What does that have to do with whale hybrids confirming Noah's Flood?

​@@sciencerules2825 keep watching the video beyond the whale story. Story #2 is on that.

​@@sciencerules2825 start at 05:48

And Ravi Zacharias of all people lived the truth of his own words

@@skeeterburke the fossils more accurately. Only someone who loved being taught that racism is fine would be so openly ignorant and hateful

And Palestine

@@RealHooksy Yes pray that the Palestinians have some remorse about their atrocities and can start loving their neighbors as themselves.

@@alantasman8273 Hamas isn’t Palestinians

@@RealHooksy You should actually do some research instead of blindly following your communist cult Masters. Hamas is a Palestinian Islamist political organization that was founded in 1987. It is considered a terrorist organization by many countries, including the United States, Israel, and the European Union. Hamas has been in control of the Gaza Strip, a Palestinian territory, since 2007. Palestinians voted for Hamas. In the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council, which is the legislative body of the Palestinian Authority. However, Hamas and Fatah were unable to form a unity government, and in 2007, Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in a violent coup, expelling Fatah officials and security forces. The international community, including Israel and the United States, do not recognize Hamas as the legitimate governing authority in Gaza because of its use of violence and its refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. Since 2007, Hamas has maintained control over the Gaza Strip, while the West Bank, which is also part of the Palestinian territories, has been governed by the Palestinian Authority. It is worth noting that the Hamas has not held any elections in Gaza since the 2006 legislative elections.

@alantasman8273 Does it make you feel good to pretend you're helping? Like to give your omni god advice do you? And you like to excuse Israeli atrocities, do you? They are 100 fold.

The same, if not worse, here in Canada. God Bless

Satan is the author of confusion...and the modern state is his tool of convenience.

@@canadiankewldude Yeah, I don't know how you Canadians DO it. If I lived in Canada, I'd probably apply for political asylum in the USA, then I'd settle in a solidly red area of a solidly red state.

@@juliebaker6969 If you moved from a blue state to a red state you'd raise the average IQ of both places.

@@sciencerules2825 Considering my IQ is over 200, I raise the average IQ WHEREVER I am.😘😎

Just like evolution would predict

Evolution doesn’t predict anything. Evolution isn’t science. Genetics prediction due measurable science definition. What you are implying is evolution is your religion and god.

@@abashedsanctimony154 I'm sure that made sense in your head. But just try reading it back. I have no idea what you are talking about

Man killed off most of the whales. No wonder wrong whales have nooky with each other. They are rescuing whales in general.

@@mattbrook-lee7732 I think you do in a general sense.

What's your point

No particular point outside of showing another area of hybrids... the idea of breeding within kinds...

@rockymarquiss8327 OK. Sounds like a good argument for evolution to me. Wasn't sure if that's what you were getting at

@@mattbrook-lee7732 not at all. Buffalo and cattle are both bovines... They are of the same kind.

Quite off topic but about 30 years ago I was on a motorcycle tour of N. California when we stopped and had lunch at a little country tavern advertising beefalo burgers. Had one and as I recall it was quite tasty. The next day I came down with a terrible case of _E coli_ poisoning which laid me low for 2 weeks. Had nothing to do with the meat _per se_ , just how it had been improperly stored and prepared. Your post just gave me flashbacks. 😮

_These two species were not supposed to be able to interbreed on their Evolutionary timeline._ Where did you get the data to come to that conclusion?

​​@@sciencerules2825 we certainly don't get our information from your "sources." You can believe that.

​@@sciencerules2825Why does "data" matter if most "data" contained in textbooks are fabricated? Ever thought of that, smart pants?

@@zerosteel0123 Your only source seems to be your nether regions.

@@user-lf8yv9be9v Ever think of supplying evidence to back up your false claim most evidence in textbooks is fabricated? Or were you hoping everyone would let you slide on that blatant lie?

so if god killed every human save 2 people, tomorrow...would you be ok with it? i'll give my answer now. it was be the most evil act to have ever happened on earth.

​@@bbjornr I would be okay with it. Look around

Lol time is magic

🤮

​@@--..-...-..-.--.... You need attention that bad? My goodness, grow up.

@@hleigh7201 🥺 🤮

Sanctimonious clap trap.

@@howdydoodey3872 be careful. God's word never returns void.

@@IAMhassentyou "be careful. God's word never returns void." The God of which you speak is nothing but a fiction.

​@@philhart4849 Have you even given God a chance? How do you know and what if you're wrong.. Where is your proof He isn't real? Furthermore man you have value.. don't go selling yourself out to some theory we're just here on the planet for no reason or purpose. I refuse to hear that.. because God made and loves every single person! Do you not see that the Bible is a love story of God's love for mankind. Even though man has rejected and turned away countless times.. I mean why do you think Jesus came to die on cross? God made a way for us to be saved.. from our own destruction of sin which we chose. You are not an accident! So don't talk like you are one.. what do you have to lose in giving God a chance. We're all going to die someday anyway.

@@John-cv9yf "Where is your proof He isn't real? " Your logical fallacies are: shifting the burden of proof, special pleading (for your particular god), category error (there is no such thing as proof in science, only in mathematics, liquor and numismatics), projection (you have made your god in your own psychological image), and false witness (claiming that Jesus died on the cross for us). Nobody has ever demonstrated the existence of any god, let alone the God of the Bible. My death is assured and final, and I have no qualms about accepting that fact.

me too

As far as I can tell the implication is that the evolutionary theory of time is wrong. And kind as referenced in the flood is the real basis of species. Henceforth proving Noah was a true account. I agree a really round about way to say evolution is wrong again. I'm guessing it helps to beet the moderation of content on the web.

@@shadowknightgladstay4856 oh i see. Thank you for explaining.

@@shadowknightgladstay4856 « evolutionary theory of time is wrong. « what?

They didn’t

So both parties?

I agree. Creationism should not be taught to children. It’s intellectual abuse.

What about the party that wants to literally indoctrinate kids with religious ideals?

​@@Quint-ib4nf i agree to an extent. But who are you kidding which side pushes their demon agenda? No matter what or who gets hurt.

Yes, creationism is a crime against sanity, and the lie of the world.

Hello to slicknic1362

Valentines is of pagan origin and thus none biblical. Proverbs 18:13

@@thunderous-one The holiday is believed to have originated in ancient Rome as a pagan fertility festival known as Lupercalia. The festival was celebrated on February 15th and involved the sacrifice of animals and other rituals to promote fertility and ward off evil spirits. During the 5th century AD, the Christian church sought to replace the pagan celebrations with Christian holidays and began to associate the feast day of St. Valentine, a Christian martyr, with the pagan festival of Lupercalia. Over time, the celebration of St. Valentine's Day became associated with love and romance, and the holiday evolved into the modern celebration of love and affection. Stamping out evil practices by changing the day to be about Love sounds like something God would approve of. Christians are called to love others, and expressing love and affection for others is a central aspect of Christian teachings. Whether or not Valentine's Day has pagan origins, Christians can still view it as an opportunity to express love and gratitude toward the important people in their lives.

@@CelticSpiritsCoven utter garbage, every word of the “word salad” you have responded with. All you have done is use a desperate form of rationalisation to justify a clear demonic practice dressed up as “an expression of love that god would approve,” I mean, really? Since when between Abraham (circa 2000 BC) and John (97 AD) has God ever approved of practices that have been co-opted into the mosaic law or the law of Christ? Your the sort of person that would justify/accept and promote vile anti biology lifestyles because those contrary to nature relationships have/express “love”

​@@CelticSpiritsCovenIt is traced back to Nimrod the same one who gave us easter and Christmas. He is also the beast of revelation. I would be very careful what I worship. The entire calendar is pagan.

The Ligers are like Nephilim cats lol… same type of thing happened when the Watchers and human women mated, made giants/nephilim…. The Lions are like the Watcher and the female tiger is like a female woman…. When the genders are switched it creates a different hybrid the Tigon but isn’t a “giant”. All this miscegenation was one of the forbidden secrets these Watchers practiced and taught man during the times of Enoch.

Hogle Zoo in Salt Lake City had a Liger many years ago.

Dont do it Sherry, having faith is 100% okay but denying facts like these guys do is not okay.

How else are they supposed to scam money out of believers?

Because all they have is a myth and confirmation bias

For what ! ignorance and lies

@@gowdsake7103 your opinion. Sad you felt you had to comment on a strangers response, instead of making your own. Thank you and have a blessed day.

​@@gowdsake7103going for the easy comments. Lol. Tell us how its lies..... go on

"the literal impossibility of the theory of evolution" Evolution is observed routinely. The God of which you speak is merely a fiction.

@@philhart4849 "observed routinely"😂Care to share one example? Just one...

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 Covid-19 is routinely observed as evolving. Your "crickets" remark discredits you.

@@user-on3wh6wu9n So changing viruses is confirmation of the theory of evolution? Got it. 😂Your absurd ludicrous comment discredits you.

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 I thank you for confirming that you are willfully ignorant about evolution. Your willful ignorance is emblematic of all god mobsters. And I thank you for the laughter that you have given me this day. 😀

Except, they're not. Period.

Faith when you have no EVIDENCE

How did you know you were trans? You have only ever been yourself so who told you, or made you think you were the other gender? Why didn't you consider that you weren't stereotypical gender type or that you were struggling with anosognosia tinged body dysmorphia?

Praying you have repented and have become who God made you again.

Or shake of the shackles of medieval faith. Just be who you are

@@wingednut2283 People can be who they think they are without resorting to permanent surgery and endocrine system damage. Saw one on TV earlier tonight. Total bad joke. A "mental health condition' made manifest in the flash they were.

77th brigade strikes again. 🙄

Nothing can confirm something that never happened

@@gowdsake7103 So, you don't believe in the Bible or God? Interesting. At the Throne Judgment, you will find something that does confirm it.

Most of America's Founding Fathers didn't believe in it either.​@@gump1005

So the world ends when Jesus comes back?

@@Quint-ib4nf after his 1000 year reign

@@christtheonlyhope4578 I heard different but OK.

There is no rapture,as Jesus comes in the clouds to conquer and destroy this evil world government system his people will be caught up to him as he descends and will rule with him a thousand years(the stone cut without hands that grows in to a mountain and fills the whole earth as taught in the book of Daniel).

@@Quint-ib4nf it's in Revelation. You should check it out 🙂

Why should I give credence to the Bible?

@@philhart4849 you don't have to do anything

@@IAMhassentyouThen it pleases me to call out the Bible for the nonsense that it is.

@@user-on3wh6wu9n it pleases me to please God and serve Him and that is exactly what I am going to do until the day I die.

It is a tautology. The definition of God is the being that is perfect. The word for a perfect being is God.

The first «whales« appeared 50 million years ago

Skipped basic biology class, eh?

​​@@razark9 😂😂😂 Funny what you assume. But let me ask you something... Who is the open minded here? Creationist who take everything into consideration and make logical conclusions after their observations OR Evolutionists who reject from the beginning the bible and the hypothesis that there is a creator? They even said: although everything points to a creator, it will not be taken into consideration. So, who's the open minded here? Evolutionists? 😂😂😂

@@idi8874 _Who is the open minded here?_ Certainly not the creationists who reject 99% of the scientific evidence just because if goes against their literal Genesis narrative. That is the exact opposite of being open minded.

@@samburns9350 Evolutionists/atheists are the ones that say "it cannot be because of a god". They do not even consider the evidence for god. Sounds pretty close-minded to me. At least theists/creationists have considered the evidence and made an informed decision. What informed decision did you make about God? Did you sit through classes, as an adult, in university, learning about God? Or did you just accept "it cannot be because of a god" without even putting any thought into it?

@@CelticSpiritsCoven No, they say "there is no evidence a God did it", and they are right.

What's wrong with the scientific narrative? Tetrapods colonized the land roughly 400 MYA. Over the next several hundred million years they evolved into various groups including mammals. Around 55 MYA some of those mammalian species began living near the water and catching fish as part of their diet. Over the next 10-20 million years those species evolved to be semi-aquatic, then eventually fully aquatic to best survive in the new environment. That's what the fossil and genetic evidence shows.

We have a very good fossil record of the evolution of the whale. We also have a lot of semi aquatic animals today (hippos, penguins, seals). Its really not that hard to see if you just stop seeing genesis as a literal explanation

​@@mattbrook-lee7732 I am going to walk you through a story to help you understand how evolutionists are just making it all up.... Let's say there was a fish (who we will call Fred), who's offspring would eventually "evolve" into a gecko. Fred wants to breed, so he finds a girlfriend fish named Susan. They have babies, but one of the babies seems to have a birth defect. We will call this baby Sam. Sam (amazingly even though he has a birth defect), is able to survive and meet a girlfriend who we will call Carol. They have babies, but one of their babies seems to have a birth defect that is a gecko. We will call him Dave. Dave must survive his birth defect and then his offspring will be geckos. In order to prove that one species changed into another species, you need something called an "interspecies". In order to prove an interspecies, you need the direct lineage of the particular specimen. In this case, you need the fossils of Fred and Susan, you need the fossils of Sam and Carol, you need the fossil of Dave, and you need the fossils of Dave's offspring. The problem with evolutionists is that they don't have the direct lineage of the individual specimen. You just have random fossils. How do you know who the parents were of these specific fossils? How do you know who the direct children of that fossil is? You don't. You just have a random fossil and then imagine that one species changed into another. You are looking a birth defects and imagining a story. You do not have direct lineage. There is no direct evidence for macro-evolution. It's just guesses from people don't want there to be a god.

@@CelticSpiritsCoven That's a great example of creationist understanding of "science". 😅😅🤣🤣😂😂

@@sciencerules2825 YT is doing something weird. I cannot see the comment that I made, that you replied to here. Now please show us the entire lineage of that individual fossil so we can clearly see how the birth defect's offspring eventually turned into another species. Like I said, if you don't have the lineage, then you are just looking at a birth defect and using your imagination. But you are attempting to claim otherwise, yet you present no evidence.

Lol, Christians aren't in competition with the entertainment you watch from the world.

Have you considered that they are being professional at like, I don't know what, like "what THEY DO just like THEY DO IT"?

@@Woopor That's exactly what zealot cult members say about people not in their cult. Why are you a zealot?

​@@CelticSpiritsCoven you might want to read the definition of a cult and stare into a mirror

And which _"transitioning"_ do you mean? Transitioning to atheism is liberating. And about other transitions, AIG knows nothing.

@@edgarmatzinger9742 your post is typical of people who support atheism and particularly evolution, which you no doubt believe. When you are presented with scientific data, you just evade even mentioning any of it. You don’t try to refute any of it. In fact, you say zero about science at all. That is the pattern I have seen over and over and over. I used to call myself an atheist. It wasn’t liberating. It was delusional. It was denial. I will be praying for you. Best I can do. Welcome to mute.

@lass4068 _"I used to call myself an atheist. It wasn’t liberating. It was delusional. It was denial."_ Most people who call themselves an atheist and are now a christian, weren't atheists at all. But hey, you do you. AiG never presents any evidence. They can't as the evidence doesn't support their world view. And doesn't confirm their bias. _"Welcome to mute."_ Would be a wise thing to do: keep silent on things you know nothing about... Word of advice: evolution is fact. And the bible is *NOT* a history document. It's a set of stories. Nothing more, nothing less.

*We know that evilution can't possibly be true. It's just a matter of time and we can figure out the details on why.* A shame then that creationists overwhelmingly _accept_ evolution.

How long do you need. You've been trying for 150 years.

​@@mattbrook-lee7732 wrong. Scientists try for almost 200 years to prove evolution, but fail miserably from some point of view. No one ever denied that natural selection exists, or that there can occur changes through speciation because of adaptation or isolation etc. The problem is that the well known evolutionists claim that simplicity forms complicity, inferiority forms superiority, life from nonlife, order from chaos, one animal kind into another etc. There , scientists fail completely to explain these questions from the evolutionary point of view. In fact, they are sure no God exists and some even said that although all evidence points to God, they cannot take that in calculus because he is not matter or something like that. How dumb. Since when do scientists exclusively ignore a point of view (or the explanation) that is older than 5000 years and try to explain it from another point of view and still fail for 200 years?

You've had over 2,000 years to prove creation and 150 years to disprove evolution. What's the hold up?

Thing with evolutionist is that you need 150 million years. No big, but that span has to be 'Stable'. Stable atmosphere, Stable habitat, Stable food chain, Stable climate.. guess what, the earth doesn't show this stability in any fraction of that time frame. This is science, observable science. Not even going into absence of cataclysmic events and other variables. Time is the hero there, but you still would need numerous miracles for that extremely slow and drawn out process to have occurred. Also, the Bible does not give the age of the earth. Deducing a genealogical line is your doing and assumption. Conjecture and sounding a bit stupid putting words into something that isn't there.. isn't scriptural.

The fossil was not vertical. It was 40 to 50 degrees off horizontal, and the fossil was oriented parallel to the strata. In other words, the whale was horizontal when buried. The strata were later uplifted and folded into their present orientation.

Noah's Flood is a copy of a copy.

@@luish1498 Thanks for confirming at least one whale was found in a coal seam...

There were no whales when coal was deposited

@alantasman8273 a fossil of a whale found in California that was alleged to have been buried and fossilized in a vertical position. As evidence for a global flood, some creationists and catastrophists have pointed to the strange tale of a fossil whale from California that was found buried "in a vertical position" and intersecting several rock layers. Investigation of the tale revealed that it was mostly false.

Definition of “Kind”: The Hebrew word for “kind” is “min”, which signifies subdivisions within a larger group. In Genesis 1, God created plants and animals “according to their kinds.” The Bible’s plain reading suggests that plants and animals were designed to reproduce within the boundaries of their kind. If two things can breed together and produce offspring, they are considered members of the same created kind. Examples: Dogs, regardless of their specific breeds (wolves, dingoes, coyotes, or domestic dogs), can easily breed with each other. When dogs breed together, you still get dogs-thus, there is a “dog kind.” Similarly, chickens come in various breeds, but they all breed with each other, resulting in more chickens. Hence, there is a “chicken kind.” Misconceptions: People often confuse the term “species” with “kind.” However, “species” is a man-made classification system, and its definition can be challenging. The Bible consistently uses the term “kind,” emphasizing the idea that creatures were created to reproduce within their designated boundaries.

Example of “kinds”, zebras and horses are the same kind, but scientists classify them as different species

@@VintageTealDog That isn't a definition. What scientific tests can you use to determine what "kind" a species belongs to? Surely there must be some genetic signature is a "kind", right?

A KIND is a singular type of animal. Multiple sub species/breeds can fit into a single kind such as different species of cats interbreeding, such as a lion and a tiger. Even when they do successfully breed to form a liger it's still a cat and no one denies that. Different types of canines are another example of multiple breeds under one Kind of animal type. Different dogs can breed together and have dogs. What this means for evolution is that species are completely incapable of making something that it isn't. A cat will never birth a dog or a fish.

@@Cr1msonFir3 _A KIND is a singular type of animal._ By that definition all mammals are the same "kind". In fact all eukaryotes are the same "kind".

_"Thank you for bringing up the transgender issue"_ They don't know anything about that. They should remain quiet. Or they embarrass themselves.

Your bigotry shines through.

@@razark9 so sorry but you are wrong. As always. The Bible is truth. Will always be truth. Is irrefutable. Your religion of atheism will get you nowhere in the end.

@@razark9 atheists don't know reality when it comes to the things of God. You don't even believe there is a world beyond this one. I'm certainly not going to take "reality" lessons from you. 🥱 There is a God. He exists, He is real and is coming to judge the dead and the living.

@@razark9 There is a God. He exists, He is real and is coming to judge the dead and the living. I don't take reality lessons from you guys because you don't even know what reality is. But you'll find out one day! Guaranteed.

@@razark9 I'm showing a lot of patience with someone who acts like you. There you go. There is your display of God. Galatians 5:22,23. And I'm 100% certain. Speak for yourself.

@@razark9 how certain am I? Willing to bank my life on it.

What is darwinism?

@@wingednut2283 type "define darwinism" in the search engine.

@@wingednut2283 look it up, it's an actual word with a real definition.

@@wingednut2283 Charles Darwin. Father of Evolution.

@@yarnicles4616 do you mean researcher/author? Not sure why you chose the word father.

Noah's flood never happened. Period.

@@edgarmatzinger9742 That is both off topic and wrong.

@@TickedOffPriest Off topic maybe. But wrong? Nope. You seem to believe a dumb story.

If the flood had been real, all life on Earth would have ended (you need to realize the amount of energy involved in that much water, and the heat the flood as described would have resulted in). Even without the heat, the vast majority of marine life would have died (broken food webs, lack of photosynthesis due to cloud cover and water turbity, decreased oxygen concentrations as all that dead life decayed, etc etc).

It did not so you do not have to worry

​@@mrastin821 Dude, it only rained for 40 days. That's not enough to kill all the algae. You would be surprised what many microorganisms can survive. We have found microorganisms in extremely hot springs near volcanoes. We have found worms and other life at the bottom of the sea where there is no possible photosynthesis. We have found spores that survived being launched into the stratosphere and even space. You don't know half about what is possible.

Almost like science is a consensus amongst the masses of experts.

@wingednut2283 Experts.....if that's what you want to call them. Fun fact: Charles Darwins grandfather/2nd cousin Erasmus Darwin is actually the first guy to publish a book about evolution called zoonomia where he hinted at yt ppl being more evolved, and Africa being the birthplace of mankind because that's where the most primates are. Real scientific huh? Charles Darwins son/2nd cousin leanard Darwin, that Charles called slow and backwards as a child, grew up to help found the eugenics movement, and is on record advocating for surgically sterilizing minorities, blind and deaf ppl, ppl with disabilities and even poor ppl to cleanse the gene pool. Is that the kind of expertise your referring to?

How so?

Only you atheists agree on that. Lol 😆

Excellent point. I wonder if any of the AIG groupies here will read and understand it?

Bruh , you are talking about speciation. No one ever denied that this happens and that species change through isolation and adaptation. What is scientifically incorrect is the "fact" that all kinds of organisms evolved from LUCA. Also, what isn't proven and evolutionists claim it indirectly are these: something comes from nothing, complexity from simplicity, life from nonlife, information from non information, order from chaos etc.

@@idi8874 None of what you just blithered has anything to do with Sam Burns' point.

Here's public record comments from one of your side..... *"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."* Stephen J Gould. Did he say that? Yes or no? *"A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record, the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants. Instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God."* Stephen J Gould. Did he say that? Yes or no? What about...... *"Well represented species are usually stable throughout their temporal range, or alter so little and in such superficial ways (usually in size alone), that an extrapolation of observed change into longer periods of geological time could not possibly yield the extensive modifications that mark general pathways of evolution in larger groups.* *Most of the time, when the evidence is best, nothing much happens to most species."* Stephen J Gould. Did he say that? Again, yes or no? *"Anything that we dig up that is supposedly more than 250,000 years old should have absolutely no radiocarbon in it whatsoever. But instead, we find it in everything that we dig up, even dinosaur bones. This is clear evidence that the “millions of years” theory is simply a bunch of nonsense”.* Stephen J Gould. Again, you know the drill, Did he say that? Confirmation of yes condemns your brown shirt atheist foundation agenda. Denial condemns your brown shirt atheist foundation agenda. Fed up of having to teach you lot about what your side has said in books, talks and interviews. Talk about being willfully ignorant of science. Atheists win Gold in the dishonesty Olympics every time.

@@bigbabatunde1218 More of the same creationist quote-mining you're already been corrected on? Thanks for showing yet again how intellectual honesty is an alien concept to creationists.

So... does the sequence of fossils going from _Indohyus, Pakicetus,_ and _Ambulocetus_ to _Kutchicetus, Rodhocetus,_ and _Dorudon_ not mean anything to you?

And this is your proof of Naturalistic Evolution? You're kidding right? I see different animals..... why is there never transition critters? After all for every 1 you listed Darwinian evolution states that thousands to millions of " in betweens " must have been. Yet none exist. So honestly I'll look deeper into what you state but in my regard I did study some on human biologic anthropology and found " most " variance to be incorrectly assembled bones, to down right fraud to Lucy who was a monkey. When people refuse truth they have nothing left but to manufacture lies. @@burnttoast2790

@@WNYXeb777 You want a whale with legs? Durudon. It's a toothed whale that has tiny vesitgal rear limbs (with front limbs evolved into flippers as with modern whales). As to transitional fossils, we have thousands. Let me ask you a question. What do YOU think a transitional organism would look like? What characteristics do you think it would have to have for it to be convincing for you? Feel free to use examples, descriptions, a hypothetical, whatever helps you to explain. If you do that, then I think we'd have a good basis for a conversation.

You have none and your argument is lame. Plz go research cell biology for a start. No life has every come from nonlife and no anything has ever turned into something other - reptiles don't turn into birds ect. Your concept of transition fossils is complete absurdity. Have you ever researched the supposed human evolutionary line - total crap - Monkeys/chimps/apes or human. Not one into another and between the frauds " piltdown man " and manipulated skeletons/ or impartial one there is no link.@@mrastin821

@@WNYXeb777 I have several degrees in biology, so I'm very well aquainted with the material. I'm not using an argument from authority, merely that I have experience with this field. I asked YOU to define a term, so we could have a discussion, and you instead went off on a nonsequitur. 1. We have thousands of great examples. You hand waving and saying "nuh unh" is a childs argument. 2. Birds evolved from a branch of the dinosaur group, which evolved from reptiles. Archaeopteryx is a famous example of a transitional fossil; it has both bird and dinosaurian features, exactly as you'd expect a transitional organism to have. 3. Humans ARE apes, by biological definition. It is the group we belong to according to even Linnean taxonomy. 4. Yup, Piltdown was a fraud. You know figured that out? Physical anthropologists who were extremely suspicious of the fossil, and worked out how it had been made. Science self corrected, exactly as it should. You know who DIDN'T figure out the fraud? Priests. You can't hold up such events as proofs against science when it was science that found the proof. Now, you say we don't have transitional fossils. We do. So, what do YOU think a transitional fossil would have to be? What characteristics would it have to include in order for such evidence to be convincing for you? If you say "it can't", it just means you are not open to the idea on religious and ideological grounds as opposed to scientific ones. That's fine, but you should admit such instead of saying that science CAN'T demonstrate it. Its more that you don't want to hear it.

Who saw whales being land animals?

@@CelticSpiritsCoven Millions of professional scientists have seen the huge amount of evidence cetaceans (and other marine mammals like manatees and seals) evolved from land animals.

Well yeah? Every teacher showed me and other biology students only the diagram with Darwin finches (which is a classical example of allopatric speciation). Never has anyone ever shown a diagram of an ancestral land animal becoming a whale. Even when I looked up on the internet.

@@idi8874 You certainly didn't look very hard. A simple image search on "whale evolution" produces dozens of such diagrams.

So you were told. Here's something you missed.... *"No fossil is buried with its birth certificate. That, and the scarcity of fossils, means that it is effectively impossible to link fossils into chains of cause and effect in any valid way....to take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story, amusing perhaps, even instructive, but not scientific."* Dr Henry Gee 'Evolutionist' and Senior Editor at Nature.

The young earth interpretation of Genesis is less than 300 years old. Therefore, your faith is always evolving with new revelation.

_"haphazardly constructed theory"_ Or how to write "I know nothing about evolution..."

Predicted evolutionary timescale. Keep up.

@CelticSpiritsCoven that doesn't even begin to answer my question. How does 2 whales getting it on confirm a biblical flood? What is the connection?

@CelticSpiritsCoven my question has nothing to do with evolution or any timescale. It's quite sweet that you think it's me that isn't keeping up though

@@mattbrook-lee7732 Awwwww, thank you sweetheart! 💋 Just missed you for Valentines day.

@@CelticSpiritsCoven Where does evolution theory say after a specific number of years 2 divergent animals can no longer breed? Hint - it doesn't, there is no 'set' time period that this must happen in. It depends on many factors such as rate of mutations, rate of change from selection pressure, etc, etc....

Western protestants are obsessed with science and other secular/logical proofs

What evidence would it take to convince you one species can evolve into another similar species? Because we have a ton of fossil and genetic evidence for such speciation as well as documented cases of observed speciation. 🙂

@@sciencerules2825 None of that proves that a species turned into another species. It's just speculation from people who don't want God to be real. It's an excuse.

@@CelticSpiritsCoven Heh. You don't even know what the evidence is but you're already sure it is wrong. That big red nose sure fits you.

​@@CelticSpiritsCoven you mean kind. No animal kind cannot turn into another kind. A species can become two different species because of adaptation, geographical isolation etc. But this is called speciation. What I mean, for example Darwin's Finches are one great example of allopatric speciation. Because the initial individuals couldnt fly over the sea from one island to another, the population were isolated, and so there were formed subspecies of the same species . But that's speciation. Not evolution as how they say. God created animals and plants after each kind, so the cat kind, the dog kind, horse kind. No problem with that. In time, (after the flood ) there could be mutations, isolation, adaptation etc which bring different species or subspecies. For example, saying that the dog evolved from a wolf (through adaptation and mutations, and , well, natural selection, meiosis) it's ok to say it, because they are of the same kind. But saying that a dinosaur, a reptile evolved into an avian animal namely birds, there is the impossibility. See the differences? Evolutionists tend to confuse speciation with their theories (which includes also what Darwin and others claimed, that complexity comes from simplicity, order from chaos, information from non information, life from nonlife etc). Here's the problem. No scientist (even Christians) denies that there are changes within species and populations. The problem we have is, well, what I said before and which all processes in living organisms contradict. Hope this helps. Be blessed.

​@@sciencerules2825no Christian has ever denied speciation. Don't confuse it with the theories Margulis, Haeckel, Lamark, Darwin etc claimed to be true.

I'll give you my opinion but first I must say that I don't consider man as one of the ''great apes', as your preface would imply, however the reasoning would also work with humans. Here is my reasoning and I am sorry that it doesn't answer your question directly... Can those types of apes interbreed? If so, then they are the same kind. If not, then they are not the same kind. You can breed lion and tiger - so they are the same kind. You can breed servals with caracals so also the same kind. You can not breed a lion with a serval - so they are different kinds. Same with tigers and caracals - different kinds. When research is done on the apes we will know better u til then, that is how I look it. Hope this helps.

​@@jayyrod1very well explained.

Geologic rocks confirm massive flooding. Science confirms. Astronomy has signs of intelligent design. Catch up. You may be wrapped up in your belief system that you unable to see the obvious.

@@joinjen3854 This video claims whale hybrids confirms a literal Noah's Flood. Please explain the reasoning behind the claim.

@sciencerules2825 watch the video, and LISTEN.

@@joinjen3854 I did. There is no evidence or reason given that whale hybrids evidence a literal Noah's Flood. If you think differently then *please provide that reason here.*

@@sciencerules2825 "a literal Noah's Flood" There's evidence all around you for a flood.

Nothing can convince someone who has already made up their minds. It's called cognitive dissonance. Like the wife that will not believe her husband is being unfaithful,even when the proof is literally in front of her eyes. Her whole belief system is being threatened, so denial takes over.

@@joeythebushkangaroo1 flood or not noahs boat was never built in any way that the book says math is not cognitively dissonant no boat anyone ever built held and cared for as many animals as the claims santa for adults is what it is !

the flood is fiction prove it

@@joeythebushkangaroo1 a good summary of modern religion

@@Woopor The best description of atheism. Denial takes over. Cognitive dissonance.

crater chicxulub is an impact crater buried underneath the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico.

Vapourised for the most part. The impact was about 100,000,000 megatonnes - roughly 5000 times the power of all the nuclear bombs in the world going off at the same time.

You really think lions and tigers are the same species? Wow.

@@samburns9350 I suppose aborigines and Eskimos are separate races. Just because you or someone else asserts something does not make it true. You need evidence

Those "worthless legs and feet" are fins and are used for navigation. So they are not worthless at all.

@@CelticSpiritsCoven Cetaceans don't have hind limbs. They do however have the unexpressed Tbx4 genes for producing hind limbs. They also occasionally have atavistic hind limbs develop when those genes are partially reactivated by a mutation. Your creationist explanation is...?

@@annieoaktree6774 It is important to note that the expression of the Tbx4 gene alone is not sufficient for hindlimb development. Other genes and signaling pathways, such as the Sonic hedgehog pathway (SHH), are also involved in hindlimb development and are necessary for the proper formation of the hindlimb. Chemicals cannot evaluate whether a certain trait in the overall physiology of an organism will be able to survive. Do chemicals in test tubes talk to you? I've never heard them tell a species how to survive. Did you hallucinate that they did? You believe in magical thinking chemicals! Rocks having dreams! Imagine that....

@@CelticSpiritsCoven Way to dodge the point. Why do "designed" cetaceans have unexpressed Tbx4 genes for hind limbs *AT ALL?*

​@@annieoaktree6774You were told that by 'evolutionists' who got paid to have careers as 'evolutionists'. It's the same for snakes and their embryonic state. Pro 'evolutionists' said they had remnants of legs. Later turned out to have been more lies as what 'evolutionists' were looking at and telling lies about was the snake's external genitalia before being fully formed. Look at what 'evolutionary' biologist Richard Lewontin said about himself and his peers.