Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children | Big Think
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2012
- Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children
Watch the newest video from Big Think: bigth.ink/NewVideo
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OVERVIEW:
The school boards around the U.S. who’ve decided to teach children creationism, intelligent design, or whatever you choose to call it, are poking a stick in the eye of anyone who hopes to expand our understanding of the world around us. According to Bill Nye, evolution is such a fundamental scientific truth that…well, watch.
If you dismiss evolution, Nye says, how can you get any of the followup questions right? The massive number of generations required for evolutionary changes make obvious the kind of time involved, lengthening the age of the earth from religion’s few thousand years to science’s billions of them. And that expanded view, argues Nye, makes so many other things make sense: If we’ve only been around a little while, for example, what’s the deal with those ancient dinosaur bones and fossils? A belief in deep time is so critical to our understanding of life, the earth, its processes, and the stars above us, that to deny it is to force oneself into settling for ever-more-implausible explanations of what we see around us.
What’s got Nye even more chagrined is that it’s one thing to turn your own back on science, but when you pass that outlook on to your children, what’s at risk is nothing less than the creation of a generation whose basic premise-creationism-leads to and answers that just get wronger and wronger. Brilliant young minds consigned to scientific failure from the start. We’d hope for better from educators and parents. Just imagine the things these fresh, inquisitive minds could discover someday.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NYE:
Bill Nye, scientist, engineer, comedian, author, and inventor, is a man with a mission: to help foster a scientifically literate society, to help people everywhere understand and appreciate the science that makes our world work. Making science entertaining and accessible is something Bill has been doing most of his life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
BILL NYE: Denial of evolution is unique to the United States. I mean, we are the world's most advanced technological-so, I mean, you could say Japan, but generally the United States is where most of the innovation still happens. People still move to the United States, and that's largely because of the intellectual capital we have, the general understanding of science.
When you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in that, it holds everybody back, really. Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, and all of biology. It's very much analogous to trying to do geology without believing in tectonic plates. You're just not going to get the right answer, your whole world is just going to be a mystery instead of an exciting place.
As my old professor Carl Sagan said, "When you're in love, you want to tell the world." So once in a while I get people that claim they don't believe in evolution. And my response generally is: Why not? Really, why not? Your world just becomes fantastically complicated when you don't believe in evolution. I mean, here are these ancient dinosaur bones, or fossils, here is radioactivity, here are distant stars that are just like our star but that are at a different point in their life cycle.
The idea of deep time, of billions of years, explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your worldview just becomes crazy, it's just untenable, inconsistent. And I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we have observed in the universe, that's fine. But don't make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems. It's just a really hard thing, it's really a hard thing. In another couple centuries, that world view, I'm sure, just won't exist, I mean, there's no evidence for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABOUT BIG THINK:
Smarter Faster™
Big Think is the leading source of expert-driven, actionable, educational content -- with thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, we help you get smarter, faster. Subscribe to learn from top minds like these daily. Get actionable lessons from the world’s greatest thinkers & doers. Our experts are either disrupting or leading their respective fields. We aim to help you explore the big ideas and core skills that define knowledge in the 21st century, so you can apply them to the questions and challenges in your own life. - Věda a technologie
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
Want to get Smarter, Faster™?
Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/SmarterFaster
@RESISTANCE IS FUTILE You're an unattractive old biddy, Maria Futile.
@RESISTANCE IS FUTILE Prove what old lady? Resistance is Futile isn't even your real name.
@RESISTANCE IS FUTILE Prove what old woman? Resistance is Futile isn't even your real name.
@RESISTANCE IS FUTILE *"Good. So you admit that Jeb Stuart isn't your real name"*
A) Where did I admit that in this thread loony woman?
B) I was named after him, but like him, Jeb Stuart is not my name, as I have told you previously.
C) What the actual fk does this have to do the video, weird old lady? I thought you wanted to be the police woman in charge of relevance?
LOL.
@RESISTANCE IS FUTILE Hey look, REASONING IS FUTILE has posted twice in less than 8 years that don't contain an insult.
Make an observation.
Ask a question.
Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.
Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
Test the prediction.
Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.
Apparently I’m supposed to resort to a 3000-year-old holy text that was written by ancient ignorant immoral men instead 😂😂😂😂
Do you know what the three constituent parts of a scientific experiment is? I bet you don't. You left that out.
Bruh that’s the scientific method not the scientific experiment 😂
@paulmcgarrity4580 HERETIC!
99% of the comments: 3 dudes
1% everything else
THEY'RE ALL I SEE LOL
Yea , yea wtf is wrong with the comment section !
I just watched the responses to this video, 9k views from good sir ken ham
That jebstuart guy,I saw him everywhere in evolution videos
how is this even possible lmao
And 10 years later the spread of ignorance is even worse
You are the chief offender.
God is real
God is real that’s all I know I think evolution is real too and I think the earth is a lot older than 6000 years old
@@justmythoughts2786 which god is real?
@justmythoughts2786 why do you know that, might i ask?
“Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof.” - Ashley Montagu
👏
It is no accident that every creationist posting comments to this video is a science illiterate.
Wherever you find someone who rejects evolution, there too you find someone with a cartoon understanding of science and a grasp of evolution that amounts to barbershop gossip.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect ensures that those who are the most profoundly ignorant of science continue to reject evolution based on their cartoon understanding of science in general and evolution in particular.
@@amyrenee1361 there you go proving your profound scientific illiteracy.
I read that he got booed some place in Texas for saying that the moon reflects the light of the sun.... seriously. "Houston we have a problem!"
Yes, what you read was true. Bill is no genius, not as portrays himself to be anyway. He is a fake and gives out more BS information then a politician on the eve of election. Anyone who buys Bills BS is either an imbecile or they simply cannot make rational choices for themselves.
Ok... so you think the moon is BS?
Ronin So explain me this? How would a loving God create us with a predisposition to not believe in him, and then eternally torture us for hurting his feelings? If he was all-knowing, he would have seen it coming wouldn't he?
EddieHedrick Easy Its called FREE WILL my friend. God gave it to ALL of us. We are born with the ability to make choices ourselves. We are given the opp to believe in and follow God. If you choose not to, then you are turning your back on him. There is no predisposition to Not believe him. There is no proof of this. This is inside the soul, something we do not know. But we do know that once presented the TRUTH, you have one of two ways to go, its a choice. The key world their being CHOICE (IE free will), is yours. And correct, he IS all knowing. Again, that does not mean he is not going to let us make our own choices. God does not force us to be fuck ups. He does not cause hatred, strife, hunger etc. He created man without sin. Man F'd this up. Enter Jesus (a actual historical figure that cannot be argued seeing how there were hundreds, or it may be thousands of eye witnesses). Scholars with any sense do not deny Jesus existed. He is a historical figure like any other. The only argument is if he is the true son of God, which to these eyes, it has surely been proven. I hope this helps.
Ronin So are you a creationist or something? As in, God made Adam and Eve from dirt? There are plenty of Christians who make more rational compromises between science and religion. Like guided evolution. BTW is it man's fault for draughts, plagues, or pests eating crops?
I’ll be honest, I prefer Thor to the other fictional gods. At least he has a cool hammer.
🤣
@@uneducatedchristain2963 Hey mate, come check out the video called “Dawkins: One Fact to Refute Creationism”. Lots of crazy fundies there! 😅🤪🤣
@@toostupidforsciencetryreli2987 Is this your entire life dude?
In Stargate SG1 he's an alien
Most polytheisms have awesome stories and characters. Hindu mythology, Norse mythology, Greek mythology, Egyptian mythology. Norse and Greek are my favourites
Questions creatards never answer:
Why do endogenous retroviruses like syncityn exist? Why do antibiotics need to kept up do date with micro organisms if they don’t evolve? How do you explain ring species? Where can I find a single example of a non-transitional fossil? Why does DNA show that some species are more distantly related than others? Why have there been three new variations of American Goatsbeard flowers if macro evolution doesn’t happen? Why do you pretend that you’re qualified to separate micro evolution (speciation) from macro evolution when you can’t even tell the difference between evolution, abiogenesis and atheism? Why do we have vomeronasal organs despite not using pheromones? Where did we get chromosome 2 and cytochrome B from? Why do we have pseudogenes, appendixes, wisdom teeth, Plica semilunaris and Nictitating membranes? Why are there stars farther than millions of lightyears away if the earth is only 6,000 years old? Why do tree rings say the earth is older than 6,000 years old? Why were stone tools older than 790,000 years found in Gesher Benot Ya'akov? Why were stone tools older than 400,000 years found at the Revadim Quarry in Israel? When has a creatard used electron spin resonance and thermoluminescence to prove the earth is only 6,000 years old? What is the flat earth method for predicting an eclipse? Where can I find a map of your space frisbee that makes geometrically accurate flight patterns? What is the flerfer explanation for the phases of the moon? Why is there continental distribution when Noah’s Arc says different? What proof do you have that a bunch of dust can turn into a man? What proof do you have that a bone can turn into a woman? Why should I believe in your god instead of Zeus, Thor, Krishna or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Long before Jesus supposedly lived, a general and philosophers promoted the 'golden rule' - good advice from a biological standpoint that requires no god(s) :
"Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him." → Pittacus, (military general) Greece (640-568 BCE), Fragment 10.3.
"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." → Thales, Asia Minor (624-546 BCE).
"Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." → Confucius, China (5th century BCE), Analects XV.24, also at V.12 and VI.30.
No need for superstitious belief in supernatural deities such as Jesus in order to have a decent moral code.
Liam: Like all humans, I am a social animal, meaning is what each of us makes of it. Do you really believe you would revert into a wild aggressive animal without your faith? Sounds like brainwashing, sorry. Perhaps repressing homicidal tendencies? (sarcasm) Careful, if that is your meaning, what you'd like to do, society has laws, I will prosecute if you kill me in my sleep. You might have an innate moral compass that'll make you feel bad about it too. I say "might" because religion can skew it.
You fail to see the difference in what Jesus said. He said DO unto your neighbor as you would have him DO unto you.
It is a call for action, not just the avoidance of doing wrong.
Find your neighbor stuck in a ditch and with the first one you can pass on by without getting involved. What Jesus said requires you to help him out of the ditch.
With the first you did not cause him to go into the ditch so you are not required to help him out. With what Jesus said, you would want him to help you if the situation were reversed and you were in the ditch, so you must help him.
Bungalo Bill "do not to your neighbour what you would take Ill from him" leaving him there is what you would talk ill from your neighbour if he would let you there so no need for Jesus there.
Wrong. Your noninvolvement is not doing ill to your neighbor. It is neutral. You were not involved with him going into the ditch, so you do not have to be involved with getting him out.
Creationism (as evolution denialism) is the result of:
1. The assumption that creationism is correct and anything that disagrees with it can't possibly be right,
2. The observation that evolution is inconsistent with their personal interpretation of their holy book (and all other interpretations are wrong and potentially dishonest),
3. The assumption that they have wisdom (and knowledge) from The Book on any subject, theological, scientific, or otherwise, in any topic on which the Holy Reference Manual makes any statement they deem to be literal,
4. The conclusion that the vast, VAST majority of scientists are either lying or incompetent or both.
5. They further conclude that they themselves are humble and that all those pointy-head scientists are arrogant.
Well technically creationists don't admit they're right 100% of the time - they only know a few basic things. Who said anything someone says in the name of the Bible is true? Creationists still discuss particular topics and come up with tentative theories that perhaps might not be true. Secondly, is there something wrong with a lot of scientists being wrong? Consider all the wrong theories scientists have come up with in the past and all the "evidence" they collected to support it. And all those scientists aren't arrogant, they're just misinformed, so it's not like creationists are trying to make themselves look right. Go believe what you want to. It's just a matter of what you want to put your faith in. (Your first 2 points are correct though.)
Samuel Lam
Creationists start out assuming that the Bible cannot be wrong. If it seems wrong, then we misunderstand it or the data are wrong, etc.
I refer to you the ICR loyalty oath, refer to as their "tenets of faith:"
www.icr.org/tenets/
That scientists are often mistaken doesn't justify rejecting whatever science you don't like simply because it disagrees with your prejudices. (The fact that you call it "faith" does not mean it's not a "prejudice.")
Scientists are "misinformed" because their conclusions don't agree with the conclusion you started with before you knew anything about the science? That is, the science is wrong, because it disagrees with the Bible. THAT is the problem, not just for the lay creationists such as yourself, but for the creationist "scientists." Regardless of what degrees anyone has, real science doesn't start out with conclusions and then work backwards to decide what science is acceptable.
Fallible Fiend I was talking about assuming that your personal interpretation of the Bible is always right is wrong, we don't have a "right" and "perfect" interpretation of the Bible. Some might believe they do, but who are you to claim that you're right 100% in interpreting some text? Unless you're the guy who thought up the text, and that happens to be God.
Samuel Lam
There are LOTS of "evolutionists" who consider themselves Christians. I don't think my interpretation of the Bible is 100% correct (in fact, I've read it and I don't even understand some of it and I'm sure I misunderstand some of it) and I don't think those particular Christians who accept evolution (for the most part) believe their interpretation is 100% correct.
But for the guys who are convinced that evolution, i.e. the actual science, is wrong because it disagrees with their interpretation the Bible - well, they seem pretty sure of that interpretation. The Christians who have no trouble with evolution, well, I don't follow their reasoning, but I get that they accept that some things may not be as they appear in the scriptures. But those other guys (the creationists), they don't seem any less than 100% sure that their interpretation of the literal creation account in the Bible is correct.
@@TheFallibleFiend the Bible cannot be wrong. yes!
He's trying so hard not to call them stupid lol what a legend
Why don't you say that to a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Astrion Zoroastrian or a rabbi. You incredible stinking hypocrite. You make me sick.
😂 for real
Does evolution teach me to be prideful?
Evolution indeed is prideful to understand. From Biology, History, Archaeology, to the physics of atom's. It's the most complete data based knowledge that is complete and objective.
Science is all about Thinking, especially critical, rational, and scientific thinking of methods
I have a new coworker from South Carolina, here in California. She told me her parents were creationists. I didn't realize how extreme the beliefs were. I had a client and we were talking about space, she started to laugh. I feel bad for her because I don't think she has done her own research or gone beyond her parents understanding.
Yes. A very sad state of affairs indeed.
We had a religious person here who denied space not too long ago. All those big rocket launches, satellites, the space station, the space telescopes, the moon landings - all lies! It is rather mind-boggling.
Its very sad and AGGRAVATING! My child got DUPED into believing creationism at about 14-15yo... it drove a wedge between us and was the result of many an argument as I TRIED to unbrainwash my own child from another familys beliefs.. that were so delusional and foreign to me, (a product of a cross between extreme Christianity and Evangelicism type beliefs, that I broke away from at about the same age..15-16yo) I was flabbergasted. That ANYONE, could not only believe it without question or doing their own research, (as I did as a teenager when realizing what I was taught my whole life up to that point, didnt make complete sense!) But happily argued actual nonsense that made 0 sense and buried their heads in the sand to sanity, logic, and reason.
My child stopped believing a word I said and exhibited such vanity, arrogance, and straight disrespect towards me due to these beliefs.. like I was a savage from a foreign land that had no true understanding or knowledgeable about life or the world, and what I imagine the Europeans treated Native Americans like during the Settling years.. very degrading. I'd never been so disappointed in my child before, in her life! Up to that point, I'd been so proud of how smart, responsible, and educated she was. She was, and still is, a very smart, giving, and loving person. And THANKFULLY disabused of this FALSE notion of Creationism and that this world is only roughly 6,000 y.o.! WoW!
Her dad and I honestly thought it was getting time to keep her away from that family and the church they went to, AND specifically take her to a psychiatrist or psychologist that specialized in unbrainwashing people that ended up in cults! That is how worried we were!!
@@emeraldrayv3n Happy for you that your daughter was finally disabused of Young Earth Creationism. My nephew was the same, I vaguely wondered why his mom never talked about her religion. Turns out many Southern Baptists are indoctrinated to shun family members who are not fundamentalists. 20-30 years, I was shunned, those extreme beliefs became a wedge.
I was visiting from abroad one day, nephew asked me if I believed we came from monkeys, it blew me away. Deep down I felt it was a form of child abuse. I decided to learn the ropes and do my best to change his mind over the following years. His parents thought he'd make a good gym teacher, now he is climbing the ladder at Amazon as a machine learning expert. Godless for better or worse. I'm not really against faith, just against fundamentalism.
@@emeraldrayv3n Won't you be surprised one day how terribly wrong you were.
“If we offer too much silent assent about mysticism and superstition - even when it seems to be doing a little good - we abet a general climate in which scepticism is considered impolite, science tiresome, and rigorous thinking somehow stuffy and inappropriate. Figuring out a prudent balance takes wisdom.”
― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (1995)
Get a life, fellow homo sapiens, stop whining on my posts.
@@ergonomover Get Jesus b4 you wish you could whine in hell
Eternal punishment is a sick idea, my condolences for your illness and loss of humanity. I love my fellow humans, I never talk about shooting them in the eye, maybe you're going to hell and not me.
@@ergonomover I thought you vanished off of youtube. What I said I said it a long time ago, what's his name got me ticked off and we all make mistakes. Not that I would repeat them
Poor Carl. …Carl Sagan was bugged by the many atheists who thought they thought like him.
Carl Sagan changed his mind, hon. He was not, after all, an “atheist”, as he put it…ultimately, he was humbly merely an “agnostic”, saying, “I won’t know what’s on the other side till I get there, will I.” That is admitting to possibility, and that says everything.
Admitting to possibility is scientific. That’s what labwork is all about.
Atheists aren’t atheists because they possess evidence that certain phenomenon “don’t” exist…they have no way of proving what doesn’t exist because they haven’t traveled the entire universe and gained all knowledge in it in order to be able to prove what is “not” so.
No one bearing proof that God exists owes any doubter their own evidence on a silver platter, just as they will not exercise for them, eat for them, lose weight for them, study for them or sleep for them.
You cannot give others documentation for this evidence because it is privileged territory.
You follow the protocol yourself or you don’t get it.
If you attempt to alter the protocol to your own comforts, you nullify it.
Ask me how I know this..but don’t expect an answer.
It’s not this warned-about state of hell that’s most painful just because it’s hell. Hell is a state of loss. A state where anticipation has ceased. Hell is lowest of all moods. Some suffer that sorrow right here, right now, so underestimating it’s consequential suffering is not reasonable. It’s location would not be a subject one would fret about, their feelings would be a far greater, overwhelming sense of living burial. I can describe a degree of this pain because I suffered 26+ years from a chemical disruption due to malpractice.
If we’re going to address self-imposed pain, though,
what’s most painful is hindsight,
because it’s late.
I remember when I was really little, maybe about 10, I was talking to my mom about dinosaurs and stuff... Do you know what she told me? "God put the bones there for people to dig up". Even though I was young and this came from my own mother, I just couldn't believe it.
^wow!
the bible does mention dinosaurs in it the word dinosaur however is a fairly recent term Job 40:15-24 Job 41:1-34 the first verse describes a Brachiosaurus and the second a Elasmosaurus type of large water-dwelling dinosaur and dont give me the whole bible is a parable thing its pretty clear when it's a parable and when its to be taken literally
john doe I think you're taking too much coke.
Alexander Est considering the word is confirmed to be over 4000 years old i dont see what your talking about prove to me otherwise that i am wrong
john doe Really, bro?
I will say one positive thing in favour of flerfers...
...they do make creationists *appear* relatively smart.
Don't forget, appearances can be deceptive. 🤭
The important term here is relative. Snails are super slow, but relative to one celled organisms they are speedsters. The bar for flerfers is so low that hell considers it a tripping hazard
Clueless creatard cliche number 56: Micro evolution is proven but macro evolution isn’t.
Reality: First of all, this is cherry-picking. It’s like saying that “2+2=4 but 2 million + 2 million doesn’t = 4 million.” Secondly, macro evolution is speciation, which has been observable in American Goatsbeard flowers since the 1950s.
Oh I wouldnt worry... I was raised by parents that had no idea but sent me off to church, and I learned all of the creation stories and believed it. Then I became an adult, and a free thinker, and now I know better.
Minds Eye Visual Guitar Methods that comment was 5 years ago.. but that’s the temptation of the devil to get farther away from god
Tommy Le No
@@tommyle3754 the only devil in this world is you ignorance
@@tommyle3754fairy tales come to an end eventually
@@Legend-mg2ry as dose your life, what do you belive is at the end of life?
The fun thing about science is that it is true wether or not you believe in it.
+Tracomaster *"The fun thing about science is that it is true wether or not you believe in it."*
In science, what was true yesterday isn't always true today, and what is true today won't always be true tomorrow.
*"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." - Richard Feynman*
Alan Clarke It sure is better evidence than a book from a couple of hundred years ago or so with stories from longer ago.
Alan Clarke and on top of that, it is true...the interpretation changes as new evidence comes in.
***** someone with a brain
+Alan Clarke can't we say the same thing about the bible? I mean no one knows who wrote it after all. When it comes down to it who is to say the person was an expert for our fallen christ? (yes our fallen i'm catholic and i do believe and have faith in my religion just i prefer evidence rather than just being told to believe)
JAMES 1:22 “Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says."
MARK 16:18 ..... "and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them"
*PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH IS ALL THAT WE'RE ASKING.*
Every body is reading our previous comments
@@Sca408 IMAGINE BEING SO STUPID THAT YOU THINK THE WORD EVERYBODY IS SPELLED "EVERY BODY"
THAT'S CHRISTIAN DUMB RIGHT THERE.
The Bible says that sorcerers created living snakes from unliving rods. So Yahweh is not the only entity capable of creating life from non-life. I wonder if those sorcerer-created snakes could talk as well?
Why Ken Ham is wrong. This is a long post. The first three points are the most important.
1) The Earth has a protracted history recorded in crustal rocks. The sheer number of events that have to be accommodated in 6,000 years is absurd. Implied rates for many phenomena are 4 to 11 orders of magnitude more rapid than those of today. Yet nothing in the rocks displays even a hint of such a change. It isn’t necessary to know or assume anything about evolution or radioactive decay constants to reach this conclusion. If the rocks were created that way, we must assume that God set out to deceive us.
2) Ham has no explanation for a highly resolved fossil record in which every fossil appears and disappears in exactly the same order at a global scale. That record is incompatible with the Genesis account in which plants were created before fish and birds, and birds before land animals. It is not the case that every ‘kind’ of organism existed before the asserted global flood. ‘Pre-flood’ strata (Precambrian) are generally unfossiliferous. ‘Flood’ deposits (primarily Paleozoic to Mesozoic) are dominated by marine organisms. There are virtually no representatives of the ‘kinds’ of terrestrial plants and animals that were supposedly wiped out by the ‘flood’, and the preservation of which Noah’s ark was intended to guarantee. No human bone has ever been found in ‘flood’ strata. Indeed, there are no human bones in most of the ‘post-flood’ strata either. Ham has no explanation for observed biogeographic variations, many of them incompatible with the contemporary distribution of continents and oceans.
3) There is no evidence for a global flood. We don’t need to assume that sedimentary processes were the same in the past as they are today. It is a matter of observation. Fine details of modern and ancient deposits are the same. Asserted ‘flood’ deposits have numerous attributes incompatible with marine sedimentation (from wind ripples to river channels, soils and desiccation features, to glacial pavements and landforms, to the tracks of terrestrial vertebrates and plants in growth position). There is no clear-cut global boundary between ‘pre-flood’ and ‘flood’ deposits. The geometry of layered sedimentary rocks and their highly varied character within many successions is incompatible with continuous sedimentation. The style of tectonic folding and faulting in many ‘flood’ deposits, and the relationship between those structures and younger ‘flood’ deposits indicate that over wide areas it would have been necessary to convert unconsolidated sediment into hard rock in a span of no more than a few months. No explanation is provided in the flood hypothesis for very considerable variations in stratigraphic thickness or for the source of the sediment once the continents had been inundated. No plausible source exists for the water (two to three times the present volume of the oceans). No plausible explanation exists for where the water went after the flood.
4) No plausible explanation is provided for how or why the rheology of the Earth could have changed so radically during a year-long flood to permit catastrophic plate tectonics (rates of displacement 8-9 orders of magnitude more rapid than today). No explanation is provided for why that event began during the waning stages of the ‘flood’ and continued well into the ‘post-flood’ interval (with rates of displacement at least 3-4 orders of magnitude more rapid than today). Nothing in human history over the past 4,500 years relates to the massive earthquakes and tsunamis that ought regularly to have disrupted civilization, but didn’t.
5) No explanation is provided for how, when or why an Earth operating under catastrophic rules transitioned into an Earth characterized by phenomena at contemporary rates: everything from reversals of the Earth’s magnetic field, to rates of radioactive decay, to the pace of evolution within asserted ‘kinds’, to processes of sedimentation and crustal deformation, to the development of continental ice sheets, to regular seasonal cycles (versus the many summer-winter alternations implied by the ice core and tree ring record on an annual basis).
6) No plausible explanation is offered for how it is possible to observe most of the stars in our own galaxy, let alone the 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe, so great are the distances involved. There is no basis for supposing that the speed of light changed.
In short, Ham’s position is based upon ad hoc assertion unsupported by even a shred of evidence, with clear evidence contradicting many of his claims. This is explicitly not a matter of different assumptions or worldviews, or different explanations for the same data. Nor is there any valid distinction between observational science and historical science. Our presence or absence is irrelevant. Ham’s assumptions are themselves contradicted by data, and he ignores much of the evidence that requires explanation. Young Earth Creationism is incompatible with science on the facts and with respect to philosophy. As Ham admitted when pressed, there is no circumstance in which he would change his mind. His associates at AiG declined a recent offer from me to examine and discuss the critical evidence in the field.
Three explanations exist for scientists who go along with YEC: a) They partition their lives. Evidence matters above all else, except when it doesn’t. b) Their field of research is distant from disciplines relevant to the Earth or human origins. Most of the individuals mentioned by Ham in his presentation fall into one or both of these categories. c) They completed PhDs without ever grasping the essence of science. Ham’s colleagues at AiG are examples.
My heart skipped a beat when he said ".. in another couple of centuries I'm sure that world view (of creationism) just won't exist". Why, you ask? Because I discovered last week that the number of self-identified Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc have been declining year over year for the past 12-15 years, and that the only group whose numbers were rising are Agnostics/Atheists/Non-believers. _Christians and Muslims were still 1st and 2nd respectively in world populace, but get this folks! Self-identified Agnostics/Atheists/Non-believers had risen dramatically from being ~10th to being 3rd! It therefore appears that Atheists/Agnostics/Non-believers will soon outnumber Muslims and Christians - WooHooo!!!~ The end of god-fearing people, and wars in the name of god(s), and fortunes in church coffers while people starved, and the Clergy abusing their followers and the faithful, etc. OH HAPPY DAY!~
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! *_You're JUST DECEIVING YOURSELF, aren't you?_* Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Jim: I agree that the trend is favorable, if painfully slow. Organized religions have proven very effective at indoctrination. So generation after generation, the pattern repeats. Also, while the internet has vastly increased global interconnectivity, the religion industry has harnessed the same tool to spread ignorance and misinformation. Creation Moment is an example on this comment page. Based on the experience in Europe, I expect a tipping point to be reached in the United States at which a small change in the acceptance of beliefs leads to a large change in the sway of religion over our daily lives. The way forward is also through education and persuasion, and not by banning Muslims or any other group.
Sorry to disappoint you all, but those are the numbers reported by numerous reliable sources. Apparently people who were previously afraid to identify as Atheist/Agnostic/Non-believers are coming out of the proverbial closet. Sorry you didn't get the memo....
As John Lennon wrote/sang, "Imagine no religion, It's easy if you try. No Hell below us, above us only sky!" So why on earth do you sound so surprised? This isn't something new. Oh, wait, you weren't paying attention, were you?? ROFL!!~
+Fuzoo, The lamest response of all; When you can't defeat the truth, try to defeat it's messenger. You're a kid, right?
I hate that we have to be careful and tip toe about this subject because it destroys the fantasies of believers in creationism." I've decided to be uninformed so don't hurt my delusions with your knowledge. Feed into it please. Thanks." I have a close family member who is a flat earther and I'm so ashamed 😑
Stay strong.
That family member is probably ashamed of you, too...
@@WesD92422 right....... 😂
@@FlandiddlyandersFRS What a surprise that you're still trolling 😴
@@WesD92422 Nice projection. 🤭
'Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful'. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE
There are exceptions to all of Seneca's categories. Einstein was dubious of Judiasm (a religion), BUT was enthralled by Jesus:
*ALBERT EINSTEIN Interviewed by George Sylvester Viereck, 1929*
*GV* _To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?_
*AE* _As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene._
*GV* _Have you read Emil Ludwig's book on Jesus?_
*AE* _Emil Ludwig's Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot._
*GV* _You accept the historical existence of Jesus?_
*AE* _Unquestionably. No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. How different, for instance, is the impression which we receive from an account of legendary heroes of antiquity like Theseus. Theseus and other heroes of his type lack the authentic vitality of Jesus._
*GV* _Ludwig Lewisohn, in one of his recent books, claims that many of the sayings of Jesus paraphrase the sayings of other prophets._
*AE* _No man can deny the fact that Jesus existed, nor that his sayings are beautiful. Even if some them have been said before, no one has expressed them so divinely as he._
35 years after that interview, Einstein wrote in a letter: "The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this. [...] For me the Jewish religion *like all other religions* is an incarnation of the most childish superstition." He might have found the sayings were beautiful and the legends venerable, et alors?@@alanclarke7
And I'll have to take his word for it, because? I do not give a fuck who that man was, religion has and always been a fact, you can deny the existence of God all you want, but once death creeps in , you will find yourself clinging to idea of the existence of a higher being that can deliver you from the existential terror.
@@khalil8043So it is based on emotions?
so you just confirmed that religion is based on feelings. Lmaoo facts dont care about your feelings bozo@@khalil8043
Debating with a creationist is like playing poker with a blind man, no matter if you have the winning hand, he's just going to assume he won since its what he wants to hear and walk away.
hahah that is the best analogy I have heard for a creationist. I so sorry, but I will have to steal that.
ben owen No prob
@@mynamejeff8741 həłłø
Same with you. Except you choose to believe in the devils lies and dont accept the life of holyness. And that's fine. Keep rejecting God and live your life according to sin. Don't do the loop de loop. Face him.
Cmooooon. Blind people aren’t sore losers! Blind people are much better than freaking nerd creationists!
The only thing creationist based arguments are good for is learning how to easily identify a variety of logical fallacies.
633495 Like your argument from ignorance regarding the Cambrian developments?
Or like Zaki's straw man arguments where he rants about what evolution is without actually addressing what evolution is?
Or perhaps like Tom Adumbs association fallacy, where he tries to link atheism to every dictator in the 20th century?
Or perhaps XME's continuous ad-hominem attacks?
You're right, we NEVER identify fallacies in the arguments you guys give us (Sarcasm)
Wrong
You need help
@@tyrelbrim9728 why?
@@mike_404 why?
Q: What’s an “evolutionist”?
A: A creatard’s attempt at spelling the word “educated”.
Q: Why did the creatard ask a snake to help him with his illness instead of a doctor?
A: Creatards believe in talking snakes but not antibiotic research
Q: Why did the creatard jump off the building?
A: He thought gravity was "just a theory"
Q: Want to hear a joke about flat earthers?
A: They exist. That’s enough of a joke already.
Not true. Creationists accept antibiotic research.
Also, no creationists has denied gravity.
@@KingPingviini Evolution is tested in labs and used for antibiotics on a daily basis.
@@KingPingviini to accept antibiotics is to accept evolution because microbes evolve resistance all the time
@@masterdeetectiv9520 isn’t that micro evolution? Christianity doesn’t fundamentally deny micro-evolution. Macro evolution it does.
@@landonbohinc8146 there is no such as micro and macro evolution, there is just evolution
Creatard: 'Duh, I can't see grass growing therefore it's not growing duuuuuhhhhhh'.
Gods sneakily replace all the plants with fresh slightly bigger ones each night when we're asleep.
Ha HAW!!!! @@PoorCreationists
Every single morning, as I go to work, I get run over by the same bicycle.
It's a vicious cycle.
🤣
WHEEL we hear another one soon?
That makes me thirsty for a stiff drink but I cannot HANDLEBARS.
*Q. What do you get if you cross an atheist with a Jehovah's Witness?*
*A. Someone who knocks on your door for no apparent reason.*
@L Ron Cupboard Give it a brake. :-D
"There has been nearly 3,000 Gods so far but only yours actually exists.
The others are silly made up nonsense. But not yours. Yours is real"
- Ricky Gervais
Thanks, you're right, my apologies, to both you and Ricky.
Cheers
No, I don't mind when somebody shows me I'm wrong and gives me the correct information. That's the way we all learn, but not creationists, they stick with the same bullshit for thousands of years.
Cheers..
H
POQ
The quote isn't really valid, because there is an ENORMOUS difference between the God of Abraham, and the gods of mythology. (aka, entities that live WITHIN our universe)
Found out last week that my mother is creationist, after living over 30 years blissfully unaware of that fact (now I'm grateful she didn't try to push it). After watching this video, I came to the realization that I can actually thank Bill Nye the Science Guy for helping me, in part, become the free thinker that I am today. His show was such a big influence as a kid for me.
I'm sad my mom will probably never be in awe of the echoes of nature and the connections within them that can only be explained through the theory of evolution - to be amazed and yet also understand it. But feeling okay about it right now; at least I can sit here in awe. Thanks, Bill.
Yeah everything came from nothing totally explains it
@@dabbking That has nothing to do with evolution.
@@Lexi2019AURORA I have never seen anything evolve what about you
@@dabbking So because you didn't see something happen before your eyes, it "didn't happen"? Got it.👍🏻
@@Lexi2019AURORA yes I never seen evidence of evolution
What is a person of faith to do when deeply held beliefs are contradicted by empirical evidence?
1) Deny or ignore the evidence.
2) Complain that ‘evolutionists’ never provide the evidence, as if one’s personal ignorance were somehow the responsibility of others.
3) Refuse to consult any and all sources of legitimate factual information, even when references are supplied.
4) Assert that scientific explanations are ‘unproven’, ‘just a theory’, a belief, or dependent upon assumptions; that science by its very nature is biased against supernatural phenomena.
5) Misrepresent both the science and the evidence on which it is based, either deliberately or through a failure to understand. Make liberal use of red herrings, straw men and non sequiturs. Never deviate from one's faith-based stance, no matter how many times factual corrections are received.
6) Co-opt the science, accepting the stuff that can no longer be denied, and asserting that whatever is discovered, it was God’s will that it should be that way. Ken Ham’s distinction between laboratory-based science and ‘historical’ science is a variant of the former. The Roman Catholic acceptance of the historical fact of evolution and rejection of the role of natural selection is an example of the latter.
7) Make lists of ‘scientists’ who go along with creationist thinking, ignoring the clear factual and philosophical incompatibilities, and the fact that in earlier times scientists were immersed in a cultural milieu in which certain religious beliefs were more or less universally accepted.
8) Use quotes out of context to claim scientific support for those same religious views.
9) Claim that all unresolved scientific issues such as the origin of life, the origin of the universe or the Cambrian radiation require divine intervention, ignoring the near total collapse of God of gaps thinking in the teeth of scientific discovery.
10) Assert that complexity itself requires intelligent design, even as the characteristics of that complexity are precisely what would be expected in natural systems dominated by feedbacks, and incompatible with the idea of design.
11) Claim that science is a hoax or a lie, or a conspiracy by god-hating atheists. Never mind that the scientific approach clearly works, and that about one-third of scientists maintain some kind of religious beliefs.
12) Insist that the science must be wrong because it is at odds with a literal reading of scripture. This is primarily the province of Young Earth Creationists like Ken Ham.
13) Argue that science can be safely disregarded because, unlike scripture, scientific theories are forever changing - albeit mostly through increased sophistication rather than outright falsification. And never mind that to be guided by evidence is why science works, and to persist in beliefs contradicted by evidence is why religion doesn’t.
14) If all fails, resort to insults. Belittle the credentials of any person with any actual qualification.
What SHOULD a person of faith do when deeply held beliefs are contradicted by empirical evidence? Take a close look at the evidence. Consider why particular beliefs are held in the first place. And given that beliefs are largely a function of early indoctrination and cultural heritage, consider the possibility that they might not actually be true. The real world is a wonderful place. The acceptance of reality turns out to be remarkably liberating.
Ahhh I agree but being an athiest requires quite a bit of faith aswell. And say the theory of god was as indisputable as evolution. That same fear and denial would take take place. People dont loke being told what to do and being under anyone so the thought of a god is still just as uncomfortable as their not being one.
redking497 "Ahhh I agree but being an athiest [sic] requires quite a bit of faith aswell [sic]." Check point 4. My post deals with science, not with atheism. But no, atheism requires no faith whatever. That is rather the point of atheism.
There is no 'theory' of god. There isn't a shred of evidence for ANY god. Were such evidence to exist, I would be among the first to be interested in it.
With regard to people being 'told what to do': if I had to rank my many objections to religion, the inclination of people of faith to force their beliefs onto others is near the top of that list. Again, however, my post has to do with science - an approach to inquiry aimed at discovering how the natural world works. It has nothing to do with telling people what to do.
@@nicholaschristie-blick3139 if you want to learn about possible evidence for a god there’s lots of stuff to go on. Talk to Catholic theologians about the many miracles they attribute to saints especially modern day ones or padre pio, talk to Muslims about Mohammed’s descriptions of the universe and the cosmos before humans had any way of seeing that far into the sky. It’s interesting stuff atleast.
@@icecold7184 All mythology is interesting. Too bad none of it is true. A miracle, by the way, is any unexpected or seemingly improbable yet favorable outcome. All unfavorable outcomes (prayers that bore no fruit) are swiftly forgotten as god working in mysterious ways. Why does god hate amputees? I know of no case where a leg or arm has grown back.
@@icecold7184word of mouth miracles can hardly be classified as evidence.
Denying evolution... is pretty much exactly like denying that the top of a tree is attached to the rest of the tree. Think about that.
+MOSES PRAY Obviously we haven't, as evolution happens in the course of millions of years and intelligent humans haven't been around for even a million, doesn't just happen over night.
***** Why would land animals evolving wings be part of *_recorded_* history? Might that have happened... I dunno... BEFORE recorded history? Dumbass. Oh, but there is a fossil record filled with dinosaurs that have primitive feather-like features and plenty of ancient birds with more reptile-like features. Oops, guess that's the 'observations' you thought didn't exist.
+MOSES PRAY black people. or white people that go to the sun for long periodes of time they adapt to the climate wile the skin darkens. and bacteria evolves ganing resistances.
+MOSES PRAY What evolutionary paper did you read that says you should observe an animal evolve wings ? When you make up straw-man arguments of things that evolution actually says you will not see , it demonstrates just how weak your position is and just how little reason you have to doubt evolution . After all you had to make up a reason .
Evolution is an observed fact, hard to hide from that except by saying things that evolution says you would not observe haven't been observed and pretend they should have.
***** As convenient as the fact that nobody can prove your religion to me until after I die? Or maybe a little less convenient?
Alan Clarke has over a thousand posts here arguing with “evolutionists” and yet he still thinks evolution means we came from rocks. This man’s devotion to stupidity deserves a reward!
👌👍👏
Did life always exist or did it come into existence from non-life?
@@skyvipers Try looking into abiogenesis.
@@happilysecular2323 and the only (supposed) evidence for that is from rock deposits, which isn't that what you are making fun of Alan Clarke for? Suggesting that life came from non-life through rocks?
@@skyvipers Oh hi there, Alan. Nice sock account. Totally not suspicious at all how a stranger would come to this video, scroll down to a 3 week old comment with only 7 likes just to defend you.
Anyway, as I’ve already pointed out, that’s abiogenesis and not evolution and as YOU just pointed out, it doesn’t involve any rocks coming to life.
*I use to be a creationist...*
...then I developed an interest in nonfiction. 😃
Are you interested in English grammar books?
@@alanclarke7 Are you interested in being intellectually honest?
lol a creationist posted "Biologists have absolutely no idea why molecules are left-handed" Really? In a few clicks, I found this: "Here we show, by computer simulation-with a model based on the RNA world scenario, that the biased-chirality may have been established at polymer level instead, just deriving from a racemic mixture of monomers" The origin of biological homochirality along with the origin of life
Yong Chen 1, Wentao Ma 1
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007592
Oops, back to the drawing board for creationists, time to move goal-posts again, look for a new gap of scientific understanding to hide their god in. This one is -absolutely- slowly but surely closing.
Lost books of the Bible: If Mary gaveth birth to Jesus and Jesus is thine Lamb of God, then Mary actually did have a little Lamb whose fleece was white as snow.
That's the ticket you go girl
There is no record of Jesus' hair colour.
There's no physical description of the mythical book character because it's mythical. Three of the four resurrection stories say that it reanimated into a different looking guy and none of those stories physically describe it either. It's all fairytales and lies.
Hahaha, that was funny!
@@garybell1291 look at the historical evidence surrounding the resurrection and the Bible
I HAVE A MAGIC WIZARD WHO MAKES CHILDHOOD CANCERS BECAUSE HE'S BORED. BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU SHOW LOVE TO CHILDREN..... BY KILLING THEM.
"A godless universe would also only produce life rarely and sparingly, and that’s also what we see: by far most of the universe is lethal to life (being a deadly radiation filled vacuum) and by far most of the matter in the universe is lethal to life (constituting stars and black holes on which no life can ever live)." - Richard Carrier
Watch this video.
czcams.com/video/JQ3hUlU0vR4/video.html
@@MARTINELSA1 Thanks for the video, but creationists attacking a strawman of abiogenesis is nothing new on CZcams.
Ignoring the fact that chemical interactions are not governed by chance alone, our biggest clue that Meyer is misusing probability is that he's deriving his figures from a sample set of 1, for we have no other universes to compares our to where functional proteins formed by chance. And even if we could, that would solve his problem anyway since multiple universes would increase the probability of one like ours existing where functional proteins form by chance. You see, when you use a sample set of 1, then the probability can only ever be 1:1. Meyer is also operating under the assumption that the constants can be altered, which is a completely unfounded assumption. Either he doesn't understand probability, or he does and he's blatantly misrepresenting it. Not convincing at all.
@@EnlightenedByKnowledge your belief in order and life springing forth from a chemical explosion is like imagining someone blowing up the Campbell's alphabet soup factory and the bits and pieces of pasta that used to be alphabet letters drop from the sky to form something intelligible. Its nonsense
@@EnlightenedByKnowledge what blew up and why did it blow up? Where did whatever blew up come from? WHERE did it blow up since nothing and NOPLACE existed then?
@@EnlightenedByKnowledge your beliefs are a religion built on blind faith.
Some people say, "Oh, we should teach BOTH 'theories' and let the kids decide!" However, teaching false facts, poor reasoning and incompetent science does not induce children to think critically.
People saying that we should teach both theories, are to be ignored and excluded from making the decision. Why? Because anyone with basic knowledge of science knows that there can only be one theory. If they would say one theory and one hypothesis, I'd listen to them. Both theories... nope. I expect people to know these things if they want to make an important decision for children.
Gwen Walravens I just explained that the people who say that both are theories don't know what a scientific theory is. People who do not understand science should not be defining science teaching policy - or misinform children about science.
Binguh Bungah Your science illiteracy does not refute the actual science of evolution.
Binguh Bungah
Your science illiteracy doesn't refute anything. As a victim and paragon of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, your uninformed opinion is noted and scoffed at.
Gibbering does not make you literate in science.
Incidentally, this is Melvin Goodrum/God Rules/God Reigns/Evotard Killer.
I have nothing against people finding comfort in their religious beliefs. That, however, does not include comment-bombers with nothing to say, who have something against higher learning, against people who defend science and technology, and who want themselves and the world to be smarter. Coming to a video whose message they disagree with to post oodles of little word games and to vaguely jab at the quest for intelligence and good ideas, is not a good idea.
Dude, this video is literally just Bill Nye being equally petty.
What he is saying here adds nothing of value to the scientific community or body of human knowledge. It's just a video of a self-righteous science celebrity trying to cling to relevance by appealing to scientific-athiests' sense of superiority. If Nye actually gave a crap about convincing Christians to abandon their beliefs, he'd have taken a completely different tone.
And, I do in fact believe in evolution, and I am a Christian who knows just how important science is. The way Nye presents his opinion at the end is just not very tactful at all. Again, the point of the video isn't to teach, correct misunderstandings, or address concerns someone who denies evolution might have. It's just a blanket accusation that American Christians are holding science back, and that they have no right to teach their own children about their beliefs.
@@travelsizedlions A blanket accusation that never mentions Christians, Christianity, God or even religion? According to polls and surveys, most American Christians do not deny evolution, they hold that God used it to create species.
It is not petty to defend settled and useful science, as you seem to admit.
Nye's plea is well motivated (he wasn't the first) and Nye didn't say believers have no right to teach their beliefs. He said "don't make your kids do it", as in deny evolution. It is possible to teach Christianity without denial of evolution, why shouldn't Nye plead for that?
Funny, the creationmuseum rebuttal video won't allow comments or ratings. I thought they weren't afraid of evolution?
Everyone knows the internet was invented by satan (al gore) as a way for his minions (people with educations) to spread his LIES (empirical truths).
Was just going to point out the same thing about how this one is open to comments and ratings and the other one isn't. Doesn't that just perfectly sum up the two different viewpoints =)
Adam Wright Oh I never looked at it like that. Absolutely represents their viewpoints.
I like your choice of pic. Did you know that Wernher von Braun was a creationist?
Robert Sparks Thanks, I took it. And I didn't know that, but I suppose it is a fairly common point of view. I don't suppose he was raised in a household that taught evolution.
One of the early acts of the Christian Nazis on gaining power was to disband and outlaw atheist groups. By 1930 the German Freethinkers League had 500,000 members. It was closed down in 1933, with creationist Hitler saying in a speech that year:
“We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.” (Creationist Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on Oct.24, 1933)
Dude it hurts to know there are people who still believe is creationism.
You’re not very intelligent, huh
lets be real, we looked at some finches and decided our grandparents were rocks.
I believe in old earth creation. God spoke the universe into existence and evolution doesn’t go against the orthodox faith.
I think the reality is far too brutal for them to accept, they have to cope somehow
19,000 people were covering there ears going; "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
No, 19,000 people apparently had sense
WeegeeSlayer Wrong, 19,000 live in reality just fine and disagree with the hateful people who liked this video.
WeegeeSlayer I’m one of the people who disliked this ignorant video, I’m a Christian and I embrace reality.
WeegeeSlayer I don’t troll anyone, if I make a claim or assertion, I back it up with solid reasoning. The Bible proves through history not to a be a mythological tale but a book of history, and this is shown by a great deal including many points of fulfilled non vague prophecy. I’m neither a troll nor ignorant, and as for people who don’t believe in my well founded beliefs, I’m sorry that they have yet to learn the validity towards it.
There are a great number of prophecies that come from original unmodified scripture that have been fulfilled, some may be vague but there are those referring to specific events and circumstances : such as the prophecies pertaining to Israel and much of what has become of it:
--Trees again would grow in Israel
Bible passage: Isaiah 41:18-20
Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
Fulfilled: late 1900s
In Isaiah 41:18-20, the prophet's talk of a future restoration of Israel coincides with an occurrence in modern Israel - the construction of a vast irrigation system to improve farming. The lack of available water, including rain, is one reason why Israel had been a desolate, unproductive land during much of the past 2000 years. But, during the 1900s, when many Jews returned to their ancient homeland, they built a network of irrigation systems. And during the past century, more than 200 million trees have been planted in Israel.
--Isaiah said Israel's fruit would fill the world
Bible passage: Isaiah 27:6
Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
Fulfilled: late 1900s
In Isaiah 27:6, the prophet said Israel would one day blossom and fill the world with fruit. This prophecy has been at least partially fulfilled, literally and symbolically. Today, the land of Israel, which had been barren for centuries, is a leading producer of agricultural products, exporting food to many countries. This prophecy also has been fulfilled symbolically with the worldwide spread of Christianity. Christianity, which began with Jesus in Israel, now has about 2 billion followers worldwide.
--Israel's deserts will become like the Garden of Eden
Bible passage: Isaiah 51:3
Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
Fulfilled: Being fulfilled now
In Isaiah 51:3, the prophet said that God will restore Israel and make it a paradise, like the garden of Eden. This foreshadows what is currently happening in Israel. The Jews have been irrigating, cultivating and reconditioning the land during much of the 1900s. Many of the country's swamps, which had been infested with malaria, have been converted into farmland. And water from the Sea of Galilee has been channeled through portions of the deserts, allowing some of the deserts to bloom. Much work remains, but parts of Israel are blooming again. Although it was described as a wasteland as recently as the late 1800s, Israel is now a food source for many countries. And at least 200 million of trees have been planted there during the past century.
There are a number of prophecies that refer to the ancient city of Tyre which was destroyed and submerged..The Tyre that still stands today was rebuilt and is much different than the one during the time of scripture:
--Tyre’s fortresses would fail
Bible prophecy: Amos 1:9-10
Prophecy written: About 750 BC
Prophecy fulfilled: 333-332 BC
In Amos 1:9-10, the prophet said that God would cause Tyre’s protective fortresses to fail, as punishment for the way that Tyre treated Israel. That prophecy was fulfilled in 586-573 BC when Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar attacked the mainland of Tyre, and in 333-332 BC when Alexander the Great conquered the island of Tyre. Alexander’s army built a land bridge from the mainland to the island so that they could use a battering ram to break through the island’s fortress.
Amos 1:9-10:
This is what the Lord says: “For three sins of Tyre, even for four, I will not turn back [my wrath]. Because she sold whole communities of captives to Edom, disregarding a treaty of brotherhood, I will send fire upon the walls of Tyre that will consume her fortresses.”
--Tyre would be attacked by many nations
Bible prophecy: Ezekiel 26:3
Prophecy written: Between 587-586 BC
Prophecy fulfilled: 573 BC, 332 BC, etc.
In Ezekiel 26:3, the prophet said that Tyre, the Phoenician Empire’s most powerful city, would be attacked by many nations, because of its treatment of Israel. At about the time that Ezekiel delivered this prophecy, Babylon had begun a 13-year attack on Tyre’s mainland. Later, in about 332 BC, Alexander the Great conquered the island of Tyre and brought an end to the Phoenician Empire.
Ezekiel 26:3:
therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves.
--Tyre’s stones, timber and soil would be cast into the sea
Bible prophecy: Ezekiel 26:12
Prophecy written: Between 587-586 BC
Prophecy fulfilled: 333-332 BC
In Ezekiel 26:12, the prophet said that Tyre’s stones, timber and soil would be thrown into the sea. Ezekiel’s prophecy accurately describes how Alexander the Great built a land bridge from the mainland to the island of Tyre, when he attacked in 333-332 BC. Alexander’s forces took rubble from Tyre’s mainland and tossed it - stones, timber and soil - into the sea, to build the land bridge (which is still there).
Ezekiel 26:12:
They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea
WeegeeSlayer Everything I’ve given is valid and not mere Bible verses. The Bible is demonstrably an historical nonfictional text.
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Mahatma Gandhi
Science and technology seems to work against humanity. The evidence is clear. The farther man drifts from understanding how frail we are the more diseases we have. How many mothers have to suffer from our ignorance. Science is not such a good thing in the hands of politicians.
+Antony Caporicci Traditionally, the guns and war come from the Catholic Church which promoted a paganism version of what Christ taught and brought in all sorts of mumbo jumbo from pagan religious dogma and stupid looking robes, funny hats, and royalty of priesthood and garbage like that. It is all about keeping the royalty rich and nothing more. Controlling the masses.
There is no "hell" in the original ancient Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew languages in the scriptures.
There is a fire pit where dead bodies go after death. There is only mention of death as the reward for transgressions and return to everlasting life for righteousness.
But for the Romans that was not enough to control the masses. They needed to add even more fearful control so they came up with "eternal suffering in fiery hell and only the Church can save you". I can just see the priests going; "That dogma otta get them under control and pay their 10% and taxes. Don't you think; Constantine? "
"It is far easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled" Mark Twain
Using Christ, as a political tool is pretty disgusting and Christ did teach about this and warned about it; that it would happen.
A true christian and congregation does this:
(Not necessarily in any order but simultaneously):
1/ No paid preachers of truth. Sustenance and covering is enough.
2/ Never go to start war or enter another country with an army.
3/ No sex outside of marriage. Stay married for life and keep the family structure for the sake of health and life: for the sake of the children.
4/ Don't spread diseases.
5/ Do not change the wording in the Bible to fit a dogma. Follows the Bible as best as they can.
6/ No monetary pagan based holidays simply for economic (greed) reasons. Religion that feeds the economic systems are not about Truth. Truth has no economic basis.
7/ Always give willingly to help the weak and sick that cannot fend for themselves, but never promotes laziness and living on the dole.
8/ Willing to defend against attacks but never go "rape pillage and murder" for profits. This is what Gandhi was talking about, ie, England's rape pillage and murders in India. (Now England is trying to blame religion for this and promotes the new “Christ” Darwin and pseudo science.)
9/ Never promotes nationalism, racism, boundaries, but only promotes harmony among people. The Truth in reality promotes unity and harmony. Lies and deception, like evolutionism and creationism (the earth is 6000 years old and stupid nonsense) (false sciences) cause division as we can see.
10/ Works on themselves to improve and be better fit examples of Christ's teaching.
11/ Never condemns others. Never forces dogma on others. Offers direction to others Allows others to learn as they ask for direction.
12/ Lives as healthy as possible.
13/ Pays taxes and “gives to Caesar what belongs to Caesar”.
14/ Husbands are responsible and take lead role in protecting the family and children.
15/ Mothers are clean and nurturing, teaching health and kindness to children.
16/ Honest and fair in all business dealings.
17/ Promotes “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, (sound familiar?). Funny but this is the basis for all forms of absolute morality: Good is that which promotes True Knowledge, Health, Life and Joy for Living.
Evil: Actions promoting, ignorance, division, fear, spreading diseases, and shorter lives with earlier deaths. Pretty much what we have with all the governments so far.
18/ No adoration (worship) of any other man. No priest class, no class division at all. No honoring of people and status like the modern professors are to be worshiped as the new high priests of garbage (state owned religious crap like Evolution) or any crap like they deserve anything special.
19/ Uses Christ's perfect example of how to be.
20/ Follows the 10 commandments.
And More. That is just off the top of my head. Consider that I am a yogi, a seeker of truth and I belong to no religion.
@@antoncourtois Guns are a great means of self-defense; nothing opposed to Jesus' character by possessing one or two or 10.
Sadly this is true for a lot of people.
@@GoodScienceForYou Dude I mean, you don't enjoy your life enough if you agree with the 3rd point
"There is no evidence for it".
Never stopped humanity before
If you argue for a *_supernatural_* origin of life on earth, you are making an argument from incredulity in the clear absence of any proof of your position: "Even though there's no evidence for it, I don't personally accept how the first cell could have formed except from a _guiding intelligence, like Jehovah for example, yet since life is obviously here on earth, and I can imagine how it could have happened, _*__creationism must therefore be true_*
God of the gaps, eh?
I have lost track of the number of times Mr Aminu has been set straight on his absurd claim about SOMETHING arising from NOTHING.
Atheists not only don't make that assertion. They have no interest in it. To be an atheist is to reject belief in the absence of evidence, not to make bold assertions about things for which no evidence exists. 'We don't know' is a perfectly rational statement.
And once again, the God of gaps argument that a creator is needed to account for the existence of the universe is irrelevant because there is no basis - repeat, no basis - for connecting that hypothetical creator with any contemporary theology or any of the mutually incompatible gods in which people actually believe.
We must conclude that Aminu is a) incapable of rational thought, b) irretrievably deluded, c) clinically insane, or perhaps a combination of all three.
who created god?
*First monkey-human embryos reignite debate over hybrid animals*
Monkey-human embryos have been created. In April 2021, researchers fertilized eggs extracted from cynomolgus monkeys and grew them in culture. Six days after fertilization, the team injected 132 embryos with human pluripotent stem cells, which can grow into a range of cell types inside and outside an embryo. Wouldn't be possible if 'separate creation' was true, would it?
It is no accident that every creationist posting comments is a science illiterate.
Wherever you find someone who rejects evolution, there too you find someone with a cartoon understanding of science and a grasp of evolution that amounts to barbershop gossip.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect ensures that those who are the most profoundly ignorant of science continue to reject evolution based on their cartoon understanding of science in general and evolution in particular.
+Fallible Fiend
Of the many crazies and socks who post at this site, I nominate +Vaquero 357 for any award we may be handing out for belligerent willful ignorance. He takes denial and rejection of reality to a whole new level.
***** Nobody cares about the gibbering numbskull fuzzybrain.
***** Your continued lying and obsessive fantasies with child sex do not refute the actual science of evolution.
***** Nope. You're making stuff up, because you're an idiot.
*****
Of course the theory of evolution doesn't depend on how either Christians or atheists misunderstand or misrepresent it. It depends on evidence. There are no 'both sides'.
"Infinite punishment is infinite cruelty, endless injustice, immortal meanness. To worship an eternal gaoler hardens, debases, and pollutes even the vilest soul. While there is one sad and breaking heart in the universe, no good being can be perfectly happy." - Colonel Robert G. Ingersoll, statesman and orator, 1833-1899
PAPA
_"Gravity hasn't been proven"_ - wesd68
🤭😆😂🤣🤣🤣🤣
i love how ken ham made the comment section disabled for his video...it's like he's shouting in your face "i don't care about your opinion go write it somewhere else"
ROFLMAO! "Everyone on Earth is wrong, life never emerged from what it's comprised of." ~ Miss Agnus Futile Peroxide.
Denying science with arguments from incredulity is completely immaterial, a lost cause and an exercise in futility.
You have a group of zombies that really like you, they must like your corps aroma Bell.. You say the worst mamadas and you still and will get liked
Aren’t humans made out of dirt, as described in Genesis?
Evolution is not “science”. I believe in the scientific method. That’s why I reject evolution.
@@maskofscience More lies or are you really this uneducated?
Christians come here every day to cry about how badly they failed Biology class 😂🤣
😂🤣😂🤣 All evolutionists act the same way...
No science. All insults. Like insults scream intelligence 😂😂
Keep going 👍🏿
@@WesD92422 And yet we have over 99% of the global scientific community in agreement. Who’s having the last laugh…
@@toostupidforsciencetryreli2987 Great argument...
Lots of people believe in it so I do too 😂🤣😂🤣
When people thought slavery was alright, would you have been backing the consensus too? 👀
Moron 😁
@@WesD92422 DID YOU FIND MAGIC?
WE CAN'T WAIT TO SEE IT.
@@uneducatedchristain2963 un. Anti-christ magic belongs to the occultist.
"But now chemists in the United Kingdom report new evidence that precursors for all three sets of biomolecules-nucleic acids, amino acids, and lipids-can be generated by a pair of simple compounds that would have been present on early Earth. As such, the work offers a possible way out of the paradoxes of the origin of life on Earth."
*ORIGIN OF LIFE PUZZLE CRACKED* Science, March 2015
Why miss? Why do you think an argument from increduity painted in enough scientific terms is a reasonable argument? MAKE AN ARGUMENT. FINALLY.
*Because* that is what living systems require, silly Stuart! Are you a ‘miss,’ Stuart?
You're not making any sense, miss Wolf. Try to address the topic.
+jebstuart: If the "origin of life puzzle has been cracked," then it should be *NO PROBLEM* for you to demonstrate that the nucleic acids *all feature D-ribose* to the complete exclusion of *SEVEN* other aldopentose isomers, and that the amino acids *all feature L-isomers.* You will then show the unguided, prebiotic synthesis of DNA and catalytic proteins, featuring >95% reaction efficiency and the efficient removal of *unwanted reaction intermediates* by unguided, natural chemistry.
Guess what, Stuart? *YOU CAN'T* .... *EVER* ...
"But now chemists in the United Kingdom report new evidence that precursors for all three sets of biomolecules-nucleic acids, amino acids, and lipids-can be generated by a pair of simple compounds that would have been present on early Earth. As such, the work offers a possible way out of the paradoxes of the origin of life on Earth."
*ORIGIN OF LIFE PUZZLE CRACKED* Science, March 2015
"Progress is born of doubt and inquiry. The Church never doubts, never inquires. To doubt is heresy, to inquire is to admit that you do not know-the Church does neither." -- Colonel Robert Green Ingersoll (1833-1899)
You know what I really like about this comment is that it makes me feel better about what I'm Doing. And there is no body to answer to when I die. Only,,,, wait ,, whats going to happen when I die?? holy shit ,,, hold on??? let me re think this.
@@sheckygagstein8966 Are you just spamming this horribly illogical comment on everything you don't like, or did you forget that you made this senseless point on another thread?
The stench of the ergo brain dead fart noise is very overpowering in this one.
What nonsense. Biblical Christianity, not organized religion, is not based on doubts but compelling evidence, both biblical and secular--massive manuscript evidence, thousands of amazing, precisely fulfilled prophecies, over 300 Messianic prophecies alone, many made hundreds of years before Christ was born; scientific evidence (i.e. archaeology) ; compelling legal-historical evidence for Christ's life, death and resurrection; incredible unity and preservation of God's Word, despite over 2000 years of assaults from the biggest guns (both theologians and scientists) both inside and outside the church (and you claim Christians do not inquire as well as skeptics); secular documentation from several sources, the amazing power of the Gospel to spiritually transform hearts and lives of all who believe it, etc. to name just a few. . Check your history, my friend, most of the great inventions we have today as well as branches of modern science were the results of the inquiring minds and research of scientists who believed in the God of the Bible and in the Son of God, Jesus Christ--Kepler, Kelvin, Newton, Boyle, Pascal, Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell , Orville and Wilbur Wright, Wernher von Brawn, head of NASA, believed in a designer and opposed evolution (first moon landing), James Irwin, a creationist who walked on the moon; Joseph Lister (antiseptic surgery), Louis Pasteur (Bacteriology, vaccination and Immunization, pasteurization and Biogenesis law), Blaze Pascal (Barometer, Mathematical theory of probability), Charles Babbage (Calculating machine, Computer Science), Sir James Simpson ( Chloroform and Gynecology), Carlos Linneas (Classification system, systematic biology), George Civier ( Verebrate Paleontology), Sir James Fleming (radio valve), Dr. Raymond Damadian (inventor of MRI), Dr. John Sanford (inventor of the gene gun) , to name just a few. Go back to a school that teaches (not indoctrinates) its students to think critically and honestly evaluate the evidence, my friend,
Ray: Was the city Tyre destroyed forever? Was there one word written by a non-Christian of the time of Jesus about any supposed miracle? Did Jesus return within the generation of his listeners? Did the Roman Catholic church burn scientist Giordano Bruno at the stake in 1600 for observing that distant stars were suns with solar systems like ours? Does the bible not say "lean not on your own understanding" (don't think for yourself")?
Serial nuisance Alan Clarke is comparing the Holy Trinity to the states of water. So you're saying each member of the Trinity has physical elements in common. What are those elements, stumpy?
THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS,
“ENERGY CANNOT BE CREATED OR DESTROYED”
*CREATIONISM IMMEDIATELY DISPROVED. NICE* 👍
Not so. Creationism doesn't assert that things come from absolute nothing. It asserts it comes from an uncaused cause. And you're saying there is an uncaused cause: energy. Creationism asserts there is a God, who is all powerful, which means He holds all the energy. You know what the first law of thermodynamics does prove? God. Because God is neither created nor destroyed. And what did God do? He created the universe by His power. NICE
If you do some research, I think you’ll discover that no scientist claims to KNOW where our universe’s mass/energy originated, so your idea that creationism has been “DISPROVED” is incorrect. Naturalism certainly has never been proven via operational science. What you are dealing with is purely in the realm of philosophy and/or religion. For me personally, I find the God of the Bible to be the most satisfactory explanation for my existence.
*The Faith Which Skeptics Question in Regard to Religion is the Same in Regard to Science*
_"Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words Ye Must Have Faith. It is a quality which the scientists cannot dispense with. The man who handles a bulk of results obtained from an experimental process must have an imaginative picture of the law that he is pursuing. He must embody this in an imaginary hypothesis. The reasoning faculties alone will not help him forward a step, for no order can emerge from the chaos of elements unless there is the constructive quality of mind which builds up the order by a process of elimination and choice. Again and again the imaginary plan on which one attempts to build up that order breaks down and then we must try another. This imaginative vision and faith in the ultimate success are indispensable. The pure rationalist has no place here. …we are always being brought face to face with the irrational. Else we couldn’t have faith. And if we did not have faith, but could solve every puzzle in life by an application of the human reason, what an unbearable burden life would be. We should have no art and no music and no wonderment. And we should have no science; not not only because science would thereby lose its chief attraction for its own followers-namely, the pursuit of the unknowable-but also because science would lose the cornerstone of its own structure, which is the direct perception by consciousness of the existence of external reality. As Einstein has said, you could not be a scientist if you did not know that the external world existed in reality, but that knowledge is not gained by any process of reasoning. It is a direct perception, and therefore, in its nature akin to what we call Faith. It is a metaphysical belief. Now that is something which the skeptic questions in regard to religion, but it is the same in regard to science." - Max Planck (1858-1947), originator of quantum theory, Nobel Laureate in Physics_
@@alexlischak3116 it sounds like you’re trying to elevate your own personal beliefs beyond reproach.
Same thing a lot of atheists are trying to do, I guess.
@@alanclarke7 you obviously don’t realize it, but Max Planck is regarded as someone who failed to reconcile his personal religious beliefs against his understanding of science.
Science and religion are almost completely incompatible.
@@myguykaikai9215 *”Max Planck is regarded as someone who failed to reconcile his personal religious beliefs against his understanding of science.”*
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you but could you be more specific? In what way did he fail to reconcile them?
The US bible belt, also known as the gay porn belt, divorce belt, teen pregnancy belt, meth belt, food stamp belt, welfare belt, poverty belt, low wage belt, HIV belt and the STD belt.
***** And the McDonalds belt.
+Jatz07 "How can a black person evolve from a white person?" The US desperately needs a national education curriculum, ASAP.
+Gary Bell You have people who preach Democracy and the US as a shining example of the equality that comes with freedom and want to build a wall along one border to keep out Hispanics but not the border with Canada; people who perceive international criticism as jealousy and being ungrateful to the US.
And the rest of the world thinks Aussies are a weird mob? This place is schizophrenic! LMAO
werriboy55 How long since you've been in Oz?
Gary Bell 3 years, 1 month and 16 days. I'm coming over for a few of weeks in May if everything goes to plan. I can't wait.
One more time: the theory of evolution doesn't depend upon the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition, and the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition doesn't disprove the theory of evolution. Endless misrepresentation of and quote-mining from the paleontological literature on this interval of time doesn't constitute an argument. It's a red herring. A diversion.
Got a mormon ad lol
There's imaginary sorcery afoot in creation while there's human design in engineering and mythology.
There’s something wrong with you MrDrink alcohol 🍷 in the rain 🌧
@@Sca408 I'd be lucky to drink alcohol 4 times a year. You need a new theory.
@@garybell1291 My theory is that you're a nerd.
@@Sca408 *It's just another trolling account of the same "ergonomover". Isn't Aronra's cult wonderful?*
@@garybell1291
My friend! Why do you have a hard time believing in God and His Holy Bible? Everyone knows Him through creation.
Do you have a hard time in believing because of all the evil, death, destruction and lack of miracles? God is still alive and active and He's working through me!
Choose Jesus and the Holy Bible! He wants us with Him in paradise forever! DO NOT GO TO THE LAKE OF FIRE 😰 I believe, from my studies of scripture, is that it's everlasting conscious torment.
Let us stop sinning and do good deeds for our friends (by friends I mean all people) and give glory to our God! Hallelujah and AMEN!
I may have to insist on some consistency here. If evolution isn't outlined _in detail_ here on youtube, then the fundies say it's not correct, and if creation isn't outlined _in any way, anywhere_ whatsoever it's still correct. That seems a little deranged.
Perhaps in this context, immaterial is synonym to -deranged- inconsistent.
Intelligence realizes it’s boundaries while ignorance has none.
How old would you say is planet Earth?
Presupposition fallacy
Dismissed 🚮
I clicked on this video thinking it was Jordan Peterson without a beard explaining why YE is cool, but instead I found a video with Bill Nye in it. I came thinking I found dirt, but I actually found gold.
This is not gold this is dirt. A really arrogant video only with some empty statements! ☺️
Some people find that science is useful tool worth defending, they even love science, can you understand that? What was empty about Nye's statements?@@loveistheanswer5924
*"I have no obligation to do any work personally"*
*"Look it up yourself"*
*"Explain your paper..."*
*"You provided the paper, now help us understand it..."*
*"I see no need to prove anything"*
*"I have no obligation to "write out the entire list."*
*"I see no need to do any work personally"*
*"The OP does NOT have to be "backed up" by a "scientific review paper."*
*A reasoned argument is a reasoned argument. There is no need for 'scientific peer review' papers"*
Miss Giggles Futile hard at work supporting her claims.
Those are all your quotaions reproduced in full and the context is obvious. You are an obvious liar.
So, there's a context in which it's okay for you to claim the following:
"I have no obligation to do any work personally"
"Look it up yourself"
"I see no need to prove anything"
"The OP does NOT have to be "backed up" by a "scientific review paper"
"A reasoned argument is a reasoned argument. There is no need for 'scientific peer review' papers"
You've got a terminal case of Do-As-I-Say-Not-As-I-Do. Sucks to be you.
Dog Peed on my homework
@@richardwind2859 i only just now saw this comment but i’m so glad i did
Scientists have observed species evolving into other species via natural selection. So.. evidence enough for me.
Son, get a life, because obviously from your high school class you have failed to differentiate between micro and macro evolution. There is sufficient genetic information to change inside of a species to create maybe a slightly longer neck or longer claws. It does not, however, allow for change such as a fish -----> salamander. It's just genetically impossible. Information is usually lost during a mutation, get over it. And when information is lost, yes, you may lose something bad, and your species might benefit, but unfortunately, you don't gain information and you can never get from a fish -----> salamander.
Get over it.
Excuse me, are you talking to me?
Samuel Chan Ad hominem attacks and conclusory statements are clear indicators that you know what you're talking about. I'm convinced.
^that's called sarcasm^ haha
Bullshit. Cats, dogs, lizards, birds, fish, and plants have all been observed to speciate into distinct species. I was not referring to hybrids like ligers or mixed breeds.
Reading creationist lies is like watching a kid with two left feet repeatedly falling over while trying to kick a duck.
This is the best atheists can do. They have no scientific evidence supporting their position, so they resort to insults 😂
Keep going... The people who are undecided, but intellectually honest will see this 👍🏿
Creationist lies… that doesn’t even sound right, like it can’t fulfill a lie. We all know God is real, and other than this fact you should be labeled crazy 😜 if you deny it.
@@Sca408 It was a reference to the comment below mine lying that he was an astrophysicist. I don't believe in Hanuman or any of the other monkey gods. 🐒
@@WesD92422 Missed the duck again... Wes. 🦆
@@garybell1291 lol 👌👍
Still waiting to hear the creatard explanation for ERV markings, pseudogenes, ring species, syncytin, antibiotic research, continental distribution, chromosome 2 in humans, cytochrome c and b, vomeronasal organs in humans, nested Hierarchs and classification, homologous structures, divergence Nictitating membranes, endemism and observable speciation.
TODAYS CREATIONIST MOMENT.
REMEMBER THAT TIME THEY FIRED ALL THE DOCTORS
AND REPLACED THEM WITH FAITH HEALERS......
YA NEITHER DO I.
Today's atheist moment: We can't back up our own dumb and ridiculous beliefs so we'll just keep making ignorant twists and attacks on the Bible. The book that survived impossible odds for thousands of years and is still the best selling, most well preserved literature in all of human history.
@@williamholshoy8883 DID YOU DRINK THAT DRANO YET?
DON'T BE SCARED.
HOW COULD FAIRYTALES BE WRONG?
@@williamholshoy8883 the Bible also keeps fooling the skeptics. The Hittites were a fable they said, now we know better. Hezekiah's tunnel never happened because it was too ambitious and the technology wasn't there they said.... Trans gendered people can go to your school and teach kids about the many wonderful genders but won't dare in Muslim schools... Bill Nye approves of that, another evil actor.
@@godreigns482 Did you notice that Israel became a nation again, did you notice there have only been 15 million Jews since Christ? Did you read in the Bible where it says God would scatter them among the nations where few would survive and then bring them back?... Some Kool Aid.
@@mike62mcmanus DID YOU HAPPEN TO NOTICE THAT TYRE STILL STANDS
EVEN THOUGH GOD SAID IT WOULD BE DESTROYED AND NEVER REBUILT.
Changing to secondary is always faster than reloading
-Albert Einstein
This made me chuckle violently, thank you
I'm getting tired of the mis_quotes. Most educated people should know it was the dalai lama circa 1989. Excellent use of the quote though. Why try reloading your Bible facts to fit reality when you can toss it and use something that makes sense. Science is my secondary. It seems to have unlimited ammo
@@paulthepainter2366 but it really doesn't it's just a mith
@@ollyprak162 I simply believe that a banana has more dna than a homo sepien aka a miresable atheist
Heisenberg had the fastest reload -- his spare ammo just quantum-tunneled into his rifle.
I wonder if Head Wound 71 thinks his Jesus is proud of him for all the sickening, spiteful, hate-filled comments he makes?
According to Nicolas Christie-Blick, geologist: "I suspect that a great many people of faith are good, well-intentioned folk who acquired certain beliefs in childhood, and never saw fit seriously to question those beliefs. When tolerance and respect are dressed up as “I won’t knock your beliefs if you don’t knock mine,” it is possible to maintain the lie that all beliefs are equally valid, no matter how obviously in conflict they are. *Trolls, therefore, perform a remarkably useful service. By setting aside conventional deference to respect, they draw attention to the nuttiness upon which all religion depends.* When the only way to preserve faith is to ignore, deny, misrepresent or lie about what has been discovered through science, at stake is not one set of beliefs vs another. It is the entire edifice of religion that needs to be rejected."
😉👏👏🤝
Good morning, dear mr PhD. Did you notice that everything immanualkant posts on a certain video is being censored, doubtlessly by one troll who has figured out a trick with the safety tools? I asked Google how it is done but no luck so far. Hard to believe my 100 deleted posts were all flagged by 7 trolling accounts.@@FlandiddlyandersFRS
Good afternoon my good friend. Apologies for the late reply, this did not appear in my 🛎 notifications.
Yes, that is frustrating. As is the inaction of YT to shut down his accounts after so many reports of his blatant harrasment.
The only conclusion I can draw is that he is using some kind of hack...or even more disturbing, that he is actually an employee at google/YT.
Remember he use to be obsessed with "software developers". Perhaps that's what he does and is obviously proficient at it.
Remember Joe Petkus had been trolling the Hitchens video since it was uploaded. We only had slight success in flagging and getting accounts deleted early on. But his main account is still active even though he no longer posts there.
I don't have a solution unfortunately.
It seems YT are not holding up their end of the bargain.
Thanks for your thoughts. He seems to obtain deletion with very few clicks. He can have that forgotten hell-hole, humans can be insanely territorial beasts at times. @@FlandiddlyandersFRS
@@immanuelkant6309 *"I suspect that a great many people of faith are good, well-intentioned folk who acquired certain beliefs in childhood, and never saw fit seriously to question those beliefs."*
I was in that category until I read the Bible for the first time at 22 years of age.
_"If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin. He that hateth me hateth my Father also. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause. But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning."_
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe... Romans stabbing a thief off the shoulder of Jerusalem... I watched a zombie glitter in the dark near the Jerusalem Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... Time to die." ~ Joe/Jan Camel codswallop.
What surprises me is that modern Christians seem to think young earth ideas are the default position for a Christian when in reality it's a very recent construct of fundamentalism of just the last 200 years or so, before then many scholars didn't regard the genesis account as trying to convey the age of the earth at all or think it was some scientific account of creation but read it as it is, a multi-faceted piece of literature infused with allegory, poetry, actual history and theology all wrapped in one piece of writing, for someone to read it in a completely literal fashion is just a misreading of the text and how it was written, plain and simple.
If you believe God created the universe and all life in it (if you're a Christian), why can't you believe that he could have done it in 6 days? Even if it gave the appearance of having been there for eons, (and the earth might be billions of years old, the Bible isn't clear) it could in actuality be young. If a Christian believes in an omnipotent, almighty, omniscient God who can do anything, surely .God could create a full grown oak tree complete with rings which would appear to be 500 years old and a world or universe simply by Speaking it into Existence. So my faith and science harmonize. If there appears to be a contradiction, it is either my interpretation of the Bible, or science just hasn't finished self-correcting, or what appears to be old is really not old. The main thing is that the universe and life were created as if there was nothing - no time, space, matter - there would still be no time, space matter. But the universe requires a cause and the only cause that fits is a Creator God who is transcendent. I believe the Bible literally.
It's possible but holding that position removes yourself from scientific discourse since there would be no reason to look at the evidence if it is totally misleading.
Genesis is much more deep than most people think it is once you start digging into it and I think you're right that it's not at all clear on the age of the earth or universe, and i don't think the authors intended for it to teach that. About the beginning of the universe though I think that is spot on.
On believing the bible literally, do you mean you believe it's true or do you mean you think everything it says is literal?
Yes, the bible is like any other mythological book with some people taking it to heart
95TurboSol, you think about the theory of evolution is always changing due to facts that seem to disprove it. Now look at Christianity with the Bible. NOT 1 single thing has ever changed. I believe the Bible is 100 percent true. Please search up different things that evolutionist have a hard time explaining. Then look at their THEORIES not facts.
Gandhi, The bible is not a mythical book. As a person who is not a believer you may view that way. But as a Believer I see it as a God speaking to us. Now if you read the Bible you might see some SPECTACULAR MIRACLES but you might ask why don't they happen today. well, they were to be a sign, evidence to show a message was true, but now we have the Bible l, it is really the only thing we need as evidence.
If we're made in the images of gods, then why aren't we invisible and inaudible?
+Gary Bell *"If we're made in the images of gods, then why aren't we invisible and inaudible?*"
God made us in his image, not in the "images of gods" which could be anything from a monkey to a cow to an elephant. When God came to earth, he came as a visible and audible man, not as an animal or something invisible. >>>>>>>>>>>>> *"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son" - Romans **8:29*
Alan Clarke Oh really, so jesus claimed he was god Al?
+Gary Bell *so jesus claimed he was god Al?* >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll let you decide: >>> John 5:18 - Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. >>>>>>> John 14:7-9 - If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Alan Clarke As the tale goes it was half human/half alien which isn't your god but it's illegitimate child that was born under a magic star that could light up an individual barn.
Zaki Aminu So you're corrupt and sinful Cletus, yes... yes quite right, religion turned you into a manically cackling monster and you didn't need any gods to tell you that.
How creatards “win” debates
1. Dodge all questions
2. Keep repeating their own questions while pretending they can’t be answered
3. Get in the last word
Delete this.
@@isaacthegoat1432Hell no
When that doesn't work, some of them use multiple trolling accounts to flag everything as hate speech in hopes CZcams will delete everything, and sometimes it works.
I noticed that you asked the same questions above after I already answered them, so I had to answer you a second time.
@@alanclarke7 Nope, you’re lying. You’ve never even acknowledged the evidence I gave you before today. And your “answer” was a cherry-pick with baseless contradiction.
Creationists actually believe in Supernatural Design, not Intelligent Design. They need to be more honest with themselves.
Then I must not be a creationist since I believe in both.
@@alanclarke7
@@alanclarke7 Based on what evidence?
@@alanclarke7 I don’t think he’s saying you’re not a creationist. I think he’s saying you’re not honest.
Actually they believe in both. Creationism is the intelligent design of this world
The best way to debate a creationist about evolution is to simply ask them to correctly define evolution. They will never get it right because they don't actually know what it is. They'll say something along the lines of cats turning into dogs. At this point its pointless to debate someone who can't even correctly define what it is they're trying to disprove.
kossxf Wow. Looks like xme71 was just dying to prove your point with creationist gibberish. Very astute kossxf, +1 internetz for you.
Whilst I concur with the current theories of evolution, what I love even more is idiots like you who have scant understanding of the complexity of say the broader definitions of ‘evolution’ as you have so eloquently summarised, yet feel so intellectually emboldened as to set forth swaging those that challenge (or ignore) the generally accepted lore.
Good on YOU.
Creationism is not appropriate for anyone.
trinix777 Lies
Everyone has heard the saying God save the Queen. So what happened.
lol 👍👏
I think religion is a way to make kids, and adult kids, behave.
If that were true, please explain why, per capita, religious believers commit more violent crimes than the non-religious.
TheHigherVoltage
They didn't say it was necessarily a good way.
TheHigherVoltage If people can convince themselves that it is the will of God, then the mental barrier against violence is diminished. Afterall they're just following orders from God, similar to soldiers who commit atrocities under orders from superiors eg Abu Ghraib tortures of P.O.Ws. Violence is so easier when there is an authority figure ordering it, rather than committing such acts under their own free will.
All that's left to do is cherry pick bible verses of God ordering violence. Preferably from the Old Testament, because OT God is ruthless.
***** I'd argue NT God is way more violent and psychotic.
From "if your eye causes you to sin gouge it out" to the whole being cut down and thrown into a fire for eternity threat. At least in the OT, you were just killed and that was that. In the NT, you're tortured for eternity.
When the world was run by religion do you know what we call that period of time???? The dark ages
yeah the god fairytale has had its hayday...now we should let a state of pure science persist for a thousand years. human beings can decide which is a better way to live.
The dark ages is when Europe (not the world) was run by Catholicism. Catholicism does not represent religion as a whole.
You are right. That’s why God is not religion, He is a person.
And what about now that the ones that rule the world are atheists and scientists. Biological weapons like viruses and diseases are being tested on human beings. No difference buddy. Any thinking person can agree that the periods are getting darker.
@@voiceoreason9884 exactly. But you know how atheists are the self righteously clamp up all religions together and act like the self proclaimed critiques that they often try to be.
Intelligent Design Creationism collapses under the merest hint of scrutiny.
Evolution and abiogenesis, by contrast, come through unscathed...indeed triumphant.
Your posts are what one would expect from a low IQ ai bot. Billboard boilerplate examples:
1) "Intelligent Design Creationism collapses under the merest hint of scrutiny."
2) "Evolution and abiogenesis, by contrast, come through unscathed...indeed triumphant."
3) "The Book of Genesis is a steaming pile of [shit].*
4) "Evolution is regarded as scientific fact due to the overwhelming mountain of evidence supporting it."
5) "There is no God without superstitious imagination."
Prove that you're not a bot and have an IQ above 60.
@@alanclarke7Dry your tears, little troll.
Faith is tangible....that's why it's believed and facts. Those with faith literally experience it.
@@zari5972 Faith is believing something without evidence. In other words, you're a gullible fool.
If Mary gave birth to Jesus and Jesus is the "Lamb of God", did Mary actually have a little lamb? O_o
Garish Belliferous Too funny.
And have you ever thought about _why_ they talk about "sheep" and "shepherds" and "flocks"?
Key word - abattoir.
matchlockfun
They have to be properly fleeced first. On average that takes about 83.4 years.
Garish Belliferous And from what I hear shepherds are known for doing nasty things to their sheep.
ExtantFrodo2
I always considered the removal of tails a suspicious activity.
Alan Clarke
There was a question mark involved Al, surely you're not answering a question with a question, don't you know everything?
You've retyped my question in a different font, that undoubtedly would be a thought crime like looking upon the body of a woman with lust in your heart, tsk tsk, I hope that doesn't affect your immortality.
I suspect that a great many people of faith are good, well-intentioned folk who acquired certain beliefs in childhood, and never saw fit seriously to question those beliefs. When tolerance and respect are dressed up as “I won’t knock your beliefs if you don’t knock mine,” it is possible to maintain the lie that all beliefs are equally valid, no matter how obviously in conflict they are. Trolls, therefore, perform a remarkably useful service. By setting aside conventional deference to respect, they draw attention to the nuttiness upon which all religion depends. When the only way to preserve faith is to ignore, deny, misrepresent or lie about what has been discovered through science, at stake is not one set of beliefs vs another. It is the entire edifice of religion that needs to be rejected.
I am not a troll, I do not use this platform because it lets me show no respect, I use it because it allows me to respond to "their" lack of respect in pushing this bullshit onto others. Logic simply must speak up, "they" love to spread their disease!!. If they all kept their opinions about "the 1st edition of mans knowledge of the world" to themselves and not infect it upon their children, then we wouldn't be in this brainwashed belief of a omnipotent unicorn and a life after death. dead is dead, we are semi-intelligent animals flying through space at 3,000,080 km per hour, did the bible makers know this? Brainwashing of children is evil! Sanity must knock back!
cope
@@thefly6537 He left YT a long time ago, coping just fine.
@@ergonomover the fly
A flea and fly in a flow. Said the fly "let us flee", said the the flea "let us fly", so they flew through a flaw in the flow. @@thefly6537
The Concrete Confessional blog guy just dropped a lighthearted article on apparent problems with evolutionary theory that covers porn, substance abuse, Cluster B disorders, and speed-freak bees.
A lot of keyboard warrior controversy going on over it at the moment, but it was an interesting take and def worth checking out
Seems to me he talked about the evolution of addiction, not so much of species (which he did explain adequately).
He concluded: "Again, however, this isn't necessarily a good thing. Were our environment to suddenly shift due to climate change, conflict, or some other catastrophe, those same "negative" traits seen in addictive brains might suddenly be the ones that save us, after all."
I saw but 2 comments on his article, where is the keyboard warrior controversy taking place, pray tell.
Doomsday fear-mongering usually leaves out all the good things that are happening "in these times", for example, death by war, famine and illness are down, we eradicated Smallpox, saving hundreds of millions of lives. Extreme poverty is down from 90% to 10%, like literacy is up from 10% to 90%, and we have doubled life expectancy - all over the last 200 years.
It is a great time to be alive, to take full advantage of this one life we are sure to have.
It's not "fear-mongering". It is what it is written in the Holy Book.
Stop doing the devil's work.
@@WesD92422 Reporting verifiable facts is now the "devil's work"? Are you ill?
Just because Yeshua thought the end was nigh "sell all your possessions, have no thought for the morrow" does not mean the rapture is imminent, after 2000 years of false promises. If it's in the bible, when exactly will it happen? Care to make a prediction we can all laugh about when it fails like every other?
@@FlandiddlyandersFRS 😂 🤣 😂 🤣
You think I care if someone that believes octopi come from rocks laughs at me.. 😁
Keep up the worthless posts, Flanders. Keep proving you're nothing but a joke.
@@WesD92422 Wes admits to worshipping ink and paper.
@@garybell1291 You worship the devil.
If I did worship ink and paper, it would still be better than that
😂😂
If all the textbooks and religious texts were burned today in a thousand years we will have rewritten all the textbooks the same but all religious texts would be completely different as we'd figure out the same science yet invent all new stories/religions.
I love this comment. I can only like it once, but here is as close as I can get to liking it twice: +1
@Joe Gallop why would you ever think that fighting human emotions with the god (fear) is a good thing?
You know what I really like about this comment is that it makes me feel better about what I'm Doing. And there is no body to answer to when I die. Only,,,, wait ,, whats going to happen when I die?? holy shit ,,, hold on??? let me re think this.
@@sheckygagstein8966 Why would you rethink it? What makes you believe anything happens when you die? That's a dumb argument.
@Joe Gallop How can you logically assert that there exists more than we can know about. If you start the sentence with "we can't know", you can't end the sentence with any other conclusion than that. Just doesn't make sense.
Also, can you demonstrate that there is such a thing as a spirit? Or is that another thing which can't be known that you magically know? You're argument starts off alright but falls apart after the first few words.
I also think people should be open minded. But not so much so that their brain falls out.
Today, I learned that being a young-earth creationist means actually having a position on the speed of light. Tomorrow, young-earth creationists are going to talk about having a position on the temperature at which water boils.
Let me get this straight; his position on the speed of light is that, in a big-bang singularity, empty space might travel faster than light, that's as far as I could stomach. Doesn't that mean acceptance of big-bang cosmology is requisite to his "position"? Didn't you know water boils at lower temperatures at high altitudes during a supernova, on Thorsday in July, in the 5th dimension of the 3rd mulitverse? Positioning is key to obfuscating everything we know.
… and they're getting miffed that the world isn't taking their claims seriously, claims that include every single individual out of 78 species of coelacanths drowned before one giraffe calf did, before a single wolf puppy did and before a single baby mouse did.
I salute your reasonable position but what good reason is there to believe the bible was divinely inspired?@@AmberDennis001
@iadatoroboto8427 idk if I believe in God anymore
FROM THE IMMORAL BUYBULL (HOW TO PILLAGE A TOWN) *Deuteronomy 20:10-14*
"When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. *But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder.* You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.
FROM THE IMMORAL BUYBULL *EXODUS 21:20-21*
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, *since the slave is his own property.*
@ClickMeFor CovidTruth NEVER READ THE HOLY FAIRY TALES?
I'M NOT SURPRISED....... MOST CREATARDS HAVEN'T.
@ClickMeFor CovidTruth that verse is actually in the bible. This guy's an idiot, but it is
*IS HUMAN EXISTENCE AN ACCIDENT?*
If so, then we'd be like frightened little children, frantically running around inventing countless false religions to explain why we're here, and be at a loss to explain an apparently infinite universe ....HEY! wait a minute - that's *exactly* what we do ...
Owen Atkins You've hurt my feelings now, miss. I hope you're proud of yourself.
Owen Atkins
How will you get out of your chair? You're quite large for a little girl. Maybe mommy could help you?
matchlockfun "false religion" is just redundance.
matchlockfun "false religion" is just redundance.
juan reyes
I hear you.
I love how the triggered religious Karens on this video are pretending to be our moral superiors while blatantly lying to us about our own beliefs/disbeliefs. The only tactics I’ve seen from them is redefining words and cowering behind Straw Men.
Yep! 👍
Ahhh. You can tell the truth. So they are just beliefs and not facts.
Thanks for finally admitting it 👍🏿
As for the "triggered religious Karens" 😁
Is it Creationists starting threads just to insult a group of people who do not share the same beliefs, or is it the crying Atheists like you... 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
😂 🤣 😂 🤣
HOW TO TELL PEOPLE YOU'RE UNEDUCATED WITHOUT SAYING YOU'RE UNEDUCATED......
"When a scientific theory is proven it becomes a scientific fact." - CAMEL TOE
.
*SHOW THEM YOUR IGNORANCE* .... *THAT'S HOW*
If you politely ask most adults, "do you believe in magic?" They'll quickly tell you, "No!" Then ask them if they believe in gods and realise that 59% of them lied to you on the first question.
+Gary Bell
"If you politely ask most adults, "do you believe in magic?" They'll quickly tell you, "No!" Then ask them if they believe in gods and realise that 59% of them lied to you on the first question."
Hahahahahahahahahaha! *_Ignoring your WHOLLY MADE UP figure, those who are lying to you are the ones who believe - LIKE YOU ATHEISTS - that THE UNIVERSE CAME OUT OF NOTHINGNESS; AND THAT CHANGE CAN OCCUR WITHOUT CAUSATION!_* Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
+Zaki Aminu Cletus the Win/Gallup poll on religiosity (2012) isn't a made up figure. Do you wear an oven mitt to remove heated items or do you enjoy being burnt on a regular basis? Lies don't really constitute an argument little man, they only reveal the moral paucity of those who repeat them on a daily basis. There is no such place as nothing yet detected but you echoing head would be worth examining.
Gary Bell
"Cletus the Win/Gallup poll on religiosity (2012) isn't a made up figure...."
Hahahahahahahahaha! *_Well, we're in 2016 now, if you haven't noticed. And, also, the poll is conducted in the US - and so CANNOT say anything reliable about people in general!_* Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
"...Do you wear an oven mitt to remove heated items or do you enjoy being burnt on a regular basis?..."
Hahahahahahahaha! *_I OBSERVE AND THINK FOR MYSELF - and so find I have NO NEED to rely on polls, as you do!_* Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
"...Lies don't really constitute an argument little man, they only reveal the moral paucity of those who repeat them on a daily basis. There is no such place as nothing yet detected but you echoing head would be worth examining."
Hahahahahahahahaha! *_So, are you AFFIRMING THAT THE UNIVERSE MUST BE HAVE COME FROM SOMETHING ELSE, then - and NOT NOTHING? Or are you ONLY capable of BUFFOONERY and ABUSE?_* Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
+Zaki Aminu You're such a dope Cletus, the Win/Gallup poll was worldwide and even a backward bumpkin such as yourself should know the US is 70% theists. I'm amazed that you know that it's 2016 while you prattle on like a bronze age troglodyte about nothingness. Gaining a basic understanding of 21st century physics would only take one afternoon.
Gary Bell
"You're such a dope Cletus, the Win/Gallup poll was worldwide and even a backward bumpkin such as yourself should know the US is 70% theists....."
Hahahahahahahahaha! *_The idea that a US company went ROUND THE WHOLE WORLD and ASKED EVERYBODY THEIR OPINION ABOUT ANYTHING and got RELIABLE answers is rather FAR-FETCHED and FANCIFUL, is it not?_* Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
"...I'm amazed that you know that it's 2016 while you prattle on like a bronze age troglodyte about nothingness....."
*_You mean THE THING YOU SAY THE UNIVERSE CAME FROM - WHICH I HAVE POINTED OUT TO YOU DOES NOT EXIST, eh?_* Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
"...Gaining a basic understanding of 21st century physics would only take one afternoon."
Hahahahahahahaha! *_When seen from an ATHEISTIC perspective, eh?_* Hahahahahahahahahahaha! *_Then one would have NO DIFFICULTY understanding how THE UNIVERSE COMES OUT OF NOTHINGNESS and CHANGE OCCURS WITHOUT CAUSATION - JUST LIKE YOU, eh?_* Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!