Seven Magnificent Mammals That Confirm Creation!

Evolutionists claim that mammals are some of the most highly evolved forms of life, but when we look at the mammals themselves, we see careful design, not random chance!
Host Lauren and Dr. Frank Sherwin discuss a number of fascinating creatures on episode 62 of The Creation Podcast!
To become a member on KZbin: / @icrscience
To become a patron: / instituteforcreationre...
-
Do you have questions about science or Scripture? Post them in the comments and we might answer them in future episodes.
Tune in every other Tuesday here on KZbin for new episodes. You can also find the audio version on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, and Google Podcasts.
Don't forget to subscribe to our channel to get notified about all of our upcoming episodes!
Hope to see you next time on The Creation Podcast!
-
Learn more about the Institute for Creation Research: www.icr.org/
Shop our store: www.icr.org/store
Support our ministry: www.icr.org/donate
Plan your visit to our Dallas creation museum and planetarium: discoverycenter.icr.org/

[@brettlogan73]

Here's a joke I heard when I was a kid. God and an atheist were having a discussion. The atheist said, "I can create anything you can." God said, "okay show me." The atheist bend down and picked up a hand full of dirt and God said, "Hold it, get your own dirt. "

[@jamesedington9126]

I heard that joke but it was a bit more in depth than that but it's still good lol.

[@psyck]

Reminds me of a short video I saw not too long ago where a guy is re-enacting the devil tempting Jesus. He gets to the part where the devil takes Jesus to the mountain peak and says, “Serve me and this can all be yours.” “Jesus” gives the devil a wry look and says, “Wait a minute. How are you going to try to tempt Me with My own stuff?”

[@Left-Foot-Brake]

Where's the joke?

[@deannesanv8931]

The pogo stick joke was great…. :) For some reason, when the “Cambrian explosion” of life was mentioned, I thought…. It wasn’t an explosion of life; it was a catastrophe of death. Not that we don’t already know that, but it struck me that evolutionists see the millions of remains of animals that died and they call it the opposite of what it is - the exact opposite of what the evidence actually is. They see the devastation of death on a massive scale and they call it an explosion of life. For some reason the words “Cambrian explosion” really hit me when hearing it this time as the contradiction that it is.

[@lizd2943]

All life dies eventually. You didn't know that? There was no more death at the time of the Cambrian explosion than at any other time.

[@TheChadPad]

That is such an interesting point. That juxtaposition between what they say and what is really true, literally saying the opposite of what is true, is fascinating insight. It’s the Devil’s work. The Devil’s lies come through

[@lizd2943]

Creationists do love to lie, it's true. @@TheChadPad

[@TheChadPad]

@@lizd2943 well, I would say that creationists, if potentially misinformed, are at least being honest about what they believe. Being wrong doesn’t make you a liar, in other words, as they are not being intentionally dishonest. However, you have just been intentionally dishonest about what I meant by my statement. That makes you the liar

[@lizd2943]

I was trying to make sense of your statement, since creationists are consistently dishonest and the original comment you responded to was misrepresenting both the data and what scientists say about it. Cambrian strata doesn't show an unusually high death rate compared to other strata. What it shows is new forms of life that aren't in the lower strata, although precursor fossils have been found. Every creationist talking point has been debunked ad nauseum, yet they continue to use them. That is intentional dishonesty.@@TheChadPad

[@deannesanv8931]

I just scanned down through a lot of the comments and I see it appears that more and more people are watching the videos, including more skeptics - some making rude comments. I hope you at ICR will not be discouraged by this. I like the presentations and understand that it is impossible to cover a topic completely and thoroughly in a short video. You’re doing a good job and I appreciate the presentations, as I know many others do also. Thank you. :)

[@AssaultEnigma]

It's people like this that your explaining who are have to believe the impossible over the logical. They're idiots. They prefer a life of sin.... Happy to hope there isn't a god because they don't want anything to impose on a fake sense of freedom...

[@lizd2943]

Why do you assume anyone who accepts reality must prefer a life of sin? That makes no sense.@@AssaultEnigma

[@kathleennorton2228]

​@@lizd2943 Romans 3:23 KJV - For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

[@lizd2943]

That's nice. It has nothing to do with my point, but it's nice.@@kathleennorton2228

[@adelinomorte7421]

***GOD COULD NOT DO IT BETTER , BUT AS GOD HE DID IT BETTER, SPREAD CONFUSION CREATING SCIENCE, SO HE CONTINUES TO DEAL THE CARDS, NOT ALLOWING OTHERS (WE MENKIND) TO BE GOD AND RECREATE AS THEY TRY***

[@delauney]

Why are we always talking in the past? Did evolution stop? We should be seeing intermediary species now. We should be seeing some progressive microbiological life that is between stages. Unless evolution ended, there should be present proof of the current species between stages of prior form and the next form, and morphological evolution should be in abundance.

[@kevinjohnson3521]

Crocs NEVER “evolved,” how do some “evolve” while others did not…

[@TheChadPad]

@@kevinjohnson3521horseshoe crabs neither, nor coelacanths. They’re the same now as they were “millions” of years ago

[@kevinjohnson3521]

@@TheChadPad yes, soon it will be “trillions” of years!

[@TheChadPad]

@@kevinjohnson3521 amen

[@ronysmith1]

They're still evolving in the textbooks 😂

[@wingedpanther73]

Dogs/Wolves have struck me as a prime example of evolution NOT resulting in speciation, despite our best efforts to make it happen.

[@alantasman8273]

Dogs / wolves are an example of variation...as are all domesticated breeds of dogs..yet they all remain canines...they have never been observe in the fossil record to be in transition to another species. Variation is not an example of macro-evolution or one kind transitioning to another kind.

[@roblangsdorf8758]

When someone asks you how Kangaroos got to Australia, you can tell them that they just were bound to get there. Actually, the evidence indicates that they just hopped to it.

[@alantasman8273]

Also note that Kangaroos fossils have been found in other locations beside the continent of Australia.

[@rodneyplewright7685]

Frank, God has gifted you with a beautiful speaking voice, and fluent expressiveness. Thank you from a brother in Jesus for using your gift to build our faith in our Creator. All praise to Jesus!

[@A.P.I.-2bon2b]

The Ardvark? The Elephant? The Kangaroo? The Armadillo? The Giraffe? The Moose? The Mole? The Hippopotamus? The Goat? I sure like them. :) Thanks for reminding me to think of them .

[@Rick-cj7xr]

Fascinating show, Dr. Sherwin. Lauren, great job as host! Love watching you hosting these segments!

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

100%

[@frankwirt]

I wish you would have discussed the platypus.

[@johnmonk9297]

The platypus was God's idea to confound the evolutionists

[@chucklesdarwinwaswrongevol9264]

Evolutionists Always deny that abiogenesis (origin of life) is part of evolution, they Also deny The origin of the universe as part of evolution.

[@VFA666]

Evolution no more has to explain abiogenesis than chemistry has to explain the origin of atoms.

[@lizd2943]

So you're saying a theory about biology is... about biology? Wow.

[@captaingaza2389]

Allow me to use your own deluded logic against you Math does not explain the origin of numbers Therefore math is false You guys are f*cking pathetic

[@johnglad5]

And that is why analogies are worthless.

[@alantasman8273]

@@VFA666 A Sgt Schultz comment if I ever heard one...I don't need to know how life came about to understand the biology of life...I see nothing...I hear nothing......

[@georgeherod4252]

The Bible says that seeing they won't see.

[@zerosteel0123]

Thanks ICR! Keep up the great work 💪💪💪

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Amen ICR! Combined with your video on thw papers that destroy evolution, these are two very powerful videos to counter evolution. Thanks so much! Praying for you 🙏

[@williamhoward2731]

I wish to thank Doctor Shewin for sharing this informational podcast with me . Amen

[@iblogthereforeiam4267]

I also would like to thank the doctor, but I would like to offer information that has come to my attention ..which I believe is valid, and that is we are on a flat plane incased in the firmament, which is biblical. It’s mentioned many times in the old testament as an example . . There is no deep space. So we must be consistent … and if we disagree let’s take a look at this fact ..That the ball is not how you would describe earth; we’re not spinning 1000 mph plus! And hurling millions upon millions of miles projecting in deep space!! All kinds of evidence backing this up that we are Not! Just one thing that could really change the picture for someone who wrestles with this and that is we would not have the same constellations yearly for centuries. ney, millennia. If we were hurling through the Cosmos, the universe as they call it, we would never see the same constellation two years in a row let alone from time in immemorial .. Thank you for your time.

[@christtheonlyhope4578]

Beautiful video! Thanks for sharing this as always

[@rubiks6]

ICR - Check your spelling of Dr. Sherwin's name in the video description. _"Host Lauren and Dr. Frank_ *Shewrin* [sic] ..."

[@APR4U]

❤❤❤ love this conversation 🫶

[@twosheds1749]

Ever heard of a thing called confirmation bias?

[@UserRandJ]

​@@twosheds1749No need to whinge. J

[@davissalaki8703]

It's amazing that an atheist would care what someone else believes and try to disprove them. No matter how far you run that God instilled desire for truth still haunts you.

[@twosheds1749]

@@davissalaki8703 The only thing that haunts society is the non sense of different religions trying to kill each other!! No matter how you protest you have zero evidence that we are instilled by God to do anything!! Indeed, all the science points away from that conclusion!

[@studygodsword5937]

@@twosheds1749 The evidence for a creator is so strong, that you are bringing your own intelligence into question ! 5 levels of extreme complexities, for abiogenesis, that can only be explained by a creator/designer ! Then there are well over a dozen more for sexual reproduced animals (the reproduction process, an all the needed organs !

[@UserRandJ]

Beautiful ! Very important discussions that should be on people's mind & lips, rather than swept under the carpet as though it's all been proven. This planet is fine tuned for our lifestyles, not only survival. You guys have a fantastic ministry. Regards J & R

[@annieoaktree6774]

No. Life evolved to fit the parameters of the planet. The planet wasn't fine tuned to fit us.

[@UserRandJ]

@@annieoaktree6774 You wish

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@UserRandJ No wishing required. That's what the scientific evidence shows.

[@UserRandJ]

​@annieoaktree6774 I think you're sleep talking. The trash you've been taught is a comedy. But you haven't stopped to question.

[@UserRandJ]

@annieoaktree6774 Science? Ha ha ha yeah no. All of it is contrived. Care to discuss? That's where you exit stage left isn't it. J

[@Torby4096]

When God created the kangaroo, he said, "Let's see them try to figure THIS thing out!"

[@Torby4096]

@@mirandahotspring4019 Hop it! They go pretty fast.

[@rayross997]

Thanks ICR.

[@arthurdinucci]

"during the ice age"? But wasn't that at least 11000 years ago?!

[@kattykitters5310]

Don't confuse the creationists with scientific facts.

[@davissalaki8703]

And don't confuse pagans with intellectuals lol

[@SunShine-xc6dh]

According to what?

[@daviddickey9762]

We are technically still in an ice age since we still have the polar ice caps

[@seaknightvirchow8131]

Actually, the Biblical flood explains the developments of polar ice caps. The Bible says that the fountains of the depth broke open. The fracture of the ocean basins was discovered late in the 20th century and it extends 40,000 miles. Not magma erupted and rapid tectonic plate movement and subduction with cold oceans basalt sinking beneath the continents. There would have been heavy moisture in the atmosphere and precipitation coupled with blocking of sun light by volcanic eruptions. The Coriolis effect would have deposited ice and snow in the polar latitudes and below. Dinosaur bones are found in Alaska indicating a rapid climate change. Antarctica was once ice free. All of the dating of this is based upon assumptions that things in the past were the same as now. When science looks at human genetics, it shows that we are extremely homogenous which means we were a very small population not long ago. Mitochondrial clocks have assumed that we emerged from chimps 6 million years ago and that mitochondrial Eve emerged about 100,000 to 200,000 years ago based on the assumed mutation rate and evolutionary time scale. However since the human genome was mapped, it has been possible to measure the actual rate of SNPs rather than an assumed rate. It turns out that the single nucleotide substitution rate is 20 times faster between generations than predicted. Doing the math puts Eve about 6,000 years ago. The oldest human writing is about 4,000 years old. There are many rate processes that indicate an earth far younger than evolution assumes or needs. Recent findings in dinosaurs underscore this in a big way.

[@hasone1848]

All of the evidence in this video is Frank Sherwin saying "this is what evolutionists say...... but that is wrong because the bible says kinds". That is it. I wish they would start asking some real questions (like they say they do) like, How did god do it? What tools did he use? What process does he use to keep gravity and all the other forces the way they are? Why did he make humans look and act just like mammals (even though we are not mammals some how)? Why did god make every single natural process of measuring the age of the earth come to billions of years when it's only 6K old (this age is from people counting the supposed ages of the people in the bible, which is a book written by humans). One other line of "evidence" he gives is "Kangaroos are only found in Australia because they are good swimmers" (then he gives an example of a kangaroo that was running, then started swimming and got eaten by a shark). This is the low bar "evidence" that we see. If they are such good swimmers then why are not on every continent, they would have swam there.

[@ms.1789]

What a wonderful podcast! ❤

[@rogerchristian2418]

Isn't there an aerodynamic analysis of the bumblebee that says it sh ouldn't be able to fly or is it just an urban myth?

[@annieoaktree6774]

Urban myth. The story is in the bumblebee thread you started yesterday.

[@alantasman8273]

Only recent research purports to understand how bees fly. So until very recently you would have been correct. However scientists have not yet been able to duplicate how bees fly. So the jury is still out.

[@Hydroverse]

Good presentation ICR. Animals are an intriguing subject to study.

[@silence8806]

Still God of the Gaps and lying for Jesus. "Religion poisons everything." - Christopher Hitchens

[@margomoore4527]

At his age he won’t have to wait long to discover he was wrong!

[@silence8806]

@@margomoore4527 How old are you? You seem to know nothing about Christopher Hitchens.

[@margomoore4527]

I try to avoid reading nonsense, but I know he is no spring chicken. I was born in 1950. Anyone who talks about ancient aliens is spinning bullshit.

[@seaknightvirchow8131]

No matter what is observed, the godless claim that evolution predicted it. This is the materialist god of the gaps. It predicts everything and in the end explains nothing. Evolution is unfalsifiable because it assumes everything is the product of evolution. There is almost nothing that is true about evolution except that adaptation does occur but does not lead to new species or types. Abiogenesis is impossible and the missing links which should be innumerable are absent exactly where they ought to be. The rocks are a testimony to an event, a global flood, not the passage of time. If you wish to follow Hitchens rather than Christ, it is a terrible mistake with eternal consequences. What is puzzling to me is why an atheist visits creation sites when they are invincibly convinced there is no God. I don’t spend my time haunting sites that claim that Amelia Earhart survived and lived in New Jersey or Elvis really didn’t die. One other thing, I cannot remember a single comment by an atheist that actually addresses the facts rather than just posting snarky glib throwaway words.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

God bless ICR!!! Very informative.

[@HeatherHogue73]

Can you do one of these on amazing invertebrates? Octopi 🐙 are amazing and my absolute favorite animals, and I’d love to see an episode that includes them!

[@icrscience]

You're not going to believe this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mXWyi5yPes9-mJI

[@johnhoey7717]

As a Christian and PhD Molecular/Cellular Biologist, I am beyond insulted that we are still entertaining Darwin’s theories and Natural Selection. I can say with confidence, Darwin would laugh at and even deny these ideas were he alive today.

[@seaknightvirchow8131]

One thing that has puzzled me, though I agree with ICR, is that there are living kangaroos in Australia but also fossils of kangaroos no where else? This is something I ran across in reading biogeography articles. I suppose tsunamis or other post flood events might explain this but I would love to hear more about this. Perhaps this has been addressed in other ICR publications. It is fascinating that 40% of mammals are rodents and 20% are bats; I have never heard that before.

[@helenaconstantine]

OK, Sherwin. What is a kind?

[@robertlaboube1365]

It's so refreshing to hear someone talk about animals being 'designed by the Creator' when so many TV shows and movies spout the evolution theory. Every time I hear them say something about it, I just say, "WRONG!"

[@bobwilkinson2008]

Seriously? Perhaps you're wrong and the rest of the world, certainly the scientific world, is right?

[@robertlaboube1365]

@@bobwilkinson2008 If you believe Creationism is so wrong, why are you watching these videos? I suggest you keep watching them until you learn the truth. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools (Romans 1:22)

[@bobwilkinson2008]

@@robertlaboube1365 LOL. I watch them for entertainment. That is, it's entertaining to see creationists try to justify the unjustifiable. Obviously there's also an element of concern that people might believe this drivel.

[@thomasfortis9933]

Absolutely incredible. Willfully hullabaloo

[@helenaconstantine]

4:26. Ok, Sherwin. Is there reason you don't mention the Ediacaran? Any reason other than wanting to deceive your audience.

[@rogerchristian2418]

Hey annieoaktree how do the evolutionary scientists know that the fossil bat couldn't fly well I seem to recall that bumble bees shouldn't be able to fly and yet they do!

[@annieoaktree6774]

I already posted a paper with the aerodynamic analysis below.

[@HH-ru4bj]

According to the principles of aerodynamics, a bumblebee shouldn't be able to fly, well neither should most things. Bees and insects have different flight techniques from a bird, just as a helicopter is different from a plane. That is just one of those smart sounding and erroneous claims floating all around.

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@HH-ru4bj That's a well known urban legend. The story goes back in the 1930's some aircraft engineers were out to dinner and the topic of bee flight came up. One guy did some quick calculations on the back of a napkin and found bees wouldn't be able to fly *if they used their wings as stationary airfoils like airplane wings are.* Of course bees' wings aren't stationary but beat rapidly providing plenty of lift to get them airborne. Somehow the story got passed around and is still repeated as "goofy engineers think bees can't fly!" 😀

[@HH-ru4bj]

​@@annieoaktree6774yeah, its a bit odd when there is something we know quite a lot about is used to discount something else we know quite a lot about...enough to know they aren't the same thing. Urban legend is a good way to put it.

[@HH-ru4bj]

"suddenly, completely, fully formed..." So is he expecting to see a bunch of rats in the fossil record with lizard tails or without an andomen? Thats not ever how anytine ever described a transitional form to be, except those untentionally trying to confuse others. Each creature however you find is both a transitional form and its own complete species. The thing is we do have fossils if many rodent like creatures that arent rodents but look very similar, and in se vases we have fossils of creatures that have so mant shared features that you cant tell which classification it should be put into. Even today we are scrutinizing fossils with better techniques and tools and reclassifying them after duscovering a previously unknown feature. Some living creatures are so similar that we cant tell if it's the result of being divergent evolution, or a different family altogether. Some therapsids are so mamamal like, or reptile like that they remain a mystery as to where they should be placed in a group.

[@annieoaktree6774]

I've asked many time what creationists think a "half formed creature" would look like and have never received an answer. 🙂

[@HH-ru4bj]

@@annieoaktree6774 yeah I'm pretty much asking rhetorically because the response given is more often than not, dishonest and over confident ignorance. However I'm the case of ppl like Kurt Wise or Kent hovind, they actually know what the science and literature are, what they are supposed to mean and intentionally misrepresent it to favour creationism. A good example is the accumulation of deleterious mutations within a population putting a cap on the age that species can reach, that just so happens to correspond with an 8-12,000 range. But what they don't mention are the various mechanisms such as bottlenecks, migration and repatriation, specialisation deleting some and cresting new genes... These claims are often taken from a vacuum with no external influences as if how things are now is how it's always been.

[@UserRandJ]

Complex multi-integrated systems specialised and advanced features, in creatures that are supposedly simple and early on in evolution- that's what's being discussed, how ever emotional you want to get. There are fantastic examples of such creatures very early in the Rick layers, some of which defy even your immense kmowledge- for example the Ichthyosaur recently found directly after the ' mass marine extinction' permian rock layer- if it is not sudden and fully formed then what do you call it? When did that evolve by your calculations? Where's all the cousins? Keep dreaming H. J

[@UserRandJ]

​@annieoaktree6774 Your views are half formed, the rest us emotional reactivity and ego. J

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@UserRandJ All that poo flinging probably wore you out. Did you remember to wash the poo off your hands? Or did you just lick your fingers? 😄

[@appaloosa42]

Difference from animals? We are capable of caring for others, especially injured ( and defective) humans.

[@annieoaktree6774]

Plenty of other species show altruism and caring for others of their species.

[@appaloosa42]

@@mirandahotspring4019 mothers, maybe.. and elephants and horses given the opportunity pay respect to their dead. But only humans play nurse and doctor to the sick and injured. Animals push them away.

[@lizd2943]

Chimpanzees have been observed treating each others wounds, and not just mother to child.@@appaloosa42

[@diannealice3601]

At 21:36 he says, "We do know where dogs come from."

[@johncollins8304]

Beavers -- God's chainsaws.

[@michaeldeas1969]

Great presentation, have to admit I thought this was Steve Forbes 😅

[@catdogky]

The missing links are still missing because they never existed from the beginning.

[@lizd2943]

The missing link refers to a species that would be anatomically about halfway between us and the other apes. It was found a century ago. It's Australopithecus Afarensis.

[@catdogky]

@@lizd2943 "It"? like one specimen? It's much too easy to find a single specimen of anything and make very broad theoretic conclusions.

[@lizd2943]

There are over 300 specimens of Afarensis, the first being found about a century ago.@@catdogky

[@PyroTurtleGaming]

Id say that theres no reason to assume dogs cant have come from wolves. I dont believe in macro evolution but microevolution seems to be true still. The idea that humans over time have domesticated wolves into dogs isnt a stretch for me at all. Especially when we have record of how much we can change dogs through breeding already, and the fact that a similar kind of domestication has been done with foxes before, adapting into a more dog like form within only a couple generations.

[@daviddickey9762]

If you accept micro evolution then macro is just accumulated effect of micro. It's just like stacking blocks as a kids 1 at time until you get a tower.

[@PyroTurtleGaming]

@@daviddickey9762 I understand the concept. Problem is one has been observed to be true, and the other is a leap of faith based on a number of assumptions. Micro-evolution is plainly observable and can simply mean the information to manifest the given traits was already in the genetic code of the particular kind as opposed to being mutated into the gene pool by random chance. Then natural selection makes those advantageous offspring successful creating different species of the same kind. Macro evolution assumes the creation of new useful genetic code through mutation, Enough to fundamentally change one kind into another. There is shockingly little evidence of this kind of evolution. It is a theory thats impossible to test, yet is taken as gospel by the secular sciences despite the lack of real evidence as a way to explain the world we live in without God.

[@daviddickey9762]

@PyroTurtleGaming until you idiots can define "kind" stop using it in reference to anything in evolution. The Shepard kind, the German shepherd kind, the dog kind, the canine kind, the mammal kind, or the chordates kind? Guess what? You fall into 2 of those kinds yourself so put don't your mythology bk and pick up a science bk written in this decade.stop listening to some idiots that have been proven wrong a 100x and still lie about the facts just to suit their religious beliefs. And ffs stop equating evolution as a belief or world view or whatever other stupid phrase your apologetic speaker is teaching you. Micro mutation accumulated over time turns into what you call macro evolution. It just takes so long because it's so slow we dont see it. Did you notice the moon moved 3cm last year?did you notice the Himalayan mtns grew 5cm last wk? How about that Europe is now 3ft further away than when the pilgrims landed? No, why not? we were here to see it.

[@RussellGrantAppling]

Nothing is millions of years old.

[@annieoaktree6774]

How did you determine that?

[@RussellGrantAppling]

@@annieoaktree6774 Faith that the word of God is true. And the physical evidence seen. And exactly zero missing links were ever found.

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@RussellGrantAppling What physical evidence establishes a *maximum* age for the Earth? I can think of plenty which establish a _minimum_ age but that's not the question, is it? If by "missing link" you mean transitional fossils there are thousands known to science.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

​@RussellGrantAppling There is no missing link, and your faith only demonstrates that you have faith. I won't bother waiting for physical evidence because you have none.

[@APR4U]

I don’t know why the spirit said to me dogs know how to recognize illness in people because dog is made for man. We don’t train them we communicate our need for them to act on the natural ability God created in them🫶

[@lindakrumenauer1099]

My dog does, because i am monitoring her bloodsugar, and it has dipped seriously in these last two weeks when i have been very ill.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

God's intelligent design is AMAZING!!!

[@lindadechiazza2924]

Beaver 5:13 Dog 14:05 Elephant 22:52 Kangaroo 26:31 Humpback Whale 36:22 Pangolin 41:26 Bat 44:15. Whalesong hoping to hear about this subject

[@bobbieolsen7264]

The “Spirit” didn’t say this to you; sell crazy someplace else; I’ve had hundreds of animals, wild and domestic, singulars to herds, I found that some are very in tune with me on their own volition, while the rest of the herds and flocks have no ability or desire to communicate what so ever, it’s uncanny. I’ve had to get rid of dogs that just never had the ability to understand the animal husbandry needed in the farm environment & chickens able to communicate and ask me to come to rescue another animal in peril. Chickens, pigs, owls, horses, whistle pups, sheep, great grey herons, cattle, rabbits, cats, muskrats, dogs, to many to name; (some) of every “kind” had an uncanny spirit, a “want” to relate with me like I was their best friend and un-coaxed. ALL the rest had No ability of spirit whatsoever. Any animal can be trained, but a few of “any kind” have the ability or the desire to train you to recognize them, love for and recognition of your superiority of mind and Vice versa… whispering animals come in all “kinds” and some people are animal whispers. Some horses are just to large to be “service animals” on an airplane but they’re far and away more intuitive and calm than some crazy ladies Fi fi…

[@forrest_ghost4410]

Rats, ants, bees, worms, pigeons and more can smell diseases in humans so not that special to dogs really

[@Gadfly247]

Gotta love that cowboy Texas tie! YeeeHawwww!

[@JungleJargon]

There are missing chains.

[@TubeLVT]

Right! The isolated ”links” exist. The chain is imaginary.

[@auramatic77]

I enjoyed this, but how on gods green earth did the platypus not come up?

[@stuartofblyth]

27:17 The animals going into the ark were a subset of those alive at the time. The animals that didn't make it into the ark became fossils. Therefore if we want to know what animals were in the ark we just need to look at the fossil record. Does the record contain fossilised kangaroos, elephants, giraffes etc etc? Genuine question.

[@mike16apha16]

you ask about fossilized elephants, well its a funny way to spell Mammoth but alright. just when they came to live in Africa they didn't need the fur no more so it was naturally selected out of the genome and the change of climate and atmosphere made them grow smaller. same for the other animals. they were bigger and different pre flood. post flood life was different so eventually everything became into what we see today over the thousands of years of adapting to new environments. like sharks and crocs not different from their cousins just smaller and some physical differences there are lizards and fish found in the fossil record that are very much alive and exactly the same back then as they are today like the Coelacanths. its a big miss conception that animals on the ark and pre-flood are 100% the same way we find that today as if they somehow didn't change like at all over thousands of years of climate change. we just don't believe animals can change species like lizard to bird. but a Sabretooth Tiger becoming a Siberian Tiger totally legit

[@asmodeus5326]

​@@mike16apha16yet a bird today has wings hmmm kinda goes against your logic

[@Desertflower743]

@@asmodeus5326 A bird has always had wings, how does that counteract what the previous commenter said?

[@margomoore4527]

Not all animals became fossils, only a certain percentage, that got covered in sediment. The leviathan, whales, orcas, sharks, alligators feasted on the warm-blooded mammals that were swept out to sea.

[@stuartofblyth]

@@margomoore4527 And your evidence for this is ...

[@eafrancos]

He just give the word and all creation became and it wasn't before.

[@daviddickey9762]

We also said let there be light before he created the source for the light.

[@danilodistefanis5990]

Who is she ? I want to learn more about this hypothesis.

[@Hermanopepe]

*_Interesting_*

[@Tanengtiong]

You need to put more emphasis on salvational crosses in natural world, and improve your video production team for better montage.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Mammals are one of the examples of evolution that is easiest to understand and the most remarkable. Mammals include a set of animals that evolved on land but took to water - inlcuding whales, which still have the pelvises they used to connect their hind legs to their spines, and two nostrils even though they have one blow hole. Clear evidence of adaptation leading to speciation.

[@annieoaktree6774]

Never underestimate a creationist's ability to misunderstand even the simplest scientific concept.

[@UserRandJ]

​@annieoaktree6774 You said whales did not evolve gills because evolution uses parts that already exist.. so who is missunderstanding ? Where did baleen come from? Think you might want to check your views.

[@UserRandJ]

Words are cheap- you can say what you like, but you can't show that unguided mutations can build a whale from a rat. Get real.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

@@UserRandJ No, they did not build a whale from a rat, the Whales closest living land relative is a Hippo. You've just hand waved away the very clear evidence I gave you. Evolution explains why Whales have Pelvises and two nostrils. But actually there are myriad of transition forms that precede Whales for which we have fossils.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

@@UserRandJ Baleen whales come from the same ungulates as other Whales. Are you suggesting they have Gills? They don't, they breath in the same way as other Whales, breathing air though their blowholes or mouths.

[@user-do1qn4pj4w]

Creators Light may travel It's not the ground

[@davidshannon2450]

I struggle to understand how we have evolved from apes on the basis that the neck of an ape goes into the back of the head and a human neck goes into the base of the head. Yet to see the evolution of the head rotating through 90 degrees 😂😂

[@nathancook2852]

Well, we didn't evolve from apes. That is a big part of your problem. We and apes evolved from a COMMON ANCESTOR. That is a huge difference from your statement. Maybe you should actually learn about science and evolution before you try to start to make arguments against it.

[@davidshannon2450]

@@nathancook2852 and perhaps you should not accept evolution as fact. It is NOT proven. There is nothing scientific about it. Show me proof in the fossil record of a dinosaur evolving into a bird and the micro changes involved you can't. I believe in adaptation, but this is not evolution, despite evolutionists arguing otherwise. Stop being blinkered and start looking outside the box. Evolution is not enlightened thinking, it is a lie that is used to deny at the very minimum intelligent design

[@luish1498]

@@davidshannon2450 FFS!! go learn first evolution before post your ignorance for everyone see it evolution is a fact. ToE explain that fact. «Show me proof in the fossil record of a dinosaur evolving into a bird » The specific group of dinosaurs that gave rise to birds is called theropods. Theropods were a diverse group of bipedal dinosaurs that included well-known species such as Tyrannosaurus rex and Velociraptor. However, it was a subgroup within theropods known as maniraptorans that eventually evolved into birds.~ he fossil of Archaeopteryx is an incredibly important discovery in the study of bird evolution. Archaeopteryx is a genus of early bird that lived during the Late Jurassic period, around 150 million years ago. Fossils of Archaeopteryx provide crucial evidence of the transitional forms between dinosaurs and birds. The fossil specimens of Archaeopteryx show a combination of reptilian and avian features. «adaptation, but this is not evolution» adaptation is a specific process that occurs within the framework of evolution. It is one of the ways in which organisms respond to selective pressures and contribute to the overall evolutionary process. STOP LISTEN CREATIONISTS LIARS!!!!

[@davidshannon2450]

@@luish1498 - oh dear............ Thank you for being so rude. I believe you are demonstrating YOUR ignorance. I have considered the evolution/creation debate over 30 years. Adaptation does not change the chromosome count, therefore a dog is still a dog!! Adaptation will create a dog with short hair or long hair, short muzzle or long muzzle, etc dependent on whether the dominant or recessive gene is selected and this is how we now have 500+ dog breeds, but only one dog species!! IT IS STILL A DOG!! And then you accept the lie of archaeopteryx - I was also once similarly deluded.................. As I said to the previous contributor, show me the evidence. Are you aware that DNA has been extracted from fossilised dinosaurs - DNA tends to decay over a period far shorter than 65 million years. Even Darwin said that if there are a minimum number of components required for a base life form and these cannot be reduced, then evolution falls flat on it's face.................... The simplest organism has 50 different components which if one was not available, would make it non viable. If you take the flagellum of a virus or bacterium (the thing that makes it move), it requires 39 different proteins to operate. Making the bold assumption that approximately 40 proteins are required for each component part, that means for the 50 different components, 2000 proteins in total would be required which of course could be duplicated, so not necessarily 2000 different proteins would be in this one cell. Of course this could evolve over millions of years, but if the organism is irreducible, then even Darwin would admit evolution is a non starter. The whole idea of phylums, which evolutionists use to 'prove' evolution was devised by a Christian scientist in the 18th century to show similarities in design and how these then branched off. This was hijacked by evolutionists to prove their theory (please note that evolution is not a theory, it is only a hypothesis. For it to be a theory, you would be able to conduct an experiment to prove the anticipated end result). In order to try to prove evolution in the 1950's, fruit flies were exposed to UV radiation. Rather than evolving into a different animal entirely, they remained fruit flies, although their DNA over the time MUTATED and the impact was disabling rather than seeing evolution into a brand new species. Rather than say that the fossil specimens of Archaeopteryx show a combination of reptilian and avian features, tell it as it is - it's a bird!! Yet again, over time and using adaptation, if archaeopteryx is extinct, certain elements of the bird would disappear, but hey guess what, it's still a bird. Evolution is far from proven - evolutionists change their mind every other week. How did the Bombardier beetle not blow it's own backside off when it first came into being, only to start all over again. What about the pistol shrimp? Do your own research instead of reading books that have pretty pictures and convincing arguments using big words to make the argument appear to be academic - even academics have their own hidden agenda. Just remember that Lucy (the branch product that developed humans) is still hotly debated by anthropologists, with many honest atheist anthropologists saying it is very much an ape - stop swallowing atheist lies and broaden your mind.

[@luish1498]

your ignorance is not evidence against evolution. «Adaptation does not change the chromosome » Mutations can indeed play a role in changing the number of chromosomes in a species. Chromosomal mutations are alterations or changes in the structure or number of chromosomes within an organism's genome. There are several types of chromosomal mutations that can impact the number of chromosomes. Dog breeds are not a result of natural evolution in the same way as species in the wild. Rather, dog breeds have been selectively bred by humans over many generations to emphasize specific traits. This process is known as artificial selection. artificial selection is a mechanism for evolution. «IT IS STILL A DOG!!» dogs only produce dogs ...... i smell Kent Hovind BS..... and mammals only produce mammals .... some mammals give birth dogs. if you expect an animal give birth a different animal thats is pokemon not evolution. »If you take the flagellum of a virus or bacterium» Michael Behe BS. irreducible complexity is a bad argument. «(please note that evolution is not a theory, it is only a hypothesis.» LOL.... evolution is a theory. a scientific theory. stop swallowing creationists lies and broaden your mind. I can summarize your comment with «I don't understand this, that's why this is wrong» why dont you write to scientific journal? why you dont aply for a nobel prize?

[@jeffburton1326]

We are the "Missing Link".

[@robtrindade9087]

*some life-form* evolutionists: "well it needs the things that it has to do the things that it does....and that's how and why...."

[@TheHeggert]

😂😂 My hubby is a scientist and I teach elementary (science included). We both love science and are continually reading and watching anything about creation. We have a line we always say to each other especially when we're watching something the world puts out. We always say, "Well, they needed ____ so they just decided to grow one." I don't really get why I can't grow eyes in the back of my head or an extra arm. I could really use more energy, less required sleep as I'm a mom. I should try just willing it into existence. Their belief system is absolutely bonkers.

[@alantasman8273]

@@TheHeggert You are describing the "think system" exclusively used by Professor Harold Hill in the Music Man movie. LOL

[@helenaconstantine]

Ok, Sherwin. Which of the necessary components of life--metabolism, long chain molecule replication, homeostasis--which of these do not, apart from from life, go on quite happily just being organic chemistry? In other words, which part of life of is not well-understood organic chemistry. If you say the soul, be prepared to show an image of one.

[@GreatBehoover]

Your question doesn't make sense. Please rewrite this so we can see your point. It looked interesting, but asked incorrectly. 👍

[@Desertflower743]

Sorry, Helena, thank you for your response but your comment is not making any sense. No part of a living creature’s being ceases to exist unless the being dies, and a person’s soul is their character, it’s not a physical component that is fossilised. Your question does not seem to be reflecting whatever you wanted to say. If you decide to re-post, perhaps you could also address the guest speaker respectfully as Dr Sherwin, I’m sure you wouldn’t want another commenter to say okay, Constantine in response to your question.

[@helenaconstantine]

@@Desertflower743 I don't generally treat lairs and frauds with respect. Saying that a person's soul is their character is, from a Christian perspective a rather strange equivocation. Doubly so is the idea that I asked for a fossil soul. Moral decisions, which could be a definition of, or at least a large component of, character can be detected by brain scans (the kind of thing I meant by image). They are well understood to be made by the physical components of the brain. They would not therefore survive death and the putrefaction of the body to go on and be cast into the lake of fire if one's name is not found written in the book of life (and when you're standing in front of the recording angel and he he is busily consulting the book of life, would he look like an anthropomorphic figure with wings, or like wheels within wheels?). What I'm suggesting is that life is a series of well-understood physical processes that have reached a tipping point and that there is nothing supernatural involved, that there is no evidence whatsoever for anything like a god or a soul. Sherwin up there would have to begin by presenting evidence to the contrary, not by telling a lot of lies about cladistics (which is also well understood--we know exactly how beavers evolved from the crown mammal, how mammals evolved from fish and so on and there is no record of a beaver or a rodent created separately unrelated to other mammals and to all other life which can be seen in the independent and mutually confirming lines of evidence preserved in the fossil record and in the genomes of all organisms).

[@johnglad5]

Organic molecules break down immediately after life ends. DNA in each cell is repaired a million times a day I'm told.

[@johnhess3886]

How did life originate? Biological soup is nonsense.

[@xviewmytubex]

Let's understand more context in the creation - evolution discussion. =). A group of scientists return to their lab after studying the animal kingdom and excitedly declare to their colleagues back home something like "we may have possibly discovered an unknown, never before existing species of "insert technical jargon here". Let's just say dogs for logics sake. So, they declare "we may have possibly discovered an unknown, never before existing species of dogs". They are congratulated by the other colleagues and they all move on. So, what would be the next steps for the scientists who were delegated this task? They would begin conducting more exams, controlled experiments and scientific operations, on what? ON THE FACTUALLY EXISTING SPECIES OF DOGS (whatever the official species is). Why? BECAUSE YOU CANNOT CONDUCT SCIENCE ON AN UNKNOWN, NEVER BEFORE EXISTING ANYTHING! IT DOESN'T EXIST TO CONDUCT ANYTHING ON IT, MUCH LESS REPEATABLE SCIENCE! Think! This is the fallacy with 'science of/for evolution'. No one was there at the beginning of a pre biotic earth! No one! No one can claim they recd even the term evolution from mother evolution some 888.8 billion years ago! Evolution is not an observed codon (coherent information, instructions) in the genome of any living organism reading "evolved from evolution", or the like! So, where does evolution come from? If it exists it obviously has to have a factual origins (otherwise it doesn't exist!). But its origins is an idea in the mind of an individual! That's it! That's it's literal origins! No science can be conducted on a non existent fact, reality. Evolution is not science for reality based results! For simulations, sure. But this has nothing to do with reality relevance! Evolution is interpreted not observed! Think! =)

[@xviewmytubex]

@@travisbicklepopsicle Why? Because evolutionsts say so? =)

[@xviewmytubex]

@@travisbicklepopsicle Now, even more so than your previous, you read well versed in regurgitating/paying lip service to what evolutionists say. Thanks for the honesty about where you've chosen to place your faiths, beliefs, biases etc in. Since that's your a priori commitment, you have to make the moral choice first (being truthful with yourself) to let go of that faith in order, second, to understand the facts against it. Dawkins (Richard) trumpets a lot like you do. He's been quoted for over 4 decades saying things like "well it just is (story for evolution instead of evidence) and we must accept it" and the like. Or should I say, you trumpet a lot like he does? And finally, some simple logic, nothing just is. It has an origins, maintains cause/effect, etc. =).

[@daviddickey9762]

You're as biased as you claim evolution believing people are. If you only believe in the bible and won't learn anything about the real world you're just an idiot.

[@duaneburris7ate9]

And always will be...

[@marktapley7571]

Opening tactics used by this channel will not work for those who are not already members of the choir. Should not mention God or the Bible but just present the evidence for intelligent design and irreducible complexity from a strictly scientific prospective. IC also needs to get better interviewers.

[@timothyfox6807]

Amen GBY.

[@Torby4096]

Strange that bats do not have rodent style teeth.😉

[@annieoaktree6774]

Bats didn't evolve from rodents. The distant ancestor of bats is though to be from the order _Eulipotyphla_ which includes moles and shrews.

[@1754Me]

Supposedly. No proof. But on evolutionist’s faith.

[@kimboland8933]

Being a dog lover too, I was a bit surprised (interested) that the discussion on dogs did not go into if they came from the wolf. This should, surely not, worry creationist. We need only watch how dogs respond to wolf calls to assume there is a relationship between them. If dogs came from wolves, this is not evolution, it is hereditary. A discussion of this would be useful. When we look at sheep, there are lots of varieties of sheep. They are still sheep. God created animals with the ability to adapt. This is not evolution. You seem to want to avoid this discussion. However you had the chance in stating how many breeds of dogs there are that came in the last 200 years. It seems you missed a great opportunity to discess adaption, unless you do not accept it. Were dogs created? Or were Wolves the progenitor? Please don't dumb this down or become simplistic. As a creationist I doubt God created dogs a wolf wold would do to give us dogs.

[@OgdenCrimmcramer8162]

I posted in this thread recent scientific research on the evolution of canids including a DNA generated phylogenetic tree, but no one was interested. 😥

[@beecee985]

Wolf is a genetic dead end, you won't get domestic dogs out of a wolf, learn genetics pal

[@lizd2943]

Descendants always remain part of their parent clades, so yes, the descendants of sheep will always be sheep. Just like the descendants of mammals will always be mammals, and tetrapods will always be tetrapods. But there is no identifiable "kind" break in the nesting of these clades. All life is one "kind."

[@davidjackson7051]

Yeah where are the links evolutionist there missing cause that's not what happened after its kind after its kind every creature has a purpose

[@daviddickey9762]

When will creationist ever define what a kind is? Whales and dogs and kangaroo are all KINDS of mammals.so are bats cats pigs badgers wombats sloths lemers etc..

[@rubiks6]

Wooly mammals. 😂

[@terminusest5902]

Fossils are very rare and difficult to find . Most ancient species have not yet been discovered. Including' transitional 'species. But many more fossils are being discovered to support evolution .

[@mikebosler7516]

👍🙏❤️🦕

[@cmcer1995]

The Enemy Satan does not want anyone the believe that there is only one God and He is the Creator of the heavens, the earth, and all life and that life was by design not by some magic show by chance of something coming to life in so many different species with very complex systems even down to the microscopic level. Creating something out of nothing has never been repeated anywhere in know history. We are uniquely made. Noone has ever created life on earth even with all the scientific progress and equipment available, not even a simple living cell.

[@daviddickey9762]

So Abra cadabra poof they're created by a magical creator that's never been seen by anyone?

[@sleepingbearffg5008]

Your excited about it? You ever read what happens? Name one thing to be excited about? Listen to Troy.. he personaly gets God's word. Talks to him.

[@markl8679]

How long was the Cambrian explosion?

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

No scientist was alive at that time, so no no one can say with certainty.

[@twosheds1749]

Around 20 million years. However This video is out of date. The fossilised remains of pre-Cambrian complex animals have now been found so the Cambrian explosion was not an explosion at all!

[@markl8679]

@@twosheds1749. I believe you’re right but these people think the earth is only no more than 10000 years old. 😖

[@twosheds1749]

@@markl8679 Ignorance is so sad!

[@Vernon-Chitlen]

@@twosheds1749 There are no transitional fossils to the sudden appearance of 25-35 phyla, complex organisms.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

Evolutionists: even though we don't agree among ourselves (consensus), we don't know how it all started (abiogenesis), we can't find the evidence (missing links), but trust us anyhow because EVOLUTION IS SIMPLY TRUE. 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@lizd2943]

Um... there's tons of evidence. There's disagreement over details like the relative impact of selection vs drift but no disagreement on the basics.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@@lizd2943 "evidence" "basics": FYI: 1. Most evolutionists can't even agree among themselves (no consensus beyond "Darwin is right") 2. Evolutionists can't explain how life began (Abiogenesis: life from inanimate matter) 3. Paleontologists can't find fossil evidence for transitional forms - the 'missing links' (all fossilized animals resemble their living counterparts) 4. Many, many fossils showed the animals died SUDDENLY while EATING. They certainly did not die "naturally" (even if they did, how did the carcasses not decompose??) Well, if you want to believe them despite all of that, then by all means keep your head in the sand. 😄😄😄

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@@lizd2943 Btw, by far the BEST proof refuting Darwin's theory is this: stupidity. The fact is that after supposed millions and billions of years, evolution's fairy has been unable to weed out the biological trait of human _stupidity,_ hence we get evolutionists!! 🎉🎉🎉

[@lizd2943]

I mean, if your goal is to show yourself to be a stupid person, then mission accomplished. But many types of stupidity aren't always an impediment to reproduction. @@pj_ytmt-123

[@daviddickey9762]

You believe in a book written over the course of 2k yrs and not a single thing in it is scientifically correct. No breeder will try and mate animals in front of stripped sticks. The flood not only didn't happen it couldn't have happened. Not more than 10 people from the bible can be proven to be real. The history is dependent on when the specific bk was written.

[@johnlittonsy2054]

Watching this video made me belive more in evolution. Thank you for providing all the amazing facts, intentionally or unintentionally, to turn my back on creationism. And in gratitude, I will leave you with a quote that i love. “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”

[@catdogky]

God (or Satan) has closed your eyes to the truth in plain sight.

[@johnlittonsy2054]

@@catdogky god or satan might. I'll soon find out. Will I? Have a great day.

[@ekundayoibikunle1181]

You watch too much scify😂 Just ask yourself where the DNA came from, the information of life, what of morality, music, appreciation. The cell is ls like a super factory, with different stations and worker. Evolution is not for the intelligent.

[@johnlittonsy2054]

@@ekundayoibikunle1181 Well I guess i am a lower species of human, like you suggest, because I believe in evolution. I am sorry that I am not as good as you are. Perhaps the process of natural selection didn't favor me.

[@nathancook2852]

@@ekundayoibikunle1181 And yet, creationists still can't even comprehend the basic principals of it. I don't even mean the won't believe it, I mean they don't even understand the basics of evolution so they can argue against it. So what does that make creationists? More unintelligent that evolutionists...

[@johncipolletti5611]

I hope this guy means nature that creates. Anything else is a fairytale!

[@KenJackson_US]

Nature is a fairytale, John. It was invented to give atheists a way to talk about God without mentioning him by name.

[@johncipolletti5611]

@KenJackson_US Wow, I thought those hallucinating mushrooms are too hard to get hold of. How often do you smoke them? Can you sell me some?

[@margomoore4527]

Mother nature is a fairytale based on idolatry.

[@nathancook2852]

@@KenJackson_US Brainwashed much?

[@KenJackson_US]

​@@nathancook2852 The facts of molecular biology leave no room for the myth that all life evolved from a microbe. I can walk you through it. Do you know what a protein is?

[@marieatkin5669]

Basically, evolution is saying that from the simple amoeba to the most complex mammal, that at each stage, they willfully chose to advance or change. That would give every life form godlike abilities. Now that we have CRSPR technology, we too can play god and yet say it is evolution. Yet whether it is technology or life forms, there is a creator behind it in the beginning.

[@daviddickey9762]

No evolutionary scientists say evolution is done by choice.

[@A.E.Lanman777]

This guy is brilliant I would enjoy to hear what he has to say, without this girl who just keeps going on without saying anything.

[@daviddickey9762]

He's a liar.

[@A.E.Lanman777]

@@daviddickey9762 why do you say that?

[@lhart5632]

I usually enjoy your site, but this was a major disappointment. Please don't dumb down the information we have on the development of dogs in particular. I DO believe in creation fully, but your saying that we don't know where dogs came from is not giving God or science credibility. We know that dogs came from the same family as wolves. They do have an amazing ability to be bred for certain traits, more than other species, but still we DO know the origin of dogs in wolves and other canids. Nothing in this detracts from God's amazing creation! Please don't dumb down what God did in His creation and the amazing depth of it all! Love your site still, but hoping for better. The deeper you go in what science has shown in recent years brings it closer to seeing the awesomeness of God as our creator and master source of life. God bless.

[@appaloosa42]

Answers In Genesis and the construction of the replica of Noah’s Ark, explores the notion of created kinds, and the changes that occurred subsequent to the flood.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

The idea that dogs evolved from wolves is not a slam dunk. I just read an article that claimed otherwise, using arguments from genetics. Take a second look at that. I have always thought that hypothesis made sense, but it’s not accepted by all modern taxonomists, and not based on creationist concepts either.

[@lhart5632]

@sliglusamelius8578 I've been breeding and showing dogs for 40 plus years, and I love studying genetics. DNA shows all dogs except for a few rare breeds like those with the hairless genes go back to wolves. I'm a young earth person, and I am always in amazement at how God made unique species that are able to create varieties on that DNA genes within each kind. Ignoring known facts on the genetics of dog breeds like they did on this video doesn't take away from God, but from their own credibility with those who need to be given a truthful presentation on it all. That is my concern and complaint

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@lhart5632 Why do you accept that DNA evidence yet reject the DNA evidence dogs shared a common carnivore ancestor with cats, bears, weasels, and seals?

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@lhart5632 This is from a Scientific American article: “Analyzing whole genomes of living dogs and wolves, last January's study revealed that today's Fidos are not the descendants of modern gray wolves. Instead the two species are sister taxa, descended from an unknown ancestor that has since gone extinct.”

[@mervinlitzenberger4779]

Before you can confirm anything was created; you have to verify that any of these creator gods existed (Ganesha, Khnum, Pakhangba, Ptah, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Yahweh, Abassi)

[@Hamann9631]

@mervinlitzenberger4779 That is some bad logic. So, according to you, the natives on jungle islands in the Pacific in the 1930's and 1940's should have believed random chances and no designers and no creators caused those ships and airplanes and guns they saw. The existence of things which could have been the result of unguided random chance is proof there is something which caused them.

[@mervinlitzenberger4779]

@@Hamann9631 Those ships, airplanes, and guns they saw did have a designer, and that was mankind. They also mistakenly attributed the mysteries they did not understand to gods. This is good example of the logical failure of superstition and religion to understand our reality.

[@Hamann9631]

@@mervinlitzenberger4779 You typed, " Those ships, airplanes, and guns they saw did have a designer, and that was mankind. " However, you are contradicting yourself. Those islanders did not see the makers, so according you to there were no factories and those things evolved. Failure to understand weather, lightning, etc does not disprove the atoms come together on their own to create stars, planets, and life. It is a logical failure you demonstrated.

[@mervinlitzenberger4779]

​@@Hamann9631 - It was a logical error for the islanders to attribute those ships, airplanes, and guns to an unverified supernatural cause and gods. It is the same logical error that religion is making when theists attribute our reality to an unverified supernatural cause and gods.

[@Hamann9631]

@@mervinlitzenberger4779 You are the one who is making logical errors. Actually, you are dishonestly using different logic and standards for different things. God has been seen by many prophets and apostles. It is such a sacred experience that they do not tell great details. The Lord's current living Apostles are examples. Joseph Smith Junior gave us great details. John the Revelator gave us great details which are frequently misused by idiots. The misuse is ignoring when John wrote, "...like...". When John talked about hair color he specifically said, "...white like wool.." He focused on the color of the wool, and I have heard the texture used as evidence. I invite you to stop denying scientifically proven and witnessed beings.

[@helenaconstantine]

Godd god! If he accepts that rodents are mammals, how can he deny evolution? How did the crown mammal get to be the rodents except for evolution?

[@apoliticalobserver2741]

From the mammal "kind' on the Ark. 😉

[@helenaconstantine]

@@apoliticalobserver2741 can you refer me--I won't ask for a peer reviewed journal--a creationist journal, creationist website, or public statement by a creationist with a PhD (in other words, not Kent Hovind) that so much as suggests that the ark kinds were at the family level (that would make it pretty easy on Noah who would have to carry--what?-- a dozen pairs of animals, but all the evolution of animals to get from mammals, Reptiles, Amphibians, etc., to all the species we have (including the extinct ones) would be several thousand new species a year. How many new large animal species do you think evolved last year?

[@OgdenCrimmcramer8162]

@@helenaconstantine Did you miss the winking emoji showing the answer was tongue-in-cheek?

[@helenaconstantine]

@@OgdenCrimmcramer8162 What's an emoji?

[@jameshale6401]

What did evolution or a big bang or hardest to sweep under that lumpy rug what did chance or odds come You do know odds need something to work with and chance aint matter or anything else Chance dont exist how much is it a pound

[@paulanderson7628]

Stop investing. No need to use science. It's MAGIC! God made it. Nuffsed . This kind of ignorance makes me panic a bit.

[@all_bets_on_Ganesh]

This is such an interesting lecture, as a case study. I will never not be fascinated by the level of narcissism it takes to believe the sole purpose of entire planet and indeed all 100 billion galaxies is because Jesus wants a relationship with me 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@AssaultEnigma]

Congratulations, that's the dumbest comment I've heard this year... I'll give you an update later on in the year. Just remind me to waste my time on you.

[@edubal6394]

Creationism is NOT science.

[@fergusonhr]

DNA being a code is not science...God gave us the tools to do science...God made science work the way it does because of how He created.

[@edubal6394]

@@fergusonhr God is a creation of man.

[@adelinomorte7421]

***I JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR OBSESSION WITH CREATIONISM, IT WRITEN IN THE BIBLE THAT GOD CREATES EVERYTHING, EVERY BELIEVER KNOWS THAT.***

[@ClementGreen]

So is micro-evolution the result of man's sin, or is it part of God's intelligent design?

[@SunShine-xc6dh]

What's micro evolution?

[@ClementGreen]

@@SunShine-xc6dh Micro evolution is small mutations that take place within a species, whereas macro evolution is small mutations on top of so many other small mutations that a new species can be declared to exist.

[@helenaconstantine]

5:05 Ok, Lauren. Nice one, using the term magic to describe scientific theories when you think your god created the universe by literally casting a spell (God said, "Let there be light" and there was light).

[@davissalaki8703]

Eternal existing God created everything from His will vs nothing exploded and created everything. I'll trust in God. Lol, pagans

[@davissalaki8703]

Cast a spell? Did you learn to read with Harry Potter? Nothing exploded and created everything? That sounds super scientific.

[@helenaconstantine]

@@davissalaki8703 A spell is ordering something to happen and then it actually happens by magic (as I quoted already, "God said let there be light and there was light"). Do you have some other name for it? Christians believe in creatio ex nihil, that all the energy and matter in the universe suddenly came into existence out of nothing by god's magical utterance. There is no scientific theory that holds that "Nothing exploded and created everything." that is a lie that somebody told you to keep you in a state of ignorance and deceive you. You ought to look into that.

[@nathancook2852]

@@davissalaki8703 You are correct. Nothing exploded. You finally got something right. But there was an incredibly rapid expansion, which is still happening as I type this.

[@johnmeredith6890]

@@nathancook2852 What expanded and what caused it to expand in the first place?

[@DigtlNativ]

There are Theories about fish fossils evolving teeth

[@1754Me]

But they are still fish.

[@DigtlNativ]

@@1754Me no... Romundina are ancestors of us

[@1754Me]

@@DigtlNativ Hahahahaha. And your proof is....? Where are all of the missing links?

[@DigtlNativ]

@@1754Me you mean there are millions of fossils from certain animals in certain geological layer wich only existed for certain time on earth and fossils from animals never existed before, but similar to these before are not related because we dont find every step of these evolutions as fossils? imagine a million pieces puzzle, you search for corner pieces and sides, than you group pieces by colore. After some time you can place your puzzle islands relative to each other, you dont need a complete connection everywhere to see the big picture.

[@johnmeredith6890]

Lol. A fossil can't evolve anything. Its basically just a rock. That used to be a living thing that got buried deep very quickly and turned into a rock quickly as well.

[@jackripper5270]

As far as religion goes, and who is right? I haven't a clue... but I am 99.99% sure there was a creator.... the laws of the universe are stable, predictable, etc... and all life has purpose? The odds of getting that out of a series of accidents is.... well 0.001%... with all our knowledge and "science" with all its glory (lol) we still can't create a cell ... and we have all the pieces... imagine doing it with non life, no lab, and on accident!!!! .... lmfao ... yeah right! And if evolution is indeed the reason for all the diverse life, living and extinct... it has to happen alot!!! It has to be a pretty regular thing.... well, it hasn't happened not once in written history!! Mutations, natural selection, etc... happens... but that's not evolution! That is mutations, natural selection, etc... macro evolution has not happened once in written history.... strange?

[@nathancook2852]

It is easy to claim it has never happened, but we have all kids of proof that it has happened. And that it continues to happen. Why do all human embryos have a tail in utero? Why are wisdom teeth becoming less common with each generation? Color vision an the ability for adults to drink milk are also evolutions that have occurred in the human species.

[@bobwilkinson2008]

LOL. Mutations, natural selection, etc IS evolution. You don't know science. 'all life has purpose' - any proof of that assertion? 'if evolution is indeed the reason for all the diverse life, living and extinct... it has to happen a lot' - exactly, it did over billions of years, as the evidence shows.

[@jackripper5270]

@@bobwilkinson2008 micro evolution (mutations, natural selection) does exist, but that's not where all life came from. And macro evolution doesn't exist. ... sry.

[@bobwilkinson2008]

@@jackripper5270 That's not what the science says but then it contradicts your book of fairy tales.

[@mabus999]

The amount of misinformation and lies you are spewing is shameful.

[@lawrencemurray568]

It is ever more difficult for creationists to hang on to their worldview. The totality of the fossil record, genetics, geology, etc. make the likelihood that life evolved extremely high. Claiming that complexity and gaps in our knowledge are evidence for God is a doomed strategy.

[@moveablefeasttv]

Mention your theory to God when you meet Him in eternity after this short life.

[@jimhughes1070]

Well obviously you missed all the "Science" 😭😭... The truth is we are more bold than ever! 🤣🤣... Because we've looked at the science and it "doesn't" back your fairy tales 👍 Simply quoting the propaganda... Without investigating what the science actually says... Is folly. Scientists motivated by money on the other hand... Will say whatever gets them the cash... People are evil... Some fear the consequences of their actions... Others are shielded and paid...

[@jimhughes1070]

Unlike you, I was continuing to watch the video 😮... Searching for clues that you may have "watched" any of it😂... Am I to assume that you believe all of the specialized complexity we find in nature ... Was purely by accident?... Or do you believe in the "nature god" that "selected" via random mutation... Or do you lean towards smart chemicals that knew what to "break" and what to substitute with?... R and R? Looking at biology it seems that the chemicals would have to be much smarter than the collective human species! 👍

[@OgdenCrimmcramer8162]

@@jimhughes1070 Smarter than the one named Jim Hughes anyway. 🙄

[@jimhughes1070]

@@OgdenCrimmcramer8162 as you like 😭😭🤣

[@leonardgibney2997]

Why did God create pathogens?

[@jameshale6401]

Thank for your show but i dont we should only talk about GODS great creation Not the color book proof the other side has

[@nathancook2852]

How many GODS did it take to create this place?

[@jameshale6401]

@nathancook2852 one more than any man Which cant cant create squat

[@jameshale6401]

@@nathancook2852 how many nothings did it take to make one... something

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@Humpback whales: ahahha so these were supposed to be land animals that returned to the oceans? Hell will freeze over before a bunch of house cats decide to become aquatic creatures. 😂😂🤣🤣 Ok maybe a psychotic cat or two somewhere but it doesn't prove evolution's ridiculous excuse. All this talk of amazing feats of animals reminds me of our Lord's saying, "With God all things are possible." (Mt. 19:26)

[@annieoaktree6774]

Yet today we still see mammals like otters and sea lions moving towards adopting aquatic lifestyles. Why don't you explain why whales still have the unexpressed Tbx4 genes for hind limbs and occasionally produce hind limb atavisms?

[@UserRandJ]

​@annieoaktree6774 Why didn't they cut to the chase and evolve a set if gills?

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@UserRandJ Because evolution works by modifying what already exists. Why didn't your Supernatural Designer POOF the marine mammals into having gills to live in water?

[@UserRandJ]

@@annieoaktree6774 There was no evolution, but you can flap your mouth all day if you like. Mutations did not build advanced life. No process is shown anywhere at all except in your dreams.

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@UserRandJ Keep licking those poo fingers! Maybe one day you'll mature enough to actually understand the science you keep flinging poo at. 😄

[@georg7120]

Why is this evidence for creation?

[@UserRandJ]

Do you know what day it is?

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@UserRandJ It's Creationist Tell A Lie day. But then again every day is creationist tell a lie day. 🙂

[@UserRandJ]

@@annieoaktree6774 You are stuck in a loop, can't you say anything original? I asked you- if whales evolved from already existing parts- (the reason you said to me they never evolved gills), where then did their baleen come from? Which creature has baleen?

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@UserRandJ I answered you twice, even provided a scientific paper on the evolution of baleen from teeth for you to read. You ran screaming from the evidence as you always do, then pop up to lie about it.

[@UserRandJ]

@@annieoaktree6774 What are you dribbling about? I never saw it posted, and you call that me lying? Can't you achieve actual conversation without acting like a child?

[@mervinlitzenberger4779]

It is true there are some gaps in the fossil record and in our understanding of it; but the evidence for any of the mythical creator gods is zero.

[@Hamann9631]

@mervinlitzenberger4779 Actually, the myth of random chance creating things is without evidence.

[@mervinlitzenberger4779]

@@Hamann9631 Your wording is somewhat correct; random chance cannot 'create' anything as there is no evidence of a creator. There is obvious evidence of life evolving over time. The myth is belief that gods exist.

[@Hamann9631]

@@mervinlitzenberger4779 Wow. Evidence?! Creative story telling is not evidence.

[@mervinlitzenberger4779]

@@Hamann9631 Exactly, The creative story telling of the bible is not evidence that anything supernatural exists.

[@Hamann9631]

@@mervinlitzenberger4779 God told Moses what happened. It is a witnesses testimony (albeit diluted over time). A witness testimony is not creative story telling. Nobody has ever seen genetic mutations add information to an offspring's genetics. So, it is creative story telling to claim it happened.

[@erwinrommel6777]

Hit that like plz thumbs-up helps spread the word of GOD ❤😊

[@daviddickey9762]

Harry potter is true because he used magic too.

[@annieoaktree6774]

You can see a DNA generated phylogenetic tree of rodent evolution in the 2019 paper *A phylogenomic rodent tree reveals the repeated evolution of masseter architectures* Any creationists brave enough to take a look and see for yourselves how this guy is lying?

[@VFA666]

"Brave creationist" is an oxymoron.

[@DigtlNativ]

What about millions of layers of earth with fossils inside crumbling up to mountains

[@margomoore4527]

The flood was more catastrophic than you can imagine, and supervolcanos added to the mixture.

[@DigtlNativ]

@@margomoore4527 ah ok so you have geological evidance for a world wide flood and supervulcanos less than 10.000 years ago?

[@bobwilkinson2008]

@@margomoore4527 'the flood...' - LOL

[@daviddickey9762]

Mountains are created by plate tectonics pushing together that's why you find sea fossils on them not a flood.

[@DigtlNativ]

And dinosaurs are fake

[@pascalguerandel8181]

Such BS!