not just dismantles. absolutely DISMANTLES! lol amazing.

That's because you have wool over your eyes

Naw he is right

​​@@Blinky25256you've got to be a sheep in order to have the wool pulled over your eyes. Everybody's going to believe what they want to believe, but some people are going to have better evidence to support their beliefs than others. You're not making a compelling argument and in fact you're widening the gap by taking the approach you take. Has anybody ever convinced you that you were wrong by telling you that you weren't intelligent or that you're blind? I'm going to go ahead and bet that the answer is no. Christianity used to thrive because the people delivering the message were far more civil than a modern Christian. Now ya'll have a failing message AND failing personalities.

@@lousyacrobat did they change the definition of "DISMANTLES" from breaking it down, to not understanding it?

Sure, buddy. I bet that you're very familiar with how evolution works...

@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 Yes. By mystical mechanisms no one can seem to explain. But if you can explain how amino acids can form proteins and those proteins can form cells all on their own, and all of this happens by random natural processes, I’m all ears.

@@SDRBass Huh? Buddy, you are conflating evolution with abiogenesis. We know a lot about how evolutionary mechanisms, such as mutation, selection, and genetic drift, function. Meanwhile, abiogenesis explains how amino acids were able to form peptide bonds and undergo folding to form proteins, which were encased in an amphipathic membrane to form the first protocell. This occurred through dynamic chemical interactions and a selection mechanism. This makes much more sense than a mythological Canaanite deity making humans from clay.

@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 Stop defending your religion with hand waving and answer the question. All of the other processes you listed have no inherent directionality to them. That’s the problem. If those mechanisms are truly random (meaning probabilistic), then evolution, as it currently stands, is a giant crock.

​​​@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440Evolution works? Are you sure? IF evolution works ,then YOU are as guilty of accepting supernaturality as creationists are! How so? The universe is mindless,yet it was suppose to have set events into motion which are pivotal to evolutionistic premises. Natural or supernatural? Let us go further: The same mindless universe appeared out of nothing! OR it has always existed! Natural or supernatural? Let me help you with an answer. It is supernatural for something to merely pop up out of nothing or to have existed eternally. It you contest my assertion ___tell me ALL THE NATURAL WAYS THROUGH WHICH THE UNIVERSE CAME TO EXIST OUT OF NOTHING,OR HAS ALWAYS EXISTED?

I believe that Ken is saying there is no point in believing in a worldview with no hope over a worldview with hope, hence the sarcastic "become an atheist!"

ROFLMAO

Why can’t we see or hear or feel him. Why is he hiding? Please don’t tell me about the trees etc.

​@@RetiredRoo-oq1edbecause yahweh is just 1 of over 4000 gods man created. Matter of fact when yahweh 1st appeared in the historical record he was a very MINOR god out of MANY before the Hebrews became monotheistic. He was the god of storms. He was basically the Hebrew Thor. Praise Hebrew Thor. Hahahaha. What about Hebrew incredible hulk and Spiderman?

@@RetiredRoo-oq1ed Check your own moral conscience... (Romans 2:14-15)

@@ChrisFerguson-zm4gt How do you know that? How do you know that your god (Nature) and your naturalistic worldview are even possible?

Amen 🙏✝️

I love it. I have never heard that one before.

@@markduell2468 Lol. I read it in a finance book but i thought of Ken Ham.

Not just his salary, but these days, his complete and utter cancellation from the "scientific community" for not towing the woke secular atheist line in our corrupt DEI driven universities..

@@Moist._Robot That's strange. I thought of evolutionary biologists.

​@@scottb4579What is it that you think evolutionary biologists don't understand?

ah yes, finding an argument you like and rejecting everything provided that may reject the argument you like in favor of the argument you like being true

this man is a liar. Nothing about that is "excellent"

Maybe no one speaks of faith, but it's still there. Faith and evidence are not opposed or exclusive of each other. They work hand in hand. Every scientist uses faith. In fact, every human being uses faith every day. Faith is part of everyone's experience and not something to shy away from or ridicule. To do so or to try to diminish the use of faith is foolishness.

Exactly. As Thee Dalai Lama says, when the truth is known faith is unnecessary. Dawkin's problem is that he doesn't believe knowledge of the truth is possible. This is because he doesn't bother to do any research but just has faith in his poorly researched opinions. I'm surprised any decent academics take him seriously as a scholar. .

@peterjones6507 I hear what you're saying when you say faith is unnecessary when the truth is known. But there is more to faith than just trust in the unknown. Faith is also the confidence and trust we have in the known. That is why every person on earth uses faith every day. We still have to trust the known too. If a person has been faithful to us 1000 times, we trust them to show up or be there again. The repeat becomes evidence and we KNOW by faith. Every time we sit in a chair we put faith in a chair. Each time we drive we put faith in other drivers, even total strangers that we put faith in without knowing them. But we have confidence because it's always been safe with other drivers. Nothing in life is completely known either. We just trust the evidence by faith. Every scientist trusts evidence by faith and uses faith to conduct more experiments.

@@adamr8628I would completely agree with what you say. It's an important and often forgotten point. Faith is, after all, the basis for atheism. My point was that it is possible to go beyond faith to certainty, albeit only when we become truth. It would, for example, be a mistake to say that Jesus had faith that Man and God are one.Likewise for the Sufi master Al-Hallaj, who was brutally executed for stating, 'I am Truth'. Bertrand Russel, whose words I was responded to, knew nothing and wanted to know nothing of any of this.

Evolution is based on emotion

Your profile pic is blasphemous

That must be the same source attributed to Matthew that claims fulfillment of prophecies that never existed in the Old Testament nor any other document. May I suggest a slightly different version. Do not give false information in succor to the deluded and those who will not acknowledge actual truth for they will turn a blind eye to that which is fact.

Swing and a miss​@@douglasrasmussen480

Where these bodies came from makes no difference.God created us like Himself: spirit. Find Spirit, Ken Ham, and you will know the Way. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Be careful who you call pigs. We reap as we sow.

that is what the creationist do with their lies

Thanks for the advice. Good old Matty. And there I was, just about to throw my wife's pearls to some pigs. I didn't realize those naughty pigs would trample all over them. There's lots of great advice in the bible, for example" Cast your bread upon the waters, for you will find it after many days". Yep, I threw about thirty bread rolls in the ocean and, miracle of miracles, I found a few of them three days later. Quite what I'll do with the soggy bread, I'm not sure.

I don't really want to go into a deep debate here, but just to give you a bit of thought. Virtually every historical scholar, Christian or not, agrees that Jesus existed and he died on a cross. The Bible also had laws that we now know are to prevent the spread of diseases back when nobody know much about how diseases worked. There is also no one today who can confirm the claim that evolution and the big bang happened.

​​@@natcuber Absolutely incorrect. Jesus living and being crucified has absolutely nothing to do with any claims of supernatural ability. Secondly, people did know how diseases worked, humans aren't stupid. While we didn't yet understand germ theory we knew that sick people made other nearby people sick. Isolating them was common sense, the Quran says something's similar too. Finally, would you like confirmation for evolution and the big bang, or am I wasting my time?

Were . . . you . . . there?

⁠@@Templetonqguess…what…the…apostles…who…literally…wrote…the…bible…weren’t…there…either… 🤯

If there are millions of years the moon would be touching the earth.

​@@EstherSteffenson And it did. The moon formed from Earth when Theia collided with it.

@@gecko-saurus If there were millions of years, there would be no moon. it would have scarpered by now.

@@EstherSteffenson Source? Multiple sources, such as BBC and Astronomy Magazine, state it would take up to 50 billion years before the moon scarpers from the Earth (in other words leaves). However, the sun will likely expand and engulf the Earth, before shrinking into a white dwarf, long before 50 billion AD. So no, the past 4 billion years of deep time would not have caused the Moon to leave the Earth.

Hey creationist, If evolution is false and creationism is true, answer both these questions with evidence backing up your claims, and i’ll give you $1,000 1. Provide a single example of a falsifiable prediction made by evolutionary theory that has proven it false. 2. Provide one FALSIFIABLE prediction made by creationism that has not already been proven false

if you think he is a Christian you need to study the world of God and find out what it really means. He is one of those in the last day that has brought a famine of the word of God as he gives it false meaning.

​@@user-vt3vo1yd3v I've answered before but since you ask twice I answer again, a bit more briefly. Your first to-do: - The evolutionary theory has never made any verified succesfull prediction. So you saved your $1,000. Only scientific theories can be falsified as Karl Popper states. Evolution theory can't be falsified because no evolutionist can tell what is the correct version of evolution. If we refer to Darwin's theory, evolutionists argue that Darwin's theory is not in use anymore. The original Darwinian evolution (All life stem from a Universal Common Ancestor) has become a chameleon -theory. When science proves that mutations produce decay but not evolution, Darwinists give evolution new definitions like: ”Nobody has claimed that evolution always means positive change”. However, Darwin's book ”Origin of Species” claims the opposite! The Neo-Darwinian loosely determined evolution explains even the contradictory phenomena like "fossils and missing fossils both prove evolution”, "positive and negative changes both prove evolution”, "genetically devolving subspecies prove evolution”, so-called living fossils "prove evolution". Evolution is "slow and gradual" but it can also be "quick and advance by saltations". Evolution causes mind blowing changes or keeps everything static for millions of years. Evolution is random except when it advances towards a goal. Acquired qualities can not be inherited except when they do get inherited. So anything proves evolution! But if you start falsifying, evolutionists say "No no, that's not the correct theory - you don't know what evolution means ..." That's why evolution can not be falsified and can't be called a scientific theory. Your second to-do: " Provide one FALSIFIABLE prediction made by creationism that has not already been proven false." One of the falsifiable creationist predictions is the DNA construction. "An intelligent code can only come from an intelligent mind" is a compelling, proven and logical fact supporting creationism and telling of Intelligent Design. It successfully predicted the essence of DNA being planned and not random, just like scientific studies later revealed. In a purely mathematical analysis DNA can only be created in a rigorously guided process. Random mutations can't do the job because accumulating mutations quickly degrade the structural and thermodynamic stability and function of protein folds. The stable tertiary structure of DNA is lost before the mutations could generate a novel protein fold. Time is the enemy of random constructing because each error creates more errors. The more time goes, the smaller is the chance to get a functioning DNA. No more than 3-15 mutational trials and errors are enough to destroy a DNA section while different possibilities for error are counted in millions. A successful random evolutionary process is mathematically impossible. Even if we thought that some kind of a random unguided DNA would appear against all mathematical realities, it would not be functional. Why? Because DNA has no brains. Somebody outside DNA must plan its order and define its purpose. This creationist prediction and its authentication can be easily falsified by an empirical research where DNA is generated in laboratory through a random unguided process.

creationism is a modern heresy based entirely on lies, and it has NOTHING to do with the "faith once delivered to the saints"

@@user-vt3vo1yd3v Psalm 14:1

Nobody has proven macro evolution either, so I don't think there are any Nobel Prizes to be won in this subject.

@@jounisuninen what's a macro evolution? Is that a scientific term?

​@@igorkrugly4842 No

It's speciation.@@igorkrugly4842

LOL

But he does understand science. He's been thought thousands of times, outargued hunderds of times, convinced dozens of times. He's just a con at this point.

​@@futuramaniakTrue. There are much better examples of believers in God that argue from science. There are present day scientists as well as from the past, the literal heroes of science that gave us many of our greatest discoveries including the development of the scientific method, itself.

Extremely ignorant comment! You don't even truly understand science or you wouldn't of made such an Extremely ignorant comment as such.

@@futuramaniak Dr. Ham is a teacher, and a philosopher...I will be the first to admit that scientific debate is not his strong suit. He's not a very capable apologist. He is excellent at teaching to believers and giving them information to engage in discussions like this one. You put Bill Nye or Richard Dawkins into a discussion with Stephen Meyer or Michael Behe and I think you'd see a different scenario entirely played out.

@@futuramaniak This guy has a BA in applied science. He’s no more a scientist than an actor portraying a doctor is a real physician.

This guy is preaching to the choir! They laugh on queue and clap on command!

Where these bodies came from makes no difference.God created us like Himself: spirit. Find Spirit, Ken Ham, and you will know the Way. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

@@robertdouglas8895 So, if it makes no difference, why not just accept evolutionary biology as the explanations of the diversity of life?

@@davegaskell7680 If that works for you to help each other now, then do so. Does it help, besides put your mind at ease? Does it help with medical surgery, with decreasing pain or stillborn babies? My focus is helping people by realizing the world is determined by our minds, not by the past.

@@willpower6720 No, science is not just another opinion. It is evidence and reason. What you said is true about faith, which is fine, but science is important too. And if they are not reconciled, you have a problem.

@@willpower6720 No - it isn't a choice and it isn't that either or. You either believe something because the evidence persuades you that it is true or you don't believe it. I don't believe any religious claims.

He gave lots of evidence; did you even watch the video?

Your comment is evidence that you most likely didn’t watch the video, or you didn’t understand the video.

The tenants upon which evolution rely on to be proven have never been observed. If man can turn wolf to dog then why cant god turn ape to man?

Extra ordinary claims need extra ordinary evidence.

@@andrewwright9960 says who, you? Good evidence is good evidence regardless of what you call "extra ordinary". Asking for extra ordinary evidence is athesits attempt to shift the goal posts. But it is expected. It's weak, but expected.

Careful, they prefer to delete comments like this. God is scared of research in biology, geology, geography, virology, chemistry, paelontology, linguistics, zoology, archaeology, astronomy, physics, astrobiology, etc.

@@wefinishthisnow3883 Indeed. I have lost count of how many times I have had comments deleted, and accounts blocked. every Creationist Snowflake can be quite different

Funny your message hasn’t been deleted. Got have mercy this man. Remove the scales from his eyes. God bless you. Hallelujah amen.

@@WKDMOUSE67 God moves in mysterious ways. I am sure the scales will be removed from his eyes when the biblical god adds a comment in here demonstrating where Ken Ham dismantled evolution in this video. It was a comical video.

@@wefinishthisnow3883 dna is information, and that does not arise, by chance....as the technology increases the complexity of life becomes clearer...and as such, evolution becomes more and more suspect....

Sí. Al menos si ves diferentes símbolos blancos en la esquina inferior derecha del reproductor de KZfaq, uno de los cuales es "papel con tres líneas de texto" y el siguiente es "rueda". Primero selecciona ese "papel" (Subtítulos) para que aparezca una línea roja debajo. Luego haga clic en "engranaje" (Configuración) y seleccione desde allí "Inglés (generado automáticamente)" y finalmente seleccione el idioma de destino deseado en el menú desplegable. ---- Yes. At least if you see different white symbols in the lower right corner of the KZfaq player - one of which is "paper with three lines of text" and the next one is "wheel". First select that "paper" (Subtitles) so that a red line appears under it. Then click on "gear" (Settings) and select from there "English (automatically generated)" and finally select the desired target language from the drop-down menu.

@@MR-ub6sq many thanks

The Lord sent Ken Ham to bolster our confidence it exists? 😂

The Bible is merely a collection of fairy tales.

The Supreme illusion of the World Mind is that it accepts mortality/form as reality. Through Conscious Realization We must Establish Our Oneness with God....! Christ is born in us when we come to the virginal conscious realization that Spirit(Divine Consciousness)is the Only Presence. It is an unadulterated, unsullied moment of Illumination. It is an immaculate conception of the rare, but highly receptive, intuitive readiness for the Absolute Truth. It is an unblemished, impeccable Mystical insight into our True Spiritual Nature. The Birth of Our Spiritual State of Being as the Activity of Truth in Our Consciousness.....! Christ teaches from a different level that the human intellect is not prepared to receive!! Jesus was saying what all Illumined beings said before and after him, which is: Realize your own Divine Christ(Immortal Nature)within, and it will lead you out of the Veiled Dream of Time and Space. Out of the Cycle of Birth and Death. Follow me(Accept Your Immortality), I, the Christ of your being across the Mystical Ocean of Time where you don't walk in the world of matter, form, physicality, iniquity, mortality..... The Truth(aka Christ, just a name used to identify a State of Consciousness) we are walks in the Kingdom of Heaven right here, where no mortal being or carnal mind can reach it!! The Christ we are is Untouchable, and only sees that which is the Kingdom of Spirit/God!! All Illumined Beings Rest in this Principle: Abstain from the Temptation to believe that which is finite/material is of Consciousness/Spirit/God. If it's happening in Time and Space it can not be taking place! Both the religious and atheistic world interpret this Mystic teaching through the same illusory sense known as human intellect, and this is what the Mystical Manuscript points out to those that are able to Discern it. Religion is born of ignorance, and atheism is born of religion, so what we have here are two sides of the same coin of nothingness. Both turn away from Oneness, from Omnipresence, from Spirit, from God! We must abandon the illusion/nothingness of the personal, physical self, and accept the Perfect Spiritual Body of the Kingdom of Spirit as the Only Reality. When this happens there is no longer anything to fight, to correct, pray to, pray for, or to run to or from!! "My Kingdom is not of this Material World" My Kingdom is the One and Only Spiritual Kingdom! The Kingdom of Heaven Within! The bible(and every other ancient Mystical Manuscript) has been hijacked by the carnal minds/human minds ignorance of the belief in a life separate and apart from Omnipresence(God....Oneness), yet, if Spiritually Discerned as it's meant to be, shows us how to walk out of the appearance of matter, out of the shadow of the Acceptance of birth and death(Atheism), and into the Immortal State of Our Being that is Spirit/Immortality/Incorporeality/Consciousness As the Only Presence. The Bible reveals the Unreality of the Material Dream of the Mind, and the Reality of Spirit/God as the Only Presence. The Truth and Untruth are placed next to each other in the Bible to show us Immortal Spirit as Reality, and the Mental Distortion we call Finite Form that we Entertain as Reality.... What we believe we are experiencing as a mortal being is actually the Binding/Imprisoning of Spiritual Immortality as the Truth of the Activity of Our Consciousness into a Mortal and Material Sense of Awareneness. The message of the bible(and all true Spiritual teachings) is not for the timid, it is for those who are willing to walk the Earth in Proportion to their Receptivity of Spiritual Immortality as Jesus, Buddha, Lao Tzu, Shankara, and many others have(THE STRAIT GATE)! Through the Realization and Acceptance of Spirit as the Only Presence Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, and many others became Interpreters and Demonstrators(as you will ultimately be)for the language of the Realization of Spirit/God as the Only Presence. Thereby Demonstrating the Unreality of the Material World, Human Mind, and the 5 Senses. Everything of the Senses is Perishable because it is not of Spirit, and therefore, not a Reality. Everything of Spirit is Imperishable, and your Divine Infinite Being, that which Jesus called The Father Within, the Buddha called the Buddha Mind, and Lao Tzu called the Tao, is Immortal, Omnipresent Spirit. Where everything appears to be, only Spirit/God is.... The Cornerstone of the Christ(God/Spiritual Consciousness Realized)Teaching is that Spirit/God is the Only Presence, not to worship Jesus the illusory form that is nothing and can do nothing of itself....(with Spirit being the only Presence, to worship anything of an illusory material nature, such as a human form, is to worship a graven image, as all matter is a graven image). GOD/SPIRIT IS OMNIPRESENT! (God/Spirit is the Only Presence) Therefore, to Be Reborn is to Overcome the Belief of a Human Birth, and Accept Spirit as the Only Presence! What is not of Spirit is not a reality. Every Temptation of this World is Meaningless when you know the Truth of Your Immortal Christ/God/Spiritual Being!! The Matter/Error/Evil is not there, ONLY THE TEMPTATION TO ACCEPT IT AS REALITY IS!! The Bible is a Mystical Manuscript written for the Development of Spiritual Discernment by those of a Mystical/Spiritual Consciousness, and written in such a way that if it were to make it's way outside of the Mystery Schools it couldn't be Spiritually Discerned by man with breath in his nostrils, and would instead be misinterpreted, and this choice has worked Perfectly, as the World Mind Illusion worships it as a religious document! No religion has found God, ever!! Only the Mystic has Realized God/Immortality because the Mystic knows where not to look! Religion, Philosophy, and Science seek God/Spirit in the Material World of Illusion through the faculty responsible for it, the human mind, hoping for a glimpse of Truth/God where no Truth/God of any kind Exists. The Mystic(of my Household, aka my Consciousness)knows God is the Realization of Infinite, Incorporeal Omnipresence(Spirit) that is the True Essence of Being. The Mystic Discerns the Reality of Spirit through the Unreality of Matter. The Mystic knows Our True and Only State of Being is Incorporeal, Infinite, and Omnipresent. The Mystic sees only the Spirit of Immortality through the Sense of Form/Matter of all beings. The Mystic knows that if it is happening in Time and Space it is Not Taking Place. The Mystic allows Infinite Perfection to be his Thought through Conscious Awareness of Spirit as the Only Presence!! Therefore, the Mystic reaches not for God or Truth, the Mystic Rests in the Realization of it!! This releases him from the reliance upon that which is ERRONEOUS, the 5 Senses!! We don't Transcend, We Realize!! The Mystic allows Infinite Perfection to be his Thought through Conscious Awareness of Spirit as the Only Presence!! The Mystic doesn't accept Love as a Sensual Emotion. The Mystic Knows Love is a State of Spiritual Integrity! The Mystic belongs to no religion, no human belief structure, and never to the mortal world of man with breath in his nostrils. The Mystic Says: I am not in this world to acquire or achieve anything: I am here as an instrument of God/Spirit to bear witness to Spirit/God's presence. I have appeared for one reason, that God/Spirit, through me, may be made manifest on Earth. I have appeared for the Glory of God/Spirit, not for my personal glory, not for my personal reputation or my personal wealth, but appear that Spirit/God might be Glorified as His Love shown forth through me! Prace Be Unto You!!

​@@Moist._Robot Our confidence in God comes from logical thinking as much as from science. World is full of evidence for Intelligent Design. In the courts of law, indicium is used as evidence. The existence of God is demonstrated all the time around us by indicia. Atheist claim that a lack of belief in God's existence stems from the lack of evidence or empirical proof. But atheists do not understand what means “evidence”. Evidence is an outward sign. Indication means evidence. Since logically thinking people see indicia for God, we have the evidence for God existing. If atheists are not able to see the indicia for God, it’s rather their problem. Atheists neither do know what means “empirical”. Empirical means originating in or based on observation or experience. Since logically thinking people observe and experience God’s work, God does exist. If atheists are not able to observe and experience God’s work, it’s their problem. For any logical mind the evidence of God is compelling. "A scientific fact is the result of a repeatable careful observation or measurement by experimentation or other means, also called EMPIRICAL evidence." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact#In_science Question: How many times has (macro) evolution been repeatedly observed or experimentally measured, getting positive empirical evidence? Answer: Not once. The "universal common ancestor" is a product of lively imagination. Nobody has seen it, it has never been proven by an empirical test.

Biblical truth says the Earth is flat, but never once says anything about its age. Yet Ken ham denies the Earth being flat. Genesis and Job outright say the Earth is a disc with a crystal dome that sits on top pillars. The bible says the sun and moon are the same size, and both are smaller than the earth. It says that outright, directly. NEVER once says the Earths age. But ken hambone denies the age of the earth but says the earth is round 😂. THE BIBLE says it’s flat, but ham knows that’s factually incorrect with no ability to lie about it, unlike how he lies about evolution and the age of the earth.

Exactly! That's the straw man that the creationists want to dismantle every time. Ham and his lot don't have any real answers either. If they're version of god created it all, then he is certainly responsible for it all as well!

@@toddballard-zw5fg Their stated goal is to put real science and creationism on the same level, as if real science is faith based too. "he is certainly responsible for it all as well!" Nah. The bad bits of the universe are our fault because our ancestors ate some magic fruit before we were born. Now THAT'S science! ;)

WRONG. God designed us, any flaw in our brains or bodies is a DIRECT consequence of what God himself did. And I know your reply will be original sin corrupted us, BUT GOD HIMSELF WOULD STILL HAVE TO DESIGN THE CORRUPT VERSIONS OF US. God himself would have had to design the consequences that would happen if we ate the fruit. Anything that possibly could ever happen is Gods fault. HES OMNIPOTENT AND OMNISCIENT. Nothing can possibly happen without his control. He engineered the fall, he designed us to fall, HE CAUSED EVERY PROBLEM. STOP giving God all of the CREDIT with none of the RESPONSIBILITY:

@@user-vt3vo1yd3v Not helping. Please don't spam on every comment no matter how unrelated.

3:10 speaks of what we don’t know. Not sure what problem we have that god does not have?

@@RetiredRoo-oq1ed God is Omnipresent & Omniscient & Omnipotent. God does not have a problem! We do as a fallen and sinful creation. God cares for us and our problems and helps us through them. He has got us covered if we let Him. God knows the end from the beginning and works with our free will. Many times there is suffering involved with our problems. There will always be problems for us until the last day. Be blessed Retired Roo

​@@RisenShine-zy7dnGod is also non existent!

*** "a lot I mean A LOT" ; we can not solve the science problems with the Bible nor solve the problems of faith with science, their purpose is different, as science and believe are also different, there are not contradition if we study both equaly and without bias, honestly.***

@@adelinomorte7421 I would agree with you were it not for the fact that religions make truth claims that can be scientifically tested and shown to be incorrect (e.g. 6 day creation, global flood, etc.). If the biblical accounts were taken to be allegorical/fable/parable and not to be taken literally then, again, no problem but some people consider the biblical accounts to be literal truth so that then brings direct conflict with the scientific understanding.

Yeah, a lot of lies.

@@mnmnrt examples?

@@mnmnrtnext time, watch the video, but not on mute

Just a shame it’s all nonsense in it?

@@Moist._Robot How did you think to prove it nonsense?

@@jounisuninen Evolution is real whether you like it or not.

@@jounisuninenBecause evolution is the single most supported thing in science that has ever existed, there is more evidence for evolution than the Earth being round or gravity exisitng, or heliocentrism. Yet Ham doesn’t deny those three things. al

@@jounisuninen Hey creationist, If evolution is false and creationism is true, answer both these questions with evidence backing up your claims, and i’ll give you $1,000 1. Provide a single example of a falsifiable prediction made by evolutionary theory that has proven it false. 2. Provide one FALSIFIABLE prediction made by creationism that has not already been proven false

You are cheering that someone failed that badly? Are you a masochist?

@@OdinMagnusthey don’t know a single piece of science and they’re biased.

It’s more likely to be the 7 P’s🐹

The term "seven seas" appears for the first time in an aura of sacredness in the hymn of the Sumerian priestess Enheduanna to Inanna, goddess of love and fertility. We are in the 23rd century BC.

His answer is that a book written by men thousands of years ago about spirits, angels and virgin mothers proves that humans were created by a spirit . Oh that spirit also created the universe by snapping his spirit fingers to cause it to come into being. What nonsense

@@peterbatterham8522 How would you know it be nonsense?

@@jounisuninen Oh, I don't know ... Sky Daddy separating the primordial waters, creating man from dust, while his son, who turns out to be himself in the end, walks on water, feeds 5,000 with one fish and a loaf, etcetera ...

@@lizadowning4389 If God is real, whats so unbelievable about him defying the laws he created?

@@lizadowning4389 There is no Sky Daddy. Instead, there is Lord Jesus and if you want to learn something of Him you can read Bible. I recommend starting from Gospel of John. Lord Jesus is the Son in the Trinity. As He said "I and the Father are one". His deeds are narrated also in the Old Testament because God has given Him all power in the Heavens and on the Earth.

What science is that?

@@peterclarke3990 There are many facets of evolution and common descent. It would take a long time to write out every detail. It would be easier if you just asked me what you don't understand or would like to know.

@@tsdbhg Where are the transitional forms within the fossil record? Give me some examples of evolutionary change within animals with evidence of transitional change within the fossil record. Why did evolution take place? What was behind the obvious design within nature? That will do to be going with!

@@peterclarke3990 The science that you have never bothered to learn about.

@@peterclarke3990 There are thousands of transitional forms. Evolution is inevitable. Anythging that reproduces, has to evolve. It's a mathematical nexessity. Design in nature is improved by adaptation through natural selection.

"the title got me" yes. me too, but I thought it was "answers in Guinness" (oh darn, back to the liquor store)

Um ... On Feb. 30th 2024 at 25:00 hr

@@WingDiamond :D

Hes right tell Lord that at judgement@

are you even the same religion as him?

@@AMC2283 I don’t think either of us are fond of the term religion. We are born-again, Bible based Christians and like I said earlier, “He is brilliant.”

@@grandexchange378 well I guess you wouldn’t be since there’s about 45000 sects and you can’t all be right. Regardless your beliefs refute jack squat.

@@AMC2283 Well, because you say there 45000 or so sects and that not all of them can be right then I suppose that makes it all the more important to have the truth.

@@grandexchange378 except you’re not interested in the truth, you want to hear that your god did it and as such you get an afterlife. Or is that not true my good man? Because the truth is also that evolution is verified by a mountain of evidence beyond any rational doubt.

so, because yr brother prefers newer movies evolution isn't real?

Old is just new but a bit older

That's how I feel about The God Delusion.

@@mrtadreamernow read the bible with the same healthy skeptism.

The grand canyon was created by erosion, not volcanism. The geology is completely different

@@jockyoung4491 The Grand Canyon was created by erosion in few weeks, when the waters of the Flood streamed back to ocean and the mud and clay were still not petrified.

@@jounisuninen Obviously not.

the two are not even vaguely the same.

Carving channels through unconsolidated mud and ash is a very different proposition than through sedimentary rock. @@jounisuninen

What facts? And what reason?

​@@tobychidi What exactly is it about evolution that you don't understand?

@@LordMathiousI’m guessing, quite a bit.

Evolution is not science; science is what is observable, testable, and observable. Evolution is none of these; we do not see evolution happening, we do not see it in the fossil record, and we do not see it in the laboratory. As it is not observable, it is not testable, as it is not testable it is not verifiable, as it is not verifiable it is not science. What is the evolutionary ation for the origin of the universe? None; “it just happens.” That is a rejection of cause and effect and an embrace of magic. What is the evolutionist explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe? “It just happened“: magic. What is the source of the biological instructions in DNA? “It just happened“: magic. I don’t believe in the magic of evolution, I believe in cause and effect, I believe in the logical, orderly creator of the universe. I will leave the magic to you.

@@LordMathious“what is it exactly about evolution you don’t understand?” I understand the idea behind evolution. What I don’t understand is why evolutionist persist in believing in evolution when the evidence, for it has never been found; 160 years of phi he does not support Darwin‘s idea of evolution, 60 years of genetic science does not support Darwin‘s idea. I understand natural selection; it is a process of elimination, where, by way of environmental conditions, certain traits contribute to the survival of a life form. However, as it is a process of elimination, some traits are also lost which may not be survival factors in the current environment, but with changing climate might well have been, i.e., a species survives through an ice age, but has lost through natural selection survival traits that would’ve helped it in a much hotter, dryer, climate. The fossil evidence supports this: the fossil record shows the extinction of more than 90% of all kinds of creatures that ever lived. Natural selection gradually eliminated, viable, survival traits. Natural selection from genetic variation is not viable explanation. I understand the idea, but genetic variation is simply genetic mutation in which biological instructions in the DNA molecule is either lost or becomes garbled and unusable. I understand the idea that small mutations and copying errors could accumulate to phenotypically traits that would be advantageous in survival, but this is not born out in the fossil record; as Darwin called for transitional, fossil forms, stretching over eons of time no such have ever been found. There is no fossil evidence of one kind of life form evolving from another, therefore, no origin of species as Darwin calls for. In addition to the fossil record, not supporting evolution in that there is no record of in numerable transitional forms between one kind of life form and another, so also genetic science does not support evolution. It has been found at the human genome is the king at a rate between 1% and 2% per generation, and the human race by some estimations may be extinct in 6000 years. This is evolution, this is de-evolution, again, supported by the fossil evidence: lifeforms become unviable, and no longer reproduce. I do understand evolution: not being science it is a belief system. I have been told by evolutionist quote, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” There is no evidence for evolution, extraordinary, or otherwise. I’m told by evolutionist “lack of evidence is not an evidence of absence.” But an absence of evidence is in fact, not evidence: evolution is, therefore, a matter of philosophy, at a belief system, at worst a cult, which is cling to with a zit tree that produces two effects: (1) believe in evolution without question (2) ridicule of those who do not accept everything they are all about evolution without question. You need to look no further than comments in this thread and support of that observation. “Science is the culture of doubt.” - Richard Feinman. Evolution, not being science, evokes questions like “what exactly is it about evolution you don’t understand” with no self reflection.

Well, it's not that simple. While we haven't gotten to a scientific definition of love, we can certainly do a lot of experiments/studies around it. And we do find that when somebody's "in love", certain areas of the brain light up. So there is something there, provably; it's just that we don't have a clear definition of that "something".

@@hongotedesco8931Beautiful! Those areas of our brain just light up as a consequence of love, that something that we feel but can't explain. We got it! Spiritual things bring up physical ones.=)

@@user-vb8lq7bu5e But see, I don't think it's "spiritual", that's just a label you're slapping on it. It's all physical, it's all just a complex mess of chemicals and reactions in our brains.

What spiritual things do you mean?

@@hongotedesco8931 So then have scientists been able to explain what love is exactly? And how it works?

To use the example in the video, you weren't there, you didn't see the Eiffel Tower get built, you didn't hear the oral tradition that supposedly preceded the writings of the year of its building or that it was used to open the fair on that day, so you can't say it's true. Its not about being there. It's about inferences and reliability of sources from deductions within oberservable evidence today. We all have the same evidence. Your foundation is just off. Also no, zero atheists actually care what facts are true. Over 80% of atheists today say they would not believe in God even if he came down from Heaven on a white horse. With that level of ignorance, I don't expect atheists really care. They just hate theism. That is all. They are proving nothing by trying to take Christians out of Heaven.

Life made all kinds of mistakes. Only the stuff that worked survived to continue the process. But it didn't happen "by accident". Genetic variation may be random, but evolution is most definitely not. "Plants" did not create the oxygen for the first animals. Animals actually came before the first land plants. The oxygen was produced by cyanobacteria. But nothing "so that" anything else could happen. Evolution simply built on what it already had at every step.

Something happening doesn't mean it happened "by accident". These things just happened. But if you believe the Bible instead, God is supposed to have created plant life before the sun (!) , and the earth before the stars and the sun. Does this make sense to you?

@@drsiege3434 The 3rd verse of Genesis says, " Let there be light". Now, this may not be the sun, but it could be a source of heat and light and therefore fuel plant life. By the way, is it a requirement that starts need to exist first before the earth exists?

@@natcuber so let me get this straight. There was light on the earth before the sun? Please note that the sun and other stars are billions of years older than the earth and other planets. No life on earth could have existed without the sun. The earth couldn't even stay in place without being in the sun's orbit. The writers of the bible didn't know this, of course. They believed the earth was the centre of the universe. Science has shown that the bible is wrong and full of outdated information that couldn't have been divinely inspired.

@@drsiege3434 - Something happening doesn't mean it happened "by accident". These things just happened.- " What do you mean by that? Just happened but not by accident ... So God created that something? I've never understood why atheists think God would be like a human who can't do all those miracles told in Bible. God created plant life before the sun because He showed His omnipotence and He also created the earth before the stars and the sun. That's logical because in Bible God tells that in the future world there won't be sun at all because God himself is the light.

Evolutionist can not prove evolution. Scientist have known carbon 14 doesn't work since the 70s. 1)They won't admit it because of their religious faith in evolution. Faith only, no science 2) They want to keep their jobs or grants. 3) They have nothing else. Not even a book. The evolutionist scientist who discovered the red blood cells in a dinosaur mummy and published her findings, saying this dinosaur can not be billions of years old, was thanked by her university for such a scientific find, by sacking her. Red Blood cells can not survive even millions of years.. Mary, not sure of the spelling of her last name, Switzer. Same surname as Albert.

Evolution is a theory used by atheists to justify atheism.

I can find several...and I haven't spent a dime

@@jeremyelford7926 Great, we have a challenger. Go for it.

​@@EstherSteffensonyou cant carbon date dinosaur fossils, and soft tissue can fossilize. This doesnt disprove evolution

When has a, test, shown a species evolving into another??

Where about does he dismantle evolution?

It was terrible, as always.

Where, can you send me the link? 😊

Excellent video indeed, full of irrefutable facts.

@@jounisuninen Like what?

To non-believers, it's evidence that matters, not what a book says.

Where these bodies came from makes no difference.God created us like Himself: spirit. Find Spirit, Ken Ham, and you will know the Way. Here's what it says. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

@@robertdouglas8895 It looks like you just decided to copy and paste that as a reply to every comment. If you don’t have an original thought, then you just might be a troll. Do better.

@@TenMinuteTrips I did edit some of my replies according to the content, but some I didn't need to do that. If you learned nothing from what I wrote, then so be it.

Hey creationist, If evolution is false and creationism is true, answer both these questions with evidence backing up your claims, and i’ll give you $1,000 1. Provide a single example of a falsifiable prediction made by evolutionary theory that has proven it false. 2. Provide one FALSIFIABLE prediction made by creationism that has not already been proven false

Observations and evidence used to support a presupposition, which is a construct of the geologists' minds. Thus, it is indeed true that geologists construct the geological record.

@@cryxibus They DESCRIBE it; they don't construct it.

@jockyoung4491 They don't merely describe it. They define it, which is synonymous with what is meant by "construct" in this context.

"They categorize it based on observation and evidence." - If evolutionists, based on their biased assumptions.

Evidence is the same for both sides. It is how you interpret it. Interpretation is based on your world view- whether naturalistic or biblical.

............ you yourself explain what you never saw happen with a god you never saw. 'spirits' is a weird thing and hundreds of books can be filled with the possible definition. however i will go further on the following definition; a non physical entity that exists in every being. it's convenient that its not a physical entity since that means its presence can't be proven, it just so happens it cannot be seen, heard, smelled or felt, which are coincidently exactly the senses everyone uses to observe the world around them. so the only reason to believe spirits are real would be; i dont like the idea of death being nothing, because it would mean my life means nothing' which it does, nobody exists with a purpose everyone is going to die, deal with it. spirits can't be proven, all properties of life have a logical explanation, none of which require a magical spirit to be present. so please make the final step to realisation and humor me, what EVIDENCE do i have to assume i and every other being in the universe have a spirit? what does it mean to have a spirit? and please come to the realisation that a spirit has no reasonable explanation to exist. a spirit only makes sense if you accept that a god as described in the bible exists which you claim to do only because spirits exist. Biologists do not 'invent' explainations, they pose a hypothesis and try everything to disprove it. when they fail at disproving a theory it becomes a fact, something that is accepted to be true without any reasonable doubt.

He said Hello to me.

A word akin to fantasy.

Terrible reasoning using the most basic logical fallacies there are.

I have officially lost faith in humanity

⁠@@cubeofmars291good, put it in Jesus not man!

Are you living up to your expectation you put on others?

How could Ham offer such when the evidence for evolution is so strong? Were you wanting a miracle? LOL

@@slik00silk84 There is NO evidence for Neo-Darwinian evolution.

Now ask them what they think about the globe, and they're gonna tell you how the bible is wrong and society is right.

@@slik00silk84 I thought I would give him the opportunity to convice me.Modern science was birthed from a Judeo_christian world veiw, ie; A reasonable God made a reasonable world that could be known by reasoning people. As a Christian, therefore I follow the evidence wherever it leads. Current neo darwinisim no doubt jas its problems but it is the best fit so far. Being a theist does not limit my options and Though I would not call myself an evolutionist i am happy to accept the label 'imperisist' in regard to the material realm.

@@willpower6720 You’re or your?

​@@willpower6720Bro, you've got the whole internet to learn about evolution. You're just not willing to learn, are you?

@@willpower6720 Or Ken is wrong and misunderstands the Bible bc he doesn’t take it in its cultural context and thinks it’s a science book which the Bible never claims to be

@@willpower6720 No it’s not bc it doesn’t speak bout science these ppl weren’t scientists and what science do u think it says

​@@cubeofmars291 "you've got the whole internet to learn about evolution. " - We can learn of "micro evolution" but it really is no evolution at all, just intraspecific variation where in every fertilization same genes are reshuffled. No new genes appear to generate a path towards a new species. Evolution ("macro evolution") instead is based on a hypothetical Universal Common Ancestor. Nobody has found such an organism. There are no fossils of it either. The ancient fish could produce different fish but it had no genes to make life on land possible. You've been fooled by Charles Darwin. By the way ... mutations won't help here. If mutations could create new life forms, why has DNA the mechanism that eliminates ALL mutations it finds? Ohta, Kimura, Elena and others have estimated, that the proportion of useful mutations is so low that it can’t be statistically measured. [Ohta, T., Molecular evolution and polymorphism. Natl Inst Genet Mishima Japan 76:148-167, 1977.] [Kimura, M., Model of effective neutral mutaitons in which selective constraint is incorporated. PNAS 76:3440-3444, 1979.] [Elena, S.F. et al, Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in E. Coli. Gentetica 102/103:349-358, 1998.]

Hey creationist, If evolution is false and creationism is true, answer both these questions with evidence backing up your claims, and i’ll give you $1,000 1. Provide a single example of a falsifiable prediction made by evolutionary theory that has proven it false. 2. Provide one FALSIFIABLE prediction made by creationism that has not already been proven false

@@HangrySaturn I’ve just woke up and read this. Imagine waking up a creationist? Be like having a lobotomy.

@@user-vt3vo1yd3v Hey, those are really nice questions, but i have one for you... WHERE'S THE LAMB SAAAAAUUUUUCE!?!?!?!

Haha he didn’t understand the irony

That's excellent news. Shows that the vast majority of Christians are sane and accept the overwhelming evidence for the MES.

@@willpower6720no creationist has ever shown it’s a religion. Will you finally?

@@willpower6720 No bro, not even close. Evolution is a scientific theory, which means it's as close to fact as you're going to get. In contrast, something like christian mythology, is as *far* from truth as you're going to get. It's just invention.

No one has a problem with believing in God..I'm sure the Bible was only meant figuratively and not to be taken literally....you can believe in God and science at the same time

Im an evolutionary biologist and atheist, and have no problem with considering many of the teachings of Christianity as being important life lessons and often greatly positive and beneficial moral compass. None of that however needs conflict with clear evidence for evolution.

No proof at all! Just infered no transitional fossils soft tissues in dinos c be old c14 c be old!look up grady mc murtrys vids ian juby genesis flood whitcomb and Morris earth's mag field. Be old check itbout

What are the religious fictions and myth? Surely you don’t mean evolution?

@@therick363 I mean the Christian fictions & myths.

@@AtamMardes ah. Thank you for the clarification. I appreciate the cordial response.

It has been verified and proven over and over again...

@@jeremyelford7926 can’t tell if you’re serious or sarcastic

@@bepis126 I'm serious...the Bible has withstood centuries of attempts to discredit it...

Re: "My favorite bit of science..." It's maths rather than science. It's more commonly known as the golden ratio. From this comes the golden rectangle, whose sides fit the ratio, as well as the golden angle, the golden triangle, pentagram, and pyramid. Discovered in the 11th century by the Greeks, though in the late 15th century, the golden ratio first gained the pompous name of “the divine proportion” by friar Luca Pacioli.

lol, pompous…what the heck man…

@@cubic-h6041 Re: "lol, pompous…what the heck man…" Hey, If the person giving the dates wished to add that to their web page. and I wished to copy into my comment, who am I to remove what they wrote.

​@@cubic-h6041 Yes. Pompous.

@@BrianNewton286 Yes, the ratio is indeed mathematics. However, the investigation and discovery of its existence in most things is science.

There are at least 10 types of solid proofs for evolution including ancient organism remains, The fossil layers (verified every day by radio decay data - some can pinpoint back to 30,000 years and others can go back 15 billion years but with less accuracy), similarities among organisms alive today, similarities in DNA, and similarities of embryos. Thousands of human fossils enable researchers and students to study the changes in brain and body size, locomotion, diet, and other aspects of the way of life of early human species over the past 6 million years. Millions of stone tools, figurines and paintings, footprints, and other traces of human behavior in the prehistoric record tell about where and how early humans lived and when certain technological innovations were invented. The study of human genetics shows how closely related we are to other primates and how connected we are with all other organisms - and can indicate the prehistoric migrations of our species, Homo sapiens, all over the world. Advances in the dating of fossils and artifacts help determine the age of those remains, which contributes to the big picture of when different milestones in becoming human evolved.

You are just a thought that someone Somewhere somehow feels you should be here And it's so for real to touch To smell, to feel, to know where you are here And my streets are paved with gold and if Someone asks you, you can call my name

Who needs digital photographs when time period and fossils are all very scientifically the same? The Shroud of Turin in dozens of test have a definitive time period. The age of the shroud is obtained as AD 1260-1390, with at least 95% confidence. There is meaning in life even if no god. Believe me. Which is kind of what Religion tell us - take everything on faith. Nobody is saying there isn't a flood. It's just not caused by god. I doubt a humane god would want to hurt the Egyptian first born.

so what do you need Ken for?

Debunked

​@@user-hr8dx9qw4nFor real these people who don't believe in evolution and would rather believe that the whole Earth was flooded and the Earth is flat and 6000 years old without any evidence besides my modified plagiarized fairytale book says so are just idiots they have been debunked over and over again 😂

@@AtamMardes Exactly! The main harm and danger caused by the man-made Bible and the man-made Quran is, that even though they contain man-made wisdom, they also contain man-made errors that are claimed to be the word of their god. By that, they expect the reality to adjust to those errors and not vice versa. Thats very harmful, especially as those man-made and “godly claimed” errors include topics like e.g. astronomy, evolution, biology and homosexuality.

@@AtamMardes and where is Voltaire today? Banished to the annals of irrelevancy and obscurity. And where is Christ today? Still contained in the pages of the alltime bestselling, most read, most reviewed, most venerated, most translated, most authoritative, most influential, and therefore most important book in human history. Archeologists actually use the Bible as primary source material. Don't end up like Voltaire. Trust the most authoritative source; receive Christ.

He didn’t state a single fact.

@@willpower6720 maybe he goes to a church where the people value truth...

I've been a Christian all my life (and still am), but if somebody told me that I need to believe that the universe is 6,000 years old, I would be gone. (I would look for another church.)

That quote is exactly correct. But time and evolution are unrelated questions. Time just exists. The Earth is over 4 billion years sold. What happened diring those 4 billion years is a matter of scientific evidence.

​@@jockyoung4491 What happened during those 4 billion years is a matter of scientific evidence and there is no scientific evidence for it. There neither is evidence for 4 billion years. Young Earth: 1. Amount of salt in the sea. 2. The amount of sediment on the sea floors at current rates of land erosion. From a biblical point of view, at the end of Noah’s Flood lots of sediment would have been added to the sea with the water coming off the unconsolidated land, making the amount of sediment perfectly consistent with a history of thousands of years. 3. Iron-manganese nodules (IMN) on the sea floors. The measured rates of growth of these nodules indicates an age of only thousands of years. Lalomov, A.V., 2006. Mineral deposits as an example of geological rates. CRSQ 44(1):64-66. 4. The age of placer deposits (concentrations of heavy metals such as tin in modern sediments and consolidated sedimentary rocks). The measured rates of deposition indicate an age of thousands of years, not the assumed millions. See Lalomov, A.V., and Tabolitch, S.E., 2000. Age determination of coastal submarine placer, Val’cumey, northern Siberia. J. Creation (TJ) 14(3):83-90. 5. Pressure in oil / gas wells indicate the recent origin of the oil and gas. (Petukhov, 2004). In their opinion, if models demand the standard multimillion-years geochronological scale, the best exploration strategy is to drill wells on a random grid.” -Lalomov, A.V., 2007. 6. Direct evidence that oil is forming today in the Guaymas Basin and in Bass Strait is consistent with a young earth. The pattern of magnetization in the magnetic stripes where magma is welling up at the mid-ocean trenches argues against the belief that reversals take many thousands of years and rather indicates rapid sea-floor spreading as well as rapid magnetic reversals, consistent with a young earth (Humphreys, D.R., Has the Earth’s magnetic field ever flipped? Creation Research Quarterly 25(3):130-137, 1988). 7. Measured rates of stalactite and stalagmite growth in limestone caves are consistent with a young age of several thousand years. See also articles on limestone cave formation. 8. The decay of the earth’s magnetic field. Exponential decay, with fluctuations especially during and after the Flood, is evident from historical measurements and is consistent with the hypothesis of free decay since creation, suggesting an age of the earth of only thousands of years. Humphreys, R., Earth’s magnetic field is decaying steadily-with a little rhythm, CRSQ 47(3):193-201; 2011. 9. Excess heat flow from the earth is consistent with a young age rather than billions of years, even taking into account heat from radioactive decay. See Woodmorappe, J., 1999. Lord Kelvin revisited on the young age of the earth, J. Creation (TJ) 13(1):14, 1999. 10. Carbon-14 in coal suggests ages of thousands of years and clearly contradict ages of millions of years. Carbon-14 in oil again suggests ages of thousands, not millions, of years. Carbon-14 in fossil wood also indicates ages of thousands, not millions, of years. Carbon-14 in diamonds suggests ages of thousands, not billions, of years. Note that attempts to explain away carbon-14 in diamonds, coal, etc., such as by neutrons from uranium decay converting nitrogen to C-14 do not work. 11. Incongruent radioisotope dates using the same technique argue against trusting the dating methods that give millions of years. 12. Incongruent radioisotope dates using different techniques argue against trusting the dating methods that give millions of years. 13. Demonstrably non-radiogenic ‘isochrons’ of radioactive and non-radioactive elements undermine the assumptions behind isochron ‘dating’ that gives billions of years. ‘False’ isochrons are common. 14. Different faces of the same zircon crystal and different zircons from the same rock giving different ‘ages’ undermine all ‘dates’ obtained from zircons. 15. Evidence of a period of rapid radioactive decay in the recent past (lead and helium concentrations and diffusion rates in zircons) point to a young earth explanation. 16. The amount of helium, a product of alpha-decay of radioactive elements, retained in zircons in granite is consistent with an age of 6,000±2000 years, not the supposed billions of years. 17. Lead in zircons from deep drill cores vs. shallow ones. They are similar, but there should be less in the deep ones due to the higher heat causing higher diffusion rates over the usual long ages supposed. If the ages are thousands of years, there would not be expected to be much difference, which is the case (Gentry, R., et al., Differential lead retention in zircons: Implications for nuclear waste containment, Science 216(4543):296-298, 1982; DOI: 10.1126/science.216.4543.296).

My guess he is pretty rich given he's found a niche where all he has to do is cast aspersions on what others do, claim things, focus on the problems with evolution that others have identified and he has a huge following who will gladly donate money.

and you still believe that nonsense?

I feel sorry for u and more so ur daughter bc she gonna grow up and realize that evolution is real and leave the faith bc if this true and what I was taught the Bible said to be false then all of it false and that’s what’s happenin rn us christians need to realize that the authors lived in a different time period and culture so they viewed things differently so I hope yall realize this and accept the Bible isn’t a science book nor dose it claim to be and some of the stories in the Bible aren’t literal and we can see that by looking at other ancient texts from cultures around them and that time and compare what kind of genre they were writing in

there may be a god. But it is not the narcissistic psychopath depicted in the bible.

"Hell is for the self condemned only. Ending up in such a place, will be because you chose to be there. " - This is so true. Still atheists tend to blame God for their own choices and for the wickedness of the wicked.

I reject Hell. I do not give consent to be placed in Hell. Hell is against my will completely. I also reject the sacrifice of Christ on my behalf.

@@bobhubson8511 if you truly believe this then what brings you here.....

@@philipbuckley759 a compulsion to be a voice of sanity against the madness. Who believes that all the wickedness they committed doesn't count anymore because a spottless human-divine hybrid virgin zombie's blood was spilled voluntarily on their behalf? That paying homage to such an event is the one and only way to be deemed worthy by the one who set the works in motion knowing full well all non Gods make mistakes and fail at times. Madness.

well, even Hitler was a christian

Are you yapping against or for evolution?

Well you are wrong. Atheism does not deal in absolutes nor does it claim to know things it doesn't know. That's what religion does. Atheism says that we do not believe in a god because we see no evidence that there is one. We see no evidence that a God is needed to create the universe, as it seems to get along just fine without a creator. Atheism is simply a lack of belief due to evidence.

You like it because the individual lies to you exactly in the direction in which you want to be lied to. In fact, you are lying to yourself... Read something about psychological manipulation and you will understand what this person actually does. Maybe in this way you will wake up to reality.

@@ancataut7891 You have blind faith in abiogenesis and evolution. It is YOU who should read something about psychological manipulation 😎

​@@jounisuninenno, it's definitely you. evolution is real, god isn't.

​@@mnmnrt Evolution is real? So why don't we have any transitional fossil chain to prove that claim? "The fundamental reason why a lot of paleontologists don't care much for gradualism is because the fossil record doesn't show gradual change and every paleontologist has known that ever since Cuvier. If you want to get around that you have to invoke the imperfection of the fossil record. Every paleontologist knows that most species don't change. That's bothersome if you are trained to believe that evolution ought to be gradual. In fact it virtually precludes your studying the very process you went into the school to study. Again, because you don't see it, that brings terrible distress." - (Stephen J. Gould, Professor of paleontology from Harvard University, During the question and answer session following his Hobart and William Smith College lecture, Dr. Gould was asked if there was not Stratigraphic evidence indicating gradualism) The evolutionary theory is all but dead, as discussed at the Royal Society's conference "New Trends in Evolutionary Biology" in London in November 2016. The Austrian evolutionary theorist Gerd Müller stated that the neo-Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection lacks the creative power to generate novel anatomical traits and forms (new body plans) of life that have arisen during the history of life. Yet, as Müller noted, neo-Darwinian theory continues to be presented to the public via textbooks as the canonical understanding of how new living forms arose. evolutionnews.org/2016/12/why_the_royal_s/ “Because no scientist can show how Darwin’s mechanism can produce the complexity of life, every scientist should be skeptical,” said biologist Douglas Axe, director of Biologic Institute.“ evolutionnews.org/2019/02/skepticism-about-darwinian-evolution-grows-as-1000-scientists-share-their-doubts/ Professor James M. Tour is one of the ten most cited chemists in the world. He is a Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science at Rice University. Professor Tour: "…I simply do not understand, chemically, how macroevolution [evolution] could have happened. Does anyone understand the chemical details behind macroevolution? If so, I would like to sit with that person and be taught, so I invite them to meet with me." uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-world-famous-chemist-tells-the-truth-theres-no-scientist-alive-today-who-understands-macroevolution/ No evolutionist has dared to meet him. "...because of the incompleteness of the fossil record, it is unlikely that any particular form represented in the fossil record is a direct ancestor of any other." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil

@@mnmnrt "Micro evolution" aka intraspecific variation is real. It happens within a species' own genome. No new life forms ever get born. "Macro evolution" aka Darwinian evolution instead is never seen, and indeed can't be real because it would mean a species gets strange genes from outside. Such does not happen.

No it isn't.

@@mnmnrt of course it is. Why would you think otherwise? 🤔

Well Christians already do neglect the word of god bc we don’t understand it in its cultural context so we get things wrong and end up like Ken ham and think science is wrong and evolution is false when the Bible isn’t a science book and we shouldn’t take it as such

And what does the word of God say about professional liars like Ham?

@@theTavis01 what makes you so sure that you aren't the one who has been lied to? Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. Without Christ you cannot know truth.

"Explains the scientific aspects"??? No, just no. He's trying to sound science-y, but his arguments are complete fails. The problem is that it's easy to con people that don't have a strong foundation in science; and that is exactly what he is doing.

Unfotunately it is quitre typical of these kinds of channels. There is a large industry for science deniers and theyg et increasinlgy sophisticated,

What this individual does is pure manipulation, everything he says are exclusively manipulation methods, it's as if he were reading from a "manipulation manual". What I find fascinating is the level of the individual's toupee. It is absolutely limitless, it can say absolutely anything without feeling any shame, embarrassment or empathy. The characteristics of any manipulator...

I am guessing what pushed you away is some emotional trauma......

@@philipbuckley759 I'm sorry, Philip. Your guess is wrong. It was a gradual realisation that the whole Christianity thing was a pyramid of lies and self delusion right from childhood. Brainwashing keeps one invested. Once you start allowing yourself to ask serious questions, the illusion disappears.

@@philipbuckley759 Any kind of manipulation, including(mostly) religious manipulation, produces emotional traumas on humans, and even physical consequences on the human brain. The gaslighting practiced by this Ken is the lowest form of abjection I have encountered in recent years. It is absolutely toxic to anyone who pays attention to her and believes what the manipulator Ken says.

Hey creationist, If evolution is false and creationism is true, answer both these questions with evidence backing up your claims, and i’ll give you $1,000 1. Provide a single example of a falsifiable prediction made by evolutionary theory that has proven it false. 2. Provide one FALSIFIABLE prediction made by creationism that has not already been proven false

@@user-vt3vo1yd3v hey evolutionist, in order for the GTE to be true, organisms would have to have added brand new genetic information to their genome. Give us ONE example of an organism that has been shown to have added BRAND NEW genetic information to its genome through mutation. Dawkins couldn't do it and neither can you. 😀

I agree with your statement, 00% true is correct😅

@@jimmyh6601 well spotted. Fixed it.😇

@peterdunne1717 You love to be lied to by this abject manipulator.

Creates the whole universe out of nothing but needs a rib to make a woman 😂😂😂

The Bible is a claim

@@willpower6720 my englis not perfect

What?

Atheists admit they do not know how matter or energy or time appeared. These of course can't be eternal because universe exists under the law of entropy, which in turn means that universe will inevitably meet its end in the heat death. Still atheists can't admit that the obvious answer - in fact the only possible answer - is God. Nitpicking with the question of "which god?" is irrelevant in this context. Being in absolute denial about God tells of the nature of atheism not being based on logical thinking or the lack of evidence. Richard Dawkins' words are revealing: “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” It was not very clever from Dawkins to admit that, since atheists expressly consider themselves intellectually oriented. He inadvertently admitted that atheism was never based on intellect or science. Atheists became happy when they finally could refer to something that at least LOOKED scientific, albeit being just the ignorant Darwin's pseudo scientific ideas. Here we saw Dawkins’ atheistic world view, but no scientific or intellectual approach from him. Based on Dawkins’ statement, atheists were atheists before Darwin and would always be atheists with or without Darwin. For being atheist, no scientific evidence is wanted or needed.