"So You Say You Believe In Evolution?" | The Atheist Experience: Throwback
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 окт 2024
- Call the show on Sundays 4:30pm-6:00pm CT: 1-512-686-0279 or use your computer to save on long-distance charges: tiny.cc/callthe...
► LinkTree: linktr.ee/athe...
► Don't like commercials? Become a patron for ad-free content & more: / theatheistexperience
► Find all of our links here: linktr.ee/athe...
► Podcast versions of the show may be found at:
www.spreaker.c...
► Atheist Experience merch can be found at: https:tiny.cc/merchaca
► Become a RUclips member: / @theatheistexperience
► Join our discord:
tiny.cc/acddiscord
Note: We request pronouns as part of the call screening process on our shows, and we display the pronouns our callers provide. If you see a caller with no pronouns indicated, this is because they chose not to provide us with any, and we respect that decision.
-------
WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?
The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is a 501(c)(3) educational non-profit organization based in Austin, Texas. The Atheist Community of Austin is dedicated to promoting atheism, critical thinking, secular humanism, and the separation of religion and government.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES
www.atheist-com... (The Atheist Community of Austin)
NOTES
TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Opening Theme:
Shelley Segal "Saved" www.shelleysega...
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2024 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.
![Oscar Maydon x Fuerza Regida - Tu Boda [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_ymicn0_GYc/mqdefault.jpg)
Your inability to understand science is not an argument against it!
REALLY! -Yeesh- What a maroon!
He was clearly unprepared for this call, constantly jumping from one topic to another whenever he was proven misinformed or outright wrong.
@@RickLambert963You again. Don't you have a pride parade to go to? 🏳️🌈
That is standard procedure for creationists. We call that argument by Wack-A-Mole. The reason Dawkins quit debating creationists was because they knew absolutely nothing about evolution and couldn't even hold an intellectual conversation on the subject.
@@RickLambert963 Your theme song Ricky!
Young man, there's no need to feel down.
I said, young man, pick yourself off the ground.
I said, young man, 'cause you're in a new town
There's no need to be unhappy.
Young man, there's a place you can go.
I said, young man, when you're short on your dough.
You can stay there, and I'm sure you will find
Many ways to have a good time.
It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A.
It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A.
They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys ...
@@RickLambert963
You can get yourself cleaned, you can have a good meal,
You can do whatever you feel ...
Young man, are you listening to me?
I said, young man, what do you want to be?
I said, young man, you can make real your dreams.
But you got to know this one thing!
No man does it all by himself.
I said, young man, put your pride on the shelf,
And just go there, to the y.m.c.a.
I'm sure they can help you today.
It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A.
It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A.
They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys ...
It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A.
It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A.
@@RickLambert963 Do the dance Ricky! Yay!
Caller is proof how under educated creationists are.
" Creationists are so ignorant that they don't know enough to even be wrong." ( Not original ) It is like they wear their ignorance as armour.
Or how tragically effective Islam (or any religion) is at hijacking critical thinking.
@@alanmacification indeed.
Yeah, and Moslems particularly.
Beyond uneducated
"We were taught in school that one creature evolves into another". Yeah, I'm going to go with your "school" was a mosque for $500, Alex.
100% sure😂. And the "teacher" was an ignorant, stupid, reality denier, magic lover dishonest, liar imam. A clown. 😂😂😂😅😅
Or he did not listen or did not understand. I mean a Chihuahua dog evolved from wolves within a few thousand years. They are still the same species even they look completely different. And yes, a platipus is a fascinating animal, but I really doubt the caller once read a biology book about that animal.
@@HelenaRG71are wolves and chihuahuas the same species? Certainly they wouldn't be considered so in the wild.
@@Olyfrun they can still mix and have fertile pups. Every dog, also the chihuahua, is a descendant from a wolf from a genetic point of view. It doesn’t matter if it will be “considered so in the wild” whatever that means. I know a wolf would see a little dog for a pray maybe but every dog today is still a descendant from a wolf like every other domestic animal has its ancestors in the wilderness and is still able to mix with them.
@@HelenaRG71 well, you might have to take this up with Gutsick Gibbon! She made this claim just the other day. But for the reference, there are lots of dog types that can't interbreed without human intervention- and indeed there are species that whilst a genetic crossover is possible, they are considered different species for morphological and other reasons- for example lions and panthers, wolves and coyotes, several species of Finch.
The platypus doesn't have fangs, they have spur on their back legs that transfers venom rom sacs.
Exactly! and this guy's from Australia... shouldn't he know this??
@@pmarq32 You'd have thought he would, some people are just ignorant.
Do da sacs make it a bird?
😅🤣
@@pmarq32 maybe he is a troll from the Bible belt. 🤔
Platypus is not a bird, it's not a reptile and it doesn't have fangs... It's a mammal that lays eggs and has venomous glands in its back legs.. And he is Australian..? Seriously?
A ducks bill and fangs, That's Count Duckular 🤣, The caller is confused by a cartoon character.
@@dogwalker666😂😂 venomous vampire-duck-beaver.. 😂
@@einienj3281 Is is scared of Garlic butter 😂
@@dogwalker666 😂😂
Accent doesn't sound aussie so I am guessing he is either lying or new to the country and not educated here.
"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane."
Richard Dawkins
Could be dishonest.
There is option 4) A liar making money off the other 3 category's
Cue someone using the equivocation fallacy on the word "believe"
I miss the days when I used to look up to Dawkins.
@@Tuna_Man2323 Yeah, he's just another old man yelling at clouds now.
Creationists still haven't figured out how to Google basic science facts
We have sir Isaac Newton, Tesla, Heisenberg, Boyle, Pascal, James Clerk Maxwell, and thousands of top scientists who believe in God. You have Bill Nye, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and a swashed man in a wheelchair who speaks through a computer? who might not even be saying anything? as the machine says it all. You have the C-team. we have the A-team.
@@paultimson6674
That is one of the worst arguments Ive seen. Most people back then, including "scientists", also owned slaves, so if one was to use your line of thinking, that would somehow make slavery right or good....
I hope you can see the problem with your reasoning.
@@paultimson6674 Argument from authority? Yawn. Also, way to mock disabled people. Christians are truly the best.
@@paultimson6674Belief in god and creationism aren't the same thing.
@paultimson6674 They believed in God, they didn't have the audacity to say they can prove God exists. They were infinitely more humble than how you're acting right now.
Here's the answer to Haroons gotcha question: Platipus is not a reptile it is a mammal. It is a Monotermes mammal, also called the egg-laying mammal. We don't lay eggs because we are placental mammals.
One beaver and one duck had a late night and now the whole world is confused. Cross breeding has been looked at as bad ever since. It scares us so much. Breeding between races is taboo.
I don't think that's going to resonate with someone who thinks anything with fangs is a reptile.
But it has fangs so it's also a reptile. And it walks on the ground so it's also an insect. And it has a beak so it's also a bird. And it lives on Earth so it's also a fungus.
@@skblack5050
This is a joke… right?
But I would rather believe platypus weird, therefore god.
The real reason believers don't talk about why they believe is because such discussion tends to threaten those beliefs and they can't have that. Many of them base their very identity and relief from their darkest existential fears on that belief. Their beliefs don't stand up well to critical examination and they know that so they purposely seek ways to avoid that kind of scrutiny.
I think there's a lot of truth to that.
"My google search didn't turn up anything, so I can't find any evidence for the platypus."
He clearly didn't look very hard. He just needs to type about 3 words into google.
@@leglessinoz PERRY THE PLATYPUS!
@leglessinoz I typed "platypus evolution", and it's all there. Liar.
Sure: a platypus is a bird. And Leviticus says a bat is a bird too.
Wouldn't that be a batypus?
@@normkeller2405 only if the male has fangs and is therefore a reptile
A bat is a reptile because the male has fangs 😂
Funny thing also, a platypus has no fangs. They do have venomous spurs on their ankles -but no reptile does.
@pdoylemi Yes, but fangs on their feet helps when creationists put their foot in their mouth.
People say they believe in microevolution but not macroevolution. They should realize that macroevolution IS microevolution over a huge period of time.
The term macroevolution has been used for a lot of different things but essentially it is indeed merely the summation of increments of evolution.
Yea, it's a kinda dumb statement that they make.
It's like saying you believe in meters, but there's no such thing as a kilometer.
@@JWanswerYes, and there's hundreds of transitional fossils to prove it.
Macroevolution: Large-scale evolution occurring over deep geologic time that results in the formation of new species and broader taxonomic groups. Microevolution: Changes in the traits of a group of organisms within a species that do not result in a new species.
On the behalf of Australia I apologise for this guy.
His name is Haroon, so he has probably immigrated to Australia from somewhere in Asia. On behalf of Asia, I apologize to Australia for this guy.
Can’t you feed him to the gangs of motorized nuclear mutants that roam the irradiated wasteland?
I learned that from a documentary on Australia called Mad Max.
@@hammalammadingdong6244 good thinking 99!
@@hammalammadingdong6244 we could also simply utilise a "Donk".
@@BlarglemanTheSkeptic2 bonzer!
A platypus is a mammal, the duck like bill is a result of convergent evolution, similar to how squids have a parrot like beak
You really need to do more research🤦♀
“All science has to be wrong for you to be right.”
"It's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person."
Haroon couldn't find out anything about the platypus. I Googled it and the first hit at Wikipedia had a section on platypus evolution!
And he is an Aussie. I'm finnish and I learned about platypus in school, decades ago. I'm a bit disheartened by the lack of basic knowledge and the absence of ability to find it. Like, they have never heard of Google either? As a kid, I had to bike all the way to the library, damnit.
@@einienj3281I doubt if he is an aussie. Accent is wrong. If he is, then he wasn't educated here and arrived after school age.
Platypus are related to And evolved from a common ancestor with the echidna Their babies look a lot alike. I googled ot really quick.
The egg laying monotreme showed up about 110 million years ago. Also, mammals used to lay eggs and the platypus is a remnant of that history.
The platypus is actually really good evidence that evolution is just a brute force system
Evolution: The King of "Meh, good enough".
@@Finckelstein
C’s get degrees.
The babies are called "puggles".
There is no need to "believe in" evolution, or anything else. That's a kind of emotional investment in the necessity of something being true.
By all means, have beliefs. We can't do without them. I believe there's milk in the fridge. There was, the last time I checked. But I could be wrong.
I believe that my wife loves me, and that's a thought that makes me happy. But I don't insist that because it makes me happy, it must therefore be true. I could be wrong. Or, better said, love is not the only consideration that governs our lives. There's no need to "believe in" the power of love. There's sufficient evidence to be rationally convincing.
You don't need to "believe in" your wife loving you?
That is what belief IS - it simply means that you consider a proposition to be true to the best of your ability to know that. You can believe for good reasons or bad reasons but it remains belief. Belief CAN be based in emotion, but it need not be.
Jesus got to Kashmir via a Stairway to Heaven.
Nice Zeppelin pun!
That was a really strange comment. 🤔
Lol
Why do some people have such problem with time? Why is it so hard to understand that that time can be more than 10.000 years? 😠
Lack of comprehension and imagination. For most people , 'god' is just a crutch for their intellectual laziness...
Try & get a theist to describe what they think Civilizations were like Before the Time of judaism, christianity or islam became Folklores.
How does something always come before something
So many species/sub-species have come into existence over the time life has been on this planet. Where do the creationists think all these new creatures came from if they didn't evolve? SMH 🤦♂
Happily, creationists are a very small minority here in Aus, most people are becoming less and less religious each year, but religiosity is like a cancer, it may go into remission for a while but theres always the chance it will pop back up, so we need to be ever vigilant and not let these kinds of people go unchallenged.
90 % in Australia don't give a single thought about your sky daddy.
Giraffe gave birth to a dolphin! I had a really good laugh.
Not to mention that the caller seeks explanation of a science concept from atheist show.
It just shows that so many creationists don't know what evolution is
Is it Kent Hovind that always asks why dogs don't give birth to anything else than dogs, or something? And that we evolved from a rock? He thinks a monkey gave birth to a fully formed human baby.. I think it's Hovind. I mix the nutters all the time.
Kent Hovind thinks WE think a monkey gave birth to a human baby.
I know a RUclips creator who thinks we think a monkey gave birth to a human baby. "Dr. Dino" himself..
@@einienj3281
I don't know who that is!
The caller failed to bring doubt to evolution by reveal he knows diddly squat about evolution. And then Jesus... that last part made so sense why he *brought* that up.
The platypus is a monotreme, mammals that lay eggs.
That's interesting, I didn't know that they lay eggs, I just know that they are weird looking.
@dogwalker666 . Kind of halfway between birds, reptiles, and mammals. Evolution does not care about looking " normal". It just is.
@@dogwalker666 They are also venomus and can detect electrical impulses through their bill. Platypus' are utterly bizarre creatures.
They also have a tendency to wear snazzy hats and throw down with mad scientists.
@@dogwalker666 I always thought they looked pretty cool.
@@MrStringybark Like a mole with a shovel.
Evolution is a wonderful truth. So many lines of evidence.
I don't know how all the new species appeared because I don't understand evolution - Doc Clown 2024
Sorry for missing the live chat, have you heard about the new species of Orcas?
@@ookekklibarianbornagain6708 Do you mean the ones the giraffe's gave birth too or the rudder f*ckers?
The platypus presents fascinating evidence FOR evolution. Platypus ancestors (the monotremes) split non-monotremes incredibly early in mammal evolution. Hence, monotremes keep features that non-monotreme mammals do not such as laying eggs. Mammals evolved from creatures that lay eggs, and the earliest mammals laid eggs before the placental branch of mammals evolved and were wildly successful. The split of monotremes from non-monotreme mammals is pretty well documented in the fossil record, and I did my internship under a palaeontologist (Dr. Thomas Rich) who spent the latter part of his career researching early mammals and looking for the gaps in our fossil record for them.
An egg-laying mammal would be predicted, by evolution, to have ancestors that split very early from non egg-laying mammals in the fossil record, and this is exactly what we observe.
Yup, its one of my favorite series showing transition.
Verifiable authentic Biblical prophesies that have come true: 0%
Have you tried looking at the trees?
Never a single verifiable authentic fulfilled prophesy provided, despite claims that there are many. Strange.
Still not a single VERIFIABLE authentic fulfilled biblical prophesies.
Christian idea of a fulfilled prophesy: There will be bad times. A river will dry up. A city will be sacked. Jesus will bring the kingdom of heaven before all his disciples taste death.
Yep. Not a single concrete fulfilled prophesy.
Still not a single VERIFIABLE authentic fulfilled biblical prophesies.
I think it should have been clear. _Post hoc_ rationalization doesn't count. Yeah. Sure, the Bible said cashless society.🙄 I'll bet NONE of these "things that are happening now that the bible totally prophesied" indicate when it would happen.
Here, I'll do one. There will be a large earthquake that causes a great disaster. So when this happens, some time in the next thousands of years, you'll see how prescient I am!😂😂😂😂
Prophecy?
Delusional thinking is more like it.
Since Ezekiel was penned, Egypt has never been recorded as a 'desolate waste'. There is no historical evidence of a time when people have not walked through Egypt; when for forty years Egypt was uninhabited after the civilization started there; or for when Egypt has been surrounded by other desolate countries.
In Ezekiel 29:16-21, God claims that Egypt will be conquered by Nebuchadnezzar. It is not known whether Nebuchadnezzar actually campaigned in Egypt; however, it is certain that he did not actually conquer the land of Egypt proper.
Another major prophet, Jeremiah, also declares that Nebuchadnezzar would conquer Egypt. He does this twice. Didn’t happen.
Isaiah 17:1-2 tells us that Damascus will be laid waste, and it will remain uninhabited forever.
Damascus is one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world, with a current population of 2,685,000.
Platypus - a beaver mating with a duck? 😂 Come on😂
Doc Clown: Biology teaches us that a species can only reproduce with the same species.
Me: Demonstrates how wrong he is by showing all the different hybrids of two species.
Doc Clown: Why can't you understand that species means kinds, except where it's not the same as species???
Doc Clown: If you met a guy who made the extraordinary claim that he had a pet whale, surely, you'd be sceptical, and ask for proof.
If he kept deflecting, dodging questions and claiming that you are the one who needs to prove that he doesn't own a whale, then we would _KNOW_ that he doesn't own a whale (you'd be a _gnostic_ "awhalist").
But if he actually wasn't lying, he could simply invite you around and point at the thing in his GIANT backyard pool.
*You are that first version, deflecting and dodging, and trying to make it OUR job to prove YOUR **_extraordinary_** claim is false, rather than simply pointing at the thing.*
*I call you a LiarForGod.*
@@JWanswer you didn't say that, eh? Really? Surely you can point to the post you put up, that is being misquoted.
Well?
Wrong. A species can only produce fertile offspring with it's own species. Horses and donkeys can mate, but the resultant mule is sterile.
“It’s not like a giraffe gave birth to a…” (Yes? What will it be?!? A zebra? A camel?!? The anticipation is killing me! This is going to be great!) “…a dolphin.”
Brilliant!😂
They aren’t fangs, they are spurs on the hind legs that deliver venom. But even then, venomous fangs do not make something a reptile, the majority of reptiles don’t have venomous fangs.
Only the males have the spurs.
A claim is an assertion that an idea about reality is actually true in reality. If someone is simply stating something that is not under dispute, that is not called a claim.
The moment it is under dispute, it's a claim. The dispute can be resolved by demonstrating the truth of the claim or by referring the disputant to information resouces that demonstrate the truth of the claim. Or the dispute can remain unresolved and the proposition continues to be a claim, at least far as the disputant is concerned.
Whether it remains a claim to a reasonable person is a matter that is subject to adjudication by rational arguments, not by piling assertions upon assertions.
The Platypus actually proves that mammals evolved from egg laying species, as they too lay eggs.
I'm not sure you can claim that as a fact. Maybe they and the echidnas evolved from the other marsupials into being egg layers.
@@MrStringybark Sure...if you ignore every other data point in all of history. I guess.
@@plaguedoct0r Whose data?
@@MrStringybark Anyone's data from anywhere ever. FFS.
@@MrStringybark Damn near everyone!!! Like I already said! Wikipedia is fine, anything that isn't a creationist bullshit citation is fine!! Why don't you understand this???
Why do they always think evolution is like Animorphs?
Me: Doc Clown quibbles with definitions to say that once you disbelieve something, you can't change it.
Doc Clown: I never said that
Me: Oh right, you said that someone who disbelieves is incapabale and unwilling to believe. Yeah, completely different.🙄 Talk about quibbling with meaning.
I think you're confusing him with a different apologist troll, actually. They both fail to understand how knowledge works, though, so it's understandable.
@@Beacon80 He repeated what RachelLevine claimed. He's repeated the idea that disbelief means unable to believe evidence.
Respect for ol' Don. He may not have been a complete atheist rockstar, but by God, he was always in trenches putting the work in.
Why are you calling an atheist show to ask about platypus evolution.
Not the question I was expecting to hear today.
I also wasn't expecting someone to claim a platypus was a reptile.
You're taking about someone who also believes mohamad cut the moon in half and then flew to heaven on a flying horse, so.......
I don't believe in evolution, I accept it as a fact of life.
So, an echidna is a mix of an anteater, hedgehog and chicken? What the caller needs tto do is go to his local museum or zoo..either of which in Australian cities will have exhibits of Platypus. Seek and you will find the truth about Monotremes.
One can always tell when a Creationist doesn't understand evolution, when they talk about one animal turning into another, or they state "We don't come from monkeys."
As I've said before
Evolution is the change in inherited characteristics across generations. This is proven every time offspring are compared to parents.
This change can accumulate across generations. This is proven every time generations are compared with earlier generations.
Changes can be selected for or against. This is proven whenever successful individuals are compared with unsuccessful ones under the same conditions.
Which bits are difficult?
Great now why would any of that require a physical mechanistic explanation to cater to the Naturalistic atheist modus operandi?
@@damonkenny7818
Please evidence that MO is true first.
@@damonkenny7818It doesn't logically require that. It's just how it seems to work, that's all.
@@damonkenny7818 Evolution never suggested Naturalism in the first place.
I asked myself "why do I believe tbis" as I was reading the Bible, answering the "why" honestly led me out of the Cbristian beliefs I had been raised in.
Now even simpletons are trying to wave atheism away. Well, I guess nothing really changed.
I so agree that comparative religion should be taught in schools. Not only for education, but also for the origin of myths, and tolerance.
If you find a spammer just report them they only care about engagement
Well, at least for Doc Clown, I'm going to stop responding in his thread. And I think I'll stop directly replying to him. I'll just clown him in my own thread.
there's a 9 minute video on the evolution of the platypus from 4 years ago on youtube from Moth Light Media.
Giggles the Liar (AKA Doc Clown) thinks a basic structure of arguments is an atheist narrative.
Other examples of venomous mammals: northern short-tailed shrew, Eurasian water shrew, vampire bats, and the slow loris. Venom in male platypuses isn't a gotcha against evolution.
Other examples of monotremes (egg laying mammals): echidnas. There are 4 distinct species of echidna. Monotremes aren't a gotcha against evolution.
I really hope in the 8 years since this episode this caller has learned more and given up the blatant incredulity.
Ok that's cool, I did not know there were other venomous mammals (never really thought about it). That's awesome, thanks for that info.
Evolution is such a simple, well explained process. Why does it seem so difficult to comprehend for some ?
I have no idea. It would help if they could imagine long periods of time, rather than 13.000 years max. They live in a tiny box, where as we have no boxes at all..
Because they don't want to.
Religious brain rot
I noticed most people who believe in all the claims of evolution like the idea our ancestors were sea creatures they usually believe at least based on my experience that everything came from nothingness or a singularity.. a singularity so small that it can fit a million of them if a million existed on the head of a pin
Fundamentally, it's simple and can be described in a sentence, "the change in the distribution of heritable traits in a population."
But the detailed mechanisms of how it works from molecular, genetic, cellular, anatomical, psychological, behavioral, etc is amazingly complex. Yet these yahoos who can't even understand the basics think that they know more than the countless scientists and the mountains of data.
And because of their belief that they understand, they say dumb things like how evolution is wrong because it doesn't explain the origin of life. 🤦♂️
And I'm not kidding, there's a Christian here who says things like that.
A platypus is a reptile? That's all he has? Poor bloke. A platypus is a monotreme. Here in Australia there is another monotreme, the echidna. And coincidentally in recent weeks there was a fossil found and described that seems to be an evolutionary ancestor to them both.
To BELIEVE means to accept something as True, or FALSE, without sufficient evidence.
Belief is stupid by definition.
I don't believe you.
No it doesn't. You seem to be confusing belief with faith.
For I example, I believe evolution is true *because of the preponderance of evidence* that's supports it.
@@jamesarnette1394
Good, l am not to be trusted.
No, I do trust you, but I don't believe you. So, by your logic, I am not stupid.
@@fattymcbastard6536 There are multiple definition of belief. Some say "hold something as true" (so with that definition we believe that 2+2=4), and some also require that it's without sufficient evidence. Usually belief is used in that second definition because otherwise we use "knowing" instead of "believing", but some definition doesn't do with it
"The Dark Ages were dark on principle. Augustine fought against secular philosophy, science, art; he regarded all of it as an abomination to be swept aside; he cursed science in particular as “the lust of the eyes.”
-Leonard Peikoff-1986
The platypus is not a reptile, nor does it have fangs. It is a monotreme (it has a cloaca and lays egs) and the male has venomous spurs on its hind legs. The caller is grossly uneducated about the things he talks about.
He is muslim educated.
He's also taught to believe mohammed cut the moon in half and then flew to heaven on a flying horse.
The dynamic duo. The best
Does he think evolution has stopped? If so, when did evolution stop happening? When modern humans appeared?
Actually, yes. I talked with a creationist who agreed that evolution was real and every animal evolved... except humans. We didn't evolve from animals, but were created perfect by God in his image.
@@FrikInCasualModeIt must make sense in their mind, somehow.. They have detached themselves from nature and placed themselves above it. Like I've said multiple times: Worst case of "main character syndrome", thinking that the universe was created for them.
@@RickLambert963 Learn what the word "theory" means in the science world. Would help you a lot.
Organisms evolved I don't know anybody who denies that fact. That's proven by the scientific method.
What I noticed some atheists believe which isn't proven by the scientific method is the ideal their ancestors were sea creatures.
Environmental reasons like weather diet and natural selection.
If you believe your ancestors with sea creatures and microorganisms because of environmental reasons like weather diet and natural selection, I would imagine you would also have to believe depending on environmental reasons like whether diet and natural selection that your future offspring could evolve back into sea creatures and a single cell organism.
I just find it interesting that an atheist would mock a Christian for believing in faith that Jesus walked on water.
And in the same breath claiming they believe their ancestors were lizards that walked on water. And not claiming that belief in faith but convincing themselves that this was proven by the scientific method.
@@Mr.RichardLevine4th "lizards that walked on water"??? I can't take anything you say seriously.
our main Australian government science organisation has one afternoon a week where anyone can ask their scientists questions.
That is so cool, I wish they did that here in the US
That is a shockingly bright polo shirt
Yes... brighter than the caller. Ba-dump-dump!
These species questions can be shortcut quickly, by simply noting that nature does not care about species. The classification into species (and families, etc) is human made, after the fact, to more easily talk about groups of creatures.
"The Platipus has features from mammals and reptiles" - who cares? It is classified as mammal, because its DNA shows it evolved from mammalian ancestors. Classify it as reptile if you feel better about it, it does not change the fact that it evolved.
"No,No,No,No,No"
😂
I didn't think they know why they believe.
"Biology teaches us that a species can only reproduce with the same species - Doc Clown 2024"
I wonder how ligers and tigons arise? I wonder what a mule is. Or a hinny, zonkey, zorse, wholphin, cama, beefalo, leopon, coywolf...
In before, "they are the same kinds".
@@JWanswer QC denies scientific definitions like homologous morphology, emergent life properties, and decay to equilibrium- death. Clearly QC cannot be reasoned with.
@@JWanswer QC denies the science of morphology, which is the foundation of taxonomy in biology.
“Kinds” - the most vague undefined bullshite theists have ever come with.
@@tonyclements1147 I literally predicted that he would change to "kind" as soon as I demonstrate that he was wrong when he said "species".
@@tonyclements1147 I JUST saw that he edited his post to now say "kind".😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
And I'll predict that he absolutely can't define what a "kind" is!
If you have to phrase your statements confusingly to avoid making their idiocy obvious, their idiocy is still obvious, just in a different way.
"Atheists concentrate more on words and grammar instead of the fact their worldview is entirely flawed - Doc Clown 2024"
This is the same guy that tried to use a dictionary definition of "disbelief" to say that no belief can ever change.
And this guy says that species can only reproduce with the same species. But when shown how WRONG they are, they want to say that he meant "kind", on a post where I predicted that he would say "kind" instead of "species".
He wants to quibble with the definition of "species".
“is a semiaquatic, egg-laying mammal” google search in less than 45 seconds.
"But but but..."
As an Aussie I apologize for this Dumbledorf
Why do you need to apologize for the actions of another man?
Why do creationists look at dog breeds and still deny evolution?
They don't deny variation. They deny macro evolution. The evolution of new body plans.
@@blusheep2
Variation IS evolution.
You need to prove this can't build up over generations.
Because the creationists make Forrest Gump look like a member of Mensa.
I always find it strange when people who arent scientist try to debate other people that arent scientist about science.
How is evolution not just completely obvious at this point? Geuine question. What about it even seems nonintuitive?
There isn't enough time. That is what fails intuition.
@@blusheep2
Evolution occurs over each generation.
And geology shows there's enough time. Even Lyell agreed on this.
@@nealjroberts4050 The time needed for evolution isn't just the time needed to evolve from a common ancestor to what we have today, which is problematic enough. Its the fact that the Origin of Life must happen in a non-evolutionary environment before evolution can begin. So the time needed for the Origin of Life must be added to the time for evolution from a common ancestor.
What exactly did Lyell say?
@@blusheep2
So what. Your ignorance and incredulity about time don't make a young Earth.
Lyell said the Earth wasn't young.
@@blusheep2 People that say it's not enough time to change from a common ancestor are grossly underestimating how much time 3.5 billion years is. Origin of life is not evolution though, but you raise an interesting question by incorporating it. If abiogenesis happened on Earth than we can calculate that it took about .5-1 billion years to occur, but if it was panspermia where complex macro-molecules or simple organisms came to Earth, then there really is no telling how long that took.
Yes, and yesterday. That sums up evolution in just four simple words.
The old shows are so much better that the new, I've been a viewer for many years and enjoy the throwbacks immensely even though I saw them at the time, I even remember specific episodes.
Platipi do not have fangs... They have a spore in their feet... Almost like they developed a whole different kind of delivery system independently...
I wonder how many of the theist commenters here spewing so much ignorance would have the guts to call into the show? Hmmm....
Projection.
And I wonder if it'll be a theist who understands what a strawman fallacy is, while CONSTANTLY strawmanning atheism and science.
@@JESUS--NEVER--tAPPED "I wonder how many of the so-called atheist commenters here spewing so much ignorance would have the guts to call me directly for a one-on-one debate since I’ve called the show twice! Hmmm....
- no mention of the Bible or Christianity"
So what's the debate about? Kickboxing?
I'll tell you how the debate would go...
1. You'd make a claim about what atheists believe;
2. I'd say "no, that is not what atheists believe" and correct you;
3. 5 seconds later, you'd say the same thing again.
It's what you do here in your replies. Why would anyone want to debate someone who puts their head up their arse, their fingers in their ears and parrot the same strawman bullshit lines over and over.
Please note that the caller doesn’t represent all people from Adelaide, even most of the theists 🤦🏻♂️
I sincerely hope he is an outlier. The problem is how many others have equally simplistic views. I would say that evolution, on the whole, is quite poorly taught in schools, and unfortunately, after leaving school, many people never delve any deeper into the process. They stay with their partially remembered school lessons and mis-information from sketchy sources.
Even if evolution somehow was disproven, it would not make the theory of gods any more real or provable than it is today. That's the short cut to dispensing with this argument.
That point has been made multiple times. I'll bet all the evolution deniers here have heard that said to them.
@@queuecee The problem is that you have quite a few God deniers who say that evolution disproves God. Even if evolution is true, it would not mean God isn't still a real entity.
@@blusheep2
Evolution has evidence.
You have none for your god.
@@nealjroberts4050 I agree that there is evidence for evolution, but if you don't think there is evidence for God then you need to read more.
@@blusheep2
I read a lot.
If your god is hidden in books then it's less real than the natural world I can experience without reading.
On behalf of Australia I sincerely apologize for this man.
All atheists have the belief that there's NO evidence of "gods" - Doc Brown (if he actually knew what he was talking about)
@@JWanswer So when I ask for evidence for god, I'm asking for nothing??? You understand that you are admitting that there is NO evidence of god. Right?😂😂😂
Welcome to atheism!
I'm glad to see that a theist troll admits that there's no evidence for the existence of god.
“Atheists ask for evidence of nothing”
Damn, your God’s nothing?
The best example of evolution in action that I can recall off the top of my head is the peppered moth. I'm fuzzy on the details but basically the moths were black and white speckled. Cue the industrial revolution, coal power, soot everywhere, the moths with more white spots stood out more than the ones with black spots, and so were eaten. Thus within the span of a single human generation, the peppered moth basically turned black. Now that's not truly becoming another species since the white spot traits were still present, they were just a very undesirable trait. Had those conditions continued as they were for another hundred or so years, then the moth may very well have lost the white spots from their genome entirely, and become a new species.
Theists when they want to make a special pleading fallacy:
"Everything must have had a cause, except god. But that's because god's special, he's eternal."
Yeah, sure, not a special pleading fallacy. 🙄🙄
When you don't understand that the science of evolution is the explanation, the description of what happens.🙄 It's not a prescription that forces certain things to happen.
And instead of addressing the special pleading fallacy itself, goes to whataboutism. As expected of a creationist.🤦♂️
@@queuecee What’s your proof to prove that evolution requires a physical mechanistic explanation? Debunked Mendelian genetics?
@@queuecee Atheists refuse to address evolution. Why do atheists require one-sided physical mechanistic explanations for evolution?
Bullshite. Atheists always address evolution, you lugnuts run screaming from it.
@tonyclements1147 not sure what Damonkey is getting at, but theists ask atheists questions that they should be asking evolutionary biologists. Nevertheless, atheists end up answering it because how bad these creationists are.
Maybe Damonkey means that nobody answers him because he's so incoherent. 😂
Ignorance is the pillar of religion
Religion considers intelligence and logical thinking as an enemy.
Wombat crap in cubes-square-faced, sharp-edged, three-dimensional cubes. ... Wombats are the only known animals that poop in cubes
Good to know
They actually poop in the shape of a 4 dimensional hypercube, but we can only perceive the 3d cube portion.
I remember when I first heard about it and laughed while typing "wombat poop shape" on Google.. 😂
@@queuecee You took the words right out of my mouth 😄
@@einienj3281 Hey, who hasn't Googled 'wombat poop shape' at some point? 😅
A duck billed platypus, an animal I loved as a kid mainly because of its both bizarre but also cute appearance, is a mammal. "Duck billed" is just the anthropomorphic descriptor we put on it seeing as its mouth resembles a duck's bill (to us), but that doesn't mean it is literally a duck's bill! It just looks like it. Platypuses do not have fangs: they have spurs on their hind legs. But just because they have venomous spurs doesn't make them a reptile! There are various species of venomous mammals, including bat species, solenodons, and some rodents. The reason a platypus is classified as mammalian is because it has fur, and it feeds its young with milk from teets. Those are the primary identifiers of a mammal. What differentiates them from other mammals is that they don't give birth to live young, but eggs. But again, that doesn't make them a bird, or a reptile! Spiny anteaters lay eggs too, also from Australia. Australia has many unusual species of creatures, which is what fascinates so many biologists, just as the Galapagos Islands did. And evidence of evolution is that Australia's species evolved without selection pressures from other continental sources for millions and millions of years, and tectonic plate evidence points to the separacy of Australia over a very long term also.
So, more importantly, what's the plural of platypus?
Platypuses or platypodes.
Some will accept platypi
@@nealjroberts4050 I love how some people use octopussies.. 😄
@@einienj3281Ooh er!
The correct plural is platyspus, such as we say attorneys general.
Even MORE importantly, why do some people pronounce "fungi" like FUN-jee or FUN-jye?
I've never heard "fungus" pronounced like FUN-juss, so why should the plural form make the G soft?
The skeleton of the Platypus is heavy and has several similarities to that of fossil and modern reptiles. These include pectoral girdles made of five bones, splayed legs and rudimentary ribs on the neck vertebrae.
Jimedith has returned simply to insult people here, no other reason. He’s shown his true nature
As time passes his mental is deteriorating even more....
He comments on my videos and there are SO many comments from him that gets hidden because they are offensive.
He can't even say HOW his moral system says that child abuse is morally wrong, and he can't deny that if god ordered him to do it, it would be moral. And yet he accusses others.
"Jimedith has returned simply to insult people here, no other reason. "
That's hardly news. That all cAssholeberry does.
The platypus is the result of a craaaaaazy Australian key party apparently.
Giggles the Liar has proved that there is no God. According to him, if something is a claim, it is not a true statement. "God exists" is a claim, therefore God doesn't exist.
@@simpletowaveawayatheismBut it is, therefore by your ludicrous logicking, God does not exist!
@@simpletowaveawayatheismNo, that doesn't follow. Your idiotic wordplay signifies nothing.
@@simpletowaveawayatheism The fact that you don't realize it's a claim doesn't change the fact that "God exists" is a claim.
That made no sense, @@simpletowaveawayatheism
@@simpletowaveawayatheismYou can make claims about objective things.
Many creationists reject evolution, saying there is no transition form. The platypus would be one. It is a mamal lay eggs has duck beak and the male has a venomous claws. It's a mixture of birds, reptiles, and mamal. That's a transition form, proves evolution.
So is it transitioning from a bird to a reptile, or a mammal to a bird, or a reptile to a mammal. Transitional forms are transitioning from one thing to another. The platypus only appears to have features found in various other types of animals without a connection between them. That doesn't work.
@@blusheep2Except there is a connection there, just as there’s a connection for any transitional species. But creationists are basically looking at transitional species all wrong. Basically any creature is a transitional species as all are still evolving (unless they die out of course, that’s called an evolutionary dead end).
@@angrydoggy9170 Only in looks. This is a correllation causation fallacy. Just because it looks like a duck bill doesn't mean that a duck or its family was the cause behind the platypuses bill or vice versa. You must demonstrate that there is philogenetic connection between the platypus's features and these other animals that share similar features.
Whether there are transitional forms or not is another question. I'm just trying to show you that your reasoning here is fallacious unless you can trace the lineage of evolution through the platypus to these other animals. Show an actual connection to them.
@@blusheep2 And that is exactly what has been shown. You dismissing or not knowing the evidence doesn’t change that simple fact.
@@blusheep2 But anyway you’re being rather silly with your suggestion that ducks evolved from a platypus or the other way around.
Hallelujah!!! I’m the favorite, $60,000 every week! Now I can afford anything and also support the work of God and the church.
Oh really? Tell me more!
This is what Ana Graciela Blackwelder does, she has changed my life.
After raising up to 60k trading with her, I bought a new house and car here in the US and also paid for my son’s (Oscar) surgery. Glory to God.shalom.
I know Ana Graciela Blackwelder, and I have also had success...
Absolutely! I have heard stories of people who started with little or no knowledge but managed to emerge victorious thanks to Ana Graciela Blackwelder.
All the believers of all the different religions in one place without a secular oversight to keep them under control? I doubt they would have a discussion.
Caller got his evolution facts from 1st gen pokemon
"God did it" - A simple and elegant method of explaining multiple fields of scientific study to a person with a 10th grade education.
That thing about comparative religion was exactly my experience in a Christian gradeschool. I remember Wondering how in the world people believed gods lived on Mt. Olympus. That idea grew into serious doubt and then outright rejection within a year of leaving that school and entering public highschool. Ive softened since then and take the possibility of a god to be about as likely as anything else we don't know. Id be really damned surprised though if anyone's ideas or concepts about what that "god" is are anywhere close to correct. In short, i just dont think it matters all that much
It's not a question of belief. It's an acceptance of the credibility of evidence based upon factual observation compared to oppositional improbabilities that have been rendered so unlikely that anyone who takes them seriously has got very serious problems, either with credulity, interrogative capacity disenabled, information processing and retentive understanding, proneness to mesmeric influence and gullibility or all.
Now a Biblical story about how Jesus went to Kashmir and did LSD with the Beatles would be a story worth reading 😂
Groping a little on your evidence there...2:20