I'm a big fan of Paulogia's videos. When I clicked on this video to watch it an advert for the new Bible app came on. I think this may be the wrong channel tree to be barking up to get Bible app downloads. I think an atheist app should be created with the best quotes from like Matt Dillahunty and Aron Ra, then we can advertise it on AIG News videos 😋
owyn bond They're in front of practically every video involving atheism on here at the minute. No doubt somebody feels quite proud of their idea to put them there right now. But they reckoned without the power of the SKIP BUTTON! Take that christians! Your feeble efforts are nothing to us!
It's the youtube algoritm that matches the ads with the videos(religious theme ad + religious theme video), having no clue that the videos are talking against religion.
This one is easy. According to Creationists, God gave dictation. Unerring dictation. Dictation so good that centuries and multiple translations have not altered the meanings. Scholars have determined least five people then authored the various parts of the Pentateuch. Not all of any of them, mind you. Bits and pieces of each. "The Book of J" by Harold Bloom is an excellent starting point for study in this area. Here's a bonus video on the accuracy of translations: ruclips.net/video/Rte07sl3Vf4/видео.html&ab_channel=MalindaKathleenReese
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God , and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. ALL things were created by him, and without Him NOTHING was made that was made. .... and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . He was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew Him not. But as many as received him he gave power to become the Sons of God . He is the Light of the World, but men prefer darkness because their deeds are evil. Choose Jesus , The light of the world
With the difference that THAT is actually often true at least in Europe where they built churches on top of "heathen" places of worship to bury the old faiths.
@Ox777 An interesting case is the cathedral in Cordoba, which was erected on the site (actually, within) the Mosque erected when Andalucia was controlled by Muslims. The mosque, in turn, was supposedly built on the site of an early Visigoth Christian church.
Am I the only one who noticed that their narrator sounds like a Dollar Tree NDGT? There's also some weird background hiss to his voice that makes me think they deliberately modified his voice to sound more like Neil's.
Took me a couple of days to sit down and give this the undivided attention it deserves. I wasn't disappointed. Great work as always, Paul. Your efforts are MUCH appreciated.
I thought it was transparent crystal, hammered out _like_ one would hammer bronze? Eh, that's probably a translation thing. Nevertheless, 0% of the translations say "NOT a hard surface, but a permeable atmosphere."
"Waaaa you are taking it out of context, read the original hebrew you atheist!" *Reads verse out of context, and ignores original hebrew* "You just hate god! Why dont you accept him!"
Great work! Glad you’re watching through this, and debunking/pointing out the contradictions, falsehoods, and frankly, straight up lies (imo they have to know some of this is just plain incorrect, or intentionally misleading, so I’m comfortable calling it lies). Looking forward to the rest of this. I’m so glad I found this channel. I’ve been binging on your vids lately. I used to always get exasperated looking up the actual scientific data, when YEC made “scientific” claims to support their delusion, but with your channel, I can get all the real science in one place! Thanks!
I love the Far Side cartoon at 9:35 of God rolling bits of modeling clay between with his hands, making that rubbing motion kids use with Play-Doh. The caption reads something like: "These snakes are a cinch!"
I don't understand why sense is considered "common" when it is obviously not. In my experience, following the common consensus of the majority is the best way to be wrong.
Creationists are like flat earthers in a lot of way. In order to justify their belief they try to tear apart actual science and explain away certain aspects bit by bit. They will come up with alternate explanations for specific events. HOWEVER they can never put together an *entire working model* of their conclusion because there are too many conflicting parts. Their explanations for one thing directly contradict their explanations for another. It's a right mess. It's not like the actual scientific models we have that not only work out, but all have supporting evicence for each aspect.
How is it that Hovinds abd Hams ask "Were you there?" as an autoreply to anything they don't like, but then assert that Mars is "young" based on observation now? HOVIND... WERE YOU THERE? Mic. Drop
Another good video. I'm a little disappointed (with the Genesis movie). IF they'd just done a straight animated version of Genesis I'd be interested in seeing it. Not convincing but hey talking serpents, world wide floods could have been made into an interesting movie. Instead they throw in all this "science" which would be interesting... if it had some basis in actual science but sadly isn't.
Exactly and would have served their purpose better. Lets face it they aren't trying to convert people (anyone with a basic science education knows better), and while reassuring the believers is obviously also part of their goal there's also the whole making money thing which we know the Hovinds are both all about. There are I think more people who would have paid to see it that one night in theatres (I skipped it because of the psuedo science myself) and more peopl who'd be interested in it now if it was a good dramatization. I don't even think it'd be hard to sell that to backers (didn't Eric hate the Noah movie? it'd be his chance to tell how it REALLY, in his mind anyway, happened a biblically accurate dramatization).
I'm watching this video in a separate tab, and I had to pause what I was doing several types just because of how similar the narrator sounds to Neil Tyson.
Paul, you need to pull a “Ray Comfort!” Put these videos on DVD & stand outside of any playing of “Paradise Lost” & hand out your videos. I’m sure you could get some help in doing so. Anyways, thanks for your videos & the time you put into them!
Great post Paul, your work is always concise, well thought out, fluid, organized, and most importantly based on evidence. I can appreciate the time and research you must put into these videos, as I am a grad student and research is all I do (without exerting effort making 22 min videos). Currently, I'm doing an entire semesters work on the causation/correlation of thinking styles, cognition, and personality types. I feel that behaviors (actionable emotions) can predict and determine a person's future to some extent, therefore predict the future, and again to some extent, of societies and culture in general.This is important regarding the future of ALL people. Thanks again Paul, you're a rock star bro!
I had to laugh when they complained about scientists taking control of science. Whatever next? Historians taking control of historic research? Chefs taking control of cooking? Carpenters taking control of woodworking? Of course, what they really objected to was science contradicting their fairy tales.
I was surprised that there was no mention of Peleg from Gen 10:25. "because in his time the Earth was divided" - as an accommodation for continental drift. Or did we miss something?
Bodie Hodge (AiG's Peleg expert) has had to swallow such idea because they need it to happen during the flood... it's interesting when the theories crash head on.
Of course to be "in his time" it would mean Peleg was around during the Flood so that can't be used. I was also shocked that they introduced Mars. AiG should get Earth Geology right before poking at Mars. (which along with other planets and galaxies are not mentioned in Genesis). I really don't get why AiG feel the need to cram all geological time into the year of the Flood. Someone has probably pointed out by now that you had the wrong photo for Mars to show water depositional ripples. The photo shows melt rivulets or run-off down the side of slopes.
WTF? This was posted only 4 *DAYS* ago?!?! I just looked up your channel feeling like I've not seen a new video in nearly 2weeks...but I watched this 4 *days* ago?! Unreasonable to ask for more videos more often, so I'm not...I am, however, anxiously awaiting the next 1. =) Hope you're well!
Another good job sir. If I remember right there are two creation accounts in Genesis and they both have a different order of when things were poofed into existence by magic. Have to go back and reread it to make sure.
There's another person who says "sir" and has a cat profile picture back on the first video replying to the top comment, but he's far less reasonable and scientifically literate than you are (he's a creationist)
Is it just me or are Young Earth and Flat Earth creeping ever so closely? My guess is that loosening the firmament may be necessary to show some day light between their positions. On a side note, what is the AiG position on the Moon landings?
I've already heard Muslims say that Allah stretching the heavens in the Qu'ran is evidence that the Qu'ran predicted the Big Bang, and then basically . . . therefore one may as well convert to Islam.
.... .... _I'm actually disappointed I didn't think of that before._ Wow. Every time I think we've found every way that story fails there's something new.
God invented time and space. He has always been outside of time and space. It is like an inventor inventing an airplane. The inventor made the airplane to their specifics. It does not mean that the inventor has to be in it, the inventor can be outside of the invention. It does not mean they dont exsist or it does not work to the inventors specifics.
@@jamiecockwill9277 You analogy fails since we have logged evidence, material purchases, etc documented and logged. You can trace back the origins of the planes, the design plans of the inventor, etc. You can't do the same with God. You look at the world, and attribute it to an unknown force, then shoving God into the spot instead. Plus in this scenario the plane is still in the material universe, and God is not - something we don't even know is possible yet. So no, once again, the analogy fails
Great video! It is important to understand that Creationism is a business, the entire point of the "Genesis Paradise Lost" project is to make money. Of course, that in itself do not prove it is wrong, but it certainly explains why it is made. The proven scientific facts is what proves it is wrong. But in religion facts are optional at best.
Paul, while most people can agree that preconceived conclusions have no place in science, Creationists - and AiG in particular, only acknowledges that which will support its conclusions. Further, if forced to countenance something that contradicts them, they rely on God as their "Get Out of Science Free" card by accusing you of using the present as the key to the past when everyone knows that physics were different in Biblical times. Because God. And also because run-on sentences.
If we are to believe the firmament model then Mars doesn't actually exist since it is just a point of light on the dome. Consistency really isn't their thing, is it?
I'm no kinda Rock, Dirt, Fossil, Science Nerd; but I "feel" that at 10:22 there may of been some misrepresentation from Paul's video clip collector†. I don't think the continents started out the way they look today only to drift around a few million years to then go back to there original position (specifically: I think the clip was played in reverse then spliced in the middle from the beginning and played forward), am I off base? or wrong? † I feel bad for forgetting her name, I know someone else can tell me?
Thanks for pointing that out ...you're right that clip is loopy af. Do either of you know the name of the person who finds the clips though? ...I just don't want to have to re-watch hours of his past vids to find out, but I'm nearly to that point being that it's been bugging me for a weak now.
LOL as soon as I saw your name, I thought, "wow duh". Now I'm just dealing with anxiety, brought on by your youtube fame (by mention only, weird nvm). Good job btw in most cases
The heat of those new continents - zipping around at such staggering speeds - would be so intense as to completely liquify the rocky crust as well as pretty much evaporate all the oceans. Even 6,000 years wouldn't be remotely long enough to cool down that vast quantity of molten rock... Also, any residual atmosphere would be highly contaminated with mineral compounds due to out-gassing (from pockets within the magma), making the air sadly toxic for most types of life (including Eukaryotic, like humans) except perhaps a very few Extremophile Archaea able to survive in boiling hot pools of chemical sludge contaminated water. Of course, *Creationists* could wave all of this away with some G̶o̶d̶-̶M̶a̶g̶i̶c̶, sorry, _Miracles_ ...
I’m confused by that last bit about the impact craters and volcanoes. They claim that this shows that Mars is about 6000yrs old due to the presence of these features and that they may have been caused by the same event that caused the Genesis Flood. But surely the flood was 4500 years ago? So where’s the connection? A bit of the old ‘sleight of hand’ trick?
So... they believe that a global flood happened on Mars proves that one happened on the earth. How does this work from a biblical worldview? Why did God flood Mars? Were there a bunch of sinners on Mars?
Somehow I'm not the least bit surprised that there's a "Shop Now" button on AIGs website! (20:22 top right) Meh, thanks for doing these Paul...OGia ;-)
Wow... so they made shiny video to convince the already convinced they are right and ignore everyone else. Wow. Thanks for torturing yourself with that.
It's nothing more than a cash grab by Jr. Dino,. Step 1: Have other pay to make your movie. Step 2: Sell it back to them.Step 3: Worship the Holy Profit!!!
Regarding your point at 2:11 I really like this quote from Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong, "The world has moved on, leaving these elements of the Christian Church that cannot adjust to new knowledge or a new consciousness lost in a sea of their own irrelevance." Granted, he was specifically speaking about the fundamentalists' hatred of members of the LGBT community, but I think he would apply it here as well given what he has written elsewhere. For instance, the below quotes from him seem to back this up. "The Biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense." "The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity." "The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age."
Genesis strongly implies that there were no major changes in the shape of the land after creation, thus it is not consistent with science or Accommodation. For example, the description of the rivers around Eden: in Genesis, those rivers were there from the beginning with no apparent change from the beginning to the time of the writing of the story. (same goes with diversity of life)
When you have the plethora of options available within the human imagination, you can make any story fit the observable. We see children explore this phenomena during play, but it's disappointing when adults employ it in the face of contrary evidence.
5:45 "And God said "Let there be a dope-ass CGI sand tornado and all the beasts of the field shalt spring forth out of it" and it was so. -Hovindus 1:36.
"Let there be a firmament, in the midst of the waters. And let it divide the waters from the waters" Sounds like the dump i took this morning, it was unusually firm and the splash was tremendous.
You know, I can believe in micro-flooding, but I'm just not convinced on the subject of macro-flooding. Now, you might say that macro-flooding is just the cumulative effect of micro-flooding over long periods of time, but we have never observed macro-flooding. There are no examples of transitional floods in the fluidic record, nor have we ever witnessed one kind of body of water transforming into another kind. X3
It would interesting to research into what young earth creationist have been saying over the last few centuries about the map of the earth from its beginning until now. When did they start claiming that there was initially one land mass? Was it after scientist began to accept plate tectonics?
Correct me if I'm wrong but, wouldn't continental drift during during the flood melt the earth? I know such fast drift is impossible but what exactly would happen if it were that fast. I'm thinking global melting but I'm not 100% sure.
Paulogia What about hydrothermal vents? They release water water with a temperature of about 200 degrees Celsius. My point is that if the flood did happen, with that fast plate movement, all that water should have cooked the entire planet. Just saying.
I'd expect, if the bible really did contain continental drift, that theists would have been saying so long before Wegener, and I'd expect that once Wegener came out with his idea that theists would have loudly proclaimed, "We told you so." As far as I know, neither happened.
I liked the reference to Calvin's doctrine of accommodation. Simply put, Calvin thought God taught subjects based on one's ignorance. God couldn't teach Bronze Age people about clouds so he taught them about something they knew about; a "firmament". However these Biblical creationists would probably think that such an idea amounts to accusing God of being a liar. They think that God wrote absolute truth into the text and we just need to figure out what it is.
They really want the stamp of respectability that science brings. but without the actual evidence that science is based on. Or the process that checks to see if you have gone wrong. That should tell you something.
The Creationist Genesis movie says animals of all kinds are found in all the deposited fossilized layers (likely to varying degrees) and you're statement about the fossilized layers suggests the fossils of each layer or perhaps time-groups of layers (ie. layers designated lower/older as opposed to those grouped into upper/later time periods) were excluding the kinds of fossils of other time-groups of layers? (Part 2 16:30)
I feel like I have a confirmation bias When I am I not getting tired of complimenting you on good videos. Oh yeah. Because they are all good videos. I’m not really sure if it helping confirm my confirmation bias though. Great videos as always m8.
12:01 I know I shouldn't complain but, Paul that statement makes no sense. When the Space Shuttle is "Blasting off" It's not moving at all, that's just the moment when it begins accelerating. Did you mean orbital speed? That would be closer certainly, but for most snail species the number is closer to escape velocity, and the Space Shuttle definitely can't go that fast. Not that that's important since litterally every single rocket destined for low orbit ultimately travels at the same speed. I know most people don't know anything about orbital mechanics or rocketry, so you're not alone there. I just wish people would stop pretending they know what they are talking about.
So strange that they can reinterpret all those Bible passages to fit the current astronomical and geological knowledge but can't do that with evolution...wonder why...maybe because if they accept evolution they don't have that special place above animals ?
ken has in every debate and discussion stated that the firmament was an ice dome that created a pressurized greenhouse enclosed system, and when the flood came it melted and came down as rain while the earth split open and water from under the land came up to flood the earth. Now he suddenly is happy with it just being clouds , ha ha ha they are destroying their own arguments.
It's interesting that the spirit of God moved on the face of the water. There is no explanation where this water comes from, Adam Clark suggested something that would kinda look like what Laurence Krauss suggests, though Clark says God arranged the atoms into place, then again Clark does go off on irrelevant stuff sometimes... Adam Clarke's Bible Commentary on The Bible - Genesis 1:2
31:27 Biblical reference for the land splitting apart, Genesis 10:25 _"And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan."_ Peleg is a descendant of Noah. It goes Noah, Shem, Arphaxad, Salah, Eber, Peleg. But considering the bible puts Noah's age at 950, he was probably alive when Peleg was born.
They don't mention it in the movie because their claim is that the flood caused the tectonic shifting, meaning the timeline would not longer add up if found that late into Genesis
There seems to a leap of logic when Mars once being covered (partially anyway) with water gets mentioned. They call it a ‘cataclysmic flood’. The scientific claim is that there once were oceans on Mars, not that there was a one-off event that flooded the planet. The presence of a large body of water in no way implies a cataclysm but that’s their interpretation!
Ken Ham and eggs next project should be Flat Earth Park. He could paint the map in the parking lot which would prove the earth is flat. And does the ark park have an incest diorama?
Those saying that religion destroys science, know nothing of religion. Actually, science and religion go hand in hand. I’ve always felt this! All those who first took to science, were Christian...I knew this too.
So what I gather from this is that, according to Creationists' reading of the Mars water situation, the earth's current coverage by water (at literally double what was proposed for Mars' maximum coverage) is "cataclysmic", rather than just being oceans?
The largest flood in the region that could been 'Noah's Flood' line up closer with the Tartessos Events... which if you believe some claims.... is the real life event that Plato might have drawn on when he wrote the allegory of Atlantis.
Love the video, lots of great information and well-researched. One thing that stood out though is the claim at about 16:30. "No modern creatures in the older layers..." Yes, I agree fully with this and it supports evolution 100%, but then you follow with "...ancient creatures die out in the more modern layers - no exceptions", which although it is mostly true, there are still a handful of species around today that have survived largely unchanged for hundreds of millions of years, even through mass extinctions. We both know this doesn't go against evolution, since evolution doesn't say species must undergo a constant rate of change, or must change at all if it's suited for it's environment, but the claim of "no exceptions" leaves the argument open to some Creationist who doesn't understand living fossils to bring up something like the Coelacanth.
![Kodak Black - Catch Fire [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A4ch-olIuZo/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm a big fan of Paulogia's videos. When I clicked on this video to watch it an advert for the new Bible app came on. I think this may be the wrong channel tree to be barking up to get Bible app downloads. I think an atheist app should be created with the best quotes from like Matt Dillahunty and Aron Ra, then we can advertise it on AIG News videos 😋
owyn bond They're in front of practically every video involving atheism on here at the minute. No doubt somebody feels quite proud of their idea to put them there right now. But they reckoned without the power of the SKIP BUTTON! Take that christians! Your feeble efforts are nothing to us!
Eh, bible-pushers are actually paying for Paul to continue his work. I find that fantastic.
I get a lot of scientology ads on atheist videos, lately. seems weird to me, too.
It's the youtube algoritm that matches the ads with the videos(religious theme ad + religious theme video), having no clue that the videos are talking against religion.
I hear Anthony M has a good Street Epistemology app.
In the beginning there was nothing... and God said... "Let there be light"... well there was still nothing... but at least you could see it.
apparently there were waters pre-existing?
This one is easy. According to Creationists, God gave dictation. Unerring dictation. Dictation so good that centuries and multiple translations have not altered the meanings.
Scholars have determined least five people then authored the various parts of the Pentateuch. Not all of any of them, mind you. Bits and pieces of each. "The Book of J" by Harold Bloom is an excellent starting point for study in this area.
Here's a bonus video on the accuracy of translations:
ruclips.net/video/Rte07sl3Vf4/видео.html&ab_channel=MalindaKathleenReese
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God , and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. ALL things were created by him, and without Him NOTHING was made that was made. .... and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . He was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew Him not. But as many as received him he gave power to become the Sons of God . He is the Light of the World, but men prefer darkness because their deeds are evil. Choose Jesus , The light of the world
Non-sequitur much?
so you think you get it ? You dont get it
"Took over the museums"
The scientists _built_ the museums. Against the attempts of the theological authorities to suppress them.
I hate that the religious took over the churches.
With the difference that THAT is actually often true at least in Europe where they built churches on top of "heathen" places of worship to bury the old faiths.
@Ox777 An interesting case is the cathedral in Cordoba, which was erected on the site (actually, within) the Mosque erected when Andalucia was controlled by Muslims. The mosque, in turn, was supposedly built on the site of an early Visigoth Christian church.
If only there was some way they could do their own science.
@Einstien Brown ooooppps.
Thanks corrected now.
Am I the only one who noticed that their narrator sounds like a Dollar Tree NDGT? There's also some weird background hiss to his voice that makes me think they deliberately modified his voice to sound more like Neil's.
Yes! I thought the same thing.
yup
I believe it was intentional that they tried to make the narrator sound like Neil deGrasse Tyson, probably to counter the new Cosmos.
It's it Tony Reed?
Took me a couple of days to sit down and give this the undivided attention it deserves. I wasn't disappointed. Great work as always, Paul. Your efforts are MUCH appreciated.
My voice is so cheesy, but then again, that's what I was going for.
Really enjoying this series.
who doesn't love cheese?
Love this series and looking forward to chapter 3!
Paul - your videos continue to get better and better.
Keep up the good work.
thank you!
Love the narration by Tony Reed.
So yom has to be translated literally as day, but rakia doesn't have to mean a literal bronze bowl spread out over the sky?
Nifty.
I thought it was transparent crystal, hammered out _like_ one would hammer bronze? Eh, that's probably a translation thing.
Nevertheless, 0% of the translations say "NOT a hard surface, but a permeable atmosphere."
"Waaaa you are taking it out of context, read the original hebrew you atheist!"
*Reads verse out of context, and ignores original hebrew*
"You just hate god! Why dont you accept him!"
Original Hebrew places birds and stars in the same "expanse" with waters above both, so...
Great work! Glad you’re watching through this, and debunking/pointing out the contradictions, falsehoods, and frankly, straight up lies (imo they have to know some of this is just plain incorrect, or intentionally misleading, so I’m comfortable calling it lies). Looking forward to the rest of this.
I’m so glad I found this channel. I’ve been binging on your vids lately. I used to always get exasperated looking up the actual scientific data, when YEC made “scientific” claims to support their delusion, but with your channel, I can get all the real science in one place! Thanks!
I love the Far Side cartoon at 9:35 of God rolling bits of modeling clay between with his hands, making that rubbing motion kids use with Play-Doh. The caption reads something like: "These snakes are a cinch!"
So Excited.
I'm always rewatching your vids.
I don't understand why sense is considered "common" when it is obviously not. In my experience, following the common consensus of the majority is the best way to be wrong.
BRB, taking over the museums.
Creationists are like flat earthers in a lot of way. In order to justify their belief they try to tear apart actual science and explain away certain aspects bit by bit. They will come up with alternate explanations for specific events. HOWEVER they can never put together an *entire working model* of their conclusion because there are too many conflicting parts. Their explanations for one thing directly contradict their explanations for another. It's a right mess. It's not like the actual scientific models we have that not only work out, but all have supporting evicence for each aspect.
How is it that Hovinds abd Hams ask "Were you there?" as an autoreply to anything they don't like, but then assert that Mars is "young" based on observation now?
HOVIND... WERE YOU THERE?
Mic. Drop
Another good video. I'm a little disappointed (with the Genesis movie). IF they'd just done a straight animated version of Genesis I'd be interested in seeing it. Not convincing but hey talking serpents, world wide floods could have been made into an interesting movie. Instead they throw in all this "science" which would be interesting... if it had some basis in actual science but sadly isn't.
Right? A dramatization would have been better.
Exactly and would have served their purpose better. Lets face it they aren't trying to convert people (anyone with a basic science education knows better), and while reassuring the believers is obviously also part of their goal there's also the whole making money thing which we know the Hovinds are both all about. There are I think more people who would have paid to see it that one night in theatres (I skipped it because of the psuedo science myself) and more peopl who'd be interested in it now if it was a good dramatization. I don't even think it'd be hard to sell that to backers (didn't Eric hate the Noah movie? it'd be his chance to tell how it REALLY, in his mind anyway, happened a biblically accurate dramatization).
Perhaps they'll make a better job of Genesis II "After the Beginning" ??
If you want a dramatized Bible story, Prince of Egypt is pretty darn good.
I got an ad for a car called Genesis before this. Good job RUclips. Well played.
Is it purposefully done that the narrator kind of sounds like Neil deGrasse Tyson?
I think so.
They were going for a Cosmos vibe I think.
I'm watching this video in a separate tab, and I had to pause what I was doing several types just because of how similar the narrator sounds to Neil Tyson.
Paul!!! When are you going to finish this video series?
Paul, you need to pull a “Ray Comfort!” Put these videos on DVD & stand outside of any playing of “Paradise Lost” & hand out your videos. I’m sure you could get some help in doing so. Anyways, thanks for your videos & the time you put into them!
Really great work! I really enjoyed it and cant wait for the next installment.
thanks for the support, my friend
Great post Paul, your work is always concise, well thought out, fluid, organized, and most importantly based on evidence. I can appreciate the time and research you must put into these videos, as I am a grad student and research is all I do (without exerting effort making 22 min videos). Currently, I'm doing an entire semesters work on the causation/correlation of thinking styles, cognition, and personality types. I feel that behaviors (actionable emotions) can predict and determine a person's future to some extent, therefore predict the future, and again to some extent, of societies and culture in general.This is important regarding the future of ALL people. Thanks again Paul, you're a rock star bro!
Another great video! I love the BG clips you pick. The shower scene makes me want to go watch Tomb Raider (2001) again. :) Keep being awesome!
that clip was about water! :)
Oh yay, I have been waiting for Part 2. Can't watch it until later. Rats.
I had to laugh when they complained about scientists taking control of science. Whatever next? Historians taking control of historic research? Chefs taking control of cooking? Carpenters taking control of woodworking?
Of course, what they really objected to was science contradicting their fairy tales.
ha!
Hell ye boi!
Calvinist accommodation seems to be more useful as a public accommodation.
Again, beautiful work, Paul!
20:50 If we assume we're right, and only consult sources that reinforce that we're right, _then we'll be right!_
Right?
heh ... some unicode problems in the Patron list, might want to fix that next time :)
Great video non-the-less
I was surprised that there was no mention of Peleg from Gen 10:25. "because in his time the Earth was divided" - as an accommodation for continental drift. Or did we miss something?
Bodie Hodge (AiG's Peleg expert) has had to swallow such idea because they need it to happen during the flood... it's interesting when the theories crash head on.
Of course to be "in his time" it would mean Peleg was around during the Flood so that can't be used.
I was also shocked that they introduced Mars. AiG should get Earth Geology right before poking at Mars. (which along with other planets and galaxies are not mentioned in Genesis). I really don't get why AiG feel the need to cram all geological time into the year of the Flood. Someone has probably pointed out by now that you had the wrong photo for Mars to show water depositional ripples.
The photo shows melt rivulets or run-off down the side of slopes.
WTF? This was posted only 4 *DAYS* ago?!?! I just looked up your channel feeling like I've not seen a new video in nearly 2weeks...but I watched this 4 *days* ago?!
Unreasonable to ask for more videos more often, so I'm not...I am, however, anxiously awaiting the next 1. =)
Hope you're well!
Another good job sir.
If I remember right there are two creation accounts in Genesis and they both have a different order of when things were poofed into existence by magic. Have to go back and reread it to make sure.
There's another person who says "sir" and has a cat profile picture back on the first video replying to the top comment, but he's far less reasonable and scientifically literate than you are (he's a creationist)
Is the part 2 of this movie already in dvd
Is it just me or are Young Earth and Flat Earth creeping ever so closely? My guess is that loosening the firmament may be necessary to show some day light between their positions.
On a side note, what is the AiG position on the Moon landings?
I have a prediction about the next part Paulogia, they conflate red shift with stretching the heavens.
booleanenator "Adam and Eve saw the tail lights as they drove away because I don't understand the physics of light."
-Kent Hovind if he were honest
how did you know?
Because they don't have new arguments?
I've already heard Muslims say that Allah stretching the heavens in the Qu'ran is evidence that the Qu'ran predicted the Big Bang, and then basically . . . therefore one may as well convert to Islam.
And a 'hi' to Tony Reed!
If God is outside of time/space. Then it took him 0 days...
....
....
_I'm actually disappointed I didn't think of that before._
Wow. Every time I think we've found every way that story fails there's something new.
It gets worse. It would have taken nil days.
God invented time and space. He has always been outside of time and space. It is like an inventor inventing an airplane. The inventor made the airplane to their specifics. It does not mean that the inventor has to be in it, the inventor can be outside of the invention. It does not mean they dont exsist or it does not work to the inventors specifics.
@@jamiecockwill9277 You analogy fails since we have logged evidence, material purchases, etc documented and logged. You can trace back the origins of the planes, the design plans of the inventor, etc. You can't do the same with God. You look at the world, and attribute it to an unknown force, then shoving God into the spot instead. Plus in this scenario the plane is still in the material universe, and God is not - something we don't even know is possible yet. So no, once again, the analogy fails
I'm a bit confused. At the end of the movie it says "To be continued". However, I can't find the second part of the movie where it "Continues" from.
Sweet dreams are made of this! Nice.
I have a question . If there was sufficient water to cover the whole earth then the waters receded, where did the water go?
Great video! It is important to understand that Creationism is a business, the entire point of the "Genesis Paradise Lost" project is to make money. Of course, that in itself do not prove it is wrong, but it certainly explains why it is made. The proven scientific facts is what proves it is wrong. But in religion facts are optional at best.
Paul, while most people can agree that preconceived conclusions have no place in science, Creationists - and AiG in particular, only acknowledges that which will support its conclusions. Further, if forced to countenance something that contradicts them, they rely on God as their "Get Out of Science Free" card by accusing you of using the present as the key to the past when everyone knows that physics were different in Biblical times. Because God. And also because run-on sentences.
If we are to believe the firmament model then Mars doesn't actually exist since it is just a point of light on the dome. Consistency really isn't their thing, is it?
you don't get it , what a maroon
@@jwsanders1214 I get that Christianity and flat Earth are total bullshit. Do you?
@@chrisose Ever been to Texas ?
@@jwsanders1214 Yep. A whole lot of stupid there.
@@chrisose Flat earth Exists .
I'm no kinda Rock, Dirt, Fossil, Science Nerd; but I "feel" that at 10:22 there may of been some misrepresentation from Paul's video clip collector†. I don't think the continents started out the way they look today only to drift around a few million years to then go back to there original position (specifically: I think the clip was played in reverse then spliced in the middle from the beginning and played forward), am I off base? or wrong?
† I feel bad for forgetting her name, I know someone else can tell me?
It's just on a loop back and forth is all. You can see the names of the represented time periods in the corner.
He's right it's on a loop.
Thanks for pointing that out ...you're right that clip is loopy af. Do either of you know the name of the person who finds the clips though? ...I just don't want to have to re-watch hours of his past vids to find out, but I'm nearly to that point being that it's been bugging me for a weak now.
Brant Lafrenz that would be myself and Paul. We compile all the clips
LOL as soon as I saw your name, I thought, "wow duh". Now I'm just dealing with anxiety, brought on by your youtube fame (by mention only, weird nvm). Good job btw in most cases
I'm quite happy for people of faith to interpret the creation story as allegory but I'm not certain the authors intended it to be read that way.
For the sorting of the fossils in the rock layers it is obvious that "ancient fish" were worse at swimming than horses so they drowned first.
Imagine XD
Excellent work as ever. Thank you :)
The heat of those new continents - zipping around at such staggering speeds - would be so intense as to completely liquify the rocky crust as well as pretty much evaporate all the oceans.
Even 6,000 years wouldn't be remotely long enough to cool down that vast quantity of molten rock...
Also, any residual atmosphere would be highly contaminated with mineral compounds due to out-gassing (from pockets within the magma), making the air sadly toxic for most types of life (including Eukaryotic, like humans) except perhaps a very few Extremophile Archaea able to survive in boiling hot pools of chemical sludge contaminated water.
Of course, *Creationists* could wave all of this away with some G̶o̶d̶-̶M̶a̶g̶i̶c̶, sorry, _Miracles_ ...
I’m confused by that last bit about the impact craters and volcanoes. They claim that this shows that Mars is about 6000yrs old due to the presence of these features and that they may have been caused by the same event that caused the Genesis Flood.
But surely the flood was 4500 years ago? So where’s the connection?
A bit of the old ‘sleight of hand’ trick?
So... they believe that a global flood happened on Mars proves that one happened on the earth. How does this work from a biblical worldview? Why did God flood Mars? Were there a bunch of sinners on Mars?
Somehow I'm not the least bit surprised that there's a "Shop Now" button on AIGs website! (20:22 top right)
Meh, thanks for doing these Paul...OGia ;-)
Wow... so they made shiny video to convince the already convinced they are right and ignore everyone else. Wow. Thanks for torturing yourself with that.
you're correct. and you're welcome?
It's nothing more than a cash grab by Jr. Dino,.
Step 1: Have other pay to make your movie.
Step 2: Sell it back to them.Step 3: Worship the Holy Profit!!!
Bill Brasski hahaha;) so right. ;)
Amen!
Mock the Bible at your own peril.
sounds like you got Tony doing your end narration... i miss him!
Regarding your point at 2:11
I really like this quote from Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong, "The world has moved on, leaving these elements of the Christian Church that cannot adjust to new knowledge or a new consciousness lost in a sea of their own irrelevance." Granted, he was specifically speaking about the fundamentalists' hatred of members of the LGBT community, but I think he would apply it here as well given what he has written elsewhere. For instance, the below quotes from him seem to back this up.
"The Biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense."
"The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity."
"The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age."
Tony Reed was the perfect choice to VO This. Eat your heart out Seth Andrews!
I agree.
Genesis strongly implies that there were no major changes in the shape of the land after creation, thus it is not consistent with science or Accommodation. For example, the description of the rivers around Eden: in Genesis, those rivers were there from the beginning with no apparent change from the beginning to the time of the writing of the story. (same goes with diversity of life)
When you have the plethora of options available within the human imagination, you can make any story fit the observable. We see children explore this phenomena during play, but it's disappointing when adults employ it in the face of contrary evidence.
5:45 "And God said "Let there be a dope-ass CGI sand tornado and all the beasts of the field shalt spring forth out of it" and it was so. -Hovindus 1:36.
"Let there be a firmament, in the midst of the waters. And let it divide the waters from the waters"
Sounds like the dump i took this morning, it was unusually firm and the splash was tremendous.
You know, I can believe in micro-flooding, but I'm just not convinced on the subject of macro-flooding. Now, you might say that macro-flooding is just the cumulative effect of micro-flooding over long periods of time, but we have never observed macro-flooding. There are no examples of transitional floods in the fluidic record, nor have we ever witnessed one kind of body of water transforming into another kind. X3
It would interesting to research into what young earth creationist have been saying over the last few centuries about the map of the earth from its beginning until now. When did they start claiming that there was initially one land mass? Was it after scientist began to accept plate tectonics?
Did you get Tony Reed to do your intro and outro?
Michael S 😁
I did
Correct me if I'm wrong but, wouldn't continental drift during during the flood melt the earth? I know such fast drift is impossible but what exactly would happen if it were that fast. I'm thinking global melting but I'm not 100% sure.
don't bother doing the math, common sense said things under water can't be hot.
Paulogia What about hydrothermal vents? They release water water with a temperature of about 200 degrees Celsius. My point is that if the flood did happen, with that fast plate movement, all that water should have cooked the entire planet. Just saying.
And don't you just love how the narrator in Hovind's video even sounds like Neil DeGrasse Tyson? Just to give it that air of scientific authority.
Moses dates was preceded by a "c" meaning approximate dating. Even within archeology, a possible period of accuracy may need to be given
Awesome!!
I'd expect, if the bible really did contain continental drift, that theists would have been saying so long before Wegener, and I'd expect that once Wegener came out with his idea that theists would have loudly proclaimed, "We told you so." As far as I know, neither happened.
I liked the reference to Calvin's doctrine of accommodation. Simply put, Calvin thought God taught subjects based on one's ignorance. God couldn't teach Bronze Age people about clouds so he taught them about something they knew about; a "firmament". However these Biblical creationists would probably think that such an idea amounts to accusing God of being a liar. They think that God wrote absolute truth into the text and we just need to figure out what it is.
It must be a comedy if Ray Comfort plays a part.
No ,its a tragedy.
They really want the stamp of respectability that science brings.
but without the actual evidence that science is based on. Or the process that checks to see if you have gone wrong.
That should tell you something.
Thanks a bunch!
you're welcome, Arne
The Creationist Genesis movie says animals of all kinds are found in all the deposited fossilized layers (likely to varying degrees) and you're statement about the fossilized layers suggests the fossils of each layer or perhaps time-groups of layers (ie. layers designated lower/older as opposed to those grouped into upper/later time periods) were excluding the kinds of fossils of other time-groups of layers? (Part 2 16:30)
Nice job Paul. I really dig your style.
I feel like I have a confirmation bias When I am I not getting tired of complimenting you on good videos. Oh yeah. Because they are all good videos. I’m not really sure if it helping confirm my confirmation bias though. Great videos as always m8.
thank you, my friend.
Perfect timing. Coffee Cigar...
not how I pictured my audience watching, but that works
Some of us plan our Hovind time....
Interesting, I didn't know it was Calvin who first reinterpreted "Firmament" to mean cloud.
"Let the waters under the firmament be gathered together in _one_ place." Suggests the Mediterranean Sea is the only major body of water! 😲
nice somthing good to watch
hope it worked out for you
I've always wondered how much money/royalties Ken Ham wanted for his few moments of genius insights in GPL.
No creationists will never agree to anything that does not support their end goal
Any truly intelligent designer would turn the lights on first
Lol. Literally
Who are the people talking about yoms?
So was Mars God's practicing before flooding the Earth, or were there a bunch of Martian sinners, but no one good Martian worth saving?
12:01 I know I shouldn't complain but, Paul that statement makes no sense. When the Space Shuttle is "Blasting off" It's not moving at all, that's just the moment when it begins accelerating. Did you mean orbital speed? That would be closer certainly, but for most snail species the number is closer to escape velocity, and the Space Shuttle definitely can't go that fast. Not that that's important since litterally every single rocket destined for low orbit ultimately travels at the same speed. I know most people don't know anything about orbital mechanics or rocketry, so you're not alone there. I just wish people would stop pretending they know what they are talking about.
I'd have to check my notes, but I believe it was the shuttle's speed at booster separation point. Fair point on non-specificity.
This was excellent! Possibly your best work yet, thank you
wow, thanks Charlton
So strange that they can reinterpret all those Bible passages to fit the current astronomical and geological knowledge but can't do that with evolution...wonder why...maybe because if they accept evolution they don't have that special place above animals ?
ken has in every debate and discussion stated that the firmament was an ice dome that created a pressurized greenhouse enclosed system, and when the flood came it melted and came down as rain while the earth split open and water from under the land came up to flood the earth. Now he suddenly is happy with it just being clouds , ha ha ha they are destroying their own arguments.
I think you're thinking of Eric's dad, Kent.
Wait, is it bigoted then to say all creationist look the same? O.o
but his dad is in the movie and was apart of it was he not, and also dose their story not the same between each creationist. ha ha ha
It's interesting that the spirit of God moved on the face of the water. There is no explanation where this water comes from, Adam Clark suggested something that would kinda look like what Laurence Krauss suggests, though Clark says God arranged the atoms into place, then again Clark does go off on irrelevant stuff sometimes...
Adam Clarke's Bible Commentary on The Bible - Genesis 1:2
31:27 Biblical reference for the land splitting apart, Genesis 10:25
_"And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan."_
Peleg is a descendant of Noah. It goes Noah, Shem, Arphaxad, Salah, Eber, Peleg. But considering the bible puts Noah's age at 950, he was probably alive when Peleg was born.
They don't mention it in the movie because their claim is that the flood caused the tectonic shifting, meaning the timeline would not longer add up if found that late into Genesis
There seems to a leap of logic when Mars once being covered (partially anyway) with water gets mentioned. They call it a ‘cataclysmic flood’. The scientific claim is that there once were oceans on Mars, not that there was a one-off event that flooded the planet.
The presence of a large body of water in no way implies a cataclysm but that’s their interpretation!
"millions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth" well that certainly yeeted me back to elementary school
Ken Ham and eggs next project should be Flat Earth Park. He could paint the map in the parking lot which would prove the earth is flat. And does the ark park have an incest diorama?
Those saying that religion destroys science, know nothing of religion. Actually, science and religion go hand in hand. I’ve always felt this! All those who first took to science, were Christian...I knew this too.
So what I gather from this is that, according to Creationists' reading of the Mars water situation, the earth's current coverage by water (at literally double what was proposed for Mars' maximum coverage) is "cataclysmic", rather than just being oceans?
The church I went to taught the firmament was the water that later came down in the great flood.
♥
Good stuff
The largest flood in the region that could been 'Noah's Flood' line up closer with the Tartessos Events... which if you believe some claims.... is the real life event that Plato might have drawn on when he wrote the allegory of Atlantis.
Love the video, lots of great information and well-researched. One thing that stood out though is the claim at about 16:30.
"No modern creatures in the older layers..." Yes, I agree fully with this and it supports evolution 100%, but then you follow with "...ancient creatures die out in the more modern layers - no exceptions", which although it is mostly true, there are still a handful of species around today that have survived largely unchanged for hundreds of millions of years, even through mass extinctions.
We both know this doesn't go against evolution, since evolution doesn't say species must undergo a constant rate of change, or must change at all if it's suited for it's environment, but the claim of "no exceptions" leaves the argument open to some Creationist who doesn't understand living fossils to bring up something like the Coelacanth.