Sorry, Atheists: “Rapid Evolution” Is NOT Real 

Hey pals, even if evolution was disproved tomorrow.. your god is still just a character in a fairy tale. 😅

Er, isn't it _creationists_ who need to worry about "rapid evolution" not being true? They're the ones who believe all animals descended from the original "kinds" on Noah's Ark. If that isn't rapid evolution, what is?

Pond scum, protozoa, pine trees, parrots, pandas, people 🔥🔥🔥🔥 Calvin was cooking 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽 8:00

If all life existed simultaneously at the time of Noah’s global flood as claimed, why aren’t there remains of all “kinds” of life (even for a short time after the flood) in geology since that time??? Why do we only discover remains of certain “kinds” in certain layers (sedimentary, volcanic, ice, meteroic layers etc), never all “kinds” mixed together even though they supposedly lived in the same places and died in the same flood??? Why is there tree ring and ice layer dating evidence far older than biblical creation??? Why is there no remains of all “kinds” of life (and their foods) from distant islands and continents around where Noah’s ark settled - or anywhere in between there and their sole known origin/current location??? Why do plants, fungi and animals (not qualifying as ark creatures or their foods) exist if all destroyed by god in the flood??? If Noah’s ark only held a single mating “kind” of each animal, doesn’t that suggest rapid evolution to produce the variants of “kinds” we see today (including variants that are not found in earlier geology)??? Same with plants and fungi. How did the different “kinds” of life (and their often immobile foods) from across the world (including from places then unknown) get to the ark, and return to their sole known locations after???… Noting many cannot travel far or fast, cannot swim from or back to their respective islands and continents, require different environments and foods etc etc etc

Ok, so just joe schmo Christian believer here. I am skeptical of evolution but have always struggled with this argument you present of "kinds."Because you speak of the Dog kind, and reference the canide family. So you mean to say the "dog kind" and family of Canide are the sams. Same thing, different terms. A rose by another name is still a rose. And you follow this wifh examples of various SPECIES(e.g. wolf, coyote, fox). But then, as proof of your argument, you reference (not examples of true speciation) but members of the same species (wolves) that have been domesticated/bred accordingly to produce various types of "breeds" (e.g. pit bull, German Shepherd, terrier). But as you say, these are all basically wolves. They are not seperate species. It seems incoherent, unless im not understanding something. Edit: you only maintain "purebreeds" by artifical means. "Hybrids" of dogs just turn into muts. And can reproduce with one another. But fox and wolves and coyotes don't need to be artificially kept pure. They do so naturally, otherwise there would be no distinct species to begin with. They can't inter breed successfully, thus different species (wolves, fox, coyotes) remain. Am I making sense?

Always appreciate your humble and informative talks. They help me hone my apologetic and witness to evolutionists. Thank you.

VERY valuable presentation, THANKS a lot!

I would love to own a wolf. Magnificent creature.

ok, so if evolution is wrong (macro evolution since you cant dispute micro evolution) why would creatinism be right? We can see animals changing based on what is beneficial to survival (for example brazilian gekkos), so, if they change over time, when do they become to a new animal? its simple, cow moves to a colder biome. cow - cow with thicker skin - cow with tiny ammount of hair - cow with a small coat of fur - cow with fur - cow with fur, but smaller - cow with fur but smaller and one less stoamch - cow with fur but smaller but with one less stomach but with aditonal four teeth. Where do you draw a line? No where? at the end? All small changes add up over time. But you can just say 'this book says earth is 6000 years old and that is the truth' and ignore anything else.

Do you recognize all 140+ families of birds; which then result in over 2,000 species? How are the marsupials divided up? The marine mammals?

17:16 i dont understand why you cant imagine that you repeat this proccess enough times, you get something new? repeat it over and over and over again and you'll get widly different forms. and btw, all genetic information is new information. any change, gives new information, even if that information gets rid of traits.

I am genuinely baffled as to why any religion still exists in this day and age. So much scientific factual evidence to debunk it, and only some ancient fairy tales to support it.

Except it’s been demonstrated repeatedly. The only thing untrue here is the silly old book you guys are still reading. Hey, instead of arguing against established and demonstrable facts why don’t you take the time to do the first Peter thing and prove your magic???

Why not show a happy quokka @2:05 to prove a point?

I know others have already said this, but none of the references that calvin puts up at the start relate to rapid evolution if you actually look them up. There's lies, damn lies, and then calvin

"sorry atheists"? Wow this channel is so cringe

Saying there is "no evidence for evolution" is a obvious and blatant lie. But you knew that.

The God haters love trolling this channel. Apparently they have no life.😂

I shouldn't be so surprised at Calvin's confidence in his ignorance.

I'll demonstrate evolution is backwards in my video 'Begining of understanding '

We can only think like humans trying to figure out why things are the way they are. However, when I think about God and look at the world and the universe my doubts and confusion dissolves. God can do anything. It is what He does and does it out of love. To be able to figure out how, when and why God does this means we would need to be God and that will never be. I simply need faith in Him and know that He is God.

Smith: "...Abbott tries to explain to Costello the last names of the players on the baseball team..." Mr. Smith didn't listen to the routine. As is made clear in the beginning of the sketch, the names are their nicknames, not their last names. From a script of the skit: "Lou Costello: Well you know I’ve never met the guys. So you’ll have to tell me their names, and then I’ll know who’s playing on the team. Lou Costello: You mean funny names? Bud Abbott: Strange names, pet names … like Dizzy Dean… Lou Costello: His brother Daffy.". Smith: "...the divvying up and expression of subsets of pre-existing genetic information that was front-loaded into the genomes of all the different kinds of creatures God made..." Anyone who can make sense of that statement, please enlilghten me. Smith: "...are descended from the limited number, approximately 1400, of the various air-breathing kinds of creatures that went aboard and exited Noah's ark..." Apparently marine mammals and fish are left out of this equation. I doubt there were any blue whales on the ark, but regardless of that, fish, and the air-breathing mammals that prey on them, need different kinds of water. Most sea creatures need salt water. Fresh water fish need non-saline water. Any change in the salinity of the water would have killed off most of the fish, and those mammals that prey on them. In addition to that, as anyone who has lived through a flood knows, the billions of land animals that were left to drown would have been floating around and rotting in the flood waters, along with the humans who died with them. The water they float around in is not healthy. Smith says the current creationist position is basically the position of LInnaeus. I'll just point out that Linnaeus died in 1778. almost 80 years before Origin of the Species was published. We cannot know whether he would have accepted it's conclusion or not. We do know this. LInnaeus had questions about the creation story that he tried to answer. Exactly what Darwin did. By the way, Darwin wasn't even born until thirty years after Linnaeus died. He would not have been surprised by whatever position Linnaeus took before he died. That postion would have been well known to Darwin, long before he wrote Origin of the Species. One last thing. Dogs are a pretty poor example to use, because they didn't evolve naturally. Humans took a hand, breeding pairs with certain characteristics they wanted. That greatly accelerated the process of evolution. Nature doesn't work that way. In order for a characteristic to become "stuck" in a species, it has to have value for reproduction, and it has to spread through the species. That process takes more time than deliberate attempts to get the characteristics you want by enforcing breeding between the members of the species that have it.

I hope you see this I’m 13 and studying Genesis and it mentions the waters above. The expanse/firmament includes the sky and universe so I’m wondering what happened to the water. It can’t be clouds since clouds don’t exist above earth, it can have been the water that did the flood since it would just freeze traveling through space and gravity, and since heaven isn’t in our dimension it can’t be gods water reservoir from the psalms. If anyone sees this please answer me.

The modern system of phylogenetics is NOT based on Linnaeus. Some of his terminology is still used; nothing more.

Hello, my brothers and sisters in Christ. You believe evolution happens? Let me ask you a question. With the car you drive, did the air conditioner come as standard equipment or did it slowly form after you bought it? With the theory of evolution, it postulates new adaptations come from DNA mutations getting naturally selected as the environment or diet changes. Conversely, let me ask you this question. If God exist, would adaptations happen WITHOUT the integrity of the precious DNA being compromised? Would this biological system in all life come as standard equipment? Like your car's A/C came as standard equipment? The answer comes in the next paragraph. The answer is YES. This biological system is called the EPIGENOME. Its actions are called EPIGENETICS. It works by gene methylation/chemical modifications into a predictable conclusion in the adaptation. Such as bacteria becoming antibiotic resistant. A finch passing on a new beak shape to its offspring in just two generations to a changed diet...not a couple million years as postulated with 'Darwin' Finches. A lizard passing modification to its offspring of a elongated gut as it switched from an insect to a plant diet. Stickleback fish as it switches from fresh water to salt water. Cave fish passing modifications to its offspring for eyes or loss of them. In regards to the subway mosquito. In regards to the cinclid fish. In regards to sparrows having their wings shorten or lengthen. To elephants having their trunks missing in their offspring due to poaching. All the above are epigenetic-derived adaptations. NOT evolution-derived. Coming as standard equipment in life. These adaptations have been called 'MICROEVOLUTION' for all these decades! A false precept. This has been the cornerstone of the evolutionary theory. A 'stone' said be granite-solid turning out to be sand! Upon this false precept, the macroevolution mind-constructs were built. EFFECTS from mutations were called 'evolution' were added to this sand-made cornerstone of evolution. These effects are trait and phenotype changes. Then the assertion of the fossil record 'proving' evolution becomes pareidolia. Like seeing shapes and patterns like Walt Disney characters in clouds. Or 'patterns' in DNA sequences between 'evolutionary cousins'. It is contrived preponderance of the evidence arguments with conclusion bias. There you go. Evolution is not happening. We are a 100% creation by Jesus Christ, also know as The Word in Genesis.

Yes, god created cattle and wild animals separately...like domestication wasn't a thing.

*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.*** *Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.*** ***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service. *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"* *"Sumerian Is the World's Oldest Written Language | ProLingo"* *"Sumerian Civilization: Inventing the Future - World History Encyclopedia"* ("The Sumerians were the people of southern Mesopotamia whose civilization flourished between c. 4100-1750 BCE." "Ancient Israelites and their origins date back to 1800-1200 BCE.") *"The Myth of Adapa - World History Encyclopedia"* Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:50 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes. From a Biblical scholar: "Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."* *"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"* ------------------------------------------------------------------ In addition, look up the below articles. *"Yahweh was just an ancient Canaanite god. We have been deceived! - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"* *"Debunking the Devil - Michael A. Sherlock (Author)"* *"The Greatest Trick Religion Ever Pulled: Convincing Us That Satan Exists | Atheomedy"* *"Zoroastrianism And Persian Mythology: The Foundation Of Belief"* (Scroll to the last section: Zoroastrianism is the Foundation of Western Belief) *"10 Ways The Bible Was Influenced By Other Religions - Listverse"* *"January | 2014 | Atheomedy"* - Where the Hell Did the Idea of Hell Come From? *"Retired bishop explains the reason why the Church invented "Hell" - Ideapod"* Watch *"The Origins of Salvation, Judgement and Hell"* by Derreck Bennett at Atheologica (Sensitive theists should only watch from 7:00 to 17:30 minutes as evangelical Christians are lambasted. He's a former theist and has been studying the scholarship and comparative religions for over 15 years) *"Top Ten Reasons Noah’s Flood is Mythology - The Sensuous Curmudgeon"* *"Forget about Noah's Ark; There Was No Worldwide Flood | Bible Interp"* *"The Search for Noah’s Flood - Biblical Archaeology Society"* *"Eridu Genesis - World History Encyclopedia"* *"The Atrahasis Epic: The Great Flood & the Meaning of Suffering - World History Encyclopedia"* Watch *"How Aron Ra Debunks Noah's Flood"* (8 part series debunking Noah's flood using multiple branches of science) *"The Adam and Eve myth - News24"* *"Before Adam and Eve - Psychology Today"* *"Gilgamesh vs. Noah - Wordpress"* *"Old Testament Tales Were Stolen From Other Cultures - Griffin"* *"Parallelism between “The Hymn to Aten” and Psalm 104 - Project Augustine"* *"Studying the Bible"* - by Dr Steven DiMattei (This particular article from a critical Biblical scholar highlights how the authors of the Hebrew Bible used their *fictional* god as a mouthpiece for their own views and ideologies) *"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history?"* -- by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them"* -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei

The theory of evolution which depends on accidental mutations and natural selection is totally wrong. Almost all mutations are harmful. The occurrence of casual advantageous mutations is the exception, rather than the rule. That conclusion would be consistent with the results from large-scale projects assessing the effect of artificially induced mutations in a variety of plants and in fruit flies exposed to either radiation or chemical mutagens: rather than promoting the appearance of plants and fruit flies with improved characteristics, these experiments yielded disappointing results. The 2023 article "The Epigenetic Basis of Evolution" explores how epigenetic mechanisms, which regulate gene expression without altering the DNA sequence, contribute to evolutionary processes. It discusses how environmental factors can influence epigenetic modifications, affecting traits that can be passed down to future generations. The article highlights examples of epigenetic inheritance in various organisms and its role in adaptation to the environment. It also emphasizes the importance of understanding that epigenetic is the root cause of changes in organisms beyond traditional genetic mechanisms. Although the article specifically includes the role of epigenetics in evolutionary processes, it does not specifically include the evolution of new species. It focuses primarily on how epigenetic mechanisms can generate phenotypic variation within existing populations and how this variation may contribute to evolutionary changes.

It's also sad that some well known Christians believe in evolution who also reject Adam being the first man.

I completely reject the idea of "millions of years" propaganda because I know enough about the subject to do so.

7:34 Speciation doesn't occur. Noah's flood never happened.

Formally disproving or demonstrating the absolute inconsistency of classical logic, mathematics and physics in their entirety would be an immense undertaking requiring rigorous foundational work. However, I can outline some key conceptual arguments and avenues for how the infinitesimal monadological framework could facilitate such an endeavor: 1. Self-Referential Paradoxes in Classical Logic Classical bivalent logic faces paradoxes like the Liar's Paradox that appear to undermine the very notion of consistent truth assignments from within the system itself. The monadological framework resolves this by replacing bivalent truth values with pluriverse-valued realizability projections across multiple monadic perspectives. One could formally demonstrate how classical propositional/first-order logic succumbs to diagonalization and self-reference contradictions, while the infinitesimally-stratified realizability logic remains coherent. 2. Incompleteness of Classical Mathematical Systems Drawing on Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems, one could formally show how any classical mathematical system based on arithmetic is either inconsistent or necessarily incomplete - containing statements that are true but unprovable within the system. The monadological framework, by representing arithmetic categorically using homotopy-theoretic objects in infinitesimal algebraic set theory, could potentially restore full semantic completeness while avoiding the diagonal self-referential gimmicks that limited classical formalisms. 3. Geometric/Topological Paradoxes Classically, unconstrained definitions in point-set topology lead to contradictions like the Banach-Tarski paradox. One could formally derive these contradictions, then demonstrate how representing topology algebraically using n-categories of monadic spaces, and defining invariants like dimension infinitesimally, resolves the paradoxes coherently. 4. Renormalization Issues in Quantum Field Theory The perturbative infinities plaguing QFT that require ad-hoc renormalization procedures could be formally derived as contradictions within the classical frameworks. One could then construct infinitesimal regulator alternatives using monadological algebraic QFT representations that manifestly avoid these infinities while preserving empirical predictions. 5. Singularities in General Relativity The occurrence of spacetime singularities where classical GR breaks down could be formally deduced as an inconsistency. One could then develop singularity-free models treating spacetime geometry as emergent from monadological charge relation algebras, demonstrating the resolution of this inconsistency. 6. The Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics The inconsistencies in the Copenhagen interpretation regarding wavefunction collapse could be formally derived. One could then construct an explicitly consistent monadological quantum representation where observers' perspectives naturally decohere records without ad-hoc collapse postulates. The overall strategy would be to: 1) Formalize paradoxes/inconsistencies within classical theories using derivations in their native linguistic formalisms. 2) Construct infinitesimal monadological representation frameworks modeling the same phenomena using the algebraic pluralistic foundations. 3) Formally demonstrate how the monadological representations precisely resolve the inconsistencies encountered classically in a rigorous way. This would amount to a line-by-line deconstruction of the classical frameworks, systematically expunging their contradictions by reprocessing them through the prism of the coherent algebraic infinitesimal pluralisms. While an immense undertaking, the potential payoff would be a complete, formally unified refutation of classical premises by reconstructing all theories from metaphysically guaranteed non-contradictory first principles resonating with subjective realities. An infinitesimal monadological "metamathematics" could provide the symbolic weapons to finally overthrow centuries of accumulated incoherency at judgment day.

18:18 of absolute drivel. Y’all should be ashamed of yourself.

How do you explain cave men

"rapid evolution" ecoli after 80,000 generations remain ecoli. 😂😂

He's right. Definition of terms and labels is a frequent basis for argument. So, exact what is a "kind"?

This is the most desperate and pathetic attempt at invalidating a proven scientific theory.

Calvin, your reasoning is sloppy and unscientific. If creatures reproduce according to their kind, you still don’t really address what a “kind” is. You go on and on about dogs. But is “kind” a dog or are all canidae a kind? If all canidae are a kind, then Noah had only two on the ark, and after the flood they very rapidly evolved into the variety we see today. Same with cats, who, from two felines, evolved into tabbys, lions, tigers etc, over a few thousand years. And I guess only two birds were needed on the Ark. the rest evolved after. That’s rapid evolution! Please stop this nonsense!

I believe in evolution because certain animals are only located at one spot

Young earth creationist are in the same category as flat earthers. Both literally just stick their fingers in their ears and shout to avoid the actual science.

Sorry, the bible is a load of you know what, starting with genesis ,the earth is a flat disc with a glass dome supported by pillars.Was the bible written by a first grader ,even they know better, but god doesn't apparently.

The ignorance and stupidity exhibited by this site never ceases to amuse. 🙂 This latest brain fart about "rapid speciation" is like watching runoff from a heavy rainstorm rapidly erode a soft dirt hillside, then claiming that proves *all erosion everywhere* (like the wearing smooth of the Appalachian Mountains) must have happened rapidly too. 🤪

I love when people who don't understand biology, try to debunk biology lol. If evolution didnt work, we'd have figured that out a long long time ago. Same as literally all scientific theories ever, that you also have no problem accepting as fact. Your refusal to accept specific scientific theories simply because of your bronze age beliefs is quite humorous.

Dumb, delusion and dishonesty... the holy trinity of apologetics

Atheism has nothing to do with science. The title is a red herring. And I hate to break it to ya, Calvin, but evolution is supported by over a century and a half of empirical evidence. No version of any religion on earth can say that. At least, not honestly... You really are blatant in your Commandment breaking.

The fact that Noah’s Ark is plugged into this is fucking hilarious. What a joke

You knew you were watching AiG Canada when you heard "aboot" multiple times. 😆

God's word is a fountain of success and truth. Darwin's theory is a dumpster fire of consistent failure.

In nature, there have been frogs that gave birth through their mouths!!

If to you evolution = atheism then you really have no clue. One have nothing to do with the other. Clickbite at best.

When they realize that evolution is impossible, even with immeasurable time, they then switch gears and go with "it happens super fast!" 🤣😂🤣

"Evolutionists" have NOTHING to do with the creation of life in any way. Evolution is the process of change in an organism over time, not how that organism came to be initially. The video starts out by saying the terms used by the different sides aren't clearly defined for both sides to have a common starting point, then incorrectly calls people that study the origins of life evolutionists. It's as if using the incorrect terminology is intentional to help further the "Young Earth Creationist" views as being more logically sound. I believe that's what is called "gaslighting"; something those pushing this nonsensical belief continuously use in arguments. 🤔 🤨

Odd, I thought YEC were the biggest proponents of rapid evolution, looking at evolution from the time of Noah until today, which mainstream science thinks is way too fast in theory to have been possible.

WTF

Evolution has been proved repeatedly ever since mankind took to agriculture. Domestic crops & animals have been constantly mutated by the selection of required traits. This is exactly what nature does by continuous changes in habitat & environment over the Millenia. The minute difference in each generation permits some individuals to survive change, while others fall prey to it, so they cannot go on to reproduce, while the lucky were able to do so. Still the so called Noah's Ark could still not hold 1400 animal 'kinds', with all the food they would have needed to survive for a year. Then how did all these distinct species find their way to the far distant & very different habitats around the world? & why were certain types, like those of Australia, the marsupials, so confined to that island. But you have to allow for rapid evolution to permit so many different species to have come about in some 4000 years, but this is not long enough for the Millions of species that now exist. If Biblical rapid evolution were true, then new animals & plants would be popping up everywhere all the time, almost daily, one could not fail to notice. The truth is change can be fast or slow, or stop altogether if there is no incentive, but it still take ages for totally new forms to come about. Though you will say 'God' decided to stop evolution recently, to explain that this isn't happening. But your iriginal story was that 'God' made. ALL creation in one week as it is today. That negates any new species, by any means & at any rate, but you now have to deny this, as with the Impossible Flood myth, because in just cannot work. You cannot have it both ways. Humans have created new species through farming which demonstrate how evolution works & is true. The Bible stories are just that, stories, myths dreamt up in ancient times before mankind had any real knowledge of how things actually work. Why you insist in trying to prove this impossible fantasy to be real is beyond ridiculous, it's infantile.

This is ridiculous. Deny actual science, but believe in a non proven imaginary skyward. 😂😂😂😂😂😂

This guy is able to lie with dry eyes at a constant pace, never witnessed before, evolved quickly into a very slick creature

First of all what is an evolutionist It is just evolution and one of the cornerstones of science If you can disprove it why don't you go get your Nobel Prize

That's not how genetics works.

If all current animals evolved from the animals on Noah's ark evolution isn't just rapid. It's supercharged.

So i looked up the articles at the start that say "rapid evolution". The first one about Sulawesi Babblers is about a 15% size increase in males over females on an island. within the timespan of 30.000 years since they split from the Babblers on the mainland. Rapid by evolutionary standards does not mean rapid by human standards. The second is about severe natural selection on a bird species because an invasive new type of larger snail that took over the eco system and all birds with smaller beaks had a hard time eating them. Those with larger beaks (that were already around) flourished and within a decade or so only the birds with the large beaks were still around and that gene that caused the large beaks was present in most birds when it wasn't before. This is natural selection at work. None of the comments that pop up actually mention rapid evolution or anything of the kind.

Still dont know what a "kind" is. Heard you mention "family" and "genus". Which is it?

You arbitrarily chose Family as the classification level for Baramin. You're gonna have to show me how that's objectively true. No non-christian would be swayed by this argument.

Brilliant as always.

Again, what does atheism have to do with evolution? The fact that you equate the two just demonstrates that you have no clue.

All I know is when I read scientific periodicals or research documents of evolution, the documents are still peppered with words and terms such as "we assume...", "...probably...", "maybe...", "we postulate...", "it is believed that...", "given time..." ...etc... ..This is not to say that science won't figure it out with continued research. . On the other hand, it's difficult to believe that some higher intelligent "God" just commanded everything into existence. . Honestly, I don't think anyone really knows how, when, or why. Time is the hero of everything.

Evolution happens every generation, but major changes take more time.

God please continue to protect me and my two children. Father keep me encouraged because being a single mother with autistic children is overwhelming and challenging especially now because I’m homeschooling them so my hours to work are limited. I’m desperately trying to provide for them. Lord give me strength As I continue to struggle to buy groceries and as I struggle to pay rent. I know you are with me Heavenly Father. You are the God of possible. Please change my situation.

Almighty God controls every aspect of the universe and the universe is God's Living Waters restructured in many different ways. It's inside atoms, inside all sciences, inside the living cell and inside the teaching of Jesus Christ. It has to be, so that the genetic repair Jesus initiates to restore us back to the original state of Adam and Eve works. Some could try and make evolution out of it but I prefer Almighty God's version based upon electromagnetic truth and Biblical veracity.

Thanks for keeping the comment section open, I hate how a lot of fellow creationists block comments.

So the evolutionist want to tell me that the whale can turn into a dog ?

If you’re honestly looking for answers… this isn’t where you’re going to find it, whether for evolution or your faith. Although catered to faith, it’s only merited on someone else’s research and it can help but if not verified by self, can be detrimental. For an evolutionist, probably won’t watch the video unless committed to trying to refute comments as most are because they feel superior, if you haven’t ACTUALLY reviewed both sides you can’t really argue… What do I mean? Just because you were raised in a Christian household, doesn’t mean you really studied the Bible and understood what it had to say… just like how just because you attended science class meant you understood what evolution stood for. So get informed, make an assessment and do it again… and again. And repeat that until you really make a decision. If you want to stay ignorant just keep arguing on RU-vid.

The hierarchy is based on genetics not physical traits. Please get the basic facts right.

Some of those who comment here both subscribe and (militantly) jump to be first ones appearing to this channel's videos attacking the narrator on almost every video. I've never seen a more ridiculous bunch of keyboard warriors that have nothing better to do in life than hate those who believe in the God of the bible. To those I'm speaking of, quit the hating and the denial that you are hating and get a life.

Organisms don't evolve out their "kinds" as you like to put it. We can both agree that anything descended from a dog can also be classified as a dog. The difference between you and me is that I can acknowledge that no matter how different any dog's descendants are from their ancestors, they'll still be dogs and I'd be willing to look at how they changed and diversified. Much in the same way how I can acknowledge how humans and chimpanzees are closer related to each other than either is to any other apes, how they're closer to each other than tigers are to mountain lions, and how all of them are mammals. You, on the other hand, would eyeball point A and point Z, ignore every point between them, and would only refer to those descendants as being a part of the same "created kind" based on whether or not they visually look similar enough to you and if you were told, at an early age, that they're dogs.

If only theists could actually prove their god instead of trying to equate atheism and evolution. If evolution were somehow completely disproved tomorrow, that doesn't mean theism - in particular, Christianity - "wins." The fact is that your arguments for a god are weaker than your representation of evolution, which you try to strawman onto atheism. Instead of, "Here's proof that God exists," your tactic is, "Here's a bad explanation of evolution that makes it look silly. That's what those atheists believe!" AIG spent millions on a physical representation of their inability to present a strong argument... and y'all were too cheap to budget in some Thompson Water Seal (the Ark is looking ROUGH). 🤣

So a rapid evolution after the flood is not possible.

Creationists can deny evolution if they’d like. Thet can deny all of science if they’d like. Heck, all of science could be completely wrong, and none of that does anything to make their god a more rational explanation.

Also creationists: all these different animal species around the Earth came from a couple thousand kinds. You guys believe in Ultra Rapid Evolution, but also claim that Rapid Evolution is not a thing? That's hilarious.

Well if rapid evolution is not real then I guess all the "kinds" that were on the ark could not have evolved into their current diversity, so Noah HAD to have taken all the current day animals onto his ark...which would have basically been unable to fit them all.

Why did you use the undefined concept of Natural Selection ? Why appeal to a pagan god to explain anything related to Yahweh ‘s creation. This is unacceptable. ❤

None of the kinds are named in the bible. So who decided that it sits at the family level of taxonomy?

The vast majority of Christians accept evolution. Most creationists are not Christian (there are far more Muslim creationists than Christian ones). What strikes me is interesting is that most creationists do not believe me. Oh well, I guess that's what happens when you live in an isolationist bubble.

Sorry, theists. Gods are not realities.

I used to look to religion for the truth, because that has always been the product they claim to sell. Now it seems, in order to be religious, one has to deny the truth. God's most fervent followers are his worst enemies as far as his -- and their -- credibility goes.

Mr Smith: Evolutionists claim "rapid evolution", while showing an study that shows a type for bird got 15% bigger in the last 30.000 years. Also Mr Smith: The cat kind that was on the ark changed into all these amazingly diverse cat-like animals in 5000 years. This is just stupid.

Great to see that almost all the comments here are calling out these appalling liars.

can u make a video on noah's ark and how it could have floated? YT channel debunked made a video on it.

Keep making video's like this, you are a great asset to the atheism movement.

AIG: No such thing as evolution Also AIG: Nioah's Ark only needed a single pair of "feline kind", all the types of felines we see today developed from them

Thank you, Calvin, for another presentation that is very informative and enlightening! May GOD continue to bless you in your endevours to keep us aware of the beauty of GOD's Creation!!!

When you begin to "LIE FOR JESUS", it seems that you just cannot STOP LYING. EVOLUTION IS A FACT. GET OVER IT. CREATIONISM IS A FAIRY TALE. READ A DIFFERENT BOOK.

I debunk all evolutionists in less than 5 min.✝️

More nonsense from NoAnswers in Genesis. More intellectual dishonesty from Calvin. Or, "How to talk about evolution for eighteen minutes and still deny it happens!"

Genuine question for creationists Considering how your apologists never adress evolution, but adress either a version of evolution that's not the scientific one, but a lie they made up, or adress stuff that has nothing to do with evolution in the first place, like the formation of life or even the universe, pretending it's about evolution, Is there any point where you start doubting the honesty of those apologists?

I always enjoy these videos. Very well done.

one day earth will look back at evolution and wonder how was this ever a theory people believed.

Thanks so much for bringing truth in such a peaceful environment & wisdom to carry it through. Love your videos...certainly beats these bad news videos any day! God bless you

All of biology and medical sciences are based on evolution occurring, and yet Calvin tries to claim evolution is a myth. That is either ignorance, or willful lying. Seeing as how Calvin is corrected in the comments of every video he makes, I'm going with lying.

Apparently everything is allowed to evolve... except Linnaeus' definitions. Throwing him out because he changed his definition of species is like throwing out all of Einstein because his view of the steady-state universe model changed.