32:34 If I spill milk time allows it to spoil but the mechanism is the bacteria in it which makes it go bad. Saying over time macroevolution will happen but time isn't a actual mechanism for justification it just allows it to happen. Does this make sense or relate idk
Sigh…. The Bible says you must have faith to believe. So again evolution is not faith based religion is. The shear dumb required to make this argument is outstanding.
You seem to have the same video twice. Do you really think that evolution is just an opinion that's has never been tested and confirmed? If you can have micro evolution over a small period of time, then why can't you add those up to make macro evolution. How did God create life? How did he move atoms in place to make living things?
Indeed, evolution is a demonstrable (observed) fact; evolutionary theory has been confirmed to be correct many hundreds of thousands of times. Evolution cannot be "religious" as it is a natural phenomena just like gravity. I assume the video creator means evolutionary theory and not evolution: if so, he is of course also wrong. Meanwhile, Creationism is demonstrably wrong and has never passed even one test.
@@Desertphile Evolution shouldn't be called a theory, a hypothesis at best, its never been observed and is propped up by very weak evidence, founded on presumption, assumption, circular reasoning, lies, fraudulent evidence, and an absurd wilful ignorance that the source of complexity and information is always a mind. Considering the fact DNA is the most complex purposefully arranged information ever found, the necessary mind would need to be a supernatural one. How does a mutational destructive process grind out ever increasing complexity by corrupting the inherited information that had less mutations prior to passing them on? All species are devolving, including our own, why do you think cancers, allergies, defective organs, etc, are constantly rising? We are not going to evolve, we are going to become extinct. The number of beneficial mutations (rarer than rocking horse poop) required for the absurd notion of monkey to man would need 180 billion years but the official explanation for this never happened event is 4 million years. Even if evolution is granted this impossibility, how did the constant corruption of DNA, that we know is occurring in every successive generation today, manage to pretend it was not a problem and plodded on without a care anyway? At least evolutionists have worked out the simple matter that if they believe they have evolved from a monkey they get a research grant and if they don't they won't be hired or even fired. That's a kind of evolution I suppose.
@@Desertphile Macro evolution has never been observed, it is inferred using the deceptively named 'micro evolution', which is adaptation. Gravity is often used by atheists in support of evolution without actually realising its a law, where did that law originate, and no one actually knows what gravity is.
@@spamm0145 ; "Macro evolution" has been observed a many of millions of times every year. You might want to remove your occult superstitions, then look again.
This is embarrassing... The need to equivocate science with faith in order to discredit it just shows u have nothing. Evolution does not disprove religion and is not needed to disprove religion. Religious scripture and the facts of the known world regardless of atheism or evolution disprove religion. Can you see the difference?
@@Desertphile Provide a citation for any person in the history of the world observing a species producing another species. Macro evolution has never been observed, it is inferred because organisms adapt and the deceptive term 'micro evolution' is used. A birds beak adapts over time to allow the bird access to different food sources, therefore a monkey can become a man. This is the nonsense you have fallen for. Mutilations corrupt the specified information necessary for the organisms systems, it results in fitness issues and will not lead to ever increasing complexity, it leads to extinction. What is observed concerning mutations in humans? Oh yeah, more cancers, allergies, defective organs, and general health problems. This is the exact opposite of evolution but it aligns with the fall of man. All atheists are religious, their deity is 'no-thing', they believe 'no-thing' created all matter and energy and one day life came into being from non life without the need for a creator, they spend their lives arguing that God does not exist because their deity 'no-thing' is more powerful, 'no-thing' is so amazing it can create life and bring forth information from unguided inanimate matter, then go on a billions of years journey grinding out ever increasing levels of complexity via an unguided no end goal mechanism that corrupts information but produces higher levels of specified information accidently on purpose. Their deity 'no-thing' has mastered all the disciplines required for life, mathematics, chemistry, physics, engineering, biochemistry, light, electricity, magnetism, and even though their deity 'no-thing' has no mind, it miraculously brought into existence 'abstract concepts'! So you see, atheists have more faith than any person who believes in a creator because their deity 'no-thing' is as powerful as God
Wow, the most supported model and the best explanation for the diversity of life is a religion? Is Atomic theory a religion? Maybe i belong to the church of Gravity, too! That's also a theory that I believe.
Sorry to nerd out, but you should read "Einstein's Unfinished Revolution" by Lee Smolin. I wouldn't go so far as to say quantum mechanics is religious, but it's definitely been highly influenced by a specific anti-realist philosophy.
@wesleycolemanmusic I'm in the middle of EARTH Hendrix-Thimpson and next is a collegiate primate anthropology textbook, not sure which one, yet. I'm way more interested in what we have learned than what someone thinks. Thanks tho.
@ I don't think you can make a true dichotomy between the two. When you read a textbook you are reading a second hand source of thoughts from one who compiled them for reference. When you read source material, you are reading the thoughts of the thinkers directly. For instance, "Ideas and Opinions" by Einstein is a good example of a first hand source. What you are inevitably doing when you read is attempting to exegete someone's written thoughts.
@wesleycolemanmusic I disagree, reading a college level textbook in geology is all sourced to scientific literature, articles in journals. 100% of the models of reality are current scientific models of utility. These aren't people's thoughts, they are established knowledge. I wouldn't say that about 3-12th grade textbooks.
I appreciate you, but you need to define your terms and be precise! You cannot say evolution is a religion, it's just factually incoherent. This is coming from a YEC. Animation and emotion are not means by which we decide if something is religious. If our fundamental axioms/presuppositional beliefs are challenged, then of course you can get emotional. That does not mean you're religious. Also, calling atheists religious gives them too much credit, frankly. Religion shouldn't be slandered like that lol.
So you call making a human out of clay scientifically sound? As a mechanical Engineer this is not your field of expertise so how about going to actual biologists who are qualified in the field?
What a pile of rubbish… If atheism and science is religion or faith then you should be happy to accept it and stop your childish nonsense right then and there but you go on and on baselessly claiming rubbish
32:34 If I spill milk time allows it to spoil but the mechanism is the bacteria in it which makes it go bad. Saying over time macroevolution will happen but time isn't a actual mechanism for justification it just allows it to happen. Does this make sense or relate idk
Sigh…. The Bible says you must have faith to believe. So again evolution is not faith based religion is. The shear dumb required to make this argument is outstanding.
You seem to have the same video twice.
Do you really think that evolution is just an opinion that's has never been tested and confirmed? If you can have micro evolution over a small period of time, then why can't you add those up to make macro evolution. How did God create life? How did he move atoms in place to make living things?
Indeed, evolution is a demonstrable (observed) fact; evolutionary theory has been confirmed to be correct many hundreds of thousands of times. Evolution cannot be "religious" as it is a natural phenomena just like gravity. I assume the video creator means evolutionary theory and not evolution: if so, he is of course also wrong. Meanwhile, Creationism is demonstrably wrong and has never passed even one test.
@@Desertphile Evolution shouldn't be called a theory, a hypothesis at best, its never been observed and is propped up by very weak evidence, founded on presumption, assumption, circular reasoning, lies, fraudulent evidence, and an absurd wilful ignorance that the source of complexity and information is always a mind. Considering the fact DNA is the most complex purposefully arranged information ever found, the necessary mind would need to be a supernatural one. How does a mutational destructive process grind out ever increasing complexity by corrupting the inherited information that had less mutations prior to passing them on? All species are devolving, including our own, why do you think cancers, allergies, defective organs, etc, are constantly rising? We are not going to evolve, we are going to become extinct. The number of beneficial mutations (rarer than rocking horse poop) required for the absurd notion of monkey to man would need 180 billion years but the official explanation for this never happened event is 4 million years. Even if evolution is granted this impossibility, how did the constant corruption of DNA, that we know is occurring in every successive generation today, manage to pretend it was not a problem and plodded on without a care anyway? At least evolutionists have worked out the simple matter that if they believe they have evolved from a monkey they get a research grant and if they don't they won't be hired or even fired. That's a kind of evolution I suppose.
@@Desertphile Macro evolution has never been observed, it is inferred using the deceptively named 'micro evolution', which is adaptation.
Gravity is often used by atheists in support of evolution without actually realising its a law, where did that law originate, and no one actually knows what gravity is.
@@spamm0145 ; "Macro evolution" has been observed a many of millions of times every year. You might want to remove your occult superstitions, then look again.
@@spamm0145 ; Everyone who wants to know what gravity is need merely read G.R.
This is embarrassing... The need to equivocate science with faith in order to discredit it just shows u have nothing.
Evolution does not disprove religion and is not needed to disprove religion. Religious scripture and the facts of the known world regardless of atheism or evolution disprove religion.
Can you see the difference?
No one is this ignorant in real life: you must be faking it.
I think he is sincere - we should acknowledge this...and try to understand
@@petertheore668 ; Alas, anyone who believes an observed natural phenomenon is "religious" deserves compassion and sympathy.
@ agree 100% and the man is intelligent too…
@@Desertphile Provide a citation for any person in the history of the world observing a species producing another species. Macro evolution has never been observed, it is inferred because organisms adapt and the deceptive term 'micro evolution' is used.
A birds beak adapts over time to allow the bird access to different food sources, therefore a monkey can become a man. This is the nonsense you have fallen for.
Mutilations corrupt the specified information necessary for the organisms systems, it results in fitness issues and will not lead to ever increasing complexity, it leads to extinction.
What is observed concerning mutations in humans? Oh yeah, more cancers, allergies, defective organs, and general health problems.
This is the exact opposite of evolution but it aligns with the fall of man.
All atheists are religious, their deity is 'no-thing', they believe 'no-thing' created all matter and energy and one day life came into being from non life without the need for a creator, they spend their lives arguing that God does not exist because their deity 'no-thing' is more powerful, 'no-thing' is so amazing it can create life and bring forth information from unguided inanimate matter, then go on a billions of years journey grinding out ever increasing levels of complexity via an unguided no end goal mechanism that corrupts information but produces higher levels of specified information accidently on purpose. Their deity 'no-thing' has mastered all the disciplines required for life, mathematics, chemistry, physics, engineering, biochemistry, light, electricity, magnetism, and even though their deity 'no-thing' has no mind, it miraculously brought into existence 'abstract concepts'!
So you see, atheists have more faith than any person who believes in a creator because their deity 'no-thing' is as powerful as God
He's black
Nonsence start to finish..
He's black. His IQ is probably 85
Wow, the most supported model and the best explanation for the diversity of life is a religion? Is Atomic theory a religion? Maybe i belong to the church of Gravity, too! That's also a theory that I believe.
Sorry to nerd out, but you should read "Einstein's Unfinished Revolution" by Lee Smolin. I wouldn't go so far as to say quantum mechanics is religious, but it's definitely been highly influenced by a specific anti-realist philosophy.
@wesleycolemanmusic I'm in the middle of EARTH Hendrix-Thimpson and next is a collegiate primate anthropology textbook, not sure which one, yet. I'm way more interested in what we have learned than what someone thinks. Thanks tho.
@ I don't think you can make a true dichotomy between the two. When you read a textbook you are reading a second hand source of thoughts from one who compiled them for reference. When you read source material, you are reading the thoughts of the thinkers directly. For instance, "Ideas and Opinions" by Einstein is a good example of a first hand source. What you are inevitably doing when you read is attempting to exegete someone's written thoughts.
@wesleycolemanmusic I disagree, reading a college level textbook in geology is all sourced to scientific literature, articles in journals. 100% of the models of reality are current scientific models of utility. These aren't people's thoughts, they are established knowledge. I wouldn't say that about 3-12th grade textbooks.
@@claytonhenrickson9326 When you say "thoughts" what do you mean?
Evolution does not contradict Christianity. You can believe in God and not have to deny the reality we observe.
Religion is nothing more than cult thinking.
You need to break free.
So, anything I believe is religious? 2+2=4 is a religious world view? No.
I appreciate you, but you need to define your terms and be precise! You cannot say evolution is a religion, it's just factually incoherent. This is coming from a YEC. Animation and emotion are not means by which we decide if something is religious. If our fundamental axioms/presuppositional beliefs are challenged, then of course you can get emotional. That does not mean you're religious. Also, calling atheists religious gives them too much credit, frankly. Religion shouldn't be slandered like that lol.
I don't accept evolution. But "gawd did it" has even less evidence.
So you call making a human out of clay scientifically sound? As a mechanical Engineer this is not your field of expertise so how about going to actual biologists who are qualified in the field?
What a pile of rubbish… If atheism and science is religion or faith then you should be happy to accept it and stop your childish nonsense right then and there but you go on and on baselessly claiming rubbish
You still have time to delete this lolol STAY IN SCHOOL KIDS