Evolution is dead.

[RWNJ]

I realize that the hardcore atheists on here probably won't take the time to watch this. I really don't care. But if you haven't made up your mind yet, you might want to take a look at this. It completely destroys the theory of evolution using science. Well worth your time. Check it out.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

49 minutes? You think I’m going to listen to some phony science for 49 minutes?

 

[BETH-MIDAN]

No its not, its only a theory, it can't die !

 

[BETH-MIDAN]

49 minutes? You think I’m going to listen to some phony science for 49 minutes?

Do you practice a buffalo bill voice in the mirror ?

 

[aaronleland]

49 minutes? You think I’m going to listen to some phony science for 49 minutes?

I made it as far as "Endtime Productions Presents"...

 

[BETH-MIDAN]

Yeah, I admit. I'm not watching it either.
Evolution being God and whisking the minds of all the children away and all.

It might be a nightmare.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

49 minutes? You think I’m going to listen to some phony science for 49 minutes?

I made it as far as "Endtime Productions Presents"...

Yep, that is where I felt the stupid wave coming and shit it off.

 

[aaronleland]

Judging by the title I guess the premise is that evolution is a scam designed to turn the population atheist. Because God knows you can't control a population with religion. That's unheard of.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Judging by the title I guess the premise is that evolution is a scam designed to turn the population atheist. Because God knows you can't control a population with religion. That's unheard of.

Yep, no irony there. Let’s move along.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I realize that the hardcore atheists on here probably won't take the time to watch this. I really don't care. But if you haven't made up your mind yet, you might want to take a look at this. It completely destroys the theory of evolution using science. Well worth your time. Check it out.

Firstly, he said a design from elsewhere in the Universe. Are you saying God is sitting somewhere in Universe? They said he was up in the sky, astronauts went up there and didn't find him. Go figure.


It seems to be trying to prove something by going "hey, we know about this stuff, it's more complex than your brain can cope with, so, just trust us on this one"

 

[fncceo]

You’re partially right. Death is a major factor in the process of Evolution.

Without it, evolution wouldn’t work as well as it does.

 

[Syriusly]

I realize that the hardcore atheists A]

Nope- not going to waste my time on idiotic science denier propaganda.

But I will ask you this question:

What theory best fits the facts that we know for why there is the diversity of life on Earth?

 

[RWNJ]

Just what I expected. You people are afraid of the truth. Or at least you're afraid of honest debate. If any of you could just pick something from the video and try to refute it, I might have a little respect for you. But you can't, and you know it. Sucks to be you.

 

[ScienceRocks]

There's real evidence for evolution, while there's not one single piece of proof proving this god to be real.

Evolution doesn't need to be perfect as there's more then enough evidence from thousands of species proving that something like it was responsible for life on this planet. You sir are a maker up of utter trash without a single point of evidence or shoe to stand on.

 

[alang1216]

I realize that the hardcore atheists on here probably won't take the time to watch this. I really don't care. But if you haven't made up your mind yet, you might want to take a look at this. It completely destroys the theory of evolution using science. Well worth your time. Check it out.

I got through 12 minutes of it and learned nothing new. The same old argument: the life we see is so complex it could not have been natural. I bailed when they started interviewing laymen with no real knowledge of the science.

 

[Hollie]

Just what I expected. You people are afraid of the truth. Or at least you're afraid of honest debate. If any of you could just pick something from the video and try to refute it, I might have a little respect for you. But you can't, and you know it. Sucks to be you.

Some folks are a bit more discriminating. If you get your "twoofs" from goofy YouTube videos produced by "Endtimes Productions" you probably should be excused from the population of the planet that has attended formal education.

 

[RWNJ]

I realize that the hardcore atheists on here probably won't take the time to watch this. I really don't care. But if you haven't made up your mind yet, you might want to take a look at this. It completely destroys the theory of evolution using science. Well worth your time. Check it out.

I got through 12 minutes of it and learned nothing new. The same old argument: the life we see is so complex it could not have been natural. I bailed when they started interviewing laymen with no real knowledge of the science.

Then why don't you try to refute it? All you say is that it's a bunch of BS. If you cannot give a reasoned argument, then you lose. Pick something from the video and try to refute it. You can't. In fact, no one has even tried.

 

[alang1216]

I realize that the hardcore atheists on here probably won't take the time to watch this. I really don't care. But if you haven't made up your mind yet, you might want to take a look at this. It completely destroys the theory of evolution using science. Well worth your time. Check it out.

I got through 12 minutes of it and learned nothing new. The same old argument: the life we see is so complex it could not have been natural. I bailed when they started interviewing laymen with no real knowledge of the science.

Then why don't you try to refute it? All you say is that it's a bunch of BS. If you cannot give a reasoned argument, then you lose. Pick something from the video and try to refute it. You can't. In fact, no one has even tried.

According to a strawman argument in the video, information cannot be created so life can not start from non-life since that would require more information. They say this is a problem for evolution but they are incorrect. Read this and this:

Creationists, in an attempt to coat their myths with a veneer of science, have co-opted the idea of information theory to use as a plausible-sounding attack on evolution. Essentially, the claim is that the genetic code is like a language and thus transmits information, and in part due to the usual willful misunderstandings of the second law of thermodynamics (which is about energy, not information), they maintain that information can never be increased.[10] Therefore, the changes they cannot outright deny are defined as "losing information", while changes they disagree with are defined as "gaining information", which by their definition is impossible. Note that at no point do creationists actually specify what information actually is and often (even in the allegedly scientific case of complex specified information) will purposefully avoid defining the concept in any useful way. Creationists tend to change their meaning on an ad hoc basis depending on the argument, relying on colloquial, imprecise definitions of information rather than quantifiable ones - or worse, switching interchangeably between different definitions depending on the context of the discussion or argument.

The deliberate conflation of the totally unrelated concepts of thermodynamic and informational entropy is, while an obvious flaw in the argument, a flaw that the creationists' intended audience is less likely to pick up on, so it remains a popular argument, as seen in Ken Ham's... debate with Bill Nye at the Creation Museum.​

 

[norwegen]

49 minutes? You think I’m going to listen to some phony science for 49 minutes?

If you stop watching when they start rolling the credits, it's probably only 47 minutes.

 

[RWNJ]

I realize that the hardcore atheists on here probably won't take the time to watch this. I really don't care. But if you haven't made up your mind yet, you might want to take a look at this. It completely destroys the theory of evolution using science. Well worth your time. Check it out.

I got through 12 minutes of it and learned nothing new. The same old argument: the life we see is so complex it could not have been natural. I bailed when they started interviewing laymen with no real knowledge of the science.

Then why don't you try to refute it? All you say is that it's a bunch of BS. If you cannot give a reasoned argument, then you lose. Pick something from the video and try to refute it. You can't. In fact, no one has even tried.

According to a strawman argument in the video, information cannot be created so life can not start from non-life since that would require more information. They say this is a problem for evolution but they are incorrect. Read this and this:

Creationists, in an attempt to coat their myths with a veneer of science, have co-opted the idea of information theory to use as a plausible-sounding attack on evolution. Essentially, the claim is that the genetic code is like a language and thus transmits information, and in part due to the usual willful misunderstandings of the second law of thermodynamics (which is about energy, not information), they maintain that information can never be increased.[10] Therefore, the changes they cannot outright deny are defined as "losing information", while changes they disagree with are defined as "gaining information", which by their definition is impossible. Note that at no point do creationists actually specify what information actually is and often (even in the allegedly scientific case of complex specified information) will purposefully avoid defining the concept in any useful way. Creationists tend to change their meaning on an ad hoc basis depending on the argument, relying on colloquial, imprecise definitions of information rather than quantifiable ones - or worse, switching interchangeably between different definitions depending on the context of the discussion or argument.

The deliberate conflation of the totally unrelated concepts of thermodynamic and informational entropy is, while an obvious flaw in the argument, a flaw that the creationists' intended audience is less likely to pick up on, so it remains a popular argument, as seen in Ken Ham's... debate with Bill Nye at the Creation Museum.​

DNA is a language. It meets every definition of it. It uses symbolic processing. The information is read and acted upon. In fact, Every observation ever made proves that language is the result of intelligent minds. No exceptions. You can believe that the language of DNA just popped into existence all by itself. But such a belief would make you a fool.