Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe (Season 1 Compilation)

The cell is what biochemist Michael Behe has called evolution’s “black box,” its spectacularly complex, superbly designed contents unknown to Charles Darwin. When the box was opened by modern science, it was a turning-point moment for the articulation of the modern theory of intelligent design. A revolution followed, fundamentally challenging how scientists discuss the history of life. Join Dr. Behe as he explores the mysteries of the cell, the limits of evolution, and how the cell points to intelligent design. This show is a re-edited compilation of the first five episodes of Behe's Secrets of the Cell KZbin series. Now you can watch the first five episodes all at once!
============================
The Discovery Science News Channel is the official KZbin channel of Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. The CSC is the institutional hub for scientists, educators, and inquiring minds who think that nature supplies compelling evidence of intelligent design. The CSC supports research, sponsors educational programs, defends free speech, and produce articles, books, and multimedia content. For more information visit www.discovery.org/id/
www.evolutionnews.org/
www.intelligentdesign.org/
Follow us on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter:
Twitter: / discoverycsc
Facebook: / discoverycsc
Instagram: / discoverycsc
Visit other KZbin channels connected to the Center for Science & Culture
Discovery Institute: / discoveryinstitute
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer: / drstephenmeyer

[@tiffanymagee2700]

Dr. Behe, I read your book "Darwin's Black Box" while I was an undergrad. It is to this day one of the best books describing the amazing complexity and beauty of creation. Thank you for being a voice of reason in science today!!

[@pjo2386]

uhhhm. i don't think he is interested

[@OklahomaDsDad]

agree

[@sunnyblue1]

I need the pdf of book

[@owen980]

Agreed-Darwin’s Black Box challenges, to my mind, overconfident Darwinian theory-I am thankful for learning of irreducible complexity-refreshing!

[@gi169]

Well done Discovery Science... Thank you...

[@JamesKing2understandinglife]

Behe really comes across to me in a truthful scientific way. This is good. Life is more complex than our own minds will ever be able to comprehend.

[@FrankPCarpi]

Yes, our Creator the Lord Yeshua Messiah is so far more intelligent than the brightest of all men combined.

[@pog519]

The only issue is that he's completely wrong and in opposition of reality. This is not simply pseudo-science, it's complete make-belief...

[@fohrum4757]

Are you aware that he was caught lying in all 3 books he wrote on evolution? You likely don't care otherwise your beliefs would be shattered. But yeah, he's a blatant liar. No different than James Tour, Casey Luskin, Stephen Meyer, Kent Hovind, they're all caught lying all the time.

[@richardpurser2935]

​@@pog519 where's your refute besides he's wrong?

[@vladtheemailer3223]

​@@richardpurser2935 He was refuted decades ago. You can read about it for yourself.

[@P.H.888]

Intelligent Design is everywhere

[@jerrylindberg7881]

Nice to see Dr. Behe brought his theories to the small screen. His academic works are impressive. I wish every high school studenty could see this series. I gave his book, "Darwin's Black Box" to a young lady who was studying to be an MD. She assured me she would read it. She has been a practicing Dr. in Canada for about a decade now, but he never read Behe's book. A shame.

[@MisterHowzat]

Well, not surprising since "she" became a "he". I don't suppose any gender bender would be interested in the contents of the book.

[@annoelzinga791]

Everyone on earth should see this and learn.

[@beinganddoing2123]

I wish my children had science teachers like this when they were in school. This is amazing.

[@TrevoltIV]

Unfortunately a well known secular scientist said, and I quote "We should tell the children that the world is not to be thought of that way [referring to obvious design in life] but that science has the answers". This was in the context of how children at the age of 4 start to understand that there must be a designer for life, regardless of their parents beliefs.

[@johnbrown4568]

Thank you Dr. Behe for this presentation.

[@MLeoM]

It's hard to go against the stream, it's the right thing that you are all doing.

[@silverbell6160]

Im loving this series. Thank you!

[@Charlie-qe6lv]

Behe, as well as Denton are both published in peer-reviewed journals. Fascinating stuff.

[@chrismerli301]

But none of their work in peer reviewed journals even suggests that evolution does not happen.

[@JohnSmith42374]

@@chrismerli301 Which proves that you don't have to be an evolutionist to be scientifically minded, right? Which proves that within their field, evolution theory is not the sole criteria and scaffold within which we can advance our understanding of the science, right? I haven't found too many practical implications of evolution theory that has helped industry which discoveries wouldn't have been valid otherwise should we accept an alternative theory. In some ways one might argue that if evolution should be refuted, then it is currently an impediment to scientific discovery and a healthy academic community.

[@FrankPCarpi]

While I understand your mention of "peer review" I also don't believe that the peers agreement mean anything at all if they are hung up on evolution.

[@FrankPCarpi]

@@chrismerli301 which definition of evolution do you mean?

[@danem.9402]

@@FrankPCarpi There is only one type of evolution. the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth. Evolution is the most well corroborated theory in the history of science. Everything we know so far is consistent with the theory of evolution.

[@akirataira6053]

Wonderful explanation of God’s design!!!

[@gsem000]

A true scientist‼️ With correct methodology‼️ Coming to the best explanation‼️

[@theinsectmanofwv]

"Of the simplest machines, a toothpick has no moving parts. The only way to make it is by machines and engineering. Given every tree on the planet and infinite time, evolution could never make a toothpick. The only thing "evolution" can do is rot the wood." Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo

[@TrevoltIV]

Agreed. All the modern so-called evidence for evolution that I've ever seen presented as a biologist is simply slight change over time that always seems to degrade the organism, and never adds new features such as a flagella on a bacterium, or feathers on a bird. It always deletes things like that at the very least, just in a somewhat beneficial way sometimes. To think that all this complexity arose from mutations is complete delusion. There's no environmental pressure for almost all features we see in organisms until the feature actually works, which means it is fully formed. For example, a heart and circulatory system cannot add any evolutionary advantage until they are effectively complete.

[@TrevoltIV]

Pretty much yeah. I wouldn't say *infinite* time, because technically there's bound to eventually be a tooth pick somehow in like 439,455,938,284,745,099,232,854 years

[@charlesmorris8791]

Great information, thank you very much for sharing. May God Bless you and your loved ones...

[@reymago23]

This was beautifully put together, just like life...

[@gard7662]

I'm pretty sure this documentary evolved from a photograph that appeared suddenly from the void 3.5 billion years ago.

[@geobla6600]

What's astounding is not only both the complexity and irreducible complexity of the mechanisms in the cell , but the mind boggling capability's of those mechanisms to create and read code and then transcribe it so other mechanisms can build specified mechanisms to function with 1000's of other nanomachines to create an infrastructure similar to modern cities. Then somehow these cells have to interact with trillions of other cells and have the foresight to build every known living creature on the planet .And all of this from inanimate molecules.

[@jaybennett236]

AND. . . . . . how did the VERY FIRST cell come to be via natural selection and/or random mutation? Are you kidding me? Who could believe this happened accidentally? THEN. . . . .how many billions of years had to pass before the ingredients for the second cell randomly came together and attached itself to the first cell?

[@taylor6618]

@@jaybennett236 Dr. James Tour destroys abiogensis by natural means weekly.

[@spod2998]

@@jaybennett236 it's pretty easy to believe how this happened accidentally; the idea that proteins were folding to achieve a certain goal or that cells were developing for the same reason is false. The concept of, "here, put together a disassembled car" or anything along those lines is incorrect because, in this case, nature wasn't trying to build a car to begin with. I'm not saying that there is definitively no god, but the idea of science is to logically understand and validate everything we can UNTIL we reach a point that doesn't make sense, and this isn't that.

[@gregkiser8880]

Very enjoyable. Very well done. Thank you!

[@emmaaudu3461]

I am learning alot from your channel :)

[@paratrond]

Quite a fantastic presentation. This video should be useful for all schools around the entire world. As a teacher myself I have experienced a lot of resistance when discussing the topic of origin of life. Colleagues often get angry when i want to present a another wiev than evolution for the students.

[@johnpinckney7269]

they get angry because they hate God.

[@alanthompson8515]

You are a Religious Studies teacher, of course?

[@FrankPCarpi]

Yes, I too have been met with angry opposition when I have openly challenged my professors in college. As it is written, "professing to be wise, they have become fools."

[@FrankPCarpi]

@@alanthompson8515 real science doesn't require that one teach religion. The obvious scientific evidence against the possibility of extremely complex information emerging from nonliving chemicals is astronomically against all odds of it ever happening. If you recall in the beginning of this presentation, Dr. Behe has stated that he was a believer in the theory of evolution and not a believer in exnehilo creation by God.

[@TubeOzaurus]

@paratrond Those colleagues (and others, all over the Earth) are getting angry because their mean god is getting angry. They only manifest his evil spirit...

[@jimmazurek5589]

Thank you Dr. Behe for this excellent series. I have enjoyed your DBB book very much, but the quality and beauty in the production of this video is just outstanding. God bless you, sir.

[@MLeoM]

Watched these before and found it good, much needed compilation.

[@mounbakko5871]

... great... a beautiful channel discovery with an intriguing subject.

[@HoratiuManea]

Huge fan!!

[@janitjones3963]

Very nice production. Thank you.

[@khadermatarieh2713]

this is really a voice of reason. it makes sense and it is very logical. Thanks to all who made this possible.

[@kishidabu]

I had no idea this series was going on! Even though I was a biologist, I was stunned when I read Behe's book: "Darwin's Black Box" back when it first came out. It is so great to see visuals put to rather complicated concepts to make it more understandable. I'm looking forward to this series immensely.

[@jcrosset]

This is the best series on the channel so far. Simple, clear, concise, to the point; easy for a general audience to comprehend what would otherwise be difficult concepts to grasp. Also a very professionally shot and edited video series. Highly recommended! I also especially appreciate the questions that are brought up at the end. It is a great way to pick up discussion with other people on those very important follow up questions about the Creator. An interesting question I would leave as a follow up, essentially the same at the end of the series: Who would you say is the Creator (i.e. name), and what other lines of evidence would you say (if any) demonstrates that specific identity? 🧐💁‍♂️

[@Bigchurchmusic]

Isaiah 42:8 King James Version 8 I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

[@jcrosset]

@@Bigchurchmusic I just came around to your comment just now. Thank you for the comment. And I agree with the passage you highlight, as far as it draws attention to the God of the Bible is concerned. However friend, the quote from Isaiah there as you quoted (and this is not just a problem of the KJV but most modern translations) is technically incorrect (the verse properly translated though is not). To highlight two particular translations (earlier 20th century ones): “I am Jehovah, that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise unto graven images.” (American Standard Version) “I am Yahweh, that is my Name,-And my glory to another will I not give, Nor my praise to images.” (Rotherham) Do you see where I am getting at? Just curious. Again thank you for the comment. 🙏😊

[@clarkharney8805]

I live in a golden age of discovery 👨‍🏫

[@zgobermn6895]

Great series!

[@kendallt2020]

i believe why so many Doctors misunderstand the living cell is because instead of the word evolution they should use the word education. The cells learn just like our knowledge not evolved with subtraction. keep up this work Michael. it starts with the belief to the saving of the life.

[@theHentySkeptic]

Thanks for your amazing work Dr Behe.

[@FrankPCarpi]

Thank you Dr. Behe for the exceptionally detailed explanation about the way that life must need hyper intelligence in the very purposefully designed lifeforms, in contrast to the imbecilic ideas of Charles Darwin and those who adhere to his non-existent explanation for the Origin of the Species by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. If Charles had the knowledge of today's molecular biology and genetics at his disposal when he thought to write his book, I would highly doubt that he would ever have written about such an inconclusive theory, and perhaps today biological science would be far more developed, and far closer to reality than his fictional work that has been adopted as fact by the secular populous in the universities.

[@FrankPCarpi]

Comment on my own statement: it appears as though I have read a lot of Paul the Apostle, since it seems like I have developed the same propensity to write very long sentences! 🤣

[@fyrerayne8882]

Great series

[@stylembonkers1094]

Superb production quality, images, electron microscopy, explanation, and argumentation.

[@maambomumba6123]

Fascinating. Thank you.

[@danielcristancho3738]

I think it's useful to point out that after years of mutating E.coli and over 60,000 generations, Lenski still has E.coli. The little buggers refuse to evolve to their so-called next stage of evolution . Hmmmmmm.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

Lenski made a huge deal out of citrate metabolism. Meh, it’s not too impressive.

[@TheFhdude]

Great video! I enjoyed it very much. Thank you!

[@tonyvillella4108]

Endless thanks. Well done, it makes so much sense

[@yasinali6223]

Dr. Behe thank you for making these video series. They're more enjoyable and brings out what one would rather struggle to imagine while reading the books. Your concept of Irreducible Complexity defined I suppose what many people including myself had imagined but didn't have a phrase to sum it all up. It is a concept that has become a nightmare for evolutionary scientists. Well done for the simple examples that you use to explain complex systems to laymen making your series easy to understand by anyone.

[@s.unosson]

Evolutionary biology is probably the only branch of science that affirms that programs exist without programmer(s).

[@ianrmacdougall3875]

Fascinating I always believed Darwinism to be a stumbling block upsurped by the wonderful marine biology, two thirds of the earth was covered in water and the Seahorse is a type of enigma to Darwin's theory that at the time was amiss from his field of studies, the cell is like the mind of God, it has its own science creation.

[@davidsicilia5316]

simple, but profound insights

[@richardboddington5939]

Life changing - pardon the pun. Thank you Dr Behe. enlightening!

[@lrn_news9171]

This was beautifully made. Very strong case for design.

[@Dr_Diaz]

This was great. I feel like Darwin's theory was more of a visualization assumption of life and perhaps due to media suppression or lack of knowledge, no one debated it... same reason why evolutionists shun away any other idea out there.

[@ohwearyone]

Outstanding work, thank you!

[@piratessalyx7871]

Thanks to scientist like you and Dr. Stephen Meyer and Dr. james Tour….maybe we can change the world……love one another…..be thankful God made you and this paradise!

[@sadcel]

"The kingdom of God is within you" - Jesus Christ

[@bacontheclown2502]

Amen 🙏

[@KenJackson_US]

It's a shame that politics has made it so difficult to explore, publish and teach the truths science reveals.

[@Arbutuscoveretreat]

Beautiful!

[@groovecouple4644]

This was excellent

[@dougtibbetts857]

I didn’t know what the term irreducible complexity was as a young adult but when I asked teachers how a strand of dna was miraculously made and then a cell wall just appears out of nowhere I got told…. Nothing… absolutely nothing!! Except the occasional “ shut up”!!

[@mimelnaggar]

A wonderful presentation. Thank you Sir. Glory to the creator .

[@smithkarine9678]

brilliant ,thank you

[@shawncirignano4876]

the mouse trap is a good illustration, however where did the metal parts come from as well as the wood which is far more complex than the mouse trap that is a part of. 😊😊😊

[@gerstmanndavid]

I read Dr. Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box" about 20 years ago and the principles from that book form the basis for my discussions on the subject of evolution with agnostics and atheists. That book was absolutely brilliant. Thank you for your contribution of reason to an increasingly dishonest academic world.

[@jim7634]

Outstanding presentation. Extreme complexity woven into understandable parallels of reality. I hope this helps people understand and appreciate the gifts of their very existence.

[@adilsumbul5066]

I really appreciate the conclusion

[@bluejysm2007]

Great series learned much with this video. Thank you, Dr.Behe and the Discovery Institute.

[@afsnburakyuzbasoglu3210]

Very good work...please write in turkish language

[@KelliAnnWinkler]

Excellent.

[@solideogloria5553]

if we are being humbled. we should acknowlege that : the more we know about creation, the more we realised we don't know. Richard Feyman was humble enough to say: what i did not create, i do not understand.

[@AniMAYAanimation]

We just love Dr Behe... Egyptians I mean

[@doctorhossamabumostafa2418]

Egyptian here too....and i share your love to dr behe ..

[@alok1]

Nice

[@StefanMihoc]

Loving this, but it would be so much better without the background music.

[@BiigTitties]

I like how the bird agrees with him after every sentence.

[@grahamgibson4669]

Great series, thank you. Would like to see "real/SEM" or Computer Simulation" added to the graphics to know what we are really looking at. Also a discussion of the mathematics behind changes in cells to a new species (Meyer et al) as that describes the crazy odds of a change of species happening in a specific time would be useful.

[@veritas5078]

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.” 1st Peter 3:15

[@dagwould]

Even more astonishing in organisms, IMO, is that these separate 'machines' are integrated into a 'system of systems'. The several 'systems' of life integrate with parsimonious system/sub-system interfaces. The individual systems are non-deterministically related; that is any system doesn't __need__ any other system, in many cases; yet the multiple systems cooperate to a result that is not determinable by any one of the component systems. This makes the organism even more astonishingly designed and introduces a necessary transcendence to it: that is, the design information and objective must be external to the organism. Related to this conceptually is the 'parsimonious' (or economical) fit of organism functions and operations within the external constraints and opportunities of our environment. What I mean is the close congruence with form (of the creature) its function and the external target/s of that function. The 'fit' is too neat to be reasonably attributable to chance, in fact by orders of magnitude. Example, our hands, with opposable thumbs: they grip far better that is probably necessary for most operations they are called upon to perform. In fact, in most of these operations we could get away without an opposable thumb. It would simply be less convenient and less efficient, more awkward for us. Is 'awkwardness' going to be 'noticed' in comparative reproductive success of variants within the species? Probably no.

[@averagejoe8839]

What an absolutely fantastic series! It is extremely sad all biology students are not required to view this program. There are so many( like me) who leave the school system with the impression if our teachers dont have evolution and origins of life locked down then the towering intellects of science must know! If our education system would speak truth and admit all their musings boil down to massive speculation more young minds would jump into the search for truth ! Instead like our teachers they/we take the theories at face value and parrot what in fact is just utterly meaningless dogma. Life and the universe manifested from a mindless luck process. I submit a mindless chance luck explanation for this reality is utterly absurd and never can be shown to be a causal agent as any attempt to recreate some supposedly pointless luck process can never be done without intelligent control and manipulation of matter and enviroment thusly rendering the intended goal pointless and meaningless! all complexity of information such as found in computers and cells has never and cannot be witnessed to manifest from non intelligence . Only in the fantasy musings of the human mind can blind pointless luck produce coherent purposful funtionality driven by puposeful information.

[@michellecruz100]

Several yrs. ago our church used to have a science movie time Wed. nights. We watched some Answers in Genesis movies and other movies where they would include interviews with Michael Behe and other brillant scientists. With even more detailed elaborite animation. I am always glad to see praise go to whom it is due. Thank you for this new series! I love it.

[@oldpossum57]

Behe had a chance to convince the public that ID was science and not pseudoscientific Creationism back in 2004, when he was the expert witness in the Dover Schools case. Under oath, he had to admit that his theory was a hoax.

[@khalidtaheri4893]

Thank Dr. Behe; that was very cleverly put all together, with very high quality, you really have to be full of hatred if this Video didn’t make stop and reconsider your thought for a while The most l liked about it; when the Dr said we don’t know the why or how ; but that doesn’t change the fact how intelligent is the one; if any, designed it .

[@solideogloria5553]

wow, how great thou art oh Lord. through a telescope is your magnificent cosmos declearing your glory, under a microscope is another dimention of wonders. we are so blessed to live in such a cinematic age. your wisdom oh Lord are infinite. hallelujah. let all sing praises to our God.

[@bryanbirtwell8445]

Just something that's bothered me for years: Dr. Behe describes the bacterial flagellum motor as an "outboard motor" Its actually an inboard-outboard motor. The "engine" is inside the cell, the "propeller" is outside the cell's membrane wall. Love your work, Dr. Behe. Thank you.

[@dessiewatkins1006]

My intuition says that animal adaptation to available foods is a hidden key in genetic variability. For example, high protein content fosters ample muscle buildup, and would be more likely in carnivorous animals whose teeth are strong with adequate gestational calcium intake. The higher nutritional dietary stability would promote health in offspring so they are more likely to flourish in changing habitat.

[@blueskiesandgreenpasturesp3848]

I just found your channel and I can’t wait to watch all the videos!

[@vladim73]

All Truth passes thru 3 stages: 1. It is ridiculed. 2. It is violently opposed. 3. It is accepted as being self-evident. Schopenhauer

[@masterhammer7048]

Very enjoyable, intelligent and logical compilation expressed with impartiality and humility. It is self evident. The existence of life points to God. Michael Behe knows it but he is simply waiting for our weak and slow minds to catch up. The Holy Bible gave us the necessary information before Charles Darwin and evolutionary biologists existed. John 1:3 He (Jesus) was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools... Such is the education system in schools around the world today, flatly refusing to acknowledge a supremely intelligent mind and an awesome creator of astonishing power. Instead believing in foolish possibilities like random evolution, such as the wind carving out the faces on Mt Rushmore by itself so the rock face closely bears the resemblance of ex US presidents. Richard Dawkins and his ilk would argue that if given enough time, with the right wind and sun exposure, such phenomena as the face carvings on Mt Rushmore can be made entirely possible by chance through many, many millions of years of 'focussed weathering'. I shudder to think about when Richard Dawkins faces God one day, that God will not be gentle and understanding towards him about his confusion. God will likely say to him and others like him that they are simply without excuse and that their academic arguments during their lives in this world have been nothing but fatuous grandstanding behind which there is defiance, age old human pride and stubbornness.

[@cptrikester2671]

The starting point of the theory of evolution, begins with belief and faith of 'something'. The theory of creation identifies the 'something' that evolutionists refuse to acknowledge.

[@pasteghost428]

I contend that deep within their hearts, they know the worlds were created by a holy God. Refusing to acknowledge him or thanking him because their foolish hearts are darkened proclaiming themselves to be wise they became fools

[@narnia1752]

@@pasteghost428 Yup! *Romans Ch 1* * the Himalayas Mt Range of the Bible, as Mt Everest !* 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man-and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. 24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

[@grahammewburn]

Who wrote the genetic code?

[@les2997]

It didn't write itself.

[@rubiks6]

It wasn't me.

[@nikowaqaisavou9371]

@@rubiks6 😂😂😂

[@Dilly972]

The author of life.

[@narnia1752]

1) machine: noun. 1-d (1) an assemblage [collection, gathering] of parts that transmit forces, motion, and energy one to another in a predetermined manner" ~ from merriam-webster dictionary 2) "I will praise You [LORD], for I am fearfully wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows well." ["You are fearfully wonderful" : please refer to the Footnotes below ^^] ~ Psalm 139:14 ~ *Psalm 139* ~ *A Psalm of David* 1 O Lord, You have searched me and known me. 2 You know my sitting down and my rising up; You understand my thought afar off. 3 You [a]comprehend my path and my lying down, And are acquainted with all my ways. 4 For there is not a word on my tongue, But behold, O Lord, You know it altogether. 5 You have [b]hedged me behind and before, And laid Your hand upon me. 6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; It is high, I cannot attain it. 7 Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? 8 If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in [c]hell, behold, You are there. 9 If I take the wings of the morning, And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, 10 Even there Your hand shall lead me, And Your right hand shall hold me. 11 If I say, “Surely the darkness shall [d]fall on me,” Even the night shall be light about me; 12 Indeed, the darkness [e]shall not hide from You, But the night shines as the day; The darkness and the light are both alike to You. 13 For You formed my inward parts; You [f]covered me in my mother’s womb. 14 I will praise You, for [g]I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. 15 My [h]frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them. 17 How precious also are Your thoughts to me, O God! How great is the sum of them! 18 If I should count them, they would be more in number than the sand; When I awake, I am still with You. 19 Oh, that You would slay the wicked, O God! Depart from me, therefore, you [i]bloodthirsty men. 20 For they speak against You wickedly; [j]Your enemies take Your name in vain. 21 Do I not hate them, O Lord, who hate You? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? 22 I hate them with [k]perfect hatred; I count them my enemies. 23 Search me, O God, and know my heart; Try me, and know my anxieties; 24 And see if there is any wicked way in me, And lead me in the way everlasting. *Footnotes:* Psalm 139:3 Lit. winnow Psalm 139:5 enclosed Psalm 139:8 Or Sheol Psalm 139:11 Vg., Symmachus cover Psalm 139:12 Lit. is not dark Psalm 139:13 wove Psalm 139:14 So with MT, Tg.; LXX, Syr., Vg. You are fearfully wonderful Psalm 139:15 Lit. bones were Psalm 139:19 Lit. men of bloodshed Psalm 139:20 LXX, Vg. They take Your cities in vain Psalm 139:22 complete

[@Khatru39]

The more I see the more I know the hand of God at work in creation. At one time science and religion were good bed fellows, however scientists became arrogant and made statements such as “Science has made God redundant” or “God is a God of the Gaps”. Well, one of the most accomplished and well known scientists, Einstein, once said “There’s only one thing worse than ignorance and that is arrogance”. I suppose he meant, an ignorant person can understand he is ignorant and change, But an arrogant person always thinks they know everything, and so there is absolutely no chance they will ever see who and what they are so the can never change!!! Please recognise the times in which we live, the end times, so seek the Lord Jesus Christ while He can still be found, He’s already given His life for you, and will forgive you. God bless 🙏🙏🙏

[@georgiakritikos4955]

Sir❤ love your work, on " irreducible complexity " just a thought? Is missing parts just like non working parts, further more artificial parts? Can the outside fool the inside?

[@georgiakritikos4955]

I've RECOGNIZED IT BY DEMONSTRATION IN THE WORK PLACE❤ JUST SAYING

[@georgiakritikos4955]

On my part I JUST KEEP WORKING❤NOT EASY BUT IT WORKS GOD IS MY PROTECTION it's HIS CREATION

[@garudasomanna]

Thanks for this wonderfully prepared video presentation. Loved it.

[@azizadaki3671]

The question that must be asked is where did the first living cell come from?

[@billyhancock7851]

In watching this and other videos, I see that at 29:18 on Professor Behe's video, it is stated " Removing just 1 part of the flagellum makes it dead in the water." On the otherside of the "argument " in the video by Professor Kenneth Miller "The collapse of Intelligent Design," says at the 44:05 +/- minute mark,, that it is possible to remove 40 parts and it keeps working. I just want to know what is the actual facts.

[@truthiselusive]

I just watched Kenneth Miller's video except the question-and-answer portion. Miller never said you could take away any part and of the flagellum and it would still function as it currently does. I believe Behe is saying if one part of the flagellum is removed it will no longer be able to propel itself using a swimming-like motion or like an outboard motor does for a boat. What Miller said was if you take away 40 parts it could serve a different function which is the “Type III secretion system”. “In pathogenic bacteria, the needle-like structure is used as a sensory probe to detect the presence of eukaryotic organisms and secrete proteins that help the bacteria infect them” (Wikipedia). At best Miller's argument is for a precursor to the flagellum with 40 missing parts.

[@DiscoveryScienceChannel]

And Miller's claims about the Type III Secretory System have been refuted. Even evolutionists now believe that the Type II Secretory System arose AFTER the flagellum, so it couldn't be its precursor. See: revolutionarybehe.com/2016/09/08/type-iii-secretion-system/

[@truthiselusive]

@@DiscoveryScienceChannel Thank you for that reply. I knew there was more information concerning the flagellum and the "Type III secretion system" but I didn't know where to look.

[@billyhancock7851]

@@truthiselusive I just watched it again and I am not getting what you're getting from the statement, he even says that if irreducible complexity is right than than these parts can't do other jobs, but if evolution is right they can do other jobs. Maybe I am putting more into it than what you think he is saying. (43:23), maybe I grasping it wrong. Hmm, a theists that doesn't believe in creation 🤔.

[@truthiselusive]

@@billyhancock7851 Sorry for the exceptionally long delay (9 months). This video covers things well about the trial and information you're curios about. I think it's worth a watch. Titled "Documentary Revolutionary, Michael Behe and the Mystery of Molecular Machines" kzbin.info/www/bejne/fKrHZXacjsuJeaM

[@jimborowy8160]

Praise God for all the creatures He made!

[@1icky]

Behe gave my Christian foundation the specific boost to refute 200 years of nonsense....

[@stephenglasse9756]

He's great isn't he? Check out GENETIC ENTROPY AND THE MYSTERY OF THE GENOME by Prof John Sanford a book Behe recommends

[@Embur12]

Dr. James Tour is excellent talking about Abiogenesis, life forming from non life. Look him up on utube...😊

[@techstuf4637]

"Evolution states that, given enough time..." Time is one thing our World is very short on these days. See - "Huge media blackout regarding supermoons" on the net See - "Pole shift of Noah's day about to happen again?" on the net Good Journeys All

[@Deathlock61]

What do you mean? Explain

[@mozkitolife5437]

Imagine thinking the parts of a mouse trap is analogous to DNA!

[@addersrinseandclean]

I thought my wife was human but now I think she is more Machine😂😂😂😂

[@narnia1752]

1) machine: noun. 1-d (1) an assemblage [collection, gathering] of parts that transmit forces, motion, and energy one to another in a predetermined manner" ~ from merriam-webster dictionary 2) "I will praise You [LORD], for I am fearfully wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows well." ["You are fearfully wonderful" : please refer to the Footnotes below ^^] ~ Psalm 139:14 ~ *Psalm 139* ~ *A Psalm of David* 1 O Lord, You have searched me and known me. 2 You know my sitting down and my rising up; You understand my thought afar off. 3 You [a]comprehend my path and my lying down, And are acquainted with all my ways. 4 For there is not a word on my tongue, But behold, O Lord, You know it altogether. 5 You have [b]hedged me behind and before, And laid Your hand upon me. 6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; It is high, I cannot attain it. 7 Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? 8 If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in [c]hell, behold, You are there. 9 If I take the wings of the morning, And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, 10 Even there Your hand shall lead me, And Your right hand shall hold me. 11 If I say, “Surely the darkness shall [d]fall on me,” Even the night shall be light about me; 12 Indeed, the darkness [e]shall not hide from You, But the night shines as the day; The darkness and the light are both alike to You. 13 For You formed my inward parts; You [f]covered me in my mother’s womb. 14 I will praise You, for [g]I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. 15 My [h]frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them. 17 How precious also are Your thoughts to me, O God! How great is the sum of them! 18 If I should count them, they would be more in number than the sand; When I awake, I am still with You. 19 Oh, that You would slay the wicked, O God! Depart from me, therefore, you [i]bloodthirsty men. 20 For they speak against You wickedly; [j]Your enemies take Your name in vain. 21 Do I not hate them, O Lord, who hate You? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? 22 I hate them with [k]perfect hatred; I count them my enemies. 23 Search me, O God, and know my heart; Try me, and know my anxieties; 24 And see if there is any wicked way in me, And lead me in the way everlasting. *Footnotes:* Psalm 139:3 Lit. winnow Psalm 139:5 enclosed Psalm 139:8 Or Sheol Psalm 139:11 Vg., Symmachus cover Psalm 139:12 Lit. is not dark Psalm 139:13 wove Psalm 139:14 So with MT, Tg.; LXX, Syr., Vg. You are fearfully wonderful Psalm 139:15 Lit. bones were Psalm 139:19 Lit. men of bloodshed Psalm 139:20 LXX, Vg. They take Your cities in vain Psalm 139:22 complete

[@onelightindark935]

Darwin's Theory Of Evolution Darwin's Theory Of Evolution - The Premise Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature). Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time. Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Slowly But Surely... Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an "irreducibly complex system". An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4] Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5] And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [6] Footnotes: Charles Darwin, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life," 1859, p. 162. Ibid. p. 158. Michael Behe, "Darwin's Black Box," 1996. "Unlocking the Mystery of Life," documentary by Illustra Media, 2002. Michael Denton, "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis," 1986, p. 250. Charles Darwin, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life," 1859, p. 155.

[@onelightindark935]

So, basically about 2 centuries ago, Darwin himself destroyed his own "theory of evolution by natural selection", simply by agreeing that irreducible complexity would destroy his theory entirely, and he himself didn't believe that the eye would be a product of his "theory of evolution by natural selection". Today, we know "irreversible complexity" is an observable and testable fact, and the eye is an example of this "irreversible complexity".

[@onelightindark935]

Furthermore, Darwin about 2 centuries ago, didn't have the observable and testable science of today such as molecular biology, biochemistry, genetics, which in fact destroyed entirely his "theory of evolution by natural selection". Hence, by Darwin's own admission, and today's science in the 21st century AD, "theory of evolution by natural selection" has been destroyed. This means "theory of evolution by natural selection" is not a theory based on observable and testable evidence to begin with, but merely a failed hypothesis with failed terms, failed definition, failed explanation, etc. Simply put, such a theory is just fantasy. So, what does this mean for us humans? We today know devolution exists instead of evolution, and mutation exists instead of natural a selection. When evolution and natural selection both does not exist, and devolution and mutation both exist, coupled with irreversible complexity made possible only by an intelligent Mind, then we can sensibly, logically, reasonably come to one conclusion alone, which is Creator made all life on earth. Who is this Creator? His name is God Jesus Christ, as proven by history and prophecy. Peace be with you.

[@cptrikester2671]

Note: The mouse trap actually has 9 parts, not 5. There are 4 hold down loops that hold the other parts to the board. Let's call that 'junk DNA', still required, even if it wasn't noticed.

[@KenJackson_US]

Even those with absolute faith in microbe-to-man evolution have backed away from _"junk DNA"._

[@siemhaa]

Junk DNA was a thing of the past...they later realized all DNA has function. And what does it matter the number of parts, it's just used as an example.

[@cptrikester2671]

@@KenJackson_US what is the basis of the 'absolute faith' in microbe-to-man evolution? That sounds like a belief without reason.

[@cptrikester2671]

@@siemhaa with any of these discussions, evolution vs creation, the details are important. They (scientists/ biologists assumed) usually claim they know how everything works, publish papers to prove that their theories are correct (better than creationists), but later realize that they don't know all the details. Yes, I know it was only an example, but the example has 4 more critical parts that are not mentioned (like junk DNA, until they realized it wasn't). Please see my other comment (evolutionists vs creationists).

[@cptrikester2671]

My response was to Ken Jackson's comment: Even those with absolute faith in microbe-to-man evolution have backed away from "junk DNA". But for some reason, it was deleted.

[@brentboden8203]

Thank you for making this so easy to understand. I just get stuck when you say that we "know" and then show the intricate machines within the cell. It's not that I don't believe in a creator because I see it clearly from a macro level and believe in God, but these images of micro machines are clearly images created by a computer. Do you have actual images of these things or is this theoretical?

[@mmark292tbib2]

SO IF OUR EYES ARE SO perfectly designed and irreducibly complex ,then why do so many people have to wear glasses????

[@nicolassbrown9881]

Brilliantly produced video in every way. The dogmatists won't allow it to be shown to a science class, but I see no legal reason why it can't be included in a religious studies or philosophy course. Check out: Life Without Evolution - A Comprehensive Deconstruction...

[@AlessandroFranchi]

This series is a real GEWEL of beauty and INTELLIGENT DESIGN! question: how can it be that only DEVOLUTION is quoted? As far as I know, in lensky experiment, apart from adaptation through DEVOLUTION, it happened also some de novo gene adaptation... some gene can appear de novo, it's been observed, and also symbiogenesis and other particular increasing in gene function it has been observed. I sincerely want to understand this topic, since nobody seems to present a complete picture of the observable evolution phenomenon.

[@bahmedab]

There were no new genes, there were multiple point mutations that modified functions of existing genes resulting in new phenotypic traits.

[@pasteghost428]

Yeah, you said it. Phenomenon. Just like ghosts and aliens, observable evolution only exists in the mind. 🥂

[@ralphgoreham3516]

symbiogenesis has not been observed, it was proposed by the late Lyn Margelis. Lensky was covered in the video. It did not produce any new information via protein manufacture .

[@ralphgoreham3516]

Biochemists have NEVER produced new information to DNA, despite insisting they have.

[@KenJackson_US]

*Alessandro:* _"... some gene can appear de novo, it's been observed, ..."_ I don't think that has ever happened. Though many published papers *_claim_* it has happened. Here's their evidence: the gene appears in one species but is missing from another species that they claim evolved from a common ancestor. It's _here_ but not _there,_ *therefore* it *must have* evolved! It's _assumed._ That's bad science. Do you know of any paper or book or other source where someone offers actual evidence of a de novo gene? I'm interested in this too.

[@wapperjaw8282]

“. . .I praise you because in an awe-inspiring way I am wonderfully made.. . .” … “. . .Your eyes even saw me as an embryo; All its parts were written in your book Regarding the days when they were formed, Before any of them existed.” - Ps 139: 14, 16 How did King David know that???

[@whatis_asis]

First, love that Ron Howard has become a scientist. Second, at 15:00 those are not good examples. There are different *kinds* that emerge from a single species but not different species that emerge. The Real Time experiments have not proven the latter.

[@ogmakefirefiregood]

I often read comments about the size of the universe and the arguments for extra terrestrial life. The whole idea highlights the ignorance of the general public regarding the odds of abiogenesis.

[@sassy3923]

God clearly left His fingerprints all over creation. How did we allow ourselves to become gaslighted into believing that random, unguided processes could explain it all? it's time to declare Emperor Evolution has no clothes....