Mountains of Evidence for Evolution Still Not Enough for This Creationist | Erika and Jackson Wheat
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 июн 2024
- Original Episode Here: • Convert Us If You Can!...
A theist, Anthony, calls in to ask Erika and Jackson for the best evidence supporting evolutionary theory and common descent. The hosts present multiple convergent lines of evidence, including patterns in genetics, index fossils, and transitional fossils in human evolution. Anthony remains unconvinced, arguing the evidence relies on inference rather than direct observation. This leads to a lively discussion on the validity of historical science, whether humans are apes, and if creationists use special pleading by accepting some inferences but not others regarding common ancestry.
SUPPORT THE NETWORK
---------------------------------------------------
Patreon: / calltheline
Become a Channel Member:
SUPPORT PRODUCTION
---------------------------------------------------
Paypal: www.paypal.me/mratheist
Cashapp: cash.app/$jimmyasnow
Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls...
MORE LIVE SHOWS & CLIPS
---------------------------------------------------
/ @callthelinex
CONTACT US
---------------------------------------------------
contact@qnaline.com
HOSTS
---------------------------------------------------
Jimmy Snow: @JimmySnow
Matt Dillahunty: @SansDeity
Arden Hart: / theardenhart
Katy Montgomerie: @KatyMontgomerie
Forrest Valkai: @RenegadeScienceTeacher
Dr. Ben: @FamilyDrBen
Aron Ra: @AronRa
Shannon Q: @ShannonQ
John Gleason: @godlessengineer
Erika: @GutsickGibbon
Eve Was Framed: / eve_wasframed
Paulogia: @paulogia
Alyssa Ljub: @AlyssaLjub
Eric: @skepticsandscoundrels
Dr. Aaron Adair
ADDRESS
---------------------------------------------------
The Line
110 N Interstate 35
Suite 315-1027
Round Rock, TX 78681
United States
SHOWS ON THE LINE
---------------------------------------------------
Sundays: The Sunday Show
Monday: Skeptalk
Tuesday: Chewed Gum
Wednesday: The Hang Up
Thursday: The Trans Atlantic Call In Show (TACIS)
Friday: Debates and Bonus Shows!
Look out for “HOSTility” and “Cus I Wanna” any day, any time
#CallTheLine 
Развлечения
![Megan Thee Stallion - Otaku Hot Girl [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/USxIYOaIpig/mqdefault.jpg)
Theist declares he is not an expert on evolution but still thinks he knows more than scientists on the subject.
It's so strange. I mean I hear it and then just hear the name Darwin ad nauseum. So despite the fact this guy did exceptionally poorly he is far superior to many, even most people with questions on the subject.
He did this just by getting past Darwin and asking questions no matter how bad that are at least modern in their applicability.
Today Anthony killed his god, may it rest in peace.
I've stopped having those conversations. Apparently I'm a part of "big science".
What does he mean we've never seen one species evolve instantly into another. We observe it everyday in the US. Everyday humans give birth to unsightly creatures. They look like humans at birth, but as they grow their mutations become obvious, and they're easily identifiable as MAGA's. Clearly not human, barely even ape.
Well said
Telling 2 scientists that they're wrong on subjects that they're experts on is a bold move. 😵😵💫
The word "bold" is accurate, although I was thinking "arrogant" is a stronger fit.
Not smart but definitely bold lol
@@devilquill - agreed.
Their faces were priceless 😂
Not bold... Maybe stupid.
You can lead a creationist to water but you can't make them think.
You’d need that fella jepus to turn it into wine 🍷🤭🤭
But if you say the water is gods piss, they'll lap it up instantly
can't make them * drink *
@@yy3hhthey know that.
*whoosh*
Even if the science of evolution is wrong, it doesn't prove god.
And yet creationists keep thinking that it does.
But those satanic atheists invented evolution to trick people into thinking God isn't real.
It’s such a boring take too , I don’t know how to explain it , but just for them to keep slapping a sticker on “god did it” on everything they can’t understand instead of being curious and wanting to actually learn into it and think.
you can see why they dont like evolution though
if evolution is true then jesus turning up for original sin is then redundant
Speaking as a geneticist myself, Erika is SUCH a treat to watch. Infectiously enthusiastic, genuinely kind and of course full of brilliant examples, illustrations and reasoning. Keep up the good work, Gutsick!
“I’m gonna go hard on hominids!”
Classic.
Shame her voice is pretty annoying.
Dude, her explanation of genetics as her evidence was fantastic. I was blown away.
I mean she always amazes me but nice to know her peers are also impressed!
Agreed, she is brilliant
Gotta love it when they have a higher standard of evidence for reality than they have for mythology.
Exactly. They believe more in what goatherds knew 2,000 years ago than what scientists know now.
Boat loads of evidence, but still believes myths with non.
Can you be religious in any other way?
Its bias thats why
Anthony: "I want to see evolution happen in 5 minutes or else I don't accept it."
By Anthony's logic, we couldn't solve any murders unless we actually observed them being committed.
That is exactly what he said.
But talking snakes That makes sense!😂
He’d still not accept it.
He literally said he wanted to witness one animal giving birth to a different species. SMH
Here is it summed up
Scientist” here’s the evidence”
Creationist: “nuh uh. I’m right you’re wrong.”
Scientist” ok, well here how it works ____”
Creationist:”Didn’t listen. I know more than you and instead I’m just going to horribly argue in a circle nonesense about the subject I know nothing of.”
I was totally owned the other day by a creationist who declared "I guarantee I am far better read on the subject than you". Well that settles it then!
"Correct me if I'm wrong."
"You are completely wrong."
"NUH UH *plugs ears" LA LA LA LA"
You forgot the "But god tho..."
Creationists are always outmatched by Erika, but they can't accept that fact.
As a fully modern ape, I'm really glad she's on my side.
Ah but you're not 100% a chimpanzee
They don’t know enough to realize they don’t know anything.
Erika doesn't have any idea how the diversity of life arose.
It's also the smug racist superiority complex the religious are ingrained with.
Because to them, calling someone an ape is an insult, so the word has a derogatory connotation. And God-created humans are way better than anything they define as an ape, even other humans that have a different skin color or ideaology.
@JohnWinters-on8jr neither do you. And therefore you cannot just claim, I don't know, so God did it! For any claim, DATA fvckin' needed!
Love how creationists demand only the most hardline, rigorous data from Evolutionary theory, but Creation can be based on faith and the "either/or" fallacy and that's enough for them.
I've had one respond that creation is a religious claim therefore doesn't require evidence 😂
Because the bible.
And then they are presented with hardline, rigorous data and they STILL say, "Nuh uh!" And have the balls to call themselves pro-science.
a pillar of theism, accept anything that supports you and reject anything that refutes you.
As soon as he said “kind” and “evolutionist” we knew where he was getting most of his “research” from.
Aig
Those are basically red flag words when it comes to this becoming an honest or productive dialogue.
Those are great examples of "Creationist / Intelligent Design Proponent" apologetics, but there was a better one: When he was demanding evidence that one "kind" could evolve into a completely different "kind". But not through many incremental changes at the macroscopic level (aka species level) over hundreds of thousands of years - which is how evolution by natural selection works.
Instead he was demanding evidence that any given "kind" could produce offspring of a completely different "kind" - at the individual level. For example, one particular specimen giving birth to offspring specimen(s) of a different "kind". Which is absolutely not how evolution works, and nobody with any degree of scientific competence has ever claimed that evolution can do or has ever done this.
Using the terms "kind" and/or "evolutionist" indicate that he gets much of his "information" from deliberate bullshit merchants at "Answers in Genesis" or the obvious contradiction-in-terms which is the "Discovery Institute". But arguing that evolution should include one individual producing offspring of a different "kind" is far more telling: This is classic Kent Hovind - just about every video that clown has ever made on the subject of evolution includes this utterly idiotic claim. Which in "red flag" terms would be a gigantic flag the size of a football pitch, if not bigger.
😂 💯
Anthony is like if a blue fairy turned the Dunning Krueger effect into a real boy.
His nose must be a foot long by now
This argument is basically "Ok, you might have the fingerprints on the gun, and the gun shot a bullet that was found inside the victim's body, and there is a recording of the person having those fingerprints walking inside and then outside the crime's scene, the diary of that person stating they were going to kill the victim, but you haven't SEEN the crime happen so that's just your interpretation"
Brother, we have figured out what happened, it's a skill issue on your part you still haven't connected the dots
It's funny how creationists always ask for evidence for evolution but they need none for creationism.
How do you think people come to believe in creationism? Do you think they haven't been convinced somehow, or that convincing isn't necessary at all?
@@Conan_the_rastafarian childhood indoctrination
@@LHRPG_Official Incorrect. At the very least, over simplified. Personal accountability comes into play as an adult.
@@Conan_the_rastafarian Any adult that still believes this crazy s**t is the same as an adult that still believes in Santa Claus.
@@Conan_the_rastafarian NOT incorrect. Studies have shown that children between the ages of 3 and 14 are suseptable to being indoctrinated in religeon very easily. They are instructed, week in and week out to NOT QUESTION their parents and church leaders. Isolated from other viewpoints in society, they carry on into adulthood.
Wow this guy cant understand the difference between "we are 100% apes" & "we are 99% similar to Chimpanzees"...
Haven’t you heard that the 99% figure is not really true?
I was raised indoctrinated and for some reason this statement made more sense than anything! Thanks.
@@SeattleDinghyer I hope you've found your way out, if not please keep asking questions & don't be satisfied with a non answer :) Be truly sceptical
@@spicyhummus6266 oh yes, definitely out. Your comment though, hit different for some reason. 100 percent ape here signing out. :)
So, basically, Anthony can't believe evolution is real unless he gets to watch it happen, in real time, over the course of a few billion years.
I guess he doesn't believe in a million dollars either bcuz he'll never see that lol
Doesn’t have the same requirement for god though. Never heard a theist ask for god to create the world in real time before believing he created the world, hell never met a theist that saw Jesus irl before believing in him. And I am not talking about Jesus the latino landscaper.
@@pansepot1490 Ironically, they would scoff if an atheist said they wouldn't believe until god presented himself to them...
@@pansepot1490 Yeah, it's the standard "I'm just going to assume it was god unless you can give me step-by-step instructions for creating everything" argument. Which like... OK, but don't be surprised when people don't take you seriously.
Yet he's never met JeBuS, but he's a believer!😂
Sweet baby Bajebus, how much evidence does this guy need? Seriously, he has to ignore literal mountains of evidence just to protect his belief in his favorite mystical wizard. But there are plenty of people that accept evolution and keep their beliefs, so what's this guy's damage?
For me it depends on how much emotional investment someone has in a particular belief system. Given the multiple variants of Christianity this will mean different theists will have varying reactions to aspects of science.
@@martifingersastute observation, 100%.
Funny how the evolutionists are anti science…the science of archeology which supports the Bible as being at least historically accurate, therefore is trustworthy. By the way, evolutionists have a magical wizard as well. Time plus mutations turn pond scum into people.
He only needs to ask for one more piece of evidence than anyone will spend the time to provide and he’ll never have to change his beliefs.
Oh this is hilarious. Basically : "I accept all the evidence that proves the scientific theory of evolution is true, but I don't know any evidence for the thing my pastor told me evolution was supposed to be but no scientist has ever proposed. Can you give me the best evidence for the thing I made up to pretend I reject evolution?" 😂😂😂😂😂
The biggest problem I have with these people is that they want evidence for science, but god can just be magic. If at the very least god was Q from the Q Continuum there would be "something" to work with as Q had "limits", but "well, god just existed forever and has infinite power" is just bizarre. You can't do ANYTHING with that. You can answer any question with "well its just magic".
There isn't any scientific theory of evolution. That's because there aren't any naturalistic processes capable of producing the diversity of life.
@@taurculh69 I've always wondered what the limits of Q are. Lol, ty for maybe motivating me to look into it finally.
@MrWillheim There’s some interesting data about the nature (and by inference limits) of Q in the Voyager episode “Death Wish” and the second season of Picard.
@@joelpartee594 Ty, I need to rewatch Voyager anyways to tide me over til SNW releases.
“If we could just start by defining me as correct, then we can have a civil debate about why I’m better than you.”
It won’t matter what evidence is presented, and there was a mountain of it during this conversation, he won’t accept it. At every turn, when he asked for an example it was given and he still didn’t accept it.
His main argument seems to be, “Mommy I keep telling these mean biologists Jesus did it and they won’t believe me!” Every one of his arguments is instantly eviscerated by the biologists. Then he goes to well that a judgement call. Let’s see whose judgement are we going with here. The biologists are the guy that says god could fake evolution.
Who else is here after anthony's call with Matt yesterday?
I just watched it! Anthony is as thick as a cement block!
Yesterday he tries to destroy cosmology and today he tries to defeat biology; all done with a sick phone and a small brain..
It's hard not to be when he failed so fantastically yesterday. I had to see how today went. Also always good to hear from smart people about things I don't know.
Absolutely! I'm just upset I didn't make myself some popcorn before watching this video.
@@andymccracken4046 But in the smooth brained & delusional interpretations of all the theists who watched the calls with Matt & Erika, Anthony CRUSHED everybody! 🤩Anthony had all the highfalutin atheists whimpering in the fetal position BEGGING Anthony to stop his overwhelming onslaught of HOLY GHOST IRON AGE LOGIC! 😇
"I disagree"
Said the layman to the specialist.
There has to be a large degree of arrogance to say you disagree with someone who spend years studying a subject, when one hasn't done so.
"I find that hard to believe"..."I need to think about that"..."I'm not sure about that"...would show a degree of humility and intellectual honesty that I can respect as a fellow layman.
Sure Anthony may know more about evolution than I do, but he's not a peer of Erika and Jackson.
IMHO it would be more honest for him to say, "I don't want to accept your argument."
At this point it would be more honest if he just stuck his fingers in his ears and said "LALALALALA"
Yes, ironic how humility seems rare in Christian discourse.
Absolute smugness in their racist superiority. "I'm not an ape! I'm way better than an ape! An ape is what I call people who are beneath me by having a different skin color or who is not a Christian!"
Tons of scientific evidence for evolution & not one scrap of scientific evidence for creationism. That why science is taught in schools/colleges & universities.
You get education diplomas for science subjects but have not heard of one main stream educational diploma for creationism.
Theists would use Romans 1:19 and Genesis 1
Evidence for evolution is not evidence for evolution by means of blind and mindless processes.
"but were not 100% chimpanzees, so were not 100% apes" thats like saying were not 100% mammals because were not 100% cows
Literally 🤣
Damnit. I love how Anthony did try to solve the issue by holding the phone away. But he didn't realize he was raising his voice trying to accommodate for the distance lol.
Thinking that humans are somehow separate from nature and animals is the height of "look at me aren't I special" arrogance and it's so frustrating.
And frankly a bit hypocritical. They are coming off as arrogant, egotistical, and narcissistic displaying a "look at me aren't I special" attitude.
Doesn't Jesus talk about being meek, humble, loving, gentle, etcetera? Then again when you think about it, the bottom line of Christianity is all about saving yourself - keeping your own behind out of a place of eternal fiery torment.
@@discontinuedmodel232 Everyone likes to feel special. But these folks think they are so special, that they imagine the most powerful being and then think they're best buddies with it.
@@joeyssymank1035 dark matter 2525 has a video explaining how incredibly vast the universe is, and how insignificant our planet is among all the countless galaxy clusters full of countless galaxies full of countless stars with planets & moons orbiting them. Now factor in how insignificant one human is to planet Earth. But somehow whoever created the universe is interested in either welcoming you to eternal heaven, or sending you to eternal torture. What am I missing here? 🤔
Is this the same Anthony who said the entire world of science covers up the evidence for God? 😮
Yup, same guy. They specifically asked him to call in to this show and he did.
@@revanmal Wasn't he supposed to ask about the big bang?
@@bc2112320he asked that one on a different episode with Erika and Aaron, it went just as poorly as this one did.
Oh that's him!!! OMG I cannot understand what goes on in an indoctrinated mind when something is explained to them and they continue down their rabbit hole
"Correct me if I'm wrong."
"You're absolutely wrong."
No , I think you're wrong.
At one point he was like, "you're wrong and let me tell you how. Now, correct me if I'm wrong...."
🤦🏻♂️
What we don’t see is humans being formed from clay…
Or mud, or blood, or the Gods themselves.
Pick any random creation story, all have the same veracity.
So should i tell my wife I don’t need one of her ribs back?
Or women being created from a mans rib
His point about the dogs and wolves is the greatest illustration of Anthony’s myopic view.
To him, wolves are “fitter” to exist because they can exist outside of human cohabitation. This, amongst other things, reveals his pro-human bias in thinking that we aren’t a natural influence on the planet, when we certainly are.
Grey wolves are less fit than dogs to live on the planet right now, because their mode of living conflicts with the superior (that is to say, more profoundly affecting) environmental effects of human encroachment.
Dogs instead engaged in a symbiotic relationship with humans, and thus have no need for the skills or features wolves need to survive, and on top of that, flourish all the more than wolves can.
The dog is fitter, because its mode of survival enables it to proliferate better in the environment in which it finds itself.
Wolves do not do this quite as well.
Without human introspection, wolves might have gone the same way as all the other larger macro organisms that found themselves in proximity to humans.
Yeah there are maybe 250k gray wolves in the world but there are nearly 1 billion dogs. Dogs are definitely doing better.
Not to mention, if you leave dogs alone they will develop into feral packs and survive on their own.
I imagine mastiffs would be pretty fit to survive in nature
He keeps saying hold on hold on let me finish, a clear example of not listening but just wanting to talk.
Eh, that was probably the thing I agreed with Anthony most on (which isn't saying much).
Hosts on these shows have a tendency to give long verbose answers, and both hosts have their own points often leading in different directions. This is useful for getting ahead of callers that are just here to preach, but IMO hampers conversation with those actually willing to talk.
I thought Anthony was engaging with the points and questions of the hosts pretty well, if not accepting the logic, and he was also good at passing the conversation back to the hosts. There are _definitely_ callers that are just waiting for their turn to talk, or even take interruptions as evidence of censorship, and the hosts do have to be prepared for those callers, but I think this call was pretty good all around.
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but..."
"Yes, you are wrong."
"You are misinterpreting blahblahblah"
People like Anthony really do drive me crazy. His entire argument can basically be summed up as, “I don’t understand evolution, therefore it must not be true.“ And then, as soon as he gets the evidence that he asks for, he immediately discounts it.
These hosts put on a masterclass in explaining evidence for evolution. Absolutely amazing.
I am an athiest and I 100% agree with the caller's main point.
If an invisible all-powerful wizard with the power to create anything by mere force of will exists, it can create anything in any form. Okay. Great. Now...
Demonstrate that this wizatd exists.
I wouldn't give that much credit. You can make assumptions about the creator otherwise under theism where's your evidence that God wouldn't deceive you and just create you 10 seconds ago with memories of the past? Why give special credence to any specific theological standpoint?
@JustADudeGamer Hold on, he didn't say "if the wizard has the power, then he did this.", he said, "if the wizard has the power, than he could have done this."
It's very different. The first is an absolute statement about the world as it is, the other is an absolute statement of what could be. If space daddy were real, he also could have created a matrix and we are experiencing a simulation of his creation, doesn't mean we are.
@@noodlekeeper5150 My point is theism isn't the scapegoat the caller wants it to be. Either God can do anything, and that undermines religion and trust of reality, or he's constrained by some rules that make him good/truthful/consistent. In which case you can't just say God made things look old or evolved or give special pleading against the evidence.
Yes.. we will wait… and wait……
Jackson did an excellent job of flipping the script on the caller. The way he lead him step by step towards the unarguable conclusion that his creationist beliefs make absolutely no sense.
I'm trying to imagine what Kent Hovind would say to all of that, he'd probably say, "well dogs only make dogs, and a dog will never make an elephant. Therefore, Jeebus"
Erika is a treasure as an educator. I once tried to be one but my forte is a different one. Though I do get to deal with the best of the best in labs I also get to deal with students and that has been a treat for me as well since they only get as far as my labs by actually being the best of the best.
I did try teaching as a professor for a while, that was a disaster. Raising two kids from age 1 and 2 you'd think I'd have a lot of patience but it turned out that I only have patience for people willing to learn and some of those students were not in that category but more like in the category of "reality is irrelevant, this is my "truth" and you should be ashamed for not accepting that everyone gets to have their own truth as an opinion".
Oh and I'll never, ever work with Americans again, highly educated and great at what they do they are no different than those students. Not willing to learn at all they have their "truth" and what the experiments show is something that they will try to reinterpret to fit their "truth" or discredit in any way they can. It's a damn shame but the US academia is not one we should ever collaborate with until that is fixed.
That's why every discovery is done elsewhere these days and the US helps with production, like the mRNA vaccine. In the US politics rule academia. Right now apparently Israeli lab results should be thrown out and studies discarded only because of where, and by whom they are conducted.
We're supposed to be above this but in the US, you are not and it's a DAMN shame.
We fat, stupid, and arrogant because we're the greatest country in the world! 🙄
"I don't know enough about this, but you two experts are wrong."
-this guy
"one hundred years of research makes no sense to me" but a magical being snapping their fingers and making an entire universe appear out of basically nowhere makes perfect sense?
"there is no scientific empirical way to verify this", what, you mean, like for your GOD? Wow.
Meanwhile the standard secular school text book:
an entire universe appears out of literally nothing.
Why do you deny the basic consensus?
There is no mention of fingers, snapping, or entire universe appearing out of nowhere in the Genesis. I don't speak for creationists. Bible describes God creating things by speaking. It all exists because of the Word, and you lot are going to disprove that by using words? Genius.
@@tulisotilas Finger snapping is metaphorical for taking a single action. There's no practical difference in a snap or a word, so moot point. Also you're a liar. You've never seen a modern textbook that says the universe came from nothing.
“All science has to be wrong for you to be right.”
Everything the caller accuses "evolutionists" of doing is exactly what Creationists do, whether that be making judgements based in inference, intuition, or interpretation. If the caller distrusts evolutionary theory based on these criteria, then he should just stop believing in god by his own standard.
You are making a lot of assumptions in expecting people like Anthony to have intellectual integrity and honesty.
You can’t teach an idiot logic, just like you can’t teach a cat to fly
Two thumbs up 👍 👍
“I want evidence for evolution, but don’t use evidence for evolution.” Seriously, the request to “not use prior data” is ridiculous.
The hilarious thing though is that... you still don't need to use evolutionary science as evidence to showcase that evolution is infinitely more likely than it not being real. We can and have to look at literally everything manmade in the last 2000 years and we have if not evidence strong indications of evolution, which is why Darwin wrote down his thoughts. He wasn't the first ones to have 'em and we have since then learned so much more than what Darwin could even imagine but... what made Darwin special is simply that he wrote down what folks already knew to be the case, but hadn't thought of it from a scientific sense since before the Enlightenment period ... there was no science, only natural philosophy which whilst similar still had significant philosophical differences, especially in regards to consensus and record keeping.
We don't need evidence to know that evolution is more logical and likely to be true, simply because this has been an accepted reality for literally thousands of years. Prior to Darwin though, we just didn't have a name or established record keeping of it.
Mountains of physical evidence vs "i have these ideas based on this book"
Yet they accept the latter with zero evidence
well Anthony doesn’t think evolution is real! You know what that means! We have to throw the whole theory out🙄
Seriously why do these people think they can debunk evolution? If they really could, why not submit their findings to the Nobel committee, collect their prize and money, and become the most famous person in the world
And quit using your religious word "kind" when referring to things in this conversation.
Kind is fine to talk about as long as (as explained in this video) you accept humans and chimps as one kind. There’s no way around it, and once that is understood the whole “humans are not animals” myth is already dead, so there’s nothing left for creationists to stand for.
Nothing worse than an obtuse creationist arguing with EXPERTS on a subject they know NOTHING about... nor willing to learn about
I love listening to smart people talking about the thing they know about.
This guy again? 🙄
Inference from evidence isn't convincing, but magic is? Got it!
What is observable and repeatable about creation?
🎯
I think it's good. They really got into the weeds about specifics of evolution that the caller is probably more familiar with than I am and I can see how they dismantle his complaints.
What is observable and repeatable about creation?
1. Read a Bible then go look at a tree. Repeat.
2. Go to a junkyard after a tornado. Observe the absence of airplanes. Repeat.
Checkmate atheists.
Poor Anthony always brings a nerf bat to a knife fight.
You mean he brings a coughing baby to a hydrogen bomb fight 😂
WRONG. A Nerf Bat can dish out a little pain. He's bringing the threat of a Nerf Bat that he is thinking about purchasing one day. ;-)
What's really frustrating is that Anthony isn't even on the proper level to have this conversation. His issue with the inference really is just "sure all of this data objectively proves that evolution is at least FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES true, but hey a trickster god could have just made it so to PRETEND evolution is real, and you can't disprove that idea so nanananana I wiiinn"
It's the ultimate cop-out position, and the quip about "how do you know the universe wasn't created five minutes ago" exposes it perfectly. Because that's the same level of falsifiability, and it is objectively useless to argue on those terms, because nothing we could possibly arrive at means anything. Sure if we assume any old shit can happen, then any old shit can happen. Where are we going? Nowhere. It's just pathetic that anyone believes god is even worth believing in when this is the best he has going for him.
That was a massacre, sorry Anthony, you got smashed
Did Anthony just argue that the police cant use evidence of a crime that has already happened?
I lost it when the creationist said "If I'm not mistaken..." and then immediately proceeded to say something wrong 😂
It's funny cause all these examples of evolution were also predicted by the model. Where with theism, they have to shoehorn in some explanation to explain those examples away, or say that god could have done it just like that cause god can do anything...
The nested hierarchies is such a good example of this, if evolution is true, this is the only thing we would expect to see, and that all dna and phylogenetics will corelate with the hierarchy.
it also predicted the existence of unknown animals that have very specific features because of that hierarchy and we find them where they would have had to have lived in the right geological time with the exact traits they would have needed to have to be a transitional species.
but, ya know, if god is real, there is no 1 thing we could expect, because it's an unfixed goalpost, it makes no actual predictions that enable it to be falsified, and it can just change its story to fit the evidence.
Quit denying reality, Anthony.
I wonder why these science deniers don't debate Scientist on evolution instead of phoning in an atheist talk show. A lot of scientists are religious themselves. Trying to debunk evolution won't debunk atheism.
I’m not very familiar with Jackson, but Erika IS a scientist. She’s a paleoanthropologist and current PHD candidate. He DID “debate” a scientist on evolution, that’s what makes his entire persona so arrogant and off putting cuz he has no idea how ignorant he sounds. I don’t know how Erika keeps her cool w callers like this tbh. It’d be like me, a woman who knows nothing about auto mechanics, arguing with a mechanic about what’s actually wrong w my car… “just because YOU think it’s the transmission doesn’t mean you’re right, this one other mechanic told me it could be gremlins inside the engine, and I like that possibility better”…it’s incredibly arrogant and pretty moronic to be completely honest.
I genuinely think Francis Collins if he watched this would be like ‘what a moron ! OK - here are the 43 reasons you’re wrong’
They are scientists....
Thankfully erika IS a scientist. So even in their cowardice, science deniers can't get away from being debunked in humiliating manner
@@sarahchristine2345the analogy needs some work.
It's not "this one other mechanic" it's more like "this dude who's really wants to sell snake oil says there's gremlins in my car, and to buy his snake oil and pour it into the gas tank to flush them out" or smth like that
"Who's more fit to survive, a chihuahua or a grey wolf"
In a city? In the house of an old lady? Animal control is gonna kill that wolf in minutes. Chihuahua are perfectly fit for their environment XD
Also recent research is revealing that dogs/cats are becoming even more fit for surviving & thriving in a human dominated environment by figuring out how to better manipulate/integrate with humans - like playing off our emotions for more food & better treatment - and adjusting their behavior accordingly.
I could listen to Erika speak all day! She is an absolutely brilliant woman!
The first question you must ask of any science-denier: "What specific evidence would you need to see in order to change your mind?"
If the answer is not very good, there is a high probability that the conversation will go nowhere.
Creationists make the fundamental mistake of thinking that "God did it" is an explanation in competition with actual scientific findings.
If one does not accept common descent, where does one suppose new animal forms come from? Is the alternative "explanation" to evolution theory that, rather than forming gradually, from already-existent components, via natural forces - some forms of life appear suddenly, from nothingness, via magic?
Sometimes I like to watch Erika just to remind myself how goddamn dumb I really am.
"I won't believe it unless I see it."
So you better open the jails and let all the prisoners free. A huge number of crimes don't have witnesses. If this "I need to see it" standard reigns, then unless you can see the murderer do it, you are saying it is impossible to determine who did and we shouldn't charge anybody.
You don't get to have it both ways.
Evolution does not have an agent. This analogy thus fails. We are able to trace crimes to specific agents, which have a corporal body. Therefore we can jail criminals without direct line of sight when the criminal act happened.
Challenging the base reality of "how the world is" is not as simple as observing it. Surely evolution is a simpler solution. We can stop at that.
We are letting shop looters just be not chargeable with anything even with direct evidence and witnesses. We have worse than "I need to see it" standard, and it is called "I don't want to see it".
He asks not to see evidence as we understand, but a point of view of God, which in his theology he dies at the very moment he gets to see the evidence that he could accept.
Coming from last vid to hear. I already seen this live , but this is golden even the second time
Thanks for this. I'm a recovering YEC, and these conversations are so helpful.
"I get what you are saying, but God though"
It's fascinating that creationists never complain that there is no contemporary observable evidence for anything being created by a god
As a geologist, geology degree & 20 yrs in industry etc, listening to YECs is extremely painful. They’re taught to pretend science doesn’t exist & ppl are making stuff up without much evidence - they’re ignoring there’s enough data to spend several lifetimes learning. It’s awful whats been done to them to make them think like this - & you can bet the ppl that did it were making quite a bit of money.
"I will only accept evolution if I see with my own eyes things that are impossible according to evolution"
Ok, baby theist, go back in the corner sniffing glue XD
“Correct me if I’m wrong”. They did, repeatedly.
Basically his whole argument is even though our genetic makeup proves that we are all related doesn't mean God didn't just make everything with similar makeup. His argument literally dies from the start because to even start with that hypothesis, you have to prove a God exists first and that God is capable of designing it that way
I'm so ill with creationists stating that they are not an expert and then responding with nuh-uh to experts.
This guy is so close minded that he doesn’t recognize that he was wrong from the start to finish. Why don’t you PROVE that there is a dude who “created” everything without saying the phrase “there has to be….”
Ignorance and denial is the theist way
So ultimately it boils down to “God can do whatever he wants.” How does one wrestle with such silliness? Just nod, turn around, and leave.
Theist -"There are no transitional fossils"
Scientists - "Here are a bunch of examples"
Theist - "There are no transitional fossils"
You did a wonderful job dismantling that guy's lack of consistency
If he's "researched" evolution but not found anything that convinces him, I wonder what his sources were. I'm assuming he's not a scientist. His incredulity about things that don't convince him, when speaking with legit scientists, is laughable.
His research is probably a Google search and no biology background
@@neothepenguin1257 A google search gives convincing enough evidence. I think he went for religious sources, like AIG, living waters, etc.
@neothepenguin1257 - most definitely. He keeps repeating that he's not an expert. So shut up dude. These 2 are literally experts in this area. So lame!
@AXKfUN9m even AiG is smart enough to not have their apologists speak on subjects they're experts in. Whenever they talk about genetics, Georgia somehow always has that day off
We already know about his sources. He basically said, "Correct me if I'm wrong, but this non-creationist source says...", followed by "Yes, you are wrong and I was just reading that creationist garbage the other day."
Caller thinks science can’t prove anything because it was actually magic
Anthony is a perfect example of what my grandma used to say: “he knows enough to be dangerous.” I appreciate a lay person trying to educate themselves themselves and it seems Anthony has two problems here:
1) he has investigated with a conclusion already formed. In other words, he is not truly open to being wrong and the implications of being wrong.
2). While he can talk a big game he doesn’t actually know much. He doesn’t know enough to be able to work through the problems (which is likely exacerbated by number 1).
Creationists must love this caller because he speaks almost authoritatively and uses words and phrases such as "geologic column", "stratified", "complexity", etc. I'm stunned that he thinks the science of evolution is defective, illusory, deceptive... but his god belief is well founded and clearly established.
Another pet peeve of mine, only slightly touched on in this conversation, is the presence of consciousness. Humans nearly always assert that only humans are conscious. And I ask, "How do you know that?" I assert that every living creature on Earth is as conscious as they need to be to reproduce successfully in their current environment. In other words, consciousness is an adaptive phenome just like any physical phenome.
The man could be an Olympian, he keeps moving those goalposts.
Dude's whole shtick was "if I first make the unwarranted assumption that a deity exists, then these facts can be seen like this". Such ridiculous dishonesty.
DNA by itself shows common descent. We wouldn't share DNA with anything else if we didn't have a common ancestor somewhere.
That said his opening statement and question was essentially, " Show me your species evolving into amother species right or I won't believe it." He wants it in "real-time." That's just not healthy work. We see the little changes, but we won't live long enough to see the big changes. We can see the results of the big changes which we have.
Esit: wow....Erika's explanation of this blew me away.
Do you know what it's called when you believe in something that you cannot see?
Blind faith.
Every Evo has it.
Way back in the day I knew a dude who didn't believe in evolution because there was a gorilla at the Atlanta Zoo who had been there for several years, but he never did evolve into a human. 🤨 BTW this was a fellow NCO in the military and a couple of pay grades above me, which made me feel dead inside. 😮💨
@@elguapo2831False equivalence. Evolution *can* be seen through the fossil record and genetics. Scientists have been able to use knowledge of evolution to make tangible predictions as well: ie where to set up oil rigs or where to find transitional fossils, etc. What the OP was mocking about Anthony does not give credence to the idea that evolution requires faith, it just shows the extent of Anthony's, and by extension your, ignorance on the subject.
@@relic5752 I've looked extensively into the fossil record and have found all species have missing links that are more like missing chains.
How can there be Anthropods at the very bottom in the Cambrian Explosion if they supposedly weren't evolved yet?
An entire ecosystem, just poof.
@@elguapo2831 ummm, genetics IS evidence....as is the fossil record, Bioanthropology, archeology, botany, ecology, PHYSICS, Geology, direct observation, Embryology, virology, medicine, agriculture, and every other line of evidence from every branch of science that even remotely touches life.
Can't we just point at covid and how it evolved into multiple different strains right in front of us with the whole world watching?
Yeah, but can covid turn into a dog? That's all that really matters.
@@quinn0517yeah why is covid still here when we still have dogs 🤭❤️❤️❤️❤️
@@quinn0517 lol good one
@@quinn0517when I got Covid I became a little horse…
Yes us normal individuals can, but then a creationist will come along and move the goalpost saying that's not evidence of macroevolution.
24:30 "And correct me if I'm wrong"
"You are wrong"
"No I am not."
People who can accept no correction profit the least from education.
It’s clear to me now, that the single biggest hurdle for theists (in understanding evolution) is the nagging belief that humans are special creations that are separate from non-human animals.
Anthony is becoming a prolific content contributor for the channel.
"Before you answer, let me give you my question..." Anthony.
Erica is an absolute treasure to this channel.
Despite how difficult it was getting through to the caller, I can at least appreciate how respectful everyone was. Both sides allowed the other to speak, even when things were getting a little frustrating. No yelling, no expletives or name-calling, just a back and forth. Honestly, quite refreshing.
“Correct me if I’m wrong”
In creationist speak - I cannot be wrong and I will never accept that I could be wrong. The arrogance, the ignorance, the hubris and the poison of religious belief.
If he lies like a creationist, shifts goalposts like a creationist, rejects reality like a creationist, and spouts pseudoscientific garbage like a creationist -- does it REALLY matter whether he's a young earth creationist specifically? =D
Can we observe God creating kinds in real time, instead of inference ?
Couldn't God just make them outta thin air? Like a crocoduck?😂
Willful ignorance is a difficult thing to overcome, apparently. Good luck in your self-made rough life, Anthony.
What a great introduction to evolution! Some people have to pay to get lessons this good!
every single one of his arguments began with ''i feel'' or ''i think'', he doesn't care about evidence, he cares about his feelings
Excellent explanations. Now, regarding the sound. The Line has consistent sound issues that we don't hear on any of the other call in shows. Logically, one must reasonably conclude it is an issue on the Line's end of the call. This is a great group of shows, I hope they can fix the problems so we can have more enjoyable conversations.
24 minutes in and I think the problem with the caller's argument is that there is no evidence that could be brought up to him that wouldn't support the design argument. It's a fundamental failure of the design model because there is nothing that could come up that wouldn't fit with the explanation that a god wanted it that way. It's an entirely vacuous model because it's a non-explanation. And this problem extends to cosmological design too, though that's a different topic.
Erika and Jackson are so kind. I’m so impressed with your patience and ability to explain advanced scientific topics clearly and concisely. I would have given up with Anthony and honestly hope he never calls again because he doesn’t WANT to be convinced of anything.
"It's always special pleading baby!"
Always.
They cannot use inference in science, but the religion can infer god.
Creationist ‘logic’ 😂
I am not sure I have ever felt more sorry for a person…. Poor Anthony to be so clearly wrong and to have to argue a position that is so fundamentally incorrect. God that must be so painful….
I feel sorry for him because he hits all the marks of someone indoctrinated since youth, to the point his brain won't even let him consider he might be wrong.
People can break out of that, but Anthony seems too far gone.
@@solly119119There's a possibility he'll break free of it, but it won't be easy that's for sure.
@@Elena_7839 Yeah, and the thing is, even if we could stop religious indoctrination of children, I'm not sure we should.