Tom Wolfe on why Darwin's evolution theory is a "myth" 

Paul Moffat the only thing they can do is decompose

If both of them go to heaven

what makes you think darwin amd tom are both in heaven

@@tauqeerhussain4057 to be more practical Darwin by definition didn't believe in Heaven.

@@976_evils how ?

Darwin's theory is a myth

@@kurshtivk8876 yes

Try challenging Copernicus

DO you have a tail?

@@kurshtivk8876 Nope, not a myth, a scientific theory that still holds true to this day.

A threat face to face how could he continue talking about his point?

How can you threaten an 85 year old

(EDIT: Sorry I missed the some might say dangerous but still don't misquote people you left the bold part entirly out of the quote.)

The threat of ignorance.

The threat of evil

It was a selling point and the highlight of this vid

People like this shouldn’t be allowed a voice and should be cast away in a progressive society. He contributes nothing.

Please repent and turn to GOD I love you

@@DonutWarLord yep, you would make a perfect low tier bureaucrat in the governments of such countries as N.Korea, China, Iran. Why don't you send them your resume?

@@DonutWarLord ah... how the fascism excels!

Same here

something tells me he wrote exactly what he said in the video over and over in the book with random unrelated facts trying to disprove evolution.

As soon as corporate controlled news gets on a story, the intellectual level slips down to elementary school.

suck it atheists guess y’all don’t have any purpose in life 😏

Please! Teach me Somethingism!

Agree, although cultists have a hard time with that, whether they are found in Religion, Science, Politics, the Arts.

That’s false, just ask anyone who challenges the beliefs of the majority in countries with state religions like most Islamic Countries, they’ll tell you how safe it is to go against those beliefs. Darwin’s discoveries are not beliefs though, they’re scientific facts.

It's dangerous to live and think, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.

laserfan17 wrote, "Darwin’s discoveries are not beliefs though, they’re scientific facts." Evolution is based solely on elaborate just-so stories, beginning with Darwin's overextrapolation of observable science (breeding, variation, adaptation, and speciation) into unobservable "common ancestry," for which there is not a shred of evidence. Evolutionists hide that fact by smothering us with examples of observable changes within species, which no scientist disputes, and then claiming they prove one type of species can "morph" over time into another type, which is abject nonsense. It recently got much worse for the devout evolutionist. Modern genetic research has shown it is virtually impossible for humans to have evolved from another type of animal, such as a Simian ape. Three separate research papers -- one by intelligent-designers (IDers), and two by evolutionists (who were trying to dispute the research of the IDers) -- have shown that under the most favorable conditions it would take about 25 million years for a single, coordinated pair of mutations to occur in humans (Michael Lynch, 2005.) Two other evolutionist researchers determined it would take over 100 million years (Durrett and Schmidt, 2008.) To put that into perspective, humans and chimpanzees have hundreds of millions of base-pair differences. It got worse. Eric Davidson, who spent much of his career studying the developmental gene regulatory network (the dGRN,) determined that embryos develop only one way, and that any changes (e.g., mutations) that affect the early stages of cell division (before the body plan is determined) are almost always catastrophic. It got worse. The 2012 report of the government-sponsored Human Genome Project (ENCODE) determined that about 80% of the human DNA is functional, negating the claims by evolutionists that the non-coding DNA (about 98-99% of the genome) is "junk" and is evolvable. By 2018, the functional portion had increased to greater than 95%, which, for all practical purposes, points to the entire genome being evolutionarily constrained, or non-evolvable. The fossil record is also no help. The fossil record shows abrupt appearance of species followed by stasis (no evolutionary change,) and disparity before diversity. The latter is devastating to evolutionary theory since it turns the so-called "tree of life" upside down. All major phyla that exists today appeared abruptly and early in the geologic column. Darwin predicted the opposite: that one or a few simple organisms would gradually evolve into more complex ones. Dan

@@BibleResearchTools in the second line did you mean to write “They're scientific theories”? Or you meant what you wrote.

Germany had an idea once. 80.000.000 people died.

@@Lezeik1 lol.

@@Lezeik1 Yes, the idea was a form of social Darwinism.

@@kamandi1362 It was not a form of social darwinism and social darwinism hade nothing to do with actual darwinism.

“Dangerous ideas” and misinformation are used interchangeably.... misinformation is definitely both dangerous and harmful to society

SadamYT evolution needs way longer than that to get anything done LMAO

Is he commander Wolfe brother of star wars lol jk

Evolution is literally so bs

Victor Faria why?

@Pudding microevolution if u want to call it that lmao a billion years from now i will wager its still gonna b bacteria maybe by then though it will sprout some wings and b flying bacteria that has eyes

so untrue 😆

Evolution is an assumption. Not a fact. So true bro

I believe this is true. Well said quote.

@Chad Harris God replaced it with "gods" already. Men are weak mortals; either way.

@Chad Harris Prove it

that's how the networks make their money.

A book can be clearly seen by its cover so no need to read it

Snipe G4mer Condemnation before investigation is the height of ignorance. Good jerb moran.

@@snipeg4mer693 have you not heard "never judge a book by its cover"? if one looked at say Harry Potter and the sorcerer's stone's cover ... would one be able to tell you what it was about without ever reading it?

@@TheVVumpus I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

Well the theory of Evolution is entirely based off of less than 1% of all known species throughout history. And that less than 1% of evidence alone is heavily debated even by believers of the theory. So its not as blasphemous as all these morons in the comment section think it is to question the theory all together.

Fahad S ikr they say that we believe in fairytales then cite the Bible as a source

@ Fahad S... my thoughts exactly

OK, we defs come from nothing and stardust

@Richard Fox whatever buddy

@Jake the Astronaut "And what about the energy that was used for the "big bang"," You're thinking of energy as a plus, when instead energy is both plus and minus. Or in other words, negative energy. The total sum of energy is still 0. All that's needed is quantum vacuum potential. "in Genesis God created everything" Except god himself apparantly. Apparantly this nothing also allows for actions, requiring time, hence it isn't a philosophical nothing, so what is it then? Meanwhile, unlike primitives, we understand time is relative and requires space. Therefore you god is located in spacetime that also not spacetime as it is supposed to be nothing. Or in laymen terms: including a maximum only brings problems, it doesn't solve anything. "therefore the only thing that could resolve that stalemate would be to take a leap of faith, decide who or what you believe in, and move on." Well, no. One answer doesn't require a magical skydaddy existing outside of existence yet still caring about what hole you put it in in the bedroom. You act as if any answer is equal when evidence is short. It's not.

You are an animal. We are humans.

no we are not , we have minds and morals which animals dont have .

Wolf Exile we are animals that evolved morals

some look human but act very much like an animal

@@JellyAntz Morals isn't something that evolve.. it's somthing we can not get it by any sources outside.. its something that just there.. and animals don't have them..

Evolution is not truth

@Ricahrd P'Brien What has your response got to do with what I posted?

@Ricahrd P'Brien What is a cell? Cells are the basic building blocks of all living things. The human body is composed of trillions of cells. They provide structure for the body, take in nutrients from food, convert those nutrients into energy, and carry out specialized functions. Cells also contain the body’s hereditary material and can make copies of themselves. Cells have many parts, each with a different function. Some of these parts, called organelles, are specialized structures that perform certain tasks within the cell. Human cells contain the following major parts, listed in alphabetical order: Cytoplasm Within cells, the cytoplasm is made up of a jelly-like fluid (called the cytosol) and other structures that surround the nucleus. Cytoskeleton The cytoskeleton is a network of long fibers that make up the cell’s structural framework. The cytoskeleton has several critical functions, including determining cell shape, participating in cell division, and allowing cells to move. It also provides a track-like system that directs the movement of organelles and other substances within cells. Endoplasmic reticulum (ER) This organelle helps process molecules created by the cell. The endoplasmic reticulum also transports these molecules to their specific destinations either inside or outside the cell. Golgi apparatus The Golgi apparatus packages molecules processed by the endoplasmic reticulum to be transported out of the cell. Lysosomes and peroxisomes These organelles are the recycling center of the cell. They digest foreign bacteria that invade the cell, rid the cell of toxic substances, and recycle worn-out cell components. Mitochondria Mitochondria are complex organelles that convert energy from food into a form that the cell can use. They have their own genetic material, separate from the DNA in the nucleus, and can make copies of themselves. Nucleus The nucleus serves as the cell’s command center, sending directions to the cell to grow, mature, divide, or die. It also houses DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), the cell’s hereditary material. The nucleus is surrounded by a membrane called the nuclear envelope, which protects the DNA and separates the nucleus from the rest of the cell. Plasma membrane The plasma membrane is the outer lining of the cell. It separates the cell from its environment and allows materials to enter and leave the cell. Ribosomes Ribosomes are organelles that process the cell’s genetic instructions to create proteins. These organelles can float freely in the cytoplasm or be connected to the endoplasmic reticulum (see above). The human body is composed of trillions of cells. These replicate then die throughout our lifetime. Which one of the trillions do you think has caused you to change from one creature to another?

Uh, reproductive cells (sperm and eggs)?

DonswatchingtheTube there are a couple important terms you’ve forgot to research about Research about DNAs, RNAs and MUTATIONS and you’ll have some answers

Ricahrd P'Brien Ha, "directly observed" No human has ever observed macro (not micro) evolution, giraffes were always giraffes, not cows; there's a big gap there which evolutionism couldn't fill

@Mim ಠ_ಠ Evolution is not an atheistic idea it’s a scientific theory. So nobody is in danger.

Can you explain why atheism is in danger and guess what evolution is not a atheistic idea it is a scientific theory which many atheist believe in

@@insciencewetrust1183 But atheist love to use it as sheild against God existence.

@@MRakshay-fb2mu that doesnt really disprove it tho does it

@@Vlad-ri8hb As an atheist I don't believe in evolution, I understand evolution.. I agree with everything else you said but evolution is not something you believe, it's either you understand evolution or you don't..

Ok just quick why today apes didn't evolve ? Since we evolved from apes ?

Cat Games first of all, we didn’t evolve from apes. Both us and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Secondly, they are evolving. Every species on earth is evolving. We just don’t notice it in our lifespans because it takes hundreds or even thousands of generations for it to become obvious.

God could've created us through evolution, that's possible. The problem is when atheists counterattack anti-Darwinists on grounds that "You're a religious person who believes the world was created in 6 days, don't talk" Like what? It has nothing to do with whether God exists or not, why do you atheists call religious people "crazy for not questioning their faith" when you're not questioning yours? And when someone criticizes your theory, you just deflect it with "you're a religionist" I miss objective science, where atheist and creationist scientists tried together to understand the world question every theory

@@yub2.045 Evolution is a fact, why would you question something that is proven fact? One can only question unproven claims like God exists..

@@yub2.045 - "I miss objective science, where atheist and creationist scientists tried together to understand the world question every theory" WHO says that isn't happening? tons of scientific articles are published annually by atheist and creationist scientists collaborating. REMEMBER: RU-vid COMMENTERS are NOT SCIENTISTS, right? "God could've created us through evolution, that's possible." YUP, sure is. Now it just has to be proven. Problem is, the scientific method has rigid standards and rules to uphold the validity of findings: 1) All HYPOTHESES *MUST* be falsifiable. That means, it MUST be possible to DISPROVE the hypothesis. What GOOD is one, if we can't PROVE it's FALSE or NOT TRUE? Science is about searching for ANSWERS, not about proposing IMPOSSIBLE QUESTIONS TO ANSWER. 2) "God" is UN-FALSIFIABLE: how COULD you prove that "god doesn't exist", couldn't he be sitting under an Apple tree, half-way across the visible universe where we could never go look for him? 3) God has "no explanatory powers" - i.e. God is a MYSTERY, what is the benefit of answering a question, with a MYSTERY? 4) therefore "God" can NEVER be part of any scientific hypothesis BY DEFINITION. 5) Evolutionary Theory has NO unexplained contradictions or gaps that suggest it is not valid and sound as the reason for the diversity of life on this planet. i.e. no "God" is required to "make it work OK". It stands alone, and works just fine. 6) Science LIVES by questioning. Nothing is sacred. HOWEVER, poorly conceived or flawed arguments are quickly DISMISSED. Why should we waste time on them? Once we KNOW 2+2=4, who is willing to waste the time on someone arguing it equals 5?

ഇതെന്താ മലയാള മാസവോ?😂

Agreed

"Personally I dont think science should bully everything else into science" If presenting facts is "bullying," you're skin is simply too thin to actually exist. "in truth it is all theory" Only if you ignore laws and hypotheses, and such.

@@eddyeldridge7427 it is though its was charles darwins theory and although science has been a part of our lives we still dont know if we can prove to see if we evolved or not has a lot of thinking and dna resoursment put together so we actually dont know.

Do you want to try that again, hold the word salad?

@@eddyeldridge7427 ?

superduperjoi yep

Now I want to read his book and others he's written, hope he gets out his commentary on PC culture.

I think you're cute. Him. Facebook Germain St. Johnson❤

**Hit me up

You call him a legend but he’s not even close to that. I feel sorry for charles and any other real scientist in the world

Evolution makes sense to me but I still believe in god you can have both also I think you we don’t have all the answers to evolution

Nonsense. There are lots and lots of intermediate forms in the fossil record.

Uh.... no we don't. There is zero evidence, but we would be happy to consider the sources that are confusing you.

There are ZERO .... put up your proof are stop acting like an ignorant PhD.

I'm not confused at all. It's also not my duty to teach you anything. There are scads upon scads of intermediate forms in the fossil record. You denying it doesn't make it any less true.

If not confused, then you don't understand the fossil record and the wishful thinking of secular scientists who love to put up half truths to support their opinions. There is no fossil records of intermediate forms showing 'evolution'. Zero, nada, not any 1 billion years ago, not any 1 billion years from now.

Eric Nielsen then leave dude why are you commenting,smh .

qusai al halabi I wanted to highlight the ignorance of people who don’t accept Evolution as fact, because it is absolutely ludicrous. I’ll say it again, it is absolutely ludicrous. The ammount if evidence that we have supporting Evolution is undeniable and is irrefutable. To say that Evolution is wrong is like saying the Earth is flat. All the evidence is there, multiple scientific methods support it, yet people’s ignorance gets the better of them.

@@ericmago4110 Dna is proof of God not evolution

@@ericmago4110 its not on the level of knowing the earth is round. you'll have to observe an animal in real time evolve. adaptation is not evolution btw

JFK on LSD We can observe bacteria evolving in real time. Animals though? That won’t happen because it takes hundreds, thousands years to see noticable change. Adaptation is EXACTLY what Evolution is. Adapting yourself to the environment to better suit it for survival purposes. Again, soooo much evidence supporting Evolution. If you deny Evolution in a highly developed country with a great educational system like Denmark (where I live) you would be 1. laughed at 2. laughed hysterically at 3. get called stupid 4. be sent to the insane asylum (for free because of our free health care). It’s only in less developed countries and in highly religious countries like the US where people still do not accept Evolution as fact. North Western Europe is faaaar past that stage.

Very bad logic. He was talking about speech not smell

If you even understood his argument, you would dispute evolution. But then again, your stubbornness prevents you from doing so.

We can never be absolutely certain about the vast majority of things, but we can be extremely certain with many things, just like we are with the theory of evolution being correct.

we do have it majorly figured out....darwins the origin of species delegates in creeping accuracy why and how the changes on genetics cause speciation and those keep going till today darwins predictions on evolution are right even today

Evolution is proven to be real.

@@venglomarci Not really is a theory... Just like the big bang theory...

@@leroyvermilion7708 You don't know what scientific theory means then do you? Scientific theory: A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Evolution and the Big Bang are both scientific theories.

Catholic church has nothing to do with the Bible except for the fact they use it as a prop. So it's not a surprise catholics have no problem with "Evolution", or the "Big Bang Theory". Two fictitious jokes.

IKR. I would have kick him in the chest if I was there. Just for DIRESPECTING an Elder.

@Jr Juarezsorry to disappoint you but we don't have any evidence for species to different species evolution

@Jr Juarez do you even understand the meaning of species? A moth changing to another moth is still a moth! A horse breeding with a donkey produces a mule which cant breed with a donkey nor with a horse(direct parents let alone ancestors) not even with itself.. So no! You didnt prove anything

@Jr Juarez youre trying to act smart but failed miserably... You still didnt provide any evidence for Macro evolution!

Jr Juarez yes evolution within is species is real, not entire changes of species

And there was no evolution. Many scientist has proven it wrong

and yet more than half of the world population accept evolution accept it as fact

@@johnong2655 Which scientist has proven it wrong? I'd like to see his peer reviewed evidence.

@@johnong2655 tell me how many scientist proven it wrong?Evolution is a scientific theory, therefore it has alot of proven facts supporting the claim which cannot be answered as true or false! Are you an idiot? Using Evolution to disprove science is weak, Science is imperfect to everything yet it has alot of correct understanding and knowledge of the world, unlike your claimed god that snap then exist, Why would god create humans to suffer, that thing can be dangerous a. f. God is so smart that it created bible with flaws, God is so powerful that it cant banish satan, god gave us freewill? i thought god planned everything from the start?! If you hate science, then why your using smartphones? electricity ?air conditioner? modern school? gas? oven? and every thing modern are created by science!

The apocalypse just stands for an unveiling of what was unknown...When we find out we've been lied to by science governments and other people in power and we find out the truth about our nature our planet and how we were created it will cause total chaos. Which is dangerous? I guess. I didn't really understand that comment either but theres something to think about

@@quintonkirk285 No yeah I like your comment, but it seems like Darwin caused a lot of danger already. Massive amounts of atheism and racism sprung out of Evolution. I'm not saying evolution is invalid but it's undeniable that figures like Hitler were able to justify their beliefs of a master race based on Darwin, Freud and Nietzsche's pop sciences. Wolfe explains it a bit better in a speech he gives to Brown in the 90's. Also E Michael Jones, if you ignore all his Jew hate, has some really interesting things to say about the taking down of Christian/western culture by the aforementioned forces.

@@kotaykcanary6020 well put, couldn't agree more

It's dangerous because it's a bunch of unscientific nonsense and seeds doubt in the process that cured malaria, eradicated smallpox built the phone or P.C. you watched this video on and instead promotes religion, the thing that retards progress, burns books of knowledge and when given rule over law always violate human rights. Almost every group that came to the American colonies did so do escape religious persecution.

@@kotaykcanary6020 evolution has nothing to do with atheism or racism. Most "evolutionist" are christian and from the standpoint of evolution there are no human races. You could maybe argue for eugenics. The actual science says Europeans have the most Neanderthal DNA making us less human than africans meanwhile there are no real markers genetically for different races with no hard boundaries between them. Race is almost exclusively a cultural phenomenon. There is a much stronger argument to be made for the dangers of religion as much bloodshed is motivated or justified over religious differences. Every time religion gets rule over law it inevitable results in a violation of human rights. Christianity is no exception with it's long history of persecution between denominations. Hitler, Stalin, etc where all anti Darwin to if memory serves.

Evolution is the narrative. Whether it's real or not is irrelevant, when the established narrative is challenged, it's a direct threat to those who have built themselves upon it, so it's considered dangerous to challenge it. Always remember, it always returns to politics in the end, and politics don't care if you favor religion or science, it will find a way to use either of them to achieve it's goals.

DrewPicklesTheDark True, but I'm sad science lost it's objectivity. People who affiliate themselves with science usual call themselves atheists, to the point that science has become synonymous to atheism! It has nothing to do with whether God exists or not, but in our society it looks that way such that it now forms a barrier: either you're a religious fundamentalist against Darwinism or hardcore Darwinist atheist Where are the objective scientists, whether believers in God or not???

I think it's just as dangerous as calling gravity a myth. They're both demonstrable theories which align with absolutely all evidence, predict things frequently, and explain things which nothing else can. It represents the absolute poison of religion.

because a lot of stupid people consider it to be the truth

@N/A yeah but you also can't prove time travel wrong

@N/A of course you go for there is evidence but you don't understand it argument, there is no evidence, accept it and move on with your imaginary life

@@shadygaming6523 Scientists,,, ---- those that gave you your iPhone, your Tesla, your Chemotherapy, your Lunar Lander, your High Speed Internet, are, "stupid"???

@@brianmi40 If we put a bomb inside a mountain of metal, would that bomb and 7 millions of magical evolution build an airplane from scratch with no guiding hand? I wouldn't call Scientist stupid,they are just "fools with non discerning hearts" as t God calls them.

a fact on it's own is not science. a bunch of facts bundled together is not science either. when scientists say something is a theory, they don't mean 'just a theory' or 'probably true'. a good way to think about a scientific theory is that a scientific theory is supported by thousands of pieces of evidence, has been able to perfectly explain everything that the theory itself supports, and is also subject to lots of questioning yet still is able to explain the things it supports. im actually a former-muslim myself and I was able to learn about how to think objectively. however I do still eat halal.

Salam

Please go watch Acts17apologetics it will change your life, and stay open minded

How did thousands of human races appear from just adam? Things had to have changed since then. Or how did neanderthal & denisovan DNA make it's way into European & south eastern peoples DNA but not everybody's?

@@Jesus-lf4bq An theory is that Adam and Even were chosen by God not the first humans, and theire creation description could be just an methaphor of their part in creation and theire relation with God. Not shore if that is true, but that is the most natural explanation in the light of the evidence.

papide no

@A Aart No

@A Aart We are all created from one person (which Im assuming is Adam) is not correct because there no evidence we came from 2 people. We all share a common ancestor. Also try to say all of that again have a hard time reading it.

Exactly yes

@A Aart Yes I read the Quran.

No it isn't. You can disbelieve evolution and it won't hurt you in any way. Actually, it is the science nerds who are socially inept and tend to be dull and boring people. You can believe in flat Earth and most people just won't care.

It's stupid to challenge evolution

@@linkthepig4219 no it's actually the process of challenging ideas like the one about evolution that propells science. Evolution only withstood the test of time and gets proven to be right time and time, fossil by fossil again. There is no problem of challenging it.

@@luigimario4458 By challenge I don't mean thinking of other perspectives about science or coming up with explanations that may contradict certain ideas, I mean completely denying evolution. It takes basic understanding of life to understand evolution and most people who deny it simply don't fully understand it.

@@linkthepig4219 accepted and understood.

maybe you should take a peek in the book before you start refuting it

Not a fact big shot.. Millions of evidence? Give me one for species to species evolution..

jorgensenmj there is nothing rational about your position. All you said was ‘this group of people tells me evolution is true therefore I believe it’

Thank god, there's another rational person in this comment section.

​@Old World Order XD

@Old World Order watch more flat earthers and creators of conspiracy theories

HAAHAHA try to explain sun, moon eclipses and moon phases on flat earth XD

@Thomas The Thank Engine maybe he has. But if you'd educate yourself, you wouldn't need some RU-vid users to explain you basis knowlegde of science.

@Old World Order Why would DNA be too complex? We know how it could occour, and the disproof of it is usually people simplifying it to an extent that has no place in reality. Nevermind the fact that people argue that complexity points to God, which should mean that this happening would point to God even more. But no one thinks like that for some reason.

Your masters convinced you that you are a monkey and then they trained you to attack those who know they are not. Simple.

read the book and find out hahah

really tell us how speech evolved????

Same question for evolution, Why hasn't any animals reached human level? Clearly nothing makes us special to get this advanced. It feels to make evolution was really nice to humans, in terms of how smart we got. Also things that we did that just made no sense can't be explained by evolution like farming, using fires which is not the same as using tools because many animals use tools.

just one of the many reasons why is has been locked up and considered a con artist

Kent Hovind is a buffon

Hugh Ross is pretty cool

@@darkbozo11 .....he was locked up because he is a con artist.....

Hovinduism rots the mind.

🤣

more complex communication doesn't mean more intelligent. It just means more complex... you're not very bright, are you?

Charlotte Freymann then why don’t they go ahead and travel to space? Or build, I don’t... anything?

What a stupid thing to say. We can say the same about any religious book.

@@LawrieAllen I believe this is a troll, if not, I need to find a good place to schedule myself a crucifixion and get outta here. Personally, I believe in God. And I also believe in the gifts that God has given us, like science. Just because we used to attribute things to god in the past, doesn't mean he doesn't exist, it just means we have no way to wrap our head around the concept.

@J S Correct but we did evolve from a common ancestor which would now be extinct.

@@UltimatePowa courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-wmopen-biology1/chapter/outcome-evidence-for-evolution/ What Lawrie Allen says is correct. You could call me a troll, but his words actually make sense.

bro stop listening to Kent Hovind lmao😂😂😂 take biology and bioinformatics classes

Evolution is not amazing/beautiful. Do know how much trouble it brought to people darwinism and mistreating people, looking down on people. Yeah we are also animals, why not? I'm not against in searching in our roots. I even don't understand the whole world itself. unintelegent materials do something the makes sense with the help of laws. Where do they even come from ?????

@@irenesara455 We are definitely closely related to the other great apes. Phylogenists, molecular biologists and paleontologists no longer argue about this, and I really mean : No Longer. I can answer if you have doubts. Also, regarding your first point, I personally think it is fascinating to see how we got here. We can now better understand (for the first time) our place in the universe. We are no mere animals. We are conscious, empathic, creative and intelligent beings. What a privilege to be alive today - with all the scientific knowledge we have acquired over the years. I find it uplifting and wonderful. Also, if you wanna believe in God, great. It doesn't contradict science as long as it's not REPLACING it.

@@irenesara455 I do wanna point out that I agree with your statement on "Darwinism" and how it has led to major problems in our societies. That's a different issue though. I do not want to live in a "Darwinian society" either. You can understand and acknowledge evolution and love your neighbour as yourself at the same time. Again, we are not mere animals. We can achieve incredible things.

@JV R How?

eddy eldridge because fairy tale books are more more compelling than scientific discoveries.

@Generation X Evolution has been observed. The only people who think otherwise don't know what evolution is.

@JV R The Bible is great and all but it's still written by people.

So from where did the native americans come from? Or maybe the aboriginals of Australia? They must have evolved!

@DG int yeah, war is quicker evolutionary mechanism.

Evolution is not science, evolution is false and evolution bullcrap requires more bullcrappy faith!

Then how do you explain selective dog breeding?

@@eddyeldridge7427 It's adaptation not bullcrapy evocraption

But HOW are they adapting? What's the process? Mutations? Selection pressures? Passing on genes? Guess what? That's evolution. You can slap a new label on it, but that process is still evolution.

eddy eldridge Lol, he didn’t know how to respond to that

Liam I was going to comment the same thing lol

Liam evolution is BIG CAP

LMAO good one.

Something being complicated does not require a creator, at it’s nothing totally random at all DNA has become more complex over time like how a tree starts off as a little shoot and can have thousands of branches as it matures

@@kye4216 Trees have DNA.

​@@s.unosson yeah every living organism have cells and each cell have dna inside it

Because you're not entitled to your own facts.

@Dan C. if it was mandatory, you wouldnt be doubting it. As for your other points? I'm sure you accept micro, yes? You know that little changes add up to big changes, right?

Macro evolution for creationists: comprehension is optional (or absent even), denying is mandatory.

@Dan C. You lose those things just like if you're a flat earther in a career that involves accepting the Earth is round. Who wants to employ a person who denies obvious facets of reality?

@Dan C. And you know dogs evolved from wolves, right? That's one species of canid into another.

It's a function in their brain that has not evolved but has been there we have not challenged it until recently

When you find a rat (mouse?) who can design a maze, then you'll have a point. Otherwise, you should consider keeping the conversation unsaid.

Dead on. These guys literally just repeat the lies from online apologists and preachers. They have no arguments of their own and have never actually researched evolution, they just "know" it's wrong out of emotion because a religious guy said so.

@@zachtastic625 yeah, it would be great if they at least learned what the science says even if they dont bother to learn about the evidence.

@Ricahrd P'Brien there are old earth creationists who actually can accept and learn science.

Hes dead, he doesn't believe anything

@Don C. White Ah, another conspiracy theorist who doesn't know what a freemason is. Just like he doesn't know that no what cares what Darwin thought.

What makes your opinion "superior"?

lmao

You fused game theory and film theory.

Ronaq Sahni It’s a fact m9

A scientific theory is the combination of many facts that form a larger fact, so it's beyond a fact and then some...

@@hamstergodfufurufufu8842 Evolution isn't a scientific theory. It's just a theory.

Kind of. They don't want to call out all scientists, just the ones that work in fields that go against their holy books. So they try to delegitimize those who accept evolution by using terms that make them seem like they're merely following some sort of religion, rather than a highly proven science. Using the term Darwinist actually points out how ignorant they are, thinking that, because Darwin first posed the evolutionary model, that we must still use his model. We don't.

No, they mean atheists who are unable to comprehend the idea of a Higher Power so they reject it. Darwinism is based on fear and arrogance that Caucasian humans are the "top" of every life form. Speciesist and racist theories.

Shut up 😂😂😂

@@lonelyyychilddd7911 No

The majority of his theory is correct. People have tested and found that yes he is somewhat correct. But there are still gaps and still to this day scientists are trying to fill the gaps

No one who accepts evolution uses Darwin's model. So you're just ignorant.

@@eddyeldridge7427 there was never evolution .

@@emaddima5136 Not that you even know what evolution is. You never even so much as looked the theory up.

@@eddyeldridge7427 the only thing i'm sure of is the creation is getting smaller in size , that's all .

@@revan552 nope that’s micro evolution not macroevolution. There’s a lot of evidence against MacroEvolution. Speech & memory would be small but major development for humans... when people think of evolution they think it’s one organism turning into a completely different & new organism which is not the case...

@@revan552 bruh literally everything we can think of is “MADE UP” by something😭 are you stating that what Frank Turek and Ken Ham is doing is completely different from what Darwin did? I beg to differ bro

@@revan552 there may be a flaw in my statement but there’s definitely a flaw in yours as well.

@@revan552 and no duh we’re not the only animals that have memory and possess the ability for communication. I love your insight bruh but instead of coming with insults how about we be civil & respectable🙏🏽💫

@@Ianthedisciple Macroevolution is just a culmination of millions of years of microevolutionary steps, like how a minute is the culmination of 60 seconds in a row. In that sense you could think of it as microevolution being the thing that actually happens and macroevolution is a just a label that we use to describe when a culmination of microevolutionary steps leads to speciation. I'm a little confused though, you first statement that there is no evidence for macroevolution seems to imply that you don't agree with evolution through natural selection but your second statement seems to imply that you do, or are you just being fair and trying to represent it correctly? If that's the case I can definitely respect that because I don't see that very often.

Nice theory based on zero evidence.

Every person who denies evolution has never read a Darwin book. Funny how that works lol

Who? Tom Wolfe?

In fact, we are puny

They very well could've cut it out. These interviews often go on for hours, and they only take snippets.

@@Gerwulf97 If there was one, someone would have won the Nobel prize for it. Since a competing hypothesis doesn't exist, no prize and no comment either.

Read the book ffs

@@johnholland6180 Its not a myth if the evidence shows it happened.

Show me the 'missing link' or any species in transition

John 14:13 would be a good start.

Actually a good question -that's the essence of miricles: a recipe is impossible because they come from the supernatural.

Because Darwinism is not a myth, the book was a desperate attention grab

@@conorleon3591 If you believe you evolved from an animal where does consciousness and morality comes from?

MosheMYY M Well except for the fact that it has more evidence than any other scientific theory beyond every scientific threshold of standard of evidence.

Shawn Stop kidding yourself. You're quoting the usual and it holds no water. You can't even test evolution in a lab because of how long it takes, too long for anyone to make a definitive claim to say it actually happened. Philosophical naturalism is really what's behind the evidence for evolution, if it wasn't for that interpretative spin along with a bunch of dishonesty, evolution is dead.

MosheMYY M You have that reversed actually, its the anti evolutionsts who yse lies, especially since they usually dont understand it in the first place. And aspects of evolution can be tested in a lab. But the lab isnt the only source of evidence nor the only way to test.

Shawn You're making my point as you comment. Thanks. You will show nothing to support evolution.

MosheMYY M you can actually test evolution in a lab though, so I don’t know what you’re on abiut

You should lose it because of ppl who believe in Evolution

srsly the universe made evryting to fit in place wit one another y would anything need to evolve

Theres a creator of the universe End of story

He is making silly statements. They simply expressed skepticism about obviously false statements.

Fossil are fake. They are ALL fabricated. Loser.

@@itchypussyhole2704 Are you high

The only 1 million people who are keeping the Evolution lie alive. Literally it is the education system that is keeping the evolution theory going. MONEY, MONEY, MONEY!!!!

You call insults, name calling and shaming an intellectual challenge or civilized debate? Your virtue signalling is disingenuous and frankly quite hypocritical and disgusting. I do not block others views or opinions, on the contrary i embrace it and i have friends who are also evolutionists who are far more capable intellectually to put up a greater debate than you have so far demonstrated. I do block stupidity and ignorant people like you, who have absolutely nothing to contribute to this debate. Either intellectually or in any capacity to seek a better understanding or pursuit of knowledge/truth. In short i have the humility to stay open to others views and opinions for further learning and discovery but i also have the wisdom to know when to ignore people who nothing to offer but ignorance and unfounded indoctrination. This conversation is now finished!!!!

Evolution doesn't work, you and all your blind priests are religious zealots for a false faith.

@Whitney Washington It’s not believing it or not, it’s about questioning it and reviewing the evidence for yourself, a lot of well known and respected scientists have different views about the evolution theory and some don’t think it’s credible. But the whole point is to find evidence and consider all aspects to disprove or prove this theory as a law or not. If we had ALL or enough evidence to prove evolution is a law, then it wouldn’t be a theory. There really isn’t an overwhelming amount of evidence, there are so many gaps that we still need to find to prove (or disprove) the evolution theory.

@Whitney Washington no it’s best to talk ask questions and discuss to learn your mistakes, I’m not a grown adult btw. 😂😂😂 (I’m a freshman in high school). And because of your comment I learned something, the difference of a law and theory, and you are correct. So thank you! But if I didn’t make a mistake or said anything, I wouldn’t have learned! 😃 I respect your stand on this matter, and maybe I am a fool but that’s okay. 👍 I can’t say and I never have said I really understand evolution, I don’t. If I did I probably wouldn’t have watched this video anyways. 😛

I don't know if it is or isn't yet, but from what i've seen fossil dating isn't all that accurate. It's more of educated guessing. Fossilisation is a quick process. People left barbwire in the middle of nowhere and in 20 years it was fossilized, pretty much turned to stone. So would it be crazy if maybe evolution is false? I mean, Darwin's theory from the Galapagos islands isn't exactly evolution, but more like adaptation.

Why would someone feel the need to change a duck's mind? You came from an egg. Be happy with it.

@@professor0reo700 1. Citation needed on the barbed wire. 2. No one uses Darwin's model. 3. Yes, they are adapting to better suit their environment. And there's a name for the method used to adapt: evolution.

@@ahmedkauseropu359 But which came first, the duck or the egg?

@@sirderam1 it can't. They both need to be there, right?

@Joshua Frenkel sad

Perhaps you should get your science information from actual scientists.

Chomsky doesn't reject evolution; the longer answer goes like this: Chomsky is arguing that it doesn't give sufficient insight into the nature of a 'natural organ of language', the existence of which has been won, as admitted by Dennett in this review of his book by the biologist Maynard Smith, who also agrees with Dennett on this. Searle points out that Chomsky moved linguistics from a classificatory science to a structural one; that is all human languages have a deep structure that is universal; and this universal grammar is already innate to the mind - in other words the child's mind is not a tabula rasa (blank slate), on which language is inscribed; but already has a language native to it; which when exposed to a language environment - say Gaelic - gradually loses its generality and becomes specific; and it's specific character is Gaelic.

Jessica W and Steven Pinker is the most prominent defender of that view today

Joe Giuffrida Original Art not according to all the scientists who study it. In fact it is usually regarded as one of the most evidenced and supported theories out there. You are being dishonest.

Yes, those scientists who already have a presuppositional bias, but not scientists like Jeans Eddington, for example. And, if there were evidence, you would be citing it for me right now.....What is evolution's credible answer to no fossil record and also irreducible complexity?? They have none. Do the research...you are probably just repeating what you've heard.

Joe Giuffrida Original Art so you're saying that 99% of the scientific community is hopelessly biased so much that they cant do their jobs? Interesting assertion. Anyway, evolution isnt my claim to prove. The scientists that make the claim, however, have also made all of the information regarding it widely available. If you truly do not know of any evidence, its because you havent looked.

Chris, first of all, you didn't answer my question. Second, if you want to be a good little automaton and just believe what the majority of people believe, I feel for you. Third, your saying 99% of the scientific community believes in evolution??? Show me that statistic...it's not even close. If you are going to get into a discussion about a subject, you should have at at least some command of the facts. You are just telling me how you feel, not addressing the very real issues that oppose the idea of evolution. Here's one: The universe is approximately 10 to the 18th power (seconds) old. That's about 14 billion years. The earth is approximately 4 billion years old. According to the mathematics of random selection, the DNA of a bacteriophage (dust mite) would require the universe to be 10 to the 72nd power (seconds) old. And that's just the DNA of a dust mite. Evolutionists say, well, maybe things were speeded up by some sort of process that we don't know about right now. Ha Ha. And maybe the moon is really made of green cheese. But the clincher is the problem of irreducible complexity. Scientists are really stumped by this. Because, for instance, an eye ball, in order for it to be a functioning eyeball as a evolutionary change to meet the challenge of sight, would have to be present in one whole organic form. But it's obvious that the eye is made up of thousands of components that each would have to "evolve" on its own without any apparent purpose in time. The intransigent scientists who are materialists by profession have to come up with something to say, anything that might answer the problem...I know what their answer is, and it's absurd. It's like forcing a square peg into a round hole. More and more scientists are leaving the dark ages of evolution because of the discoveries of quantum physics and are now willing to admit that maybe there is an invisible realm out from which all matter emerges. Imagine that!? Amazing. But its like the room you are sitting in right now where probably hundreds of electromagnetic frequencies and waves are passing through, but you don't believe it, because you can't see them. Same issue

Joe Giuffrida Original Art last i read about the consensus on evolution, the actual figure was 97% among scientists of all fields (not limited to just the ones that study evolution). I didnt answer your question because it is not a valid question. You asked what the scientific answer to "no fossil record" is and since there is a fossil record with clear evidence of evolution, that question doesnt make sense.

Not at all. It's that the majority of the people who claim it's made up (without really knowing what it is) are anti-science, ignorant, a religious nut, etc. There's a difference between critiquing and repeating the same arguments based on ignorance for years.

Evoution is actually nota fact it has many holes which is just civerd with

@@mohamedka3762 It is a fact.

Phil der komische typ if it’s a fact then why aren’t we still evolving tell me one thing that has evolved in your life time?

We are still evolving, albeit very slowly because we're not a genetically isolated species of animals in the wild. New species to have evolved in your own lifetime include Culex pipiens, Hawthorne flies, Peromycus maniculatus, Halcyon chloris, Lalage, Primula kewensis, Tritiocosecale, and the new Geospiza that evolved three years ago to name but a few.

Aaron Kellett and evolving how!? What is evolving our brains cuz if so I think it’s aging backwards I mean if that’s what you call evolution then you’re theory is correct considering you all still think we came from nothing pretty much I mean how would the world be created or how would everything we need in life be created I mean and our bodies have everything we need to survive nature can’t do that and you can’t say we just grew arms and also where’d EVERY single animal come from?

Which are?

New species of plants, bacteria, birds, insects, rodents and fish such as Culex pipiens, Hawthorne flies, Lalage, Halcyon chloris, Tritiocosecale, Parus major and minor, Primula kewensis, Peromycus maniculatus, Spalax ehrenbergi, and the new Geospiza that evolved three years ago to name but a few.

@@chimpanzeethat3802 lol, give me observable evidence

scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=biological+evolution&oq=biological+ev All 30,000 plus scientific papers on the subject including hundreds of examples of observed micro AND macroevolution along with thousands of different evolution experiments. www.sciencealert.com/darwin-s-finches-evolve-into-new-species-in-real-time-two-generations-galapagos Here is the new Geospiza that evolved three years ago. blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/ Here are some other species to have evolved in your own lifetime.

Nothing is evolving and nothing has ever evolved tell me one thing that has evolved in your lifetime???

Christian surely they always get everything mixed up

@@Himmyjewett Stick to video games and let politics be 😉

@@Blackstar-ti4py when did i say anything about politics

@@Himmyjewett because that is politics, but high politics and I didnt expect you to know that 😉

Well he's correct

It's an endangered species

Viktor the victor We can only hope

America! - The place with some of the smartest people in the world BUT also the place where - despite a decent educational system - the pinnacle of pure stupidy and ignorance is found among a large portion of people.

@@ericmago4110 Wow, I just have to start off with a wow. Anyways, hey man, I’ve seen what you said. First off, if your going to give a statement about something, show some proof/evidence, explain what you truly believe is going on, and then think deeply about it before you post it. No one can and should follow what you say if there is not an example. However, if you truly believe in Theory of Evolution, it must be hard knowing that your “just another step” in the Evolutionary process. I believe that this Theory is honestly, quite depressing. How could you live knowing that your useless and you won’t be going anywhere after death? Thanks, and I hope you find the Truth.

@SCP- 999 First of all, Evolution does NOT say anything about how life formed at first. Evolution is merely adapting over a period of time. I do believe in Evolution. BUT, I do not claim to know how life was formed - because we do not have sufficient evidence to prove it. BUT this does not mean that life did come from "nothing". We just do not know yet. I am not an expert on Evolution and science by no means. Neither are you as clearly shown. From what I can read, organisms CAN gain more genetic code over time because they are able to duplicate. AND this has been proven with a significant amount of evidence - so I have no idea where your knowledge comes from. 'You also have to keep in mind that Evolution takes thousands if not millions of years. Evolution does not just happen like in Pokemon. It happens veeeryyy slowly. There are thousands upon thousands of research papers proving Evolution, I would love for you to find just 1 proving Creationism.

He was an educated prat.