@ the fact that you only comment on words I use instead of actually responding to my point shows that you’re not capable of actually making an argument and can only just assert that I’m wrong for no reason except because you say so
Even a prokaryotic cell is complex. At hindsight, it may sound simple compared to a eukaryotic cell due to the lack of a nucleus, but if you shrink down and go on a cellular journey inside the single-celled microorganism, you will find all sorts of molecular machinery. Molecular like factories (ribosomes) synthesizing proteins, ATP Synthase generating energy, and even a network of Kinesin motor proteins carrying cargo and moving on the surface of microtubles to build a cytoskeleton. To think that all of those exist inside the cell of not even an animal, but in bacteria. If Darwin knew about this, who didn't know anything about genetics/cells, he would have his mind blown away already. This is one of the reasons why I believe in the Creator.
Abiogenesis is not Evolution. The Evolutionary theory that explains biodiversity on this planet stands separate from abiogenesis. So Darwin didn’t had to know how non-life came to life. The evolution theory still stands and gets stronger by the day.
@@janbuyck1 Have you ever heard of the term "the chemical evolution theory of life" (as used by people like Haldane & Oparin)? Or chemical evolution for short? The ScienceDirect website uses the term "the theory of chemical evolution of life". And it describes it as follows: "The modern theory of chemical evolution is based on the assumption that on a primitive earth a mixture of simple chemicals assembled into more complex molecular systems, from which, eventually came the first functioning cell(s)." So what subject are they referring to as being accomplished (or caused) by a process of (chemical) evolution?
@@janbuyck1"So Darwin didn't HAD to know." 😅😂😮😢😊 And you DON'T know😅😂😮😢😊 You're an example of de-evolution in real time 😅😂😮😢😊 Getting weaker and weaker😢 Peace
Good question. God-people hold that He is outside of His creation and separate from it. We also hold that he is pre-existent, meaning he had no beginning but always was: IOW, the "uncaused cause". This is a matter of faith, not science, but the science sure seems to point to an author for all this cool stuff. Where exactly is God? You guess is as good as mine. :)
No intelligence needed: 1/64 of all mutations creates information. ACGTACGTACGT....1000times is *not* information. Just one mutation creates information.
@@magnetocheck So, all energy and matter and the laws that govern them suddenly appeared, uncaused from "something" smaller than you? God is more reasonable since energy and matter had a beginning. Information, intelligence is invisible, without mass, non material. We acknowledge it's existing by it's influence on energy and matter. There's a $10 million prize, share in patent rights and obvious Nobel Prize for discovering how information emerged from the elements. Unclaimed since posted, July 2019. Ever heard of a newly manufactured SSD's having the instructions for replicating themselves?
No sorry, I thought all information needs to be authored? That’s the idea this video uses to ‘deligitimize’ one of the guesses at the origin of life. If we can’t give a coherent answer as to where god came from, doesn’t that mean something created him? I mean, he’s COMPLEX! There’s no way he just came into being without being constructed.
@@therick363 So they can see what happens when one is given the room to think for themselves by seeing ALL of the possible explanations for the origin of life. There is nothing more fanatical than excluding one point of view from a discussion.
When it comes to biology, between intelligent design and natural processes, natural processes is the only option that makes any testable novel scientific predictions and is the only option with real-world applications that are saving lives as we speak. As soon as you can use intelligent design to actually predict the evidence or pioneer a new real-world application it will have some scientific application.
Perfect timing! You guys bring light to a dark world! Blessings to keep at it until the light becomes blindingly obvious and the world works out Whose behind the guise of Mother Nature. 🤫
I have a problem. My problem is the paucity of the English word "complex" to adequately describe the elaborate, precisely integrated, mutually interdependent, perplexingly intricate and complicated arrangement of the mechanism of life in living organisms. I wish we had better words to express this. Because of its complexity, it's obvious that life cannot be the accident of unguided chemical reactions and random chance mutations, but a product of foresight, design, and planning and very careful engineering.
Gotta love how 99% of this video is literally Kent Hovind level arguments. "The Gettysburg Address was written by a human so obviously life was designed by something too!". Literally taken straight from Kent Hovind but instead of a pencil or a car it's the gettysburg address.
Yeah and Kent Hovind's arguments in this area are fantastic. You probably listened to the first 30 seconds of the video, realized it was gonna challenge your worldview, then came straight into the comments to insult the creator. Athiesm at its finest :)
Your videos are so informative and entertaining. They're Must Watch TV! ❤ Higher functions can only be endowed to lower states by higher intelligent action. Inanimate element cannot be infused with animation unless the spirit of life is breathed into it, just as Genesis says.
An entertaining and easy-to-understand story for young adults to inspire faith in support of Genesis creation and the evolution debate is in the book Axis of Beginning. A quote from the book Axis of Beginning: “To say that God needed millions or billions of years acknowledges a form of evolution and deception. God warns about adding or taking away from His Word. And adding even one more hour to six days of creation leads to a form of evolution and deception. IS IT WRITTEN: “In the beginning, God.” However . . . ?”
This is exactly why ID is not taken seriously. Such as shame that it is the domain of the religious which obscures and devalues any of the scientific factors in its favour.
@@davidchamberlain6466 Religious is the desperate belief in a "warm little pond" could be your "mother." Despite the evidence. All the experimental evidence claimed by naturalists is rigged by their emotional attachment to methodological naturalism. IE: all things shall be explained by having a natural cause. Find anybody who has made carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, sulfur and phosphorus form a single protein or gene. These are the elements that comprise 97% of what living things are made of. The warm little pond or whatever managed, exposed to all 98 naturally occurring elements. The simplest cell has 525 genes and 16.8 billion amino acids specifically arranged in it's 42 million proteins.
@@davidchamberlain6466 Who refuses to take ID seriously and what theory do they hold up as having better explanatory power based on the evidence we have?
*_"It is only at the semantic level that we really have meaningful information; thus, we may establish the following theorem: Theorem 14: Any entity, to be accepted as information, must entail semantics; it must be meaningful. Semantics is an essential aspect of information because the meaning is the only invariant property. The statistical and syntactical properties can be altered appreciably when information is represented in another language (e.g., translated into Chinese), but the meaning does not change. Meanings always represent mental concepts; therefore, we have: Theorem 15: When its progress along the chain of transmission events is traced backward, every piece of information leads to a mental source, the mind of the sender."_* Dr. Werner Gitt (Former Head of the Department of Information Technology at Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Germany)
This content is amazing. You should put this animation series on its own TH-cam channel. I am afraid that it gets drowned in all the other types of videoes on here. Its a shame, because I believe this would draw its own unqiue audience if you put it into another channel.
@@DiscoveryScienceChannel thankyou, but what I ment was that these kind of videoes draw their own kind of audience. If it was on its own channel, people would more easy subscribe to it and I believe it would get more views as it would get picked up by the youtube algorithm.
I don't think its impossible for nature to create non random information but I think its just extremely rare, we can find tree trunks that look like faces to us so its possible you could find tree bark that has the complete gettysburg address, it would just be inconceivably rare just like how rare life appears to be in the universe. You use physical laws as proof it can't happen but theres no laws saying they can't do it either.
You want to play poker with me? When it being my turn to deal I got a royal flush the first time in spades, then diamonds, spades and clubs. You'd throw a fit, absolutely certain I cheated. But here you are, betting your soul on humongously, unfathomably greater odds with hardly a concern?
Origin of life has already shown to be impossible. There are various paradoxes to overcome. Not to mention the astronomically small chance of the stars aligning in the one spot to produce it to satisfy RIRI life. Panspermia is more plausible because it's behind even less difficulties, but it has it's own incredibly unlikely requirements. It's just not possible. As sensical as evolution is, I just cannot accept naturalism. I can accept micro and macro evolution easy. But common descent as far as single cell organisms, it's just too hard for me to believe.
Information is invisible, without mass and non material. It's existence is acknowledged by it's influence on energy and matter. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
Just bring the peer reviewed publication detailing the actual demonstration of anybody making carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, sulfur and phosphorus form a single protein or gene to a creationist/naturalist debate. Or a scripture bashing debate. These are the minimum elements that should be in the simulation of a prebiotic earth, being they account for 97% of what living things are made of. And adequate for forming genes and the specific 20 amino acids for constructing proteins.Claiming what the elements did on a perfectly sterile, barren, prebiotic world and cannot make them do what you claim in a laboratory? How are the Miller Urey experiments evidence for Abiogenesis? 3 compounds and 1 element sealed in a glass apparatus, providing only carbon, nitrogen, oxygen and hydrogen, excluding all other 94 elements?
(03:53) "... Specific arrangements of independent parts in a complex way ..." So we have *illusory* information, *deterministic,* and *indiscriminate* information. I there a label, a name for the kind of information in the Declaration of Independence, a creature's DNA code, or a LEGO assembly book?
@@markp1845 Exquisitely, specific complexities, upon exquisitely interdependent complexities.... Psalm 139:14 I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well! All 37 trillion cells in my body bearing witness to Him, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Ex 3:15
Please do a rebutle video against professor stick because he is trying to say your videos are wrong and that abiogenesis is right even though he isn’t right I would love to see you two debate
@@robstadler927I like professor stick's strategy. He listens to one part about the video, says he's lying about his sources, then skips the parts of the video where LSS predicts his objections and explains why he's wrong. He then calls LSS a manipulative liar because athiests have nothing better to do with their life ig
This is such a great video. Thank you for getting this information out to the public. Life is way more complex than early scientists ever thought. There is no way that that Gettysburg Address just randomly wrote itself. It must have had an author; that much is obvious. Scientists need to be honest and admit life as we know it is clearly a result of a creator: praise to Ahura Mazda, Most Infinitely Wise and Knowledgeable. My friend, thank you for leading me back to the True Path.
It’s funny you say scientists need to be honest and then fail to short your claims a god did it all and you aren’t being honest here in your post. Huh.
So, who is the creator of life, and when and how did He create it? The same Mind that wrote DNA code also wrote a book, with words that tell His story.
I remember a debate where Michael Russ asked when does the designer's hand stop and nature takes over? He seemed to think of the designer as a puppet master moving every piece, rather than how the Bible teach that God ended his involvement after the sixth day and ordained nature to function by the laws created.
Consciousness is eternal, the Mind of God is eternal. Matter needs no purpose, a bunch of atoms moving in random directions can not create information, nor can they create the complexity that Life is from the tiniest to the largest levels, let alone the complexity of the Human Brain itself. These Atheists who think we are just atoms with thoughts sound so ridiculous.
It's always astounds me how incredulous many of these Origins of Life Researchers are. It shows how uncritical intelligent people can be thru both their own impiety and belief in their own unsubstantiated bias speculations.
This is BS. They're purposefully misleading the viewer about the scale we are dealing with and flat out lying about molecular formation. Molecules are extremely small and interact very fast and the world is extremely large and very old. There are quintillions of chances for new molecules to form at any given second inside any given gallon of water. In this vast world of chemicals, almost any process you could imagine in a lab has occured septillions of times randomly by natural processes all over the planet. Even something with a .0000000000000001% chance of happening is practically guaranteed to happen on that scale.
There was then no "origin" of life. And the "author", being an "infinite intelligence" will never be known and have a name we can pin down. Life then is just infinite modifications unto the present surroundings.
I follow what you are saying... the Origin is God... who has alfways existed if this is true. Also, it means that since he is infinite he isn't knowable. However... your conclusions doesn't follow. God has revealed himself in the person of Jesus. While the hypostatic union, eternal nature, and utter holiness of God is not fully comprehendible, he did condescend to our level through the coming of Jesus which we will celebrate soon, and made himself known then by walking with humanity. *If your argument is that we can't really know someone or something without knowing everything about them... you can see where this is fallacious. Grace and peace to you
I love these because that’s stupid Information is literally in everything and anything you cannot have anything without information Even nothing itself has information Information is eternal Information has about two meanings The thing about nature cannot make information A chemical reaction or chemicals to form new chemicals This is the dumb argument DNA is complex yes it is that doesn’t mean it’s created by an author
The word =Chemistry literally reduces the complex process of molecular admix . Its no such thing as evolutionary Chemistry it sounds so contradictory to even hear this used. Are they trying to increase complexity in areas we have already mastered step by step how it works? Why not share proper information so that everyone learns around you ? Lol
Ummm no. Educated scientists and advanced science educators are actually saddened by the poor attempt to inject theology through a quasi-scientific understanding and explanations.
The fact that this video doesn't have 10M+ views baffles me
the fact that people like you refuse to read books about geology and geography is more baffling
@@roscowbrown3937 The fact that you wrote geology makes me think you don't understand the video. The fact that you wrote geography confirmed it!
@ the fact that you only comment on words I use instead of actually responding to my point shows that you’re not capable of actually making an argument and can only just assert that I’m wrong for no reason except because you say so
Actually it is probably not promoted by the algorithm
As always... brillant explained. Being a materialist doesn't make sense more and more at all
Even a prokaryotic cell is complex. At hindsight, it may sound simple compared to a eukaryotic cell due to the lack of a nucleus, but if you shrink down and go on a cellular journey inside the single-celled microorganism, you will find all sorts of molecular machinery. Molecular like factories (ribosomes) synthesizing proteins, ATP Synthase generating energy, and even a network of Kinesin motor proteins carrying cargo and moving on the surface of microtubles to build a cytoskeleton. To think that all of those exist inside the cell of not even an animal, but in bacteria. If Darwin knew about this, who didn't know anything about genetics/cells, he would have his mind blown away already. This is one of the reasons why I believe in the Creator.
Abiogenesis is not Evolution. The Evolutionary theory that explains biodiversity on this planet stands separate from abiogenesis. So Darwin didn’t had to know how non-life came to life. The evolution theory still stands and gets stronger by the day.
@@janbuyck1 Have you ever heard of the term "the chemical evolution theory of life" (as used by people like Haldane & Oparin)? Or chemical evolution for short? The ScienceDirect website uses the term "the theory of chemical evolution of life". And it describes it as follows: "The modern theory of chemical evolution is based on the assumption that on a primitive earth a mixture of simple chemicals assembled into more complex molecular systems, from which, eventually came the first functioning cell(s)."
So what subject are they referring to as being accomplished (or caused) by a process of (chemical) evolution?
@@janbuyck1abiogenesis is chemical evolution
And it doesn't stand the evidence
@@janbuyck1
Actually, the opposite. But you're too fanatical to see it.
@@janbuyck1"So Darwin didn't HAD to know." 😅😂😮😢😊 And you DON'T know😅😂😮😢😊 You're an example of de-evolution in real time 😅😂😮😢😊 Getting weaker and weaker😢 Peace
Great, and obviously such a great amount of work has gone into this, thanks very much.
no, the video spontaneously appeared, a hidden bug which creates amazing videos by chance.
Science points to intelligent design of reality from the atom to the dna to the cells
The most amazing series on intelligent design
Thank you Long Story Short, Keep up the good work
Great as always! Simple words about complex things
Another awesome video. I can't get enough of these. Thank you.
So well made! Thank you!
The only source of information is intelligent causes. Keep these videos coming.
So where is god from?
Good question. God-people hold that He is outside of His creation and separate from it. We also hold that he is pre-existent, meaning he had no beginning but always was: IOW, the "uncaused cause". This is a matter of faith, not science, but the science sure seems to point to an author for all this cool stuff. Where exactly is God? You guess is as good as mine. :)
No intelligence needed: 1/64 of all mutations creates information. ACGTACGTACGT....1000times is *not* information. Just one mutation creates information.
@@magnetocheck So, all energy and matter and the laws that govern them suddenly appeared, uncaused from "something" smaller than you? God is more reasonable since energy and matter had a beginning. Information, intelligence is invisible, without mass, non material. We acknowledge it's existing by it's influence on energy and matter. There's a $10 million prize, share in patent rights and obvious Nobel Prize for discovering how information emerged from the elements. Unclaimed since posted, July 2019. Ever heard of a newly manufactured SSD's having the instructions for replicating themselves?
No sorry, I thought all information needs to be authored? That’s the idea this video uses to ‘deligitimize’ one of the guesses at the origin of life. If we can’t give a coherent answer as to where god came from, doesn’t that mean something created him? I mean, he’s COMPLEX! There’s no way he just came into being without being constructed.
Very well presented. Thanks 👍
These videos are incredible. Brilliant as usual. Thank you!!!
good to see you again LongStoryShot
This is an excellent video.
Every high school and college student should watch these brilliant videos.
So they can see what happens when religion comes first?
@@therick363 So they can see what happens when one is given the room to think for themselves by seeing ALL of the possible explanations for the origin of life.
There is nothing more fanatical than excluding one point of view from a discussion.
When it comes to biology, between intelligent design and natural processes, natural processes is the only option that makes any testable novel scientific predictions and is the only option with real-world applications that are saving lives as we speak.
As soon as you can use intelligent design to actually predict the evidence or pioneer a new real-world application it will have some scientific application.
As soon as you can use abiogenesis to actually predict the evidence or pioneer a new real-world application it will have some scientific application.
Also saving lives is hardly the prerequisite for finding truth.
Perfect timing! You guys bring light to a dark world! Blessings to keep at it until the light becomes blindingly obvious and the world works out Whose behind the guise of Mother Nature. 🤫
Great series
My favorite videos on TH-cam
So great, guys.
I have a problem.
My problem is the paucity of the English word "complex" to adequately describe the elaborate, precisely integrated, mutually interdependent, perplexingly intricate and complicated arrangement of the mechanism of life in living organisms. I wish we had better words to express this.
Because of its complexity, it's obvious that life cannot be the accident of unguided chemical reactions and random chance mutations, but a product of foresight, design, and planning and very careful engineering.
How about "complexineering" or "designgineering"?😊
Exquisitely, specifically complex?
It's not "complexity", it's the breathtaking, awe-inspiring handiwork of our maker, defender, redeemer, and king :)
This is such an excellent series.
Brilliant! Good info presented with sharp humour … Well done! And thank you!
Always great!
Gotta love how 99% of this video is literally Kent Hovind level arguments. "The Gettysburg Address was written by a human so obviously life was designed by something too!". Literally taken straight from Kent Hovind but instead of a pencil or a car it's the gettysburg address.
Yeah and Kent Hovind's arguments in this area are fantastic. You probably listened to the first 30 seconds of the video, realized it was gonna challenge your worldview, then came straight into the comments to insult the creator.
Athiesm at its finest :)
Your videos are so informative and entertaining. They're Must Watch TV! ❤
Higher functions can only be endowed to lower states by higher intelligent action. Inanimate element cannot be infused with animation unless the spirit of life is breathed into it, just as Genesis says.
An entertaining and easy-to-understand story for young adults to inspire faith in support of Genesis creation and the evolution debate is in the book Axis of Beginning. A quote from the book Axis of Beginning: “To say that God needed millions or billions of years acknowledges a form of evolution and deception. God warns about adding or taking away from His Word. And adding even one more hour to six days of creation leads to a form of evolution and deception. IS IT WRITTEN: “In the beginning, God.” However . . . ?”
This is exactly why ID is not taken seriously. Such as shame that it is the domain of the religious which obscures and devalues any of the scientific factors in its favour.
@@davidchamberlain6466 Religious is the desperate belief in a "warm little pond" could be your "mother." Despite the evidence. All the experimental evidence claimed by naturalists is rigged by their emotional attachment to methodological naturalism. IE: all things shall be explained by having a natural cause. Find anybody who has made carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, sulfur and phosphorus form a single protein or gene. These are the elements that comprise 97% of what living things are made of. The warm little pond or whatever managed, exposed to all 98 naturally occurring elements. The simplest cell has 525 genes and 16.8 billion amino acids specifically arranged in it's 42 million proteins.
@@davidchamberlain6466 Who refuses to take ID seriously and what theory do they hold up as having better explanatory power based on the evidence we have?
Os melhores vídeos desse canal, sem dúvidas, são esses! Essas animações são top!
Smart video.
*_"It is only at the semantic level that we really have meaningful information; thus, we may establish the following theorem: Theorem 14: Any entity, to be accepted as information, must entail semantics; it must be meaningful. Semantics is an essential aspect of information because the meaning is the only invariant property. The statistical and syntactical properties can be altered appreciably when information is represented in another language (e.g., translated into Chinese), but the meaning does not change. Meanings always represent mental concepts; therefore, we have: Theorem 15: When its progress along the chain of transmission events is traced backward, every piece of information leads to a mental source, the mind of the sender."_* Dr. Werner Gitt (Former Head of the Department of Information Technology at Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Germany)
Superb..
amazing
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!
This content is amazing. You should put this animation series on its own TH-cam channel. I am afraid that it gets drowned in all the other types of videoes on here. Its a shame, because I believe this would draw its own unqiue audience if you put it into another channel.
Check out our playlist of the episodes here: th-cam.com/play/PLR8eQzfCOiS0AfFPsMAUYr_VVkpU13uv9.html
@@DiscoveryScienceChannel thankyou, but what I ment was that these kind of videoes draw their own kind of audience. If it was on its own channel, people would more easy subscribe to it and I believe it would get more views as it would get picked up by the youtube algorithm.
@@MrReierzexactly
Very nice, good job!
Wow! Life is information
What information?
What you need is to have a debate so you can get reactions.
I don't think its impossible for nature to create non random information but I think its just extremely rare, we can find tree trunks that look like faces to us so its possible you could find tree bark that has the complete gettysburg address, it would just be inconceivably rare just like how rare life appears to be in the universe. You use physical laws as proof it can't happen but theres no laws saying they can't do it either.
You want to play poker with me? When it being my turn to deal I got a royal flush the first time in spades, then diamonds, spades and clubs. You'd throw a fit, absolutely certain I cheated. But here you are, betting your soul on humongously, unfathomably greater odds with hardly a concern?
Origin of life has already shown to be impossible. There are various paradoxes to overcome. Not to mention the astronomically small chance of the stars aligning in the one spot to produce it to satisfy RIRI life.
Panspermia is more plausible because it's behind even less difficulties, but it has it's own incredibly unlikely requirements.
It's just not possible. As sensical as evolution is, I just cannot accept naturalism. I can accept micro and macro evolution easy. But common descent as far as single cell organisms, it's just too hard for me to believe.
The problem with speaking to skeptics is that they logically understand that you are correct. They are just too proud to concede the point.
False but please do support that
@@therick363 point proven
Bravo
There is both material and immaterial existence, that is the basis of the Creationary Synthesis.
Information is invisible, without mass and non material. It's existence is acknowledged by it's influence on energy and matter. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
I'll start the comments by helping the algorithm. Blessings
Does that mean we could classify abiogenesis as a forensic science (for now, at least)?
That's a good way of looking at it. All of paleontology, really.
Seems information always sources from one mind and is taken in by another mind.
Someone needs to learn how to draw switches.
5:19
These Videos and channels are so so underrated in this woke silly word of our time.
I'd like to see an informed rebuttal to the contents of the video. Better yet would be a debate.
Just bring the peer reviewed publication detailing the actual demonstration of anybody making carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, sulfur and phosphorus form a single protein or gene to a creationist/naturalist debate. Or a scripture bashing debate. These are the minimum elements that should be in the simulation of a prebiotic earth, being they account for 97% of what living things are made of. And adequate for forming genes and the specific 20 amino acids for constructing proteins.Claiming what the elements did on a perfectly sterile, barren, prebiotic world and cannot make them do what you claim in a laboratory? How are the Miller Urey experiments evidence for Abiogenesis? 3 compounds and 1 element sealed in a glass apparatus, providing only carbon, nitrogen, oxygen and hydrogen, excluding all other 94 elements?
(03:53) "... Specific arrangements of independent parts in a complex way ..."
So we have *illusory* information, *deterministic,* and *indiscriminate* information. I there a label, a name for the kind of information in the Declaration of Independence, a creature's DNA code, or a LEGO assembly book?
Generally it's called "Specified Complexity" - I call it Meaningful, Useful, or Purposeful Information or Prescriptive Information.
There is a label for each of these types of information. It is Complex Specified Information.
@@markp1845 Exquisitely, specific complexities, upon exquisitely interdependent complexities.... Psalm 139:14 I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well! All 37 trillion cells in my body bearing witness to Him, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Ex 3:15
"Ya Boi Abe" 😂😂😂
NICEEEE
Can you guys translate this to other languages?
Your info badly needed to everyone
Please do a rebutle video against professor stick because he is trying to say your videos are wrong and that abiogenesis is right even though he isn’t right I would love to see you two debate
Thanks for letting us know about this. I've posted a few comments on his videos - he clearly misinterprets the literature and misleads thousands.
@@robstadler927I like professor stick's strategy. He listens to one part about the video, says he's lying about his sources, then skips the parts of the video where LSS predicts his objections and explains why he's wrong. He then calls LSS a manipulative liar because athiests have nothing better to do with their life ig
This is such a great video. Thank you for getting this information out to the public. Life is way more complex than early scientists ever thought. There is no way that that Gettysburg Address just randomly wrote itself. It must have had an author; that much is obvious. Scientists need to be honest and admit life as we know it is clearly a result of a creator: praise to Ahura Mazda, Most Infinitely Wise and Knowledgeable. My friend, thank you for leading me back to the True Path.
It’s funny you say scientists need to be honest and then fail to short your claims a god did it all and you aren’t being honest here in your post. Huh.
Even with all the pure chemicals and high tech equipment, they don't get very far!
So? Doesn’t then equal a god did it
The Amoeba Sisters if it was good:
So, who is the creator of life, and when and how did He create it? The same Mind that wrote DNA code also wrote a book, with words that tell His story.
I remember a debate where Michael Russ asked when does the designer's hand stop and nature takes over? He seemed to think of the designer as a puppet master moving every piece, rather than how the Bible teach that God ended his involvement after the sixth day and ordained nature to function by the laws created.
LESGOOOOOOOO
Consciousness is eternal, the Mind of God is eternal. Matter needs no purpose, a bunch of atoms moving in random directions can not create information, nor can they create the complexity that Life is from the tiniest to the largest levels, let alone the complexity of the Human Brain itself.
These Atheists who think we are just atoms with thoughts sound so ridiculous.
Yo bro
It's always astounds me how incredulous many of these Origins of Life Researchers are. It shows how uncritical intelligent people can be thru both their own impiety and belief in their own unsubstantiated bias speculations.
If you're feeling incredulous, you probably haven't talked to them just heard about them secondhand.
This is BS. They're purposefully misleading the viewer about the scale we are dealing with and flat out lying about molecular formation. Molecules are extremely small and interact very fast and the world is extremely large and very old. There are quintillions of chances for new molecules to form at any given second inside any given gallon of water. In this vast world of chemicals, almost any process you could imagine in a lab has occured septillions of times randomly by natural processes all over the planet. Even something with a .0000000000000001% chance of happening is practically guaranteed to happen on that scale.
Well the problem is the odds are longer than that amd we do not even have the beginning of a model to explain how any of this came to be.
There was then no "origin" of life. And the "author", being an "infinite intelligence" will never be known and have a name we can pin down. Life then is just infinite modifications unto the present surroundings.
Big claims, can you substantiate them?
I follow what you are saying... the Origin is God... who has alfways existed if this is true. Also, it means that since he is infinite he isn't knowable.
However... your conclusions doesn't follow. God has revealed himself in the person of Jesus. While the hypostatic union, eternal nature, and utter holiness of God is not fully comprehendible, he did condescend to our level through the coming of Jesus which we will celebrate soon, and made himself known then by walking with humanity.
*If your argument is that we can't really know someone or something without knowing everything about them... you can see where this is fallacious. Grace and peace to you
I love these because that’s stupid
Information is literally in everything and anything you cannot have anything without information
Even nothing itself has information
Information is eternal
Information has about two meanings
The thing about nature cannot make information
A chemical reaction or chemicals to form new chemicals
This is the dumb argument
DNA is complex yes it is that doesn’t mean it’s created by an author
The word =Chemistry literally reduces the complex process of molecular admix . Its no such thing as evolutionary Chemistry it sounds so contradictory to even hear this used.
Are they trying to increase complexity in areas we have already mastered step by step how it works? Why not share proper information so that everyone learns around you ? Lol
In the islamic world none of these videos are made, cuz everybody knows this lol.
The heads of atheists watching this video: 🤯
And... 😡🤬🖕
Ateus odeiam perguntas, eles ficam furiosos quando sua fé é questionada!
@@KradBrumsproof of the LORD God Almighty is the continued existence of the Jewish people.
Ummm no. Educated scientists and advanced science educators are actually saddened by the poor attempt to inject theology through a quasi-scientific understanding and explanations.
@@KradBrums ~ Look in the mirror.
These Videos and channels are so so underrated in this woke silly word of our time.