+algi Some do, the flat earthers for example

not only that... it's like saying Newton was inaccurate therefore there is no gravity and no theories predicting how it all works and that's positive evidence for Peter Pan

+algi When their appeal to Pathos is already highly suspect & their Appeal to logos practical crippled by previous assertions, does it really shock you that attacking Ethos is the only way left to go?

+Pope of Atheism KZfaq "crazy Christians" and you might come to the conclusion that it is a dead heat.

+algi For that matter, why do opponents always say "Darwinism" instead of "evolution?" It's as if they're pretending Darwin alone worked in the field.

+soupflood YES!!!

Abracadabra .. Open Sesame .. there, Magic .. All is Explained .. Believe .....

David Anewman so you’re more science able huh? I’ll bite, if evolution is false then how do you explain the multiple species on our planet

David Anewman and Aron has absolutely dismantled Noah’s ark dude

David Anewman any proof of this or just a nuh uh

+ Jeff Boldgloom Exactly. I am much more likely to believe a system that changes its claims when new evidence becomes available. A system that will not change even when evidence now debunks it is dishonesty at its finest.

or more like its impossible that chemicals formed even something close to self replicating protocell.

@@cobramcjingleballs since the human bodies functions can be explained naturalistically, why do you argue that it's impossible for chemicals to create sentience?

@@riflebusters1 Actually that its impossible for chemicals to create a cell. Or for bacteria to turn into eukaryotes. The amount of new information needed to achieve that coded in DNA implies intelligence. (also DNA existing and epigenetics as most recent thing.) I said nothing about sentience, but its an interesting question I have only recently started to think about, literally 4 days ago, the origin of symbolic language, both in actual language and human thought as its fundamental to sentience. But thanks for reminding me, I had to look up the thing I came across, structialist biology and modern antidarwinist proponents of the theory. Stuart Kauffman...WOW. Lot of ideas there to unpack.

@@cobramcjingleballs ah I see, good luck with your research

Top Lobster excellent point

The worst ones are the ones who speak ill of Darwin without even understanding what he wrote. I talked to one who didn't even know his nationality or even where he got the idea. They can't define natural selection or even want to know more.

Projection. That is how religion operates, so they operate as if science acts in the same manner.

@@thatguy22441 The whole "Darwinian" label is crap. Just because Darwin was ahead of his time doesn't mean the theory of evolution wouldn't exist without him. It all would have unfolded eventually

@tekitron As someone who came out of Young Earth Creationism, I can confirm this. A lot of Young Earth Creationists actually believe evolution (as well as any other scientific evidence that disagrees with Genesis) IS a religion of which Darwin is the founder.

Matt Purvis It's not entirely true. But yeah. Islam used to be tame compared to Christianity in the dark ages but went to shit when radicalization movements began popping up.

There was an Islamic sect called the mutazilites who decided to bring greek philosophy into islam, they were declared heretical btw but they had a strong momentum for about 200 yrs due to befriending the abbasid leaders so iraq was the learning centre of the world Then came ahmed ibn hanbal and the mongol invasions

Yeah this is so funny He starts with challenging science, try to undermine scientific methods, say its not reliable.. Then act proud of the origin of science method that he hates and stood against!!

It's worth noting that medivel Islam was even toying with the idea of evolution. Ex. Al Jahiz

i think you are misinformed, many experts in this field deny some aspects of evolution, especially human evolution.

+CALI warrior elaborate.....

+CALI warrior About 99.86% of biologists accept evolution

@@caliwarrior5452 no Lmaoo he takes individuals and paints them as majorities and in addition to that misconstrued their words as he did on genetic variation (such as when he quoted Relative Differences: Myth of 1%) he failed to mention the authors still think humans shared common ancestry with chimps due to common dna correlation…he left that out due to his bias. Pew polls showed 97% of scientists in Europe and North America believe in human Evolution

@@RedTailShark100 To quote Telltale Atheist: "Go Vote. Left or Right, you do NOT want someone who does not understand the very basics of Science as a Senator. Extremists literally have voiced that they wanna go more than ever and run for Office. That’s fact, not Theory: they’re doing it now."

I see what you did there :)

@@ardenking3481 Is that about Muhammad's magic Lamasu ride to Jannah? I'm Ex Muslim. Haha. A Lamasu is the ancient Persian magic horse-like creature that Islam took and adapted to.

that was mean :( I agree though

"ride a dead horse", "just won't fly". Ugh! God resurects the dead horse and gives it the ability to fly. Duh!

"Lucy is an evidence!" ok . The analysis revealed that the chance of A. sediba being a direct ancestor was 0.09%. “That’s next to nothing,” says Du. [The research is published in the journal Science Advances] wait! I believe in evolution but not this guy who is lying constantly without any idea !

But they are IN FACT, extremely rare when you consider the millions and millions of animals that have lived on earth and 99.999% probably left no fossil of any kind.. it takes extraordinary conditions to do so and those extraordinary conditions are much more prevalent in certain areas of the earth, vs others, but most of animals that ever existed, probably didn't exist in those relatively few fossil rich areas

They are possible to find but compared to how many species existed they're fairly rare. He basically used that as a deflection in order to not explain the fossil relations and morphology other than "it's an Ape"

+CoolHardLogic Your bet is correct iERA/LDM/GDM , the organisation(s) he belongs to( I think charity commission is still investigating iERA), is full of Islamic bullshitters. Stop Spamming( channel/UC3IBoui-a48G33hNmU7xRcg ), amongst others , has been tracking and debunking these guys for years, Essenceofthought recently had a run in with another member of the group, Hamza Tzortis . They are quite often to be found on speakers corner. Their organisation was the one behind the fuss about enforced segregated seating at UK universities lectures. My own organisation amongst others played a part in getting the law changed to prevent this.

+CoolHardLogic That's exactly what I was thinking. He started out, if not logical, at least a little more sophisticated than most creationists. Then, when he got to "Nebraska Man", I deflated in exasperation. Just another Ken Ham.

+CoolHardLogic There are people I have met and talked to where it seemed as if their minds had a mechanism which prevented them from accepting evidence and explanations which contradict their religious beliefs. I have debunked their pseudoscientific woo-woo scatology and I could see the wheels spinning behind their eyes and still have them refuse to accept it even though the realization caused a physical reaction. These LDM/iERA chaps seem to be worse than liars in that they draw their "knowledge" from the creationist echo chamber and regurgitate it, often incompletely. Their tool of self-deception that they then project is the equivocation of scientific language. You can see it in shifting definitions of "fact", "observation" and "truth", for instance, and trying to use their redefinition as a weapon against the use in the scientific literature, or it even inject redefined concepts where there were none before, having no education in the material they are trying to refute. These people buy into the deceptions of Islamic apologetics and it becomes their self-identity. Once their identity and their sense of self-worth is tied up in such and endeavor, they become impervious to reason. Just look at Ken Ham. He is an impenetrable slab of stupidity and self-delusion. It would be comical if these people weren't such a danger to the progress of society. It is hard to call them liars. They are just broken, like people who eat their own shit and try to convince people it's ice cream.

What is iERA?

Paul TheSkeptic Dodgy Islamic UK charity , googled?

even answers a stupid question often asked by creationists like kent hovind namely how does gene increase in "information"

No there is none

Mirrorgirl I’m guessing it wasn’t a lecture - probably he was invited to speak to a local Muslim student chapter and the audience would be people who only wanted someone to tell them they are right just like the Christian audiences in the states. Just an assumption though.

Too bad we don't get to see the audience, like to see their reaction to his lecture.

+Jeong-hun Sin They aren't even skeptics by the real definition of the term. Skeptics follow evidence wherever it leads and accepts the most sensible explanation of the evidence. Evolution comes from that, creationism does not.

+KTBlackadder You misprounced his name, it is said as "Hamster Tortoise"

That is a Christian theist I actually find it pathetic and it just shows how humanistic religion really is - most notably seen among American evangelicals

Actually Abrahamic religions.Other religions like Dharmic are pretty chill and most of buddhist and hindus accept evolution and don't fight each other

In a three-camp-of-existence of the Biblical model, it makes perfect sense.

@@jarrygarry5316 Dharmic religions are like sponge.. It will just absorb all changes and still continue to exist. When Buddhism appeared... Kid you not the Buddha was made an avatar of Shiva who was to destroy the previous caste based distinctions

That's a really cool way of explaining it, but I wasn't able to find it on Asimov's wikiquote page, so I'm just going to attribute it to you lol

It's as simple as 'science refines it's findings' And that's because science actually gives a shit about truth

!!!!Brilliant mr RA. The lie has been taught for a very Long time.. and the rich depend on people like you to keep them walking on the Human race for a much Longer time.. don't you think its time to make a change? The lie has not been working for Humanity.. and the truth is self evident. However you seem to push it under the Carpet. Your real Masters. and traitors are P-ercy A-ldobrandini O-rsini B-reakspear F-arnese R-osenberg LUISS-DOT-IT. And you are working for material things and not spiritual !!!!!

@@ralphpercy4846 You are the one lying. To yourself most of all. Does your god find your lies pleasing?

"Lucy is an evidence!" ok . The analysis revealed that the chance of A. sediba being a direct ancestor was 0.09%. “That’s next to nothing,” says Du. [The research is published in the journal Science Advances] wait! I believe in evolution but not this guy who is lying constantly without any idea !

@@md.shofiqulislam1492 that´s not the conclusion of the paper, btw published in 2019, so after the statement was made, and at the end the paper says :"and the most viable ancestral candidate for the genus Homo remains Australopithecus afarensis both on morphological (5) and temporal grounds (7, 8)", so there´s that. Science is dynamic.

@@md.shofiqulislam1492 no Lmaoo he takes individuals and paints them as majorities and in addition to that misconstrued their words as he did on genetic variation (such as when he quoted Relative Differences: Myth of 1%) he failed to mention the authors still think humans shared common ancestry with chimps due to common dna correlation…he left that out due to his bias.

Exactly, that worry me a lot! Why esteemed university still invite idiots to say bullshit nonscience to dress up as science something obviously pseudoscientific bullshit !! That may affect some children without adult guidance

+Brian Namtar That was terrible. If you do it again I'll tie you to a Hitchens.

Ha.

+Brian Namtar I cannot think of a Dennett pun...

Give him a break, he was just Sagan...

+Brian Namtar Boo on your pun while I simultaneously applaud it.

Same god as the Christians, which explains a lot.

+Muppet Head Yeah,Christians and Muslims use the exact same arguments.

+Muppet Head If that god actually exists, he must be split-brained, scatter-brained and autistic at the same time. That's the only explanation of why there are so many religions and sects worshiping him.

Self-replicating whatnot According to the Bible and Koran, this God gets positively giddy from the scent of blood, burnt flesh and the sounds of murderous carnage. Like some God of chaos and entropy, from a Michael Moorcock novel. Oh, but wait! according to Christians and Muslims, he is a God of perfect love, perfect morality and the fundamental laws of physics, that make the universe so fine tuned for life!

+Jeffrey P Marvelous analogy and bonus points for reference to Michael Moorcock. I have often thought of the correspondence of the Christian/Jewish/Islamic god and the dark gods of chaos in Moorcok's novels - its all a matter of perspective.

ugh >.< this is insulting to the students who paid to get an education.

I full well support your position . If you went to an astronomy lecture and the speaker tried to teach the stars were stuck to the firmament in the sky that was holding out water he would be thrown out and you would get an apology from the school . Same thing if you were in a lecture and the speaker was trying to teach the earth flat .

"If I WERE in a college course, ..." - "My education is EXPENSIVE." Maybe you should have spent some more. ;) However, I agree with your point.

evolution is a theory btw. you can challenge me here n right now.

+Silent Mentor - Saying evolution is a theory, and saying evolution is 'just' a theory kind of implies 2 different things don't you think? Or maybe I misunderstand you and maybe you don't understand the definition of the word 'theory' as it applies to science (which is a different definition than that used by a detective, on a tv show). If it's the latter, feel free to spout off and embarrass yourself. It's Saturday, I could use a giggle.

@@tototome7046 Im sorry for you

@@tototome7046 I can. Here's your facts. 1. Similarity in DNA is the way we define and measure familial relationship. 2. Sections of DNA called genes are passed on to the decendants of organisms who possess those genes. 3. Bacteria and eukaryotes (animals, plants, fungi) share about 1000 genes. Conclusion: Bacteria and eukaryotes share a common ancestor from whom the shared genes were inherited. No story-telling necessary, just fact and logic.

@@tototome7046 Yup, that's a fact.

@@tototome7046muslims : if you want to criticize islam, you need to learn the Qur'an in arabic for 10 years. Also muslims : *refusing to read up on evolution and do research. SMH

@@zekeyeager8574 it's a funny notion cuz even the formed Muslims who have read it in Arabic say the translation isn't much different

Why don't we have a video about the reactions of the students or how the Q&A after this trainwreck of a "lecture" went? :D I can only suppose "a priori" that it would have been far more entertaining than Beardy McBeardface jabbering on about how we should not trust science above religion... *sigh*

its because he Muslim Muslims get away with anything these days.

Nah, not so much. Moderate Muslims are catching a ton of shit due to their less evolved brethren. The assholes are not being treated any better than anyone else. If you have proof to the contrary I'd love to hear it.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

vocaltalent1: Right. Repeate it enough times, and im sure you will eventually believe what you write. Your desperation is showing. Copy, pasting like a delusional fool. Fear not, only the weakminded as yourself, will believe you. Like the random conspiracy fool, standing on the sidewalk repeatedly shouting, instead of actually engaging in a reasonable debate.

Wolf Slayer "I have watched it. it nearly sent me to sleep like your doing now too" And yet your comments suggest you haven't.

Wolf Slayer _I might explain a thing or two to put your God hating fire out_ That made me chuckle. Are you a Muslim? If you're not? Then why do you hate Allah? Do you believe in fairies? No!? Why do you _hate_ fairies!? Do you believe in fire breathing dragons and unicorns? No?? Why do you _hate_ fire breathing dragons and unicorns? Logic is not your strong suit is it? Just because I don't share a belief in your primitive imaginary friend, it doesn't mean that I "hate" your imaginary friend. _it wasn't there at the time and it can ONLY speculate_ So I take it you don't have a lot of confidence in courts and forensics, either then? I mean, given that none of them were there when the crime was committed, and yet they manage to figure out who commit the crime afterwards by using the scientific method. It's the same way with things like evolution, and ideas behind physics. For instance, we've been able to make predictions based on what we knew at the time, that if discovered would prove evolution and other sciences, right. Take Einstein, in 1915 he predicted gravity waves. 101 years later we discover gravitational waves. There's thousands of similar predictions, solved, in science, from biology and evolution, to chemistry and physics. At the same time. Your creation myth has nothing going for it. ZIP. Nada.

it's quacks

DrownedInExile just curious, is your name a reference to the OC Remix song Maridia(DrownedinExile)?

+tekbarrier You got it.

He would respond by saying yes, and that Allah punishes science.

Go and have guts to ask keyboard warriors

!!!!Brilliant mr RA. The lie has been taught for a very Long time.. and the rich depend on people like you to keep them walking on the Human race for a much Longer time.. don't you think its time to make a change? The lie has not been working for Humanity.. and the truth is self evident. However you seem to push it under the Carpet. Your real Masters. and traitors are P-ercy A-ldobrandini O-rsini B-reakspear F-arnese R-osenberg LUISS-DOT-IT. And you are working for material things and not spiritual !!!!!

As long as they continue being a light too the world constantly making it known, the message of the cross and empty tomb they've won. Wether or not a person like aron ra accepts it or not isnt up to them but the Holy Spirit.

He's doing this in a UK school. From experience, I know that every (and I mean EVERYONE) would be joking, laughing and taking the piss out of this guy. He would also get laughed out of the classroom everytime he left.

U don't understand the philosophy of science

He backs everything with sources from people in the field that share YOUR world view. U dont like Subhoor? Fine. Your beef is not with him though, it s with people that share your atheïstic view.

@@dadush4 how many times do you have to be taught that there’s no such thing as “atheistic world view”

@@yeshuasage3724 To quote Telltale Atheist: "Go Vote. Especially for the small posts. Left or Right, you do NOT want someone who does not understand the very basics of Science as a Senator. Extremists literally have voiced that they wanna go more than ever and run for Office. That’s fact, not Theory: they’re doing it now. Quanon, Evolution-Deniers and many others will fini f people are; excuse the harsh word; too LAZY to vote after informing themselves who’s extreme and who is not."

@@dadush4 He quotes people and then joins the dots himself.

+TheRationalizer So only the two scientifically illiterate are in possession of this footage? Damn. Nothing more satisfying than exposing charlatans.

Remember me ;). I was the glasses wearing dork with the prof

+Diictodon Synapsida Sorry, no :)

TheRationalizer I was the dark skinned guy with the professor.

It was an Islamic Society event....do you realise how many brown people were there? :) Seriously though, I didn't realise anyone was with the professor. You didn't record the Q&A did you? iERA had a copy of the footage but wouldn't release it

+Heather Watson When I was a fundi christian I use to look at evolution the same way we skeptics look at ancient alien theories or bigfoot or lochness. They know we have evidence and they ignore it because they think its silly and false evidence and that it falls into the same category as everything a rational skeptic rejects. Evidence will never prove to a creationist that evolution is true. They already have mountains of "evidence" supporting their views and feel they have no reason to even glance at what you have to present. They heard the stereo types about evolution and think thats all the proof it offers. Would we really waste our time listening to the next guy claiming to have proof for ghosts or bigfoot? Will I sit through an ancient alien documentary? I have in the past, but if more of these people keep presenting their theories, I simply ignore it. I know where there getting at and I can predict their fallacies before they make them. Creationists see it the same way. While evolution has no fallacies, remember they are basing their knowledge of evolution on what they learn from their circles and their own understanding of it and they think thats what we have or the sources we present have to offer. Even if evolution starts to make sense to them, no creationist will except evolution over night, they're whole identity will try to salvage their beliefs. They stop leaning about evolution and seek reassurance. The only think that seems to disconnect a fundamentalist from creationism is when they are put to the test and are pushed to prove their theory while learning about the other side of the debate. That the difference between Matt Dilahunty whole found his way and Ray Comfort whos still lost in delusion. Is that Ray comfort despite all the debates hes done for his fight of creationism, he has never bother to learn about what hes fighting. And is stuck in his drunning kruger effect of thinking he understands it better than he really does. And every creationist I speak to seem to think the same. They all think they know evolution better than they really do and feel they can debunk it on their terms. Thats why when you ask a creationist, "have you even studied evolution"? they usually respond "yes I have" "I know what it is all about". They're referring to their highschool biology class understanding of it. They wont look any further because they really think they have nothing to learn from it. And frankly most books i've read that try to prove evolution such as Bill Nyes Why Evolution is True. Are not creationist or dummy literate. It would have not worked for me when I was a christian. I read many books each by themselves not convincing enough for a creationist. Most books even the ones specifically directed for creationist or deniers do a bad job at presenting evolution in a way that will cause them to consider it and want to read more. In my opinion and what has work for me, when describing evolution to a creationist, the fossil record and too much genetics are the last things you want to mention. They should come up only once they start to understand what is going on in what we observe. Darwin didn't need genetics or many fossils to understand it, and I feel it's not relevant right away for a creationist.

+Heather Watson Understanding the evolutionary need to conform and the psychological precursors of delusion might help you understand the mindset better. The Milgram effect and the Asch effect might be a good start. I don't know that it will help much in negotiating contrary arguments because a delusion supersedes the truth for the sufferer, but attempting to ignite any cognitive dissonance is better than nothing.

+Heather Watson Religion represents an emotional investment on the part of the believer. It is not simply something that one holds to be true. It forms worldviews, political stances, meaning, purpose, and mission in life. Asking someone to give that up is like asking them to give up their arm. They see the writing on the wall. They know that a literal interpretation of their scripture and evolution are mutually exclusive. But they pride their conclusion over their methods, so actual evidence means nothing to them. Instead, as Andre said, they go shopping for their favorite "evidence" to back up their beliefs.

+Raptor302 Exactly. After the age of 18 or so, they're hopeless, impenetrable to fact and deserving of nothing more than ridicule and mockery. This tack may be as futile as education, but it's easier and a lot more fun. I liken any attempt to enlighten creatards to the futile task of attempting to explain to a 10 year old that all those men who came over to visit his mother every Friday night weren't really his uncles. What is interesting is how they project their dependency onto atheists and, especially, scientists. They're convinced that scientists are as invested in evolutionary theory as they are in their religion. That explains how they think that they've all been engaged in a conspiracy to disprove god via evolution for the last 150 years. It's inconceivable to them that scientists would love nothing more than to disprove evolutionary theory. They can't grasp the fact that if god were disproved, billions of theists would jump out of windows while, OTOH, if evolution were disproved, millions of scientist would be delighted for the chance to become the next Charles Darwin. This psychological projection also explains their insistence on conflating cosmology, abiogenesis and evolution. The idea of a non-unified world view is beyond their mental abilities.

RVapes "After the age of 18 or so, they're hopeless" I wouldn't say that. I was brought up an evangelical young earth creationist. At age 19, I was in my first year at a christian college and started learning about the academic origins of the old and new testaments. At the same time, I started debating atheists on the internet. I wouldn't admit it at the time, but I started to gain some doubts about my faith. Four years later, at age 23 I came across Thunderf00t and Aronra's videos on evolution. While I had been taught evolution before in school, I had rejected it based on what I had been taught at home/church. With my faith weakened and looking at evolution through fresh eyes, it finally made sense to me. It also signaled the final nail in the coffin for my faith. Bottom line: it's never too late for anyone. It all comes down to what that person values more: the emotional weight of their religious beliefs or their intellectual search for truth, no matter the cost.

Rare is relative. The cliffs of Dover are an unfair example, because bivalves and other hard-shelled organisms fossilize rather easily compared to softies.

I heard the cliffs of Dover are made of soap. Must be true.

+Linda Ciccoli Its actually coke, from when Pablo Escobar was Colombias special envoy to the crown.

+Flip v d Fluitketel I'm flying to England tomorrow!

BlackEpyon My comment was snark. Fossilization is rare, fossils aren't. It's an important distinction that young earthers fail to make. The same way populations are subject to evolutionary pressures while individuals just reproduce or not.

You said hitchens said that...I think it was a criticism against christians if so. But its true, especially the last phrase. Humans are most responsible for their own misery. I wanted to be a astrophysicist from age 8...ended up now an artist. My mistakes have caused most of my troubles. It's not because you want them, but you trusted wrong people, made bad decisions, valued things you shouldn't have. I appreciate the christian worldview that you should not value things but people, as I have lost everything I own 3 times. Oddly the thing I want back most is my HS yearbook, rather than published stories I wrote in magazines or any comfort thing I owned. But the christian mindset, you can become a slave to things....money. Its why I always value people over those things. Which is more pathetic point of view....slave to things, or slave to doing what is right?

as far as I know, the 1st guy who said it was one of the companions of the prophet and the 2nd khalifa and it is just about being humble with people and god.

​@@iyadal-najjar3512 let's just expose this with the most hated thing of christian belief...only have sex with your wife. This would eliminate STDs in what? 1 or 2 generations? Also have to ask why most STDs seem to be fatal?

@@cobramcjingleballs I think you completely missed Cleo's point. Someone that gives another person credit (doesn't have to be god) for their every achievement but blames themselves for any mistake is going to end up with mental issues. If god (or anyone else) is controlling a person enough to take credit for their every achievement then they must the blame for their every mistake (since they have enough control over that person to stop).

@@kellycowley3535 no. Absolutely not. Imagine perfect parents who created you and nurtured you perfectly. Then you DECIDED to get into drugs, loose all your teeth, have child out of wedlock, against their advice and wishes. Would you blame them for mistakes and for the trust fund they gave you that allowed your choices to do that? Same way. God gave you the gifts you have. So a lot of the credit is due to him. How you choose to handle it is all on you. Its nots your parents or God's fault you ignored warnings not to sleep around and got an STD for life. Yeah, both have control, neither can stop you from being stupid. But to blame them for you ignoring them? NOPE.

Yes

He actually says they are atheists and secularists so YOU, the atheist, wouldnt think Subhoor is lying or inventing this stuff. Educated people with YOUR world view discredit evolution. So how can YOUR opinion on the matter be superior? There s no winning with atheists it seems: 1) "Heres why its wrong" "Ur a maazlim i don traast joo" 2) "Heres an atheist that says its wrong" "Omg he just wants to destroy those people" How arrogant are you to believe your view is superior to the experts in the field??

@@dadush4 So when are these so-called educated people claiming to discredit evolution, going to win the Nobel Prize? The same time someone buys the Brooklyn Bridge from you!

@@DrownedInExile there is a difference in understanding between Aron Ra (= you as well) and the actual scientists. No scientist claims evolution as Darwin portrays it is an absolute truth. Its a study on a probabilistic framework with many assumptions. This means it is useful as a theory but in no way a reassurance that apes and men came from the same origin. It s a possibility and you can think it, but you cant make that claim because the data is not there to engrave it in stone. Aron Ra seems to believe men and apes come from the same ancestor FULL STOP. He says it is a fact. Later on in the debate with Subhoor he defines what he means with fact by saying "a fact is something which is falsiable and true but can change depending on new data". So he s basically saying hot and cold in the same breath. Subhoor clearly defined "fact" as something which is "absolute" and "unchanging". Aron Ra did not agree with this definition. So after Aron Ra lets all the semantics drop down he concludes: Men and apes come from the same ancestor. This is a fact, but facts (according to Aron Ra) can change so men and apes can also not come from the same ancestor. Which contradicts his earlier belief and proves Aron Ra is just an inconsistent arrogant bloat that brings nothing of relevance to the discussion. You chose the wrong man to follow.

@@dadush4 "No scientist claims evolution as Darwin portrays it is an absolute truth." Congratulations, that's the first thing you got right. But Aronra is on record saying there's no such thing as absolute truth. You are dishonestly twisting his words, as you have already done with me. "This means [evolution] is useful as a theory but in no way a reassurance..." This absurd statement demonstrates you don't even know what a scientific theory is! Did you even graduate high school? LMAO! Please do go on, continue to make a fool of yourself. You do provide some harmless little amusement, if nothing else.

@@DrownedInExile 1) "No scientist claims evolution as Darwin portrays it is an absolute truth." Congratulations, that's the first thing you got right. But Aronra is on record saying there's no such thing as absolute truth. You are dishonestly twisting his words, as you have already done with me. Clearly you haven't read his book ^^, because Aronra has said so many things that contradict his own book, it baffles me you still dont know what the hell this guy stands for. I'm not twisting words, I'm clarifying the hilarious contradictions and non-consistencies you and your prophet Aronra are spouting. It's hilarious to see you insult me but not realize your own stupidity when doing so. Do yourself a favor, read the final chapter of Aron Ra's book where he makes the conclusion that ape and human have the same ancestor. It's not just a fact, it's the "absolute" fact which is him saying it's the truth. But of course, you're going to go semantics on me and say "well absolute is not really absolute and fact is not really fact" Keep juggling mate :D.. it's hilarious. "this room is blue and by blue I meant obviously white DUUUUUH" cracks me up. 2) This means [evolution] is useful as a theory but in no way a reassurance..." So you started adding words now to make my sentences look wrong have you :D?? Let me correct that for you: "This means [common ancestory] is useful as a theory but in no way a reassurance..." You said I twisted your words? well here we have you proving to me that you twisted my words. Sad little monkey looking for confirmation bias :(... Stop going Aron Ra on me and changing the meaning of words so it fits your narrative. 3) This absurd statement demonstrates you don't even know what a scientific theory is! Did you even graduate high school? LMAO! Master in engineering of science. Laugh it up, I write papers which are falsified and tested, you write youtube comments and by the looks of it, you'll keep writing youtube comments for a looooooong time :). Now I'm done with you because anything you're going to bring next is just going to be some canned argument or more semantics juggling. You're out of your league, you have no idea what you're defending and you're not interested in learning in the slightest. I have more sincere people to talk to. Begone.

"Evolution" wasn't thought of by Darwin, it dates back to ancient Greece. Darwin did correctly predict in the chapter "problems with the theory" if any highly complex component of life were to be discovered, his theory would fall on its ass which is happening today and the look of despair on the face of the secular materialist pseudo scientists and the cultural Marxist academic elites and financiers of Darwinism is apparent for everyone. The truth will always banish the false you lunatics.

@Thomas Lundy define kind

@Thomas Lundy LoL! Who says that one animal morphs into other? That's ridicoulous bruv...

@Thomas Lundy Speciation has been demonstrated in the laboratory; look into the research UC Berkeley and Harvard have done regarding evolution by natural selection. For the love of your god, get an intellectually honest education! Did you graduate from Patriot university with Kent Hovind?! Evolution by natural selection is a fact. The irony of this argument creationists don't seem to understand is that even if evolution by natural selection was falsified tomorrow, it lends absolutely no credence to the validity of any god claims. Divine assertions have little to no evidence, yet they are regarded as truth(hence, the requirement of faith). And btw, nice cherry picking of the sciences. I especially like the argument from authority with the Harvard paper, except rejecting the aspect you don't like. That's hilarious! I would recommend you educate yourself about logical fallacies also. Have a good day.

@Thomas Lundy Ok, I'm trying not to call you a completely willfully ignorant idiot; no matter how accurate that may be! First, with your "fact #1" about lifeforms never developing into or reproducing any other lifeform than its own kind, with "kind" being defined as being able to breed or interbreed. What do you think speciation is??? A speciation event is when two lineages can no longer interbreed due to biological evolution. Its been demonstrated in the laboratory!! As I previously suggested, get an intellectually honest education! Ignorance and incredulity are not excuses for spreading dishonesty! And I'm guessing your "fact #2" is the old DNA code barrier assertion. Well, guess what, that's a blatant lie, and again, if you were at all informed about the topic, you would know this. Oh, but wait; those assertions were in bold type, so they must be true, right?! Seriously, there is an embarrassment of riches when when it comes to the evidence for evolution by natural selection. Genetics, fossils, embryology, laboratory speciation events (that's changing from one kind to another kind, in case you forgot), etc. Evolution by natural selection is one of the most robust theories in science!! Its withstood scrutiny for 160 years! I know there's plenty of websites and videos claiming otherwise to satisfy your confirmation bias, but they are lying to defend an archaic ideology. Look, you seem to be literate and have internet access, so you'd like to know what's true due to the best evidence available, do some research! God forbid you actually challenge a belief you might have, huh? It's your prerogative if you want to believe the goat herder's guide to the universe, aka the bible, but you're missing out on a world of knowledge. Just saying, it's truly sad.

@Thomas Lundy Yeah, actually speciation does negate your "fact #1". Your definition of kind is "of like seed. Able to breed or interbreed." That's what a speciation event is!! How hard is this to understand?! It's the same with ring species; each species can breed with the species before or after it, but not any further removed. And sorry, but you and I are primates. I'm sure it makes you feel warm and fuzzy to believe that humans are some special creation of a god, but there's no evidence to support it. There have been thousands of gods throughout history, and none have any evidence for belief; if they did, it wouldn't require faith. In fact, it's been clearly demonstrated that Yahweh started as a canaanite god beneath El (just as Hebrew is a canaanite dialect). Sources: Christine Hayes of Yale university and John Day of Oxford university. The original Hebrew genesis story is polytheistic, btw. I'm just showing the irony of creationist beliefs; believing something that's not true while denying something that is true. It makes about as much sense as a god sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself! Yep, no circular reasoning there, huh? I'm willing to bet that no amount of evidence will convince you of the fact of evolution; the creationist cognitive dissonance is generally very strong, in my experience. I always say that it's more about psychology than salvation. So go ahead and live in your insulated bubble where you're just lucky enough to have picked the correct god to worship and know the "truth". Meanwhile, I'll be here in reality examining things critically to best have an understanding of the world around me. Remember, all the bold type in the world doesn't make something true.

peace power I love EoT!

peace power Is your screen name supposed to be ironic?

Exactlly

well, whats your evidence. Dont just say they lie about studies and not provide any proof.

yeah.. I thought the Creationist was going to be some renaissance Muslim.. but the "they just double talk, to lie to you" my blood boiled.. Just another Scumbag.

kzfaq.info-EgR4v3gM8E?si=FNL7Ewx1mjext6mw

+Chaos-Blades I concur - :)

Boom! Mic drop.... I hate the mental pollution of your generation

Asking questions is frowned upon in some religions...

the difference is that the atomic theory actually is a scientific one, it can be proven, tested and we can predict based on it, evolution have repeatedly and consistently failed since it was first brought forward and it is weaker today than ever, as far as science and the scientific method goes at least. Evolution as it currently stands does not hold up, it is even mathematically impossible once you try to make it work with real science. Its a fairy tale for people that want to stop searching for the real answers.

Lol that’s cute. And complete garbage nonsense. I bet you believe in a god… Be honest with yourself for once. It’s the ONLY reason you have a problem with evolution. Or you can lie. Either way, present evidence for all of the nonsense assertions you made. Or go away and pray to your master

@@Top_Cheeze you could not have been serious. Perhaps I’m too tired to appreciate your sarcasm.

That is correct. They are physical sources-of-information, about the thoughts of their authors. In this sense, Hol(e)y scriptures a physical sources-of-information like science books, which provide information about the thoughts of scientists. Now, when it comes to the physical templates at the ORIGIN of the respective thoughts, it gets interesting, and very troublesome and confusing - in the case of Holey Scriptures. Whereas the very thoughts of scientists, spiritually-crystallizing in the "laws-of-physics" do directly come from the physical world and its behavior, they are true descriptions about facts.

+G-D IS A THOUGHT All ancient civilizations, recorded cultures, have had knowledge passed on from generation to generation only to those who need it and the rest had to only have the "version" of the holy book that was legal to have. Any doctrine brought to the church or found by guards of the churches, would be inspected then destroy it or archive it. The Vatican, the United States of America. Saudi Arabia, Queen of England, all the major players have either doctrines or have been privileged enough to have seen the truth that faith is a human coping mechanism. Prayer doesn't work, and there is no God.

They are facts. well, atleast,historians can use them to support ideas

Angela Hall if you are a student of anthropology, which I am, you would understand what you said was very simplistic and biased.

Well, the existence of those books are facts. Same as Lord of the Rings. It doesn't mean that what's written inside is true. And even then, given Ahmed definition of facts, those books are not facts. Pretty much nothing is absolute. We could be living in the matrix right now, and those books don't really exist. Or we could have only begun to exist 2min ago, with all our memories appearing out of nowhere. It's extremely unlikely, but good luck proving the opposite...

I notice that as well, the arrogance of some people.

There are no transitional fossils Super Genius, Show me your transitional fossils. Are you ready to lose :)

@@ConstitutionalConservation Use google.

@@d.ingleberry9635 Neanderthals were human. They buried their dead, used tools, had a complex social structure, employed language, and played musical instruments. Neanderthal anatomy differences are extremely minor and can be for the most part explained as a result of a genetically isolated people that lived a rigorous life in a harsh, cold climate. They used crime seen investigators who specialize in forensic reconstructions of skulls found in suspicious circumstances, they have a very good track record of getting it right, the Neanderthals didn't look like apes, The skeleton they based their hunched over Ape men drawings on they discovered that fossil they used had a bone deforming bone disease like rheumatoid arthritis, when they used healthy Neanderthal skulls and skeletons for the forensic reconstructions they looked human, that if a little neanderthal boy or girl went to your childs school you wouldn't be able to pick him or her out from all the other kids, they were human and recent genetics shows they interbred with homo sapiens, they were bread out of existence not wiped out. Do you know what keeps growing all your life till you die, Your Brow ridges nose and ears keep growing but if you lived to be 350 or so your brow would grow out a large amount, thats Interesting because older Neanderthals had large protruded brow ridges and the Bible says people lived longer in those days, they were not Ape men. www.icr.org/article/neanderthals-are-still-human/ Edocranial Volume ECV (Brain Size Measurement) The adult Homo Erectus cranial capacity is reached by age 10 or 11, it is likely that the adult ECV of WT 15000 (WT 15000 is a skull from a anthropological dig site of a supposed transitional between apes and man) WT 15000 would be no more than about 1000-1050cc, which is still well within the modern human range of about 800- 2000cc. On the same page Jue points out that a brain capacity of 1400cc applies to the Vertesszöllos erectus specimen which is dated at around 350kya (kiloyears ago = thousands of years ). Beasley cites Broderick who reported a measurement as low as 830cc for a modern Wedda pygmy in Sri Lanka, Your Homo Erectus was a Modern human that walked upright. Like I said Neanderthals brow ridges indicate long life ages, once again the only thing's that keep growing on the human body as we grow into old age is the Nose Ears and Brow ridges, the Bible says very clearly that people lived longer back then and this is exactly what we see, they have found Neanderthal DNA this is confirmed they were human and Homo Erectus was Human as well. The Ape to Human fossils evolutionists have can be put into two categories, Humans and extinct Apes.. answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/ape-man/homo-erectus-to-modern-man-evolution-or-human-variability/ answersingenesis.org/creation-science/baraminology/homo-habilis-homo-rudolfensis-and-australopithecus-sediba/ In evolutionary circles it is becoming increasingly common to argue that although H. erectus forms are still on the ‘road’ from ape to human, the morphological distinctions between all human-type forms are insufficient to justify a separate species classification for erectus-that is, that all post-habiline forms (erectus, archaic and modern sapiens plus the Neanderthals), could be subsumed into a single species-H. sapiens, with a subspecific distinction at most. creation.com/homo-erectus-to-modern-man-evolution-or-human-variability

@@ConstitutionalConservation Neanderthals are not transitional and were never claimed to be. They existed at the same time as humans. I'm not reading the rest when your first sentence is not only irrelevant but also incorrect.

@@d.ingleberry9635 Why do you imbeciles make pictures of Neanderthals looking like apes EVERYWHERE!!! AND YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT IT ALL DID YOU.

How can you discriminate Islam separating it like that? ALL religions are religions of clowns! ;)

Tell me why we should take Islam more seriously than any other of the fairy tale compendiums?

+Clarence Hemeon which one?

Well one lie is that evolution is a fact

@Decadent _Descent go ahead keep believing you’re related to a tree. Dumbass

Sniped by the Texas Tank xD

Wow, this lecturer is sooo stupid! It hurts my brain!

+Daniel Eyre You mean surviving three days inside of a whale? I think that qualifies.

+Daniel Eyre Why is it that when an atheist criticizes Islam we have to get lectured on the problems with Christianity as if we didn't know? Your attempt to deflect is a sad one.

Whichever one we criticize, Islam or Christianity, we are pointed at the other as being just as bad if not worse. Like we don't know how messed up either one is?

Daniel Eyre Islam *includes* Judeo-Christian mythology while adding its own additional mythology, similar to Mormonism.

+Daniel Eyre I doubt that *adding* additional miracles and magical creatures to a lore makes it more plausible.

LOL kids bring AR 15s to schools in the US and shoot everyone - you are a retarded Englishman

Careful now.

They can't demonstrate lies, so they waste time trying to tear down reality.

Though to be fair, if they understood how science and evidence worked they wouldn't be trying to argue against the Theory of Evolution. Bit of a catch 22 there.

David Stagg evoshitlin is not science. The complexity of life itself is evidence of a designer

Evolution does not even have evidence for it ever happening

you are the evidence for evolution not happening...for your lineage that is.

+Ray Maritz I think that it has become a fossil by now.

“Sometimes you cant fix stupid.” That goes for the evolutionists

There are no evolutionists asshole!!! Evolution is not an ism. It is a well-documented, well-observed, well-experimented, well-tested, and evdience-based occurrence that explains the origin of life. Stupid creatards like you ignore any evidence your are shown or given. Either that or you don't even bother to do the research at all. You keep claiming evolution is false, but have provided no substantiation. The same goes for your precious faith and sky fairy!! Stop trolling!!!

@@chucklesdarwinwaswrongevol9264 oh wow well I guess I'm a word creationists made to bring me down to their level

Ryan Welke you’re obviously stupid for not understanding evolution and that it is true.

that's why he lost the debate with muslims

+Raphael Merkle It would be a rather short video if Aron were to stick to only empirical evidence for it. I'd say about 30 seconds long....