'Debating' a creationist (part 3)

Search Tags:

Categories:

'Debating' a creationist (part 3)

Uploaded by: Thunderf00t
Video Description:
Oks this is the last round. The latest video of venomfangx is a bunch of rambling fallacies loosely tied together. Indeed you could spend half an hour just untangling his latest video, and it would serve little purpose, and would really be quite dull...
For example, hes wrong from the first line about 'unless you can validate a theory its useless'. You cannot 'validate' a theory..... Well exactly, if the guy doesn't even understand the scientific method, whats the point in explaining why his implementation of what he doesn't understand is wrong!
His second line is wrong too, about it being untestable if the inside of watermelons are blue.
Well infact hes even wrong on his premise.... Color is due to the light you receive from an object. The inside of the watermelon has no light, therefore it has no color, neither red or blue!
However the pigment molecules are there, and you could monitor these by a non-invasive method such as nmr.
Incidentally, VFX just copied this argument off Hovind. When Hovind used it it was bull too! Ahh the joy of being able to think for yourself rather than just parrot idiots eh venom!!
Anyways, venom is obviously an attention whore, and while I have no problem in using him as a poster boy for creationists stupidity (a role in which he actually plays a beneficial role for civilization), he seems to be laboring under the delusion that I have nothing better to do than explain to him why hes wrong on almost everything he says.
....so in an attempt to draw a line under this and get back to actually doing something useful myself, I have simply called for a straight up vote.
Clips from:
Apollo 11, intel 45nm tech, DNA molecular visualization and others, used for educational purposes.
Voting after 2 days (ca 5000 votes, ratings = 4.97 = 97.8% (remember it goes from 1-5 stars, not 0-5)-#1 top rated this week, #2 top rated all time education):
Votes for TFoot = 4890
Votes for VFX = 110
To see the rating stats of VFX see:
http://youtube.com/api2_rest?method=youtube%2Evideos%2Eget%5Fvideo%5Finfo &video_id=7711MfObzio
For current video ratings see
http://youtube.com/api2_rest?method=youtube%2Evideos%2Eget%5Fvideo%5Finfo &video_id=oHbHeqd7meE

Tags for this video: amazing Atheism christ creation creationism Dawkins debate evolution funny God Religion science stupid venomfangx vote

Find more videos in the "Education" category
See more videos uploaded by Thunderf00t

Related Videos

The Christians are Revolting	'Debating' a creationist (part 1)	RE: venomfangx debate challenge

Can a scientific illiterate 'debate' science?	'Debating' a creationist (part 2)	Re: 'Debating' a creationist (part 2)

Share This Video:

Comments for this video: Show || Hide

Comments for this video on YouTube

What did I guess? ... ( 1 week ago by AndLOLGG)

What did I guess? My preassumptions in physics will still just be on the atomic-state with molecules, and not in the speed of light. My expectations in the speed of light is that when travelling by the speed of light, it is always: "now", therefore, no change. And physics were there long before the evolution theory. It was in ancient Greek - therefore physics can not be a product of evolution (that's what I read from your argument). Church said world was flat, scientists disproved it.

"TF belongs to ... ( 1 week ago by AndLOLGG)

"TF belongs to those who redicule others based upon the abilities to adapt upper class behaviour. ", upper class behaviour equals intelligence and good articulation? If one's intelligent, one should sound intelligent. VFX could just as well be upperclass because he is acting like a spoiled brat from what I've seen and heard. Some things VFX say are also well-articulated but VFX doesn't have facts straight, he hasn't understood science, but he has good showmanship.

Lots of educated ... ( 1 week ago by Punishment7)

Lots of educated scientist proved world was flat. as they have proved flying was impossilbe, electrisity was a force not to be recon and so on. Even greec sciense is ultimatly a product of evelution, as well as sciense is today.
If you took the time to try to understand why they say universe is old(it just even got 1000000000 years older some weeks ago), you would be stunned of how little we know.

A leading character ... ( 1 week ago by Punishment7)

A leading character in mathematics calculated that given the ammount of deadly asteriod impact (the one tht kills all life at a planet) and the time for evelution to provide life 4-50000000 years, chanser for life to occur is closer to none.
Scientist replied that they dont belive that
Belive it? Then we talk religion. (cos if they did so goes their hole life and space programs).
So I can give you a better explenation than evelution, wich actually dont have so many gaps as evelution.

"Lots of educated ... ( 6 days ago by AndLOLGG)

"Lots of educated scientist proved world was flat. as they have proved flying was impossilbe, electrisity was a force not to be recon and so on." emm what? show me the sources of that, scientists later refuted that you see. "Even greec sciense is ultimatly a product of evelution" omfg! greek science can't be a product of evolution theory because it came over a 1500 years later. They didn't know about Darwin's theory at all so then it's not possible for them to know about it.

Array ( 6 days ago by AndLOLGG)

/facepalm
You ramble on about nothing, you are not good at explaining at all - I don't understand what you're saying, it's purely nonsense. Evolution is not astromony either! Evolution is BIOLOGY! and astronomy is also older than evolution so then astronomy can't be a product of evolution. It seems to me you don't know what evolution is AT ALL. And science is a method, evolution is a theory. Evolution is a product of biology which is a product of science. You need to open and READ a textbook.

100000 years ago ... ( 5 days ago by Punishment7)

100000 years ago you wouldnt say this now would you? No, you probalby hit me in the head with a stick instead.
Now what do we call that? progress? Wich is just another "mini way" in evelution( we terminate those with a stick today). your great theories in physics is also an outcome of evelution, ask a monkey, or tht green man from the future. Now, your understanding of anyting, is a mere outcome of evelution. And guess what, so is your assumptions in physics as well. Einstein theory is not.

I use to add for a ... ( 5 days ago by Punishment7)

I use to add for a sciense magazine wich had a hole page of funny stuff wich history has thought us. Now lucky for us, it is only the well educated idiots that get theri stuff pubished, so we later generations can laught our arse off. And yes if you say that evelution exsist, then also greec sciens is part of evelution. But u might call it progress since it not a new spicy in it. But even in sciense there is a process of "evelution" going on. Whats right today, is wrong tomorrow.

If you're saying ... ( 5 days ago by AndLOLGG)

If you're saying that because of evolution happening we have science today, you can probably be right. But still evolution is not the mother of all science, since science was there way before Darwin's evolution theory came to exist. Your argument with that fails. To explain your logic with that it would be like:
"Greek science came to exist because Darwin was born over 1500 years after". That's how I read your statements. "Because Darwin is born later than everything, it's because of him."

"I use to add for a ... ( 5 days ago by AndLOLGG)

"I use to add for a sciense magazine wich had a hole page of funny stuff wich history has thought us." Of course it is funny, you don't know what you're talking about, then people laugh at you or do a facepalm. If you had an ad in a science magazine, you consider yourself well educated? You still don't know what you are talking about. You are certainly not educated in science I can tell. You speak totally nonsense. And it's EVOlution. EVElution is something different.

well the ratings ... ( 5 days ago by cinderfella86)

well the ratings show clearly that you are right and venom is wrong end of disscusion

I could have ... ( 5 days ago by Punishment7)

I could have spammed this place with so called science from the establishment wich you would be embarresed to even think of has been a part of science. Just take Nazi, against jew during the reign of hitler. Science produced evidence that white race was supreme. British establishment scientifically proved world was center and flat (along with churc). Scientist claimed roads on mars.
Tell me: is universe accelerating, or not? And what is its age?

To talk what was ... ( 5 days ago by Punishment7)

To talk what was first, science or evevlution is silly. Darwin didnt invent evolution.He discovered it. Greec Science didnt come because he discovered evolution 2500 years later as you try to put in my mouth. Science came as a process. But even our method of asuming universal age is based upon our understaning of physics wich is immensely little,and ultimately is again a product of evolution. We dont even know gravity, a major fact in time/space factors. So is speed, acceleration. Good luck

I didn't say he ... ( 4 days ago by AndLOLGG)

I didn't say he invented evolution, I said he made the Theory of Evolution. You're using the words wrong then, it should rather be: "Because of our understanding of physics the outcome can be Evolution theory"-something... You say that science is silly, how come you're on a computer/mac whatever and using the Internet? If it wasn't for science you wouldn't have either of them. Some creationist even claim that science is a tool of Satan. If you're one of those, consider what you're doing.

I dont hink think ... ( 4 days ago by Punishment7)

I dont hink think science is silly. I love science, but I do belive the ability to qestion old theories is important. I do belive also that there is a chanse that the way/method we have used to determin age of universe is wrong. But establishment dont like that idea, as alot of other understandng crumbles along in the process then. If you look into details of science you will be stunned how bad some of it really can be. Hardly even scientific. And bible can be a tool to connect more pices.

"If you look into ... ( 4 days ago by TheBronzeDog)

"If you look into details of science you will be stunned how bad some of it really can be."
Specific examples, please.
And yes, the ability to question theories is important: It's the basis of the scientific method.
The REAL problem is that Creationists question it badly: It's like challenging gravity by saying birds are "obviously" immune to it. We do the equivalent of calling them silly for not knowing anything about flight despite the fact that we've known how that works for decades.

Thunderfoot is kind ... ( 3 days ago by specialbuddy1)

Thunderfoot is kind of a jerk. I like his videos though.

damn you're ugly. ( 3 days ago by mj1903ikjshdj)

damn you're ugly.

Spesific example? ... ( 3 days ago by Punishment7)

Spesific example? Lets start in medecine, and use of all medieval methods. Or those who claime man cant fly. We shall never be able to go faster then a horse,white man is superior, flat world, arsenic is heatly, smoke doesnt cause canser, universe is 13 billions years old, universe is 15 billion years old, universe is deaccelerating, universe is accelerating (today we say tht), death and looks of dinosaurs, roads on mars (today its rivers), scientist is like the ocean, its shifts upon weather.

hmm i replied but ... ( 3 days ago by Punishment7)

hmm i replied but it got located over here..
I dont agree in all of KEN HOVINS ideas, but I do persoannly belive the theroy of evelution is based upon a linear wiew of progress from a BING BANG. wich is complete wrong if EINSTEIN is right. Our understaning of "age prosess" is measured in the state we are in now. And according to science suct claim of stabil state is wrong. We use linear methods in a non linear universe, and claim it to be right. The only thing were 100% sure of, is were wrong

You have inspired ... ( 3 days ago by thecomputergurukid)

You have inspired me to be a scientist.

This is listed as ... ( 2 days ago by maddogdelta)

This is listed as no longer available. Which is a shame that someone at youtube thinks that censorship is a godly virtue.
I thought google swore to "do no evil".

click refresh its ... ( 2 days ago by xlioilx)

click refresh its just youtubes slow servers

That's right, run ... ( 1 day ago by killer64us)

That's right, run away from your problems instead of trying to fix it. Way to take the easy way out.

Tell a friend:

WebcamSearch Videos

Video Sharing Community

'Debating' a creationist (part 3)

URL
Embed Code