Holy Hallucinations 22: Termites and Tosspots

Holy Hallucinations 22: Termites and Tosspots

This is a response to BereanBeacon’s video,
“Termites Place Hex on Evolution.” But before I begin, I’d like to correct
a couple of gross oversights from Holy Hallucinations 21 where I neglected to mention a pair of
great Youtubers who produce material in the areas of philosophy and theology. So if you
haven’t yet been exposed to the fascinating and educational videos of philosophy professor
SisyphusRedeemed, or the eloquent and beautiful deconversion and theological productions of
Evid3nc3, then you really should head over to their channels and click the yellow button.
So now, back to the subject of this episode and that’s the user BereanBeacon and one
particular example of the seemingly endless feast televisual craptitude that you can find
on his channel. I’ll be referring to you as BB for the purposes
of this response, so I hope you don’t take offense, but if you do feel so inclined then
I’d hold off until you see the rest of the video because I can assure that my little
nickname for you is going to be the least of your worries.
Like many of your videos, this one features an episode of the anti-science radio show
“Creation Moments” featuring a feeble-minded, geriatric creationist named Ian Taylor. It
seems Mister Taylor’s sole qualifications for disparaging evolutionary biology are an
undergraduate degree in metallurgy and the willingness and ability to lie like the pope
at an HIV prevention workshop. But lest I be accused of indulging in baseless
ad hominem attacks, let’s take a look at what the old fossil had to say about the evolution
of termites, and then ‘ll explain exactly why he’s either talking straight out of
his arse or has his head stuck up it. “The nest was discovered in in fossilized
wood from Big Bend National Park in Texas. Other scientists examined the grains under
a microscope and found that they were hexagonal in shape. That distictive shape told them
that the grains were termite droppings, and these droppings were identical to those made
by modern termites. With this discovery, they holes in the fossilized wood suddenly made
sense.” It’s hardly surprising of course to hear
a creationist talking crap, because it sometimes seems that that’s all they’re capable
of doing when placed in front of a microphone. The discovery that your rationally challenged
colleague’s referring to was published by David Rohr and colleagues in the peer-reviewed
journal Geology in January, 1987. The fact that this particular episode of “Creation
Moments” was broadcast in March of 2011 is a testament to the breathtakingly fast
pace at the cutting edge of modern Creation Research.
Now on the whole, Taylor makes a reasonable summary of this part of the paper apart from
his description of the fossilized frass as being “identical” to that of modern termites.
The authors of the actual paper do make an argument that the droppings are termitic in
origin because among extant insects only termites and roaches produce hexagonal droppings. They
argue against the possibility that the frass was produced by roaches, firstly because the
pellets were too small; secondly, because modern wood boring roaches prefer to live
in rotting wood and the petrified specimen in question appeared to be sound; and finally
because of the similarity of the distribution of the fossilized frass within the wood and
that of modern origin. At no point, however, do the authors state
that the frass is identical to extant termite fecal pellets, which begs the question as
to why this shriveled old fart said they did. I suspect that what he was doing was opening
the gate to prepare the way for him to drive through his muck-spreader and really start
spraying his shite. But before we see him completely lying his
nuts of for Jesus, let’s watch him as he starts up his tractor.
“The wood had been tunneled out in the same way that modern termites tunnel wood. the
nest was in the centre of the wood, just like modern termite build their nests. These ancient
termites had placed their droppings around the edge of the nest. Modern termites do the
same thing to plug any air leaks and to prevent draughts. In short, every evidence says that
termites from the time of the dinosaurs were built just like modern termites and that they
behaved in the same was as modern termites.” Once again, our budding manure magnate deliberately
overstates the case. Nothing in the paper in any way says, implicitly or explicitly,
that the insects in questions were, ”built just like modern termites.” In fact in their
conclusions the authors clearly state, and I quote, “Because the material reported
here is in the form of trace fossils, and no termites were preserved with the frass,
it is impossible to definitely prove that termites were responsible.
Now, the authors do indeed argue that termites were responsible for both the nest and frass,
and that this fossil is the oldest known example of both. And they also contend that this specimen
represents one of the earliest pieces of evidence of social behavior in insects. However arguing
and contending are very much different to stating as fact, and while these authors do
point to similarities between various aspects of these remains and their extant counterparts,
they never claim that they’re identical because they don’t have the evidence to
justify doing so. In fact, it’s very interesting to just compare
the language used by this creationist cretin and the scientists whose words he’s mining
like a dung beetle that’s just discovered an elephant’s outhouse. While Rohr and colleagues,
like all good scientists, use more circumspect and intellectually honest language when putting
forward their interpretations of the evidence, Taylor resorts to the dogmatic absolutism
of the religious zealot who, certain of the infallible truth of his scripture, can’t
even conceive of the possibility of being wrong.
So at no stage did the paper say anything about the morphology of these animals themselves,
but it appears that this wrinkled old prune doesn’t feel in any way restrained by such
trivialities as common decency or the facts. It seems that Mister Taylor is either demonstrating
the true value of his metallurgy degree in the area of evolutionary paleobiology, or
merely being a compulsive liar. Of course he is a creationist apologist, so perhaps
I shouldn’t be surprised. So with all that said. I’d love to ask this
stupid old bastard exactly which of the more than 2000 species of extant termites he thinks
these invisible fossils are “just like?” That comment alone speaks volumes about the
childish and simplistic mind that we’re dealing with here.
And now we get back to the question of why Farmer Taylor is so insistent on misrepresenting
this physical evidence. So now that he’s fired up his John Deere, let’s take at look
at what he’s been planning to do with it. “That there is no evidence of termite evolution
in this nest agrees perfectly with the Bible’s claim that all things reproduce after their
kind.” And there we have it. With this devious sleight
of hand the creatard claims that these ancient termites that weren’t actually in the fossil,
that produced similar fecal pellets and that behaved in a similar manner, are in fact the
same as the termites that are alive today, and so evolution must not occur. One can only
wonder whether he read the same paper I did. Or whether he read it at all.
And so a 65-million year-old fossil that was found in a late Cretaceous formation and in
itself conclusively negates biblical creation and a young earth is, with a generous dollop
of dishonestly, a liberal sprinkling of sophistry and a side dish of reprehensible lies is served
up as proof positive for the Abrahamic creation myth. And here I’ve been for the past year
arguing that there’s no such thing as magic. Of course, there’s nothing new here, just
a rehashing the same dismal failed arguments we’ve heard time and time again with organisms
such as crinoids, various mollusks, shrimp and plants and, of course, coelacanths, otherwise
colloquially known as living fossils. All your deceptive little muck-raker’s done
is substitute the word “termite” as an excuse to spew out the same old pathetically
unconvincing bullshit. This argument of course completely ignores
the well-documented concept of evolutionary stasis. It’s been clearly understood for
decades that evolutionary lineages can and do remain relatively stable morphologically
over periods of millions of years in the absence of dramatic changes in selective pressures.
This stasis is maintained, at least in part, by the statistical stabilization of gene pools
in large populations by allele dilution and gene flow, although the exact contributions
of these and other factors are the subject of active debate and research by today’s
evolutionary biologists. Thus, given a sufficiently large breeding population and a sufficiently
stable environment evolutionary theory easily accounts for phenotypic persistence, be it
in snails, or shrimp or fish or termites. However, over longer periods of time even
this persistence of phenotypes begins to apply only to gross morphology. Zoologists and paleontologists
with the appropriate training and experience are able to easily distinguish similar species
within the fossil record and to differentiate extant species from their extinct relatives,
even creating mathematical algorithms to quantify these differences.
Of course none of this matters to the fatuous creatards who try to propound this stunted
and sickly runt of an argument in its many forms. The fact that this concept has been
explained countless times does nothing to prevent them from gleefully interpreting stasis
as an absence of any evolutionary process at all, presumably by conceitedly using a
maxim along the lines of “it looks the same to my ignorant and untrained eye, so it is
the same.” By way of an example, let me quote from a
random paper I selected on trilobite morphology that demonstrates the detail and precision
used by a trained professional: “Granulation is coarsest on the posterior half of the axial
rings, on the glabella and cheeks, and on the pleural ribs of thorax and pygidium (pahy-jid-ee-uhm);
furrows are finely granulated to smooth.” In contrast the creationists who make these
arguments about living fossils essentially simply assert the lack of any evolutionary
change with no evidence or argument and no reference to any specific specimens or morphological
features. Essentially they best they can do is: “sure looks the same, don’t it? Hyuk,
hyuk.” That might impress you, BB, but it elicits an entirely different response from
anyone who can tell the difference between a laboratory and a lobotomy.
Now, before I wrap up this section, let’s get back to the subject of termites so I can
show you what a little real research can do. Based on morphological analyses of extant
species and on the fossil record it’s been long accepted that termites and cockroaches
are descended from a common roach-like ancestor. Unsurprisingly more recent DNA analysis has
confirmed this to be the case, providing three independent verifications of the evolutionary
relationships of these insects. Additionally, Mastotermes darwiniensis, the
most roach-like of the termites is the only one that carries an endosymbiotic bacterium
that’s common to all cockroaches. Researchers predicted that these Blattabacteria should
have co-evolved their hosts and recently conducted a molecular analysis of a number of roaches
and termite and their respective microbial symbionts. The resulting phylogenies of both
insects and bacteria were almost identical, and provided a breathtaking validation of
evolutionary theory, for only evolution both predicted and provides an explanation for
the convergence of these cladograms. This is just one example of the countless
equally impressive pieces of evidence that all converge inexorably to the same conclusion:
that evolution is a fact that is beautifully explained by the theory of the same name regardless
of what cretins like Ian Taylor have to say about it. And if he doesn’t like it – then
he can stick it up his compost heap. So now that I’ve dealt with that, it’s
time to turn my attention back to you BB. I have to say that I initially found the second
half of your video a little surreal as it was, to put it mildly, a bit of a non-sequitur.
I’m not sure whether this was an editing error on your part or merely a sign of a short
attention span, but you changed the subject faster than William Lane Craig after an honest
question. So, let’s do the same and take a look at
what you had to say about that stale and rancid puddle of Creationist vomit known as the Life
Science Prize. “They could easily shut down us creationists
by simply taking doctor Mastropaulo’s challenge and defeat him. If they have any evidence
they could bring us to an embarrassing halt as creationists. They could silence out voice.
They could make us look like morons.” Of course it wouldn’t take a scientist accepting
this challenge to make creationists look like morons because they’ve been doing a bang-up
job of that themselves for over a century. And if you don’t believe me then just take
a look at some of the many fine examples of stupendous fuckwittery from your fellow mentally
castrated intellectual eunuchs right here on Youtube.
So now let’s get back to the challenge. Firstly, let me point out that your faith
in your apparent hero, Joseph Mastropaolo, is as misplaced as your faith in your pitifully
childish and patently fallacious fairy tales. You see, it seems that the good doctor is
a kinesiologist with a PhD in the field, although, according to his entry in creationwiki, not
a particularly good one since his record of 6 peer-reviewed publications in an academic
career of over 26 years is about as impressive as a pair of hamster testicles dangling off
of a bull elephant. So while this may qualify him to comment on
the correct posture for a creationist to adopt while talking endless wank to avoid a case
of terminal brain-strain, it hardly fosters confidence in his ability to debate the veracity
of evolutionary theory with even a moderately qualified biologist. I strongly suspect that
if such a debate ever took place he’d be picking the shrapnel out of his arse for a
year afterwards. Secondly, it took just five minutes for me
to find two published accounts of exactly how Mastropaulo and his slimy henchmen reacted
when Biology Professors Michael Zimmerman and non-other than Richard Dawkins probed
them by pretending to be interested in a debate. It was more than amusing to read how their
enthusiasm dried up faster than a suspicious stain on a priest’s trousers after choir
practice when anyone even vaguely resembling an unbiased and/or qualified adjudicator was
suggested. The desperation in their frenzied attempts to extricate themselves from the
possibility of being called on their bullshit was nothing short of palpable despite the
liberal seasoning of false bravado. From just these two accounts it should, be
more than blindingly obvious to anyone whose brain isn’t seeping out of their anal sphincter
that Mastropaulo has no intention in participating in a debate. This particularly odious and
dishonest little reptile uses the façade of a genuine challenge to publicize his intellectually
indefensible position, and this is no more evident than the fact that anyone who declines
to participate in his charade is automatically adjudged to have lost the debate by default.
As a result he’s collected more so-called victories than an evangelical preacher has
venereal diseases and proudly displays his dishonesty on his web page, presumably either
because he’s too stupid to realize exactly how big a douchebag this makes look like or
because he thinks it’s OK to be a lying tosspot as long as you’re doing it for Jesus.
So, aside from this being a tactic that I might expect from a fifth grader that takes
the “short bus” to school, it’s one of the most underhanded and reprehensible
kinds of behavior imaginable. If this is the kind of lying pustule you need to fall back
on to cling to your primitive superstitions, BB, then perhaps you need to ask yourself
whether they’re really worth clinging to. Because from where I’m standing it appears
that you’re tossing very things your religion is supposed to stand for into the same cesspit
that Joseph Mastropaulo’s wallowing in. “They don’t do it because the rules for
Life Science Prize restrict them to real science. Not propaganda. Not the power of the pulpit.
They also have many pulpits in their favor. Not the power of that headlines. They’re restricted
to science and that’s why they won’t contend for the Life Science Prize.”
So presumably it was this fear of debating “real” science that compelled Michael
Zimmerman to suggest that the judge be at least a member of the National Academy of
Science? Presumably this is also why he suggested a definition of evolution (that is, “change
in allele frequency over time”) that has been in virtually, and I quote, “every biology
textbook for the past half century.” Scared of science, BB? Really?
If your Doctor Douchbag was so keen to debate science, then can you explain why he wouldn’t
accept these quite reasonable terms? Why he insisted that this scientific debate could
only be adjudicated by a superior court judge? Better still, can you explain why he wouldn’t
even accept Zimmerman’s suggestion of using an ordained priest, Dr Francisco Ayala as
a judge? Could it be that it was because Ayala is a past president of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science and a member of the National Academy of Science? Could
it be that Mastropaulo didn’t explain why Ayala was unacceptable because he was too
busy browning his kecks at the prospect of being shown up for what he really is?
So you see, BB, if by “science” you mean what every sane and rational human being on
the planet understands by that word, then it’s pretty clear that the only one avoiding
a debate on it is your Doctor Dickhead. If, on the other hand, by “science” you mean
that hazy, ill-defined concept that seems to roughly approximate to “anything that
conflicts with my delusional belief system”, (you know,the same usage that I’ve heard
coming from such monumental Youtube fucktards such as Nephilimfree and Eye2EyeIIIV?), then
you might have a point. Because at the end of the day, working scientists
have much better and much more productive things to be doing with their time than pandering
to the hallucinations of a bunch of feeble-minded, deceitful simpletons.
So quite frankly, BB, you and Joseph Mastropaulo can take your pathetic and transparently dishonest
little challenge and stick it back up where it belongs to keep it safe and warm. Because
all you’re doing by parading it around so proudly in public is demonstrating quite clearly
how your Beacon is running on only a 5-watt bulb.

100 thoughts on “Holy Hallucinations 22: Termites and Tosspots”

  1. I am a Christian not a Catholic.Dec 25th and virgin births are of pagan origin. For every truth and attribute God has Lucifer mimics and smokescreens a new strory. The evidence is since the beginning of time the cosmic chess match to lure people from the true original story. We get the word History in response to that.We ask who made the Big Bang, you ask who made God. That is the debate in itself you are being redundant. Atheists don't answer the question of how we got here. Therefore nothing.

  2. The cosmic chess match and battle of the spirit world was always eminent since the beginning. Who recorded anything since the beginning of time is not a competition and cannot be verified who wrote what first. Basically whether people followed The God of the Bible Elohim, Father, Son and Holy Spirit or false gods one being Baal that the Sumerians followed. Lucifer is involved in mimicry that is the whole decepion. He will stand in the rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem and claim to be god. AOD

  3. The Bible is a supernatural marvel that has verified prophecies. Our God is beyond a sky wizard as you call him. He has been here in the flesh and those who hated Him said He performed miracles by the power of the devil. It is verified literture that can't be denied. There are comments on these You tube posts that Jesus is mythical and did not exist. There is plenty of evidence and many refered to His miracles as false. We know God did them out of Love

  4. Remember that song by Focus called Hocus Pocus…that song is good but ridiculous.. Yodeling in a progressive rock song..Haahhaa

  5. The exact story you are speaking of The Virgin Birth, Messiah was written in the first Heaven by God as a testimony. God, Adam and Eve and Lucifer were the first beings in the garden The split between Cain and Abel is when the false god Horus began, but there was one false god before Horus and that is Lucifer. Lucifer duplicates and mocks and he is now mocking you with Illuminati built on a worldwide foundation of Masons. Lucifer will genetically alter you with the mark of the beast.

  6. Also there were many Magi that were at the birth of Jesus, not just 3. I'm curious about the extent of this story you speak of does it also mention not one of His bones would be broken. Did He die during the feast of the passover, no that's for sure. Was He buried in a rich mans tomb. Was it written in the manuscripts of the Jews who denied Him, no of course. So Lucifer fails again at a duplication of the truth. One has to be the right one and one has to be wrong as far as your arguement goes.

  7. I'll stick with my Jesus who is verified by His own Words. Supernaturally placed in His written word using fallible men to accomplish His recorded truth. Should blow your mind, but that is how God interacts with us. The world calls it BS we call it truth

  8. Know what you mock… Go to ICR and see for yourself. There is nothing to mock, Just honest people looking at evidence.

  9. This parrot needs to have a NDE just to bring himself back to reality so much hate and unsubstantial information. If that makes you feel superior super drag unchurch lady, do your superior dance, just know your information is circular and most accusations made is not within context of the debate differences, more like inference to hypothetical misquotations. The rehashing is evo's claims that their dating methods are valid and verify their timelines is the LIE.

  10. Your millions and billions timelines are a joke and you mock anyone who makes this claim is invalid. Evo is a myth with mythical timelines to explain their lack of evidence. The flood will always put you to shame. The LIE is you evo's always claim to have facts in your young religion. The middle east prophecies and the mark of the beast you will be backtracking to say Alien beings will be the explaination… evo's and Lucifer their supreme deceiver will stand behind this new philosophy.

  11. Where is Jesus mentioned in the Old Testament? And no he didn't create all things. That was God remember? Any proof that it was a demon? Or that you did anything? And so what? Eye witness testimony is shit evidence when trying to discover truth because it's all to easily muddied by bias and you very well could have been mistaken. Where's the hard evidence?

  12. 3 wise men correct? Or 3 magi? If not where does it say there were more? Unless of course you're thinking that sheppards are magi too. And Jesus didn't die during the feast of passover remember? That was afterwards. Where are these manuscripts? And actually they both could be wrong, ever think of that? Of course not because you seem to think yours is truth when you have no evidence for it.

  13. "The middle east prophecies and the mark of the beast you will be backtracking to say Alien beings will be the explaination… evo's and Lucifer their supreme deceiver will stand behind this new philosophy." – What are you trying to say? you seem to be missing several words, such as any connection between beast and you.

  14. "The exact story you are speaking of The Virgin Birth, Messiah was written in the first Heaven by God as a testimony" Can you advise us of HOW you know this? cite your source (and for this one I will accept scripture).

  15. You don't want a God that died for you.You want to believe in coming aliens and ignore all BIBLICAL PROPHECY. No fustration here, I just believe you are here to rail against the BIBLE. Soon our economy will collapse and I hope you will question the masses perception of the One World and very promiscuous society with a mark. A predicted depopulated world of new wisdom and thousands of years of Eutopia. That is the exact deception the Bible speaks of, you can find it you are concerned.

  16. First, even if all of the prophecies in your Bible actually happened, it wouldn't prove that a god exists. Second, there are no impressive prophecies in the Bible.

  17. You don't seem to be speaking to me, you seem to be talking to an alien astronaut nut, Sorry to have to tell you but I'm not that. BTW you didn't answer the question I asked.

  18. You have no evidence other than an old book of his existence. Some people would like to see some evidence and that's fine what people think. Some people grew up differently then others. So please, im trying to be nice, but before you go ahead and talk smack about religion, put down your bible, and look around the entire world. news flash! Not everyone is christian.

  19. How do you know he did all of this? You. Have. No. Proof. Please, this argument is just invalid and unequal.

  20. VERIFIED PROPHESIES?!? Excuse me, but how do you suppose this was verified? Did he come down and tell you? Do you have his email?! Because this "book" is. just. a. book!! The bible is not facts sir. It is just a religion. Again. People think differently! Some are ignorant, and some will look deeper.

  21. well not everyone can be perfect, now can they ….. as long as you believe in Jesus that is all that really matters is it not….

  22. No, that doesnt matter whatsoever, because some people really dont care. Beleiving in Jesus doesnt make everything perfect.

  23. They way I see it you are a believer or you are a non believer and you really do not want to be in the non believers boat when Jesus comes back so seek him out and save yourself, the negative people and the people that believe in science and all that have there belief's and that's all and good but Jesus is your answer so find him before it is too late…

  24. With the way the economy is headed Amish may not be a bad way to go instead of receiving nano technology for survival and rendering my free will defunct.

  25. Anyone who has the faith to hear the mockery about Jesus including Jesus Himself does not rail on those who do not believe as stupid. Jesus said Himself as He was dying Father forgive them for they know not what they do. Most don't do their homework and are deceived but that does not make them stupid. They are wilfully ignorant of true facts, because the facts are there if people want to see. It is far greater though to be convicted of sin and turn to forgiveness and be born of the Spirit of God

  26. I have. Do you know about dating methods. Do you know about worldwide flood evidence. I could go on…. Check out Creationists scientists and debunk their information if you can. Go to ICR you will find unbiased studies there.

  27. Do you know if you go to the original Hebrew language of the first 3 words in the BIBLE there are two meanings to the 3 words.

  28. So according to you we got 2 choices.
    Eather turn back to th 1800 or get forced to be plugged into some Mainframe via Nanotechology?

    Screw that i Think we all can make our own choices!!

    Atleast im sure i can….

  29. Your double negatives are always wrong. Search the scriptures find the prophecies prove they did not happen. You don't know the prophecies. find a couple just so I know your truthful. The Lord claims you are not trying to find them and prove they never could have happened. He calls you wilfully ignorant. He loves You.

  30. I'm not choosing the 1800's I'm choosing Salvation Forever. Why don't you complain that you do not like gravity and wish to ignore it. Just fly off of buildings, screw gravity I don't like that reality.

  31. Prove there is anything like the salvation you're talking about. It's all myths and legends you believe in, imbecile. You can't ignore gravity, you can however ignore and shit on your god and nothing will happen.

  32. Oh please! It only takes a second. Google "failed prophecies" and you get a long list. Isaiah 19 has failed prophecies about Egyptians speak the language of Canaan, Nile drying up. It's not intellectually honest to claim that there are no failed prophecies.

  33. Like I pointed out before, the fulfillment of some prophecies doesn't prove the existence of God. You have no way of knowing which supernatural source was behind any of the miracles. It could be God, Satan, fairies, demons. Or just coincidence.

  34. From a theological point of view, you can reinterpret the words to me anything you want them to mean in order to resolve or embrace any contradictions. The fact that Christians find the Biblical prophecies impressive is irrelevant. From an outsider's perspective the "prophecies" are so vague they don't even deserve to be called prophecies. I would like to challenge you with the converse: name me even a single prophecy in the Bible that an outsider would agree with you on. Give me your best !!

  35. because you don't know Him or accept His Grace you cannot have His Spirit, therefore no spiritual dicernment. The Lord says you must be born from above, ( born again )

  36. Why should anyone care about being born from above? Why should anyone want to have spiritual discernment?

  37. TV I reccomend you study with a true scholar that rightly divides the word of truth…Khouse.org…look up Isaiah 19…. Chuck did his thesis on this book… TV you can't know His word by just believing the lies about it. I'm glad you brought up Isaiah 19 it proves my point…. study with Chuck and you will see.

  38. You proved my point you cannot point out the prophecy that has been fulfilled and this one Satan, fairies, demons, or any arguement you priovide could not do. It can only relate to GODS perfect plan and example to His faithfulness. You don't want to know the truth I believe that TV you do not believe you need Salvation and I understand that. I don't hold that against you understanding but I pray the Lord will give you a hunger to know Him.

  39. Once again tell me the modern day prophecy…. If you don't know it then you cannot claim to know any BIBLE prophecies. Once again your debunk list is also futile and just a list of lack of knowledge of what is fulfilled and what is yet to come… and misinterpretations of the Word.

  40. No need for shit and imbecile…. doesn't bump up your arguement in the least… The myth arguement has been since the beginning of time since man has seperated himself from God by his continual practice of sin. Exactly how the spiritual battle began and transfered into a world historry of false religions and many claiming to know Christ.

  41. We aren't even on the same playing field. I challenge you to come up with even one real prophecy in the Bible. The so called "prophecies" in the Bible suffering from one or more of the following problems: 1) they are not specific enough 2) they can faked by a reader intent on "fulfilling" the prophecy 3) they are things that are likely to happen by chance 4) the prophecy must come before the event actually happens

  42. Yar you think you can ignore things of the spirit and only dwell on a material plane…. you will find even in the study of quantum physics there is a spirit world and we live in a plasma universe and digital reality. That intern allows us to speculate that even after death we are an energy that never dies. Some live in eternal happiness and those that choose sin and not to be forgiven live in darkness with no furtherance of His beautiful Creations that no man can know until we get there.

  43. That's exactly how a stupid, shortsighted and fictional god would have created the world. You're doing yourself no favors by admitting your belief in such an unworthy creator.

  44. sin is spiritual blindness…. His message is clear and verified. Don't receive the mark and don't believe that this one world government will be benevolent and the first time in the history of the world will be in harmony. Lucifer is the god of this world by default.. The Lord has the title but we allowed the evil property manager to rule this world because the majority reject the Only Perfect GOD. It's your free will to make the wrong choice. been good debating see ya yarp.

  45. Great video. I am having a discussion (if you can call it that) with a creationist that thinks whales are fish, because they live in water. It is scary to think these half-wits are taking over government. Armageddon probably will happen then.

  46. My god man!! I only just now found this gem of a channel. And the Living Dinosaur lost his enthusiasm for ripping creationist assholes. Just my luck. Well I hope your enthusiasm comes back and will spread the name of your channel to anyone I know

  47. THERE IS EVIDENCE EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD SUPPORTING THE FLOOD AND IT DOES CONFIRM FOSSILS BONES SCATTERED FROM A FLOOD AND THE ECOSYSTEM ITSELF ALONG WITH HUMAN BEING IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF DESIGN..For anyone to think it random and nothing created a single cell after the big bang then you love your sin more than you want to know a creator and Saviour… We will always disagree especially on obvious evidence in Archeology and the Bibles verification of events, people, prophecy, archeaology.

  48. Which flood? There is evidence of many floods on every continent, but they all happened at different times. Also, none of these local devestating floods were higher than mountains in the area in which they occurred. Also, the bible is evidence only of the attempt by bronze age men to explain their environment and their place in it. It is in actuality a book of myths and legends – not a historical record.

  49. Oh man… I feel bad for you. My advise would just to be give up on trying to teach common sense to someone who believes 2000 years ago a woman got pregnant magically by god so she could give birth to god, so that he could save us from our evil selves which he created.. so that we don't go to hell which he created apparently to punish us for being what he made us.

    Fuck creationists are stupid.

  50. Look up. We know the speed that light travels at. How can you explain the universe as it is in 10,000 years or less. Get your head out your ass!

  51. The "who was called christ" is a forgery and it is unclear which Jesus he is referring to – there were many people named Jesus at the time – it was a popular name. It is possible it was clear in the original Josephus' writing but the forger may have removed the text making it clear and replaced it with the forged "who was called christ". This actually reduces the likelyhood that it was gospel Jesus the text refers to.

  52. Are you trying to make a joke? The bible is so full of non-sense it's not even funny. Read the bible – all of it – and you will see page after page with drivel.

  53. If only this were true. Then you would soon go away. People who believe in Horus, Satan, Krishna, Vishnu, God, Allah, and all other forms of magic have rarely added much to human progress. Please, step in front of a bus and go join your god sooner rather than later. It's hard to imagine that even that monster would fault you for killing yourself out of an unsuppressable desire to praise him.

  54. Yes, so what? There was a guy named Jesus who had a brother James – what does this prove? The Bible never mentions a brother of Jesus, and even if it did, it would not demonstrate that any story, never mind a miraculous story is true. I personally suspect that there was a somewhat delusional cult leader by the name of Yeshua, or Jesus – so what?

  55. The forger in question was likely Eusebius of Caesara, since he was the first person to reference it and was quoted as once saying that creating fictions was acceptable "medicine" for the religion. It also didn't show up in any other works prior to him referencing it.

    Josephus was a messianic jew- spending barely 3 sentences about a messiah in an entire work that details the plots against Pilate and the actions of Herod is more than unusual, it's damning to the idea that Josephus ever wrote it.

  56. Yes, the lying for Jesus crowd has a long standing tradition in the christian church. Too bad none of them stopped to think that it is wrong an even counter productive given that people find out that they are not honest and then don't trust them. However, look at your average creationist apologist today and see how they spew off one lie after another just to "defend" what is indefensible. Not saying that non-creationist apologists are honest, just saying they are particularly bad liars.

  57. The video and audio have nothing to do with each other. The soft porn, the commercial logos, the random junk video just distracts way from the argument.  It drove me nuts and I had to drop out.

  58. You should do more from this guy. I took a look at his stuff, and it's only gotten more and more idiotic.

  59. How am I supposed to focus on the science if you're distracting me with all of that sweet ass!? :'< You know it's bad when you pause the video for it.

  60. Evid3nc3's videos are fantastic and beautiful…I almost cried while watching them. His vids were the first I watched when I started questioning my belief in the supernatural.

  61. I am new to channel, and am already on on 22. I can't seem to stop watching your knowledgeable, smart ass wit! I love it! Thanks for taking the time to call bullshit!!! Well done!

  62. Christianity has a long, proud history of dishonesty:

    Bishop Eusebius, the official propagandist for Constantine, entitles the 32nd Chapter of his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation:
    "How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."

    Eusebius is notoriously the author of a great many falsehoods – but then he does warn us in his infamous history:
    "We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."
    – Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2.

    Clement of Alexandria was one of the earliest of the Church Fathers to draw a distinction between "mere human truth" and the higher truth of faith:
    "Not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith."
    – Clement (quoted by M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria, p446)

    John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople, is another:
    "Do you see the advantage of deceit? …

    For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind …

    And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
    – Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.

    'Golden Mouth' John is notable for his extensive commentaries on the Bible which emphasized a literal understanding of the stories; the style popular at Alexandria until then was to acknowledge an allegorical meaning of the text.
    Thus eminent ‘believers’ added falsehood to the beliefs of later generations. ‘For the best of reasons’ they ‘clarified’ obscure points, conjured up characters to speak dialogue that could have been said, invented scenarios that could have happened, borrowed extensively from a wider culture. And this all before they became the custodians of power and had real reasons for lies, inventions and counterfeits. As we shall see, god’s immutable laws became as flexible as putty.
    The 5th and 6th centuries was the 'golden age' of Christian forgery. In a moment of shocking candour, the Manichean bishop (and opponent of Augustine) Faustus said:
    "Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since – as already it has been often proved – these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them."

    In the ferocious battle for adherents, the propagandists sought to outdo each other at every turn. One example: by the 5th century, four very different endings existed to Mark's gospel. Codex Bobiensis ends Mark at verse 16:8, without any post-crucifixion appearances; it lacks both the 'short conclusion' (of Jesus sending followers to 'east and west') or the 'long conclusion' – the fabulous post-death apparitions, where Jesus promises his disciples that they will be immune to snake bites and poison.
    Once the Church had grabbed mastery of much of Europe and the middle-east, its forgery engine went into overdrive.
    'The Church forgery mill did not limit itself to mere writings but for centuries cranked out thousands of phony "relics" of its "Lord," "Apostles" and "Saints" … There were at least 26 'authentic' burial shrouds scattered throughout the abbeys of Europe, of which the Shroud of Turin is just one … At one point, a number of churches claimed the one foreskin of Jesus, and there were enough splinters of the "True Cross" that Calvin said the amount of wood would make "a full load for a good ship." '
    – Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy.
    Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the tireless zealot for papal authority –  he was the founder of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) – even wrote:
    "We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."

    The Reformation may have swept away some abuses perpetrated by the priesthood but lying was not one of them. Martin Luther, in private correspondence, argued:
    "What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church … a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them."
    – Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed., Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmüthigen von Hessen mit Bucer, vol. I.)

  63. Lets just hope you channel don't get flag for you sexual thumbneils .
    I min evry body knows thet athiest hate the lowes

  64. Even if the apparent termite finding turns out to be absolutely identical to a species found today, the only thing it would prove would be: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If the conditions are identical, the food is the same, the colonial structure of the termite colony is the same… changes could well do more harm than good.

    There is a beautiful fossil – among countless others – found in a sandstone quarry in Germany of a termite queen (have seen it on a few David Attenborough programmes but its name – the quarry that is – escapes me. It's in Bavaria IIRC), which is identical in its size and look as modern queens. This was found along with a perfect feather – like a small stork feather (he placed one right next to it and there was no obvious difference), a small fish and numerous other immediately identifiable species in whole or in part. These are so old that some people <cough> creatards <cough> would insist that they would have to have changed or else evolution isn't real. The fact that these fossils are as near identical to modern animals found in the conditions that the quarry stone eventually took over (I believe it was a lagoon and its surroundings), only goes to show that evolution only happens as and when the living conditions challenge the life in an existing ecosystem to adapt and change to a better fit when new conditions take over.
    I find the fact that over a long period of time that some life forms do not change to be an excellent argument for evolution. If their conditions are the same, mutations would be more likely to be a hindrance than a help. A resettlement into an area containing a creature's original ecosystem would take a lot less time – and a lot less luck in developing beneficial mutations – so leaving well alone, biologically speaking.

    Hope that makes sense. Been a long day.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *