Thanks for watching!

Is was enjoyable because it was so ridiculous.

@offthefront7537 Your comment is amusing, since it's just an opinion. One could say your opinion is rediculous. Or do you have some kind of evidence for your world view that you can detail? As I recall, you have zero evidence for any of it, not even transitional fossils, let alone abiogenesis. There's a bunch of fictional text books with hand drawn squiggles taught as fact. Amusing you are so sure of your view. Have you been out and looked at the evidence yourself? So it's just a biased opinion. Hopes and dreams. J

@@offthefront7537you must be “professor Dave explains” KZfaqr in disguise.

@@UserRandJ Amusing all around. Exactly what proof do have for your own world view. A very old, fictional story written by god knows who. Pun intended.

No. The unfit get eliminated. By preditor or chance (do you think the eagle only gets the week or stupid mice? Of course not). There is no external agent (“natural selection”) selecting things to survive! Please go back and listen carefully again.

Excellent comment, better than much of the ICR discussion. The fact that God created trilobites and dinosaurs less than 10k years ago but they're no longer here shows there is natural selection.

There is no battle between science and Bible. Instead, there is the battle between atheism and science. The famous atheist Richard Dawkins’ words are revealing: “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” Here Dawkins (perhaps inadvertently) admitted that atheism has never had anything to do with intellect or science. Atheists are of course happy if they feel like getting some support from Darwin's old pseudo scientific ideas. We can see Dawkins’ atheistic world view, but no scientific approach from him. Atheists seem to be painfully ignorant of genome’s limits to produce evolution in the body plan of any given organism. Only superficial adaptive changes are scientifically verified. Natural selection could produce evolution if it could deliver new genes to the survivors. Natural selection however delivers nothing! It just destroys the individuals who have less suitable genes for the environment where they live. The winners must go on with the genes they have = no evolution. Because the intraspecies adaptation happens through gene loss, we see devolution not evolution. Isn't this funny? The so-called evolution is in fact devolution through continuous gene loss. The Law of Entropy guarantees that the overall direction of earth's ecosystem is decay and extinction. So evolutionists are in fact quite comical individuals 😃 Mutations can’t help evolution either. Science doesn't know mutations that could transform the body plan of any given organism. All known mutations have been non-structural like sickle-cell mutation, lactose tolerance, wingless flies, antibiotic resistant bacteria etc. Atheism is a religion. Not all religions are centered on a belief in a god, gods, or supernatural forces. The famed psychanalyst Sigmund Freud described religion as "a form of wish fulfillment". That fits perfectly to the godless religion called atheism.

***NO NEED TO CALL NAMES , you have to work it out by yourself.***

@@adelinomorte7421 What does that even mean?

"...discard this pagan concept of "natural selection". " I'm creationist and I see the natural selection as a fact. But it also is a fact that natural selection does not generate evolution but devolution. No new genes appear in natural selection and no new genes means no evolution. All deceased individuals take their genes with them so the population's gene pool impoverish and becomes more one-sided. Evolution instead would need a richer gene pool, not a poorer gene pool.

Natural selection is the result of the built-in adaptability in the code of life for each original kind. Amazing design. PTL

@@johnglad5 Then natural selection is not natural, and it does no selecting. Natural selection was a "catch-all phrase" used by Darwin to propose that it's possible for nature to be an agent or agency. Natural selection is a "virtual characteristic", the same as "virtual reality". It doesn't exist in reality as reality. It exists in the mind as a substitute for reality. Only a Darwinist would consider natural selection as something real.

Indeed ... Each lost individual takes its genes with it to annihilation. Survivors do not get new genes (no gene fairy flapping around dealing genes ...). The overall gene pool impoverish. Read: No evolution.

Then, call it 'survival selection'

I think of it as the environments 'selecting out' certain species by their inability to survive and pass on their genes.

Natural Selection is selecting survival but it can't give new genes to survivors. Read: No evolution.

Thats why so called smart people make the same decisions as the so called stupid people Drinking Drugs Crime Running red lights All good ways to survive My natural selection is GOD Not even a close second

Actually using the word selection still implies someone selecting.

There is no open discussion to be had, because there is no neutral common ground. The battle is not one of evidence, but of worldview. I don't mean that there cannot be civil discussion. Rather, I mean that a battle of evidence will be futile, because evidence is always interpreted based on one's presuppositions. What this podcast does really well is to expose some major flaws in the naturalistic worldview.

I suppose this idea depends on who is included in the discussion. As we heard in episode one, Dr. Thomas was once a secular evolutionist. It is clear that some people are willing to consider all reasonable options. Since the worldview presented here does in fact have some observable support in nature, it isn’t impossible to have an interesting conversation with people on both sides of the issue. The trick is to lay down the ground rules for what the topic is. The conversation should be limited to the topics of pre-programmed adaptation and “macroevolution” dictated by nature.

​@@callawaycass5148😊

​@@jzarbaugh😊

@@jzarbaugh I see it as a matter of courage. It's cowardly to go along with the flow when you know its wrong, but you have something to gain from it. It takes courage and higher ethics to accept and stand up for the truth.

ICR is specifically addressing Darwin...ism, that is, his use of random change and natural selection. The Long War has not had that aspect of evolution.

"tenants" --> tenets

We're glad to hear it! The audio versions of these podcasts can be found through Apple, Google, Spotify, and Amazon.

I use PowerDVD to extract audio from video files. Just a suggestion if you have it.

But isn’t this an audio podcast if one just listens and doesn’t have to necessarily watch ?

That's why we can count that the humankind can't be more than 6000 years old. If it was significantly older, we wouldn't exist anymore. We would've gone extinct for our genetic diseases.

I think you meant "implies" not "infers. The speaker implies. The listener infers.

Damn DAWINISM, 😄

@@williamgreenfield9991 infer: "To indicate indirectly; imply.", "The act of passing from one proposition, statement, or judgment considered as true to another whose truth is believed to follow from that of the former." A speaker can infer. There are several good dictionaries online. Looks like your problem is the inference of ID.

@@WestCoastProf thank you.

😮

😊

😊

Please provide your "examples of natural selection in nature and the lab".

All this fits in the creationist worldview. There is intraspecies adaptive variation but no new body plans appear. This means there is no evolution which could lead to a new taxonomic genus or family. The evolution theory's Universal Common Ancestor (UCA) is fiction, never empirically proved.

Yes it is "epigenetic plasticity".

Yes. We have learned that Darwin fell off his rocker at an early age.

It indeed is amazing how evolutionists stick to the evolution theory, while Darwin knew nothing of genes, thermodynamics or information science. It's a truly pitiful outdated pseudo scientific theory.

You are living in La La Land - God gave us a manual for keeping slaves, supposedly gave tribes the right to kill nearby tribes including the men, women and children but for those doing the killing they could keep the young virgin females for themselves? This God is a moral monster and most likely pure fiction! No death for ever, people would become crowded like a pile of worms. Besides what would you do for eternity? Praise god all the day, every day????? Only a sick god would require such adulation. Good news, no one has ever seen this god and his words are certainly words from the mind of men not some all knowing spirit!

Naturalistic science mainly swindles. Only creationist science can be truly honest. Naturalistic science must continuously correct its mistakes, but creationist science does not make mistakes.

@@jounisuninen Your own statement defeats itself. It is correct that science is continually updating itself whereas religion sticks to what they though to be correct a few thousand years ago. Most stories from the Bible have been proven incorrect or have been taken from other beliefs. Only religion can indoctrinate and threaten people into believing something that does not have one shred of evidence. Try joining reality, it's a great place to be.

Do you know a guy called Deepak Chopra by any chance 🐨🤣

@CR-yd4qe No, I have not met Dr. Deepak Chopra, nor have I studied his works. However, I study the Bible very earnestly, and believe that it's teachings on ultimately experiencing eternal life are not only spiritually encouraging to the believer, but are also scientifically sound, in view of the vastness of the inanimate cosmos, in relation to the relative smallness of the animate cosmos of humans and other creatures, and the superabundant, infinitely resourceful capacity of the inanimate cosmos to endlessly sustain life, under divine direction.

@@johntumpkin3924 Mmmm I didn’t know old Deepak’s a Doctor 🐨 The inanimate cosmic thing and the link to the smallness of the animate one, do you think has maybe just the teeniest hint of (dare I say) hubris. 🐭

@@CR-yd4qe I don't see how...??

@@johntumpkin3924 well I do. “In the image” and all that tripe. That our diastolic stoppage or whatever that is should mean anything in any scheme of anything. 🐨

We understand that Darwin had no clue about real science. No need for God to tell us that.

If you don't understand it. The Happenstance done it. Zero degrees of thinking.

@@jounisuninen Guess we're all stupid

@@jounisuninen That which science can't explain gets filed under "randomness", "deep time", or "emergence".

Natural selection does not generate evolution, only devolution. Less fit go extinct with their genes but survivors do not get new and better genes to generate evolution. They have only their existing genes. When the environment changes they also go extinct. Not true? Then why over 90% of all species in the earth's history have gone extinct and extinctions continue. No new species evolve, no matter what the Darwinists try to teach.

For "religion", read "magic". Nice self own.

Dear Ahmed, I presume you are asking because you are seeking truth; may the good God fill your thirst and hunger for righteousness. 1. Jesus did not save Himself from painful and shameful death because He became a man for the very purpose of sacrificing Himself for our sins (He says so Himself in the Bible, John 12:27: "Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save Me from this hour’? But for this purpose I came to this hour") Sacrificial love is the cornerstone issue of Christian faith; God Himself is Love, that's one of His names. It's important to note that God does not only love worthy people; He loves every last human. He loves you and me, he suffered and died for my sake and yours, so that we could live forever. 2. Gospel of John, chapter 1, says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made", and later in the same chapter, that this Word is Jesus Christ. Quran, sura 4, ayat 171, also call Jesus the Word of God. In Genesis, where creation of the world is described by God speaking things into existence: "God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light." It's important to point out that God the Father and the Son and also Holy Spirit is the same God, though three distinct Persons. So, yes, God created the Universe, flora, fauna, and all things, and finally the first two people by His Word, Who is Jesus Christ; Son of God always existed, but He has not always been a man. He was born as Word of God from the Father, in a way we can't completely comprehend, without any mother, before the time was created; and He was born again as a Man, from an unwed Maiden, without an earthly father, after the fullness of time has arrived. 3. By saying "original version of Bible" do you imply the Bible was corrupted? The original of the books of the Bible no longer exists - as do not exist original records of Quran. The earliest complete copy of Bible in existence, Codex Sinaiticus, is dated around year 325, that's 1700 years ago; and the manuscripts with fragments of New Testament from the first century exist - while some of the apostles were still alive. There are no significant discrepancies with the text of Bible in common use. The same text that existed during the life of Muhammad, which he praised as true and worthy of following in sura 4 ayat 47 and sura 5 ayats 47 and 68, exists today. 4. Jesus says: "I and Father are one" (John 10:30), that is, He is the same God as the Father -- which the unbelieving Jews understood as Him calling Himself God, and tried to stone Him. Also, "before Abraham was, I AM.” (John 8:58). What is written in English as "I AM" (note the capital letters,) in Hebrew is the name of God as He revealed it to Moses when speaking from the burning bush. Again, unbelieving Jews recognized that and tried to wrongfully stone Jesus for blasphemy upon saying this. Also, when apostle Thomas exclaims (John 20:28), "My Lord and my God!" in presence of resurrected Jesus, He does not rebuke him. In Mark 2:7, Jesus forgives sins, which Jews say only the God can do; so says Quran, sura 3, ayat 135. I hope this helps in your journey. May God support you at every step.

John Chapter 1

" If Jesus(Peace Be Upon Him) is your creator, then how He couldn't safe his life?" Because He didn't want to ... When apostle Peter said to Jesus that He should save His life, Jesus reproached him: Matthew 16:21 From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. 22 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!” 23 Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.” So Lord Jesus was fulfilling His task on earth through dying for us, so that we can get forgiveness from our sins when we believe in Him. Lord Jesus created everything as God had decided, the whole universe! Lord Jesus never denied or reproached when somebody called Him God. Jesus always admitted He is God. "I and the Father are One." (John 10:30) Let us consider THE EXCLAMATION OF THOMAS, “My Lord and my God.” (John 20:28) This is a most plain and hearty confession of the true and proper Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Lord Jesus was physically a man but He had God's spirit so spiritually He was God, doing on earth 100% of what His father did in Heaven.

Let's not err and misinterpret the Scriptures for there is one God the Father, the only true God as Jesus highlights. John 17:3. In the beginning God created. John 1:1 in which trinitarians in their idolatry claim erroneously that there are 3 gods. The word is an expressed thought. Plain and simple. God spoke everything into existance. However, this does not condone the Quran. With its pagan moon god allah whose symbol is the sickle moon and the sun. And the false prophet Muhammad who lived with lust filled eyes and by the sword. Jesus is the Son of God not God the Son. Let us open our eyes, our spiritual eyes and know that there is only one God, YHWH, the Father and one Lord Yahshua Messiah. HalleluYah.

​@@alexanderrigby6917 God is clearly triune if you actually read the gospels and the epistles. I can also show you passages that clearly show that God often speaks in the plural in the old testament and has conversations among Himself which unless you desire to worship a schizophrenic deity makes sense if God is multiple persons. Jesus says to the Father "glorify me with the glory i had with you before the world was made." Jesus aslo said that anyone who does not honor the Son as they honor the Father, honors not the Father who sent Him. Jesus is also not the Holy Spirirt nor is the Holy Spirit the Father as Jesus sends the Holy Spirit to us from the Father according to his words in the gospels and the events of the pentacost in Acts. Matthew 28:19 Jesus clearly says that we are to go forth unto all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, making disciples of them and teaching them to observe all that He has commanded. In Revelation Jesus says I Am the First and The Last the Alpha and Omega. He says that He is the one who was dead and rose again and is alive forevermore, who holds the keys of death and hell in his hands. In the book of Hebrews chapter 1, the Father calls the Jesus God. I could continue but i recommend that you take time to read for yourself and refrain from blaspheming further.

There is no attack of the person, only the ideas. If Darwin's hypotheses were fallacious, what is the problem with saying so? Because he can't debunk our refutation? He couldn't do that when he was alive.

In fact, Darwin in some aspects was on the creationist side. Darwin’s book on evolution admitted that “intermediate links” [in fossils] were “perhaps the most obvious and serious objection to the theory” of evolution. Darwin recognized that the fossils collected by scientists prior to 1859 did not correspond with his theory of evolution, but he predicted that this theory would be confirmed as more and more fossils were found. Now, one hundred and sixty years later we know that the gaps are multiplying, not disappearing. There's less and less evidence of transitional forms in the fossils.

These guys ignore that the temperature and the internal thermostat of the Artic Hare, is included as part of Nature. These guys are painful to listen to.

If you're a scientist, you might appreciate that there are 120 separate examples so far of soft tissue and proteins found in dinosaur fossils. 🦕

@@cassandrastern659 Just because nature created organisms with no purpose in mind doesn't mean I personally don't find it interesting and beautiful. My life is as meaningful as I make it. I don't need some other source of meaning to make my life worthwhile.

@@peskyfervid6515 Who told you living organisms have no purpose, or did you figure this out yourself? Nature has no mind, so your statement doesn't follow rational thought. Did you mean it as a metaphor?

​@@stephenmartin7632Nonsense, animals have died before Adam appeared.

@@georg7120 "How then does one explain the 99% of organisms that have gone extinct since life began?" This argument has been used before. We have a variety of species available today. What's the problem? Does Pesky want dinosaurs back? Maybe he wants to meet T. Rex up close and in person :|

"How then does one explain the 99% of organisms that have gone extinct since life began?" That's the Law of Entropy designed by God. God created our universe to be only temporary. Perhaps you should study what Bible says of this subject?

@@jounisuninen The bible doesn't tell anything about the law of entropy because the people who wrote the bible didn't know this law.