Not far in, but aren't Chihuahuas and Great Danes both classified as the same species? Isn't this just the bat version of what we see in dogs? Without help Chihuahuas and Great Danes couldn't interbreed, especially if the Dane was the male. How are these bats any different?
That is a good question. So yes it would be difficult but they are the same kind but different species. A lion is a different species than a tiger but they have ligers. If they are the same kind then they are mateable, however difficult it may seem.
@@razark9 For the most part, animals within the same genus can interbreed, and produce viable offspring. Though in some more dissimilar parings (like say, donkeys and horses) the offspring are frequently infertile.
@@ooelectronoo Reproductive isolation merely means that a group of animals have become cut off from reproductive options outside of an isolated group. Like say on an island, or on opposite sides of a barrier of some kind. The group can become inbred, allowing some of the genetic diversity within the species to be bred out of the group entirely. This happens with certain breeds of dogs, causing certain traits to disappear, and others (frequently negative traits sadly) to become much more prevalent. Like say, hip dysplasia in certain dog breeds like poodles, or hemophilia within the British royal line. If left isolated long enough, they can even become a whole new species, like dogs are now (they started out as wolves). But NO empirical evidence has been found to indicate they can become a different genus (no matter WHAT evolution tries to claim).
@@razark9 A bat "shouldn't SUDDENLY give birth to something completely different?" Suggesting a bat could SLOWLY give birth to something completely different? I'd like to see THAT. 🤔
@@razark9I see you commenting on every AIG video. Even though you oppose God and His truth, I’m glad you’re here and watching all their videos. As Christians we’re called to love everyone regardless of their beliefs. So please keep yourself updated with Answers in Genesis :)
Kevin (I didn't catch his last name sorry) is an awesome addition to your staff. He complements the other two presenters quite well. You are all keepers in my opinion.
The bats are still bats. Why is that hard for some to understand? I like your new associate, Kevin Hacksaw. Please put his name in the video description next time he hosts. I really appreciate his focus on presenting the Gospel.
@@mattbrook-lee7732 that's just not true. Land animals allegedly came from sea animals right? Then birds eventually grew wings according to your theory etc., etc.
@RobertA-oi6hw what you are talking about here is major evolutionary change that happened over millions of years. That doesn't mean every new species is a major event. Bats will produce bats. That is exactly what evolution predicts. But if 2 populations are geographically isolated they will develop different characteristics that favour their environment. Eventually becoming different species of bat. Just saying bats produce bats like its some kind of gotcha is the reason why creationists are accused of not properly understanding evolution
"Humanism is a religion." I agree 100%. And how about this one: "You can't legislate morality." SOMEBODY'S morality IS being legislated. Even a lack of morality is a type of morality.
There are about 15.77 Billion acres of habitable land on this planet. Enough for 15 billion people to have 1 acre of land per person. We are not overcrowded at all. Most people tend to live together in big cities so we don't even use all the land that we could. That number also does not count more land that we could make inhabitable if we wanted to. So, no, we are nowhere near overpopulated.
Except not every area is equally habitable, most habitable areas include forests and natural parks we shouldn't demolish, and you need to build infrastructure from scratch in these areas. We also need significant area for agriculture.
@@katamas832 Yes and 1 acre of land per person allows for all of that because we do not use it all. We are not using it all now and not in the foreseeable future. Don't buy into the lie of overpopulation, it is simply not true.
@@findinggodswisdomFrom south africa. Just between us and the nearest city is 50km. And there is NO farms or people there. Grass and single trees. Some places 100km to nearest town. So yes... you are right. We are not overcrowded.
Reading books like Jeremiah, we see the practice of child sacrifice being carried out. I thought, "Though the world is bad, at least we're not that bad!". Then with horror I realised, that we are in fact worse, because our child sacrifice is called abortion and we sacrifice to the god of self. Thank you AIG. We need God's light more than ever to shine through you.
I saw this article pop up and i just rolled my eyes. When I saw you guys cover it, I figured I'd watch. It was just as i thought, but you make a good point that it actually gives good example of the rapid speciation since the flood.
Exactly the speciation happens rapidly, that’s why we can see the changes in size, the evolutionists then assumes it can somehow with enough time change into a completely different genus or family, imaginary change.
Speciation happens. Evolutionary theory claims nonsense like reptiles being ancestral to birds, and land mammals to whales. Or how about single-celled organisms being ancestral to ALL fauna. That's a bold and unsubstantiated bunch of nonsense.
RUclips must be slow to post comments and the accurate view count. I wish you guys would post to alt media like "roomble". That place needs to have more decent Christians to the mix.
I am listening for a second time the section on abortion. I found it to be one of the best conversations in favor of pro-life. It's so important to keep talking about the sanctity of human life. So sad to see that there are many people who are "okay" with the killing of innocent life. Thank you AIG.
Paivi Rasanen is a particular hero of mine. She is, I believe, a Medical Doctor who is also an elected official in the Finnish national Parliament. Her Lutheran Missionary Diocese is in pulpit and altar fellowship with my faith community the Lutheran Church -Missouri Synod. I know her Lutheran Bishop Paavola who also was dragged into court last time as well. Her accusers will find her to be a redeemed daughter of Christ. It may seem at times like the Lutherans are all lost; but it is not so! May God continue to bless Dr. Rasanen as she is dragged before "kings and rulers". That she may draw strength from God's Word. Thank you for highlighting the struggle.
29:12 well just as you said that humans and neanderthals where still able to lay together, I think the idea is that they just simply got bread into the gene pool rather than dying off. Which I mean doesnt make them seem all that different?
"The real explanation lies in prenatal development: "Men have nipples because humans are created embryonically as hermaphrodites. Genetically, this is easier than forming the characteristics of the sex individually and determining them with your own genes."
Because we come from the same mother and our bodies develop the same basic building blocks initially and then the hormones come more into play and make some parts go one way or another.
@@vinipyx2369 Okay, you're giving me an explanation that has nothing to do with intelligent design. I'm really only interested in an explanation from the view point of intelligent design.
@@franciscodelgado6884 I'll point out that not all mammalian males have mammary glands and nipples. If we didn't have them, we would look like mammalian males who don't have mammary glands or nipples. My question was why do humans (and all primates for that matter) have them, from the viewpoint of intelligent design.
Relax here! Homeschooling is awesome, and so is Christian school. So can public school be. I'm a Bible-believing Christian, and I sent my kids to public school. It was a fabulous school and very Christian-supportive. Please relax and keep an open mind.
Not everyone can afford private school of any kind… nor stay home to educate our kids. We CAN stand up against woke indoctrination in their classrooms. We must read thoroughly every syllabus, SEE the class environment and BE INVOLVED. That’s what I do. ❤✝️
@@razark9 yeah, ok buddy. My kids don’t need drag queen story hour. They don’t need sexually explicit books in school libraries. They don’t need governmentally approved gender propaganda. I really don’t care what you think. They’re MY KIDS. ✌️
It is ok for them to be pro choice.... the problem i have is they are anti consequence as well. If you make a choice you have to face the consequences. You can't have your cake, eat it and not get fat.
You can also look to Hawaii for an explanation of this as well. There are multi spider species that are centrally located in pockets of greenery surrounded by old lava, hardened.
@@Censoredbyyourcult yeah you guys keep saying THAT just like I did for 28 years! (Yes I was a brainwashed idiot but I studied and realised evolution is false about 8 years ago) Get saved buddy
So everyone doing the science you have religious problems with cannot have accepted god? None of them? And science is all about imagination now? Creationist dishonesty and propaganda never ceases to baffle me.
@katamas832 You have a different size and shape of ear than anyone else on the planet. There are 240 species of finches that have different sizes and shapes of beaks. What are your ears evolving into and what are the finches beaks evolving into?
I like how some christian channels use clickbait even though its a dishonest tactic. Idk something about it doesnt sit right with me. This channel and living waters are very guilty of this. But hey, I guess its being used for good at the end of the day.
@@speciesspeciate6429 Eh I didnt say that. Nothing is perfect, and I will never say that I like these channels more than channels that do their stuff in an honest way. Im also starting to suspect you either spend way too much time on these youtube channels or youre a bot. Do you have a life dude?
@@JESUSisLORD24151 That is the most ridiculous question, I have ever heard. The landlords father built the house I live in, I was there when he was building it. NOW.....let's get to you. Were you there when they crucified Jesus? Were you present when he raised the dead, and healed the sick? I thought not! So once again, I ask the question: Does God exist, and can you prove it?
Even the ones who chose life are walking around with guilt for just considering abortion. My prayer is for healing from those thoughts. Let Jesus heal your mind of the guilt.
@albusdumbledore219”So tiny.” In the USA every year, it’s about 35,000 ectopic pregnancies per year, with 100% fetal deaths and a significant percentage of maternal deaths. An ectopic pregnancy CANNOT SURVIVE to viability, much less full term. It will be removed by abortion, or at the mother’s autopsy. That’s the choice. About one a day in every state, on the average. No chance of fetal survival. This sucks, but how should grownups deal with this? There’s other, less certain but still risky pregnancies that doom the fetus and endanger the mother. Praying for a miracle won’t change the ultrasound. Give your daughter a nice church funeral, and look after the grandchildren.
That's actually a fantastic comparison. A lot of the way that flat earther's justify their views is by shifting definitions and making "experiments" in such a way to bolster their already held views rather than making a fair experiment. For example flat earthers with the table thing, showing how on a flat surface something can go "under the horizon" When they do this "experiment" they put the camera slightly below the table which creates a similar effect to something going under the horizon, but obviously, that's not how things work. Evolutionists do similar things.
@@katamas832 Yeah and the number of people drowning by falling into a pool looks correlated to the number of films Nicolas cage appeared in. While this correlation obviously has more reason for it, it still doesnt disprove the point made. Flat earthers might use their faith partially to justify their false belief, but they still use the same kinds of flimsy evidence aside from that to further justify it that evolutionists use. Same tricks.
God does let murder happen over and over again. It's called free will. That doesn't make it ok. God judges murderers and they likely go to hell of unrepentant, but you atheists don't like that idea either. Atheism allows for murder with no punishment whatsoever. Atheism allows for any morality or no morality whatsoever. If Man is ontologically equal to animals, murder isn't even wrong. Chimps gotta chimp.
@@taylorwatson-phillips9449 In the echo chambers of young earth creationist RUclips sites, don’t you think the occasional contrarian point of view is a good idea? Plus, it’s often hilarious to hear the “arguments” made here.
There are enough contrary comments to anything Christian related as it is, more isn't necessary but if that's how you get your kicks then at least you're visiting these videos and not atheist ones.
@@taylorwatson-phillips9449 Actually, 99% of the videos I watch are what you call “atheist”. Otherwise known by sensible people as science videos. And by the way, if you ask me, more comments explaining the logical fallacies and outright lies and dissembling by fundamentalist non-scientists is a good thing.
Your imaginary friend may not be intimidated, but it's beyond obvious that the creationist community is. That's why you have to fearmonger and mislead about science near constantly.
@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 we demonstrate God to you every day by being patient with you. Personally, I would have given up talking to you by now. You seem hopeless. However, God keeps prompting me to talk to you knuckleheads. So here I am.
I usually use the eyes in discussing anti-evolution, but it does take time to do so. This morning, a cockleburr came to my mind. These are about marble size egg shaped seed pods. They are covered with short thorns, each with a sharp but hooked point. These points are designed to attach to anything furry walking by and brushing the bush, thus spreading seeds to new territory. How did a seed pod develop those thorns to do that?
Evolution through natural selection. There is nothing mystewrious about it. Plants produce seeds and there is variation in those seeds. Soem plants produced slightly burred seeds. These were more successful in propagating themselves, and grew into plants that produced simialr seeds. Repeat this process many times; they become more burred over time as natural selection favours burred over non-burred - and you end up with what you see today. Why do you think eyes pose a problem? They don't. Evolution explains eyes very well...inclouding their flaws.
@@richardgregory3684 Yeah, like the pointed burrs started out as little bumps but grew to hooked points? Your faith in that when there is not one visible mutation to a new species. Just think, if we don;t know where the seed came from in the first place, and then it must have a force of life to change. But at first, the seed pod would not have a fully hooked bur coating to reproduce itself itself. But as usual, you'll fail to see the impossibility you propose. I'm outa here.
3:20 I feel like this is a solid logical point for any time they call speciation "evolution" Like, this didnt happen over millions of years though. It happened over a few generations at most. So this shows that indeed rapid speciation can happen. Which is a point towards creationism not evolution.
Wrong, buddy. Speciation is caused by reproductive barriers being formed, which are prompted by evolutionary changes in the genome and environmental stimuli. More rapid speciation events can occur, especially in examples of sympatric speciation like this one. Moreover, parallel evolution implies that there is a powerful selective pressure that increases evolutionary rates, hence allowing speciation events to occur easily. Again, all of this supports evolution. Creationism still remains pseudoscientific drivel.
@@speciesspeciate6429 Yeah so we've always known that this is capable of happening. Why is it considered news? Or proof? Im just asking you to think logically here. We see speciation occur quickly, mutation rate, change of environment, I dont care what... This at the very least means that say that speciation happened quickly after the animals got off the arc would be a logical thing to happen. If you of course believe the whole arc thing happened, and I dont expect you to. My point is this should at least be satisfying proof that evolution is not direct evidence against that. Amongst other things, but that is the point being made here.
@@speciesspeciate6429 There is no "microevolution" or "macroevolution", only evolution. Macroevolution is a term made up by creationists who are unable to deny that living things do indeed change down generations but still want to deny evolution. It's like denying water isn;t really wet, just a little bit wet, but not ebough to be called wet.
I believe the spirits of God has directed the creation of all kinds, culminating in humanity. I also think God has allowed human kind to peer into this creation in certain ways. To us this creation looks like a physical sediment which we reconstruct into "prehistory", which is the view of this process from within time as we know and interpret it in modernity. However, time is a thoroughly perspectival thing, so we can't project that only some sort of ultimate reality of how things "really are". What we see there is indeed analogous to something real, but our reconstruction is bound to be coloured massively by our assumptions, which might not hold, and probably doesn't. My point is that macro evolution is indeed a real thing, but it is God's work (and to some extent, as humanity comes to be, a participation with us and God, but always by His grace). It didn't necessarily take place within time either, that is purely our scientific assumptions speaking. Our minds are almost incapable of escaping thinking within time and processes within time, so what ever truth we perceive, we must have it projected onto a story through time. Only in rare moments to we glipse eternity, and when trying to talk about it, invariabley use time to illustrate.
A new cell means a new seed. And, everyone know the next, just to remind us, the scientists. Need actually a feedback here, from the experts only, like Answers in Genesis.
Two chapters of Darwins evolution theory book are dedicated to..... disregard the theory if it could not be proven as thruth...... WHY do unbelievers of Creation continue with this???
Because they are fools, they deny God, who is the foundation of all truth. Therefore anything they come up with will inherently have flawed logic. As long as they deny God, they will delude themselves, stretch their imagination as far away from reality as possible so that they can believe their own lies. And yet, this changes nothing because. The truth will still remain the truth.
Still pushing the same old dishonest false dilemma. You can definitely accept the astronomical amount of science saying evolution is an undeniable fact AND still be a christian who thinks your imaginary friend used these undeniable natural processes as tools of creation.
@@justiceiria869 Normal people and bible thumpers describe ''fools'' differently. You describe a fool as someone who doesn't believe nonsensical stuff for no reason. Normal people describe it as the exact opposite. ''They deny god'' not necessarily. And yet there's absolutely nothing you can demonstrate to be true. You believe it is, and denigrate peoplew who does not as '' lost fools that love their sins'' and such. Everthing else in your comment is just ironic.
Species is used to define the largest group of organisms that can secually reproduce and produce fertile offpspring. If we stopped at families, there would be no taxonomic different between a human and a gorilla or orang-utan. lol
@@richardgregory3684 wrong. That iis what you decided. We are not of the same family. That is what evolution tries. Evolution fails miserably at every corner. You wanting it to be true... does not make it true. Lies are never true no matter how mich you preach them.
What? We and everything evolvesi in reaction to their environment.. In real time. Very little environmental change as opposed to rapid environmental change....Scientists?
How funny the speaker discussing Algae and say she doesn't know what Day god made it 😂😂😂😂. Algae is confusing this creationist because Algae really function almost like a plant but still animals and living both on land and sea 😂😂😂😂😂 a comedy skit
@@TickedOffPriest Religious liberty is not the same as carte blanche to do and say whatever you like and then label it your religious freedom to do so.
Translated: ''Having evidence and doing science is bad, and it's just assumptions anyway because I said so, but my book that we cannot put to the test must be true no matter what''
I love the atheist point of view on abortions everyone should be honest with themselves who support this just like that…I think honest will start to help people change.
How many combinations on 52 cards? 8×10^67 That's 8 with 67 zeros. Imagine the factorial on 3.2 billion base pairs in DNA, neatly arraing themselfs. The number is so great it cannot even be comprehended. By random chance? That would take an unreasonable leap of faith.
Except it is not "random chance". And ironically....you point out that a particular set of 52 cards is highly unlikely. Yet they happen all over thre world, daily!
@@richardgregory3684 ...yes, but cards do not breathe, and replicate. Any kind of positive DNA change has never been proven. Turning gene expression on/off is not additive.
@@richardgregory3684 The ordering of amino acids in proteins or nucleotides as molecules in abiogenesis would be random. You can't select for a molecule that is not living. Natural selection doesn't work on random assortments of molecules. And you're just wrong: 52 cards have probably NEVER assorted themselves in the same sequence order, no matter how many shufflings of decks of cards have been done on earth.
@@albertdepeal9658 Because they are all part of the _canidae_ or canine family - which includes domestic gogs, wolves, foxes, jackals, coyotes, dingoes etc. Family is two taxonomic ranks above species. Wolves and dogs are essentially the same species; once thought to be separate _canis lupus_ and _canis familiaris_, the domestic dog is now _canis lupus familaris_ to recognise this. Wolves and domestic dogs can interbreed and produce fertile offspring.
Moth "evolution" Scientist on the BBC in the 70's: consequent to the Clean Air Act 1956 the bark of the plane trees became lighter, thus turning the tables on the vulnerability of the lighter moth and darker moth to predators, eventually the lighter ones becoming more prolific. Proof of evolution. My question: what is the lighter moth evolving into? Answer: it isn't. It's a moth. It's still 'just' a moth.
OK, so you don;t know what evolution is, because you appear to think it is limitted to speciation. In actuality, evolution is a change in heritable characteristics in a population. The moths are evolving.
The British peppered moths went from lighter colored to darker color back to lighter colored due to the air pollution in the area changing the color of the bark on the trees. The moths that were more in synch with the bark were less susceptible to predation than the ones that contrasted more. This caused a larger number of the in-synch color variation to survive. The fact that the numbers of the lighter colored moths rebounded due to air quality improving should show that the moths never “evolved”. One merely had a larger number survive due to the beneficial color/shade. This would be the same as the selective breeding dogs or cats of one color or another. You still have the same thing you started with, just a different color. Evolutionists are so desperate to prove their “theory” that they will twist anything and everything they can to make things come out “right”…
@@kirkstickney7394 Ironically, you have just described evolution quite well. Moth colouration changed because of an environmental change that caused lighter moths to get eaten, whilst darker ones did not and went on to reproduce darker moths...and then this trend reversed as their environment changed again, and favoured lighter over darker. Evolution through natural selection in a nutshell! You seem to think that evolution is exclusively speciation. It isn;t. _You still have the same thing you started with, just a different color_ If it's a different colour, it's not the same thing. lol
@@richardgregory3684 I don't think anyone's denying that over generations certain characteristics will become dominant and species can change. It's the crossing over into a completely different species altogether that I don't think there's evidence for.
Evolution is a fact, I don’t know why religion needs to argue it. Even if it was somehow proven to not be the case, that doesn’t prove a god, let alone the Christian one..
@Oskyosky2009 evolution is fact you say? Did you know that the termites digestive system cannot process wood? There are tiny creatures called protists that live in the stomach of the termite that process the wood and the termite processes that. One cannot live without the other. Which one evolved first? What came first the veins in our bodies, the blood in our veins, or the heart to pump the blood? If evolution is small changes then they couldn't all evolve at the same time.
@@razark9 the Naturalism belief is the only one taught at public tax dollar expense. Fields can align with other worldviews, yet all others are omitted. Do you think science could take a no opinion approach? Go off of empirical data, and not invoking belief systems like Naturalism or creation in public schooling? Worldviews can establish premise, as we all have our views, but isn't science supposed to be science? The mandatory narrative, due to not being empirically accurate, is actually inhibiting sciences from being published, as nothing is able to be written through a chronological approach. Science should not matter if you are Christian, Naturalist, or any other faith. Empirical science is not (Naturalism) "Science".
@@razark9 Naturalism is a belief that nature made all things on it's own, because right now a belief is required to get life from nonliving matter. There are other philosophical principles that could and are applied, and results are achieved. Naturalism just has a bulk of the scientists because it is the exclusively taught belief in public school, with no other even getting a word in, so no one hears of others. Like how Islam is in schools in middle East because it is the only one allowed, so majority isn't saying much. Science goes off empirical data, yes. Can you provide empirical data for Abiogenesis? You can change Abiogenesis from faith in a miracle that defies reality, to empirical science, by providing a single observation of nonlife becoming living. Abiogenesis shows Naturalism is an unrealistic philosophy, as far as claim of science. Free to be believed and used towards science, but not science itself, and should not be publicly favored exclusively, as other beliefs need to be mentioned, or none, and just stick to science.
@@razark9 Naturalism is a belief. It requires faith. Things of Naturalism, like Big Bang, or Evolutionism are philosophy with no direct or exclusive empirical support.
@@razark9 my comments are not allowed through I think. Sorry man. Naturalism is a belief. A philosophy. Not science. Evolution is not science like buoyancy or anything. It is a worldview.
@@razark9 ok so Evolutionism is science. Has the start been observed? Cause currently all observations defy an Abiogenesis claim. Naturalism, is an -ism, is the one trying to fuse with science, to make nature appear as the be all. The study of nature is what science is based on, not belief in a life giving Nature that made all cosmology and etc.
For one species to evolve into a different species is about as absurd as an eagle evolving into a fighter jet. EDIT! This is merely SARCASM people. Not to be taken literally. Using the example of a "fighter jet" was only to emphasize the absurdity of transitional species. Now realizing we have young children (underdeveloped brains) responding to "Grown Up" talk, taking things way too literally.
@@speciesspeciate6429 Yes, but they remain the same family. No one has ever witnessed a reptile evolving into a bird, a completely different family. Reptiles breed variations of reptiles and birds breed variations of birds.
@@luish1498 for show us your ignorance!!!'' Oh, I don't know. I don't think it's ignorant to believe an eagle could evolve into anything other a variation on the eagle theme. He just went a little overboard. Relax.
@@danielcristancho3524 you should look up to Speciation: The Origin of New Species nature «an eagle could evolve into anything other a variation on the eagle theme. » individuals dont evolve. populations do. «an eagle evolving into a fighter jet» this is stupid.
@@luish1498 ''individuals dont evolve. populations do.'' More Macroevolution slogans. NO, generations evolve, one creature at a time. Except it's NEVER BEEN EMPIRICALLY PROVEN. There is no empirical evidence that mutations can evolve new and genetically different body parts and organs so that a reptile could evolve into a bird over time. it's never been observed, demonstrated or repeated in experiment. Evolution never goes beyond species, which means they stay the same kind of animal. A different species of bat BUT STILL A BAT. Darwinian evolution is pure BS.
So? That's your evidence, you son is taller than you? There are many factors that determine someone's height. A child with two short parents is more likely to be short, but they can be tall. This is even more likely if only one parent is short. Genetics plays a big role, but there are things call dominant and recessive genes. It is not unusual for a recessive to express.
Maybe you’re not aware but when you used the words “woke” this and woke that, it’s a racist dog whistle. Being Black, I understand the evolution of the word really well. There was a black singer who used the phrase in her song to “stay woke.” It kinda caught on in the Black community by some, but for many it was kind of a joke to say stay woke. Yes, it did carry a kind of wake up connotation but for many it was really not taking serious. Someone would say something that they cast as profound, and many times would follow up with stay woke. But, I promise you, most did not take it serious. I’m not sure exactly how, but I’m almost certain someone racist picked up on this usage and began to use it as negative, knowing the the association. Yes it did become more generally used against liberalism by FOX and other right wing orgs but when FOX first started using it, it def was a way to signal Blacks without explicitly stating it. The only thing I can think of that some hipster communicated this usage to them and they ran with, but it was really weird. Then, after Trump, Tucker and others got hold of it, it became stand usage. However, now it has somewhat evolved, but it started our racist. I think it would serve you better to stay away from these type of political dog whistles. No need to use them especially claiming to be followers of Christ. There is no way Jesus would we constantly bashing “the woke”😂. I think a lot of people really believe that Jesus is a right wing america loving God. Sorry, but they will hear Him say, I never knew you. The Pharisees used politics to crucify Christ. Lastly, this is the thing many miss: right wing or left wing it’s a world system that will pass away. If you are a friend of either side you’re enemy of God. My citizenship is in heaven and I just don’t understand how so many main goal is protecting their early group instead of waiting for Christs return. We can save either side. Stop using racist dig whistles and come out of the world. We are living in the last days for sure. The path is narrow which means most who will say lord lord are lost.
Not far in, but aren't Chihuahuas and Great Danes both classified as the same species? Isn't this just the bat version of what we see in dogs? Without help Chihuahuas and Great Danes couldn't interbreed, especially if the Dane was the male. How are these bats any different?
That is a good question. So yes it would be difficult but they are the same kind but different species. A lion is a different species than a tiger but they have ligers. If they are the same kind then they are mateable, however difficult it may seem.
@razark9 what does reproductive isolation mean ? If it is a bat then it would be able to interbreed
@@razark9 For the most part, animals within the same genus can interbreed, and produce viable offspring. Though in some more dissimilar parings (like say, donkeys and horses) the offspring are frequently infertile.
@@ooelectronoo Reproductive isolation merely means that a group of animals have become cut off from reproductive options outside of an isolated group. Like say on an island, or on opposite sides of a barrier of some kind. The group can become inbred, allowing some of the genetic diversity within the species to be bred out of the group entirely. This happens with certain breeds of dogs, causing certain traits to disappear, and others (frequently negative traits sadly) to become much more prevalent. Like say, hip dysplasia in certain dog breeds like poodles, or hemophilia within the British royal line. If left isolated long enough, they can even become a whole new species, like dogs are now (they started out as wolves). But NO empirical evidence has been found to indicate they can become a different genus (no matter WHAT evolution tries to claim).
@@juliebaker6969Very good explanation of the genetic boundaries limits between different species of animals.
Bats give birth to bats.
@razark9 Are you arguing against what they wrote? 🤔
@@razark9 A bat "shouldn't SUDDENLY give birth to something completely different?"
Suggesting a bat could SLOWLY give birth to something completely different? I'd like to see THAT. 🤔
@@razark9 Aww. Did you delete your other post? 😂
@@razark9I see you commenting on every AIG video. Even though you oppose God and His truth, I’m glad you’re here and watching all their videos. As Christians we’re called to love everyone regardless of their beliefs. So please keep yourself updated with Answers in Genesis :)
Correct!!!! You understand evolution. You never outgrow your ancestors!!!!
Kevin (I didn't catch his last name sorry) is an awesome addition to your staff. He complements the other two presenters quite well. You are all keepers in my opinion.
I heard "Kevin Hacksaw." Hopefully, AIG will print his name in the video description next time he appears.
Totally agree!!
The bats are still bats. Why is that hard for some to understand?
I like your new associate, Kevin Hacksaw. Please put his name in the video description next time he hosts. I really appreciate his focus on presenting the Gospel.
Yeah, Kevin Hacksaw did a really good job!
Speciation does not mean bats would become non bats. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
@@mattbrook-lee7732 give it up, dude. We don't fall for the same lies that you guys have.
@@mattbrook-lee7732 that's just not true. Land animals allegedly came from sea animals right? Then birds eventually grew wings according to your theory etc., etc.
@RobertA-oi6hw what you are talking about here is major evolutionary change that happened over millions of years. That doesn't mean every new species is a major event. Bats will produce bats. That is exactly what evolution predicts. But if 2 populations are geographically isolated they will develop different characteristics that favour their environment. Eventually becoming different species of bat. Just saying bats produce bats like its some kind of gotcha is the reason why creationists are accused of not properly understanding evolution
"Humanism is a religion." I agree 100%. And how about this one: "You can't legislate morality." SOMEBODY'S morality IS being legislated. Even a lack of morality is a type of morality.
There are about 15.77 Billion acres of habitable land on this planet. Enough for 15 billion people to have 1 acre of land per person. We are not overcrowded at all. Most people tend to live together in big cities so we don't even use all the land that we could. That number also does not count more land that we could make inhabitable if we wanted to. So, no, we are nowhere near overpopulated.
Exactly ..we could live on Ocean Island..and eat seaweed
@@Jay1bad1what exactly was your point?
Sarcasm?
Have you not evolved the capability of thinking or discernment?
Except not every area is equally habitable, most habitable areas include forests and natural parks we shouldn't demolish, and you need to build infrastructure from scratch in these areas. We also need significant area for agriculture.
@@katamas832 Yes and 1 acre of land per person allows for all of that because we do not use it all. We are not using it all now and not in the foreseeable future. Don't buy into the lie of overpopulation, it is simply not true.
@@findinggodswisdomFrom south africa. Just between us and the nearest city is 50km. And there is NO farms or people there. Grass and single trees. Some places 100km to nearest town. So yes... you are right. We are not overcrowded.
Great contents and great new addition to the staff. Every blessing!
thanks for all your hard work......god blesssssss
The only hard work that was done here was by the scientists doing all the research and publishing the papers...
The only hard work that was done here was by the scientists performing all the research and publishing the papers...
@@Nickleotideabsolutely correct
Reading books like Jeremiah, we see the practice of child sacrifice being carried out. I thought, "Though the world is bad, at least we're not that bad!". Then with horror I realised, that we are in fact worse, because our child sacrifice is called abortion and we sacrifice to the god of self. Thank you AIG. We need God's light more than ever to shine through you.
At least slaves got to breathe air.
I saw this article pop up and i just rolled my eyes. When I saw you guys cover it, I figured I'd watch. It was just as i thought, but you make a good point that it actually gives good example of the rapid speciation since the flood.
Exactly the speciation happens rapidly, that’s why we can see the changes in size, the evolutionists then assumes it can somehow with enough time change into a completely different genus or family, imaginary change.
@Jim-P that's wrong. Evolution does not claim one genus or family can change into a different one
@@mattbrook-lee7732 Evolutionist’s claim chickens descend from dinosaurs, that’s one animal to another.
@Jim-P it is not one genus to another which was your claim
Speciation happens. Evolutionary theory claims nonsense like reptiles being ancestral to birds, and land mammals to whales. Or how about single-celled organisms being ancestral to ALL fauna. That's a bold and unsubstantiated bunch of nonsense.
Quoting papers from 1999... We dint know how bat wings evolved? Yea that's enough brain cells destroyed today .. that took 4 min lol
RUclips must be slow to post comments and the accurate view count. I wish you guys would post to alt media like "roomble". That place needs to have more decent Christians to the mix.
I am listening for a second time the section on abortion. I found it to be one of the best conversations in favor of pro-life. It's so important to keep talking about the sanctity of human life. So sad to see that there are many people who are "okay" with the killing of innocent life. Thank you AIG.
3:45 I actually thought, "This girls got a halo! " But no, it's just her glasses..🙄
😂
Amen AIG 🙏✝️🕊️ love you guys and praying for you
I wonder if Bill Maher would be willing to remove himself from the 8 billion?
You are as bad as Bill Maher, having no respect for human life.
I know the answer... nope. They want all the rich people to live and the rest to die.
Why is it okay to kill an unborn child, but is a felony to kill an "unborn" eagle: i.e., to willfully destroy an eagle'egg?
Because the eagle doesn't belong to you.
@@lawrencerobinson9979 - The child does not belong to you, either.
Every person is made in the image of God. Every person belongs to God.
Welcome in the team, Kevin!
Bill is responsible for his knowledge. I pray he will will understand the extent of his peril before it is too late for him.
Another awesome episode!! Thank you guys!!! 🙏❤
I love these podcasts
"Are bats evolving in real time?"
...as opposed to the usual fake time?
Fake time: millions and billions and zillions of years
That's excellent 😂
yes fake time = billions of years
@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 mocking doesnt help convince.
@@HS-zk5nn You clearly don't want to understand how radiometric dating works, so what's the point?
Paivi Rasanen is a particular hero of mine. She is, I believe, a Medical Doctor who is also an elected official in the Finnish national Parliament. Her Lutheran Missionary Diocese is in pulpit and altar fellowship with my faith community the Lutheran Church -Missouri Synod. I know her Lutheran Bishop Paavola who also was dragged into court last time as well.
Her accusers will find her to be a redeemed daughter of Christ.
It may seem at times like the Lutherans are all lost; but it is not so! May God continue to bless Dr. Rasanen as she is dragged before "kings and rulers". That she may draw strength from God's Word.
Thank you for highlighting the struggle.
Kings and rulers? LOL
God made the universe and all that’s in it all life on earth is made from the earth so we are going to have a connection.
29:12 well just as you said that humans and neanderthals where still able to lay together, I think the idea is that they just simply got bread into the gene pool rather than dying off.
Which I mean doesnt make them seem all that different?
Humans are same species yet different sizes.
And skin tones and facial features but still all human kind!
Humans are in fact the same species! Our ape ancestors also had variation in sizes too!
I'm still waiting for the intelligent design explanation of why human males have mammary glands and nipples.
"The real explanation lies in prenatal development: "Men have nipples because humans are created embryonically as hermaphrodites. Genetically, this is easier than forming the characteristics of the sex individually and determining them with your own genes."
Because we come from the same mother and our bodies develop the same basic building blocks initially and then the hormones come more into play and make some parts go one way or another.
How would you look without them?!!
@@vinipyx2369 Okay, you're giving me an explanation that has nothing to do with intelligent design. I'm really only interested in an explanation from the view point of intelligent design.
@@franciscodelgado6884 I'll point out that not all mammalian males have mammary glands and nipples. If we didn't have them, we would look like mammalian males who don't have mammary glands or nipples. My question was why do humans (and all primates for that matter) have them, from the viewpoint of intelligent design.
Bats evolving into wombats. Now that would be news!
😂
And Christian’s evolving into Muslims would be news too!
Relax here! Homeschooling is awesome, and so is Christian school. So can public school be. I'm a Bible-believing Christian, and I sent my kids to public school. It was a fabulous school and very Christian-supportive. Please relax and keep an open mind.
Not everyone can afford private school of any kind… nor stay home to educate our kids. We CAN stand up against woke indoctrination in their classrooms. We must read thoroughly every syllabus, SEE the class environment and BE INVOLVED. That’s what I do. ❤✝️
@@razark9 yeah, ok buddy. My kids don’t need drag queen story hour. They don’t need sexually explicit books in school libraries. They don’t need governmentally approved gender propaganda. I really don’t care what you think. They’re MY KIDS. ✌️
It is ok for them to be pro choice.... the problem i have is they are anti consequence as well. If you make a choice you have to face the consequences. You can't have your cake, eat it and not get fat.
Thanks for posting
I can post false information too… maybe I should start doing that
It's like walking into a kennel and seeing all kinds of different dogs and saying., oh look this is proof of evolution.
Not at all…
You can also look to Hawaii for an explanation of this as well. There are multi spider species that are centrally located in pockets of greenery surrounded by old lava, hardened.
So the bat evolved into a bat = proof of evolution 🤦♂️
Evolution refers to a change in allelic frequencies within a population. Please read a Biology textbook.
I think they have all gone bats!
So you don't understand anything about evolution, thus it must be wrong? Creationist brain power right there.
@@Censoredbyyourcult yeah you guys keep saying THAT just like I did for 28 years! (Yes I was a brainwashed idiot but I studied and realised evolution is false about 8 years ago)
Get saved buddy
@@davidcallaway7471 literally lol
People will stretch imagination in any way they can to avoid having to accept the God who created them.
Except Theists who believe God created them also accept Evolution. So it’s not about avoiding accepting God.
@@Tinesthia
Theist is an appropriate word in such cases.
So everyone doing the science you have religious problems with cannot have accepted god? None of them? And science is all about imagination now? Creationist dishonesty and propaganda never ceases to baffle me.
Creationists will stretch their imaginations in any way they can to avoid having to accept empirical science and maintain their beliefs in magic.
Sounds like adaptation to the environment the bats live in
AKA evolution.
13:37 also nitrogen is really usefull
Just like Charles Darwin noticed in finches
You're cracking me up, what a con.
Parakeet
All Darwin seen was finches with different size beaks. That's not evolution.
@@albertsmith6717Different shapes and sizes. That is Evolution.
@katamas832 You have a different size and shape of ear than anyone else on the planet. There are 240 species of finches that have different sizes and shapes of beaks. What are your ears evolving into and what are the finches beaks evolving into?
Praise the Lord. Keep fighting the good fight. This ministry is blessing.
I like how some christian channels use clickbait even though its a dishonest tactic. Idk something about it doesnt sit right with me. This channel and living waters are very guilty of this.
But hey, I guess its being used for good at the end of the day.
@@speciesspeciate6429 Eh I didnt say that.
Nothing is perfect, and I will never say that I like these channels more than channels that do their stuff in an honest way.
Im also starting to suspect you either spend way too much time on these youtube channels or youre a bot. Do you have a life dude?
@@speciesspeciate6429 you misrepresented what I said. I just said I dont like it but I suppose it may be a necessary evil.
Isn't it funny how they still can't find the land creature the bat evolved from?
Geez, Don’t take the Bible literally! it’s allegorical and mystical. If you read it literally you have to jump through all kinds of hoops.
I see it the other way. Have you ever honestly challenged what you have been taught?
Much of it is meant to be taken literally .some if it is poetical
Would Answers look at “535 Krakatoa” information and report on it
Simple question from an Atheist: Does God exist, and can you prove it?
Can you prove that someone built the house you live in?
I didn't mean for this question to be disrespectful in any way, but it is a logical question.
We can prove his existence by pointing to creation itself
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n What creation is that?
@@JESUSisLORD24151 That is the most ridiculous question, I have ever heard. The landlords father built the house I live in, I was there when he was building it.
NOW.....let's get to you.
Were you there when they crucified Jesus?
Were you present when he raised the dead, and healed the sick?
I thought not!
So once again, I ask the question:
Does God exist, and can you prove it?
Even the ones who chose life are walking around with guilt for just considering abortion. My prayer is for healing from those thoughts. Let Jesus heal your mind of the guilt.
@albusdumbledore219 God actually doesn't think killing the unborn is murder. In fact, God actively partook in abortions himself.
@albusdumbledore219”So tiny.” In the USA every year, it’s about 35,000 ectopic pregnancies per year, with 100% fetal deaths and a significant percentage of maternal deaths. An ectopic pregnancy CANNOT SURVIVE to viability, much less full term. It will be removed by abortion, or at the mother’s autopsy. That’s the choice.
About one a day in every state, on the average. No chance of fetal survival. This sucks, but how should grownups deal with this?
There’s other, less certain but still risky pregnancies that doom the fetus and endanger the mother.
Praying for a miracle won’t change the ultrasound. Give your daughter a nice church funeral, and look after the grandchildren.
Evolutionists are on the same playing field as flat earthers.
That's actually a fantastic comparison. A lot of the way that flat earther's justify their views is by shifting definitions and making "experiments" in such a way to bolster their already held views rather than making a fair experiment.
For example flat earthers with the table thing, showing how on a flat surface something can go "under the horizon"
When they do this "experiment" they put the camera slightly below the table which creates a similar effect to something going under the horizon, but obviously, that's not how things work.
Evolutionists do similar things.
It's actually creationists, with most Flat Earther being young Earth creationists.
@@katamas832 Yeah and the number of people drowning by falling into a pool looks correlated to the number of films Nicolas cage appeared in.
While this correlation obviously has more reason for it, it still doesnt disprove the point made.
Flat earthers might use their faith partially to justify their false belief, but they still use the same kinds of flimsy evidence aside from that to further justify it that evolutionists use.
Same tricks.
@speciesspeciate6429 What evolution events have you witnessed in real life?
@@speciesspeciate6429
lol. It is absolutely not. That is the point. Do some research my friend.
What were pre- and mid-bats?
Murder is so bad in god’s eyes that he committed it over and over and over again.
He also lets it happen over and over and over again 🤦🏻♂️
God does let murder happen over and over again. It's called free will. That doesn't make it ok. God judges murderers and they likely go to hell of unrepentant, but you atheists don't like that idea either. Atheism allows for murder with no punishment whatsoever. Atheism allows for any morality or no morality whatsoever. If Man is ontologically equal to animals, murder isn't even wrong. Chimps gotta chimp.
You say that but who is the one doing the murdering when God told us not to do it?
You are acting like murder isn't a choice when it is.
@@justiceiria869 god
@@RealHooksy you mean the one who gave us life in the first place? he gains nothing from murder.
@@justiceiria869 why did he do it then?
Endosymbiosis has been directly observed in nature. FYI.
30 minutes of stupid.
Whenever I hear or read "evolution in action," ... I don't ask, I laugh. 😆
Here we go again! Another fact free, science free episode from the non scientists who don’t know anything.
So, since you disapprove of so many of these videos from this particular organization.....why do you keep watching them? 🤔
@@taylorwatson-phillips9449 because these bozos want this nonsense taught in schools. They are dangerous
@@taylorwatson-phillips9449 In the echo chambers of young earth creationist RUclips sites, don’t you think the occasional contrarian point of view is a good idea? Plus, it’s often hilarious to hear the “arguments” made here.
There are enough contrary comments to anything Christian related as it is, more isn't necessary but if that's how you get your kicks then at least you're visiting these videos and not atheist ones.
@@taylorwatson-phillips9449 Actually, 99% of the videos I watch are what you call “atheist”. Otherwise known by sensible people as science videos. And by the way, if you ask me, more comments explaining the logical fallacies and outright lies and dissembling by fundamentalist non-scientists is a good thing.
Home school. My wife and I home educated our nine children over 30 years with the religious exemption in Virginia.
Not sure how you square lying about science and still think your God who has told you lying is a sin is ok with that .
Lying is wrong, but lying for Jesus appears to be alright. An ends justify the means mindset.
Doesn't the Bible mention 'if a man ravish a woman with child and she loses the child, the man is to be stoned' i can't remember the exact wording.
Yes, we must keep the 6th commandment, but also the 4th to keep the 7th day Sabbath holy.
God's word is superior to the word of man. God isn't intimidated by the secular theories in this world.
Nobody can "get rid of God."
Can you even demonstrate that a god exists?
Your imaginary friend may not be intimidated, but it's beyond obvious that the creationist community is. That's why you have to fearmonger and mislead about science near constantly.
@@speciesspeciate6429 under inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16,17)
@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 we demonstrate God to you every day by being patient with you. Personally, I would have given up talking to you by now. You seem hopeless. However, God keeps prompting me to talk to you knuckleheads. So here I am.
@@speciesspeciate6429 ikr. 😂😂😂 You guys are too funny
Does the first woman who spoke actually believe things have been here for “ millions “ of yrs or is she just referring to what evolutionists believe?
Nothing that can't be explained by evolution.
21:41 at least they're honest, defining what they mean by 'reproductive care' 😢
I like your set
I usually use the eyes in discussing anti-evolution, but it does take time to do so. This morning, a cockleburr came to my mind. These are about marble size egg shaped seed pods. They are covered with short thorns, each with a sharp but hooked point. These points are designed to attach to anything furry walking by and brushing the bush, thus spreading seeds to new territory. How did a seed pod develop those thorns to do that?
Evolution through natural selection. There is nothing mystewrious about it. Plants produce seeds and there is variation in those seeds. Soem plants produced slightly burred seeds. These were more successful in propagating themselves, and grew into plants that produced simialr seeds. Repeat this process many times; they become more burred over time as natural selection favours burred over non-burred - and you end up with what you see today. Why do you think eyes pose a problem? They don't. Evolution explains eyes very well...inclouding their flaws.
@@richardgregory3684 Yeah, like the pointed burrs started out as little bumps but grew to hooked points? Your faith in that when there is not one visible mutation to a new species. Just think, if we don;t know where the seed came from in the first place, and then it must have a force of life to change. But at first, the seed pod would not have a fully hooked bur coating to reproduce itself itself. But as usual, you'll fail to see the impossibility you propose. I'm outa here.
Just because you do not understand something, does not make it magic...😂
@@davidl.williams7366 _Yeah, like the pointed burrs started out as little bumps but grew to hooked points_
Yes.
3:20 I feel like this is a solid logical point for any time they call speciation "evolution"
Like, this didnt happen over millions of years though. It happened over a few generations at most.
So this shows that indeed rapid speciation can happen. Which is a point towards creationism not evolution.
_Which is a point towards creationism not evolution_
Why?
Wrong, buddy. Speciation is caused by reproductive barriers being formed, which are prompted by evolutionary changes in the genome and environmental stimuli. More rapid speciation events can occur, especially in examples of sympatric speciation like this one. Moreover, parallel evolution implies that there is a powerful selective pressure that increases evolutionary rates, hence allowing speciation events to occur easily. Again, all of this supports evolution. Creationism still remains pseudoscientific drivel.
@@richardgregory3684 did you not watch the video?
@@speciesspeciate6429 Yeah so we've always known that this is capable of happening.
Why is it considered news? Or proof?
Im just asking you to think logically here.
We see speciation occur quickly, mutation rate, change of environment, I dont care what...
This at the very least means that say that speciation happened quickly after the animals got off the arc would be a logical thing to happen.
If you of course believe the whole arc thing happened, and I dont expect you to.
My point is this should at least be satisfying proof that evolution is not direct evidence against that.
Amongst other things, but that is the point being made here.
@@speciesspeciate6429 There is no "microevolution" or "macroevolution", only evolution. Macroevolution is a term made up by creationists who are unable to deny that living things do indeed change down generations but still want to deny evolution. It's like denying water isn;t really wet, just a little bit wet, but not ebough to be called wet.
13:18 to us, that is
13:53 MOLECULES S DESIGN
I believe the spirits of God has directed the creation of all kinds, culminating in humanity. I also think God has allowed human kind to peer into this creation in certain ways. To us this creation looks like a physical sediment which we reconstruct into "prehistory", which is the view of this process from within time as we know and interpret it in modernity.
However, time is a thoroughly perspectival thing, so we can't project that only some sort of ultimate reality of how things "really are". What we see there is indeed analogous to something real, but our reconstruction is bound to be coloured massively by our assumptions, which might not hold, and probably doesn't.
My point is that macro evolution is indeed a real thing, but it is God's work (and to some extent, as humanity comes to be, a participation with us and God, but always by His grace). It didn't necessarily take place within time either, that is purely our scientific assumptions speaking. Our minds are almost incapable of escaping thinking within time and processes within time, so what ever truth we perceive, we must have it projected onto a story through time.
Only in rare moments to we glipse eternity, and when trying to talk about it, invariabley use time to illustrate.
What's your biblical reasoning or evidence to state that animals didn't eat each other before? Animals were designed to eat other certain animals.
A new cell means a new seed. And, everyone know the next, just to remind us, the scientists. Need actually a feedback here, from the experts only, like Answers in Genesis.
Two chapters of Darwins evolution theory book are dedicated to..... disregard the theory if it could not be proven as thruth...... WHY do unbelievers of Creation continue with this???
Because they are fools, they deny God, who is the foundation of all truth. Therefore anything they come up with will inherently have flawed logic.
As long as they deny God, they will delude themselves, stretch their imagination as far away from reality as possible so that they can believe their own lies.
And yet, this changes nothing because. The truth will still remain the truth.
@@justiceiria869Does that help you sleep at night? Thinking that people don't genuinely disagree with you, and are deluded?
Because Evolutioniary theory is true.
Still pushing the same old dishonest false dilemma. You can definitely accept the astronomical amount of science saying evolution is an undeniable fact AND still be a christian who thinks your imaginary friend used these undeniable natural processes as tools of creation.
@@justiceiria869 Normal people and bible thumpers describe ''fools'' differently. You describe a fool as someone who doesn't believe nonsensical stuff for no reason. Normal people describe it as the exact opposite. ''They deny god'' not necessarily. And yet there's absolutely nothing you can demonstrate to be true. You believe it is, and denigrate peoplew who does not as '' lost fools that love their sins'' and such. Everthing else in your comment is just ironic.
13:12 yes it can. By chemical reactions.
I have a theory to the word species. A used term to make it seem that there are a lot of different animals. The reality is it should stop at families.
Species is used to define the largest group of organisms that can secually reproduce and produce fertile offpspring. If we stopped at families, there would be no taxonomic different between a human and a gorilla or orang-utan. lol
@@richardgregory3684 wrong. That iis what you decided. We are not of the same family. That is what evolution tries. Evolution fails miserably at every corner. You wanting it to be true... does not make it true. Lies are never true no matter how mich you preach them.
@@mizmera Biologically we are hominidae. What you're doign is like trying to deny humans are mammals. lol
@@richardgregory3684 wrong. If yoi cannot understand the difference between a monkey and a human... that is your problem. Not mine.
@@mizmeraIt's not not understanding the difference, but simply highlighting the similarity.
I love commenting on stories that state millions of years to ask them to explain it using the true young earth age of 6000 - 8000 years old.
Honest question. Do you really think that the age of the earth is in the 1000’s of years?
These people have no idea what evolution is so please ignore them for God's sake.
If bats started to speak, then and only then, you can talk about evolution. Just as in humans starting to grow gills to breathe underwater.
You could have just said you don't understand how evolution works.
What? We and everything evolvesi in reaction to their environment.. In real time. Very little environmental change as opposed to rapid environmental change....Scientists?
How funny the speaker discussing Algae and say she doesn't know what Day god made it 😂😂😂😂. Algae is confusing this creationist because Algae really function almost like a plant but still animals and living both on land and sea 😂😂😂😂😂 a comedy skit
Love that!!! What God's position on it (abortion) is. 🙏🥰
Your god is pro-abortion when the woman is thought to have committed adultery. Read Numbers.
The bible says abortion is just fine if it's performed on pregnant women, even against their consent.
19:38 if i tried to measure your iq (which is an outdated idea), you would... somehow score about 0 (based on traditional tests)
Even with "freedom of religion" in America, we will soon face what Finland is facing.
By every conceivable measure, Finland is a better place to live than America.
@@richardgregory3684 Even if I granted that, without religious liberty...
@@TickedOffPriest Finland has religious liberty. Are you referring to the Lutheran bishop... *who was found not guilty* ?
@@richardgregory3684 If you stand trial for it, you do not have freedom to do so.
@@TickedOffPriest Religious liberty is not the same as carte blanche to do and say whatever you like and then label it your religious freedom to do so.
“Staying on the side of Truth” instead of “flimsy evidence and bad assumptions “ thanks to you
Translated: ''Having evidence and doing science is bad, and it's just assumptions anyway because I said so, but my book that we cannot put to the test must be true no matter what''
I love the atheist point of view on abortions everyone should be honest with themselves who support this just like that…I think honest will start to help people change.
I'm still waiting for creationists to show any level of honesty. It seems to me their entire community is incapable of exhibiting it.
They are not tolerate of the truth in public education
How many combinations on 52 cards?
8×10^67
That's 8 with 67 zeros.
Imagine the factorial on 3.2 billion base pairs in DNA, neatly arraing themselfs. The number is so great it cannot even be comprehended.
By random chance?
That would take an unreasonable leap of faith.
Except it is not "random chance". And ironically....you point out that a particular set of 52 cards is highly unlikely. Yet they happen all over thre world, daily!
@@richardgregory3684 ...yes, but cards do not breathe, and replicate.
Any kind of positive DNA change has never been proven. Turning gene expression on/off is not additive.
Randomness cannot make anything predictably useful. The theory of Evolution is just wishful thinking, just another religion..
Your cards analogy just goes to show that improbable things happen all the time. Kind of shoots you in the foot really
@@richardgregory3684
The ordering of amino acids in proteins or nucleotides as molecules in abiogenesis would be random. You can't select for a molecule that is not living. Natural selection doesn't work on random assortments of molecules.
And you're just wrong: 52 cards have probably NEVER assorted themselves in the same sequence order, no matter how many shufflings of decks of cards have been done on earth.
Government and caring go together?
19:15 yes, but if abortion is what you said, THEN SO IS WASHIng your hands AND CHEMOTHERAPYA
Are Great Danes and Chihuahuas evolved wolves?
yes
@@richardgregory3684 So why are they all classed as canines?
@@albertdepeal9658 Because they are all part of the _canidae_ or canine family - which includes domestic gogs, wolves, foxes, jackals, coyotes, dingoes etc. Family is two taxonomic ranks above species. Wolves and dogs are essentially the same species; once thought to be separate _canis lupus_ and _canis familiaris_, the domestic dog is now _canis lupus familaris_ to recognise this. Wolves and domestic dogs can interbreed and produce fertile offspring.
@@richardgregory3684 All still in the same family or kind. No evolution to new kinds here.
@@albertdepeal9658 And if your argument hinges on not leaving a kind, then you shouldn't find it too difficult to define a kind for us, Albert.
Actually, they know but they don’t care.
Moth "evolution"
Scientist on the BBC in the 70's: consequent to the Clean Air Act 1956 the bark of the plane trees became lighter, thus turning the tables on the vulnerability of the lighter moth and darker moth to predators, eventually the lighter ones becoming more prolific. Proof of evolution.
My question: what is the lighter moth evolving into? Answer: it isn't. It's a moth. It's still 'just' a moth.
OK, so you don;t know what evolution is, because you appear to think it is limitted to speciation. In actuality, evolution is a change in heritable characteristics in a population. The moths are evolving.
The British peppered moths went from lighter colored to darker color back to lighter colored due to the air pollution in the area changing the color of the bark on the trees. The moths that were more in synch with the bark were less susceptible to predation than the ones that contrasted more. This caused a larger number of the in-synch color variation to survive. The fact that the numbers of the lighter colored moths rebounded due to air quality improving should show that the moths never “evolved”. One merely had a larger number survive due to the beneficial color/shade. This would be the same as the selective breeding dogs or cats of one color or another. You still have the same thing you started with, just a different color. Evolutionists are so desperate to prove their “theory” that they will twist anything and everything they can to make things come out “right”…
@@kirkstickney7394 Ironically, you have just described evolution quite well. Moth colouration changed because of an environmental change that caused lighter moths to get eaten, whilst darker ones did not and went on to reproduce darker moths...and then this trend reversed as their environment changed again, and favoured lighter over darker. Evolution through natural selection in a nutshell! You seem to think that evolution is exclusively speciation. It isn;t. _You still have the same thing you started with, just a different color_ If it's a different colour, it's not the same thing. lol
@@richardgregory3684 I don't think anyone's denying that over generations certain characteristics will become dominant and species can change. It's the crossing over into a completely different species altogether that I don't think there's evidence for.
Evolution is a fact, I don’t know why religion needs to argue it. Even if it was somehow proven to not be the case, that doesn’t prove a god, let alone the Christian one..
@Oskyosky2009 evolution is fact you say? Did you know that the termites digestive system cannot process wood? There are tiny creatures called protists that live in the stomach of the termite that process the wood and the termite processes that. One cannot live without the other. Which one evolved first? What came first the veins in our bodies, the blood in our veins, or the heart to pump the blood? If evolution is small changes then they couldn't all evolve at the same time.
Darwin says descent of man, when Bible says man is made by an ascended, loving, God.
@@razark9 the Naturalism belief is the only one taught at public tax dollar expense. Fields can align with other worldviews, yet all others are omitted.
Do you think science could take a no opinion approach? Go off of empirical data, and not invoking belief systems like Naturalism or creation in public schooling? Worldviews can establish premise, as we all have our views, but isn't science supposed to be science?
The mandatory narrative, due to not being empirically accurate, is actually inhibiting sciences from being published, as nothing is able to be written through a chronological approach.
Science should not matter if you are Christian, Naturalist, or any other faith. Empirical science is not (Naturalism) "Science".
@@razark9 Naturalism is a belief that nature made all things on it's own, because right now a belief is required to get life from nonliving matter. There are other philosophical principles that could and are applied, and results are achieved. Naturalism just has a bulk of the scientists because it is the exclusively taught belief in public school, with no other even getting a word in, so no one hears of others. Like how Islam is in schools in middle East because it is the only one allowed, so majority isn't saying much.
Science goes off empirical data, yes. Can you provide empirical data for Abiogenesis? You can change Abiogenesis from faith in a miracle that defies reality, to empirical science, by providing a single observation of nonlife becoming living.
Abiogenesis shows Naturalism is an unrealistic philosophy, as far as claim of science. Free to be believed and used towards science, but not science itself, and should not be publicly favored exclusively, as other beliefs need to be mentioned, or none, and just stick to science.
@@razark9 Naturalism is a belief. It requires faith. Things of Naturalism, like Big Bang, or Evolutionism are philosophy with no direct or exclusive empirical support.
@@razark9 my comments are not allowed through I think. Sorry man. Naturalism is a belief. A philosophy. Not science. Evolution is not science like buoyancy or anything. It is a worldview.
@@razark9 ok so Evolutionism is science. Has the start been observed? Cause currently all observations defy an Abiogenesis claim.
Naturalism, is an -ism, is the one trying to fuse with science, to make nature appear as the be all.
The study of nature is what science is based on, not belief in a life giving Nature that made all cosmology and etc.
Thanks again Answer in Genesis
They are all still bats right?
Why am i commenting? You wint stop?
21:43 😩
For one species to evolve into a different species is about as absurd as an eagle evolving into a fighter jet.
EDIT! This is merely SARCASM people. Not to be taken literally. Using the example of a "fighter jet" was only to emphasize the absurdity of transitional species. Now realizing we have young children (underdeveloped brains) responding to "Grown Up" talk, taking things way too literally.
thank you for show us your ignorance!!!
@@speciesspeciate6429 Yes, but they remain the same family. No one has ever witnessed a reptile evolving into a bird, a completely different family. Reptiles breed variations of reptiles and birds breed variations of birds.
@@luish1498 for show us your ignorance!!!''
Oh, I don't know. I don't think it's ignorant to believe an eagle could evolve into anything other a variation on the eagle theme. He just went a little overboard. Relax.
@@danielcristancho3524 you should look up to
Speciation: The Origin of New Species
nature
«an eagle could evolve into anything other a variation on the eagle theme. »
individuals dont evolve. populations do.
«an eagle evolving into a fighter jet»
this is stupid.
@@luish1498 ''individuals dont evolve. populations do.''
More Macroevolution slogans. NO, generations evolve, one creature at a time. Except it's NEVER BEEN EMPIRICALLY PROVEN. There is no empirical evidence that mutations can evolve new and genetically different body parts and organs so that a reptile could evolve into a bird over time. it's never been observed, demonstrated or repeated in experiment. Evolution never goes beyond species, which means they stay the same kind of animal. A different species of bat BUT STILL A BAT. Darwinian evolution is pure BS.
Doubt it....we are created beings ....
My son is 6 ' 4"
I'm short.
So? That's your evidence, you son is taller than you? There are many factors that determine someone's height. A child with two short parents is more likely to be short, but they can be tall. This is even more likely if only one parent is short. Genetics plays a big role, but there are things call dominant and recessive genes. It is not unusual for a recessive to express.
''we are created beings ....'' Evidence for this assertion?
I give up.
Bat kind 😂😂😂😂
CERN man made
Maybe you’re not aware but when you used the words “woke” this and woke that, it’s a racist dog whistle. Being Black, I understand the evolution of the word really well. There was a black singer who used the phrase in her song to “stay woke.” It kinda caught on in the Black community by some, but for many it was kind of a joke to say stay woke. Yes, it did carry a kind of wake up connotation but for many it was really not taking serious. Someone would say something that they cast as profound, and many times would follow up with stay woke. But, I promise you, most did not take it serious. I’m not sure exactly how, but I’m almost certain someone racist picked up on this usage and began to use it as negative, knowing the the association. Yes it did become more generally used against liberalism by FOX and other right wing orgs but when FOX first started using it, it def was a way to signal Blacks without explicitly stating it. The only thing I can think of that some hipster communicated this usage to them and they ran with, but it was really weird. Then, after Trump, Tucker and others got hold of it, it became stand usage. However, now it has somewhat evolved, but it started our racist. I think it would serve you better to stay away from these type of political dog whistles. No need to use them especially claiming to be followers of Christ. There is no way Jesus would we constantly bashing “the woke”😂. I think a lot of people really believe that Jesus is a right wing america loving God. Sorry, but they will hear Him say, I never knew you. The Pharisees used politics to crucify Christ. Lastly, this is the thing many miss: right wing or left wing it’s a world system that will pass away. If you are a friend of either side you’re enemy of God. My citizenship is in heaven and I just don’t understand how so many main goal is protecting their early group instead of waiting for Christs return. We can save either side. Stop using racist dig whistles and come out of the world. We are living in the last days for sure. The path is narrow which means most who will say lord lord are lost.
GO AIR FORCE!!