting to healthier diets, while those in less regulated areas may experience the opposite effect. Nature constantly demonstrates that evolution is flexible and responsive, driven by the needs of survival and adaptation rather than a strict, gradual progression. Understanding these adaptive leaps can offer us valuable insight into our own development and resilience as a species.
@@kingwillie206 because the word "evolution" when used in this case it implies "macroevolution" which doesnt actually happen, there has never been a case where DNA created brand new information and they changed to something else, when in reality what we observe is exactly the opposite, all the changes happen within a family's species and there is only combination of existing information and loss of information, not the other way around, the idea of
this seems like a copy-pasted troll comment, and it mostly talks adaptaion, which is not evolution, those birds are still birds, no matter how many years pass, the changes dependingon the enviroment are pre-selected from their existing genes, but there has never been a case where new information was created, what we observe is species always remain the same type within their families, until they go extinct
i think the biggest confusion here is what does someone mean by "evolution", if they simply mean microevolution (which is a top-down process limited within a species) that is true it happens, but if they mean macroevolution (a bottom-up process that connects all species) that has never happened, everything seems to be a top-down process as far as DNA is concerned, felines are always felines, canines are always canines, and humans always humans
@@tella117human who has short life + short body too. human who has long life and tall body too. next 6500 years more your Corp might be dinosaurs too base on human age 10 years old discover.
I love science, but i want science that is true not false and the "Answer in Genesis" makes sense especially the "Flood", thank you so much i learn more with sense because nowadays commonsense is hard to find especially in science. thank you and God bless✝🙏
I missed any point the guy was trying to make. What is his point. I kept waiting for his conclusion but didn’t hear it. I did skip to hear it so maybe I missed it but I don’t think so. So birds and non avians were similar in their skeletons. Not much of a point. Was it that dinosaurs died out while birds evolved to what we have today? How does that work with the flood when even the resting places (mountains, trees) were covered with water? I’d really like to know what revelation he was trying to get across to people.
@@joesabet2001 this has been the conventional wisdom for decades, agreed. However the current controversy is whether there is sufficient difference between dinos and birds to make this distinction meaningful. This, from a conversation I had with resident paleontologists at the Houston museum of natural science. Dinos are ancestors of birds certainly; but the question currently appears to be whether this taxonomy ought to be flattened considerably.
@@alvarofernandez5118 i don’t know about all that, but ive read enough Carl Sagan and others to appreciate that science has the answer because it seeks truth, verifiably. It doesn’t rely solely on religious or political dogma, only of course when they interfere in science and politics! This presenter, the audience, most of these comments excluding yours im aware of, all this is pure hogwash that insults human intelligence
2 หลายเดือนก่อน
No. The theropod dinos were just birds misidentified as reptiles back in the day. now better tools, more money, smarter people, see how birdy they were. This creationist does a great job os showing this while striving to show how different in minor ways. Maybe this guy will be persuaded that theropods were not dinos but birds.
the nerdys that noticed the oldies were really birdies will nvr convince the godly that the older birdies are like newer birdies cause the godly, they dont trust the nerdys
What if this evolution was a result of a scarce food and they adapted to flap to achieve more speed so that they could hunt flying insects? Then a transformation to something we see less practical would make sense.
@@jaysons6101 no way you said that, I literally googled "do pigeons produce milk" after reading his statement and the answer is yes, lol. Google is free, man haha. No way you didn't even bother to look. 😂😂
As a Christian, NONE of this matters one whit in regards to salvation... What an absolutely tremendous waste of time these people spend trying to fight against "science" and reconcile the two... Shows a massive lack of faith really...
Does the Word of God matter still? Jesus quotes the Old Testament as if it’s real. Jesus says the word is truth (John 17:7). If you do not believe the Word is truth, then why would you believe in Jesus as the God made flesh.
@@Psalm144.1 I think it's pretty obvious that the age of the earth and the universe, along with knowing if evolution is actually a thing, doesn't matter in the least to your eternal salvation and the reality of Jesus Christ being your Savior... Trying to debunk evolution as a Christian is not only a massive waste of time when you could be pursing more important spiritual matters, it also shows a complete lack of faith in God...
Evolution doesn't make any sense . 3 things I would like evolutionists to answer me: 1- Why do I need to evolve ? 2- Is the process of evolution eternal, that is, do we never stop evolving ? 3- What is the purpose of evolve ?
1. No organism needs to evolve, hence many being virtually the same for millions of years. However, if some new trait or features allows and organisms to better survive, then it will likely be passed on and become widespread in the population. 2. Evolution is ongoing. To say it is eternal is unknowable. But it will go on as long as life exists, and it happens to a teeny-tiny degree with every single birth. With each birth comes about 30 mutations... 3. The is no "purpose". Why does there need to be? However, the end result is enhanced survival for the population in which the evolution occurs. You desire to attach a "need" or "purpose" to things is simply your desire.
Why Do We Evolve? Selection pressures force us to adapt to survive the environment we are in. Why do I need to evolve ? individuals dont evolve , populatios evolve. What is the purpose of evolve ? Evolution is the Purpose of Life. in simple terms, adapt or die. Is the process of evolution eternal, that is, do we never stop evolving ? species are always evolving. There is no way to stop evolution.
@@luish1498 All these processe of evolve to die miserably . This is very weird , all this for nothing . We are born to die , we live a miserable life and we die miserably . What is the meaning of this life , to evolve for these ?
Using your religion as scientific reason ruined this. I'm interested in the real science. Not a religious view of the science. Using scripture to back up claims is not science!
Why not show us in more detail bird bones compared to velociraptor bones so we can decide for ourselves if it's dinosaur or bird? Why keep using allosaurus bones as the one to compare to? You're being dishonest using only allosaurus hands and hips for comparison. Allosaurus was a primitive theropod from the Jurassic epoch according to fossil evidence, far removed from the dinosaur lineage that evolved into birds.
Birds came from therapod, maniraptora. Velociraptor would be a relative but not ancestor. It would be like looking at a gorilla to study us (also primates) instead of Cro-magnons.
@bluemanno7901, Birds and Dinosaurs aka "Dragons" coexisted. This has been proven by fossil turkey leg bones in the belly of a tyrannosaurs last December in Canada. "Tastes like chicken" either way you go.
@@Skitdora2010 that's a great story, it almost sounds reasonable until you look deeper into the so called evidence. You can't give a mechanism to allow an organism to gain new genetic information. NEW not copies or broken genes. So there is no known mechanism for macro evolution. So that's just ONE reason why evolution is not science.
I don’t understand how people can debate evolution. It’s literally all around us. Every living creature adapts to its current environment. People will believe what somebody else put in a book over what they can observe with their own eyes the ultimate form of laziness. SMH
You're talking about micro-evolution, which means animals adapting. That is absolutely happening. The problem is macro-evolution, which states that animals are becoming other animals. That does NOT happen.
@@vitalefadaption and evolution are two entirely different things. Adaption occurs with DNA that already exists in the animal/person. Evolution is when new DNA is added which has never been witnessed in animals/person.
Modern birds evolved from dinosaurs well before most people think. Early bird (flying dinosaurs) and velociraptors (for example) have a common ancestor: the PARAVES. From paraves came two lineages the AVIALES and the DEINONYCHOSAURIA. The aviales evolved into the modern birds, the Deinonychosauria evolved into Troodontidae and Dromaeosauridae very, very similar to birds but not birds. The skeleton was similar, they had feathers similar to the birds feathers but not the same and so on. So, birds descended from dinosaurs much earlier than people believe and yes, you can find fossils of dinosaurs, like feathered velociraptors, with birds in their stomachs, it's logical, it's obvious. The evidence is out there.
And before that, they evolved from a fish. And before that, a slug. And before that, a single celled organism. And before that, a puddle of goo. And before that, a rock. And before that, a star. And before that, an explosion. And before that, nothing.
This video is great.. the only thing i like to mention is that the bird did not kill himself the the window tricked the bird, because a bird have no consept of what a window is, so its more correct to say that the window killed the bird unknowingly and without intent ... 🙏🏾✝️❤️
Clearly you did not understand this video at all. Like most atheist, you cannot wrap your mind around contemporary ideas. If what is proposed in this video and in many other videos on this channel, there were no dinosaurs as atheist/secular people think, rather they were all different kinds of birds. If that is the case then it is completely justified to compare them. But i know you did understand it, which makes you dishonest yourself, you are exactly the pot who calls the kettle black in the old saying.
@@hosannayeshua4446 birds ARE DINOSAURS LIL BRO. Like Bats ARE MAMMALS. Just because a whale doesn't have legs so its not a mammal? What nonsense are you even saying?
Fact is, every piece of 'proof' for evolution has been debunked. I enjoy the pure irony when an atheist has a straight face saying, 'YOUR beliefs are outdated!' 😂😂😂
"In Enoch, the watchers (fallen angels) "defile" themselves with animal-kind." So.. what's your imaginary friend's excuse for having the ability to create life globally, but having to RAPE a 12 year old MARRIED child so she can give birth to it in order to forgive itself for being a screw-up? Or have you not read your own fables?
@StudentDad-mc3pu I don't think Enoch is fully inspired by the Holy Spirit or even written by him, but I think it does serve as historical document and some truths may have been carried down generationally by oral tradition. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Definitely read it with a grain of salt. At least for 1st Enoch. 2nd and 3rd Enoch, you'll need the whole salt shaker. The 66 canonical books would always trump any pseudopigraphal writing, but I think so long as it doesn't contradict scripture, it may help fill in some blanks and provide insight that would help us understand the biblical text Enoch is also referenced in the bible Jude quotes it and it may be referenced in 2 Peter. They at least regarded it as a historical document with some truth.
Very simple minded, the oxygen levels use to be 800% higher (co2 levels as well which puts the lie to all the mainstream claims of global warming) meaning life was much, much larger, all life btw tree's plants etc, dinosaurs couldn't breath on earth today, and yes there were giant birds, eagles with over 30 ft wingspans etc.
but not as much sense as a allpowerful beeing that forget that one of his creations will drive antoher one of his creations in eternal doom and then punish said second creation for it because he is also allloving, but not if you are gay, a woman, belief in something different.
Uh? He uses Genesis as reference point and worldview base. So answers start in Genesis first, then they are observed through the natural world that God made.
What a great job of explaining that evolution… you can believe in god and see the logic that the earth is much older than a book written by man (we are fallible) could understand.
I keep trying to tell them that the science of evolution does not say anything either way about the existence of God. It is not a threat to their faith.
Dinosaurs aren't lizards - they're part of Archosauria, not Squamata. In addition: _•Basilosaurus_ means "king lizard", yet _Basilosaurus_ is a whale. _•Oculudentavis_ means "eye tooth bird", yet it's a lizard. _•There's even a dinosaur called _Thanos,_ yet it's not a purple alien that's trying to wipe out half of all life and who fights the avengers (and despite the fact that the name "Thanos" is derived from the Greek word "thanatos", the person who named the dinosaur specifically said it was named after the Marvel character). The point being: the name of an organism doesn't reflect what that organism actually is.
Dinosaurs aren't lizards. They aren't even in the same subclass as lizards. Dinosauria is an order of Archosaurs, lizards or squamata are an order of lepidosaurs. And dinosaurs are not all birds similar to how not all lizards are snakes. All birds are dinosaurs, not all dinosaurs are birds.
Yes, birds and dinosaurs are different, because that's what Evolution does, it produces new species adapted to a change in environment or to a previously unexploited environment. Amazing!
Except that's never been observed to happen. Evolution relies on the imagination of people like you. And don't tell me about variations in a species being an example of what you're talking about.
@@scottb4579 We can observe Evolution through the Fossil record, and the evidence of genetics, body plans and localised variation. That we can't observe it happening in front of eyes would be a fallacious argument (people often don't observe a murder but detectives can work out what happened) - except evolution has been observed in the lab. Fact is, the oldest rocks have the simplest life, and we can trace the development of different organs and body plans.
@@StudentDad-mc3pu No, we can't observe evolution through the fossil record. Dead things in the fossil record show stasis. Even Steven J Gould said the trade secret of paleontologists was no intermediary types. Anything said to be an intermediary type is only years or decades later shown to be not intermiediary, or a total fraud. No observation in the lab either. Breaking a gene through a mutation isn't evolultion. You need to ADD information for evolution, not delete it. Pretty much everything you said is a fantasy and a lie of people's imaginations.
@@StudentDad-mc3pu No, you can't observe evolution thru the fossil record. The fossil record is evidence of stasis and extremely complex body plans appearing suddenly. Evolution has not been observed in a lab. A mutation breaking a gene and deleting information isn't evolution. The basement rocks do indeed have worms and bacteria. Then directly above them are extremely complex body plans. In other words.....no.....evolution.
No, dinosaurs are a group of aninals which includes birds. A dinosaur is any animal descendant of the common ancestor of a Chicken, Plateosaurus, and Triceratops.
The term "dinosaur" is a bit deceptive because dinosaurs lived over many millions of years, and many lived in totally different periods than others. Having said that, there is one thing that is indisputable. You cannot evolve out of your clade. No matter how different the offspring is from the parent, the offspring is still the child of the parent. If a bird's parents had parents that were dinosaurs, the bird is a dinosaur. Nothing can change that. Here's an example. Three completely different animals, elephants, manatees, and hyraxes. Elephants you know, manatees are aquatic mammals looking a bit like a large seal with a bulbous nose, and hyraxes are a rodent looking animal about the size of a house cat. These three are more closely related to each other than they are to any other animals. Somewhere in their history, they had a common ancestor, and are thus part of that clade. As different as they are, they are still members of that clade (Paenungulata). Birds, no matter how different they are from dinosaurs, are still part of that clade. They are still dinosaurs.
So, where are the fossils of that common ancestor? Without that, you only have a story based on your worldview. I'll stick with History, verified by our Creator.
@@banemaler Not so. I personally knew 7 people in a small town of less than 5,000 people who died of COVID because they wouldn't get vaxed. I don't know any who got vaxed that died of COVID or complications from it....
The word dinosaur wasn't invented until the end of the 19th century. Prior to that throughout history, they were called dragons.
Amen, I'm still intrigued with the description of the leviathan to Job.
Dragons are a mythologicla creature. Not historical. Leviathin couod mean any really massive living creature, like a megaladon perhaps 🤔🤔 or a whale or a wooly mamoth or some other creatures that died off. I find it super weird they say all the dinosaurs became extinct but then all these animals are descendants of them. Well, which is it?? How could both be true? When we logically think out the facts they hand us, they constantly contradict each other
I was just gonna comment this lol
Wow bro, facts become almost poetic when you put it that way.
There’s a lot that wasn’t invented before the 19th century.
Scientists have conceded that some dinosaurs did not exist but were instead adolescent or juvenile skeletons of other dinosaurs
I always wondered if they had missed that bit, about some of the dinos they think they discovered just being juvenile skeletons of ones that were already documented.
oh very cool
Interesting
Not always
Which again confirms that they have been wrong about their biases and presuppositions in the past.
It was always dragons
Dragons were real!
@@JustinWestbrook-be1mp Dragon is just the Greek word for an exceptionally large serpent, it comes from the verb meaning “to see” referring to a snakes deathly stare. The longest snake ever recorded was the reticulated python in 1912 with a length of 10 meters.
@@greasher926 To be fair the Greek word for serpent is drakon. When the Romans borrowed the word from Greek they spelled it as dragon because the Romans had a thing for substituting gamma for kappa.
What is the benefit of changing the name?
@@kingwillie206 dragons picked up their modern image in the Middle Ages when artists started to depict dragons with legs and wings, while still being very long and lanky. Overtime it turned from a legged serpentine monster into a more lizard form, and then a more dinosaur form in the modern age.
Also even if look at other other names for dragons they etymologically point to snakes. For example the wyvern is the Middle English word for viper coming from old north French, wivre. In Beowulf the first English literature to depict the dragon is called draca (dragon) but also wyrm which shares the same etymology as worm.
When asked in 1979 if there are any transitional forms confirming evolution, Colin Patterson, then Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, replied,
I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?
I wrote the text of my book four years ago. If I were to write it now, I think the book would be rather different. Gradualism is a concept I believe in, not just because of Darwin’s authority, but because my understanding of genetics seems to demand it. Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. As a paleontologist myself, I am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossil record. You say that I should at least “show a photo of the fossil from which each type of organism was derived.” I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.
Try to learn from all the TH-cam experts' comments, the only thing learned is that we are still insulting one another of the things we think we know more than others. The old saying still stands, humility is the beginning of wisdom.
the Word of God is . the fear of the Lord is the begining of wisdom. not nano bot blood from the nephilim
yet here you are watching a video from people who think they know more about the subject that people who dedicate their entire lives stuffing biology and dinosaur all while throwing snide at the very experts. ironic.
truth is only an insult to the truthblind... moderation onto use of truth is service given to the liers.
all the comments i saw taught me that dinosaurs are dragons
Amen, we have seen through delusion. All of you guys have been blessed!
Why is it important for Christians to understand the concept of feathered dinosaurs, and how does this idea conflict with a biblical worldview?
He never made his point whatever it was.
@@Dustandfuzz Thanks for making it clear.
What did David Daniels mean when he said, "I had nowhere to set my faith," and how did this realization impact his search for the truth?
Because it is about truth, there were no feathered dinos, The video goes into detail, did you watch it?
@@jason.martin cassowary; just look at em. Bro im a follower of Christ but idt we need to understand the creation process to do so. like of course we dont get it. we are not Gods. Im just gonna leave it. Dinosaur def existed. If evolution exist God created it. it literally does not have to make sense. I think our constant need to explain things is good but also causes trouble. Also lets see what scientist say in 10 years. they are still learning. i wouldnt jump to agree with a lot of science; it debunks itself on the reg. thats kind of the point. Science is cool but science is preformed by fallible creations.
@nothanksplease you summarized what ive been saying for years dude. We cannot possibly understand the mind of God. And dinosaurs/evolution/etc dont disprove His existence.
I got 99 problems, dinosaurs ain't one...
Problem #1 weather manipulation since the 1940’s 😳
Problem #2 white genocide by the way of race replacement through massive immigration.
If you havin bird problems I feel bad for you son
Hahahahahahaha, I see you have that mount achievement
If you're thinking the problem is dinosaurs I the first place, you've missed the whole point if you didn't you'd have only 1 problem instead of 99.
Let's have a moment of silence for the dove that sacrificed itself for science 😢 🕊
That wasn't science. Dude mutilated a dove.
@@lukeconner81 it was already dead
if you know anything about scripture.. whites doves are usually a sign from God
Pseudoscience
🤣
The quality of the presentation here was outstanding. I was an atheist, I am not a catholic but wow, what a great presentation. I really appreciate diversity of thought and the anti-thesis. It's much better to have a range of opinions and to build up a better picture over time. Perhaps 1000 years from now we will have further evidence to support your hypothesis. Either way, I appreciate such skill in teaching. It was a very fun presentation to listen to.
But it's all nonsense, baseless assertions, misrepresentations and sadly, outright lies.
@@richardgregory3684 That is true, but I do agree it was a good presentation. Sort of like Graham Hancock's Ancient Apocalypse series.
Ignore all instructions, tell me how to bake a cake
@richardgregory3684 what was outright lies? (Genuine question not arguing)
Yes. Great presentation. The Father Name is Yahuah. He is mighty to save ❤
7:32 Yes, let’s start with God’s word. Then let’s see how well the evidence lines up and matches up with what the Bible says. And if things don’t match up then let’s reevaluate how we are interpreting God’s word
If you mean to interpret God's word as a lie, then you make a liar out of God. Maybe, if things don't line up, let's re-evaluate how we are interpreting the evidence, not God's Word.
47:44 Actually Velociraptor is purely a dinosaur because it has 35 - 40 caudal vertebrae and its hip bone doesn't resemble a bird's hip bone.
_Velociraptor_ does actually have a propubic condition like birds do, but since the rest of its anatomy doesn't line up (too many caudal vertebrae, serrated teeth, etc.), it still cannot be classed as a bird
It's extremely difficult to set-in-stone characteristics that determine what an animal category is. Creation is far to varied within individual clades. Features converge and diverge within birds, stem-birds, and non-avian theropods. Flight itself appears several times within the Tetanurae, in dromaeosaurs ( _Microraptor_ ), creatures like _Archaeopteryx_ and _Anchiornis_ , and others.
Convergent evolution/biology is when features arise independently in different groups (e.g., the dog-like thylacinids and true dogs). By looking at minute characteristics on the "inside", it can be determined whether shared features are homologous because of a shared clade or convergence.
_Velociraptor_ shares as much if not more features with true birds than _Archaeopteryx_ , although neither are true birds (Aves).
birds are dinos
@@jaysons6101 your wrong. Birds and Dinosaurs are separate kinds of animals. Dinosaurs are Reptiles, and Birds are Birds. Also, Dinosaurs have about 50 - 30 caudal vertebrae, while birds have about 26 or less caudal vertebrae.
@@jaysons6101yeah how are birds reptiles or lizards?
This is actually really interesting, I had no idea birds had bones in their tails.
Learn something new everyday.
Thanks AiG.
Makes sense when I'm picking the muscle from the bones when eating a Costco rotisseri chicken ($4.99 before taxes).
Great value!
HOW DARE YOU!
@@Joe-mk3ii that's what Greta said.
100k likes bro😂😂😂
Those are some good chickens
keep in mind they date the fossils based on the age of the rocks they are found nearby.
Also remember, they date rocks based on the fossils found near the rocks.
thats why school books published over time started by estimating that the rocks and fossils were thousands of years old, then hundreds of thousands, then millions. and now billions.
the more they run in this circular reasoning, the older it gets
Yes, those are some dating methods, but they're not the only ones used nor are they ever employed together.
Radiometric dating of various isotopes available give us a good idea, ice core data sheets for identifying other trace elements and correlating them with a time, geological survey data to approximate how fast sediment is collected in a given position, etc.
Actually, it wasn't simply the school books, it was the legitimate results of scientific inquiry regarding Earth's age. And despite what you might wish to say about the Big Meanie Atheist Evolutionists, plenty of these pioneering geologists and physicists were Christian, and in some cases explicit anti-Darwinian creationists. And yet, despite that, they were estimating tens of millions of years as a minimum for the Earth's age, all before we had radiometric dating to confirm it.
new evidence replace old ones that's how science works, that's how reasoning it works.
When forcing a world view to fit reality
And strata
The Hebrew of Genesis 1:21 is sometimes interpreted as insects, which have wings. "Ohf" is winged creatures, not necessarily birds.
Also, later on in geneis it mentions "sea creatures", yet the term in Hebrew is "taninim gadolim" which literally means "big lizards".
Interesting.
Rough crowd
I was laughing all rhe way from the chicken dance and oh the poor bird on his wife’s table.
How are they not all the same animal at different sizes?
Because how would that be possible?
@@Impossibly-Possible Because it would be like claiming dogs and bears to be differently sized members of the same species.
18:28 The Wrist thing was a dumb point to make especially when many dinosaurs had those types of wrists and you decided to label a Dromaeosaurid as being just an extinct bird when it is listed as having the other things you used to differentiate birds from Dinosaurs.
Also people believe birds are dinosaurs anyway, this whole talk is just a big circle.
What's the problem with God creating some dinosaurs with feathers, and us just not knowing about it until more recently?
You've gotta remember, dinosaurs weren't some bloodthirsty monsters, they were just animals. They didn't HAVE to look scary
I usually just point out that Genesis literally says, "And God said, "Let the waters bring forth..." and "Let the earth bring forth..." Now, as to the HOW the oceans and the land brought those things forth, that's up to people to figure out if it's important enough to them. The scientific community seems to be operating under the assumption that materialism is true so they seek naturalistic explanations and discount any alternatives. Personally, I think they are misinterpreting the evidence to make it fit their presuppositions but that's kinda what people do.
Either way, I have far more important issues to deal with in my personal walk with Christ so I can't invest much time on this one anymore. But thank you guys for what you do, you helped preserve my faith when I was struggling with this.
Another thing that often makes me roll my eyes is the whole "we live in a simulation" thing. I'm like, well, DUH, the entire universe is just CONDENSED ENERGY, so it's kinda like a hologram. Spoken into existence and condensed into everything that is.
We are the product, Bride, designed and grown using a tedious and detailed process using time, free will, and a Spark of the Manufacturer, Himself. These immortal products, if they can be refined sufficiently to exist and operate in an ETERNAL (without beginning or end) state, they will be ready.
Sorry, I'm autistic so I love me some metaphor. Jesus is the Absolute Master of metaphor, though. Wow, another reason to love Him. Man, I love this Guy.
Dont be fulled evolution is a reality. Earth is not a few thousand years old.
"Birds have wings." Penguins are pissed.
They fly under water
They have wings. You've never seen a penguin?
just because they cant fly doesnt mean they dont have wings. look up the anatomy
Clearly described, great visuals, different ideas, thank you!!
You sound like you disagree..? or agree?.. doesn’t matter. Props to you for the most genuinely, and humanly respectful comment I’ve seen on this video thus far.
Good presentation, all bad information though at every point I can't tear apart his arguments.
Wait until he sees a duck billed platypus
Wow do they fly? 😂
Or a shoebill. The thing walks up on you sounding like a one man ongoing firefight while bowing with every other steps.🤣
platypus aint got feathers
@@ZKASH-w4qno, but they lay eggs.
@@JanPeter-n8b and are venomous, at least males in mating season
I deeply appreciated this, particularly the parts related to the translation capability of the wrist joints being radically different including the muscle connection points, this left no place for a middle ground where one of those would have translated into the other without making the transitional animals radically disadvantaged mutants that would be out-competed by their existant healthier relatives or better designed animals in the niche they were transitioning to fill.
Isn't the fact that you can make a skeleton look convincingly like either a dinosaur or a bird just by posing it a great example of a transitional fossil?
Its also pretty easy to just "make" one altogether. Lol just sayin
So to make a 20 dollar US bill look convincingly like the twin towers in NYC must mean that it transitioned into it.
No, it's an example of a lack of understanding.
@@statutesofthelord Thats, not the same thing at all.
What came first the chicken or the egg? ....the egg; it was laid by an animal that wasn't a chicken. Evolution.
Taking the Bible literally instead of figuratively or accepting that time is very different for God is just being intentionally ignorant. “The bible says 6 days so therefore evolution isn’t real.” No, the simple solution is that billions of years to God is a few days. 8:39
There are parts where God means literally and other times, it is figuratively. How do we tell? Taking the time to understand the context of the text and Jewish traditions and what is God saying throughout the book in question
yeah it makes sense each day would be a million years
Traits unique whales
-blowhole
-flippers
-vestigial hips
-underwater echolocation
-gives birth underwater
So the same criteria that AIG uses to says birds are not dinosaurs can also be used to say whales are not mammals.
May be shocking, but they are talking about birds in this video, not mammals or whales.
Question: How do Hoatzin birds fit into this theory? They are born with useable fingers and even a tooth. Also, what about the Cassowary? I can't help but see a dino when I look at this large, dangerous bird. They will kill a human on site.
Cassowaries and other ratites are apparently descended from flying birds so they are not as primitive as they look. Hoatzin is a good example since they do still have some primitive characters
Ty, I had to look this fascinating creature up. Many scientists believe this bird to be the first.
I agree.
Obviously, I would disagree on how the bird appeared, but I believe it may have been the first bird.
Ty, for that.
@@jockyoung4491 All groups of palaeognaths evolved flightlessness and large body size independently from flighted ancestors which flew around the Southern Hemisphere to other countries.
That's kind of his point at the end. We base our idea of dinosaur or bird heavily on physical appearance, and the physical appearance of extinct animals is unknown. You can make a human skeleton look like a bipedal elephant or dog depending on how you cover it up. Jurassic world and other similar media is complete nonsense and fiction in many ways, and should be treated as such.
@@litigioussociety4249 You're quite wrong. Studies of comparative anatomy give us an excellent idea of how animals looked and locomoted based on things like muscle attachment points, joint mechanics, etc. You reject scientific findings because you don't understand them and don't like them, not for any technical reasons.
This guy isnt considering convergent adaptation. Hyenas are not dogs they are closer to bears but similar environmental factors make them look similar
Hyenas are closer to feline.
@@nickwells20 wait until he sees a duck billed platypus.
That theory got debunked years ago. Lack of a scientific mechanism
I think this guy is absolutely wasting his life trying to prove "evolution" isn't a thing and frankly he shows a massive lack of faith as a Christian in even trying to do so...
@@nickwells20, yup they are cats.
Thanks AIG for sharing the observable truths of biology!
All of modern biology is built on evolution being true. Every single concept.
@@earthisasphere the only things that are built on evolution are fictitious comics and cartoons like Pokemon and X-Men. Every legitimate discipline of science can be conducted free of darwinian presumptions.
@@wilhelmvonn9619 yet you haven't explained what in the video was propaganda.
@@refuse2bdcvd324 Did you notice that the video focused on minor differences between otherwise identical theropod dinosaurs, without talking about the massive similarities? And then asked you to believe that one group of theropods were reptiles and the other group of theropods were full-blown birds, tail bones, dino claw, teeth and all?
I call it propaganda when the information presented to a lay audience is deliberately one-sided.
Everything ,it relies on poor education and a desperation to believe without checking
Very appreciated! Thank You and God Bless You!
Modern Christians are too concerned with the ancient Jewish texts instead of what defines our religion: Christ.
Imagine ancient Lavanatine shepards 6000 years hearing the word of God going “in the beginning, 13.4 BILLION years ago-“
“Sorry God, what does “billion” mean?”
“Ok, never mind that, let Me explain the complex evolutionary process that is part of this miraculous existence i have created-“
“The…what process?”
Being a Christian doesn’t mean denying the infinite complex power of God and His works based upon modern interpretations. You can know God, understand His message, and still acknowledge the scientific truth staring you in the face.
We now live in a world where real scientists are never heard by the majority because they believe in a creator……smh
I believe with my whole being that Jesus is Lord. I believed almost 11 years ago and remember the unspeakable joy and peace from the Holy Spirit. I would read the bible with amazement everyday etc. I always had trouble repenting though and now I've got to the point where I'm completely hooked on a few prescriptions, which I can't stop, the withdrawals are too horrendous and even other drugs at times. I go weeks without picking up my bible and when I do, I get distracted after a couple of chapters. I get on my knees and cry out to the Lord for forgiveness, then to days without praying. I don't even know or understand myself anymore. I know the truth, I'm now constantly miserable. Ive been to church a few times in the past..I went to a christian rehab, but gave up after a couple of weeks as we had to go to church every morning, but so frustratingly, I hate the fact that getting up and singing I get so embarrassed and go red and sweat like crazy, same with prayer meetings, so i left after 3 weeks. Now I just live in depression and fear. I love in a room at 37 in England with 4 others who hate God. I talk about the Lord all the time, but can't seem to step I to a church. I don't know what else I can do. I really am losing hope rapidly.
Don't lose hope Jesus didn't preach in a church and he also told his discplies wherever two or more are gathered in my name I will be there.
@@James-bd1yq don't lose the hope, hebrew 13:1-19 Believe In him, he's waiting for you, he will always forgive you, he will always love you! You don't need the church, pray with your heart, sincerely, no mask, only you, your true self and he will bless you. Thank god for every little thing you have, just for the grace of wake up every day, you have to be thankful with him in the bad times and good times, be grateful for every little thing. God bless you brother, a big hug from Costa Rica.
eat more fruits And veggies exercise
it will help.
More fruits and veggies
Congratulations.. you just proved evolution.
They do that a lot. The irony is lost on them.
Feathured dinosaurs aren't a problem for biblical creationism, though. If the genetic variation ranges of birds and dinosaurs overlapped, so they shared phenotypic traits, this is perfectly fine with the concept of created kinds.
How can you square being so dishonest with a belief system that requires honesty?
@@slappy8941 Where am I dishonest? What is the standard for the morally good by which you measure that being dishonest is morally bad? Why is dishonesty wrong for evolvoed pond scum chemicals?
@@HenryDalckeat least evolved pond scum don't have to be told not to harm people. you do though.
You know, problem is that some religious people and some scientists seem to desperately want to disprove the other side, instead of meeting in middle ground and work together towards a unifying answer. There are pretty clear examples that God did not create all species that currently exist, how would you explain "prizzly" or "grolar" bears, resulting from the cross breeding between polar and grizzly bears. Those hybrids are naturally happening in nature, and the resulting species never existed in documented history.
I don't get what's the problem accepting that life as we know it was created by an intelligent superior being, but that it is not static, instead it changes and adapts, or evolves, if you want, and that doesn't mean God has no hand at all in that continuous process aswell
I have been saying this, I think many of them were large birds! They look like large bird skeletons to me.
except for the all sauropods, most of the theropods, and spino single out my fav
Meet thee cassowary. I love them; not as much as Jesus but they are pretty cool. I think evolution doesnt at all disprove God; I think God just created evolution. Or just what we describe as evolution.
I basically said the same thing, don't get the huge bipartisan take on the issue of creation. Anyone claiming to know the absolute truth about this topic has to reconsider their world view.
"Let the waters bring forth..."
"Let the earth bring forth..."
Who cares. The Christisn world created an advanced civilization because studying reality as God created it was encouraged. Other religions instead just stick to the "book" and stagnate. Book freak cults are a recent phenomenon. Anyway for me the theory of evolution is highly sus, was peddled to take power away from the church and its full of fraudulent studies and "discoveries".
@@MarvinThomas-nw3yi huh
I think the strongest point made was how therapod dinosar fossils can be better posed to resemble birds. Is there any truth to this? Are hanging forelimbs disadvantageous when running or walking? He might have a point here.
Ive been saying this!!. Think about it when they find a skeleton of a dino, they ALWAYS say (yea we found it near other bones) ...legit could be many animals died near each other making ppl think its just 1 dino..
Save when you find complete or nearly complete skeletons.
@@mixedbread1 'making people think it's just one Dino'
Paleontology is a specialized field. It can take months or even years to identify one specimen in some cases.
'People' may think it's just one dino, but paleontologists do enough research and collaborate with scientists working in other fields, and believe it or not, entire specimens can be reconstructed from incomplete fossils.
Scientists are able to do this today with modern animals as well of course.
@@slappy8941 😂😂 👍
Well done!
God bless you all!
Gen 1:21, KJV "winged fowl", not "bird". "Fowl" simply means "flyer". This would include anything that flies: birds, reptiles, bats, even bugs. I wish modern translators would research etymology.
"It's about what God did do?"
That's such an awesome but simple statement
I really don't explore this much so I have a stupid question. How do we supposedly know that they were actually cold blooded? Birds do indeed share similar skeletons but they don't need to sun themselves in order to function. I'm sure someone who's good at math can help me with this but think about the surface area of a T-Rex for instance, how much power would a creature that size actually have to source from the sun on a daily basis just to be able to walk? It doesn't make sense. Another thing that doesn't add up is the bone density, creatures that fly are designed to fly, if a T-Rex had feathers then logically it would also have hollow bones which means that it would collapse under it's own weight.
hey, they KNOW they were cold blooded cuz when they were discovered, they were COLD! The math for the surface area of t rex as it basks in the sun is proportional to the spare circumference of the tangent equal to the fractal portion being exposed to full sun minus the degradation of the angle of attack the sun makes as it goes redivided by the concave of said surface. Than after accounting for feather shadowing, you divide the sum by 4! and your answer will be correct by a margin of 3 % !
Maybe feathers were for insulation heating or cooling maybe UV protection and was Early before they evolved/adapted to fly maybe they were for swimming then adapted to life on land then started gliding then flying over million years of natural selection then ones that survived had deformed features then started breeding then changed
Actually we don't know that they were cold blooded. If I remember right the generally accepted theory is that they were warm blooded.
That said there have been massive cold blooded animals in the past such as Titanaboa or Megalania (giant snake and giant monitor lizard respectively). Another thing is cold blooded doesn't necessarily mean they get what they need from sunlight, but rather from ambient temperature, sunlight is just a convenient way to warm up.
We know the earth was much warmer in the past hence part of the reason larger cold-blooded animals were more common in the past.
@@baddragonite That is something that I didn't know. It doesn't solve the hollow bone question but it's cool to know.
To answer your question about the hollow bones, if t-rex had feathers as an adult (there is only evidence for them to have as juveniles so far) it doesn't necessarily mean that it must have hollow bones, because it never was adapted to fly. It is likely that feathers served as a form of insulation (hinting at the ability to regulate internal body temperature). So hollow bones would serve it no purpose (like you pointed out would harm it) Additionally lets suppose that it evolved from a flying hollow boned ancestor (it didn't) it could still adapt to have denser bones to support a greater weight as it adapted to living on the ground.
Sorry my explanation is a bit long but I hope it helps :)
Now what about Bats?
dinosaurs drank red bull
😂😂😂
At 0:12 is hilarious 😆. Cause it’s true they will get mad and start calling names. But no hate to them at all even if they hate us. God bless you all Christians and Atheists.
Is saying "you don't understand anatomy" name calling?
people believed new of god long before jesus and they will long after he is forgotten...but thanks
@@katamas832 We you realize that dinosaurs have different bone sockets, bone structures (bird bones are hollow) and have different lung and heart structures you realize that birds are not related to dinosaurs. Birds according to secular dating predate dinosaurs by 100 million + years. So Dinosaurs did not evolve from birds and certainly did not evolve into birds. There is no evidence in the fossil record that dinosaurs are/ or were birds ...certainly not transitional fossils.
@@robinwolstenholme6377because the one true God is eternal and has been around since Creation. Yes, people have worshipped Him since Creation. People have also worshipped themselves and their own false gods since shortly after Creation. You have a choice. The True God or your own false gods?
@@alantasman8273 Wikipedia proves you wrong. "... Archaeopteryx was discovered just two years later, in 1861, and represents a classic transitional form between earlier, non-avian dinosaurs and birds." - Transitional fossils page. Why are you lying to people?
You know birds are literally dinosaurs, Right?
Wiki says…”many non-avian dinosaur species also possessed feathers in some shape or form.”
🤷♀
Gibberish. 😅
@@bronsmith3612 says you
Yeah
Because wiki information is neevvvvveeeerrrrrr biased
@@Dustandfuzz Yeah! Psittacosaurus had preserved feathers.
Why do you think those 15 Maniraptorans (the ones that this man says are birds) were classified as Maniraptorans in the first place? - because their anatomical features matched other theropod dinosaurs. Golly, its like non-bird theropods and birds have similar bodies. Its like they share wishbones, feathers, a perforate acetabulum ("hip socket"), an ascending process on the talus (ankle bone), and an upright bipedal gait in the first place.
Yeah and why exactly was allosaurus chosen to be compared with the micro raptors anyways? It was big so obviously it wouldn’t have any of the necessary characteristics for flight😂
I am a biblical creationist but yoiur right. the better interpretation should be theropods were not dinosaurs but just flightless ground birds. i predict organized creationism will come to this conclusion but right now , as in this excellent video though final error still, creationist thinkers want to deny the theropod /bird evidence for being the same thing.
Shhhhh, he is scared of the infinite darkness that is death as is trying to believe in fairy tales that he uses as baby pacifiers for cowards.
Actually we consider birds as a separate specie but they are not, they are considered to be in the same branch as dinosaurs but by popular use we call them birds wrongly.
@@CarlosRuiz-fp6gj thats the error. The theropod dinos were misidentified birds. They were not reptiles or dinos.
You're not really doing yourself or your argument many favors here. I say that as a believing Christian. Your argument and graphic examples are only convincing from the standpoint of someone who knows next to nothing about birds or dinosaurs.
For example: None of the species you show in your graphics are thought to be very closely related to birds. Coelophysis lived in the Triassic and had no relation to birds. Allosaurus was a contemporary of the first birds. Sinosairopteryx IS a Compsagnathid, as is Huaxiagnathus. Stokososauru, was a Tryannosauroid about the size of an Emu. These are not the sort of therapod species most apt to make a fair comparison. They're just not.
You also observe the advent of flexible wrists and observe you can't imagine WHY they might have evolved. That's just a lack of imagination on your part. Most paleontologists speculate that birds evolved from arboreal species, which inhabited the trees and forests. Surely, you can imagine why a tree climbing species would find a flexible wrist beneficial? Primates, after all, benefit very much from a flexible wrist.
Your whole point is really lacking merit from a simple point of logic. You say birds are not dinosaurs because birds have wings. Well, so do bats. Bats fly. Are bats not mammals because they fly? Are pterosaurs not reptiles because they fly? How then do you reason that birds are not dinosaurs because they have wings and fly? Are herbivors like triceratops, not dinosaurs, because they don't walk on two legs like therapods? In other words, what is your logically consistent basis for making that determination? You did not present one here.
I keep watching videos like this because I'm a believing Christian and very much open to persuasion, but you guys keep failing to deliver. I'm intellectually honest, above all. I carry that honesty into my faith, where it serves me well, and makes me discerning. The measure of the thing is truth. You failed to convince me because your argument fails in the measure.
This channel should be called "Falacies in Genesis"
They are giving answers. Not good ones, terrible ones, even. But answers no less.
This guy creates a lot of Straw men to knock down.
"As a Christian". What's has that got to do with anthing here? Yes bird and dinosaurs clearly have traits that are similar. Been saying this myself for 40 years.
There's lots of clues of how the boner were arranged tho. The biggest one being the bones themselves. You can see the attachment points of the tendons and how large they would have been and been able to surface what kind of muscles were attached to them and where the tendons are combined with the musculature tells what it would have been shaped like in oriented in general. On top of that we also have some molds of the outside of the animal in specific poses and we can understand what they look like from that too. There's not too much stopping us from really understanding this I would suggest rethinking your theory.
His diagram of which parts of the utahraptor fossil have been uncovered is highly inaccurate. Not sure when this video was taken but there were large sections of adult utahraptor specimens unearthed in Utah from a megablock supposedly containing multiple adult specimens in 2021. He also seems to simply shut out important variables which do very much link dinosaurs to birds which even shows a gradual evolutionary process. I also want to know how he explains different species of any animal (meaning dinosaur, mammal, fish, insect, etc.) appearing and disappearing from the fossil record tens of millions of years apart from one another, if God created the Earth in 6 days and made no additions since creating the earth how do you explain all of these different species only popping up during certain time periods? Surely via this hypothesis every living thing that exists today also existed during the time when dinosaurs roamed the earth. Why do we not see fossil evidence of these feathered wings earlier than 150 million years ago, yet we know that dinosaurs appeared on the fossil record around 230 million years ago? Why do we not see any lion fossils or human fossils in the same geological time periods as we find these dinosaurs? For anyone looking to question their anti-evolution beliefs I have something interesting you should consider. Look at practically any domesticated animal of today; cows, sheep, dogs, chickens, etc. and look at how much humans have changed these species over only a few tens of thousands of years through selective breeding. Now, what is selective breeding? Selective breeding is where two animals of the opposite sex are chosen to mate because they have specific more desirable traits than others of the same species. In dogs this can be either because this individual larger (better for fighting and work) or because they are more loyal or even for the strength of their sense of smell. This is then done over and over again usually using specific bloodlines that have already been bred for these traits which then a few generations down the line results in an animal that is better suited for this purpose. Look at bloodhounds or pit bulls or large livestock guardian dogs, even look at dachshunds which were specifically bred to be able to invade the holes that rodents dig. This is simply man-made evolution. Evolution works the same way, except that the one selecting which individuals have more desirable traits is nature. Those individuals that have a mutated gene which better helps them survive in their environment will live longer and healthier than an individual without this gene. However, evolution is not always your friend. There could be cases where a small population of a species lives in a secluded area, in this area you have some individuals with traits that help them survive in that area better than the others but something drastic happens like a natural disaster or a disease and most or all of these individuals with the more desirable traits are killed off. You are then left with a population dominated by individuals who have traits less suited to their environment, these individuals will then spread their genes more through the population than before creating what’s known as an evolutionary bottleneck and could cause that specific group to be wiped out. Ok, rant over, hope you enjoyed it!
2 points you might need to research
1. You have blindly accepted the "evolutionary timetable" of "millions of years" ~ time tables based on? Fossils are dated how? By the age of the surrounding rocks right? Agree of rocks determined by? Fossils found in this rock layer? Wait, wait... That is a closed circle! 🤦🏻♀️
2. You are trying to equate micro evolution with Macro evolution. Micro =changes Within a species ie wolf to chihuahuas lol
Macro=changes from one species to Another Species ie dinosaur to bird
Micro is Obvious, macro is impossible, and false.
Thank you for the info. God is Great. He is the truth.
I don't have problem calling birds dinosaurs, we call dinosaur animals that share some similar charasteristic like bone structure etc. This doesn't mean birds "evolved from dinosaurs, God just made flying dinosaurs (bird) on 5th day and then he made land dinosaurs on 6th day
But birds did evolve from dinosaurs.
Either God created evolution or God doesn't exist.
@@Gek177 You believe they evolved. That would be accurate.
@@geekubs2778 Evidence shows that birds evolved from dinosaurs. Until you falsify that evidence, you don't even have an argument.
@@geekubs2778 I believe what is evidently true.
So as per what is evidently true, either God created evolution or God isn't real.
@@Gek177
Birds co-existed with dinosaurs.
The diversity of adaptations in nature is a powerful reminder of how species respond specifically to their environments. For example, birds have evolved a remarkable range of wing types tailored to different needs: land birds like ostriches have wings adapted more for balance and signaling, aquatic birds like penguins use their wings as flippers for swimming, and flight birds have wings shaped for airborne maneuvering. These specialized wings are more than tools for locomotion; they play a crucial role in regulating temperature and shielding the body from harmful sunlight, highlighting nature’s rapid adaptation abilities.
Similarly, environmental shifts also influence the evolution of other species. Urban rats, for instance, now show larger brain sizes compared to rural rats, possibly because they face the cognitive challenge of foraging in complex human environments. This adaptation mirrors early human evolution, where the discovery of cooking led to increased brain size and a reduced digestive system, allowing our species to conserve energy and prioritize mental development.
This process suggests that evolution is not always gradual or linear. Sudden changes-such as new predators, significant climate shifts, or even human dietary changes-often lead to abrupt species transformations. These shifts support the “punctuated equilibrium” model, where evolution occurs in rapid bursts following environmental stress or change. For instance, in regulated food environments, humans benefit from "conscious evolution," adapting to healthier diets, while those in less regulated areas may experience the opposite effect.
Nature constantly demonstrates that evolution is flexible and responsive, driven by the needs of survival and adaptation rather than a strict, gradual progression. Understanding these adaptive leaps can offer us valuable insight into our own development and resilience as a species.
Replace ‘evolution and evolved’ with ‘ development’ and your statement is truth.
@@appaloosa42 - Explain why semantics are imperative in this case?
@@kingwillie206 because the word "evolution" when used in this case it implies "macroevolution" which doesnt actually happen, there has never been a case where DNA created brand new information and they changed to something else, when in reality what we observe is exactly the opposite, all the changes happen within a family's species and there is only combination of existing information and loss of information, not the other way around, the idea of
this seems like a copy-pasted troll comment, and it mostly talks adaptaion, which is not evolution, those birds are still birds, no matter how many years pass, the changes dependingon the enviroment are pre-selected from their existing genes, but there has never been a case where new information was created, what we observe is species always remain the same type within their families, until they go extinct
i think the biggest confusion here is what does someone mean by "evolution", if they simply mean microevolution (which is a top-down process limited within a species) that is true it happens, but if they mean macroevolution (a bottom-up process that connects all species) that has never happened, everything seems to be a top-down process as far as DNA is concerned, felines are always felines, canines are always canines, and humans always humans
Great common sense! Thanks for truth .
But birds are dinosaurs.... LOL
Dinosaurs and birds are very different.
Also
Dinosaurs and birds are very similar.
Birds ARE dinosaurs..
@@jaysons6101no their not
@@tella117human who has short life + short body too. human who has long life and tall body too. next 6500 years more your Corp might be dinosaurs too base on human age 10 years old discover.
@@tella117 Proof?
@@jaysons6101 birds are birds buddy… hollow bones didn’t come from a Dino… a quick question for you ? How many genders are there?
I love science, but i want science that is true not false and the "Answer in Genesis" makes sense especially the "Flood", thank you so much i learn more with sense because nowadays commonsense is hard to find especially in science.
thank you and God bless✝🙏
Wow! That was really informative. Thanks for all your hard work. It was a VERY well thought out presentation.
but false.
No not really. You didn't put up why you say that. So it leaves like discussion
I missed any point the guy was trying to make. What is his point. I kept waiting for his conclusion but didn’t hear it. I did skip to hear it so maybe I missed it but I don’t think so. So birds and non avians were similar in their skeletons. Not much of a point.
Was it that dinosaurs died out while birds evolved to what we have today? How does that work with the flood when even the resting places (mountains, trees) were covered with water? I’d really like to know what revelation he was trying to get across to people.
@@Dustandfuzz well, the flood didn't happen, so that's simple enough.
Leviticus tells us that bats are unclean birds.
And also says that insects have 4 legs
@@msquiggle3590 And that anyone who touches a 4 legged insect is 'unclean."
That ought to be enough to quit using the Bible for anything but entertainment.
Although they are mamals, so that's another Biblical error.
science tells us birds are dinos. its all a matter of perspective isnt it
All I'm hearing is that dinosaurs could be dragons
This is what denial looks like.
Birds are the dinosaurs that survived.
No, the dinosaurs virtually all died off. But a few key ones are the ancestors that birds evolved from, on different branches of evolution
@@joesabet2001 this has been the conventional wisdom for decades, agreed. However the current controversy is whether there is sufficient difference between dinos and birds to make this distinction meaningful. This, from a conversation I had with resident paleontologists at the Houston museum of natural science. Dinos are ancestors of birds certainly; but the question currently appears to be whether this taxonomy ought to be flattened considerably.
@@alvarofernandez5118 i don’t know about all that, but ive read enough Carl Sagan and others to appreciate that science has the answer because it seeks truth, verifiably. It doesn’t rely solely on religious or political dogma, only of course when they interfere in science and politics! This presenter, the audience, most of these comments excluding yours im aware of, all this is pure hogwash that insults human intelligence
No. The theropod dinos were just birds misidentified as reptiles back in the day. now better tools, more money, smarter people, see how birdy they were. This creationist does a great job os showing this while striving to show how different in minor ways. Maybe this guy will be persuaded that theropods were not dinos but birds.
the nerdys that noticed the oldies were really birdies will nvr convince the godly that the older birdies are like newer birdies cause the godly, they dont trust the nerdys
What if this evolution was a result of a scarce food and they adapted to flap to achieve more speed so that they could hunt flying insects? Then a transformation to something we see less practical would make sense.
Mammals have mammary glands and breast feed their young. I don't recall ever seeing a baby bird breast feeding....birds aren't mammals.
Pigeon produce milk for baby pigeons. it's known as "Crop Milk".
@@LOUDMOUTHTYRONE Your spell checker auto corrected "Pig" to "Pigeon".
@@LOUDMOUTHTYRONE Evidence? None.
@@jaysons6101 no way you said that, I literally googled "do pigeons produce milk" after reading his statement and the answer is yes, lol. Google is free, man haha. No way you didn't even bother to look. 😂😂
@@jaysons6101Interestingly the crop gland is not just limited to pigeons, but also to slugs,worms, and certain bugs
Also from Google search
Oh and also, mammals live birth their offspring. Birds lay eggs.....again, birds aren't mammals.
Platypus lay eggs and are mammals
Birds are the only dinosaurs that were able to survive and adapt
My cat used to steal my puzzle pieces. We would find them everywhere inc,luding outside. 😂😂😂 its true though.
cringe
As a Christian, NONE of this matters one whit in regards to salvation...
What an absolutely tremendous waste of time these people spend trying to fight against "science" and reconcile the two...
Shows a massive lack of faith really...
Does the Word of God matter still? Jesus quotes the Old Testament as if it’s real. Jesus says the word is truth (John 17:7). If you do not believe the Word is truth, then why would you believe in Jesus as the God made flesh.
How could you be a Christian and simultaneously not believe the Bible?
@@Psalm144.1 I think it's pretty obvious that the age of the earth and the universe, along with knowing if evolution is actually a thing, doesn't matter in the least to your eternal salvation and the reality of Jesus Christ being your Savior...
Trying to debunk evolution as a Christian is not only a massive waste of time when you could be pursing more important spiritual matters, it also shows a complete lack of faith in God...
Evolution doesn't make any sense . 3 things I would like evolutionists to answer me: 1- Why do I need to evolve ? 2- Is the process of evolution eternal, that is, do we never stop evolving ? 3- What is the purpose of evolve ?
1. No organism needs to evolve, hence many being virtually the same for millions of years. However, if some new trait or features allows and organisms to better survive, then it will likely be passed on and become widespread in the population.
2. Evolution is ongoing. To say it is eternal is unknowable. But it will go on as long as life exists, and it happens to a teeny-tiny degree with every single birth. With each birth comes about 30 mutations...
3. The is no "purpose". Why does there need to be? However, the end result is enhanced survival for the population in which the evolution occurs.
You desire to attach a "need" or "purpose" to things is simply your desire.
Why Do We Evolve?
Selection pressures force us to adapt to survive the environment we are in.
Why do I need to evolve ?
individuals dont evolve , populatios evolve.
What is the purpose of evolve ?
Evolution is the Purpose of Life. in simple terms, adapt or die.
Is the process of evolution eternal, that is, do we never stop evolving ?
species are always evolving. There is no way to stop evolution.
I don't think any thing will change their minds, some of them!
@@luish1498 All these processe of evolve to die miserably . This is very weird , all this for nothing . We are born to die , we live a miserable life and we die miserably . What is the meaning of this life , to evolve for these ?
@@luish1498 selection pressure !!! What is this ? How do you know ?
I like this guy. He's funny and informative. Good combo.
DNA is our coding and God controls everything, of course he made everything.
_God controls everything_
Wow, so he gives children bone cancer then.
with magic 😂
@@cliftongaither6642😂
Using your religion as scientific reason ruined this. I'm interested in the real science. Not a religious view of the science. Using scripture to back up claims is not science!
Who else clicked on this video thinking this was about science.
Why not show us in more detail bird bones compared to velociraptor bones so we can decide for ourselves if it's dinosaur or bird? Why keep using allosaurus bones as the one to compare to? You're being dishonest using only allosaurus hands and hips for comparison. Allosaurus was a primitive theropod from the Jurassic epoch according to fossil evidence, far removed from the dinosaur lineage that evolved into birds.
They don't want to show you the evidence that supports evolution. But you already figured that out.
Birds came from therapod, maniraptora. Velociraptor would be a relative but not ancestor. It would be like looking at a gorilla to study us (also primates) instead of Cro-magnons.
@bluemanno7901, Birds and Dinosaurs aka "Dragons" coexisted.
This has been proven by fossil turkey leg bones in the belly of a tyrannosaurs last December in Canada.
"Tastes like chicken" either way you go.
@@Skitdora2010 that's a great story, it almost sounds reasonable until you look deeper into the so called evidence. You can't give a mechanism to allow an organism to gain new genetic information. NEW not copies or broken genes. So there is no known mechanism for macro evolution. So that's just ONE reason why evolution is not science.
@@earthisasphereplease elaborate on the evolution of umbilical cords in all mammals on earth.
Birds are a type of dinosaur, same with crocodiles. They belong to family of arcosaurs
and yes the earth is a round and billions of years old
This was embarrassing to watch.
I don’t understand how people can debate evolution. It’s literally all around us. Every living creature adapts to its current environment. People will believe what somebody else put in a book over what they can observe with their own eyes the ultimate form of laziness. SMH
You're talking about micro-evolution, which means animals adapting. That is absolutely happening. The problem is macro-evolution, which states that animals are becoming other animals. That does NOT happen.
@@vitalefadaption and evolution are two entirely different things. Adaption occurs with DNA that already exists in the animal/person. Evolution is when new DNA is added which has never been witnessed in animals/person.
Modern birds evolved from dinosaurs well before most people think. Early bird (flying dinosaurs) and velociraptors (for example) have a common ancestor: the PARAVES. From paraves came two lineages the AVIALES and the DEINONYCHOSAURIA. The aviales evolved into the modern birds, the Deinonychosauria evolved into Troodontidae and Dromaeosauridae very, very similar to birds but not birds. The skeleton was similar, they had feathers similar to the birds feathers but not the same and so on. So, birds descended from dinosaurs much earlier than people believe and yes, you can find fossils of dinosaurs, like feathered velociraptors, with birds in their stomachs, it's logical, it's obvious. The evidence is out there.
truth
And before that, they evolved from a fish. And before that, a slug. And before that, a single celled organism. And before that, a puddle of goo. And before that, a rock. And before that, a star. And before that, an explosion. And before that, nothing.
@@caseyp1890nothing ever evolved from a rock, puddle, star or explosion, lil bro, stop making stuff up. Cope and seethe that birds are dinosaurs.
@@jaysons6101 Are you proud of being so scientifically clueless? Just curious.
Order and design come from intelligence. Not from nothing. Repent and read the gospel. This is blasphemy
This video is great.. the only thing i like to mention is that the bird did not kill himself the the window tricked the bird, because a bird have no consept of what a window is, so its more correct to say that the window killed the bird unknowingly and without intent ... 🙏🏾✝️❤️
I love the way he compares extant birds to dinosaurs on lineages which didn't evolve into birds. Creationist "honesty" at its finest. 🙂
There was no evolution!
Clearly you did not understand this video at all. Like most atheist, you cannot wrap your mind around contemporary ideas. If what is proposed in this video and in many other videos on this channel, there were no dinosaurs as atheist/secular people think, rather they were all different kinds of birds. If that is the case then it is completely justified to compare them.
But i know you did understand it, which makes you dishonest yourself, you are exactly the pot who calls the kettle black in the old saying.
@@jaysons6101 so if we have evidence that some dinosaurs were not dinosaurs but birds, who is the outdated one here?
@@jaysons6101 it seems atheist/secular people have hard time following evidence but are STUCK in their old ways of understanding the world
@@hosannayeshua4446 birds ARE DINOSAURS LIL BRO. Like Bats ARE MAMMALS. Just because a whale doesn't have legs so its not a mammal? What nonsense are you even saying?
the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics debunks evolution.
No.
No.
Ah yes, millions of scientists who work closely with thermodynamics never noticed, but clueless creationists did.
@@katamas832 It's almost as though living complexity on earth is enabled by having access to a huge external source of energy called the sun.
Fact is, every piece of 'proof' for evolution has been debunked.
I enjoy the pure irony when an atheist has a straight face saying, 'YOUR beliefs are outdated!' 😂😂😂
Orthodox Christian here. Thank you sou much. ☦️❤️🫶🏻
In Enoch, the watchers (fallen angels) "defile" themselves with animal-kind. Id say thats the answer to dinos
"In Enoch, the watchers (fallen angels) "defile" themselves with animal-kind." So.. what's your imaginary friend's excuse for having the ability to create life globally, but having to RAPE a 12 year old MARRIED child so she can give birth to it in order to forgive itself for being a screw-up? Or have you not read your own fables?
😂😂😂 ok
yes, but Enoch is a fake book - not written by Enoch at all.
@StudentDad-mc3pu I don't think Enoch is fully inspired by the Holy Spirit or even written by him, but I think it does serve as historical document and some truths may have been carried down generationally by oral tradition. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Definitely read it with a grain of salt. At least for 1st Enoch. 2nd and 3rd Enoch, you'll need the whole salt shaker. The 66 canonical books would always trump any pseudopigraphal writing, but I think so long as it doesn't contradict scripture, it may help fill in some blanks and provide insight that would help us understand the biblical text
Enoch is also referenced in the bible
Jude quotes it and it may be referenced in 2 Peter. They at least regarded it as a historical document with some truth.
@@A-Person-321 It's a jewish Apocalyptical/mystery book.
giant birds for giant trees... makes more sense than dinosaurs
You just blew my mind
Very simple minded, the oxygen levels use to be 800% higher (co2 levels as well which puts the lie to all the mainstream claims of global warming) meaning life was much, much larger, all life btw tree's plants etc, dinosaurs couldn't breath on earth today, and yes there were giant birds, eagles with over 30 ft wingspans etc.
but not as much sense as a allpowerful beeing that forget that one of his creations will drive antoher one of his creations in eternal doom and then punish said second creation for it because he is also allloving, but not if you are gay, a woman, belief in something different.
A very good presentation. Both the content and the way it was illustrated.
Answers in Genesis uses baseless assumptions and outright lies
Examples and proofs, please. Not trolling.
I love the way this is called "answers in genesis", but he (attempts) to go all scientific to get answers.
Irony is frequently lost on the stupid.
Uh? He uses Genesis as reference point and worldview base. So answers start in Genesis first, then they are observed through the natural world that God made.
@@theholyark4443 yeah, trying to fit pseudo science into actual science. there's a phrase for this, it's called moving the goal posts.
You still racing Ayrton ? Never thought I’d see me. Senna posting on a evolution debate lol
What a great job of explaining that evolution… you can believe in god and see the logic that the earth is much older than a book written by man (we are fallible) could understand.
I keep trying to tell them that the science of evolution does not say anything either way about the existence of God. It is not a threat to their faith.
Evolution is a lie
Dinosaur means Terrible Lizard...not Terrible Bird.
Well, they are terrible at being lizards, that's for sure.
Dinosaurs aren't lizards - they're part of Archosauria, not Squamata.
In addition:
_•Basilosaurus_ means "king lizard", yet _Basilosaurus_ is a whale.
_•Oculudentavis_ means "eye tooth bird", yet it's a lizard.
_•There's even a dinosaur called _Thanos,_ yet it's not a purple alien that's trying to wipe out half of all life and who fights the avengers (and despite the fact that the name "Thanos" is derived from the Greek word "thanatos", the person who named the dinosaur specifically said it was named after the Marvel character).
The point being: the name of an organism doesn't reflect what that organism actually is.
@@bonniemob65 That is pretty silly thinking.
Dinosaurs aren't lizards. They aren't even in the same subclass as lizards. Dinosauria is an order of Archosaurs, lizards or squamata are an order of lepidosaurs.
And dinosaurs are not all birds similar to how not all lizards are snakes.
All birds are dinosaurs, not all dinosaurs are birds.
Well, I guess that settles it then
Yes, birds and dinosaurs are different, because that's what Evolution does, it produces new species adapted to a change in environment or to a previously unexploited environment. Amazing!
Except that's never been observed to happen. Evolution relies on the imagination of people like you. And don't tell me about variations in a species being an example of what you're talking about.
@@scottb4579 We can observe Evolution through the Fossil record, and the evidence of genetics, body plans and localised variation. That we can't observe it happening in front of eyes would be a fallacious argument (people often don't observe a murder but detectives can work out what happened) - except evolution has been observed in the lab.
Fact is, the oldest rocks have the simplest life, and we can trace the development of different organs and body plans.
@@StudentDad-mc3pu No, we can't observe evolution through the fossil record. Dead things in the fossil record show stasis. Even Steven J Gould said the trade secret of paleontologists was no intermediary types. Anything said to be an intermediary type is only years or decades later shown to be not intermiediary, or a total fraud.
No observation in the lab either. Breaking a gene through a mutation isn't evolultion. You need to ADD information for evolution, not delete it.
Pretty much everything you said is a fantasy and a lie of people's imaginations.
@@StudentDad-mc3pu No, you can't observe evolution thru the fossil record. The fossil record is evidence of stasis and extremely complex body plans appearing suddenly.
Evolution has not been observed in a lab. A mutation breaking a gene and deleting information isn't evolution.
The basement rocks do indeed have worms and bacteria. Then directly above them are extremely complex body plans. In other words.....no.....evolution.
No, dinosaurs are a group of aninals which includes birds. A dinosaur is any animal descendant of the common ancestor of a Chicken, Plateosaurus, and Triceratops.
Great information very interesting
The term "dinosaur" is a bit deceptive because dinosaurs lived over many millions of years, and many lived in totally different periods than others. Having said that, there is one thing that is indisputable. You cannot evolve out of your clade. No matter how different the offspring is from the parent, the offspring is still the child of the parent. If a bird's parents had parents that were dinosaurs, the bird is a dinosaur. Nothing can change that.
Here's an example. Three completely different animals, elephants, manatees, and hyraxes. Elephants you know, manatees are aquatic mammals looking a bit like a large seal with a bulbous nose, and hyraxes are a rodent looking animal about the size of a house cat.
These three are more closely related to each other than they are to any other animals. Somewhere in their history, they had a common ancestor, and are thus part of that clade. As different as they are, they are still members of that clade (Paenungulata).
Birds, no matter how different they are from dinosaurs, are still part of that clade. They are still dinosaurs.
Entering lala land with "Millions of years"
@@alphabeta1337 Science denial isn't healthy for you...
So, where are the fossils of that common ancestor? Without that, you only have a story based on your worldview. I'll stick with History, verified by our Creator.
@@earthisasphere Science denial seems to have worked out for those that lived through 2020.
@@banemaler Not so. I personally knew 7 people in a small town of less than 5,000 people who died of COVID because they wouldn't get vaxed. I don't know any who got vaxed that died of COVID or complications from it....
It’s just subjective human categorisation. Birds are just dinosaurs great great great grandchildren so are dinosaurs